Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
Could you explain the differences in the 4WD system in the Land Cruiser and the 2003 4Runner(V6)? For any differences listed, could you mention the benefits/drawbacks?
Also, if possible, could anybody fill me in on how the Land Rover Discovery system works in comparison to the TLC?
And yes, you could find yourself spinning both wheels and "out", but you soon learned, if you hadn't already, not to play "boy-racer".
Provided you're willing to live with conservative wintertime on-road driving, even in Alaska, a RWD w/LSD will be more than satisfactory 99% of the time. That other 1% will require a good set of snowchains but overall it will be worth the bother IMMHO.
Both the 4runner and the TLC have a locking center right?
Also, what would be the benefits of adding locking front and rear differentials, or possibly torsens? Wouldnt that work like a typical AWD system?
Also...I know this isnt drivetrain related, but the TLC has torsion front suspension and coil rear suspension right? Is it the same setup as the new 4runner?
As to the suspension, the Cruiser has torsion bars in front while the Runner has coil springs. Coil springs are better on road but the torsion bars are a bit more rugged.
Wow, you've seen some serious winters if you lived in N. Central Montana - hooeeeey!
The limited slip rear differential is what you had back then in RWD cars. It was often erroneously called a "locker". A true locker such as what was asked about above locks both rear wheels together and is WAY more dangerous than your limited slip experiences. Just a touch of gas with a locked rear end will cause a spin, where on an LSD rear end, you get some warning wheelspin from one tire first. No such warning on a locker.
Where did you live in MT? Check the Weather Channel and look a the weather this region is getting at the moment (yowza).
IdahoDoug
The full time differs from AWD by having a low gear avaliable ?
one more of topic question, if the V8 is turning 4 wheels and the added weight , does anyone know how the fuel rating is only 1 mpg less than the part time V6 ?
thanks
DL
IdahoDoug
thanks,
DL
Read the last twenty or so posts on the highlander thread.
Vehicle is parked. Right front and left rear wheel are on ice. You step on the gas. The normal bias of the open diffs. sends power to the two wheels on ice. Computer senses this and applys brakes to RF and LR wheels, and left front and right rear wheels get power, moving you forward. Now as you're moving forward, the right front comes off the ice along with the left rear, but right rear goes onto ice that the right front was on. Right rear tire starts to spin. Torsen increases power to front drive shaft, TRAC system applys brake to RR tire and so other three wheels get power to move you.
Sorry for the long-winded example, but hope it helps.
Driving around in a ski area parking lot to find a space may be a more perfect example. Neither the RX nor the HL can get that done. At least not last winter at Snoqualmie Pass.
If all four wheels have equally low traction then the Trac system has no ABS sensor reference to use to come into play and the VC also doesn't come into play.
"The" spin one wheel and then the other and then another is a perfect example of what the RX or HL will do on packed snow or ice. Even the Jeep Cherokee Limited's AWD system will do that.
Viscous couplings MUST have a long time delay before the onset of tight coupling and that leads to the problem of continuously shifting torque back and forth to the wheel not spinning, then this one, now that one, etc, etc.
The difference is that in the Jeep you can LOCK the center diff'l and you have the option of a rear LSD AND (this is the biggy!) you can put chains on all four wheels.
With a locked center diff'l one front wheel AND one rear wheel will turn ALWAYS. Add in an LSD in the rear and both rear wheels will turn.
The RX or HL, dead in the water, HARD water, ICE that is.
The information on the viscous coupling "cycling back and forth" and "MUST have a long time delay" are both incorrect. The transfer of torque is nearly instantaneous as it is caused by the shear pressure of the VC fluid between the plates - no notable delay and potentially faster than an electronic device could react.
As to the cycling. VC's do not transfer torque back and forth - only 1 direction. There's an input shaft from the front wheels and torque is either sent / not sent to the rear. It all comes from the front, it is not sent back and forth. Further, this is not what Toyota is worried about as VCs are meant to be used as continuous duty (constantly) when needed and the fluid itself acts to prevent overheating.
What Toyota (and ANY vehicle with electronic traction control -TC) is worried about is overheating the brakes. TC includes a function of applying the brakes to a spinning wheel. If you are in a condition where you're not going anywhere (Toyota's "all wheels spinning"), then the brakes can get overheated. No airflow, plus braking action generates heat load. This takes some doing Cotterpin, so frankly it's not a reason to worry IMO. It is not a fragile system and has plenty of reserve strength and heat capacity in the brakes. They just want to prevent a numbskull from standing on the gas in a sustained manner for 5 minutes without letup being able to sue them for damaged brakes.
IdahoDoug
The viscous fluid gets heated via the turbulence created when the two sets of interleaved clutch plates have disparate rotational rates.
Therefore you should NEVER have substantially differing diameter tire sizes on the front vs the rear. That would create constant "stirring" of the viscous fluid causing it to overheat and fail.
And yes, once the fluid is heated the increased viscosity will remain until it cools, maintaining, until it cools, a relatively high coupling coefficient from the front driveline to the rear.
First one tire spins, then another, and then...
Right front spins, VC stiffens and now the right rear spins along with it and the VC cools.
Trac is supposed to handle side to side rotational disparaties but doesn't. I can understand why not for the front, jerking the steering wheel out of somebodies hands, etc, but I know not why Trac doesn't act as an LSD in the rear as Lexus says it should.
If all wheels are spinning and there is a substantial variation of the rate at some wheel(s) the Trac will moderately brake the faster wheel(s). But in this case it would also quickly dethrottle the engine.
Leaving us with the first case, all wheels spinning freely with no substantial disparity. Other than the driver being an idiot what's the harm mechanically?
REALLY !!
At something like 90MPH and above there is virtually no wheel "spinning" resistance, almost all resistance is wind drag. Guess I better stop driving my C4 that fast for hours on end.
In my many years in Seattle I have seen many inexperienced/California BMW drivers spinning out on a snow and ice covered uphill roadbeds with the only result being lots of burned rubber smell.
To your comment that VC's have a delay in the "hundreds of milliseconds", which you also consider "long". To my mind, that's pretty fast. In addition, the VC does not have to heat up to operate. The fluid in a typical VC (they vary somewhat) is the consistency of honey when cold, so you can see that if the plates of one shaft are spun, the spinning action of the thick fluid will immiately exert pressure on the other plates to transfer torque.
To your comment on the VC overheating. VC's are easily the most durable component of a VC based drivetrain, with no heat issues, the ability to operate on a continuouos duty cycle, and no maintenance required for the entire life of the vehicle. They are simply a liquid filled canister and are designed to handle enormous heat.
To your comment on the danger of different tire circumferences F/R. A VC is able to handle this relatively small difference in rotation with ease. It is systems like Subaru's which use an electrohydraulic clutch that have problems with this as the clutch is not designed for continuous duty and can overheat. Yes, it is always best to have the same diameter tires on ANY vehicle, but this is not an achilles heel on the VC system.
To your comment (again) about the "cycling back and forth" brought forward again above in your scenario about the RF spinning, which causes the RR to spin. You imply the spinning RF causes the RR to spin, then the VC cools because the shafts are spinning together, which in turn causes the RF to spin again in a cycle ad nauseum. This is not true. If the RF spins, the average speed of the two fronts increases, which sends torque to the rear shaft via the VC. When the spinning stops, the sending of torque stops - it's that simple. The sending of torque does not wait for the VC to "cool" before stopping its delivery, it waits for the spinning. There is no mechanism to send torque back to the fronts as you imply, and there is therefore no constant cycling back and forth. This is a much simpler system than you seem to think it is.
Now, to the 90mph comment. You state that there is "no wheel spinning resistance". Mechanically, all resistance to forward travel is registered by trying to spin the wheels, and this resistance is huge at 90mph due to aerodynamic drag. To state that there is "no" resistance is simply to operate in ignorance of simple physics.
The warning is for the following reason. Spinning the tires while stuck will do all of the following:
-Damage the tires.
-Break an axle/differential if a spinning tire suddenly finds grippy pavement.
-Overheat the tranny (high fluid heat from internal shaft speeds with zero cooling airflow).
-Overheat the brakes if the system has TC (yes the brakes will apply despite all wheels spinning unless you have the incredible happenstance of all of them breaking loose at the same instance and maintaining the same rotational speed during the entire wheelspin. A situation that is impossible with a VC system, by the way. I'd be more than happy to elaborate on this, BTW)
-Create a system that is ripe for loss of vehicle control.
All of these scenarios are bad for the manufacturer of the vehicle, and they'd like you to avoid them. Thus the warnings.
When I started out I was quite ignorant on the subject. The catch phase was "a fluid in which viscosity increases with temperature". I don't have much of an education but I do know that most fluids' viscosity DECREASES with rising temperature.
So I went looking to find the truth, or something to convince me that the "catch phrase" was true.
It seems the A-Trac will be dedicated to managing the torque distribution side to side rather than having mechanical LSDs.
At first glance I too liked the Sequoia system. But owning an 01 AWD RX300 I have taken notice that its Trac system doesn't seem to be aggressive enough to get the job done.
Think of this. With Trac, or A-Trac, if the left front wheel is spinning freely then Trac would need to apply the brakes to that wheel to "force" engine torque to the other wheels. "Hard" braking application to only one front wheel would provide horrid "jerking" feedback to the steering wheel and might even result in loss of control entirely.
So I would suspect that neither A-Trac or Trac could provide aggressive side to side torque distribution to the front absent a method for "locking" the steering wheel into position during differential braking.
When I started out I was quite ignorant on the subject. The catch phase was "a fluid in which viscosity increases with temperature". I don't have much of an education but I do know that most fluids' viscosity DECREASES with rising temperature."
Wrong, fluids heat/viscosity properties vary greatly depending on the intermolecular forces of the fluid. It is too big of a generalization to say that most fluids viscosity decrease with temperature.
Also, VC does NOT operate on the principle that the fluids viscosity increases with temperature. In fact, most VC systems use fluids where temperature has little to no effect on viscosity. They do however use fluids based on their specific shear thickening properties. Doug had a great example: Honey. Go take a jar of honey, and stick it in a blender. Turn on the blender and listen closely to the motor. The motor strains, and lowers its speed, because the Honey thickens with shearing.
I dont know where you have been doing your research, but it is wrong. I would advise you to not take everything you read on the internet as gospel.
Steve, Host
For example, corn starch and water in solution will thicken when heated. Honey, like you mention, will thin when heated. Water will not experience any viscosity change when heated.
There is absolutely no way to say that most fluids behave one way or another, because every fluid is different, and every fluid will react to heat differently.
Viscous clutches and couplings work on the principle of thermal expansion of fluids when heated.
Look it up.
Believe what you want.
I went through several of your comments in my last post basically saying you were wrong in the interests of having this board be a source of accurate information. Your next post did not address any of these comments in active debate, but simply brought up a new topic, which is the viscosity of fluids. OK, now I guess we're on the subject of viscosity and you're startled to find that VC's are full of a fluid that thickens with heat.
As a result of your startling discovery, you contend that most fluids thin as they get thicker. Since we're talking about automotive fluids, here's my response - you're wrong. Gear oil, and motor oil have HIGHER viscosity at warmer operating temperatures. Why was it a surprise to you that the fluid used in viscous couplings behaves the same way when it is actually quite common? And why did you assume I did not know this, and that therefore I am somehow in error? I truly don't understand the relevance, but felt the need to clear it up anyhow.
As to your comment about "horrid" jerking on traction control systems acting on the front wheels, again you are sensationalizing and completely inaccurately portraying such systems. Traction control systems can provide quite aggressive torque distribution using the brakes without any undue steering input. The secret is good software that measures the rate of difference, and ramps up the braking force. It is not rocket science and has been around since the mid 80's. In 1986, I drove a Mercedes 4Matic Wagon flown over from Germany for our research which used wheel braking quite smoothly. 16 years later, this technique has become quite common. My '97 Audi A6 Quattro Wagon had front-wheel-only braking action and even with one wheel on glare ice and the other on dry pavement the only way I knew it was working was the sound - nary a wiggle in the steering wheel. So, I disagree with your characterization of TC-type systems, which are quite mild and act to stabilize the vehicle rather than reduce control as you imply.
It is plain to see that you are unhappy with your RX's system BTW, and I have a suggestion for you. Put winter or studded tires on it and you'll be amazed at its mobility on both the slick stuff and on the deep stuff. Better yet, try Michelin's Arctic Alpin 4X4 or another new generation studless winter specific tire. With all season tires, the system's potential is barely tapped. If you choose not to, then you'll save $$ but must recognize that you're operating on a lower level in terms of traction.
And, yes cornstarch and water is a fluid.
IdahoDoug
Yes the Sequoia can be driven at highway speeds with no problems whatsoever. Mine spend about 95% of it's time in 4WD.
Sophistication? I give the nod to the 4Runner. Ask cliffy for sure.
Not sure what the other buttons are for. The Sport that I drove had those buttons covered with plugs.
The other buttons you saw on the Runner are for the heated seats on the Limited and the optional height adjustable air bag suspension.
I'll assume that was a typo.
Several instances come to mind.
Years ago in the wintertime in Anchorage I went out early in the morning to drive my rental car away that had been plugged into a block heater all night so the engine oil didn't become so thick and sluggish that the starter couldn't turn the engine over. The engine started just fine and as I backed out of my parking spot and attempted to steer I discovered that I couldn't turn the steering wheel.
After a little bit of checking I discovered that the power steering fluid was thicker than a good batch of sorghum molasses. Don't remember for sure but I wouldn't doubt that the outside temperatrue had been as low as -50 during the night. I left the car running and went back in and had another cup of coffee while the steering fluid warmed up to the point wherein its viscosity was low enough for it to "flow".
It is my understanding that petroleum engineers have spent years and years trying to find the correct additives, formulations, to keep engine oil from thickening as the temperature declines.
Back on the farm in the wintertime 60 years ago we had to put a light weight oil in our equipment simply because engine oils with wide viscosity ranges, 5-30W, simply didn't exist then.
VCs operate because the engineers use a formulation that has a high degree, rate, of thermal expansion with a small change in temperature. It's the increasing PRESSURE of the fluid inside the SEALED chamber that raises the EFFECTIVE viscosity. That why many manufacturers that use an adequate fluid formulation can, and do, use a gas bubble inside the sealed case to delay the onset of coupling action.
I have never said VCs cannot work, and work VERY effectively. What I have said is that seemingly the formulation of the viscous fluid in the RX and HL is such that the coupling coefficient to the rear is initially VERY low and does not rise as rapidly as one might want on a roadbed environment wherein the need for chains is just a tad away.
The same being true for VSC and Trac. I know that the PSM firmware in my C4 is specifically "composed" to delay its onset to the point wherein my seat of the pants sensor has a chance to warn me to react. If I don't it steps in with a very agressive manner.
Since you're in Idaho I would suspect that you know how SUVs with intentional offroad capability solve the problem of front LSD steering feedback. They have huge shock absorbers mounted between the frame and the steering mechanism.
My 92 LS400 even has one and I know not why. Luxury and softness of the driving experience, I suppose.
As you are already aware, VSC and Trac systems can be VERY aggressive, as they tend to be in most vehicles of european origin.
But the RX300 is of Japanese origin. Watch those ads on TV, even see a man driving an RX? My point is that the RX, and by default the HL, are about "softness" of the driving experience.
The VC fluid is formulated for a "soft" non-aggressive nature, as is the composition of the VSC/Trac firmware.
Oh, last I checked the components of a solution don't separate over time. Last night I mixed cornstarch and water, thoroughly, and this morning I had two separate levels of substance in the glass. Sounds more like a "suspension" to me.
"VCs operate because the engineers use a formulation that has a high degree, rate, of thermal expansion with a small change in temperature. It's the increasing PRESSURE of the fluid inside the SEALED chamber that raises the EFFECTIVE viscosity. That why many manufacturers that use an adequate fluid formulation can, and do, use a gas bubble inside the sealed case to delay the onset of coupling action."
First of all, you are talking about a mechanical device that, when spun rapidly, raises the temperature of a fluid in the case. In other words, you are using mechanical work to raise the thermal energy of the fluid. While this can happen, the amount of mechanical work needed to raise ANY fluids thermal energy level a significant amount is astronomical.
Assuming you stick by that logic, you must also consider that in order for the VC to release its "locking" of the two shafts together, you must lower the temperature of the fluid, which means giving off the same amount of energy as you put in, which is a long and slow process...which could mean that long after you leave your slipping wheel situation, your axle is still locked together, which is very unsafe and no manufacturer would ever be stupid enough to put that on a production car.
Also, according to you, the fluid only needs a small increase in temperature to provide enough pressure to lock up. Considering that you think that a mechanical device is being used to raise the temperature of the fluid, you must mean that this fluid has substancially altered its volume through thermal expansion, to couple the plates together, with only a few degrees of difference in temperature. But how do you account for climatic temperature changes? If this fluid expands significantly with only a few degrees of temperature change, then how does the unit not explode from pressure in 100 degree heat? How does it couple the shafts together in -40 degree weather?
The answer is simple. VC DOES NOT USE THERMAL EXPANSION TO COUPLE THE SHAFTS TOGETHER.
Summary: A bunch of VC discs spinning can only raise the temperature of a fluid by a few degrees in a few seconds. If that fluid has thermal expansion properties that allow a significant pressure change when the temperature changes by only a few degrees, then that little VC case would explode in summer, and not work at all in winter.
In reality, VCs use a very simple fluid. They do not need expensive special formulations to operate, like you suggest. If they did, all manufacturers would be using TORSEN instead. VCs actually operate on a very simple principle.
Read away:
http://www.howstuffworks.com/differential7.htm
I haven't checked the link above, but it might be useful to read a summary of how a VC works if they have one. It is much more simple than you surmise - no clutch being activated in there, no pressure function, etc. Just a bunch of spinning discs with holes in them alternating "input shaft, output shaft". When one set spins, the thick fluid causes the other to spin through simple rotational friction just like the propeller of a boat spins when underway and you put it in neutral while still moving - residual drag, not pressure.
As to your LSD comment, I'm not aware of any SUV available with a front LSD. The number of them taken offroad where such a feature would be marketable is well below the level it makes sense to offer it.
The feature on your LS400 is a steering damper. It prevents abrupt steering inputs from reaching the driver and I honestly cannot recall it had one - good for me!! I was the Product Planner for that vehicle, as well as the Lexus ES250, the SC300/400 and the ES300. Following that, I was a District Manager and if you bought it in the Seattle area, I helped set up the dealer you purchased from. Small world, eh? :-)
I think you have a good grasp of what's going on under there, but at a certain point the subtleties of how these things work require fairly specific knowledge. You are knocking at this door and clearly have the capacity to grasp it. The "how stuff works" site has been pointed out by people who's opinions I respect as a good starter place to learn things like this. In some areas it's a bit dated, but overall a good site to check out.
As to your RX, consider the tires. I recall the LS400s with TC also not having an aggressive enough schedule and their snow capacity was dramatically improved with tires. The minimum available traction determines your mobility after all - increase this with tires and everything gets better.
IdahoDoug
I am of the understanding that the hummer has a locking front diff'l. But what is more to the point is that your statement seems to imply that you are in agreement that the side to side Trac activity on the front cannot be too aggressive unless something is there to absorb the shocks resulting.
With reference to the VC:
4th paragraph...
http://www.mmae.ucf.edu/~jtt/differential.htm
"...flat viscosity slope from -40F to +400F...."
Are you currently in Id?
Wife and I are driving to central MT, Lewistown, on the 20th.
She wants to take the RX.
I want to take the C4.
My other choices are a 98 AWD T&C or a 92 AWD Aerostar.
I was just kidding about the C4.
The RX can't have chains on the rear unless I find time to switch the rear struts to the front type and collapse the springs a few inches.
The Aerostar is at 125K miles but I know I can implicitly trust the AWD system, not so sure about other mechanical parts.
The T&C, 57k miles, can also handle chains all around and the AWD system uses a much "stiffer" VC than the RX.
What would you recommend?
Neither the Hummer nor the H2 have or ever had a front locker. A lot of people assume this, but in fact the Hummer had a fine and quite unusual system. You guys are going to start thinking I'm BS-ing with all these coincidences, but I also do offroad events for Isuzu and have also driven the old and new Hummers on the AM General factory offroad course. The older system (ended 99ish) used novel locking hubs at each wheel, which locked up when you applied both brake and gas. After this and still today, it has a 4 wheel TC system that is still quite effective offroad. I don't know much about the H2. I've trounced a military Hummer in an impromptu hillclimb challenge in the snow with my Montero (factory rear locker), so they're not invincible though obviously quite a serious machine.
For the trip you describe, I'd take the T&C as it will be quite capable, but have the smallest 'wince factor' while getting rained on with the gravel chips you'll get on that trip. I suspect any of them would make the trip in fine style, but I'm reluctant to take a nice car on the freeway in winter. In many ways though, I'd refer back to my prior statement about tires. When it's slick out, tires provide a far larger margin of safety than anything else, though CU recently found an AWD vehicle on all seasons will still out accelerate a FWD vehicle on snows when it's slippery out. Your mileage may vary...
Of course, the C4 would do it all, but it will also have the highest wince factor. Magnificent automobile, BTW.
IdahoDoug
My 68 Ford country squire station wagon had one of those.
BUT.
http://www.colt.demon.co.uk/CavTurbo/4wd_transfer_box.html
says it ALL.
But the RX does have Michelin cross terrains.
"Most of the viscous couplings already in use in many all-wheel drive vehicles have an assembly which is made up of a die cast aluminum with forty four steel plates. The unit contains a heavy, heat stabilized, viscous silicone fluid sealed in the assembly with a relatively flat viscosity temperature slope ranging from –40oF to over 400oF. The conventional interaxle differential is encompassed by the viscous assembly with the outer housing connected to the rear output shaft and the inner member to the front wheel driving sprocket (1)."
A flat viscosity temperature slope means that viscosity does not change significantly with a change in temperature.
The second link says:
"The properties of the silicone fluid are such that as the temperature increases so does the viscosity or thickness of the fluid. This results in the previously freely spinning plates to become increasingly locked together allowing more of the power to be transferred to the rear axle via the external discs."
Which implies that the viscosity does change significantly with a change in temp.
neither of which agree with your theory.
You state that fluid is chosen by the thermal expansion properties, because the fluid expands increasing pressure in the case, which locks the plates together.
The two sources you have given say that it uses a simple, non pressure operated design. One says that viscosity increases with temperature, which locks the two together, and one says it doesnt.
The funny thing is, one of the sources is from a guy who drives a cavalier and took apart his AWD system and took some pictures of his project. Another was written by a college student with fully referenced sources, who has some very significant research experience.
"...resulting in the silicone fluid heating up instantly..."
If the viscosity doesn't change as the fluid is heated then what characteristic is left?
Thermal expansion.
"If" the fluid is heated and "if" it expands accordingly, and considering that it is encased in a hermetically sealed container, haven't we just "compressed" a fluid into a smaller volume?
If so then the fluid is now a lot "thicker" than it was at the lower temperature and the "effective" viscosity might just be dramatically higher.
I seem to remember a "child's" trick of putting a piece of a matchstick in a coke bottle filled with water and then using my thumb or finger in the neck of the bottle to "compress" the water such that the matchstick piece would sink to the bottom.
What was obviously happening was the "pockets" of air in the wood were being compressed and displaced by the pressurized water.
Didn't someone once tell me that liquids could not be compressed?