Transmission Problems/failures with RX300 awd/fwd

[wwest]

Anyone have trouble getting their rx300 out of Park into Reverse ?

No other problems - just want to know if this is first indication of trouble to come ...

Difficult park to reverse, just moving out of park, really, is generally an indication that the electric solenoid (Audi) safety shiftlock is beginning to stick/fail or the brake light switch on the brake pedal is intermittent.

Check your owners manual, they is a manual over-ride procedure for this.

[safric99]

Anyone have trouble getting their rx300 out of Park into Reverse ?

No other problems - just want to know if this is first indication of trouble to come ...

Difficult park to reverse, just moving out of park, really, is generally an indication that the electric solenoid (Audi) safety shiftlock is beginning to stick/fail or the brake light switch on the brake pedal is intermittent.

Check your owners manual, they is a manual over-ride procedure for this.

Thx wwest.

BTW - seems to occur only when car is cold.

[tmastres]

Hi, I have just had my 2002 RX300 towed to the dealership...appears to be the transmission....waiting to hear from them. Just signed up on this site and haven't fully explored it so I was just wondering if you are still creating a list/file for this problem? I will be back on here after I find out what the problem is.

Thanks

Pam

2001-2003's have not really been an issue in reference to the mysterious trans failure. While it may be true that yours has experienced a transmission failure, I'd be hesitant to lump them in with the 99/00 group. Those years (99/00) truly have a defect or some sort of flaw which IMHO isn't present on the 01-03 models or later.

[bluestu]

I talked to the head mechanic at Mostly Toyotas today, a foreign car specialist in my town. He said that he rebuilt transmissions for many years and there is absolutely nothing wrong with the Lexus RX transmission. He said the reason they are burning up is because owners are either not having them serviced at all, or having the useless drain and fill done. He said the only way to prevent transmission failure is to have them completely flushed every 30k mi.. I'm not making this up. You can call the shop if you want more info..

Obviously, the reason there are more transmission failures reported with the earlier model RX is because they are higher mileage cars. Duh. This subject has been beaten in the ground, and even Lexus now acknowledges that the RX transmission needs to be flushed to prevent failure. Like I've said many times before, draining three or four quarts of fluid out and replacing every 30k mi. is useless when the transmission holds several time that amount. It doesn't take a genius to figure this out.

[RX in NC]

No bluestu, the failing transmissions in the early RX300 models are NOT all caused by owners failing to either flush or drain-and-fill their Type T-IV transmission fluid at regular intervals. Some Lexus techs and service managers have acknowledged a higher rate of transmission failures in these vehicles that is NOT due to maintenance practices (or lack thereof) by the owners. Lexus Corporate continues to keep their heads in the sand on this issue (probably due to liability fears) while hoping that the early RX models are now beginning to head to the junkyards so the problem will eventually go away. Many of us who do maintain our transmissions have been through this, and you can rest assured that we did not cause these problems. The early-model transmissions are flawed, probably because they are essentially Camry transmissions that were not robustly re-engineered for the heavier, higher-center-of-gravity RX300....

Anyone who chooses to flush a transmission needs to be aware of the problems that may occur as a result of dragging debris that has settled in the bottom of the transmission pan up through the transmission assembly and torque converter. Flushing a transmission can lead to even greater problems with your transmission. I highly recommend that anyone who decides to have their transmission flushed take the time to complete the necessary due diligence first. Personally, I would never have any of my transmissions flushed, foreign or domestic. Routine drain-and-fills have been considered proper transmission maintenance by ALL vehicle manufacturers for decades, and the drain-and-fill procedure remains the recommended one at both Lexus service departments that I utilize. To ensure that it is done properly and with the correct fluid (Toyota Type T-IV only), I always do it myself. My chosen interval on the RX series is 30,000 miles....

[wwest]

I talked to the head mechanic at Mostly Toyotas today, a foreign car specialist in my town. He said that he rebuilt transmissions for many years and there is absolutely nothing wrong with the Lexus RX transmission. He said the reason they are burning up is because owners are either not having them serviced at all, or having the useless drain and fill done. He said the only way to prevent transmission failure is to have them completely flushed every 30k mi.. I'm not making this up. You can call the shop if you want more info..

Obviously, the reason there are more transmission failures reported with the earlier model RX is because they are higher mileage cars. Duh. This subject has been beaten in the ground, and even Lexus now acknowledges that the RX transmission needs to be flushed to prevent failure. Like I've said many times before, draining three or four quarts of fluid out and replacing every 30k mi. is useless when the transmission holds several time that amount. It doesn't take a genius to figure this out.

If the design flaw of the early RX transaxles is as I suspect, an under-sized, under-capacity ATF oil pump, it would be a practical impossibility for someone in the field to make that judgment.

[bluestu]

If the design flaw of the early RX transaxles is as I suspect, an under-sized, under-capacity ATF oil pump, it would be a practical impossibility for someone in the field to make that judgment.

I would definitely value his opinions and recommendations over your speculations and suspicions. This shop acknowledges that the RX300 transmissions are burning up, but say it is from poor maintenance, not design. They don't think highly of Lexus or Toyota's service depts.. They work on RXs every day and are well aware of any problems associated with the vehicles. In their opinion, the RX series is among the very best of the bunch. From what I have seen, I will have to agree. It is not by luck that I own two early model RX300s with over 120kmi. and original transmissions that shift like new. Maybe I have postponed the inevitable by having the transmissions flushed, but isn't that what service maintenance is all about???

[Neophilius]

I am considering buying a 99 or 00 rx300. While looking for reviews online, I found your website. It is fantastic and I thank everyone for the time they have spent posting their information to help others. Here's my question. Given the numerous problems with the transmissions in the 99 and 00 models, is it even worth buying one at this time? I am looking at a 99 w/ 84K miles or a 00 w/ 97k. Everything I've read says that the vehicle is great except for the transmission problem and sometimes the sludge problem. I also saw elsewhere a few electrical problems but they seem rare.

Do you think it is worth considering purchasing a 99 or 00? Am I wasting my time even considering them? I've loved the look and feel of the rx300 forever. But I don't want to spend 11-14k on a car just to turn around and drop another 3-4 grand on repairs. Given the fact that I can afford either of these but not the newer versions or I would buy one of them instead, what steps should be taken, if you think it is worth the gamble on having to replace the tranny? I am assuming that I should check w/ the local Toyota dealer, as we do not have a Lexus dealer for 275 miles, to see if they can find the service records if done at Lexus. I am also assuming there has not been a transmission replacement yet but will check to find out. (the 99 is at a Ford dealership and the 00 is at a small used car place that has sold and repurchase it twice before) But beyond that, I am thinking that at the very least the transmission fluid should be changed, probably completely flushing the system, and make sure they use type IV and check the filter. Probably looking at possibly replacing the timing belt too since we're at that mileage. What else should be done for preventative measures? Again, I am asking for advice that if I purchase either of them what can be done to minimize the chance at having the problems that seem to be very prevalent from this site.

When I spoke with these salespeople neither of them had a clue, or pretended not to know, about the transmission problems. The guy at the Ford dealership suggested I purchase a service contract from them to cover the powertrain. If I understand our coversation, as I am pretty car ignorant, I could purchase a 3 yr/36,000 mile "warranty" that covers the sealed, I think he said lubricated, powertrain. I think that means, and I haven't read the contract, that I could pay "no more than $1500" which means $1500 for 3 yr/36k protection against the transmission failure and that if it happened, I should be covered for a full replacement by the Ford dealer. The original warranty has expired and I am assuming that not all of the maintenance has been done at Lexus service centers because we don't have any, other than the Toyota dealer (I know, not the same thing). If I'm right, basically I would spend $1500 on an insurance policy that if the transmission went bad, the Ford dealer would pay to have it fixed. Which sounds like a pretty good thing due to the probability of having problems from 84k to 120k.

Any suggestions would be appreciated. Also, the 99 has 84k miles and no heated seats. The 00 has 97k miles and heated seats. The other options are about the same. I live in South Dakota so heated seats are good. And it seems the 00 has less problems than the 99. But there's also 13k more miles. Any opinions as to which would be better, assuming price is virtually the same? Maybe $800 more for the 00 but we haven't haggled yet. Thanks for your help.

[lenore]

Good set of questions, First being in South Dakota, You would enjoy the heated seats in the winter, I remember when I lived there. Are the cars FWD or AWD? The FWD seems to have no tranny problems. If it is AWD take the dip stick out and if the fluid smells burnt, I know hard to describe, but it is very evident the tranny has not been serviced. If the fluid is bright red and not burnt that is a plus. I have a 99 and the car is great, other than the tranny. Mine has been fixed, you will see many posts by me. I personally would go with the 2000, but If you could find a 2001or later you would probably be better off. If one of the two you are looking at meets your ticket, have the transmission fluid changed and filter replaced every 15k miles.

I would be real nervous about a flush with the high mileages unless you determine that the transmissions have been serviced regularily. There is a lot of help on this site and Club Lexus if you buy, and we will be glad to assist you. good luck

[wwest]

If the design flaw of the early RX transaxles is as I suspect, an under-sized, under-capacity ATF oil pump, it would be a practical impossibility for someone in the field to make that judgment.

I would definitely value his opinions and recommendations over your speculations and suspicions. This shop acknowledges that the RX300 transmissions are burning up, but say it is from poor maintenance, not design.

Now you're being insulting to me and many others who follow the Lexus owners manual's scheduled maintenance to the letter. First, my '01 owners manual does not call for, nor address, any sort of ATF scheduled maintenance. Second, I check the condition of my ATF at every DIY oil and filter change. Third, I have owned MANY automatic transmission vehicles going back to a 56 Ford purchased in '61 and have NEVER had to address ATF issues except for major overhaul issues, typically at 125,000 miles or greater. Two of those vehicles accrued in excess of 250,000 miles before being hauled off to the wrecking yard with no residual valve otherwise.

So, maybe the design "flaw" was/is at the owners manual "composition" level...??

Here you go, why not ask "him" if my speculations/suspiciions are correct would he be able to "detect" that the real problem is a design flaw as I described. Note, I'm not saying it is, just asking if he might be capable, in "his" opinion, of detecting it, or even rulling it out, should it "be".

They don't think highly of Lexus or Toyota's service depts..

Gee, isn't that a really big surprise...!!

They work on RXs every day and are well aware of any problems associated with the vehicles. In their opinion, the RX series is among the very best of the bunch.

If you restrict "bunch" to FWD or F/AWD SUV's then I would agree, the RDX is probably the only real contenter but it's still too new to the market.

From what I have seen, I will have to agree. It is not by luck that I own two early model RX300s with over 120kmi. and original transmissions that shift like new. Maybe I have postponed the inevitable by having the transmissions flushed, but isn't that what service maintenance is all about???

[bluestu]

I'm not being insulting. I've just observed that you've posted numerous theories and speculations about the transmission design flaw. I haven't found anyone to substantiate your claims. Anyway, we all agree that the maintenance schedule is flawed when it comes to servicing the transmission. Owners should be made aware of this issue instead of reading posts about how their transmissions are doomed to fall apart at any moment. That sort of takes the joy out of owning a nice car, doesn't it???

[lenore]

Blustu, I have numerous examples from owners that said when the tranny shops repaired their transmissions, that there were some modifications that were done to improve the reliability. Some involved the main gear in the transmission, but I could not get specific info. The tranny is weak, and shows less than normal reliability when considering other luxuary cars on the market. As for maintenance we have been around and around about this, Many have been meticulousy maintained and still fail. I now have a email list of over 50 trannys that have failed and responded to me as a clearing point.

[mikey00]

I talked to the head mechanic at Mostly Toyotas today, a foreign car specialist in my town. He said that he rebuilt transmissions for many years and there is absolutely nothing wrong with the Lexus RX transmission. He said the reason they are burning up is because owners are either not having them serviced at all, or having the useless drain and fill done. He said the only way to prevent transmission failure is to have them completely flushed every 30k mi.. I'm not making this up. You can call the shop if you want more info..

Obviously, the reason there are more transmission failures reported with the earlier model RX is because they are higher mileage cars. Duh. This subject has been beaten in the ground, and even Lexus now acknowledges that the RX transmission needs to be flushed to prevent failure. Like I've said many times before, draining three or four quarts of fluid out and replacing every 30k mi. is useless when the transmission holds several time that amount. It doesn't take a genius to figure this out.

Where exactly does "Lexus acknowledge that the RX transmission needs to be flushed to prevent failure". Are you sure you are not confusing "Lexus" with some dealer with a flush machine trying to maximize profit.

Also the earlier model RX had transmission failure early on with low mileage. Many 2001+ have long since passed that mileage without failure. So using words like "Obviously" and "Duh" does not make that an accurate statement.

I have 121K on my 01 with only drain and fills and I am sure it shifts every bit as smooth as your flushed trans. I will stick with D&F. My reasons were pretty much covered by RX in NC in a post above.

[bluestu]

You guys do what you want. I talked to the Lexus dealer and Toyota dealer, and both are now flushing the transmissions. I'm not here to debate anyone. I'm here to share my info and experiences with other owners. If you guys want to drain and fill your transmissions, go right ahead. From your experiences, that procedure hasn't worked out too well.

[lenore]

Flushing is a fairly new procedure in terms of many dealerships. When the 99 RX came out it wasnt standard practice or available everywhere. Also remember it saves the dealership time and labor, and generates more revenue. The downside is if they are not dropping the pan and changing the filter and looking for tell tale debris, the flushing is not adequate. The other downside is on high mileage transmission the flushing can throw debris through the valve body assembly and cause premature failure of the transmission if the tranny had not been serviced regularily. I like it, when done properly and when the maintenance of the transmission is known from the history of the vehicle. My only beef with blue stu is he believes the failures are do to poor maintenance. Not true, and many have proven that.

[bluestu]

I didn't just make that up. That's what I've been told by many qualified mechanics and tranny shops. As for the design flaw theory, show me some documentation or recalls. It's only a theory until you can present factual evidence to support the claim. Speculations and assumptions don't register in my mind. Just stating that some RX300 trannys have failed prematurely is not sufficient evidence to support a design flaw theory. There are many makes and models of cars that have experienced premature transmisson failure, evident by the number of tranny shops throughout the country.

[mikey00]

bluestu,

Is it safe to assume that your statement "even Lexus now acknowledges that the RX transmission needs to be flushed to prevent failure" is inaccurate? It looks like your info came from dealers with flush machines not Lexus. My 2 local Lexus dealers do not do flushes and see no info from Lexus about the requirement you mention. To use your words, it looks like all your info is based on "speculations and assumptions".

[lenore]

When my vehicle experienced the failure, the Lexus mechanic told me that there was a definite problem, and that he personally had replaced a very high number of transmission in the AWD version of the RX300. He told me Lexus refuses to achknowledge a problem. That is straight from the Lexus mechanic in Roseville CA. By the way the second transmission was defective, and it took me 4 weeks to convince them that it wasnt working right. They ended up replacing it also. I asked him with my schedule of 30k miles fluid changes what I could have done differently, he said nothing, there is a problem, but unfortunately the Lexus dealers do not repair the trannys but send them out and get rebuilts. I guess out of sight, and out of mind. so basically they are just parts changers, with no transmission experience.

[wwest]

I didn't just make that up. That's what I've been told by many qualified mechanics and tranny shops. As for the design flaw theory, show me some documentation or recalls. It's only a theory until you can present factual evidence to support the claim. Speculations and assumptions don't register in my mind. Just stating that some RX300 trannys have failed prematurely is not sufficient evidence to support a design flaw theory. There are many makes and models of cars that have experienced premature transmisson failure, evident by the number of tranny shops throughout the country.

Hmmmm.....

89 Aerostar....

MY '94 AWD Aerostar now has 135,000 miles with NO ATF drain/refill/flush only band adjustment at 125,000. My son's '94 AWD Aerostar only has about 70,000 miles but also never with any ATF drain/refill/flush. Would have to check to be sure, but like my '01 AWD RX300 I would guess that no ATF "maintenance is called for in the owners manual.

Yours..??

"...evident by the number of tranny shops...."

Has it not occurred to you that with the number of "trannys" out there the "bread and butter" for all those shops just might be from overhauls due to ordinary wear..??

[lenore]

I know when my tranny went there was major metal debris. the pan and valve body were full.

[tmastres]

I didn't just make that up. That's what I've been told by many qualified mechanics and tranny shops. As for the design flaw theory, show me some documentation or recalls. It's only a theory until you can present factual evidence to support the claim. Speculations and assumptions don't register in my mind. Just stating that some RX300 trannys have failed prematurely is not sufficient evidence to support a design flaw theory. There are many makes and models of cars that have experienced premature transmisson failure, evident by the number of tranny shops throughout the country.

Well I personally agree that flushing is the way to go , I've had it done twice on my 00 and I'm at 105k mi. But your assertion that 99/00 and 01-later vehicles should have significantly different mileage is ludicrous, DUH!. Were already talking about 6,7,8 year old vehicles here and there's simply no way mileage is the reason the 99/00 have so many failures and the 01-03 have virtually none. Do you actually think that someone with an 00 has put on drastically more miles than someone with an 01? :o The drop-off is too steep for it to be age related. Did the 01 and beyond come with instructions to flush the tranny at regular intervals or something?

Insults aside though It's possible that the tech you mention is right in-as-much as the drain and fill (or no maintenance)may not be enough for these trannys. Maybe flushing is required. I'm willing to accept that as a hypothesis worth considering since it seems to be working for me. However is thats the case I can't see how Lexus/Toyota can escape culpability since they don't include flushing or any kind of service on the maint . schedule. I'm curious as to how the tech you mentioned wold respond to that issue.

[tmastres]

I am considering buying a 99 or 00 rx300.

20k.

Any suggestions would be appreciated. Thanks for your help.

If you haven't bought yet, I'd personally not buy either vehicle. I'm not convinced that there is no problem with the 99/00 transmission but I know I haven't seen or heard of near the amount of problems in the 01-03 range. Also in 01-03's the sludge problem was addressed so you are lot less likely to have any sludge related issues with those years. Bottom line is if you keep looking for an 01-03 you can just bypass the melee of facts/opinions/BS regarding the trannys and the engine sludge. Might just be worth a few extra bucks :P

[wwest]

I am considering buying a 99 or 00 rx300.

20k.

Any suggestions would be appreciated. Thanks for your help.

If you haven't bought yet, I'd personally not buy either vehicle. I'm not convinced that there is no problem with the 99/00 transmission but I know I haven't seen or heard of near the amount of problems in the 01-03 range. Also in 01-03's the sludge problem was addressed so you are lot less likely to have any sludge related issues with those years. Bottom line is if you keep looking for an 01-03 you can just bypass the melee of facts/opinions/BS regarding the trannys and the engine sludge. Might just be worth a few extra bucks :P

Correction..........

Apparently the '01 V6 is still subject to the engine sludging problem. If I remember correctly is was either mid-01 production run or '02 when the engine block design was revised to alleviate the problem.

Additionally the '01-03 RX models seem to be subject to some sort of transaxle problem as the ATF scheduled maintenance recommedation has been revised from NEVER to every 15,000 miles for a drain and refill or flush.

I did two sequential drain and refills on my '01 AWD RX300 because at only 40,000 miles the ATF was must definitely looking and smelling burned.

Apparently the '04 and after RX models went to DBW to "protect the drive train" keep the engine torque from rising due to gas pedal depression (1-2 second delay) until the appropriate transaxle gear ratio clutches could be fully and firmly seated. That, of course, resulted in owner safety complaints due to unpredictable responsiveness to the gas pedal.

There are a already few reports of '08 Toyota and Lexus models experiencing this 1-2 second delay/hesitation "feature".

Ford has adopted a variable displacement ATF pump for the new Edge SUV IMMHO to address these issues so maybe Toyota will cross-license the technique for the '09 models.....maybe....

[mikey00]

My RX is a late build 2001 and I am under the impression I am subject to both the engine sludge and trans issues. At 60K I decided the "lifetime" fluid was looking pretty dark and smelled burnt. I started a 15K drain and fill schedule. I am now at 121K and the fluid looks pretty good and the trans shifts like new. I plan on sticking with this schedule and keep my fingers crossed that the frequent fluid changes compensate for the design flaws in this transmission.

There is a lot of discussion here about pros and cons of drain and fills verses flushes but I bet over time the end result of a 15K drain and fill schedule is about the same as a 30K flush schedule.

A flush has the advantage of getting every bit of fluid exchanged but at the risk of moving some debris around. It also has the added cost of flushing and additional cost of about 6 extra qts of trans fluid which are wasted in the process. Others who have had flushes done reported being charged for 16 qts. of fluid and the trans only holds 9.7 qts dry fill. This may vary for others who have had flushing done.

Drain and fill has the advantage of being an easy DIY procedure without any additional cost for flushing machine or wasted fluid. It has the disadvantage of only getting a little over 1/2 of the fluid out. I get about 5 qts. out using both drain plugs. At least the trans is designed to trap dirt in the pan so you are draining the dirtiest part of the fluid. So after 2 d&f all the fluid is exchanged but not really due to some mixing in between.

It would be interesting to see if after a few hundred thousand miles a trans using one method is any different than a trans using the other.

[bluestu]

I didn't just make that up. That's what I've been told by many qualified mechanics and tranny shops. As for the design flaw theory, show me some documentation or recalls. It's only a theory until you can present factual evidence to support the claim. Speculations and assumptions don't register in my mind. Just stating that some RX300 trannys have failed prematurely is not sufficient evidence to support a design flaw theory. There are many makes and models of cars that have experienced premature transmisson failure, evident by the number of tranny shops throughout the country.

Hmmmm.....

89 Aerostar....

MY '94 AWD Aerostar now has 135,000 miles with NO ATF drain/refill/flush only band adjustment at 125,000. My son's '94 AWD Aerostar only has about 70,000 miles but also never with any ATF drain/refill/flush. Would have to check to be sure, but like my '01 AWD RX300 I would guess that no ATF "maintenance is called for in the owners manual.

Yours..??

"...evident by the number of tranny shops...."

Has it not occurred to you that with the number of "trannys" out there the "bread and butter" for all those shops just might be from overhauls due to ordinary wear..??

My 89 Aerostar is on its 3rd transmission at 180,000 miles. I always had a drain and fill, and filter change every 30k mi.. That vehicle is a piece of crap compared to an RX. I think I've replaced about everything on that van at least once. As far as the tranny shops in my city go, I sure see a lot of newer vehicles sitting in the parking lot every time I drive by. It's a fact that most people don't have their transmissions serviced until they fail. A lot of people don't have their cars serviced at all until something goes wrong. My wife's car would have exploded by now if it wasn't for me taking care of it for her. I'm sure you guys know that story all too well.