The guage on the dash indicated that the first bar is 15-30% torque to the front wheels, 2nd bar is 30-45% and 3 bars = 50%. As soon as you drive above 5mph or if you mash the gas off the line, the first bar lights up, indicating 15-30% power to the front axle. This has been confirmed by another TOD owner who spoke to Borg-Warner engineers when he was investigating a way to put in an electronic switch to allow a 50-50 lock in hi-range. The only places you would see something like this in print that would be even remotely reliable would be the owner's manual, which does not indicate that. The first bar is illuminated on ALL TOD equipped Isuzus out there.
So if you don't believe the guage, then I guess you need to ask yourself if when you fill your gas tank, is it really full? or is your oil pressure really XXX when your guage reads XXX.
I posted the answer in number 4757. I also covered it in depth in the "Toyota 4 Wheel Drive Systems Explained" topic that I have referred you to in post 4801. Further, I explain it every time this subject comes up to answer the semantic argument you initiate.
Please... for the love of Pete... take this idiotic discussion to a more appropriate topic such as the ones that compare the Sequoia to competing products. I'm sure the Subaru, GM, Isuzu and Hummer folks will love to share in your wealth of information.
You fell into the trap. The next thing heatwave will say is "catch your breath!" See "Games People Play" by Eric Berne. It's the "gotcha" part of the game...
you beat me to it... I was going to say the exact same thing to cliffy.
cliffy: don't get snagged into this endless debate which, by now, has devolved into Subaru's. Unless you are an expert on Subarus.... Maybe someone can care to explain to us how TOD on Isuzu's, AWD on Subaru's and the 2/4WD system of the Sequoia relate to each other ??? Next we know it, we may be 'debating' bioterrorism and homeland defense on the SEQUOIA forum....
but the entertainment value has been fun to watch ! so without further ado, let's get back to our regularly scheduled debate on TOD, AWD, 4WD, 2WD, XWD, or whatever else that is the toast-of-the-day ...
The 4WD system on the sequoia not only allows the stability of a 50:50 split on dry pavement, it also provides torque to one or more wheels, even if the others are on ice or lifted in the air. Heatwave, your AWD Denali would be stuck under that scenario.
Has anyone had any trouble with the rear door on their Sequoia? I came out of the grocery store last night and the door would not open correctly on my 2001 Sequoia. My husband had to hold it up/open so I could get the groceries in the SUV. Fluid had leaked all over my left brake light. Although I am more apt to think it is shoddy workmanship from the dealer (my SUV had previously been hit in the rear), I thought I'd pose the question in case similar situations have occurred.
Paisan: I recognize this should probably be posted on the Trooper forum, however the functionality of the TOD system was recently raised here and compared to the Sequoia system. While checking the Izusu site I came across the following in their FAQ section.
Do I need to lock my wheels to engage 4-wheel drive? A. A. No. Unlike older systems with manual locking hubs, or systems that require a complete stop prior to engaging 4-wheel drive, your Isuzu vehicle's front wheels will connect and disconnect from the driving axle automatically through its shift-on-the-fly capability (up to 60 mph) when moving into or out of 4H/TOD modes. When TOD is engaged (if so equipped), this system will automatically transfer up to 50% of the vehicle's power to the front wheels, as necessary, to maximize traction in slippery conditions - and automatically return to 2-wheel-drive operation, when appropriate.
This would appear to suggest that the Trooper's TOD system "returns to a 2wd" mode which would be the equivalent to having a torque distribution of 0% front and 100% rear which was the original statement I made regarding the Trooper's system not being the same as an AWD system that provides continous power to all four wheels.
I've not been able to find anything that would suggest that there's a minimum torque delivered to the Trooper's front wheels. I'm not trying to overkill the issue but even you made it clear that rumors seem to run wild on the net and I was just trying to clear one of them up.
Like I said previously. Don't believe all the advertising stuff. It will return to 0/100 under 5mph unless there is slippage. As soon as you go over 5mph it goes to 15/85, that is a fact my friend, which can be verified by the guages and everyone who has ever driven one.
There are a lot of websites, including manufacturer websites that incorrectly state information, or state slanted truths about products. If you choose not to believe me that's ok.
But I'd trust owners and people more knowledgeable than webmaster/marketing/sales folks anyday.
I have not had that problem. I hope you get an answer to your low tech problem as the high tech talk about 4wd seems to overwhelm everything else. It reminds me of the Saturday Night Live skit with the computer guys laughing at the fellow employee because he doesn't know the minutia of the Windows operating system.
To the Hood Deflector post: I also ordered one from McNeil along with mats and cargo mat. I'll post my experience with them when they get here.
it does 'appear' that way, but there is another way to interpret it (sort of).
'your Isuzu vehicle's front wheels will connect and disconnect from the driving axle automatically through its shift-on-the-fly capability (up to 60 mph) when moving into or out of 4H/TOD modes' Keyword is when moving into or out of 4H/TOD modes. So only when 4H/TOD button is pressed will it 'shift-on-the-fly'. Otherwise TOD will remain locked into 2WD or AWD dependent on whether or not the button is depressed or not.
'automatically return to 2-wheel-drive operation, when appropriate' When stopped sounds appropriate to me
Heatwave: I think the descriptions of these systems are very confusing (at least to me as a mechanical engineer). Certain things just don't seem right sometimes, and I believe it is a problem that should be addressed. It is difficult to address this problem though because the engineers could say it one way (which gives a perfect description of the system) while no one else understands. So the engineers simplify it for the advertising and PR departments and they in turn put their own twist on things.
Just got my Sequoia back last night. I have to take it back in Monday since the parts are on order. The service manager is replacing both shocks. It definitely is the hydraulics on the rear door lift. He's replacing the right side too (just in case). He skirted around the issue but he said it was a possibility that it was damaged in the accident but not fixed (he basically didn't want to confirm the shoddy work by their body shop).
With the 8 passenger, fully equipped, no-option nonsense AWD Honda Pilot at $25-30K available in June, there doesn't seem to be any compelling reason (other than time, of course) to buy an overpriced Sequoia.
dielectric7b: I agree, the information at least on the web, has been less than clear on the subject of TOD and its baseline power distribution (and for that matter the Toyota 4wd system). I'm certainly in no position to disagree with owners that see the torque bars lit in their Trooper's, however no driver will actually be able to "feel" 15% of the engine's power being delivered to the front wheels.
While I suspect it matters little to the average consumer, understanding how much torque is delivered to the front wheels under normal driving road conditions tells a knowledgable driver alot about the handling characteristics of an AWD or full-time 4wd system.
Clarity from Izusu or Toyota or any manufacturer would certainly be helpful in better understanding the capabilities and function of their 4wd systems. More specs and less marketing would be a start in the right direction in clarifying the operation of different 4wd systems for their owners.
pschreck: Just came across this interesting post of yours when describing the 4wd system in the Sequoia
"I think I recall feeling a slight thumping through the steering wheel, but I won't swear to it. I was very much caught up in the moment. I can tell you that the system is at least as effective as my old 97 K1500 pickups' old time 4WD system. I can't speak for the other Toyota systems but I can say that for my needs this is a choice system. You get 4WD with a low range that can be driven ANYTIME IN ANY CONDITIONS. I think that the best way to describe this type of system is to call it Part Time Rear Wheel Drive."
That thump in the steering wheel was torque being transferred to the front wheels when slippage occurred in the rear wheels. Unlike an awd vehicle which starts with torque already being delivered to the front wheels.
I do however agree with your personal view of the Sequoia 4wd system "I think that the best way to describe this type of system is to call it Part Time Rear Wheel Drive."
cliffy: to use minuteman's well-timed comment "Catch your breath", "you're gonna blow a gasket".
Its absolutely appropriate to discuss the torque distribution on the Sequoia 4wd setup on a Sequoia forum. To the extent you have a problem with such a relevant discussion, I'd recommend that you stop in to see your physician for a renewal of that medication you seem to have run out of.
Open differentials at the front, center and rear as you describe the Sequoia setup will not deliver a 50:50 ratio of torque to the front and rear axles in and of themselves. Please.... for the love of Cliffy..., instead of shouting irrationally, why not simply point to a single web reference that generated your information to clarify the matter?
gpm5: would you mind pointing to a single refence to support your statement "The 4WD system on the sequoia not only allows the stability of a 50:50 split on dry pavement, it also provides torque to one or more wheels, even if the others are on ice or lifted in the air" or is this forum made up of alot of statements that are focussed on just making everyone feel warm and fuzzy about their vehicles.
Look it was a simple question, seeking a simple answer with any supporting resource. Let me repeat, what is the torque distribution of the Sequoia 4wd system when operating on dry roadway conditions and can you share a published source for the info? Its really not that difficult a question.
cliffy: to use minuteman's well-timed comment "Catch your breath", "you're gonna blow a gasket".
My comment was timed only to illustrate how gamey, asinine, and boorish your posts have been on this forum [not to mention mean-spirited]. I used to think you were a paid GM shill. Now, I think you are an amateur crackpot. A shill would be more professional.
The thump was the ABS system braking the wheels that were slipping on the steep incline that I had parked the Sequoia on to test the ActiveTrac system. The torque was already at the wheel or wheels. You see, the Sequoia ALWAYS has power going to ALL of the wheels at ALL times when ActiveTrac is engaged. The ABS was simply transfering it around. It truly is a wonderful system. I can't wait to wear out the Bridgestones so I can justify a set of Michelin Crossterrans to my wife. My understanding is that with those tires the slippage is reduced a great degree over the stock Deulers.
As a side note, this weekend my stepson and I are going to pull some Arborvitia (spelling?) stumps out of his yard. They will probably be deeply rooted as they were about fifteen feet tall when we cut them down last fall. I'm quite certain that the 4WD LOW setting will come in handy for that.
Heatwave, I think it is safe to say that the finest SUV's in the world use 4wd not awd or at least have the option of 4wd and a low range (think Land Rover or Land Cruiser).
Secondly, the Toyota system is transparent. If the computer senses wheel slip and reacts in 1/100,000th of a second what difference would it make whether there was power evenly distributed all of the time?
I actually can't believe I'm involved in this debate as all of the systems work wonderfully and we probably would have a hard time telling them apart in normal driving.
If you concede that the power changes between wheels or front or back or whatever in your Denali awd system, the delay in doing this would be somewhat equal to the delay in the Sequoia system would it not? So where is the advantage?
I think the choice of awd in the Denali has nothing to do with superiority or ability but simply an acknowledgement that the average Denali owner will not be taking his $70,000 cdn. Denali where he will need proper 4wd.
Is grinding noise quite a few people are complaining about on the Toyota Sequoia's only occur on the 4WD models or is it prevalent in both the 2WD & 4WD models? What exactly is causing the grinding noise?
I am about to travel with a total of 7 people to Florida and need some extra luggage space. Does anyone have any experience with luggage carriers and advice for same. I am concerned about reduction in gas mileage and noise. We have owned our Sequoia for 2 weeks and LOVE it. Almost bought the Yukon XL because of price but decided to spend the extra for Toyota reliability. My buddy and I drove from New Jersey to Washington D.C. last weekend. He owns a 98 Suburban and he could not believe how smooth the ride is on the Sequoia and the quality of the finish. Our only problem was the parking garage scraped the rear bumper. Thanks for your help!
Funny you should ask. My brother and I took a trip from southcentral PA to southwestern FL in February. It was one of those mother maintainance trips with some other brother maintainance thrown in. We had my Sequoia loaded up with stuff from a storage unit and had to use a pod for what was left over.
On the way down we got 17mpg while averaging 75mph. Most of the time on I-4 we were doing 90mph. Not our choice. If you don't go with the flow you're likely to die.
On the return trip we encountered heavy to moderate rainfall from GA to PA. Without the pod and with ActiveTrac engaged, we got 17.5mpg. Again we were averaging 75mph. The return leg was driven straight through only stopping for food, gas and evac. I'm guessing about 900 miles with 4WD engaged. My brother, a Ford loving ex-Marine, was thoroughly impressed with the Sequoia's handling and power.
The pod, in my conclusion, was no real hinderance. Very little noise. Of course the Sequoia's cabin is remarkably quiet to begin with. We did, however, strap the pod down with ratchet straps as well as the straps that were installed on the pod. We also checked it at every stop for safety. As for the pod itself, it was a Sears model that my parents had puchased in the early 90s. We left the pod behind so I'm guessing at the size. It was about 2' tall x 3' wide x 4' long. White on top and gray on the bottom. I'm sure you've seen them before.
The grinding noise is the ABS kicking in. It will happen in both 2 and 4 wheel drive models and modes. If wheel slip is detected, brakes are applied to the slipping wheel. Antilock brakes make a grinding and clicking sound.
Is the VSC on all the time or only when in 4WD? I have pressed the VSC off button to see if the "vsc off" light will go on in the instrument panel and it doesn't. I am not in 4WD when trying this. I wonder if I have a bug already?!?
The VSC is always active unless you turn it off. On the 4WD models, you can only turn it off if you are in 4 wheel drive. It isn't a bug. Its the design.
jvkalra- maybe you haven't noticed that there are a lot of different suv choices and they all seem to be selling pretty well. Wouldn't this tell you that people like choices? Besides, my Sequoia will kick a Honda Pilots [non-permissible content removed], so there
Even though these are vehicles of a different size, they are likely to be cross shopped once the Pilot becomes available. I suspect that the compelling value of the Pilot will impact Sequoia sales, regardless of whether adults can really sit in the back row. Most people will be happy to save $10-15K. The reports I've read say that Honda has made the boxy Pilot much more roomy than the MDX.
While I don't dispute that the Pilot will cut in to all suv sales (not just Sequoia)as it is one more model to choose from and Honda is a good name, the Sequoia and the Pilot are quite different in size, powerplants, trim, option levels, towing capacity (3500lbs, 5000 with a boat) and luxury. The Pilot will probably be more of a direct competitor to the Explorer and trailblazer genre of suv's.
Looking for more room than your typical mid-size SUV, and not interested in a minivan, I was strongly considering the Pilot. After checking out the MDX I came to my senses. Yes, I too heard the Pilot is going to be larger, but we're talking 1-2 inches. All these mid-size SUV's coming out with 7 passenger seating, it's a joke. There's no space between the 3rd row and the rear of the car...what would happen to the 3rd row if there was a rear end collision! Also, you're not talking a $10 - $15k difference, more like $4 - $5K based on what you will actually pay. I've heard the stories and it's the same in my area. Honda dealers will sell at MSRP plus $2,000 in dealer installed accessories. If the same holds true for the Pilot as with the Odyssey, you'll be spending atleast $30K (without the leather) I'm picking up an SR5 Sequoia for under $35K. ($38K MSRP) Check out Edmunds TMV. The Pilot should be an awesome vehicle, but it's not a full size.
Not sure how the Pilot will be priced compared to the MDX but the MDX was priced identical to my Sequoia SR5 "package B" which includes most goodies, a sunroof but no leather.
The Pilot LX is at $25K with AWD. Add $2K for dealer markup, and that gives a $8K difference between the Pilot and the minimum TMV for the 4WD Sequoia.
I agree that the bigger Sequoia will be worth $8K or more to some people, depending on their needs. I anticipate transporting 8 people very rarely. Most of the time it will be 5 or less, so the Pilot will be just fine 98% of the time.
True, if the LX is adequate. I was thinking EX, which is a better comparison in terms of features to the Sequoia SR5(cruise, roof rack, etc)
You're right, it comes down to need, so why are we comparing these two vehicles? You can't get the space of a minivan in one of these mid-size SUV's, and Honda is marketing the Pilot in this fashion. They better hire Mini-Me to demo the 3rd seat.
That is a weird comparo, I am on the sidelines here, but figured I'd weigh in with my 2 cents...
Pilot is essentially an AWD Oddessey, a slightly stretched MDX. It is not meant for towing, off-roading or carrying 7 ADULTS, which means IMHO it would not compete with the Sequoia cause the Sequoia is a truck based vehcile, that can tow, and seat 7 adults. I'm partial to the Land Cruiser personally over the Sequoia due to it's better off-road and world-class durability, but I'd take the Sequoia over an Oddesey Mini-van Rebadged anyday. Heck in my opinion the Pilot will compete with the Highlander aka a lifted AWD Camary!
I'm considering purchasing a Sequoia and have a few questions I hope will be answered here. Can the Sequoia be custom ordered and if so how long before you took delivery? When do dealers start taking orders for a new model year? Any rumors for 2003 like optional navigation? I tried to read some of the 4800+ posts prior to this post so sorry if this has already been covered. All information appreciated
After reading many of the questions, etc. on this board it seems I am a long term owner with about 15 months and 20K on my limited Seq. This is a great vehicle. After 20k, there are no shakes or rattles. The engine doesn't tick. The stereo bass can be adjusted with a bit of patience although the JBL is not Bose or Nakimichi. I can haul a full size sheet of plywood and close the door, but not quite lock it, misses by a couple of inches. I just drove over 2000 miles on a trip and got 19 mpg. I averaged a bit over 20 (calc) for a full tank of gas in the middle of the trip because I was going side roads and was forced to drive around 55 mph. Averaging 78 mph on the interstate, I get between 18 & 19. That's impressive for a vehicle of this size.
In regard to the poster with the Grand Cherokee. I had one too, and the difference is night and day, although I do miss my stereo controls on the steering wheel from the Grand Cherokee, but I do not miss the trips to the service department. I have not been back to the service department at my Toyota dealership since I purchased this vehicle (my other car is a Mercedes-Benz that made 21 trips in 2 years so I hate to even think of a service rep). It is a larger vehicle and you do have to learn to use your mirrors. They are large, positioned extremely well and really leave no blind spots except for items that are in close, directly behind the vehicle, and lower than the pretty high back window. I suggest you take it to an empty parking lot where there are trash cans, poles, and maybe another car or two and practice parking and maneuvering with someone exterior to the vehicle to guide you. This is actually kinda fun and you will quickly not need the guide. The real problem I had to overcome with maneuvering was mental. The vehicle is really big, but drives and handles like a much smaller vehicle. I drive it like it is smaller so sometimes it requires an extra "backup" when I thought I would not have to. No big deal and something easily adjusted to. It actually has a very small turn radius for its size, but there's alot of vehicle behind the rear wheels which carve a large radius in tight quarters. My wife still hates to back it in tight places though. She loves driving it going forward because she is not tall and she can see everything from the commanding view of the drivers seat.
The back seat has plenty of room. I have had 8 happy adults enjoying loud and boisterous conversation in my SEQ for over 100 miles and all were happy and comfortable. I do have to admit we had three ladies in the rear seat. I am sure, the three 200 pounders in the middle row would have been less happy in the rear.
A man should not like his vehicle this much. My boss has a Honda Odyssey though and he might like his vehicle at least as much as I like mine. That is a good mini-van. But it ain't no HE-MAN truck like a SEQ.
I forgot that I do have/had one complaint on my SEQ. The front bumper is color coded (mine is white) on the Limited and that sucker is huge. It can kill more bugs than a bug zapper at a summer picnic, even on a short trip. And, they are hard to get off because it's paint, not chrome or rubber. But, there's hope. I found two things that work great. First, the TOYO GUARD stuff they gave you when you purchased the vehicle. DON'T throw it away. That stuff removes bugs or anything else better than anything I have ever seen. I bought some Meguire's bug and tar remover to try and reclaim my bumper after my first trip in my SEQ and wore my fingers to a bone . . . and still had bug guts on the bumper. As a last resort, I tried some of the TOYO GUARD stuff, thinking what did I have to lose. Man, that's some good stuff. It not only removes bugs with not much more than a casual wipe, it also removed some glue I had gotten on a running board that WD-40 would not remove. TRUTH. (I use it on my other car too, but SHHHH don't tell Mercedes-Benz).
The next thing I did was purchase a front end mask from Toyota, partially because of the bug guts thing above, but mostly because I was getting some rock chips. It will make you cuss putting it on because it is made to the exacting specs the vehicle is made to and the directions aren't the best. Once it's on, it fits perfectly, and allows the hood to still be opened with it in place. And BUGS DON'T STICK TO IT! And ROCKS BOUNCE OFF OF IT! It's even better than TOYO GUARD. I put it on before every trip. Let the bugs beware!
My advice is make 'em throw the front end mask in or at least sell it to you at dealer cost if you plan to do any cross country motoring in your new "land yacht". You'll be glad you did. If you want a laugh, make 'em show you how to install it, especially if they have never done it before.
Good question 714cut, and especially one to break the humdrum of recent posts....
Our Seq is now approaching the 25K mile mark (actual is 24,815 as of 03/24/02). The vehicle was purchased Dec 11, 2000, making it slightly over 15 months of ownership. The only major complaint I have occured this past weekend. Due to the extreme quietness of the vehicle, I had not noticed or heard if/when the brakes started to squeak. Last Friday as I was packing at work, a colleague remarked that the brakes were squeaking. I rolled down the window, reversed and pressed the brake pedal and for the first time heard it too. Obviously without this colleague, I'd continue driving this vehicle with my windows almost always rolled up, and not hear a beep about the squeaking brakes. How long has it been squeaking ? I have no idea. This came back to haunt me later. Read on below:
So I immediately called my local Toyota dealership (Poway Toyota). Was scheduled for a 10:00 am appt. Left the vehicle with the dealership for checking, and 2 hours later got a call. They told me that I had 0% brake pads left on the front, and already had some metal-to-metal contact occuring. Hence, they claimed that there were a couple "hot spots" on the front rotors and hence they needed to be replaced. How about machining them, I asked ? Sorry, but that won't remove the hot spots, besides the labor cost is almost higher than replacing them, I was told. And machining will never guarantee them back to OE performance. Cost of changing pads, replacing two front rotors and labor: $510 (+tax). Ouch !!! I asked for a couple minutes to check with the wife and I'd call back. I spent these minutes venting all kinds of unprintable words (to myself), felt a little better, called back and gave them the go-ahead.
What's the moral to this story: For anyone out there, I'd strongly recommend checking and having your brake pads REPLACED at 20K or thereabouts, just to give you room not to have anything happen to the rotors. Although I have heard of pads being replaced at 12K or higher, most of the 24K miles on our Seq were due to highway/freeway driving. Since the past month, it has been mostly stop-and-go traffic and hence excerbated the brake degradation. For me, I learnt my lesson. One is to take some time to drive with my windows rolled down so that I can notice any unusual sound/noise from the vehicle, if any. I am not about to get too comfortable enjoying this vehicle to the detriment of anything else happening on the immediate extremety of the vehicle. As they say: "A stitch in time saves nine"
So there you are. This is the most major thing I can complain about in my 15 months of ownership. My family and I have and hope to continue to derive many more years of comfort, pleasure and satisfaction from driving this vehicle. I suppose that I have already mentioned about the alignment issue, which had been solved since late last year. Otherwise, it is honky-dory.
Would I buy this vehicle agin, if I had to ? You betcha ...
We have had our SR5 (4x4, loaded) for a little over 1 year and have been very happy. We shopped the Sequoia against the MDX, Suburban, Montero and ML 320 and believe we made the right choice. Our prior ride was an Expedition and there is just no comparison to the Sequoia. The ride, handling and solid feel are the highlights together with a very flexible third-seat/cargo area set up and excellent seat belts all around (in contrast to the ridiculous middle row, middle seat belt in the MDX which looked like it would hang my seven year old in a crash). The lows are the too sensitive VSC and the lack of heated seats in the SR5 despite information to the contrary in the brochure. The VSC is fine in 4x4 mode but I am considering seeking to replace the module with the less sensitive 2002 version.
It hasn't been perfect, but awfully close. We love the room, ride, comfort. I love that it drives like a much smaller vehicle, even if backing up is sometimes a challenge. It is wonderful on the highway...smooth, stable, secure. I would buy one again in a heartbeat and recommend it without reservation. I cannot imagine how anyone can compare it to anything made by Ford or GM, but that's for another topic. Problems thus far: The rear window wiper had to be replaced under warranty - it wasn't seating properly when turned off. It's fine now - no biggie. The middle plastic seat belt cover in the middle row keeps falling off - a nuisance but hardly worth mentioning. The sound quality of the standard radio is not the greatest, but fine for our purposes. The only major problem I've had were the front brake pads being replaced. The squeak in ours developed before Christmas at only 9600 miles or so. I complained to the dealer about it during a routine service and they supposedly checked things out and said the brakes were fine. The squeaking came right back, though, and by mid-January I brought it back just for that purpose. They replaced the front pads and machined the rotors under warranty. I think the only reason they covered it was because I had previously complained about it. They did state that pads were really not covered under the warranty; but I claimed that my original complaint was before the vehicle was even one year old! Surely, original brake pads must last longer than that! I do think that in the long run this vehicle will eat brakes. I've heard many similar stories from friends who own the big beasts (LandCruisers, Suburbans, etc.) My husband swears it's because I drive the thing like a small car and there could be some truth to that. I'm trying to be easier on the brakes now that they've been replaced and it will be interesting to see how many miles we get out of these. All in all, we couldn't be happier with the Sequoia. I truly believe Toyota deserves their reputation for reliablility. No vehicle is perfect, but compared to the others, this is as close to perfect as you can get.
cliffy: in response to your question on the subject of the difference between awd and Sequoia's 4wd you asked "So, beyond wild speculation on your part, what gives you the impression that I am wrong?"
Before I answer let me state that you guys really need to all catch your breath. I tried to simply give my view of why awd is different from the sequoia's 4wd system. You all seem to get bent out of shape as if pointing out the difference is necessarily a bad thing. You all are way to sensitive about your vehicle.
It has its problems and a whole lot more things good to say about it than bad, but that doesn't mean you ignore the issues or stop asking questions.
While I have my doubts about your answer on the Sequoia's system, its not because of wild speculation. I posted my views in more detail in the Sequoia 4wd forum, however let me briefly answer your question here as well.
Every awd manufacturer provides a breakdown of the torque distribution of their systm. Its importnat from a handling perspective to anyone familiar with different systems. If you had asked before owning an AWD system, I might very well have answered in the same way some of you have, with "so what?"
Having driven both its better to start with "grip", IF slip still occurs, then detect, then transfer torque, then increase grip. That's how awd works without all the tech talk.
The Sequoia, 4Runner, GM Auto 4wd, Ford Auto 4wd and various other new 4wd systems start with the slip, then go to detect, then transfer then increase grip. The fact that Toyota does not provide a ratio of torque distribution is why I believe the system provides no power to the front wheels until the electronic system "grabs" a wheel, preventing further slip and forcing torque to be transferred to another wheel.
I'm not suggesting it is worse or better than other transfer systems, just that it must transfer to begin with to improve traction.
pschreck: regarding your post "The thump was the ABS system braking the wheels that were slipping on the steep incline that I had parked the Sequoia on to test the ActiveTrac system. The torque was already at the wheel or wheels. You see, the Sequoia ALWAYS has power going to ALL of the wheels at ALL times when ActiveTrac is engaged. The ABS was simply transfering it around. It truly is a wonderful system. I can't wait to wear out the Bridgestones so I can justify a set of Michelin Crossterrans to my wife. My understanding is that with those tires the slippage is reduced a great degree over the stock Deulers."
Would you mind sharing any source, even your owner's manual, where it states in the full time 4wd mode there is "power going to ALL of the wheels at ALL times when ActiveTrac is engaged." As a side nore, you will definitely be happier with the Michelin X-Terrains. They are great tires and come standard on the Denali XL.
You also shared "As a side note, this weekend my stepson and I are going to pull some Arborvitia (spelling?) stumps out of his yard. They will probably be deeply rooted as they were about fifteen feet tall when we cut them down last fall. I'm quite certain that the 4WD LOW setting will come in handy for that."
You might want to be careful, even with the Sequoia in 4wd lo, we wouldn't want you to "tucker-out" those 240 ponies:)
714cut: you ask "If you concede that the power changes between wheels or front or back or whatever in your Denali awd system, the delay in doing this would be somewhat equal to the delay in the Sequoia system would it not? So where is the advantage?
I think the choice of awd in the Denali has nothing to do with superiority or ability but simply an acknowledgement that the average Denali owner will not be taking his $70,000 cdn. Denali where he will need proper 4wd."
There is no delay in the torque transfer to the front end of the Denali becaue 38% of the available engine torque starts at the front wheels, unlike the Sequoia where it must start at the rear and be transferred forward. therefore a concession is not in order.
Think of it this way. The Denali has 122 hp and 139 ft lbs of torque directed to the front tires all the time with 203 hp and 226 ft lbs to the rear to start with. More torque is then transferred to the front beyond these numbers as needed.
Show me what the torque distribution is on the Sequoia and then we can have a better discussion of whether the Sequoia handles more like a vehicle with AWD or more like one with auto 4wd.
BTW, I doubt that anyone buying a $42000 Sequoia Limited is going to take his vehicle to a different terrain than the guy owning a $42,000 Denali XL (which is what a Denali XL runs right now out the dealership door, and I challenge you to try buying a 4wd Limited Sequoia for $42K).
Comments
So if you don't believe the guage, then I guess you need to ask yourself if when you fill your gas tank, is it really full? or is your oil pressure really XXX when your guage reads XXX.
-mike
Please... for the love of Pete... take this idiotic discussion to a more appropriate topic such as the ones that compare the Sequoia to competing products. I'm sure the Subaru, GM, Isuzu and Hummer folks will love to share in your wealth of information.
cliffy: don't get snagged into this endless debate which, by now, has devolved into Subaru's. Unless you are an expert on Subarus.... Maybe someone can care to explain to us how TOD on Isuzu's, AWD on Subaru's and the 2/4WD system of the Sequoia relate to each other ??? Next we know it, we may be 'debating' bioterrorism and homeland defense on the SEQUOIA forum....
but the entertainment value has been fun to watch ! so without further ado, let's get back to our regularly scheduled debate on TOD, AWD, 4WD, 2WD, XWD, or whatever else that is the toast-of-the-day ...
Do I need to lock my wheels to engage 4-wheel drive?
A. A. No. Unlike older systems with manual locking hubs, or systems that require a complete stop prior to engaging 4-wheel drive, your Isuzu vehicle's front wheels will connect and disconnect from the driving axle automatically through its shift-on-the-fly capability (up to 60 mph) when moving into or out of 4H/TOD modes. When TOD is engaged (if so equipped), this system will automatically transfer up to 50% of the vehicle's power to the front wheels, as necessary, to maximize traction in slippery conditions - and automatically return to 2-wheel-drive operation, when appropriate.
This would appear to suggest that the Trooper's TOD system "returns to a 2wd" mode which would be the equivalent to having a torque distribution of 0% front and 100% rear which was the original statement I made regarding the Trooper's system not being the same as an AWD system that provides continous power to all four wheels.
I've not been able to find anything that would suggest that there's a minimum torque delivered to the Trooper's front wheels. I'm not trying to overkill the issue but even you made it clear that rumors seem to run wild on the net and I was just trying to clear one of them up.
There are a lot of websites, including manufacturer websites that incorrectly state information, or state slanted truths about products. If you choose not to believe me that's ok.
But I'd trust owners and people more knowledgeable than webmaster/marketing/sales folks anyday.
-mike
To the Hood Deflector post: I also ordered one from McNeil along with mats and cargo mat. I'll post my experience with them when they get here.
"Stuck in Park"
it does 'appear' that way, but there is another way to interpret it (sort of).
'your Isuzu vehicle's front wheels will connect and disconnect from the driving axle automatically through its shift-on-the-fly capability (up to 60 mph) when moving into or out of 4H/TOD modes'
Keyword is when moving into or out of 4H/TOD modes. So only when 4H/TOD button is pressed will it 'shift-on-the-fly'. Otherwise TOD will remain locked into 2WD or AWD dependent on whether or not the button is depressed or not.
'automatically return to 2-wheel-drive operation, when appropriate'
When stopped sounds appropriate to me
Heatwave: I think the descriptions of these systems are very confusing (at least to me as a mechanical engineer). Certain things just don't seem right sometimes, and I believe it is a problem that should be addressed. It is difficult to address this problem though because the engineers could say it one way (which gives a perfect description of the system) while no one else understands. So the engineers simplify it for the advertising and PR departments and they in turn put their own twist on things.
-mike
While I suspect it matters little to the average consumer, understanding how much torque is delivered to the front wheels under normal driving road conditions tells a knowledgable driver alot about the handling characteristics of an AWD or full-time 4wd system.
Clarity from Izusu or Toyota or any manufacturer would certainly be helpful in better understanding the capabilities and function of their 4wd systems. More specs and less marketing would be a start in the right direction in clarifying the operation of different 4wd systems for their owners.
"I think I recall feeling a slight thumping through the steering wheel, but I won't swear to it. I was very much caught up in the moment. I can tell you that the system is at least as effective as my old 97 K1500 pickups' old time 4WD system. I can't speak for the other Toyota systems but I can say that for my needs this is a choice system. You get 4WD with a low range that can be driven ANYTIME IN ANY CONDITIONS.
I think that the best way to describe this type of system is to call it Part Time Rear Wheel Drive."
That thump in the steering wheel was torque being transferred to the front wheels when slippage occurred in the rear wheels. Unlike an awd vehicle which starts with torque already being delivered to the front wheels.
I do however agree with your personal view of the Sequoia 4wd system "I think that the best way to describe this type of system is to call it Part Time Rear Wheel Drive."
Its absolutely appropriate to discuss the torque distribution on the Sequoia 4wd setup on a Sequoia forum. To the extent you have a problem with such a relevant discussion, I'd recommend that you stop in to see your physician for a renewal of that medication you seem to have run out of.
Open differentials at the front, center and rear as you describe the Sequoia setup will not deliver a 50:50 ratio of torque to the front and rear axles in and of themselves. Please.... for the love of Cliffy..., instead of shouting irrationally, why not simply point to a single web reference that generated your information to clarify the matter?
gpm5: would you mind pointing to a single refence to support your statement "The 4WD system on the sequoia not only allows the stability of a 50:50 split on dry pavement, it also provides torque to one or more wheels, even if the others are on ice or lifted in the air" or is this forum made up of alot of statements that are focussed on just making everyone feel warm and fuzzy about their vehicles.
Look it was a simple question, seeking a simple answer with any supporting resource. Let me repeat, what is the torque distribution of the Sequoia 4wd system when operating on dry roadway conditions and can you share a published source for the info? Its really not that difficult a question.
So, beyond wild speculation on your part, what gives you the impression that I am wrong?
cliffy: to use minuteman's well-timed comment "Catch your breath", "you're gonna blow a gasket".
My comment was timed only to illustrate how gamey, asinine, and boorish your posts have been on this forum [not to mention mean-spirited]. I used to think you were a paid GM shill. Now, I think you are an amateur crackpot. A shill would be more professional.
As a side note, this weekend my stepson and I are going to pull some Arborvitia (spelling?) stumps out of his yard. They will probably be deeply rooted as they were about fifteen feet tall when we cut them down last fall. I'm quite certain that the 4WD LOW setting will come in handy for that.
Secondly, the Toyota system is transparent. If the computer senses wheel slip and reacts in 1/100,000th of a second what difference would it make whether there was power evenly distributed all of the time?
I actually can't believe I'm involved in this debate as all of the systems work wonderfully and we probably would have a hard time telling them apart in normal driving.
If you concede that the power changes between wheels or front or back or whatever in your Denali awd system, the delay in doing this would be somewhat equal to the delay in the Sequoia system would it not? So where is the advantage?
I think the choice of awd in the Denali has nothing to do with superiority or ability but simply an acknowledgement that the average Denali owner will not be taking his $70,000 cdn. Denali where he will need proper 4wd.
On the way down we got 17mpg while averaging 75mph. Most of the time on I-4 we were doing 90mph. Not our choice. If you don't go with the flow you're likely to die.
On the return trip we encountered heavy to moderate rainfall from GA to PA. Without the pod and with ActiveTrac engaged, we got 17.5mpg. Again we were averaging 75mph. The return leg was driven straight through only stopping for food, gas and evac. I'm guessing about 900 miles with 4WD engaged. My brother, a Ford loving ex-Marine, was thoroughly impressed with the Sequoia's handling and power.
The pod, in my conclusion, was no real hinderance. Very little noise. Of course the Sequoia's cabin is remarkably quiet to begin with. We did, however, strap the pod down with ratchet straps as well as the straps that were installed on the pod. We also checked it at every stop for safety.
As for the pod itself, it was a Sears model that my parents had puchased in the early 90s. We left the pod behind so I'm guessing at the size. It was about 2' tall x 3' wide x 4' long. White on top and gray on the bottom. I'm sure you've seen them before.
Good luck.
Besides, my Sequoia will kick a Honda Pilots [non-permissible content removed], so there
Also, you're not talking a $10 - $15k difference, more like $4 - $5K based on what you will actually pay. I've heard the stories and it's the same in my area. Honda dealers will sell at MSRP plus $2,000 in dealer installed accessories. If the same holds true for the Pilot as with the Odyssey, you'll be spending atleast $30K (without the leather) I'm picking up an SR5 Sequoia for under $35K. ($38K MSRP) Check out Edmunds TMV.
The Pilot should be an awesome vehicle, but it's not a full size.
I agree that the bigger Sequoia will be worth $8K or more to some people, depending on their needs. I anticipate transporting 8 people very rarely. Most of the time it will be 5 or less, so the Pilot will be just fine 98% of the time.
You're right, it comes down to need, so why are we comparing these two vehicles? You can't get the space of a minivan in one of these mid-size SUV's, and Honda is marketing the Pilot in this fashion. They better hire Mini-Me to demo the 3rd seat.
Good luck, hope the wait is not long...
How about a summary of your first year of ownership? Likes, dislikes, regrets, problems?
Pilot is essentially an AWD Oddessey, a slightly stretched MDX. It is not meant for towing, off-roading or carrying 7 ADULTS, which means IMHO it would not compete with the Sequoia cause the Sequoia is a truck based vehcile, that can tow, and seat 7 adults. I'm partial to the Land Cruiser personally over the Sequoia due to it's better off-road and world-class durability, but I'd take the Sequoia over an Oddesey Mini-van Rebadged anyday. Heck in my opinion the Pilot will compete with the Highlander aka a lifted AWD Camary!
-mike
In regard to the poster with the Grand Cherokee. I had one too, and the difference is night and day, although I do miss my stereo controls on the steering wheel from the Grand Cherokee, but I do not miss the trips to the service department. I have not been back to the service department at my Toyota dealership since I purchased this vehicle (my other car is a Mercedes-Benz that made 21 trips in 2 years so I hate to even think of a service rep). It is a larger vehicle and you do have to learn to use your mirrors. They are large, positioned extremely well and really leave no blind spots except for items that are in close, directly behind the vehicle, and lower than the pretty high back window. I suggest you take it to an empty parking lot where there are trash cans, poles, and maybe another car or two and practice parking and maneuvering with someone exterior to the vehicle to guide you. This is actually kinda fun and you will quickly not need the guide. The real problem I had to overcome with maneuvering was mental. The vehicle is really big, but drives and handles like a much smaller vehicle. I drive it like it is smaller so sometimes it requires an extra "backup" when I thought I would not have to. No big deal and something easily adjusted to. It actually has a very small turn radius for its size, but there's alot of vehicle behind the rear wheels which carve a large radius in tight quarters. My wife still hates to back it in tight places though. She loves driving it going forward because she is not tall and she can see everything from the commanding view of the drivers seat.
The back seat has plenty of room. I have had 8 happy adults enjoying loud and boisterous conversation in my SEQ for over 100 miles and all were happy and comfortable. I do have to admit we had three ladies in the rear seat. I am sure, the three 200 pounders in the middle row would have been less happy in the rear.
A man should not like his vehicle this much. My boss has a Honda Odyssey though and he might like his vehicle at least as much as I like mine. That is a good mini-van. But it ain't no HE-MAN truck like a SEQ.
The next thing I did was purchase a front end mask from Toyota, partially because of the bug guts thing above, but mostly because I was getting some rock chips. It will make you cuss putting it on because it is made to the exacting specs the vehicle is made to and the directions aren't the best. Once it's on, it fits perfectly, and allows the hood to still be opened with it in place. And BUGS DON'T STICK TO IT! And ROCKS BOUNCE OFF OF IT! It's even better than TOYO GUARD. I put it on before every trip. Let the bugs beware!
My advice is make 'em throw the front end mask in or at least sell it to you at dealer cost if you plan to do any cross country motoring in your new "land yacht". You'll be glad you did. If you want a laugh, make 'em show you how to install it, especially if they have never done it before.
Our Seq is now approaching the 25K mile mark (actual is 24,815 as of 03/24/02). The vehicle was purchased Dec 11, 2000, making it slightly over 15 months of ownership. The only major complaint I have occured this past weekend. Due to the extreme quietness of the vehicle, I had not noticed or heard if/when the brakes started to squeak. Last Friday as I was packing at work, a colleague remarked that the brakes were squeaking. I rolled down the window, reversed and pressed the brake pedal and for the first time heard it too. Obviously without this colleague, I'd continue driving this vehicle with my windows almost always rolled up, and not hear a beep about the squeaking brakes. How long has it been squeaking ? I have no idea. This came back to haunt me later. Read on below:
So I immediately called my local Toyota dealership (Poway Toyota). Was scheduled for a 10:00 am appt. Left the vehicle with the dealership for checking, and 2 hours later got a call. They told me that I had 0% brake pads left on the front, and already had some metal-to-metal contact occuring. Hence, they claimed that there were a couple "hot spots" on the front rotors and hence they needed to be replaced. How about machining them, I asked ? Sorry, but that won't remove the hot spots, besides the labor cost is almost higher than replacing them, I was told. And machining will never guarantee them back to OE performance. Cost of changing pads, replacing two front rotors and labor: $510 (+tax). Ouch !!! I asked for a couple minutes to check with the wife and I'd call back. I spent these minutes venting all kinds of unprintable words (to myself), felt a little better, called back and gave them the go-ahead.
What's the moral to this story: For anyone out there, I'd strongly recommend checking and having your brake pads REPLACED at 20K or thereabouts, just to give you room not to have anything happen to the rotors. Although I have heard of pads being replaced at 12K or higher, most of the 24K miles on our Seq were due to highway/freeway driving. Since the past month, it has been mostly stop-and-go traffic and hence excerbated the brake degradation. For me, I learnt my lesson. One is to take some time to drive with my windows rolled down so that I can notice any unusual sound/noise from the vehicle, if any. I am not about to get too comfortable enjoying this vehicle to the detriment of anything else happening on the immediate extremety of the vehicle. As they say: "A stitch in time saves nine"
So there you are. This is the most major thing I can complain about in my 15 months of ownership. My family and I have and hope to continue to derive many more years of comfort, pleasure and satisfaction from driving this vehicle. I suppose that I have already mentioned about the alignment issue, which had been solved since late last year. Otherwise, it is honky-dory.
Would I buy this vehicle agin, if I had to ? You betcha ...
Problems thus far: The rear window wiper had to be replaced under warranty - it wasn't seating properly when turned off. It's fine now - no biggie. The middle plastic seat belt cover in the middle row keeps falling off - a nuisance but hardly worth mentioning. The sound quality of the standard radio is not the greatest, but fine for our purposes.
The only major problem I've had were the front brake pads being replaced. The squeak in ours developed before Christmas at only 9600 miles or so. I complained to the dealer about it during a routine service and they supposedly checked things out and said the brakes were fine. The squeaking came right back, though, and by mid-January I brought it back just for that purpose.
They replaced the front pads and machined the rotors under warranty. I think the only reason they covered it was because I had previously complained about it. They did state that pads were really not covered under the warranty; but I claimed that my original complaint was before the vehicle was even one year old! Surely, original brake pads must last longer than that!
I do think that in the long run this vehicle will eat brakes. I've heard many similar stories from friends who own the big beasts (LandCruisers, Suburbans, etc.) My husband swears it's because I drive the thing like a small car and there could be some truth to that. I'm trying to be easier on the brakes now that they've been replaced and it will be interesting to see how many miles we get out of these.
All in all, we couldn't be happier with the Sequoia. I truly believe Toyota deserves their reputation for reliablility. No vehicle is perfect, but compared to the others, this is as close to perfect as you can get.
2) Do you put chains on all four wheels with 2WD or just two?
Thanks!
Before I answer let me state that you guys really need to all catch your breath. I tried to simply give my view of why awd is different from the sequoia's 4wd system. You all seem to get bent out of shape as if pointing out the difference is necessarily a bad thing. You all are way to sensitive about your vehicle.
It has its problems and a whole lot more things good to say about it than bad, but that doesn't mean you ignore the issues or stop asking questions.
While I have my doubts about your answer on the Sequoia's system, its not because of wild speculation. I posted my views in more detail in the Sequoia 4wd forum, however let me briefly answer your question here as well.
Every awd manufacturer provides a breakdown of the torque distribution of their systm. Its importnat from a handling perspective to anyone familiar with different systems. If you had asked before owning an AWD system, I might very well have answered in the same way some of you have, with "so what?"
Having driven both its better to start with "grip", IF slip still occurs, then detect, then transfer torque, then increase grip. That's how awd works without all the tech talk.
The Sequoia, 4Runner, GM Auto 4wd, Ford Auto 4wd and various other new 4wd systems start with the slip, then go to detect, then transfer then increase grip. The fact that Toyota does not provide a ratio of torque distribution is why I believe the system provides no power to the front wheels until the electronic system "grabs" a wheel, preventing further slip and forcing torque to be transferred to another wheel.
I'm not suggesting it is worse or better than other transfer systems, just that it must transfer to begin with to improve traction.
pschreck: regarding your post "The thump was the ABS system braking the wheels that were slipping on the steep incline that I had parked the Sequoia on to test the ActiveTrac system. The torque was already at the wheel or wheels. You see, the Sequoia ALWAYS has power going to ALL of the wheels at ALL times when ActiveTrac is engaged. The ABS was simply transfering it around. It truly is a wonderful system. I can't wait to wear out the Bridgestones so I can justify a set of Michelin Crossterrans to my wife. My understanding is that with those tires the slippage is reduced a great degree over the stock Deulers."
Would you mind sharing any source, even your owner's manual, where it states in the full time 4wd mode there is "power going to ALL of the wheels at ALL times when ActiveTrac is engaged." As a side nore, you will definitely be happier with the Michelin X-Terrains. They are great tires and come standard on the Denali XL.
You also shared "As a side note, this weekend my stepson and I are going to pull some Arborvitia (spelling?) stumps out of his yard. They will probably be deeply rooted as they were about fifteen feet tall when we cut them down last fall. I'm quite certain that the 4WD LOW setting will come in handy for that."
You might want to be careful, even with the Sequoia in 4wd lo, we wouldn't want you to "tucker-out" those 240 ponies:)
I think the choice of awd in the Denali has nothing to do with superiority or ability but simply an acknowledgement that the average Denali owner will not be taking his $70,000 cdn. Denali where he will need proper 4wd."
There is no delay in the torque transfer to the front end of the Denali becaue 38% of the available engine torque starts at the front wheels, unlike the Sequoia where it must start at the rear and be transferred forward. therefore a concession is not in order.
Think of it this way. The Denali has 122 hp and 139 ft lbs of torque directed to the front tires all the time with 203 hp and 226 ft lbs to the rear to start with. More torque is then transferred to the front beyond these numbers as needed.
Show me what the torque distribution is on the Sequoia and then we can have a better discussion of whether the Sequoia handles more like a vehicle with AWD or more like one with auto 4wd.
BTW, I doubt that anyone buying a $42000 Sequoia Limited is going to take his vehicle to a different terrain than the guy owning a $42,000 Denali XL (which is what a Denali XL runs right now out the dealership door, and I challenge you to try buying a 4wd Limited Sequoia for $42K).