The Torsen differentials were dropped in '98 on the Hummer in favor of the open/ABS system. Delay is extremely minimal because open differentials take almost no time to find the past of least resistance.
You say that the Denali XL excells in all catagories over the Sequoia, but I see no mention of the offroad catagory. Nor do I see any reference to GM reliability. I believe 714cut and Consumer Reports touched on that a few posts ago. Personally, I want to know the thing is going to start in the morning more than I want to race a Denali. I know Chevys don't like to start after a few years, so I can't imagine paying the extra premium for a GMC is going to make any difference.
Equal or possibly better than GM's auto 4WD? Now that's a joke. I owned a Chevy K1500. While it didn't have auto 4WD (THAT would have to have a delay), it did have GM's part-time 4WD. In this day and age it was a dinosaur. Talk about cost saving measures,GM adds a sensor to detect slippage in the rear and has the gall to refer to it as Auto 4WD.
And once again, the Denali XL and the Sequoia are not the same type of vehicle. Let's try to stick to the non-XL Denali when making comparisons.
By the way, have you watched the news and seen those old Toyota trucks that the Afghanis drive all over that mountainous desert? Can you imagine the killing GM could have made in spare parts sales over there? I know my K1500 wouldn't have made it across the border without a trip to the dealership.
Seems my original post has gotten lost amongst all the 4WD talk.
Reposted: Has anyone had a problem getting their new Sequoia out of park? It's annoying but sometimes I have to pump the brake before the gearshift releases from park in order to get it into drive. At first I thought maybe I'm not pulling the gear shift straight back or not depressing the brake pedal far enough while attempting to shift into drive. Is this a safety feature which may need an adjustment?
One of two things is happening. Either you are attempting to shift too quickly or it needs adjustment. I have experienced something like this with my Tundra, but only when I try to shift at the same time as applying the brake. If I do it in the correct order (brake then shift), I have no problems. If that is not the case, take it to your dealer.
you talk about the "delay" in the Sequoia 4wd system. In this day and age delays are measured in microseconds, transparent to the driver.
Also on your awd, does the ratio between front and back stay the same? If it does that would be a disadvantage at times. If it doesn't and the % changes there would be a slight delay while that happens wouldn't there?
I don't think it's fair to say that awd is superior to 4wd. Usually awd is reserved for station wagons isn't it:)
cliffy: the official GM Hummer site disagrees with the information on the Hummer drivetrain you have shared. The site is <http://www.hummer.com/flash.html>. Click on "vehicles", then "H1", then "H1 Advantages", then "Technology", then "TT4". You'll find that 2002 H1 Hummers have a Torsen III Limited Slip Differential combined with Torq Trac (TT4) electronic sensors to use the ABS system to "brake" wheel spin.
pschreck: All of my references to performance have been on the subject of "on-road" performance. I think I've acknowledged quite clearly that there is some advantage to the Sequoia in having 4wd lo for off-road use over a DXL. I have also pointed out that most owners of a Sequoia will never go off-road....have you?
With all due respect to your limited experience with GM 4wd vehicles, I think I can speak much better than you regarding their reliability having owned three of them. In nearly 300,000 miles driven in three 4wd Suburbans, not once...I repeat not once, in 15 years has any of my 3 4wd Suburbans ever not started for me or left me stranded. Would I have liked the brake pads to have lasted longer than 15K on the older models?... you bet. The brake pads on my 2001 Denali XL have 17,000 and were just inspected...they have less than 5% wear on them.
I don't know what year your Chevy K1500 was, but there is no comparison to a 2002 Tahoe or an '02 Sequoia. The Auto 4wd system in the GM's will have a miniscule time lag for torque transfer, just as the torque transfer in Toyota's 4wd setup. Go from dry to slippery pavement at speed in either vehicle and you most definitely will feel the shift of torque. A sensation you will not experience in a AWD vehicle.
The Sequoia uses electronics to brake a spinning wheel and the GM Auto4wd uses a limited slip diff to transfer torque to a wheel that's not spinning. Both must "transfer" torque. In the regular GM 4wd mode and in the AWD system, of all manufacturer's, there is a pre-determined amount of torque delivered to both axles without the need to transfer torque or to prevent its transfer as in the case of the Toyota or when the GM is set to auto4wd.
While you may not think the Sequoia and Denali XL are like vehicles... I do, as do car magazines doing comparison testing. You compare vehicles as you see fit, as will I.
714 cut: as stated earlier, the ratio remains the same 38/62 on the Denali AWD system until the rear slips sending more power to the front. Of course there is a time lag on ANY system that must transfer torque. The best bet is to not have to transfer it to start with, which is the principle behind awd.
In the end, it remains my opinion and I believe the opinion of most people familar with 4wd systems, that for on-road performance AWD is superior to 4wd. If you need the flexibility of 4wd lo for serious off-roading, you might be better off in a vehicle that offers a more traditional 4wd system.
pschreck: while you appear somewhat loose and free with your derogatory remarks regarding GM vehicles, at least they're owner's are not stuck in some parking lot with a vehicle that can't get out of park like fsw98 and his Sequoia:)
Thanks for steering the thread back on topic. The more of these "comparisons" I see, the more I am convinced the Sequoia is my best choice for on-road and off. I have done both with it, and am delighted with its performance. Now if Toyota can just manufacture enough stereo amplifiers to get my replacement off backorder, I will be *totally* pleased....
So what you are saying is that the Sequoia 4WD system is the better ALL AROUND SYSTEM. I agree.
I have owned a 1995 Blazer 4WD, a 1997 Astro AWD, and a 1996 K1500 4WD, all of which were crap. Not just for their drive systems, but also for their reliability and fit and finish. It took me far to long to conclude that GM is turning out crap almost as fast as Chrysler. I believe that I've earned the right to say anything I please about GM.
Have I taken it off road yet? No. But I can. Can you take the Denali off road? Can you pull anybody out of a snow bank or out of a ditch. Not bloody likely. AWD, as stated earlier by another member, is for station wagons like my wifes Outback.
We live in San Diego, CA and go up to Mammoth Mountain for skiing about 3-4 times each winter. Can anyone share their experiences with the 2WD Sequoia in the snow and how it handles?
How much more maintenance is required for a 4WD vehicle? The plan would be to purchase the car and drive for 7-8 years. Toyota's are usually reliable but am afraid that their high-tech 4WD system might impose some maintenace issues in the long haul. Any input???
Thanks for your response. I'll be taking it into the dealer. I did not mention this quirk to my wife just to see if it was/wasn't me and this morning she calls me from the car asking why she can't get it out of park.
pschreck: Tried to engage in a reasonable discussion of the merits of one 4wd system over another. Based on the host's preference to keep comparisons off the Sequoia forum and your own delusional views on the flawlessness of the Sequoia, I'll let you continue your "happy" congratulation of one another and trying to figure out how to get your Sequoia's out of Park and why its 4wd system sounds like a coffee grinder:)
In addition to the comparison topic linked above, there's some "merit" talk in the 4WD & AWD systems explained discussion (plus there's a Toyota 4WD systems explained discussion). Steve Host SUVs, Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards
heatmiser1: I also live in California and go up to the mountains about the same as you. I have driven other SUVs and is interested in the Sequoia. I would also be interested in looking at the 2WD option over the 4WD because of maintenance and lack of useage. Other SUVs have AWD systems that do not require physically putting the vehicle into 4WD like the Sequoia (Please correct me if I'm wrong). In that case I would put chains on the 2WD and save some money, JMHO.
Does anyone know if Toyota has any plans to update the Sequoia. I am mostly interested in the interior because I like a little more luxury styling like that of a Landcruiser (i.e., wood trim, gear shifter on the center console, etc.)
Also, what is a reasonable price to pay for the Sequoia, how much over dealer invoice? I have heard $1000 over.
A full-time 4WD has the advantages of AWD (like the trooper and sequoia) but also the ability to lock the center diff. So, the AWD is a subset of the the 4WD on the sequoia. Heatwave, your points about AWD are semantic in nature. It would have been nice if locking the center diff was available throughout all the low range gears in the sequoia, but clearly for a situation where it is likely needed such as rocky steep terrain, the low range low diff locking will be all you need.
Cliffy, do you know whether the 2002 LC has a locking diff over other gears--it also uses the the sequoia 4WD traction system as I understand it.
The Land Cruiser has a button on the dash to lock the center differential in any gear or range. The Runner has the same thing. I think it was left off the Sequoia because of the actual use Toyota envisions it in. Our Sequoia buyers don't care much about it and have a hard enough time understanding the system as it is. Runner and LC buyers are more likely to use it off road enough to want a locker. Honestly though, after talking to some who have used all of them off road, there are almost no conditions where the center lock is a benefit.
gpm5: you really should go do some homework on the different systems. 4wd is not AWD and AWD is not 4wd. And a locking Ctr Diff as Cliffy pointed out is of almost no value unless you are literaly in a rock climbing or swamp buggy environment. And its doubtful that most Sequoia's will ever be driven on dirt, let alone go rock climbing.
The Trooper's 4wd also is not AWD, as there is no power to the front wheels until the rear wheels slip, THEN the torque is transfered to the front wheels. IF you seek some level of power to all four wheels at all times, your only choice is AWD. Obviously it has served Subaru, Audi, BMW, MB, Volvo and GM well when considering the the high quality vehicles that benefit from the extra traction "on the road". Don't be surprised if the Sequoia comes out with an AWD version next.
Of course, then you guys will be telling the rest of the world why AWD is better than 4wd, simply because its installed on a Sequoia:)
'The Trooper's 4wd also is not AWD, as there is no power to the front wheels until the rear wheels slip'
maybe you should do some homework yourself TOD does send power to the front prior to rear wheel slippage hence it is AWD...but the transfer case can be placed into low range which locks the front and rear together.
First, the 4WD system in the Sequoia would be preferred to a center locker in serious rock climbing. The only time the center lock is an advantage is in high speed dirt driving where you want to be able to slide into and out of a corner.
Next, please remember that the Sequoia CAN function as an AWD. It is safe to put it in 4WD and leave it there. The Sequoia 4WD system gives you the option.
for you reply to my hood deflector question. I looked at the Toyota hood deflector but didn't like drilling holes in galvanized and rust proofed metal and it's pretty expensive. Noticed that McNeil has a stick on version that I may try. Been away on spring break so I missed a few days of the discussion. Heatwave always warms things up around here.
For those considering that question and living in Southern California-- it's a tough call. I my opinion, based on the ownership of a 4Wd version and experimenting in snowy/icy conditions with 2WD and 4Wd, 2Wd in such conditions is terrible. I was not able to move at all in a very icy road with a very slight incline. I had to switch to 4Wd to get under way. Toyota should offer a limited slip differential instead of, or in addition to traction control. In my opinion, traction control is grossly inferior to a limited slip differential in 2WD (and 4Wd for that matter) and if you think you will ever need to drive in snowy/icy conditions, 4Wd is your only option in a Sequoia. In other SUV's, 2WD with a limited slip differential is a very good alternative to 4WD.
Since I may only encounter snow/ice road conditions 2-4 times each year, would tire chains give me the control needed to safely navigate my family in this large SUV during these times?
dielectric is correct, heatwave, you should do more homework. The trooper can be left in 4WD TOD all the time, I do 24x7, just like I leave the sequoia in 4WD 24x7. They are both AWD type vehicles with full-time 4WD and center diff locking for certain gears as well as 2WD capability. You are confusing your AWD vehicle as special, but it is simply a limited version of a more complete full-time 4WD system. The trooper gives 15% to the front at all times in 4WD and the TOD unit partitions more in response to slippage conditions.
dielectric7bb and gpm5: Here's two sites on the Borg-Warner TOD setup in the soon to be eliminated Trooper <http://www.isuzu.com/inside_isuzu/news/torque.html> and <http://www.carbuytip.com/reviews/2001_Isuzu_Trooper.html>. Both sites point out that power is transfered from rear to front on an as needed basis. Neither suggests that that there is a minimum 15% of the engine's torque delivered to the front wheels at all times.
Would you mind sharing any source that supports your view "The trooper gives 15% to the front at all times in 4WD and the TOD unit partitions more in response to slippage conditions." If the trooper delivers a % of torque to the front tires at ALL times and can be operated at all speeds and on any road condition...then yes...I would agree the system meets the definition of AWD as it was defined by Audi, the mainstream originator. If it does not deliver some torque at all times than it is a transfer torque system, that works on the same principles with different technologies, as the Sequoia system, the GM 4wd Auto system and a half dozen other dry road 4wd systems.
There is nothing special about the Denali awd or any awd system, however for most people that will never go off-roading, it remains a better traction system that a system than one that requires torque to be transferred. Obviously the experts at Audi, BMW, Porsche, MB, GM, Subaru agree since all of their systems provide minmum torque to the front tires at all times ranging from 20-40%.
cliffy: <double sigh> For a guy that professes to know everything, you appear off-base lately. First your inaccurate statement that there's no limited slip diff in a Hummer and now the fact that the Sequoia can operate in 4wd mode in all circumstances qualifies as AWD.
If that were the case than just about every manufacturer making a 4wd vehicle could claim their system is AWD. The GM 4wd Auto system can also be left in 4wd mode permanently, yet I would no qualify it as AWD. In the same way the Sequoia system does not qualify as AWD.
Having owned 2 of the GM 4WD auto systems, I can say with authority that it is a 4WD system in name only (marketing). It is simply a 2WD system that automatically controls a part time, 4Wd transfer case. It engages the part time transfer case (front wheels) only if rear wheels slip and then only until they stop slipping. The manual warns against using the system in 4WD Auto mode all the time, stating that excessive drive train wear will occur. Having said that, it IS a great way to keep the 'soccer mom' set going in snow without having to know anything about a part time 4Wd system. And a part time 4Wd's purpose is just to get the vehicle unstuck anyway.
a) you're on the wrong forum b) you failed to read my post c) you posted false information
I said TOD sends power to the front prior to rear wheel slippage (you said 'there is no power to the front wheels until the rear wheels slip' feel free to read your articles and I can direct you to other sources...but I don't think you bothered to read your own) How is it that 15% is going to the front...and gpm5 knows this...because if you have actually driven one with TOD engaged you would know by the illumination bars...but instead you just want to spew forth false info...especially on the wrong forum.
AWD is a just full time 4WD system that lacks a low range. So you are both right! The nuances of how torque is directed is not important for the definition.
2heeldrive: Your view couldn't be further from the truth which is obvious that it comes from someone unfamiliar with the different handling characteristics of a 4wd vs awd vehicle. Its definitely not splitting hairs. It also has nothing to do with whether or not there's a 4wd lo gear. There is no technical reason you couldn't have awd with 4wd lo and there's no reason you must have 4wd lo with normal 4wd systems. Also I doubt that you have had 2 GM 4wd auto vehicles since this is a relatively new system out in the last few years. Which two GM vehicles are you claiming had 4wd auto systems?
dielectic7bb: with all due respect 1) This is absolutely the right forum I was seeking to engage in. Where else could I go to find so many guys is such desparate need of assistance in understanding how their own vehicles work:) (I can hear the screams now, take your medication before replying or the hosts will surely delete your post:)
2) I read your post perfectly well
3) I posted perfectly accurate information and provided sources of data to support the comments. The fact that the TOD shows a bar lit up (which BTW is an excellent idea that I wish was in the Denali) is to just show the driver the system is activated.
I've checked multiple sites including Izusu's and Borg-Warner's and they only stated the torque is transferred as the vehicle senses slippage. There is not one source of data that suggests the Borg-Warner TOD setup (which is an excellent design, IMO) provides anything more than a 0/100% torque distribution from front/rear until slippage is detected. Then torque is transferred.
Show me a source or even cite a manufacturer's brochure that suggests otherwise and I will gladly acknowledge my error on this system.
AWD with limited slip diffs remains the best mode of traction for road handling capabilities in slippery conditions. All of the other full-time 4wd approaches are compromises in order to achieve cost, weight or off-road advantages over an AWD design. None of the designs however can match the road-handling capabilities of a system that starts with the torque already at a tire versus a setup that starts with 0% and needs to transfer it from another tire.
I live in Southern California and travel to Mammoth Mountain 3-4 times each year to go skiing with the family. I am looking into the Sequoia but can't decide on the 2WD or 4WD model. We are planning to keep the SUV for 7-8 years if all goes well. I have a few questions/concerns regarding the Sequoia 4WD system:
1) If ran in the 2WD mode, will the SUV act exactly like the 2WD model without moving any of the 4WD components?
2) Does the 4WD system require a significant amount of extra routine maintenance?
3) How reliable are these 4WD systems? The last thing I want is to pay the extra $3K for 4WD, only use this system at most 2x/year for 8 years and have an expensive problem. The system sounds complicated and that there could be many things that could go wrong. Is it safe to say that this should not be an issue with the limited amount I will be using the 4WD?
4) What do you think the difference in resale value will be with between the 2WD & 4WD Sequoia after 8 years/120K miles?
heatmiser1: Do yourself a favor and check out a Denali XL. You'll get 85 more hp, gobs more torque, a heck of alot more space, faster slalom and acceleration times, alot more luxury features, a simple awd setup that doesn't sound like a coffee grinder when it "activates", a great sound system, second row captain's seats if thats of interest and IMO the best looking suv on the market. You'll get all that for about the same price as a Limited Sequoia with GM's rebate currently in effect.
Even if you end up buying the Sequoia, you won't regret that you took the time to compare it. My guess is you'll end up with the GMC if you take the two for a test drive:)
This site even gives a diagram of how TOD reacts and indicates one bar means 15% to the front and the bar will disappear if the front wheels begin to slip. I don't know if this is true or not but I don't think that the first bar simply indicates whether the system is on or not, that seems to be the reason for the auto indicator.
The other site is Isuzu itself in their isuzuology section
if you click on the TOD link (and can stomach the dorky joe isuzu stuff) and click on the sun, it states "TOD stays the course by directing MOST of the torque to the rear wheels." I don't know if that translates to 15% to the front, but considering this is on the Isuzu website, and from the other site I mentioned, it seems reasonable to believe 15% goes to the front under normal conditions.
Go on over to the trooper owners club. We will straighten out your misconception regarding the trooper Borg-Warne TOD unit over there. I can supply you some links also but don't want to waste my time. You are incorrect in saying it does not partion the 15% or more and can not be used at all times. The vehicross never turns TOD off.
Your still wrong and obviously don't understand how the Sequoia 4WD system operates. I urge you to read the topic "Toyota 4 Wheel Drive Systems Explained". After doing that, I will discuss why the Sequoia can be an AWD for all practical purposes, plus the advantage of a genuine 4WD system.
Heatwave: I have owned two 1999 Chevrolet Suburban K1500's with the "automatic" 4WD. Put lots of miles on them in all kinds of weather, on and off road.
AWD and Full time 4WD systems are the same -- they drive all 4 wheels all the time. Driving characteristics are irrelevant for the definition.
Question for you: Does the Denali use a center diff and a viscous coupling or just a viscous coupling?
Heatmiser: The Sequoia 4WD drivetrain and the Land Cruiser drivetrain are the same -- except that the Sequoia allows 2WD operation whereas the Land Cruiser is full time 4WD only. The durability of the Land Cruiser drivetrain is legendary. 2WD moves only the rear drive components. No special maintenance is required other than an oil change for the front and center differentials when the automatic transmission is serviced and remembering to engage 4WD every month or so to keep things lubricated. Generally speaking, a 4WD vehicle is more desirable and will hold its value better. Get the 4WD, you won't regret it, and you might find that you will use it more than you think. Southern CA roads and highways can get pretty greasy in the rain.
Just took delivery of my new '02 SR5, black with Leather. Dealer in NH had one on the lot with cloth, and I added leather, price at delivery was $36K. Came with Alloy pkg and convenience package. It was a dealer demo w/ 2K miles on it, but I saved thousands. Dealer bargained HARD CORE, dickered 3 times before we agreed and closed the deal. Stock on the SR5's are scarce though. Some dealers I called quoted me MSRP.
"The Trooper's 4wd also is not AWD, as there is no power to the front wheels until the rear wheels slip, THEN the torque is transfered to the front wheels. IF you seek some level of power to all four wheels at all times, your only choice is AWD."
The Trooper puts 15% power to the front wheels and 85% to the rear wheels. As you know, I own a Trooper and am very involved with Isuzus. The torque split on a Trooper is 15/85 and can vary it up to 50/50 as conditions warrant. Let's not get into a Peeing contest over this.
paisan and others: Wasn't trying to get in a pissing contest with anyone. I looked on several sites including Izusu's and Borg-Warner's. I specifically said I couldn't find any information that clearly stated that the TOD system deliver's power to the front wheels under all conditions. (I still haven't seen anything that states definitively that power is always delivered to the front wheels).
However, the references to a single bar suggesting 15% of the torque is delivered to the front wheels and the observations by Trooper owner's suggesting that one bar is always lit would suggest the system does deliver some power to the front wheels under all circumstances. As I stated if someone could show me some info I would gladly stand corrected. As k2rm was kind enough to do. I stand corrected.
The Sequoia system remains a system seeking slippage in order to initiate power to the front wheels. By most definitions that would not qualify as an awd system.
2heeldrive: the Denali uses a viscous liquid center differential to transfer power above the 38% minimum to the front wheels from the rear wheels.
I give up. Where did you ever see information that the Sequoia does not send power to the front until slip is detected? Nevermind. Its a pointless argument.
"IF you seek some level of power to all four wheels at all times, your only choice is AWD. Obviously it has served Subaru, Audi, BMW, MB, Volvo and GM well when considering the the high quality vehicles that benefit from the extra traction "on the road"."
Subarus with automatic transmissions don't send traction to the rear wheels except on accelleration and in the case of rear wheel slippage.
pschreck: would you mind explaining how torque is sent to the rear wheels "when they slip", if they have no power to start with according to your description of the Subaru awd system?
YOu are incorrect. The torque split on subarus As Per Subaru Engineers is 80/20 f/r on the 4EAT Tranny enabled cars. On the VTD system enabled AT cars it's 45/55 split and on MT cars it's a VC 50/50 split.
Is that true of the MY 2000 also? I thought my dealer explained it differently. We have a 2000 Outback wagon with the 4EAT. We love it. Can't get enough of that Japanese engineering. Truly a shame The Big Three can't offer a product that is so well built and engineered.
As explained to us, the torque is transfered to the rear when accelerating from a stop and when the FRONT wheels slip.
Sorry for misspeaking and saying rear wheels heatwave.
It's true. Over in the subaru owner's club, we have a rep from SOA and she investigated it for us a while back. 80/20 on all the 4EATs from 92->02 except VTD models. Before that it was 90/10. Lots of dealers don't know squat
Click on All Wheel Drive, then specifications, then drivetrain.
You'll find that the WRX and the Outback (automatics) have a VTD AWD system which on normal road conditions delivers 45% torque to the front wheels and 55% to the rear. It then redistributes the torque from this baseline to the tires that have the best traction through various systems including viscous liquid diffs, limited slip diffs and electronic sensors in different models. All of their manual vehicles have a system that starts with a 50/50 split of the torque to the front and rear.
The other automatic systems in their less expensive models provide a continously variable distribution of torque, however they don't list the power distribution under dry conditions.
I think their descriptions provide a good explanation for the basis of why AWD is differentiated from full time 4wd systems by whether or not there is power to all wheels under "normal" road conditions. For manufacturer's looking to optimize the performance of their vehicles such as Porsche, BMW, Subaru, GM and Audi with the use of AWD, they have designated a minimum torque distribution to each corner for normal road conditions, with systems that then redistribute power as need based on the traction available at each corner of the vehicle.
Therefore my question to you cliffy is: what is the distribution of torque to the four corners of a Sequoia under normal driving conditions when 4wd is engaged?
Our dealer said it was to save fuel. He very nearly lost the sale because I wanted something with a more near 50/50 split for my wife and she won't drive a manual. A fine car, although we may look at a RAV 4 for her next time.
Yes, I agree. An excellent site. My wife loves her Outback. The VDC wasn't in production at the time of our purchase. It is just a bit pricey for a Subaru though. If we were to spend that kind of money we would probably look at a Highlander, although we use the Soob as our gas milage car and I'm not sure what the Highlander does on gas.
Just don't like to see mis-information floating around. The net has a bad habit of doing that.
Also a note on the subaru AT system, 2000->2002 also use weight sensors to deteremine power distribution. (92->02) also use the ECU to learn when power should be shifted *before* it is needed. For example if after every complete stop you loose traction on the front wheels, the system will learn that after a complete stop, to apply more power to the rear wheels. Same goes for the TOD system.
Had you ever actually read anything I have ever posted on the Sequoia 4WD system, you would know the answer to your question. The fact that you even ask tells me you are not here to learn anything.
paisan: No disrespect but have you ever actually read anything that states the Trooper TOD system deliver a baseline 15% of its torque to the front wheels under normal driving conditions or are you making the assumption based on the dashboard light?
cliffy: Funny you should interpret my asking a relevant question as not wanting to learn something. Last time I looked, thats the point of asking questions....to learn.
So why not share with us the split of torque under normal driving conditions in a 4wd Sequoia when its system is activated. I'd also be interested in the source of your information since Toyota doesn't share the torque distribution on their web site and I've not been able to find it anywhere else.
In all your responses I don't recall any answer to the specific question I asked. If you don't want to repeat yourself, just point me to the post of yours or the web source that outlines the torque distribution under normal road conditions?
Comments
Equal or possibly better than GM's auto 4WD? Now that's a joke. I owned a Chevy K1500. While it didn't have auto 4WD (THAT would have to have a delay), it did have GM's part-time 4WD. In this day and age it was a dinosaur. Talk about cost saving measures,GM adds a sensor to detect slippage in the rear and has the gall to refer to it as Auto 4WD.
And once again, the Denali XL and the Sequoia are not the same type of vehicle. Let's try to stick to the non-XL Denali when making comparisons.
By the way, have you watched the news and seen those old Toyota trucks that the Afghanis drive all over that mountainous desert? Can you imagine the killing GM could have made in spare parts sales over there? I know my K1500 wouldn't have made it across the border without a trip to the dealership.
Reposted:
Has anyone had a problem getting their new Sequoia out of park? It's annoying but sometimes I have to pump the brake before the gearshift releases from park in order to get it into drive. At first I thought maybe I'm not pulling the gear shift straight back or not depressing the brake pedal far enough while attempting to shift into drive. Is this a safety feature which may need an adjustment?
Also on your awd, does the ratio between front and back stay the same? If it does that would be a disadvantage at times. If it doesn't and the % changes there would be a slight delay while that happens wouldn't there?
I don't think it's fair to say that awd is superior to 4wd. Usually awd is reserved for station wagons isn't it:)
pschreck: All of my references to performance have been on the subject of "on-road" performance. I think I've acknowledged quite clearly that there is some advantage to the Sequoia in having 4wd lo for off-road use over a DXL. I have also pointed out that most owners of a Sequoia will never go off-road....have you?
With all due respect to your limited experience with GM 4wd vehicles, I think I can speak much better than you regarding their reliability having owned three of them. In nearly 300,000 miles driven in three 4wd Suburbans, not once...I repeat not once, in 15 years has any of my 3 4wd Suburbans ever not started for me or left me stranded. Would I have liked the brake pads to have lasted longer than 15K on the older models?... you bet. The brake pads on my 2001 Denali XL have 17,000 and were just inspected...they have less than 5% wear on them.
I don't know what year your Chevy K1500 was, but there is no comparison to a 2002 Tahoe or an '02 Sequoia. The Auto 4wd system in the GM's will have a miniscule time lag for torque transfer, just as the torque transfer in Toyota's 4wd setup. Go from dry to slippery pavement at speed in either vehicle and you most definitely will feel the shift of torque. A sensation you will not experience in a AWD vehicle.
The Sequoia uses electronics to brake a spinning wheel and the GM Auto4wd uses a limited slip diff to transfer torque to a wheel that's not spinning. Both must "transfer" torque. In the regular GM 4wd mode and in the AWD system, of all manufacturer's, there is a pre-determined amount of torque delivered to both axles without the need to transfer torque or to prevent its transfer as in the case of the Toyota or when the GM is set to auto4wd.
While you may not think the Sequoia and Denali XL are like vehicles... I do, as do car magazines doing comparison testing. You compare vehicles as you see fit, as will I.
714 cut: as stated earlier, the ratio remains the same 38/62 on the Denali AWD system until the rear slips sending more power to the front. Of course there is a time lag on ANY system that must transfer torque. The best bet is to not have to transfer it to start with, which is the principle behind awd.
In the end, it remains my opinion and I believe the opinion of most people familar with 4wd systems, that for on-road performance AWD is superior to 4wd. If you need the flexibility of 4wd lo for serious off-roading, you might be better off in a vehicle that offers a more traditional 4wd system.
pschreck: while you appear somewhat loose and free with your derogatory remarks regarding GM vehicles, at least they're owner's are not stuck in some parking lot with a vehicle that can't get out of park like fsw98 and his Sequoia:)
Steve
Host
SUVs, Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards
Now if Toyota can just manufacture enough stereo amplifiers to get my replacement off backorder, I will be *totally* pleased....
I have owned a 1995 Blazer 4WD, a 1997 Astro AWD, and a 1996 K1500 4WD, all of which were crap. Not just for their drive systems, but also for their reliability and fit and finish. It took me far to long to conclude that GM is turning out crap almost as fast as Chrysler. I believe that I've earned the right to say anything I please about GM.
Have I taken it off road yet? No. But I can. Can you take the Denali off road? Can you pull anybody out of a snow bank or out of a ditch. Not bloody likely. AWD, as stated earlier by another member, is for station wagons like my wifes Outback.
How much more maintenance is required for a 4WD vehicle? The plan would be to purchase the car and drive for 7-8 years. Toyota's are usually reliable but am afraid that their high-tech 4WD system might impose some maintenace issues in the long haul. Any input???
Steve
Host
SUVs, Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards
Does anyone know if Toyota has any plans to update the Sequoia. I am mostly interested in the interior because I like a little more luxury styling like that of a Landcruiser (i.e., wood trim, gear shifter on the center console, etc.)
Also, what is a reasonable price to pay for the Sequoia, how much over dealer invoice? I have heard $1000 over.
Thanks in advance.
Cliffy, do you know whether the 2002 LC has a locking diff over other gears--it also uses the the sequoia 4WD traction system as I understand it.
The Trooper's 4wd also is not AWD, as there is no power to the front wheels until the rear wheels slip, THEN the torque is transfered to the front wheels. IF you seek some level of power to all four wheels at all times, your only choice is AWD. Obviously it has served Subaru, Audi, BMW, MB, Volvo and GM well when considering the the high quality vehicles that benefit from the extra traction "on the road". Don't be surprised if the Sequoia comes out with an AWD version next.
Of course, then you guys will be telling the rest of the world why AWD is better than 4wd, simply because its installed on a Sequoia:)
maybe you should do some homework yourself
Next, please remember that the Sequoia CAN function as an AWD. It is safe to put it in 4WD and leave it there. The Sequoia 4WD system gives you the option.
Would you mind sharing any source that supports your view "The trooper gives 15% to the front at all times in 4WD and the TOD unit partitions more in response to slippage conditions." If the trooper delivers a % of torque to the front tires at ALL times and can be operated at all speeds and on any road condition...then yes...I would agree the system meets the definition of AWD as it was defined by Audi, the mainstream originator. If it does not deliver some torque at all times than it is a transfer torque system, that works on the same principles with different technologies, as the Sequoia system, the GM 4wd Auto system and a half dozen other dry road 4wd systems.
There is nothing special about the Denali awd or any awd system, however for most people that will never go off-roading, it remains a better traction system that a system than one that requires torque to be transferred. Obviously the experts at Audi, BMW, Porsche, MB, GM, Subaru agree since all of their systems provide minmum torque to the front tires at all times ranging from 20-40%.
cliffy: <double sigh> For a guy that professes to know everything, you appear off-base lately. First your inaccurate statement that there's no limited slip diff in a Hummer and now the fact that the Sequoia can operate in 4wd mode in all circumstances qualifies as AWD.
If that were the case than just about every manufacturer making a 4wd vehicle could claim their system is AWD. The GM 4wd Auto system can also be left in 4wd mode permanently, yet I would no qualify it as AWD. In the same way the Sequoia system does not qualify as AWD.
b) you failed to read my post
c) you posted false information
I said TOD sends power to the front prior to rear wheel slippage (you said 'there is no power to the front wheels until the rear wheels slip' feel free to read your articles and I can direct you to other sources...but I don't think you bothered to read your own)
How is it that 15% is going to the front...and gpm5 knows this...because if you have actually driven one with TOD engaged you would know by the illumination bars...but instead you just want to spew forth false info...especially on the wrong forum.
dielectic7bb: with all due respect
1) This is absolutely the right forum I was seeking to engage in. Where else could I go to find so many guys is such desparate need of assistance in understanding how their own vehicles work:) (I can hear the screams now, take your medication before replying or the hosts will surely delete your post:)
2) I read your post perfectly well
3) I posted perfectly accurate information and provided sources of data to support the comments. The fact that the TOD shows a bar lit up (which BTW is an excellent idea that I wish was in the Denali) is to just show the driver the system is activated.
I've checked multiple sites including Izusu's and Borg-Warner's and they only stated the torque is transferred as the vehicle senses slippage. There is not one source of data that suggests the Borg-Warner TOD setup (which is an excellent design, IMO) provides anything more than a 0/100% torque distribution from front/rear until slippage is detected. Then torque is transferred.
Show me a source or even cite a manufacturer's brochure that suggests otherwise and I will gladly acknowledge my error on this system.
AWD with limited slip diffs remains the best mode of traction for road handling capabilities in slippery conditions. All of the other full-time 4wd approaches are compromises in order to achieve cost, weight or off-road advantages over an AWD design. None of the designs however can match the road-handling capabilities of a system that starts with the torque already at a tire versus a setup that starts with 0% and needs to transfer it from another tire.
1) If ran in the 2WD mode, will the SUV act exactly like the 2WD model without moving any of the 4WD components?
2) Does the 4WD system require a significant amount of extra routine maintenance?
3) How reliable are these 4WD systems? The last thing I want is to pay the extra $3K for 4WD, only use this system at most 2x/year for 8 years and have an expensive problem. The system sounds complicated and that there could be many things that could go wrong. Is it safe to say that this should not be an issue with the limited amount I will be using the 4WD?
4) What do you think the difference in resale value will be with between the 2WD & 4WD Sequoia after 8 years/120K miles?
Even if you end up buying the Sequoia, you won't regret that you took the time to compare it. My guess is you'll end up with the GMC if you take the two for a test drive:)
http://www.autoworld.com/news/Isuzu/Torque.htm
This site even gives a diagram of how TOD reacts and indicates one bar means 15% to the front and the bar will disappear if the front wheels begin to slip. I don't know if this is true or not but I don't think that the first bar simply indicates whether the system is on or not, that seems to be the reason for the auto indicator.
The other site is Isuzu itself in their isuzuology section
http://www.isuzu.com/inside_isuzu/isuzuology/index.html
if you click on the TOD link (and can stomach the dorky joe isuzu stuff) and click on the sun, it states "TOD stays the course by directing MOST of the torque to the rear wheels." I don't know if that translates to 15% to the front, but considering this is on the Isuzu website, and from the other site I mentioned, it seems reasonable to believe 15% goes to the front under normal conditions.
Heatwave: I have owned two 1999 Chevrolet Suburban K1500's with the "automatic" 4WD. Put lots of miles on them in all kinds of weather, on and off road.
AWD and Full time 4WD systems are the same -- they drive all 4 wheels all the time. Driving characteristics are irrelevant for the definition.
Question for you: Does the Denali use a center diff and a viscous coupling or just a viscous coupling?
Heatmiser: The Sequoia 4WD drivetrain and the Land Cruiser drivetrain are the same -- except that the Sequoia allows 2WD operation whereas the Land Cruiser is full time 4WD only. The durability of the Land Cruiser drivetrain is legendary. 2WD moves only the rear drive components. No special maintenance is required other than an oil change for the front and center differentials when the automatic transmission is serviced and remembering to engage 4WD every month or so to keep things lubricated. Generally speaking, a 4WD vehicle is more desirable and will hold its value better. Get the 4WD, you won't regret it, and you might find that you will use it more than you think. Southern CA roads and highways can get pretty greasy in the rain.
"The Trooper's 4wd also is not AWD, as there is no power to the front wheels until the rear wheels slip, THEN the torque is transfered to the front wheels. IF you seek some level of power to all four wheels at all times, your only choice is AWD."
The Trooper puts 15% power to the front wheels and 85% to the rear wheels. As you know, I own a Trooper and am very involved with Isuzus. The torque split on a Trooper is 15/85 and can vary it up to 50/50 as conditions warrant. Let's not get into a Peeing contest over this.
-mike
Community Leader of Isuzu Owners Club on Edmunds
http://isuzu-suvs.com
However, the references to a single bar suggesting 15% of the torque is delivered to the front wheels and the observations by Trooper owner's suggesting that one bar is always lit would suggest the system does deliver some power to the front wheels under all circumstances. As I stated if someone could show me some info I would gladly stand corrected. As k2rm was kind enough to do. I stand corrected.
The Sequoia system remains a system seeking slippage in order to initiate power to the front wheels. By most definitions that would not qualify as an awd system.
2heeldrive: the Denali uses a viscous liquid center differential to transfer power above the 38% minimum to the front wheels from the rear wheels.
Subarus with automatic transmissions don't send traction to the rear wheels except on accelleration and in the case of rear wheel slippage.
-mike
As explained to us, the torque is transfered to the rear when accelerating from a stop and when the FRONT wheels slip.
Sorry for misspeaking and saying rear wheels heatwave.
-mike
Click on All Wheel Drive, then specifications, then drivetrain.
You'll find that the WRX and the Outback (automatics) have a VTD AWD system which on normal road conditions delivers 45% torque to the front wheels and 55% to the rear. It then redistributes the torque from this baseline to the tires that have the best traction through various systems including viscous liquid diffs, limited slip diffs and electronic sensors in different models. All of their manual vehicles have a system that starts with a 50/50 split of the torque to the front and rear.
The other automatic systems in their less expensive models provide a continously variable distribution of torque, however they don't list the power distribution under dry conditions.
I think their descriptions provide a good explanation for the basis of why AWD is differentiated from full time 4wd systems by whether or not there is power to all wheels under "normal" road conditions. For manufacturer's looking to optimize the performance of their vehicles such as Porsche, BMW, Subaru, GM and Audi with the use of AWD, they have designated a minimum torque distribution to each corner for normal road conditions, with systems that then redistribute power as need based on the traction available at each corner of the vehicle.
Therefore my question to you cliffy is: what is the distribution of torque to the four corners of a Sequoia under normal driving conditions when 4wd is engaged?
Our dealer said it was to save fuel. He very nearly lost the sale because I wanted something with a more near 50/50 split for my wife and she won't drive a manual. A fine car, although we may look at a RAV 4 for her next time.
Thanks for correcting me.
-Paul
Also a note on the subaru AT system, 2000->2002 also use weight sensors to deteremine power distribution. (92->02) also use the ECU to learn when power should be shifted *before* it is needed. For example if after every complete stop you loose traction on the front wheels, the system will learn that after a complete stop, to apply more power to the rear wheels. Same goes for the TOD system.
-mike
cliffy: Funny you should interpret my asking a relevant question as not wanting to learn something. Last time I looked, thats the point of asking questions....to learn.
So why not share with us the split of torque under normal driving conditions in a 4wd Sequoia when its system is activated. I'd also be interested in the source of your information since Toyota doesn't share the torque distribution on their web site and I've not been able to find it anywhere else.
In all your responses I don't recall any answer to the specific question I asked. If you don't want to repeat yourself, just point me to the post of yours or the web source that outlines the torque distribution under normal road conditions?