By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
340HP normal, way excessive HP for the TT.
Folks in other threads have been saying that the new 4Runner and the highlander are polar opposites on the styling spectrum: 4Runner was a major gaffe, whereas highlander is one of the best-looking vehicles Toyota has ever sold...I tend to agree...care to comment?
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
My idea of an ideal SUV would be the HL, or the RX, with the 4runner torsen diff'l and the A-Trac.
The 01 AWD RX's Trac system was supposed to do a lot of what the A-Trac system does but I have started to suspect the firmware is setup to not be as aggressive. Anyway it never seems to come into play in mine.
I have had the VSC engage a few times, at least I think that's what happened, but never the Trac.
I keep resisting moving to the X5 and right now I'll likely delay it again in hopes the Rx and the HL get some serious AWD firmware upgrades next spring. And maybe enough rear wheel clearance to use snowchains safely.
I bought a 2001 HL Limited back in May of 2001. Since then I've put 40K miles on the vehicle and I can say that I am extremely pleased with the performance of it.
In my 40K of driving, I've averaged 21.8 miles per gallon performing mostly highway driving in the Seattle area. (In case you don't know anything about the Seattle area, highway driving here is about 50% "stop and go" and 50% "go" depending on the time of day. I say this because highway driving in other areas of the country are much less "stop and go" and thusly gas mileage from those areas will probably be higher.)
Interesting, after putting DuraLube in the engine, I had three tanks (within 3000 miles) where I hit between 24.1 and 24.8 MPG. After changing the oil two more times, the MPG went back to around 21.x. I guess you have to keep putting this stuff in from time to time.
Anyway, I've only experienced four issues with my HL, all of which I consider minor. (Note: I consider it very good that I've only experienced four issues considering I bought the "first year" model of the vehicle. This is a good testimony of Toyota getting their quality issues right the first time.) The four issues... 1) Occasional reedy like wind noise through front doors during strong side winds. (This issue was resolved, by Toyota, by replacing the door seals. This was fixed under a TSB (Toyota Service Bulletin) and didn't cost me anything.) 2) Glove box rattles. (This issue was also resolved by Toyota via a TSB. It's amazine what some small pieces of felt will do.
Other than these issues, my experience has been nothing but positive.
On a related note: The tires on my HL are really starting to get worn, so based on the discussions I've seen here, I'll look into getting some Michelin CrossTrains for it shortly. Thanks for the recommendations!
Are there any web sites that list service bulletins? Thank you.
The Edmunds Maintenance Guide.
Between these 3, you can usually find most of them :-)
Steve, Host
The description of the Nokian WR is as follows:
"Only "4-Season" S.U.V. tire to earn the Severe Service Emblem (snowflake-on-mountain).
All-weather silica compound provides excellent grip on wet surfaces while maintaining winter properties. The WR's arrowhead unidirectional tread pattern and unique tread positioning effectively expel water, snow and slush. WR features long service life and low driving noise on dry pavement with excellent off-road capabilities. Excellent handling and control in wet weather, while maintaining Nokian's "uncompromised" lateral grip on snow,
ice and slush."
http://www.nokiantires.com/indexen.html
From the little info that I have been able to find on the web, the consensus seems to be that it is a winter tire. I'm confused, is it an all-season or winter tire? Anyone familiar with this tire?
Thanks
The rear windows are useless in anything above 40 miles per hour.
Try to run at that speed with one or both of the rear windows open at about two inches, you will see what I am talking about.
Your eardrums will pop when you have to endure that thunderous wind booming sound for anything longer than 5 minutes.
However, one funny thing that I've tested out is that if I completely lower the rear windows, the eardrum shattering wind boom will disappear, the car will just be noisy with wind, but not to the point of pain in my ears.
The other feedback that I have heard about the all-seasons from Nokian is that they were designed to acually be all four seasons. Meaning that they are designed to actually handle snow and ice on a regular basis in the winter. Where normal all-seasons are really primarily set up to have best performance on dry roads and give good performance on wet roads and adequate grip in very moderate snow conditions. That is one of the reasons they recomend that you use a snow-specific tire if you live in a snow-belt.
Sorry to get so long winded, but I hope this helps.
When you roll down your windows "at speed" you're simply converting it to a large replica of a kid toy whistle.
Phenomena has been with us since cars went to closed passenger cabins. It can be avoided in vehicles that can lower the rear window, Ford station wagons, or open the rear quarter panel winglets, Chrysler T&C.
While the 4Runner is simply very noisy with rear windows opened, it isn't deafening, my ears can cope with the noise, but I can't do the same with the Highlander.
All help is appreciated!
I've got a set of Nokian's I use on my Toyota Echo here in Dayton Ohio...we get ice and snow mix on occasion...tires appear to work well and ride very nice compared to the Brigstone's orginally on the vehicle. I also have a 2002 4WD HL and replaced the Goodyears with Michelin Cross Terrain's...they are a bit stiffer than the Goodyears but I haven't had a chance to use yet in snow or ice...Tire Rack shows the ratings on this tire...appear to be good...too bad they don't show the Nokian's...
It performed flawlessly from Florida heat to Canada cold weather. It was nimble in the streets of New York City battling a sea of yellow cabs. The horrible Boston streets jolted her a bit but less than most vehicles.
The only thing I would change about this vehicle is that I would prefer to have some Nissan seats in it. And someone should invent a way to secure yourself with seatbelts while fully reclined.
a midsize SUV. we need it for versitility and space, but also need a car-like ride. We are looking at the highlander, probably the only one that we are interested in( we looked at Rav4, Rendesvus, Pathfinder), but still not sure if this is the right one. If we buy it, it ill be the base, no limited, and probably get 4WD, but want to know what other competition can match the Highlander. The SUV can be slighly used, like 2000+, we really need help making this decision and would appreciate all the advice you can give us
thank you for your help
Like the Lexus RX300 AWD, the Toyota Highlander AWD system is no more capable than the FWD version.
I really hate to suggest a Ford to anyone, but the Mazda Tribute or the Ford escape will out AWD either of these.
If you think you will have times when you truly need AWD, wintertime ON-ROAD low traction conditions, then the HL is not your cup of tea!
But now I will make a general statement about AWD that is predominantly FWD. On low traction surfaces it is predominantly unsafe! Just as unsafe as any FWD vehicle.
Well, almost any. The newer FWD Cadillacs have an over-running clutch so lagging engine torque doesn't brake the front wheels. I suppose some other FWD vehicles also have this feature.
With the HL and RX engine drive torque will be distributed evenly, 25% all around, as long as all four tires have approximately the same roadbed traction. The instant you encounter disparate traction is when you get into trouble.
In a normal, or standard VC design, once there is a disparate rotational rate between the front and rear drivelines the VC will stiffen up within a few hundred milliseconds and "moderately" lock the two drivelines together.
How quickly is usually a function of the size of the "gas bubble" within the fluid container, how moderately is a function of the formulation of the fluid itself. A viscous fluid with a high thermal expansion coefficient, once the gas bubble is fully compressed, will increase the coupling coefficient between the drivelines dramatically.
Apparently the formulation for the viscous fluid in the HL/RX VC allows it to remain flaccid for many seconds and then once it does stiffen up the coupling coefficient is so low it can only route about 25% of the torque to the rear.
You can try it out for yourself.
Drive the HL or RX in a circle continuously with the power on but at a safe level. Once the VC stiffens up the drivelines should begin to be stressed just as they would with a locked center diff'l on dry pavement. You should begin to "feel" that driveline stress as feedback, push-back, against your steering inputs.
Now try the same trick in a "true" AWD vehicle like the Jeep Cherokee Limited, or even teh Chrysler T&C. But be sure and keep your thumbs and fingers clear for when the steering wheel jerks out of your hands.
For on-road situations, the AWD system on the Highlander can be very effective. It is not fool-proof, just as any 4wd or AWD system can be defeated, but it does give additional traction and stability in slippery situations. For getting through a parking lot or driveway that hasn't been plowed yet, or snow-filled roads, it will make it much less likely that you will end up stuck.
Anyone have more than that? Just want to know what to look forward to and if there have been any additional problems.
I checked out the 2002 with the console and that is pretty cool. Too bad can't retrofit it into the 2001 easily.
I'm planning to take my '01 H/L 'base', V6 2WD in the snow this winter. I have the stock Goodyear Integrity tires and will only drive 'on-road'. Possibly w/chains. Will I have any problems? Never driven in the snow before.
I know the transmission has a "SNOW MODE" button on the shifter....never used it...does it help?
If anyone had some experience with this situation, please advise.....or refer me to previous posts.
Thanks in advance!
Gary
Since the VC case is sealed as it expands it pressurizes the case thereby increasing the coupling coefficient between the two sets of clutch plates.
And yes, you can "quickly" increase the expansion rate with a HIGHLY disparate rotational rate between the two drivelines, but you can also cause the fluid to heat with a slower but continuous disparate rotational rate.
At least you can do that on an VC implementation of AWD that is truly designed at the factory to be a capable AWD system.
Don't know about the HL for sure, but LSD cannot be purchased on an AWD RX with VSC/Trac. As you stated Trac should perform the functionality of an LSD.
I can readily understand why Trac might not work on the front, but it doesn't work on my RX even on the rear.
VSC. Can someone tell me why I can't accomplish exactly the same effect by going to tires with a little extra contact patch?
Going downhill on a slippery roadbed with higher traction on the front than the back can easily lead to loss of control of the vehicle, even with an extremely experienced driver.
If you test drive an HL or an RX notice that in the last moments of slowing or stopping, the 3 to 5MPH speed just before you come to a stop, the transmission will seemingly "upshift", reducing the engine braking to the drive wheels.
Newer Cadillac FWD drive vehicles have an over-running clutch to prevent engine braking altogether.
FWD vehicles, and AWD vehicles with predominant FWD torque bias, can be extremely DANGEROUS during operations on low traction conditions. Most everyone, your Toyota or Lexus owners manual included, will advise you that it is NEVER a good idea to have more traction on the front than the rear in wintertime condition.
Becuase of the weight bias FWD vehicles ALWAYS have more traction on the front than the rear, so your're starting out handicapped from the get-go.
Snowchains cannot be installed on the rear of the HL nor the RX, so whatever you do, assuming you value your life and that of your passengers, don't install snowchains ONLY on the front as Toyota and Lexus recommends.
Example one: Vehicle is going around a curve and is understeering. (plowing straight instead of turning due to lack of traction in front) What the VSC does in this situation is to engage the brake on the inside rear tire to help turn the vehicle in while reducing throttle to help the front tires regain grip and start steering again.
Example two: Vehicle is going around a curve and it is oversteering. (back end is kicking out - start of a fish-tail) What the VSC does in this situation is to apply the brake to the wheel on side of the vehicle that is on the outside of the kick-out. At the same time it will allow the throttle to continue and as needed apply the brake appropriate in the rear.
The AWD system in the Highlander is front-wheel biased in general. So if I remember correctly, something like 60% front and 40% rear power distribution is normal for regular driving. If, however it starts to spin one set of axles, it will transfer power. With this built-in bias, it may be that it isn't as sensitive to the situation you're trying.
A good set of snow tires gives you more traction, more depth of tread and more surface area than a regular all-season tire. The two that I am most familiar with and know are relatively good brands are Blizzak and Nokian. If you go out and look at either brand of tire, you will see what I am talking about in terms of tread depth and surface area. These two tires also use a softer rubber compound as well.
With the best tires and the best vehicle on earth, there are situations where you may still get stuck. I would also recomend having a winter weather "kit" that you keep in your vehicle in general for when you're out in inclement weather. This should include a folding shovel, blanket, flasher or flares, extra pair of gloves and an extra bottle of washer fluid. Other than this, use your head. If you aren't comfortable or think that you can't handle the conditions, don't go out. Practice how your vehicle handles a few times in an open parking lot after the first snowfall, and you'll do fine.
I am an absolute advocate of VSC, PSM, stability control systems. One correction on your dessertation. The Toyota HL and the Lexus RX VSC system brakes BOTH rear wheels on detection of understeer.
But my point is this:
If the VSC doesn't give me some sort of "heads up" when it activates how am I too learn where the "limits" are? Without the VSC having a "training" mode, how am I to learn where the limits are? In that case why wouldn't more roadbed "sticktion" be as much an advantage as VSC?
Now I know there is an indicator on the dash, but by the time I look it seems to have extinguished.
Think of the value of a "stick shaker" warning of an impending stall in a commercial aircraft, or even an audible stall warning indication in a private airplane. Both of these provide a "learning" means.
With VSC, or PSM, absent some way to put the driver in the loop we just get braver and braver until we finally exceed even the VSC's recovery limits, not unlike exceeding the roadbed adhesion limits of a greater contact patch.
I often think of that early fly-by-wire Airbus crash. It was later determined that the pilot could have flown the aircraft out of the situation had not the "firmware" designers decided to not allow the pilot to have control inputs which might over-stress the airframe.
Had they not done that then those people would likely still be alive today and the airframe in some graveyard as a result of being over-stressed.
Before you step in and take over control of my car, or even "as" you step in, give me some input as to what I'm doing wrong so maybe I won't make the same mistake the next time.
In those instances, short distances, VERY low speeds, no steep, or long downhill runs, VERY conservative driving, snowchains ONLY on the front can be okay.
My suggestion would be that if you MUST use snowchains ONLY on the front then put the transmission in 1st gear and leave it there to help you remember to keep your speed LOW for the entire duration of the use of snowchains.
But the bottom line is NEVER use chains or studs, or any traction device that will give you a substantially higher traction level on the front than on the rear except as an absolute necessity. AND go back to equalized traction just as soon as possible.
The "normal" corrective action for over-steering is to steer into the "skid" and get off the gas. That latter action does not apply if you're driving a FWD vehicle or a Porsche with rear weight bias.
For understeering, if you have RWD, "your" choice is to lift your foot from the gas pedal while decreasing the turn radius slightly. If you have FWD, or FWD biased AWD, then you should decrease your turn radius slightly and then start praying unless you can lift the gas pedal so moderately or deftly as to match the engine speed perfectly with the "natural" speed of the front wheels, no driving nor lagging torque.
I've done that on my FWD minivans. Haven't needed to do it since moving south, but I carry chains just in case. The need for conservative driving is almost an understatement. And sometimes chains can be handy for getting out of a ditch if you can get to the wheels.
Steve, Host
A downshift into a lower gear at high engine torque output on snow or ice can be even more dangerous, and deadlier, than spinning out from a stop.
What if the circumstance I am about to enter, am "entering", turns out to be beyond the recovery capabilities of the VSC?
No thanks.
Just as a side note, it's nice to actually have a discussion/debate with someone on the board without either party ending up flaming and making stupid remarks. Thank you.
But that's actually the basis of my complaint. How does it differ then, from simply adding more contact patch?
ABS...
"Just because you have ABS does that mean you wait to the last second to pounce on the brakes?"
In that one statement is wrapped almost the entire problem of all of the electronic gizzits and whizzits.
From the very beginning there has been a public misunderstanding about ABS.
Anti-lock brakes were not implemented in automotive vehicles to provide for shorter stopping distances. Anti-lock brake systems are there primarily to help you maintain directional control of your vehicle during severe or PANIC braking.
And yes, there are some instances wherein ABS will allow you to stop quicker, but in many cases, maybe even most, the stopping distance is elongated with the use of ABS.
One of these days in the very near future some bright automotive engineer will finally realize that the VSC system can be coupled to the ABS and then the ABS will not activate at all unless the VSC senses that loss of directional control is impending.
"Back" to the Future...
In relation to your other question, about adding more contact patch, that is perfect in the right situation, but in others, it doesn't help. For example, a wider tire with a larger contact patch on wet surfaces is fine, unless you don't have enough water being directed away from the contact patch. In snow, wider tires can actually be a detriment. The wider tires on some cars actually hinder in that they act more like a snow shoe and don't dig down to the pavement, so exacerbate the situation as well. The other drawbacks to a wider contact patch are that a larger contact patch means more rolling friction, so lower fuel economy. Also wider tires tend to be more expensive, which not all consumers are willing to accept.
ABS.
What if, what is important in this particular instance is stopping distance, there is no threat of loss of control nor is there any need for steering inputs? How many accidents could have been avoided over the years had it not been for ABS needlessly elongating the stopping distance in the above circumstance?