Drove HL; it needs the Sequoia's side curtain air bags (not same as the Toyota-Lexus "up-to-armpit-only" optional side air bags). Toyota insults our intelligence to offer side curtains for the huge Sequoia and not to offer this available technology in the HL. In fact, Toyota would have a safety and a marketing coup if it offered both as HL standard equipment, distinguishing itself from the "none or optional" U. S. and other Japanese SUV makers. I'll hope and wait for a 2002; also for a power passenger seat. And that etched glass? It's a half-inch wide at the base of each side window, with a gap in which the word "HL" or "Limited" is etched. It's been added by our thoughtful Gulf States Distributor, but Mike Calvert Toyota is so impressed he charges an additional $795.00 for it in Houston...must have studied P. T. Barnum.
I was finally able to leisurely explore both the interior and exterior of a Toyota Highlander Limited at a local dealership. There were obvious similarities between the Lexus RX300 with regard to the shifter style and location which, in my case, I like very much. The driver's 8-way adjustable seat was very comfortable and easily positioned via power controls. I was surprised to find out that the passenger seat was non-powered, utilizing manual controls with no option to upgrade according to my salesman. The interior materials were nice, though I didn't care for the faux wood. Otherwise, the fit and finish seemed indicative of Toyota's reputation for quality.
During the extended test drive, I was able to test both highway and snow covered secondary roads.
On the highway, the Highlander seemed very smooth and for the most part quiet. However, noise from the integrated roof racks seem noticeable over 65 mph; a sort of low to high pitch whine (the day was very calm, with little to no wind - so cross winds were not a factor). Periodically, during the 20+ miles of highway driving, I would slow down to simulate a high speed passing situation. At this point the 220 HP v6 engine seemed heavily taxed, though the driving conditions were not at altitude, requiring the engine to work hard to regain cruising speed.
The Highlander easily negotiated the secondary roads, where a couple of climbing sections contained over 9-degree grades. I was even able to drive the Highlander into deep snow (an unplowed parking lot). Interestingly, the traction-control system (which limits wheel spin by braking wheels individually or adjusting braking pressure - can't be turned off) didn't allow us to move forward because one of the front wheels kept spinning. The poor salesman didn't even mind helping to push the vehicle out! Once again, the 220 HP engine seemed sluggish from a standing start.
This Highlander Limited, with several options, was priced around $34,000, dangerously close to the Lexus RX300 in my opinion.
I'm sure the Highlander will sell very well, though I'm unsure if this is the vehicle for my needs.
Out of curiosity, does the AWD in the Highlander (and the RX 300, and Rav4) work in reverse? This may sound like an odd question, but the Chrysler AWD mini-vans revert to FWD, when you engage reverse. Is that the case with Toyota? Inquiring minds want to know...
Test drove the HL 3.0 V6 last week. My impressions are generally, though not unqualifiedly, positive.
Exterior looks -- Not stunning. You could even call it a little vanilla, designed not to offend anybody. However, it's not nearly as unattractive as many here have made it out to be. I was worried that it would look like a Forester, but it's considerably better looking (to me) than that. It's higher off the ground and has the same general appearance of a "traditional" SUV, except smaller (which is what it is). My only real objection was the rear spoiler, which seems to be a standard option (so to speak), since it was on every HL on the lot. The HL is not snazzy enough to have a spoiler, and it looks like a way for Toyota to charge $300+ for a piece of metal that couldn't cost more than $40 or $50.
Interior -- very roomy. Headroom is often an issue for me, but not with the HL. I also had no legroom problem at all, even when I put the seat closer to the steering wheel. Dashboard controls are very intelligently and ergonomically laid out, as you'd expect. Radio seemed quite good; no booming bass ala Sequoia and 2001 LC and sound didn't drift in and out as many Avalon owners have complained of. My three major complaints about the interior are (1) the lack of a center console; (2) location of the cupholders; and (3) the cheap look of the plastic. I could get over (3), since most new cars these days seem to have cheap-looking plastic, but (1) and (2) are really serious flaws, IMO. I would hope Toyota would correct this for next model year.
Ride -- really nice. No complaints at all here. The 3.0 was very peppy, particularly off the start. I didn't have it on the highway, so I couldn't say whether passing acceleration would be a problem, but I can't imagine it would. As you'd expect, much more carlike than a Sequoia but, frankly, I thought the 4Runner's ride was almost as good as HL's. Didn't get a chance to test it on slippery or snowy road conditions.
Marketing -- I went to 2 dealerships, one that didn't have one yet and the other that did. The salesmen at both places kept talking about how the HL was designed by women for women. Grand Cherokee seemed to be identified as the key competitor.
Pricing -- IMO, it's 1-2K more than it should be, but I've thought for a long time that most Toyota models seem overpriced compared to the competition. Yet they still sell well (I bought one myself last year), and Toyota continues to gain market share as Ford and GM plummet. I guess people are willing to fork over a little more for better reliability, quality, etc.
Overall -- a nice "urban" SUV. But, they've really got to do something about that center console.
IMHO, the forums are the best part of Edmunds. I like reading other people's observations/feedback.
You mentioned that "the 3.0 was very peppy, particularly off the start".
The HL Limited that I drove was _not_ at all peppy, but rather slow from a standing start. On the highway, the passing simulation I did seemed rather exhaustive on the engine and took a relatively long amount of time.
I wonder if the vehicle you drove had more miles on the engine (mine had 87 miles) which made it more "broken in"/responsive?
No doubt they're a nice safety feature, but I think in an SUV, having regular side torso airbags is more important than having side curtains. This is because unlike a lower-riding car, the impact in a higher vehicle is greater below the windowline in most crashes. A side curtain airbag helps protect against glass and has other positive benefits, but it won't help as much with intrusion from the doors against one's body.
The Highlander has them (torso side airbags) available for the front. The M-class, unlike many other SUV's (e.g. MDX, RX), has them available for both first and second row passengers (and may add side curtains as well for the 2002 model year, which is the best blend).
Of course, in a conventional sedan, side curtains are much more valuable.
The HL I test drove had ~35 miles, if I remember correctly. Possibly you were driving the 2.4? I've driven lots of cars over the years, and this truly had some get up and go from a dead stop. As I said, I didn't get a chance to take it on the highway, only a somewhat curvy road w/no passing.
1. HL is not as high as big SUV, so if that l-in-a-100,000 Side Impact by a big SUV, Truck or Pickup happens to you, the Side Curtain was necessary, espec. in roll over. 2. Side bag issue is not either curtain (or head bag) or rib bag, but if I had to choose, I'd choose head bag - a hit into your ribs is going to whiplash your head and neck severely sideways, and YOU ARE YOUR HEAD! 3. I'm not in auto business, but I follow the logic and physics of crash testing (see www.iihs.org and www.nhtsa.dot.gov)and am disappointed that auto makers are still not offering proven safety options, especially on a brand-new smaller SUV like HL. I'll wait.
Just a little food for thought on the side impact bags... I wish that my mother had them in her car. She was killed by someone who hit her in her drivers side door. The impact severed her aorta and fractured her left arm. Yes the head is important but so is your heart/engine.
Before the drive, I checked out the interior. It's not bad, but not impressive considering the price. A loaded Highlander at over $35K is not worth it. No doubt about it. A $2K to $3K discount, maybe. The Highlander I drove was a swap with Dallas and had 450 miles on it. It's not loaded and didn't have side-airbags or VSC. No moonroof or leather. It was still MSRP at $28K. Not that great a deal.
When I was playing around the inside, I tried the pass thru from back to front and I managed to squeez through. The front passenger seat did fold back but not flat. No armrest and no vents in back. It came with fullsize spare.
The test drive. I was surpised by the power. Then again, it was a 2WD that was almost broken in. The power is strong for initial pickup but I didn't have a chance for freeway test. The ride reminds me of my Camry (a compliment). It's very smooth. This would be a great SUV, if I didn't know about the MDX. Now, if the Highlander came out first and was priced aggressively, then I might have been driving the Highlander. In fact, if the SR5 V5 2WD I drove had the side-airbag/VSC option and costed less than $27K, I might have been an owner of one.
But too bad. I saw the MDX, then my wife saw it. Then the straw that broken the camel's back, my wife saw a picture of the Highlander's frontend. End of story.
P.S. In person, the front end is not real bad but that first public shot of the Highlander was a big mistake by Toyota. I got the brochure and there are pictures in there that actually make the Highlander look decent.
I just want to make sure I understand...on your test drive, you drove into a snow covered parking lot--and got stuck? You make it clear you were driving the V6, but was it FWD or AWD? "Deep snow"--are we talking 6 inches or 8 inches....
Are you also saying that you think the traction control system was actually disadvantageous in this situation or just insufficient to provide traction? Did the salesman say anything about trying the Snow mode switch?
I'd be interested in hearing about anyone else's experiences on snow and ice.
Regarding VSC: The NHTSA site (with the rollover star ratings) states that stability control systems do help prevent rollovers. It even notes which vehicles have something like VSC available, which makes it seem those folks think it is pretty useful. I take that to be a meaningful recommendation.
I would prefer to have both side and head air bags. Some side bags provide protection to both areas; too bad Highlander's aren't big enough. Head air bags have been shown to reduce the risk of serious head injury, just as side air bags better protect critical torso regions.
Interesting that you got so much mis-information when trying to get a better deal here. I have sold cars out of Southern California for years, and many out of state -- to states across the states, even Alaska, and NY and Maine, you name it. Landcruisers, the new Sequoia, Tundras, Solara ragtops, you name it. It's more that dealers prefer to not bother with the excess paperwork.
Hey, you! Ya gotta drive it. It's so "square" but I have 20 of them out here and they really grow on ya. I started with 32 but I am dealin' and they are flying out of here rapidly. Best cxolors are the most vibrant (the blues and the reds, and the greens too!) and they are selling to folks all over! I drove one all day long, and enjoyed the heck out of it.
I live in CA, and I do not think that Toyota offers an SR5 version in the v6. The Toyota sight lists the "SR5" label as only applicable to the 4cyl. Is this true??
I test drove a Limited v6 and a basic 4 cylinder. I liked the bells and whistles of the limited but not the hungry V6.Too bad you can't get leather without getting the V6.The driving position reminded me of a pickup,the steering very light,and the 4 cylinder adequate but the V6 adds a fun factor.
I was driving the AWD V6. The "deep snow" was 10-12 inches, but we got stuck near the edge where the plowed snow was deeper and more compacted from the snowplows.
Even though I feel that the traction control system typically worked flawlessly (driving up steep snow covered hills was easy), in this specific instance, even with toggling the snow mode switch on/off (as per the salesman's request), the system automatically tried braking wheels individually and adjusting brake pressure to the disc brakes (this is how the sophisticated AWD system works on the Highlander)... this kept the vehicle from moving in the snow, causing one of the front wheels to spin violently. I walked around the vehicle when the salesman tried to free the Highlander and noticed the left front wheel spinning while all the other wheels were stationary. With a little pushing, the Highlander was free again.
Therefore, in this specific case, the traction control system was a disadvantage because it wouldn't allow sufficient traction to move forward.
I must agree with you troyy2k, yes, the Tribute is much more fun to drive. This is fine some of the time but for long distance travel the Highlander will be much better due to the lower noise level and better ride. The Tribute matches up very well with the Highlander in most dimensions and is definately the better value but Mazda (Ford) sure has goofed with five recalls in the same # of months. We especially like the two piece tailgate of the Tribute but a lack of ABS components? ABS should be standard!
My wife likes the Highlander a lot better and I think the long term durability and resale value will be better. We were concerned about the traction of the Highlander after reading the USA TOday article. Can't imagine that the Highlander would be so bad especially since it is based on the same platform as the RX300 which is well proven. "cooltrucks" got stuck in 10 inches of snow! Don't think I would be driving on roads with that much snow. Thanks for the clarification "cooltrucks" appreciate your doing a thorough test. I like most everyone else sure would like it if Toyota had made the side airbags standard along with side curtain airbags. I presume that the force and location would determine the effectiveness of the Toyota side airbags. Does anyone have any updates on prices paid for their Highlanders? Thanks
At first, when I heard about the parking lot snow incident and the USA today review, I thought "why would anyone want a AWD SUV that can't go through the snow." I took my wife's Saab 9-3 with snow tires and had no trouble going through 6" of unplowed snow. However, when I hit drifts over 1', obviously the car bogged down but managed to get through it.
As far as the USA Today article goes, this is the same auto writer who said the ML stinks in the snow too. Well, my parents have one and I've driven it in the snow without fanfare. I thought it was great so to each their own.
Later posts show that the parking lot had 10-12 inches of snow and the Highlander got stuck in even deeper stuff. Well, that doesn't surprise me. Ground clearance is the key. Of course, how many people are going to drive on roads with 12" of freshly untraveled and unplowed roads. More likely, you'll be traveling on packed snow or ice. Any 4wd vehicle can get stuck in deep snow. I once went out during a storm in a friends 4wd Dualie. We drove it through a 2' deep bank of loose snow. We punched through it, but the vehicle almost got stuck. Luckily we only cut through about a 10' section.
Now as far as pricing goes, I agree with many people that the Highlander is overpriced once loaded up. At the VERY least, they should have included leather as part of the Limited package.Same goes for the RAV4. Base price is fine, but loaded for $26k! That's too much for a cute ute. A better bet may be to get the convenience packages from the base model and get after-market leather. Seeing that Sequoia's are being discounted already, it's just a matter of time before the Highlander gets discounted too.
I'm glad leather is not part of the Limited package. I'm not a big fan of leather. It's slippery, cold in the winter, and hot in the summer—just like vinyl. Give me a good cloth seat any day of the week.
As to driving in 12" of snow—I took our Subaru Impreza Outback (which has less ground clearance than a Forester or Legacy-Outback) last year, through a good 14" of snow without a hitch, what so ever. Heck, if you've got AWD, and it snows—you go out and play.
There is a distinct problem with VSC in the Highlander 4WD system. The HL has a limited slip center differential and open front and rear differentials. I am a bit confused as to why Toyota would even offer traction control in such a vehicle. We use this same VSC/TRACS system in the Sequoia but there is a big difference. The Sequoia has an open center differential. When one wheel begins to slip, brakes are applied to that wheel. Power is diverted to the other side AND to the opposite end of the Sequoia. It works VERY well.
This can't happen on the HL though. Power can shift left or right, but because it has a limited slip center differential, power is kept at the end of the vehicle which has no traction. I don't like this, but if you get VSC, you may run into a problem in deep snow.
The VSC is a great safety feature though and the trade off may be worth it. VSC is going to prevent lateral skids quite nicely. I could do without the TRACS system on the HL.
OK, when you get past the goofy position of the gear shift (which also is quite ergonomic, I have to admit)I was actually very pleased that there is no center console. When I get in a car, I like to put my "stuff" (breifcase, purse, whatever) right beside me. Plus the center console is just a hunk of plastic that takes up space I can use for my own purposes. Also, not having the center console makes the cockpit not feel like, well, a cockpit in a race car. Easy to slide between seats when changing drivers and doesn't feel so claustophobic.
Only $500 off the MSRP. Seems unfair with my pricing compared, but then again, I can't set the market for what they are bringing across the USA. Just got two MORE gold cheapie Highlanders, as the MSRPs are $25015, 4cyl 6910 models with DR QO UZ CF and later tonight, I will be putting a lot of Highlanders on my "Specials" section for viewing availability on 1/25 ( currently am stocking 25 Highlanders). Anyone local or not-so-local will be able to see each car photographed in each color choice "live" with equipment and pricing.
Yea, it is honest considering that a lot of Dealers will jerk you around on the phone and never quote you a price. They'll say "Sure, we discount, sure we have that model, sure we have that color." You drive there, seem interested. Then it starts: "This is the price, because it's in demand." "We don't have those models yet, they're on the truck." "Colors? Hey, we take what they ship us."
It's amazing how some dealers develop amnesia once you show up in person. I'm so glad I bought the Lexus, none of these dealers seem to jerk you around. Toyota dealers in the NY area are notorious.
in my NY area getting a dealer to provide their bottom price is like pulling teeth. the dealer from MD http://beltwaytoyota.com/ gives the bottom prices on his web site.
EX: he sells a corolla at invoice - $400.
toyota has a $500 rebate. this means that the deler is getting $100 for selling the corolla.
this is clearly a very good price.
my local dealers constantly try to nagitiate and i find that very enoying. i wish all dealers just gave bottom pricing like beltwaytoyota does.
the problem is that this dealership is to far from NY.
what kind of prices over invoice or below msrp are people seeing in my NY NJ CT tri-state area for highlander's, RAV4's, and CRV's???
if possible, please provide what pricing you have for your highlanders in terms if $$$ over invoice of $$$ below MSRP. just curious how the highlanders are selling in CA
There is more to honesty than posting a good price. I know of dealers that will post low prices and then try to "bump" you for freight. This is deceptive and I don't think Beltway would do that, but unless you've been there, you don't know. I also know of dealers who will wait until you arrive to break the news that the web page is outdated and the new pricing is higher. Again, I'm not saying Beltway would do that, but I'm just trying to point out that posting a low price is not an indication of honesty.
Here's a good example. Dianne has posted prices here. We know a lot more about her than you know about Brian Orlove at Beltway Toyota (his name is on the printable certificate). We know she has a reputation to uphold and we know a lot more about her integrity than we do about Brian. I think we can agree that Dianne has earned the right to be called an honest dealer. We have heard from people who have bought from her.
I'm not nit-picking here. I'm asking for proper use of language. I strive to conduct myself in an honest manner and have honestly answered as many questions as possible here. I don't claim to sell Highlanders for $500 off MSRP, nor Sequoias for $2000 off MSRP. This does not make me dishonest.
We bought two Subarus from Fitzgerald's AutoMall in Rockville, MD. They also have a Toyota store in Gaithersburg, MD; as well as stores in Florida and Pennsylvania.
This site is well worth a look, in as they list their complete inventory, along with MSRP, two internet prices (you choose which best fits your needs), options, what comes standard, and VIN #.
Our Forester was bought in September, and it was as easy as buying a gallon of milk at the 7-11. I found the vehicle I wanted on their internet site, pulled a printout of that vehicle, called the dealer to see if it was in stock, and if this was the true price. The sales person said that it was, and we went in, drove it, and bought it. A piece of cake.
This is also a good site if anyone is interested in comparing Toyotas with Subarus, or any other brand which they also sell; for both prices and features.
Fitzgeralds is a huge outfit. I know there are several happy customers over in the Edmunds Subaru forums. I can't speak to the Toyota store, but I would assume their policies are the same.
The board moderator(s) have asked me very politely to not post my sales pricing due to violation of Edmunds policy. It's not an unusual request, and I intend to honor it. I think that if it's been requested of me in Landcruiser, Sequoia, and Rav4 Forums, as well as tacoma DoubleCab areas and Prius, it's aafe to say it's policy everywhere here. So, you will see me post general information and if you recall, I was the first to post colors, interiors, and option codes (with Cliffy too!) and I will post MSRP pricing for options but an email to me re: "my" pricing is far more appropriate and according to the rules.
You noted that the HL has a limited slip center differential...What is the limited slip differential that is available as an option and with which you cannot get VSC?
Also, thanks to cooltrucks for the clarification. That seems like pretty deep snow.
On the HL, there are three differentials. The front and rear are called "open" differentials. These are very simple mechanical devices that split power right to left. If both wheels have equal traction, power is divided equally. If one begins to slip, power is routed to that wheel. They are VERY reliable.
The center differential is a "viscous coupling limited slip" differential. Again, this is a fairly simple arrangement that sends power front to rear. It will bias power to the end of the vehicle with the MOST traction. This is done very quickly and seamlessly. If your front wheels begin to slip, more of the power is transferred to the rear.
The option of a limited slip rear differential is a different matter. This is a fairly fragile device that uses a series of clutches to send power left to right based on which side has the most traction. I don't like LSD rear ends because of the fact that those clutches only last between 60K to 100K miles.
The way that VSC/TRACS works, brakes are applied to a slipping wheel. This fools the open differentials into sending power to the side of the vehicle that actually has traction. This is why it will not work in conjunction with the LSD rear end.
This is also why I'm not so crazy about the VSC option. Since you have a limited slip center differential, you are defeating the front to rear power transfer by selective brake application of the TRACS. VSC is a terrific thing for lateral stability but I think you may actually be reducing the effectiveness of the AWD system.
Just got back from test driving the Highlander, Limited AWD. First sight for me was that it was a tall station wagon. Almost looked like a volvo wagon but taller. It drove beautifully, taking bumps well. We were very impressed with the maneuverablilty while driving. As soon as I finish with the lemon law with my 1999 Jeep Grand Cherokee (in the repair shop 23 times in the last 21 months), I will do my homework on this site and price one to take home.
I haven't been able to update that webstuff I promised, am processing every photo right now, but have been swamped and forgive me! I just set the new link up at the website at carsontoyota.com so look for the "Highlander and SUV headquarters" graphic along the bottom of my index page on the site. It should, later this aftyernoon, evening, (I am in CA) have equipment and photos and MSRP pricing, with a link to email me for "wholesale" fleet pricing too.
Note: 6910 models are not easy to come by, I am discovering. (That's the base model 4cyl). -Di
We have been anxiously awaiting the V6 AWD Highlander since we heard about them back in November. After reading this message board and taking our test drive we are still undecided. I think the exterior is pretty sharp looking, but don't want to be mistaken for an overgrown station wagon as some have said here.
We like: the drive, power, Toyota reliability record, and potential resale value, but we are unsure about: the small/inexpensive looking dash/pod, the lack of curtain bags, the usability of the cupholders (sounds stupid but is a very used item in the vehicle), no memory on the power seat, no steering wheel stereo controls, and the price. We want all the features, but the price seems a little too close to the RX300 and the MDX (although certain dealers here in central Illinois have offered $1000 - 1500 off MSRP on the HL). The MDX seems to give you more for the money, but our closest Acura dealer is 120 miles away so that is not an option. We are also considering the Pathfinder, which is a more truck-like SUV so not mentioned much here. I respect and trust Toyota and thought the HL would be the perfect fit since we felt the 4runner was too boxy and the RAV too small, but we still aren't sure.
A few questions... Does the tonneau cover easily pop out (for larger cargo)? Do the back seats have the ISOfix latches for car seats? (I looked and could not find them, but wasn't sure what they look like). Does the Limited have compass and outside temp? What is the actual cargo capacity? How does safety and resale value compare between Nissan and Toyota?
The Highlander Limited that I drove had Vehicle Skid Control (VSC) with Traction Control (Option Code = VD). I noticed that there is another option 2.928 Limited-Slip Differential (Option Code = LD), but it's not available with Option Code = VD. Likewise, if you get Option Code = VD you can not get Option Code = LD... it's one or the other.
I feel that my parking lot experience would've been different if I had both VSC with Traction Control _and_ the Limited-Slip Differential, thus improving my traction in the slippery conditions.
Warning...AWD/4WD + stability/traction control lesson coming up :-)
4 wheel traction control is a component of stability control. Stability control systems have the capability of braking each individual wheels to control the skid, so it's essentially a clever and much more sophisiticated adaptation of existing ABS/Traction control hardware. The reason why a mechanical rear limited differential (code LD) is not available for VSC equipped Highlanders is because the 4 wheel traction control simulates a rear (and front) locking differential. There is no point having both the electronic + mechanical traction aid. A limited slip rear differential is entirely different than a limited slip centre differential. Limited slip does really mean "limited" and not "locking".
Steve, I posted this in another topic WRT to your message in this topic (on the 24th) titled "snow and VSC":
"The RX300's and Highlander's viscous coupling (limited slip centre differential) is still open and without the traction control system, all of the power could leak out to one axle. MB showed this at their Powertrip event last year on the ramp test (simulating a slippery boat launch or driveway). The AWD RX300 got stuck at the bottom of the ramp since it simply spun its front wheels when they were on the rollers and absolutely no power went to the rear wheels.
To me, It's quite obvious what happened. This particular person who went on the test drive simply ventured too far into the snow. The traction control system did work, braking the slipping wheels. However, the one wheel (that was spinning) simply did not have enough power or traction to pull the vehicle out of the deep snow. THAT is why it was stuck. This is also where the off switch comes in handy. By deactivating the system (or at least most of its functionality), one can spin all four wheels at at least try to power one's way out of the snow by rocking back and forth. On a related note, I still think Subaru should consider adding an off switch for these situations on snow/sand just in case. IMHO, Toyota's 4 wheel traction control system does not seem to be quite as good as the Mercedes-Benz/Continental-Teves system."
So, the Sequoia's and Highlander's VSC work the exact same way. The major difference is that the Sequoia's 4WD system has a lot more modes to play around with and there is an off-switch. Presumably, Toyota did not include an off switch since they expect Highlander drivers to stay on the road, whereas the 4Runners or Sequoias are much more likely to (well okay...they're able to) venture off asphalt.
tlcjac, the Nissan Pathfinder does not come with side curtain airbags either, and it's 40mph offset crash test results were only marginal. I should point out that the only SUV currently on the market with side curtain airbags is the Toyota Sequoia. The BMW X5 has sausage shaped head protection tubes (much less surface area than the curtain bags, hence inferior to the other design, IMHO).
"1. HL is not as high as big SUV, so if that l-in-a-100,000 Side Impact by a big SUV, Truck or Pickup happens to you, the Side Curtain was necessary, espec. in roll over.
2. Side bag issue is not either curtain (or head bag) or rib bag, but if I had to choose, I'd choose head bag - a hit into your ribs is going to whiplash your head and neck severely sideways, and YOU ARE YOUR HEAD!
It is true that the Highlander is not as high as some full-sized SUVs, but most mid-sized SUVs are in the same boat anyway! Except for the rare pickup with the extreme lift kit, I serious doubt that the front end of a large SUV/pickup truck is going to plow directly into one at head level. One has a much greater chance of being hit with a normal height SUV or a car...this is where the side impact airbags (which protect the thorax) comes in.
Side curtain airbags do not necessarily help in rollovers. Ford's system (not available till late in the '02 model year) has to be hooked up with special sensors that can detect when the vehicle is about to rollover. Only then will it sense and deploy the curtain airbags. Ford intended this system to prevent(unbelted) occupants from being ejected from the vehicle in a rollover. Buckle up and you'll have to worry much less about this. Worry instead about having a strong safety cage/roof structure over your head that doesn't collapse after more than 2 rolls.
Ford is still one of the remaining companies that doesn't do dynamic roof testing of their vehicles. Basically this means that they don't actually do any rollover tests; they use computerised modeling and strength measurements instead. While this means that the roof meets mandated safety regulations, they don't actually know how it will perform in real life...just in simulations. Perhaps this will change after all of the bad press that the Explorer has had recently.
To check out pictures of a real rollover test, have a look here. Click here for a short video clip with sound.
A stability control system is one of the things that can significantly help to prevent rollovers. How? Well, obviously a vehicle has to loose control - meaning skid - and trip over something (usually a soft surface by the side of the road, or a curb) before it rolls over. Untripped rollovers are possible but rare, especially in normal day-to-day driving. Since VSC prevents most skids from occuring, the probability of rolling over is greatly reduced as well. A wider track does help to maintain stability in turns, but doesn't do anything to help to prevent skids when certain tires (out of the 4) are at their tractive limit and about the break loose.
Drew Host Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
Just get a highlander form German toyota in columbus, ohio. The price is little bit below the medium of invoice and MSRP, not a bad deal. One thing confusion is that the instruction on the manual for break states you can't drive over 55 mph before 1000 miles. But peoples told me not over 70 mph is good enough. Anyone have some idea about it?
First, to tlcjac, go back and read post #490 for more info on the VSC and AWD system.
Now, Drew, I have a couple of observations here. I am positive that the AWD system in the HL is distinctly different than the one in the Sequoia. The viscous coupling center differential is of the limited slip variety, while the center in the Sequoia is open. The test demonstration you described confirms my suspicion of using VSC in conjunction with a limited slip center. What is happening, is that power will be shifted left to right in an effort to find traction. The braking action of the TRACS does this. Unlike the Sequoia though, since you have a LSD in the center, power is actually kept on the axle that is slipping.
To those unfamiliar with how differentials work, I know this must sound confusing but I know you know what I mean here. On the Sequoia, if the right front wheel begins to slip, brakes are applied to just that wheel. Power is biased to all other corners of the vehicle because the open differentials are fooled into "thinking" there is more traction on the right front wheel. This is the result of having three open differentials and a traction control computer.
On the HL, if the right front wheel begins to slip, brakes are applied to only that wheel and power should go to the left. If, however, the left front also has poor traction, those brakes would also be applied. Since you have a LSD center, that differential thinks there is traction up front and would keep power up there. The LSD is fooled into "thinking" there is traction by virtue of the braking action and keeps power where is can't be used.
This is why I have been a bit skeptical of TRACS systems on this kind of AWD mechanism. It still does a great job of preventing lateral skids but the TRACS part may hinder movement under certain conditions. I would like to see a test similar to the one you described on a HL (or RX) without the VSC option.
Does this make sense Drew, or am I missing something?
A $36,100 (CND) Highlander 4WD V6 does not have a tonneau cover as standard equipment. A cover is available as part of the $9,200. Limited Package. I spoke to a person at the parts department and he did not know if there will be one available as an accessory as of yet. Given the high rate of break-ins for the most insignificant items left in view, all SUV's should have a cargo cover as standard equipment in my opinion.
As a side note, the same parts person told me that a tonneau cover for the new 2001 RAV 4 is around $1,000. So I can only imagine what it will cost to purchase one for the Highlander!
Last night I test drove a Toyota Highlander V6 and immediately went to test drive a Subaru Bean-Mobile (no VDC available). My back was killing me. Good time for a test drive.
First, my wife and daughter prefer the HL because of the extra room & seating. It's like a minivan with an SUV body. My wife loved the passenger seat. I thought the driver's seat felt hard. The seats were cloth. The stereo sounded great and the climate control worked well. The moonroof is huge. The HL pulled out from a stop with plenty of power. It cornered like the tall SUV it is and though it held the road well you could feel it tilt when pushed. The best way I can describe the ride is the way Healey of USA Today described it - "busy". As soon as we hit a stretch of road with expansion joints you could feel a series of high frequency bounces or vibrations that in the hard seat really bothered my back. On the highway the HL was smooth & quiet w/plenty of power. It absorbed big bumps well. The Toyota sales people were friendly, courteous & not pushy.
The LLB H6 felt like the sporty car it is with enough room but just enough. The moonroofs are just big enough to see out. I liked the climate control but the stereo seemed chincy when pushed. The leather seat was comfortable and got so hot after a while I had to turn it off. My wife thought the passenger seat sat too low. There's no reason to have split rear seat backs w/the traditional bench seat. Subaru needs to split that seat as well. The H6 pulled out with even more power than the HL I guess because of the lighter weight. It handled & cornered beautifully. I liked the gated shifter. You could feel bumps in the road. In fact our voices would vibrate as we talked but for some reason the LLB absorbed the bumps better & didn't bother my back as much. I think I'd rather have the H6 on a long drive. I know others haven't felt that way but I don't know if they had the leather seats. On the highway it was powerful, quiet & smooth w/no vibrations over expansion joints. When we got to the Subaru dealer the salesman acted like we were putting him out. He knew I had spoken to another salesman previously so he acted like we were being a pain when we asked for a test drive. He had to go inside a get a jumper kit to get the LLB started. The Subaru salespeople I've dealt with seem like they couldn't care less whether they sell these cars or not. Bottom line - Neither car was as jarring as the Pathfinder we're driving now. Even though my wife likes the utilitarian HL w/it's extra room I'm ready for the car-like H6 for every day driving. The bouncy hard seats in the HL killed my back. Tom
The AWD RX300 that I mentioned in MB's Powertrip demo was a non-VSC model (they didn't offer VSC in 1999). Because of the lack of torque management for the front and centre differentials, the vehicle got stuck. Here is a picture of the ramp test with the stuck AWD RX300...front wheels are spinning but rear ones are not even moving:
I'm pretty sure that like MB's system, Toyota's 4 wheel TRACS monitors the speed of all 4 wheels and if one wheel is starting to spin faster than the others, the brake is intermittently applied to that wheel to slow it down to the same speed as the other wheels so that it (the wheel) does not become a power leak. For MB's 4-matic system, the activation threshold is 3mph in high range, and 1.5 mph in low range. IOW for those who are unfamiliar, if one wheel is spinning 3mph than the others, the brake is intermittently applied to that wheel so that it doesn't completely break loose and spin.
Since the HL's AWD system is similar to the RX300's and the RAV4's, the power should be permanently split (in normal conditions) at 50/50 between the front and rear axles. With all of the 4 wheels spinning at about the same rate, the AWD system thinks that there is equal resistance and there should be no leaks. I understand what you're saying and it certainly would be true IF, 1) the AWD system was split 100/0 or 90/10 front to rear in normal no-slip conditions, and 2) if the traction control component of VSC only monitored one axle/a pair of wheels at a time.
BTW, many of the complaints have centered around James Healey's review in USA Today. He is not a fan of any vehicle equipped with a 4 wheel traction control enhanced 4WD/AWD system, so I tend to take his criticisms with a large pinch of salt. Before I even saw his review, I was absolutely certain that he would critise the AWD system...and I was right!
Drew Host Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards P.S. I just realised that the first sentence of my previous message may have made it seem as if I was trying to say that I was an expert in this. Well, I didn't intend to give that impression. I'm just someone trying to make sense of all of this like you are :-) By no means am I any sort of expert. target=_blank
Every single one of my cars here, if not Limited, has *one* of the two items:
QO = quick order package which includes the keyless entry, privacy glass, and tonneau cover.
CQ = convenience package which includes keyless entry and tonneau cover.
If you have cars for that kind of expense locally which lack QO as a 4cyl or CQ as a V6, then it was a poorly built car, meaning the regional guys who decide how they want the cars brought in missed that code. It isn't Toyota -- it's your region. Toyota builds cars to suit the requests of the regions.
In Canada the only package available for the Highlander 4WD V6 is the Limited Package which includes a tonneau cover. Keyless entry, privacy glass are standard on both the 2.4 and 3.0 litre models. So thanks to the powers that be at Toyota Canada the tonneau cover might be available as a costly additional accessory.
Why the tonneau cover is not available as a standard feature in the first place both in Canada and the US I don't know. It's a must these days.
Comments
In fact, Toyota would have a safety and a marketing coup if it offered both as HL standard equipment, distinguishing itself from the "none or optional" U. S. and other Japanese SUV makers. I'll hope and wait for a 2002; also for a power passenger seat. And that etched glass? It's a half-inch wide at the base of each side window, with a gap in which the word "HL" or "Limited" is etched. It's been added by our thoughtful Gulf States Distributor, but Mike Calvert Toyota is so impressed he charges an additional $795.00 for it in Houston...must have studied P. T. Barnum.
During the extended test drive, I was able to test both highway and snow covered secondary roads.
On the highway, the Highlander seemed very smooth and for the most part quiet. However, noise from the integrated roof racks seem noticeable over 65 mph; a sort of low to high pitch whine (the day was very calm, with little to no wind - so cross winds were not a factor). Periodically, during the 20+ miles of highway driving, I would slow down to simulate a high speed passing situation. At this point the 220 HP v6 engine seemed heavily taxed, though the driving conditions were not at altitude, requiring the engine to work hard to regain cruising speed.
The Highlander easily negotiated the secondary roads, where a couple of climbing sections contained over 9-degree grades. I was even able to drive the Highlander into deep snow (an unplowed parking lot). Interestingly, the traction-control system (which limits wheel spin by braking wheels individually or adjusting braking pressure - can't be turned off) didn't allow us to move forward because one of the front wheels kept spinning. The poor salesman didn't even mind helping to push the vehicle out! Once again, the 220 HP engine seemed sluggish from a standing start.
This Highlander Limited, with several options, was priced around $34,000, dangerously close to the Lexus RX300 in my opinion.
I'm sure the Highlander will sell very well, though I'm unsure if this is the vehicle for my needs.
-C
Bob
Drew
Host
Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
Exterior looks -- Not stunning. You could even call it a little vanilla, designed not to offend anybody. However, it's not nearly as unattractive as many here have made it out to be. I was worried that it would look like a Forester, but it's considerably better looking (to me) than that. It's higher off the ground and has the same general appearance of a "traditional" SUV, except smaller (which is what it is). My only real objection was the rear spoiler, which seems to be a standard option (so to speak), since it was on every HL on the lot. The HL is not snazzy enough to have a spoiler, and it looks like a way for Toyota to charge $300+ for a piece of metal that couldn't cost more than $40 or $50.
Interior -- very roomy. Headroom is often an issue for me, but not with the HL. I also had no legroom problem at all, even when I put the seat closer to the steering wheel. Dashboard controls are very intelligently and ergonomically laid out, as you'd expect. Radio seemed quite good; no booming bass ala Sequoia and 2001 LC and sound didn't drift in and out as many Avalon owners have complained of. My three major complaints about the interior are (1) the lack of a center console; (2) location of the cupholders; and (3) the cheap look of the plastic. I could get over (3), since most new cars these days seem to have cheap-looking plastic, but (1) and (2) are really serious flaws, IMO. I would hope Toyota would correct this for next model year.
Ride -- really nice. No complaints at all here. The 3.0 was very peppy, particularly off the start. I didn't have it on the highway, so I couldn't say whether passing acceleration would be a problem, but I can't imagine it would. As you'd expect, much more carlike than a Sequoia but, frankly, I thought the 4Runner's ride was almost as good as HL's. Didn't get a chance to test it on slippery or snowy road conditions.
Marketing -- I went to 2 dealerships, one that didn't have one yet and the other that did. The salesmen at both places kept talking about how the HL was designed by women for women. Grand Cherokee seemed to be identified as the key competitor.
Pricing -- IMO, it's 1-2K more than it should be, but I've thought for a long time that most Toyota models seem overpriced compared to the competition. Yet they still sell well (I bought one myself last year), and Toyota continues to gain market share as Ford and GM plummet. I guess people are willing to fork over a little more for better reliability, quality, etc.
Overall -- a nice "urban" SUV. But, they've really got to do something about that center console.
You mentioned that "the 3.0 was very peppy, particularly off the start".
The HL Limited that I drove was _not_ at all peppy, but rather slow from a standing start. On the highway, the passing simulation I did seemed rather exhaustive on the engine and took a relatively long amount of time.
I wonder if the vehicle you drove had more miles on the engine (mine had 87 miles) which made it more "broken in"/responsive?
The Highlander has them (torso side airbags) available for the front. The M-class, unlike many other SUV's (e.g. MDX, RX), has them available for both first and second row passengers (and may add side curtains as well for the 2002 model year, which is the best blend).
Of course, in a conventional sedan, side curtains are much more valuable.
I was under the impression that the Limited Package (LL) was only available on the 3L V-6 DOHC engine?
Maybe I'll go back and test the same class vehicle again, but at a different dealership to see if acceleration is the same.
2. Side bag issue is not either curtain (or head bag) or rib bag, but if I had to choose, I'd choose head bag - a hit into your ribs is going to whiplash your head and neck severely sideways, and YOU ARE YOUR HEAD!
3. I'm not in auto business, but I follow the logic and physics of crash testing (see www.iihs.org and www.nhtsa.dot.gov)and am disappointed that auto makers are still not offering proven safety options, especially on a brand-new smaller SUV like HL. I'll wait.
When I was playing around the inside, I tried the pass thru from back to front and I managed to squeez through. The front passenger seat did fold back but not flat. No armrest and no vents in back. It came with fullsize spare.
The test drive. I was surpised by the power. Then again, it was a 2WD that was almost broken in. The power is strong for initial pickup but I didn't have a chance for freeway test. The ride reminds me of my Camry (a compliment). It's very smooth. This would be a great SUV, if I didn't know about the MDX. Now, if the Highlander came out first and was priced aggressively, then I might have been driving the Highlander. In fact, if the SR5 V5 2WD I drove had the side-airbag/VSC option and costed less than $27K, I might have been an owner of one.
But too bad. I saw the MDX, then my wife saw it. Then the straw that broken the camel's back, my wife saw a picture of the Highlander's frontend. End of story.
P.S. In person, the front end is not real bad but that first public shot of the Highlander was a big mistake by Toyota. I got the brochure and there are pictures in there that actually make the Highlander look decent.
Are you also saying that you think the traction control system was actually disadvantageous in this situation or just insufficient to provide traction? Did the salesman say anything about trying the Snow mode switch?
I'd be interested in hearing about anyone else's experiences on snow and ice.
Regarding VSC: The NHTSA site (with the rollover star ratings) states that stability control systems do help prevent rollovers. It even notes which vehicles have something like VSC available, which makes it seem those folks think it is pretty useful. I take that to be a meaningful recommendation.
I would prefer to have both side and head air bags. Some side bags provide protection to both areas; too bad Highlander's aren't big enough. Head air bags have been shown to reduce the risk of serious head injury, just as side air bags better protect critical torso regions.
--Dianne
dianne@earthlink.net
-Di
Does anybody get a similar impression??
I liked the bells and whistles of the limited
but not the hungry V6.Too bad you can't get
leather without getting the V6.The driving
position reminded me of a pickup,the steering very
light,and the 4 cylinder adequate but the V6 adds
a fun factor.
Even though I feel that the traction control system typically worked flawlessly (driving up steep snow covered hills was easy), in this specific instance, even with toggling the snow mode switch on/off (as per the salesman's request), the system automatically tried braking wheels individually and adjusting brake pressure to the disc brakes (this is how the sophisticated AWD system works on the Highlander)... this kept the vehicle from moving in the snow, causing one of the front wheels to spin violently. I walked around the vehicle when the salesman tried to free the Highlander and noticed the left front wheel spinning while all the other wheels were stationary. With a little pushing, the Highlander was free again.
Therefore, in this specific case, the traction control system was a disadvantage because it wouldn't allow sufficient traction to move forward.
I hope this helps!
My wife likes the Highlander a lot better and I think the long term durability and resale value will be better. We were concerned about the traction of the Highlander after reading the USA TOday article. Can't imagine that the Highlander would be so bad especially since it is based on the same platform as the RX300 which is well proven. "cooltrucks" got stuck in 10 inches of snow! Don't think I would be driving on roads with that much snow. Thanks for the clarification "cooltrucks" appreciate your doing a thorough test. I like most everyone else sure would like it if Toyota had made the side airbags standard along with side curtain airbags. I presume that the force and location would determine the effectiveness of the Toyota side airbags. Does anyone have any updates on prices paid for their Highlanders? Thanks
TC
As far as the USA Today article goes, this is the same auto writer who said the ML stinks in the snow too. Well, my parents have one and I've driven it in the snow without fanfare. I thought it was great so to each their own.
Later posts show that the parking lot had 10-12 inches of snow and the Highlander got stuck in even deeper stuff. Well, that doesn't surprise me. Ground clearance is the key. Of course, how many people are going to drive on roads with 12" of freshly untraveled and unplowed roads. More likely, you'll be traveling on packed snow or ice. Any 4wd vehicle can get stuck in deep snow. I once went out during a storm in a friends 4wd Dualie. We drove it through a 2' deep bank of loose snow. We punched through it, but the vehicle almost got stuck. Luckily we only cut through about a 10' section.
Now as far as pricing goes, I agree with many people that the Highlander is overpriced once loaded up. At the VERY least, they should have included leather as part of the Limited package.Same goes for the RAV4. Base price is fine, but loaded for $26k! That's too much for a cute ute. A better bet may be to get the convenience packages from the base model and get after-market leather. Seeing that Sequoia's are being discounted already, it's just a matter of time before the Highlander gets discounted too.
As to driving in 12" of snow—I took our Subaru Impreza Outback (which has less ground clearance than a Forester or Legacy-Outback) last year, through a good 14" of snow without a hitch, what so ever. Heck, if you've got AWD, and it snows—you go out and play.
Bob
This can't happen on the HL though. Power can shift left or right, but because it has a limited slip center differential, power is kept at the end of the vehicle which has no traction. I don't like this, but if you get VSC, you may run into a problem in deep snow.
The VSC is a great safety feature though and the trade off may be worth it. VSC is going to prevent lateral skids quite nicely. I could do without the TRACS system on the HL.
In this case, less is definately better.
i found a dealer in MD and they will sell for MSRP-$500
they have all prices listed on their website:
http://beltwaytoyota.com/
finaly a dealer that appears to be honest!
thanks
Dianne Whitmire
Fleet Manager
www.carsontoyota.com
http://www.carsontoyota.com/master_wecare.html
(dianne@earthlink.net)
It's amazing how some dealers develop amnesia once you show up in person. I'm so glad I bought the Lexus, none of these dealers seem to jerk you around. Toyota dealers in the NY area are notorious.
EX: he sells a corolla at invoice - $400.
toyota has a $500 rebate. this means that the deler is getting $100 for selling the corolla.
this is clearly a very good price.
my local dealers constantly try to nagitiate and i find that very enoying. i wish all dealers just gave bottom pricing like beltwaytoyota does.
the problem is that this dealership is to far from NY.
what kind of prices over invoice or below msrp are people seeing in my NY NJ CT tri-state area for highlander's, RAV4's, and CRV's???
thanks
thanks
Here's a good example. Dianne has posted prices here. We know a lot more about her than you know about Brian Orlove at Beltway Toyota (his name is on the printable certificate). We know she has a reputation to uphold and we know a lot more about her integrity than we do about Brian. I think we can agree that Dianne has earned the right to be called an honest dealer. We have heard from people who have bought from her.
I'm not nit-picking here. I'm asking for proper use of language. I strive to conduct myself in an honest manner and have honestly answered as many questions as possible here. I don't claim to sell Highlanders for $500 off MSRP, nor Sequoias for $2000 off MSRP. This does not make me dishonest.
This site is well worth a look, in as they list their complete inventory, along with MSRP, two internet prices (you choose which best fits your needs), options, what comes standard, and VIN #.
Our Forester was bought in September, and it was as easy as buying a gallon of milk at the 7-11. I found the vehicle I wanted on their internet site, pulled a printout of that vehicle, called the dealer to see if it was in stock, and if this was the true price. The sales person said that it was, and we went in, drove it, and bought it. A piece of cake.
This is also a good site if anyone is interested in comparing Toyotas with Subarus, or any other brand which they also sell; for both prices and features.
Fitzgeralds is a huge outfit. I know there are several happy customers over in the Edmunds Subaru forums. I can't speak to the Toyota store, but I would assume their policies are the same.
http://www.fitzgeraldautomall.com/
Thanks.
Dianne
dianne@earthlink.net
Also, thanks to cooltrucks for the clarification. That seems like pretty deep snow.
The center differential is a "viscous coupling limited slip" differential. Again, this is a fairly simple arrangement that sends power front to rear. It will bias power to the end of the vehicle with the MOST traction. This is done very quickly and seamlessly. If your front wheels begin to slip, more of the power is transferred to the rear.
The option of a limited slip rear differential is a different matter. This is a fairly fragile device that uses a series of clutches to send power left to right based on which side has the most traction. I don't like LSD rear ends because of the fact that those clutches only last between 60K to 100K miles.
The way that VSC/TRACS works, brakes are applied to a slipping wheel. This fools the open differentials into sending power to the side of the vehicle that actually has traction. This is why it will not work in conjunction with the LSD rear end.
This is also why I'm not so crazy about the VSC option. Since you have a limited slip center differential, you are defeating the front to rear power transfer by selective brake application of the TRACS. VSC is a terrific thing for lateral stability but I think you may actually be reducing the effectiveness of the AWD system.
Note: 6910 models are not easy to come by, I am discovering. (That's the base model 4cyl).
-Di
We like: the drive, power, Toyota reliability record, and potential resale value, but we are unsure about: the small/inexpensive looking dash/pod, the lack of curtain bags, the usability of the cupholders (sounds stupid but is a very used item in the vehicle), no memory on the power seat, no steering wheel stereo controls, and the price. We want all the features, but the price seems a little too close to the RX300 and the MDX (although certain dealers here in central Illinois have offered $1000 - 1500 off MSRP on the HL). The MDX seems to give you more for the money, but our closest Acura dealer is 120 miles away so that is not an option. We are also considering the Pathfinder, which is a more truck-like SUV so not mentioned much here. I respect and trust Toyota and thought the HL would be the perfect fit since we felt the 4runner was too boxy and the RAV too small, but we still aren't sure.
A few questions... Does the tonneau cover easily pop out (for larger cargo)? Do the back seats have the ISOfix latches for car seats? (I looked and could not find them, but wasn't sure what they look like). Does the Limited have compass and outside temp? What is the actual cargo capacity? How does safety and resale value compare between Nissan and Toyota?
Thanks for any information/advice.
I feel that my parking lot experience would've been different if I had both VSC with Traction Control _and_ the Limited-Slip Differential, thus improving my traction in the slippery conditions.
-C
4 wheel traction control is a component of stability control. Stability control systems have the capability of braking each individual wheels to control the skid, so it's essentially a clever and much more sophisiticated adaptation of existing ABS/Traction control hardware. The reason why a mechanical rear limited differential (code LD) is not available for VSC equipped Highlanders is because the 4 wheel traction control simulates a rear (and front) locking differential. There is no point having both the electronic + mechanical traction aid. A limited slip rear differential is entirely different than a limited slip centre differential. Limited slip does really mean "limited" and not "locking".
Steve, I posted this in another topic WRT to your message in this topic (on the 24th) titled "snow and VSC":
"The RX300's and Highlander's viscous coupling (limited slip centre differential) is still open and without the traction control system, all of the power could leak out to one axle. MB showed this at their Powertrip event last year on the ramp test (simulating a slippery boat launch or driveway). The AWD RX300 got stuck at the bottom of the ramp since it simply spun its front wheels when they were on the rollers and absolutely no power went to the rear wheels.
To me, It's quite obvious what happened. This particular person who went on the test drive simply ventured too far into the snow. The traction control system did work, braking the slipping wheels. However, the one wheel (that was spinning) simply did not have enough power or traction to pull the vehicle out of the deep snow. THAT is why it was stuck. This is also where the off switch comes in handy. By deactivating the system (or at least most of its functionality), one can spin all four wheels at at least try to power one's way out of the snow by rocking back and forth. On a related note, I still think Subaru should consider adding an off switch for these situations on snow/sand just in case. IMHO, Toyota's 4 wheel traction control system does not seem to be quite as good as the Mercedes-Benz/Continental-Teves system."
So, the Sequoia's and Highlander's VSC work the exact same way. The major difference is that the Sequoia's 4WD system has a lot more modes to play around with and there is an off-switch. Presumably, Toyota did not include an off switch since they expect Highlander drivers to stay on the road, whereas the 4Runners or Sequoias are much more likely to (well okay...they're able to) venture off asphalt.
tlcjac, the Nissan Pathfinder does not come with side curtain airbags either, and it's 40mph offset crash test results were only marginal. I should point out that the only SUV currently on the market with side curtain airbags is the Toyota Sequoia. The BMW X5 has sausage shaped head protection tubes (much less surface area than the curtain bags, hence inferior to the other design, IMHO).
"1. HL is not as high as big SUV, so if that l-in-a-100,000 Side Impact by a big SUV, Truck or Pickup happens to you, the Side Curtain was necessary, espec. in roll over.
2. Side bag issue is not either curtain (or head bag) or rib bag, but if I had to choose, I'd choose head bag - a hit into your ribs is going to whiplash your head and neck severely sideways, and YOU ARE YOUR HEAD!
It is true that the Highlander is not as high as some full-sized SUVs, but most mid-sized SUVs are in the same boat anyway! Except for the rare pickup with the extreme lift kit, I serious doubt that the front end of a large SUV/pickup truck is going to plow directly into one at head level. One has a much greater chance of being hit with a normal height SUV or a car...this is where the side impact airbags (which protect the thorax) comes in.
Side curtain airbags do not necessarily help in rollovers. Ford's system (not available till late in the '02 model year) has to be hooked up with special sensors that can detect when the vehicle is about to rollover. Only then will it sense and deploy the curtain airbags. Ford intended this system to prevent(unbelted) occupants from being ejected from the vehicle in a rollover. Buckle up and you'll have to worry much less about this. Worry instead about having a strong safety cage/roof structure over your head that doesn't collapse after more than 2 rolls.
Ford is still one of the remaining companies that doesn't do dynamic roof testing of their vehicles. Basically this means that they don't actually do any rollover tests; they use computerised modeling and strength measurements instead. While this means that the roof meets mandated safety regulations, they don't actually know how it will perform in real life...just in simulations. Perhaps this will change after all of the bad press that the Explorer has had recently.
To check out pictures of a real rollover test, have a look here. Click here for a short video clip with sound.
A stability control system is one of the things that can significantly help to prevent rollovers. How? Well, obviously a vehicle has to loose control - meaning skid - and trip over something (usually a soft surface by the side of the road, or a curb) before it rolls over. Untripped rollovers are possible but rare, especially in normal day-to-day driving. Since VSC prevents most skids from occuring, the probability of rolling over is greatly reduced as well. A wider track does help to maintain stability in turns, but doesn't do anything to help to prevent skids when certain tires (out of the 4) are at their tractive limit and about the break loose.
Drew
Host
Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
One thing confusion is that the instruction on the manual for break states you can't drive over 55 mph before 1000 miles. But peoples told me not over 70 mph is good enough. Anyone have some idea about it?
Now, Drew, I have a couple of observations here. I am positive that the AWD system in the HL is distinctly different than the one in the Sequoia. The viscous coupling center differential is of the limited slip variety, while the center in the Sequoia is open. The test demonstration you described confirms my suspicion of using VSC in conjunction with a limited slip center. What is happening, is that power will be shifted left to right in an effort to find traction. The braking action of the TRACS does this. Unlike the Sequoia though, since you have a LSD in the center, power is actually kept on the axle that is slipping.
To those unfamiliar with how differentials work, I know this must sound confusing but I know you know what I mean here. On the Sequoia, if the right front wheel begins to slip, brakes are applied to just that wheel. Power is biased to all other corners of the vehicle because the open differentials are fooled into "thinking" there is more traction on the right front wheel. This is the result of having three open differentials and a traction control computer.
On the HL, if the right front wheel begins to slip, brakes are applied to only that wheel and power should go to the left. If, however, the left front also has poor traction, those brakes would also be applied. Since you have a LSD center, that differential thinks there is traction up front and would keep power up there. The LSD is fooled into "thinking" there is traction by virtue of the braking action and keeps power where is can't be used.
This is why I have been a bit skeptical of TRACS systems on this kind of AWD mechanism. It still does a great job of preventing lateral skids but the TRACS part may hinder movement under certain conditions. I would like to see a test similar to the one you described on a HL (or RX) without the VSC option.
Does this make sense Drew, or am I missing something?
As a side note, the same parts person told me that a tonneau cover for the new 2001 RAV 4 is around $1,000. So I can only imagine what it will cost to purchase one for the Highlander!
First, my wife and daughter prefer the HL because of the extra room & seating. It's like a minivan with an SUV body. My wife loved the passenger seat. I thought the driver's seat felt hard. The seats were cloth. The stereo sounded great and the climate control worked well. The moonroof is huge.
The HL pulled out from a stop with plenty of power. It cornered like the tall SUV it is and though it held the road well you could feel it tilt when pushed.
The best way I can describe the ride is the way Healey of USA Today described it - "busy". As soon as we hit a stretch of road with expansion joints you could feel a series of high frequency bounces or vibrations that in the hard seat really bothered my back. On the highway the HL was smooth & quiet w/plenty of power. It absorbed big bumps well.
The Toyota sales people were friendly, courteous & not pushy.
The LLB H6 felt like the sporty car it is with enough room but just enough. The moonroofs are just big enough to see out. I liked the climate control but the stereo seemed chincy when pushed.
The leather seat was comfortable and got so hot after a while I had to turn it off. My wife thought the passenger seat sat too low. There's no reason to have split rear seat backs w/the traditional bench seat. Subaru needs to split that seat as well.
The H6 pulled out with even more power than the HL I guess because of the lighter weight. It handled & cornered beautifully. I liked the gated shifter.
You could feel bumps in the road. In fact our voices would vibrate as we talked but for some reason the LLB absorbed the bumps better & didn't bother my back as much. I think I'd rather have the H6 on a long drive. I know others haven't felt that way but I don't know if they had the leather seats. On the highway it was powerful, quiet & smooth w/no vibrations over expansion joints.
When we got to the Subaru dealer the salesman acted like we were putting him out. He knew I had spoken to another salesman previously so he acted like we were being a pain when we asked for a test drive. He had to go inside a get a jumper kit to get the LLB started. The Subaru salespeople I've dealt with seem like they couldn't care less whether they sell these cars or not.
Bottom line - Neither car was as jarring as the Pathfinder we're driving now. Even though my wife likes the utilitarian HL w/it's extra room I'm ready for the car-like H6 for every day driving. The bouncy hard seats in the HL killed my back.
Tom
I'm pretty sure that like MB's system, Toyota's 4 wheel TRACS monitors the speed of all 4 wheels and if one wheel is starting to spin faster than the others, the brake is intermittently applied to that wheel to slow it down to the same speed as the other wheels so that it (the wheel) does not become a power leak. For MB's 4-matic system, the activation threshold is 3mph in high range, and 1.5 mph in low range. IOW for those who are unfamiliar, if one wheel is spinning 3mph than the others, the brake is intermittently applied to that wheel so that it doesn't completely break loose and spin.
Since the HL's AWD system is similar to the RX300's and the RAV4's, the power should be permanently split (in normal conditions) at 50/50 between the front and rear axles. With all of the 4 wheels spinning at about the same rate, the AWD system thinks that there is equal resistance and there should be no leaks. I understand what you're saying and it certainly would be true IF, 1) the AWD system was split 100/0 or 90/10 front to rear in normal no-slip conditions, and 2) if the traction control component of VSC only monitored one axle/a pair of wheels at a time.
BTW, many of the complaints have centered around James Healey's review in USA Today. He is not a fan of any vehicle equipped with a 4 wheel traction control enhanced 4WD/AWD system, so I tend to take his criticisms with a large pinch of salt. Before I even saw his review, I was absolutely certain that he would critise the AWD system...and I was right!
Drew
Host
Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
P.S. I just realised that the first sentence of my previous message may have made it seem as if I was trying to say that I was an expert in this. Well, I didn't intend to give that impression. I'm just someone trying to make sense of all of this like you are :-) By no means am I any sort of expert. target=_blank
of the two items:
QO = quick order package which includes the keyless entry, privacy glass, and tonneau cover.
CQ = convenience package which includes keyless entry and tonneau cover.
If you have cars for that kind of expense locally which lack QO as a 4cyl or CQ as a V6, then it was a poorly built car, meaning the regional guys who decide how they want the cars brought in missed that code. It isn't Toyota -- it's your region. Toyota builds cars to suit the requests of the regions.
-Dianne
Take a look today. It sounded pretty positive.
Why the tonneau cover is not available as a standard feature in the first place both in Canada and the US I don't know. It's a must these days.