Mine is an 01 AWD RX, but supposed to be the same engine, etc, etc. At least according to T/L they were both subject to the engine sludging issue.
I have tried 92 octane several times, both in my previous "00" and the 01. I saw no discernable difference, Mileage or performance. I expected to see some "boost" in long distance travel over multiple mountain passes but didn't notice any. Did my own calculations, not OBC.
Just did my first oil change at 2400 miles (V6 AWD Ltd, 2003).
Things I have noticed. 1) the service manual does not say anything about the oil pan drain plug and what the procedure is for changing the oil. I had to guess at the torque setting for the drain plug.
2) The oil filter that came with the car is different than the one Toyota sells in their parts dept. The "made in Japan" filter has different internal construction than the "made in USA version".
3) the drain plug washer on the vehicle is metal. Both sides have a very thin coating to seal the pan. The replacement washer Toyota sells is a fibre washer.
Anyway - I have put in 5 qts of 5W-30 Mobil 1 synthetic oil.
Toyotaken is correct that 87 is all you need. I would suggest doing a bit of experimentation though. More than one person on the Sienna topic reported dramatic improvements in gas mileage with premium. It was enough to make up the price difference. The trick is to duplicate driving conditions when you check it. The next time you take a long trip, try filling up with regular and premium on alternating tanks. The constant speed will ensure that traffic and other variables don't affect the results.
Thanks to Cliffy and Toyotaken....my HL has only 500 miles on it...I've alternated between 87 and 93 octane with not noticable difference (yet). My old 98 Acuraneeded 93 octane and there WAS a HUGE difference when you would put in even 91. Next long trip, I'll try the alternating tank idea and see what happens. On a side note, I love the vehicle, runs great, plenty of power, room, etc, etc....but, the brake pedal DOES take some getting used to....kinda "spongy".
03bluestone - did you use a filter wrench and a long bar?
I had changed my oil on Sunday - and noticed the filter wasn't the same as the one on the vehicle (it was the same size, but the oil seal was black not orange like the Japanese one). I went to Toyota tonight and showed them the box (part number) they gave me - it was wrong. They gave me the proper one - which is made in Japan and has an orange oil seal, and the internals are identical.
I have only driven 50 miles on the wrong filter - hopefully it hasn't done any damage. I am swapping the filter tonight after the engine cools down.
Still haven't found any reference in the service manual on what the drain plug torque spec should be ?
Hi everyone! We are soon going to purchase a 2003 V6 AWD Highlander and are wondering about the optional equipment on your HL and you likes/dislikes/wish I had/hadn't purchased this extra. Curious to know opinions on: Appearance Pkge, Preferred or Convenience. Finally, any input on the Vehicle Skid would be appreciated.
I've heard some people say that the AWD Highlander doesn't perform very well in snow. Is this true? I'm thinking of trading my 2001 Escape for a 2003 Highlander. I actually love the way my AWD Escape drives and handles, especially on snow, but I'm getting concerned about the reports of unreliability, and my mfr. warranty is about to expire. The Highlander is rated high on reliability, but does it drive well on snow?
Other than one particularly vocal member of the boards here, the consensus seems to be that the Highlander does extremely well in the snow. From personal experience driving in snow here in Buffalo, NY, postings from the majority of owners here in the snow-belts and from talking to a great number of customers who own them, they do very well.
I have a RAV 4 AWD and looking at purchasing Highlander after 2 years of 2001 of RAV 4. It is a great vehicle but scares me to no end on snow also and ready for a change. I have read various posts that people changed the tires because the original equipment is worthless. I believe that is your problem also. You need to talk to someone at www.tirerack.com and get advice they have great ideas on what tire to use for ice or snow or rain or all of the above. Your local tire dealer will probably not be much help but these guys are great and you can order tires over the Internet probably cheaper than buying them locally. They could give you some advice about getting them mounted, balanced, serviced. I suspect if I get new Highlander I need to factor in replacing tires immediately. Maybe others have/have not had this problem--maybe we will see what kind of tires theirs came with. Mine was Bridgestone Dueller 16" and they are worthless on snow. Never had anything lose traction or not stop like these and I have driven on lots of snow with AWD before. We did a 180 going very slow on an off ramp that just shocked me based on how slow we were going. Not damage but very unexpected. Not real happy with them on rain either they always feel like that are hydro planing at most any speed. Seems a shame to buy new SUV and have to replace tires but the price of safey is always worth it. Wonder if some tire brands that new Highlanders come with are better than others. Michelin Arctic Alpins were one noted great tire in snow on this board. You can do a search at bottom of page full of messages on snow tires and get lots of older feedback on how things have gone for others.
I have an 2001 v-6 HL with the original Bridgestone Duelers on it. While these are fairly competent tires in dry weather, they are terrible in any kind of snow event. I'm reluctant to toss them because of the low mileage and the fact that Spring isnt too far off. Oddly, the Duelers do very well in deep loamy sand on the beach. The Ect/Snow mode does do a great job of providing enough breakout force(despite the tires) when the snow is up to the center caps. If you predict your HL will be mired in snow for 6 months, ditch the stock tires and fit the wheels with a quality tire like Michelin Cross terrains.
Another question, does anyone have an opinion on how the handling of the 2WD Highlander with vehicle skid control compares to the AWD? I don't do any off road driving, but I do like having AWD in the winter when it snows. I'm not familiar with vehicle skid control.
Neither the HL nor the Rx is marketed as an off-road capable vehicle and any suggestion of their use there is something I refuse to address.
First, unpacked snow is not a real challenge for a competent and conservative (throttle finesse)driver of ANY vehicle with more than two wheels, RWD, FWD, AWD and 4WD. And the colder that unpacked snow becomes the closer it begins to "handle" like that beach sand.
It's when that snow gets packed down to/with a slippery layer, or thawed and re-frozen overnight, or an icy surface of any kind that things become dicey.
Ford Escape. Here's the deal, none of us here have any real idea how much you rely, have relied, on the Escape's AWD system. While I would never say that the Escape is a better vehicle than the HL, overall, I will say that the Ford AWD system is much more functional than the Toyota system.
With the exception of being normally FWD, only, the Escape AWD system, in "auto" mode, is sort of a knockoff of the old Ford Aerostar system. If the system senses a disparate rotational rate front vs rear it automatically locks the center diff'l. After a period of time it will unlock and if it then again senses disparate rates it locks the center diff'l, etc, etc.
As you undoubtedly know, you can also lock the center diff'l manually, but you should never do that on high traction surfaces.
Bottom line is that the Ford Escape AWD system is perfectly capable of getting you through most on-road adverse weather conditions you will encounter. And, unlike the HL and Rx you are not restricted to using snowchains ONLY on the front and thereby risking your life.
The HL and RX are absolutely perfect AWD vehicles for those that feel they need AWD in high traction conditions, they undoubtedly deliver the goods in that circumstance.
The problem is, once any wheel begins to slip, the very instant that wheel begins to slip, you have a one wheel drive system. Unless you bought the rear LSD and it is a rear wheel that's slipping.
In order to keep the manufacturing expense and mechanical complexity of their AWD system low, Toyota settled for what many experts call a "simple hack" for use as AWD for the HL and RX.
Find a shop manual for the Chrysler T&C AWD minivan and read the description of their AWD system and then do the same for the HL or RX.
With the HL and RX the instant a wheel begins to slip the torque distribution ratio F/R is 95/5. If slippage persists for many seconds then the ratio can increase to as much as 75/25 F/R.
If I were you I would buy an extended warranty for the Escape.
If I were buying a Highlander I would buy the FWD with the VSC/Trac option. Except for less weight, drivetrain friction and thereby better gas mileage I would bet the FWD with VSC/Trac will be just as functional in adverse weather conditions as would be the AWD version with VSC/Trac.
As I've noted in my prior posts(esp.#7567), even with the stock Duelers, I've had no problem with the HL going in the snow or on the KY hills. At times, stopping and some turning have been a little "iffy", but overall, the AWD HL has performed as I had hoped. With a change of tires, who knows how much better it would be?
As for the VSC, mine has engaged a number of times during "sliding" turns in snow and in slick curves. The most appreciated engaging, was in areas of "black ice", where even better tires would not have mattered. It will help straighten a vehicle, but as ToyotaKen has stated, "nothing will overcome the laws of physics". From experience, I do believe it is beneficial.
Is that AWD is not just beneficial for just added traction. Although this is the greatest reason most people get it for. The other reasons are for handling. Why does the Porche turbo have AWD? Why did audi get banned from formula 1 races after winning EVERY race they were in by HUGE margins? The AWD is a HUGE benefit for handling in general. It helps for all handling situations. Having all 4 wheels give traction when turning, or even just going down the road when it is windy is a great benefit. Strictly FWD or RWD has it's pros and cons for each. The neutral handling of an AWD vehicle gives great benefits. The added traction provided in low traction situations cannot be described adequately, so I would personally recomend that you drive both versions to find the best fit for you.
Wow! Up and down winding moutain roads in driving Nor'Easter snowstorms. On packed snow & ice covered roads. Having a little bit of learning-curve-handling fun in a deserted snow-covered parking lot.
I don't have the rear LSD.
Simply amazing performance from a ONE-WHEEL-DRIVE vehicle!
First, Toyota Motor Sales did in fact market the Highlander as off road capable in a national tv spot which featured the Highlander rolling through a forest trail(unpaved/hills)-and encountering wolves. I'm sure many owners saw that commercial. Second, AWD does in fact add traction.Those tires that adorn those nice wheels aren't biting into the pavement unassisted! Thats the whole point of All Wheel Drive. Put top of the line Pirelli's on on both an AWD HL and a non AWD vehicle and then take bets on which driver will wind up like Megawattblue's buddy in the hospital. It won't be the guy with AWD..unless ofcourse its someone too busy spewing erroneous technical data to notice Deadman's Curve up ahead.
If I don't have AWD just how do I stop my car quickly?
Sometimes steeply inclined railbeds don't have enough driven wheel(s) "traction" to pull the train's weight up the incline. Lack of HP or torque? NO, not enough "iron to iron" contact "patch"!
AWD simply serves to more evenly (at least in an Escape)distribute the motive forces across all available roadbed adhesion surfaces.
Give a competent and experienced driver both an AWD HL(,RX) with VSC and a FWD HL(,RX) with VSC, equally equipped, on the same ice and packed snow course and the times turned in will be so close as to be negligible, down in the grass.
Unless the driver knows the T/L AWD system and does several long "burn-outs" to stiffen up the always flaccid VC before beginning the run.
My Highlander has the 6 cylinder engine. When I picked it up new from the dealer, I had him include 3 new Toyota oil filters. I bought a cap-type wrench for them based on their size. In trying to remove the original factory filter I found out that the across flats on it were smaller. Plus, the factory really had it torqued on. I finally had the OilSpot guys remove it. They used a large channel lock type wrench from below and finally broke the filter loose after over 10 minutes of trying. (It was crushed pretty good by the removal). I plan on using the cap-type wrench with a socket wrench on it to remove it from the top while the manifold is cool. Then only hand-tighten the Toyota brand replacement at 3000 mile intervals.
First of all, the first time you tell me that you've gotten behind the wheel of a FWD highlander with TRAC and VSC that you're so highly touting as being more capable than an AWD version I'll listen. YOU DON'T OWN A HIGHLANDER! How do you feel that you can make such blanket statement? I have been on the snow, Ice, dry pavement, etc. over the exact same route and exact same conditions with both FWD and AWD versions of the Highlander. For all of the technobable that you hide behind, the real-world experience of other highlander owners refutes your statements.
And by-the-way, the system that you tout as the best AWD system in the marketplace, the X5, I've had stuck trying to get up an icy driveway with a 5% grade with snow tires while a corolla had no problem getting up that same driveway.
I apoligize for my ranting here, but please understand that I just want to make clear that the statements made by wwest are unsubstantiated by ANY other Highlander owner that I am aware of.
I have NEVER said the FWD was MORE capable than the AWD version, I have been saying that they are so close to EQUAL on adverse roadbed conditions that the "difference" is not discernable.
Lexus' motto is the "Passionate Pursuit of Perfection", not that I put any great faith in that, but why do you think the RX330 is coming out with a "clone" of the ML's AWD system?
And I would think that given that the ML/RX330 AWD system is so much more capable, less expensive and complex to manufacture, that the HL wouldn't be far behind in adopting that same system.
I purchased my Highlander last winter and was not to impressed with it's snow capability due to the uselessness of it's OEM Goodyear Integrity tires. I never got stuck but the vehicle would slip and slide on hard pack snow. This past fall I replaced the Integrity's with Nokian All-Weather WR's and it is like night and day as far as dry/wet/snow handling and braking is concerned. The only downside is that the WR's are somewhat noisier on some types of wet pavement.
By the way, I live in Ottawa, ON Canada and we get our fare share of snow and cold conditions and the one negative I have about the Highlander has to do with the heating system. In cold weather (32F to -20F) it takes around 5 to 10 minutes for the heater air to get warm and then I generally have to set the somewhat noisy fan to either position 2 or 3 in order to kept the interior at a comfortable setting. My previous Honda Accord had a much better heating system and I normally kept the fan speed at position 1. I don't know where Toyota did there winter testing, but the heating system could use some improvement.
Ken is perfectly correct, I have no actual experience in the Highlander, of any flavor. It is also true that I have very little "real world" experience of pertinence in its virtual mechanical "twin", the RX.
When I bought my first RX I was told that the torque ratio was 70/30 F/R but would adjust to 50/50 under slipping conditions. I had previously owned two Jeep Cherokee Limiteds, an 85 and then a 92, both with RWD, AWD, and 4WD modes.
I wasn't long before I began to think something about the RX just wasn't quite right. So I took it out onto a wet muddy back road. It didn't "act" like the AWD mode in my Jeep at all. So I started looking into why that might be.
What I discovered was that Lexus had compromised the design of the VC so heavily that it was basically non-functional.
Then the 01 RX came out with VSC/Trac. The Trac was touted as being used in the same manner as the ML AWD system.
NOT!!
The VSC aspect does work, the Trac function does not. I have come to suspect that the ABS pump doesn't have enough capacity, or overheats too quickly, to be used in this manner.
But for each of you out there reading this, it is up to you, solely, to judge this information's usefulness to you, individually.
If you have already purchased one of these vehicles, just as I have, then this information is certainly of less use. But for those of you still in the decision making stage, simply make what use of this information you think is justified.
I've already placed my order for the RX330, fully expecting that like the sludge issue, some of these posts adverse to the VC "simple hack" type AWD have gotten the message across.
And I would wager a goodly amount that the RX330 will have snowchain ability on the rear.
You only want snow chains on the front of an AWD or FWD vehicle. Obviously a RWD you need it on all 4 wheels.
The front wheels are important to have chains because you need to steer and brake.
About the HL AWD not being good. As I have said - I floored the gas pedal in my AWD highlander while on loose dirt and all 4 wheels made a divot from digging in. I also drove on the beach last weekend and didn't have a problem - all the wheels were driving - worked like a charm.
I still have a 92 AWD Aerostar for backup so the Lexus AWD system's capability is not as "high profile" in my selection criteria as it might otherwise be.
If it were I'd likely be driving a Jeep liberty today. Something about BMW arrogance (and teh non-matching dash and steering wheel) just doesn't let me go "there".
Even the LS430 has some serious deisgn flaws that could easily be overcome but were I in the market for that "class" of vehicle it would still be my first choice as best, overall.
Life is a compromise, get over it, move on!
But compromising doesn't have to mean closing one's eyes and throwing a dart.
"You only want snow chains on the front of an AWD or FWD vehicle. Obviously a RWD you need it on all 4 wheels"
nimrod, This doesn't sound right to me. Everything I have ever heard on this subject says to never put chains on the front only, regardless of FWD, AWD, or RWD. With RWD you can get away with chains on the rear only as many have done for years.
I've read these "AWD or not?" discussions (or should I day "friendly debates") for some time and do find them quite interesting. However, just when I think that I understand it clearly something else is written in a way that seems to cloud my understanding.
So, here's a scenario:
If I take my FWD non/TC '93 Honda Accord and my AWD non/VSC Highlander to an icy parking lot (which can be found easily in the South today). I put the front wheels of each vehicle on an icy patch with the rears on dry pavement, stomp on the gas, what happens? I assume that the Accord will sit and spin. Now after reading some of the technical explanations HL's center VC, I assume that the VC will "lock" and direct torque to the rears allowing the HL to pull itself forward (50/50 split)?
Or, will the "open" system just expend all of the torque to the front thus having the same result as the Accord (90/10 split)?
For those of us who have actually done this on purpose, the Highlander will typically spin the front tires, but as the rear wheels also get traction when you step on the gas, the highlander gets up and moves. If you're on a large patch of ice with all 4 wheels on it, again from personal experience, one front wheel spins and one rear wheel spins, but assuming that you have an adequate set of tires and that you dont just continue giving the vehicle full throttle, you will get enough traction that it will get off of the ice. Where I've gotten into difficulty is when you're in packed snow. If you don't have enough forward momentum to continue, what I've witnessed and experienced happen is that one front and one rear wheel spins until they're buried or you're high-centered on the snow and then you need to get a shovel out to clear a path under the vehicle. This is no different than any other 4wd vehicle as well. However with the allowance of the center differential it is easier for this to happen as sometimes the V/C takes a little time to work so you have one wheel in front spinning with just a little traction and by the time the V/C has done it's job, that end is burried and then the other end does the same. But as many of us have been saying regularly, this is not an off-road ready vehicle and deep, packed snow (8" or more) is not what it is designed for. It's designed to give additional traction and stability in normal and marginal driving conditions. So in snowy, icy, rainy etc. conditions it gives an added level of traction and control vs. a traditional Front-wheel drive or rear-wheel drive vehicle.
In your proposed test there is at least 5% of the torque to the rear of the HL even with the front slipping so the HL would do better than the FWD only. How much better is really indeterminate without actually doing it.
Any rumors of the Highlander inheriting the RX 330's 5 speed automatic? 20/26 mpg in fwd would be welcomed. I notice the ES 300 has 5 speed but Camry V6 only a 4 speed.
Just finished 3500 km round trip from Ottawa to Yarmouth, NS and back this week (delivering 6 pails of fine wine grapes to a buddy who retired and moved there!). Trip out was Monday, the day the deep freeze started. Most of the time the temperature was -18C with a driving 40 km/h crosswind, and vicious wind chill, probably to around -40 (on either scale). Trip back was better, just cold, no wind. Spent Wednesday watching the wind blow snow around while pretty much no-one was driving unless they had to. Even with the mediocre factory rubber, the traction was pretty good (had to be, as my friend was not going out to blow out his driveway until after the storm).
Comments: -somebody at Toyota should drive this car before they sell it. The high-beam indicator light is bloody BLINDING at night. OK for your typical suburbanite Californian (for whom high beams are probably a mystery) but not for driving country roads after dark. Cruise control indicator is too bright as well, and neither responds to the instrument dimmer control -radio controls are not well located if you want to change volume or channel while keeping eyes front -decent heater. a bit hard to get both feet and upper body comfy at the same time though. -aerodynamic design cleverly funnels salt-laden spray over the side windows just about where you need to see out to the rear view mirrors -great having a 5 L washer fluid reservoir. Went through 4 containers during the trip -good fuel economy considering the speeds I was going. Around 9.5 l/100 km or so most of the time -good stability in crosswinds next to trucks. -sorry.. no opportunity to test moose resistance!
I have done all the rounds and its decision crunch time. Santa Fe and Sorento no head room and depreciate way to fast, the CRV sounds tinny, way to much plastic and problem with leg room. Rendez Vous, not enough clearance.... I have read all the magazines, rented a half dozen or so SUVs and the Highlander works best for me. Quality, price and most importantly ride and interior room. The hard part is over, or at least I thought.
I am having a real hard time deciding between the 4 or 6 cylinder. Here in the land of soon to be Kyoto driven fuel costs, $1 a litre gas is seemingly just around the corner. While I am not crazy about the 4s performance (compared to the 6) it is okay and I can live with it. I don't see the need for AWD, have had my FWD van for 8 years and have a RWD truck. We get plenty of snow but never stuck yet. My biggest problem with the 4 cylinder is even though it is a Toyota, that is one relatively small engine pulling a relatively heavy vehicle. I am worried about long term reliability (keep my vehicles for about 10 years or 200,000km) Has anyone run up the miles on one of the 4s? What have they been like? The only thing I ever intent to pull would be a small tent trailer. Would appreciate comments
I agree with the brightness of the high-beam and cruise indicators. I'm considering what to do to modify the glare. I thought about using colored tape and about having lower wattage bulbs, but have yet to try anything. Any other ideas?
Hopefully you'll never be able to report the Moose resistance.
You could try installing a resistor in the light circuit, but that of course is easier said than done. What do you guys think about the tiny low fuel indicator and the way Toyota skimped on the window control lights? Fortunately for me, I rarely use the cruise control or high beams (at least on purpose). Anyone find the cruise control and high beam switches in the way when wearing gloves?
BTW, you would think Toyota would know by now that the radio goes above the climate control.
I don't know about a resistor in the indicator circuit, but a piece of electrical tape over the thing might work. After all, you just need to look out the windshield to figure out which set of beams are on.
A couple of other negatives: -stalk controls really don't seem intuitive at all. Maybe if your other car is a Camry.. -really marginal seats. I am big, but the pressure on my legs causes really bad pain after more than 2 h in the saddle. I wonder if I could snag a couple of Volvo seats out of a wreck?
If the rest of the car weren't so nice I would not feel obligated to whine about these details. My other car is a BMW E36, and it has far fewer annoying traits (but still has marginal seats)
I rented a Hyundai Santa Fe last year for a long trip through New Mexico, Arizona and Central California, and the seats were QUITE comfortable, and it seemed to me that the ergonomics were, in general, better. Did not drive nearly as smoothly, though. And we never experienced a -35C wind chill, either.
Finally had a taste of real cold here in MN this past couple weeks and was able to check out our 01 HL V6 AWD in subzero temps. A few things stood out most of which occur ONLY if temp is colder than zero and car stands outside for at least several hours. 1. The transmission stays in 1st, 2nd, or 3rd gear for a long time so at 60mph the tach reads over 4500, even when the engine is warm. This may last for 10 mins or more apparently til the fluid warms up. (The OD is engaged but does not shift into 4th.)The dealer says this is very normal in all Toyotas but I never saw it in my 3 Camrys and 2 Corrollas. Does the AWD have much more fluid to warm up? 2. The airbag dash light comes on when very cold and will not go off until shutting off engine. The dealer found code fault on computer and reset everything and found no problems otherwise but said they have seen this before and Toyota is checking it out. 3. When very cold, we hear a high pitched whine between 45 and 60mph....of course dealer could not duplicate the day we brought it in (it was warmer) Anyone have any clues? By the way, we had thedreaded wind noise thru the passenger door when driving into strong winds. Had the dealer replace the seals per the TSB and since then we have had no noise there, even with very strong winds.
The overdrive thing is an emissions issue. I don't know what year Camry you have but if it is fairly late model, it should be doing the same thing. In fact, all new cars prevent the transmission from shifting into OD until the catyletic (sp?) converter is warm enough to do its job. On cold days, that can take a couple of minutes of driving. On the coldest of MN winters, 10 minutes is not out of hand.
Comments
I have tried 92 octane several times, both in my previous "00" and the 01. I saw no discernable difference, Mileage or performance. I expected to see some "boost" in long distance travel over multiple mountain passes but didn't notice any. Did my own calculations, not OBC.
Yes, as a matter of fact! You can find it here:
Town Hall New Look!
tidester, host
Things I have noticed.
1) the service manual does not say anything about the oil pan drain plug and what the procedure is for changing the oil. I had to guess at the torque setting for the drain plug.
2) The oil filter that came with the car is different than the one Toyota sells in their parts dept. The "made in Japan" filter has different internal construction than the "made in USA version".
3) the drain plug washer on the vehicle is metal. Both sides have a very thin coating to seal the pan. The replacement washer Toyota sells is a fibre washer.
Anyway - I have put in 5 qts of 5W-30 Mobil 1 synthetic oil.
On a side note, I love the vehicle, runs great, plenty of power, room, etc, etc....but, the brake pedal DOES take some getting used to....kinda "spongy".
03bluestone - did you use a filter wrench and a long bar?
I had changed my oil on Sunday - and noticed the filter wasn't the same as the one on the vehicle (it was the same size, but the oil seal was black not orange like the Japanese one).
I went to Toyota tonight and showed them the box (part number) they gave me - it was wrong. They gave me the proper one - which is made in Japan and has an orange oil seal, and the internals are identical.
I have only driven 50 miles on the wrong filter - hopefully it hasn't done any damage. I am swapping the filter tonight after the engine cools down.
Still haven't found any reference in the service manual on what the drain plug torque spec should be ?
We are soon going to purchase a 2003 V6 AWD Highlander and are wondering about the optional equipment on your HL and you likes/dislikes/wish I had/hadn't purchased this extra. Curious to know opinions on: Appearance Pkge, Preferred or Convenience. Finally, any input on the Vehicle Skid would be appreciated.
Thanks in advance!
http://www.toyotaguys.com/peroilfiltrd.html
They claim "...traps more damaging particles than ordinary oil filters, yet provides lower resistance to oil."
Anyone have an opinion on these filters?
Ken
Michelin Arctic Alpins were one noted great tire in snow on this board. You can do a search at bottom of page full of messages on snow tires and get lots of older feedback on how things have gone for others.
First, unpacked snow is not a real challenge for a competent and conservative (throttle finesse)driver of ANY vehicle with more than two wheels, RWD, FWD, AWD and 4WD. And the colder that unpacked snow becomes the closer it begins to "handle" like that beach sand.
It's when that snow gets packed down to/with a slippery layer, or thawed and re-frozen overnight, or an icy surface of any kind that things become dicey.
Ford Escape. Here's the deal, none of us here have any real idea how much you rely, have relied, on the Escape's AWD system. While I would never say that the Escape is a better vehicle than the HL, overall, I will say that the Ford AWD system is much more functional than the Toyota system.
With the exception of being normally FWD, only, the Escape AWD system, in "auto" mode, is sort of a knockoff of the old Ford Aerostar system. If the system senses a disparate rotational rate front vs rear it automatically locks the center diff'l. After a period of time it will unlock and if it then again senses disparate rates it locks the center diff'l, etc, etc.
As you undoubtedly know, you can also lock the center diff'l manually, but you should never do that on high traction surfaces.
Bottom line is that the Ford Escape AWD system is perfectly capable of getting you through most on-road adverse weather conditions you will encounter. And, unlike the HL and Rx you are not restricted to using snowchains ONLY on the front and thereby risking your life.
The HL and RX are absolutely perfect AWD vehicles for those that feel they need AWD in high traction conditions, they undoubtedly deliver the goods in that circumstance.
The problem is, once any wheel begins to slip, the very instant that wheel begins to slip, you have a one wheel drive system. Unless you bought the rear LSD and it is a rear wheel that's slipping.
In order to keep the manufacturing expense and mechanical complexity of their AWD system low, Toyota settled for what many experts call a "simple hack" for use as AWD for the HL and RX.
Find a shop manual for the Chrysler T&C AWD minivan and read the description of their AWD system and then do the same for the HL or RX.
With the HL and RX the instant a wheel begins to slip the torque distribution ratio F/R is 95/5. If slippage persists for many seconds then the ratio can increase to as much as 75/25 F/R.
If I were you I would buy an extended warranty for the Escape.
As for the VSC, mine has engaged a number of times during "sliding" turns in snow and in slick curves. The most appreciated engaging, was in areas of "black ice", where even better tires would not have mattered. It will help straighten a vehicle, but as ToyotaKen has stated, "nothing will overcome the laws of physics". From experience, I do believe it is beneficial.
Ken
I don't have the rear LSD.
Simply amazing performance from a ONE-WHEEL-DRIVE vehicle!
It's what you do, how you use, distribute that traction amongst/against the available fores that makes the difference.
I visited a guy in the hospital once. They had him in TRACTION. He was in a BED.
His accident was on a ROAD. And his car was TOTALLED.
Hmmm...
Sometimes steeply inclined railbeds don't have enough driven wheel(s) "traction" to pull the train's weight up the incline. Lack of HP or torque? NO, not enough "iron to iron" contact "patch"!
AWD simply serves to more evenly (at least in an Escape)distribute the motive forces across all available roadbed adhesion surfaces.
There's the X5 at the top.
And the HL and RX the bottom.
Give a competent and experienced driver both an AWD HL(,RX) with VSC and a FWD HL(,RX) with VSC, equally equipped, on the same ice and packed snow course and the times turned in will be so close as to be negligible, down in the grass.
Unless the driver knows the T/L AWD system and does several long "burn-outs" to stiffen up the always flaccid VC before beginning the run.
I finally had the OilSpot guys remove it. They used a large channel lock type wrench from below and finally broke the filter loose after over 10 minutes of trying. (It was crushed pretty good by the removal). I plan on using the cap-type wrench with a socket wrench on it to remove it from the top while the manifold is cool. Then only hand-tighten the Toyota brand replacement at 3000 mile intervals.
And by-the-way, the system that you tout as the best AWD system in the marketplace, the X5, I've had stuck trying to get up an icy driveway with a 5% grade with snow tires while a corolla had no problem getting up that same driveway.
I apoligize for my ranting here, but please understand that I just want to make clear that the statements made by wwest are unsubstantiated by ANY other Highlander owner that I am aware of.
Ken
Lexus' motto is the "Passionate Pursuit of Perfection", not that I put any great faith in that, but why do you think the RX330 is coming out with a "clone" of the ML's AWD system?
And I would think that given that the ML/RX330 AWD system is so much more capable, less expensive and complex to manufacture, that the HL wouldn't be far behind in adopting that same system.
By the way, I live in Ottawa, ON Canada and we get our fare share of snow and cold conditions and the one negative I have about the Highlander has to do with the heating system. In cold weather (32F to -20F) it takes around 5 to 10 minutes for the heater air to get warm and then I generally have to set the somewhat noisy fan to either position 2 or 3 in order to kept the interior at a comfortable setting. My previous Honda Accord had a much better heating system and I normally kept the fan speed at position 1. I don't know where Toyota did there winter testing, but the heating system could use some improvement.
When I bought my first RX I was told that the torque ratio was 70/30 F/R but would adjust to 50/50 under slipping conditions. I had previously owned two Jeep Cherokee Limiteds, an 85 and then a 92, both with RWD, AWD, and 4WD modes.
I wasn't long before I began to think something about the RX just wasn't quite right. So I took it out onto a wet muddy back road. It didn't "act" like the AWD mode in my Jeep at all. So I started looking into why that might be.
What I discovered was that Lexus had compromised the design of the VC so heavily that it was basically non-functional.
Then the 01 RX came out with VSC/Trac. The Trac was touted as being used in the same manner as the ML AWD system.
NOT!!
The VSC aspect does work, the Trac function does not. I have come to suspect that the ABS pump doesn't have enough capacity, or overheats too quickly, to be used in this manner.
But for each of you out there reading this, it is up to you, solely, to judge this information's usefulness to you, individually.
If you have already purchased one of these vehicles, just as I have, then this information is certainly of less use. But for those of you still in the decision making stage, simply make what use of this information you think is justified.
I've already placed my order for the RX330, fully expecting that like the sludge issue, some of these posts adverse to the VC "simple hack" type AWD have gotten the message across.
And I would wager a goodly amount that the RX330 will have snowchain ability on the rear.
The front wheels are important to have chains because you need to steer and brake.
About the HL AWD not being good. As I have said - I floored the gas pedal in my AWD highlander while on loose dirt and all 4 wheels made a divot from digging in. I also drove on the beach last weekend and didn't have a problem - all the wheels were driving - worked like a charm.
I'm just curious after all the negative press you've given the RX/HL over the same issue.
If it were I'd likely be driving a Jeep liberty today. Something about BMW arrogance (and teh non-matching dash and steering wheel) just doesn't let me go "there".
Even the LS430 has some serious deisgn flaws that could easily be overcome but were I in the market for that "class" of vehicle it would still be my first choice as best, overall.
Life is a compromise, get over it, move on!
But compromising doesn't have to mean closing one's eyes and throwing a dart.
Get thee to the nearest tire shop that sells studs for tires and have them explain why they refuse to put studs on ONLY the front of FWD vehicles.
nimrod,
This doesn't sound right to me. Everything I have ever heard on this subject says to never put chains on the front only, regardless of FWD, AWD, or RWD. With RWD you can get away with chains on the rear only as many have done for years.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
But agreed, it would/could be much worse with FWD or AWD with predominant engine torque bias to the front.
So, here's a scenario:
If I take my FWD non/TC '93 Honda Accord and my AWD non/VSC Highlander to an icy parking lot (which can be found easily in the South today). I put the front wheels of each vehicle on an icy patch with the rears on dry pavement, stomp on the gas, what happens? I assume that the Accord will sit and spin. Now after reading some of the technical explanations HL's center VC, I assume that the VC will "lock" and direct torque to the rears allowing the HL to pull itself forward (50/50 split)?
Or, will the "open" system just expend all of the torque to the front thus having the same result as the Accord (90/10 split)?
Ken
Even with the mediocre factory rubber, the traction was pretty good (had to be, as my friend was not going out to blow out his driveway until after the storm).
Comments:
-somebody at Toyota should drive this car before they sell it. The high-beam indicator light is bloody BLINDING at night. OK for your typical suburbanite Californian (for whom high beams are probably a mystery) but not for driving country roads after dark. Cruise control indicator is too bright as well, and neither responds to the instrument dimmer control
-radio controls are not well located if you want to change volume or channel while keeping eyes front
-decent heater. a bit hard to get both feet and upper body comfy at the same time though.
-aerodynamic design cleverly funnels salt-laden spray over the side windows just about where you need to see out to the rear view mirrors
-great having a 5 L washer fluid reservoir. Went through 4 containers during the trip
-good fuel economy considering the speeds I was going. Around 9.5 l/100 km or so most of the time
-good stability in crosswinds next to trucks.
-sorry.. no opportunity to test moose resistance!
I am having a real hard time deciding between the 4 or 6 cylinder. Here in the land of soon to be Kyoto driven fuel costs, $1 a litre gas is seemingly just around the corner. While I am not crazy about the 4s performance (compared to the 6) it is okay and I can live with it. I don't see the need for AWD, have had my FWD van for 8 years and have a RWD truck. We get plenty of snow but never stuck yet.
My biggest problem with the 4 cylinder is even though it is a Toyota, that is one relatively small engine pulling a relatively heavy vehicle. I am worried about long term reliability (keep my vehicles for about 10 years or 200,000km)
Has anyone run up the miles on one of the 4s? What have they been like?
The only thing I ever intent to pull would be a small tent trailer. Would appreciate comments
Hopefully you'll never be able to report the Moose resistance.
You could try installing a resistor in the light circuit, but that of course is easier said than done. What do you guys think about the tiny low fuel indicator and the way Toyota skimped on the window control lights? Fortunately for me, I rarely use the cruise control or high beams (at least on purpose). Anyone find the cruise control and high beam switches in the way when wearing gloves?
BTW, you would think Toyota would know by now that the radio goes above the climate control.
A couple of other negatives:
-stalk controls really don't seem intuitive at all. Maybe if your other car is a Camry..
-really marginal seats. I am big, but the pressure on my legs causes really bad pain after more than 2 h in the saddle. I wonder if I could snag a couple of Volvo seats out of a wreck?
If the rest of the car weren't so nice I would not feel obligated to whine about these details. My other car is a BMW E36, and it has far fewer annoying traits (but still has marginal seats)
I rented a Hyundai Santa Fe last year for a long trip through New Mexico, Arizona and Central California, and the seats were QUITE comfortable, and it seemed to me that the ergonomics were, in general, better. Did not drive nearly as smoothly, though. And we never experienced a -35C wind chill, either.
Cheers
Does the AWD have much more fluid to warm up?
2. The airbag dash light comes on when very cold and will not go off until shutting off engine. The dealer found code fault on computer and reset everything and found no problems otherwise but said they have seen this before and Toyota is checking it out.
3. When very cold, we hear a high pitched whine between 45 and 60mph....of course dealer could not duplicate the day we brought it in (it was warmer) Anyone have any clues?
By the way, we had thedreaded wind noise thru the passenger door when driving into strong winds. Had the dealer replace the seals per the TSB and since then we have had no noise there, even with very strong winds.