Buying Used Rx300 - Some Questions

[tmhtmh]

Hi all. I have learned so much browsing and searching this site! Lots of honest pros and cons of the RX300. Obviously, the transmission issue and engine sludge issue are of most concern to me as a perspective buyer. 2002 is likley one I'll buy, btw. Anyways, here are my questions.

1. The 2WD (FWD) version : I understand the traction/stability control started on the '01 model. Can it be turned off on the 2WD? (I thought I read it COULD on 2WD but NOT on AWD). Also, is it generally accepted here that far less tranny issues on 2WD vs. AWD?

2. Colors: Is "Pearl White" different from "White" for the RX colors? I see many of each, but can't tell from the photos.

3. Is the leather in the "Coach Edition" actually more comfortable (subjective, I know, but what do you think)? How 'bout less slippery (for kids in the back seat)? Seems perforated would slip less, but I've never sat in it so I don't know.

4. Warrenty. Can anyone summurize any additional drive train or engine (sludge) warrenty Lexus has added as a result of problems. Many threads discuss it, but I don't have it straight yet.

Thanks for the help. I should be buying soon and your answers will help me decide which one.

[jbarhorst2]

I believe the engine sludge issue was fixed in 2001. Can anyone confirm?

You are correct, you cannot turn off the traction control on the AWD model, but you can turn it off on the FWD model.

There seem to be fewer problems with FWD models than AWD. In fact, I don't remember hearing of a failure with the FWD.

I think there is only the one white (Pearl).

Tom

[tmhtmh]

Thanks. That helps a ton.

One more question. I see some 2002 w/ wood/leather steering wheel and shift Knob and it seems some have just leather. I test-drove one with the wood, and HATE it - here in the north during winter it's like grabbing a piece of ice! Cold, cold cold. Does the wood/leather wheel come with some specific package? I want the heated seats but not the wood wheel.

Picky, i know, but hey, I'm going to probably spend a while looking so i might as well at least know what's out there.

Oh, and the "COach Edition" comfort question - anyone want to weigh in on that one?

Thanks again.

[LexKid630]

I've owned 3 RX300's. A 1999 AWD, 2003 AWD COACH EDITION, and my current 2003 AWD. The coach leather seats have the same "comfort" as the normal leather seats, just the little holes get filled with dirt which look terrible after time. I didn't notice that the preforated leather was any less slippery either. The leather "itself" is softer in the coach editions (more flexible).

For the wood & leather steering wheels, most if not all AWD's will have it. "some" 2WD's will have the only leather one. The chances of finding ANY Rx300 without the wood/leather wheel that HAS heated seats is VERY slim. I have NEVER seen one like this. If you somehow find an AWD without the wood/leather steering wheel, guaranteed it probably won't have a spoiler. It's a trade off. Some rx300's have different combinations. Since you're buying used you just have to look around.

and it's true about the sludge issue. 2002's and up don't have this problem. and the transmission problems are mostly found in AWD versions. Only a "few" problems have been reported with the FWD's.

Also, ALL Coach editions have the wood/leather wheel's. The wood is also more of a yellow color on the coach editions.

good luck with your decision!

[lexus411]

Most cars in the Northeast have the Premium Plus Pkg.. AWD/ Leather/6 Disc Cd/ Heats Seats/ Wood wheel & HID light pkg.

[Booyah]

alot has been said but with you living in NY and you guys get the snow---its a no-brainer if it were me! AWD

[wwest]

Regarding the sludge issue Toyota supposedly made a small change in the engine block to alleviate the oil sludging problem in newer engines. But now I notice the new RX350 has an external engine oil cooler (almost unheard of otherwise) so I'm not so sure the earlier fix actually worked.

[SW03ES]

The 3.5 is also a completely new engine so its probably unrelated.

[Topshelf]

I was just wondering, what would the advantage of turning off the stability/traction control be? I could understand if you had the new IS350 and wanted to play a little. But for the life of me I can't figure out the benefit on an RX300. Just curious.

[tmhtmh]

I was just wondering, what would the advantage of turning off the stability/traction control be? I could understand if you had the new IS350 and wanted to play a little. But for the life of me I can't figure out the benefit on an RX300. Just curious.

Good question. Maybe I'll find it doesn't ever make sense to turn it off. However, having driven in Buffalo NY for 20 years, mostly with FWD, one grows accustomed to a certain "feel" when starting out on icy roads. I have driven several AWD SUVs with the new VSC/TC systems and they were all a disaster on ice. I'd pull out into traffic and the "system" would not allow the car to go because the wheels were slipping a bit (which is how you sometimes HAVE TO get going!).

The AWD BMW (X5?) was one of the worst ice cars I've ever driven. It's owner agreed 100% with me as he is also very used to winter driving.

Many here have also complained of how the RX300 handles the ice. Some say it's great also. However, I doubt it is too much different than the others I've driven with VSC/TC which I'd have liked to turn off in some instances. Actually, it's the Traction Control that causes the problem, I think. VSC actually should help a bit in staying straight in a slide, but really it's the tires that help for this.

I may just get the 2WD RX300 and put good snow tires on it for winter. I've never had anything but good luck with FWD/Snow tires on any vehicle. AWD is great for deep snow, but so are snow plows! I can save a few bucks vs. the AWD and maybe avoid the big tranny issue many have reported here. I'm buying with about 50-60k miles on it so I don't want to spend $20k then have to replace a transmission in a year or two!

Sounds cheap, but I am kinda cheap. I'd rather put the $$$ into a vehicle's ride and comfort, which is why the RX300 appeals to me.

[wwest]

The 3.5 is also a completely new engine so its probably unrelated.

No, the new 3.5L V6 with DFI is the new engine, the one in the RX350 is simply a bored or stroked 3.3L.

[wwest]

I was just wondering, what would the advantage of turning off the stability/traction control be? I could understand if you had the new IS350 and wanted to play a little. But for the life of me I can't figure out the benefit on an RX300. Just curious.

All the way back to the traction system on my 1992 LS400 I had to learn to religiously turn off the trac system each time I started the engine. Otherwise it would sometimes leave me with a totally dethrotthed engine in the front of oncoming traffic.

Traction control is definitely a good feature as it will often save your butt when you hit a slippery spot of which you were, would have been, otherwise unaware.

But.

It can also be a damn nuisance.

Any time Trac activates it will apply braking to the slipping wheel(s) to prevent or alleviate wheelspin. At the same time most trac systems will also simultaneously dethrottle the engine to prevent overheating of the rotors and subsequent warping.

But there are times when a little wheelspin, maybe even with some back and forth rocking, can be a definite advantage, as in getting unstuck initially. There are also times when the driver can be slightly more judious via feathering the throttle to get going than can the Trac system.

So yes, there are, can be, times when it is definitely advantagous to be able to turn off the Trac system.

With VSC I'm not so sure.

Porsche's PSM, their VSC equivalent, can be turned off if/when the driver expects to be doing some exceedingly sporty driving. But it will come back on the instant the brakes are used.

Obviously when ABS activates it can be, is a heads up that the braking level you're asking for cannot be supported by the available roadbed traction coefficient absent the threat of loss of directional control. Trac activation, in the same way, is a heads-up that the rate of acceleration, or drive even, that you're asking for via the throttle application cannot be supported by the available traction coefficient. While on a RWD vehicle the driver can still maintain direction control with the driven wheels slipping that is NOT true of FWD or front biased AWD. So, in general, dethrottling of the engine on a FWD will always be much quicker, virtually instantaneous, vs a RWD or rear biased AWD. Some RWD vehicles actually have a discernable delay in dethrottling, giving the driver time to react and feather the throttle, when rear wheelspin develops.

I have driven my Porsche on the track at Daytona, literally as fast as I was comfortable going, 130+, but I did not bother to turn the PSM system off. Porsche's implementation of stability control is different from most in that it gives the driver a few hundred milliseconds to react and crank in corrective measures.

Obviously that would not be a good idea for the driving public at large since very few would have the driving experience or knowledge, or in some cases not even the ability, to react correctly. For instance if a RWD vehicle with manual transmission begins to overstear the proper procedure would be to quickly depress the clutch and counterstear into the direction of the skid.

FWD vehicles are not very subject to overstearing, they more often understear. The VSC in my front biased AWD RX300 will apply both rear brakes if understearing is detected, the idea being that the rear wheels have not lost traction and therefore can be used to slow the vehicle, hopefully to the point of the front wheels regaining traction. Absent VSC the only thing the driver might do to combat understearing is to counterstear and/or apply the parking brake judiously.

[Topshelf]

Yeah, I can understand your point. But once you come to terms with traction control, it's really nice. I remember last year trying to get up my hill in my wifes C230 coupe (rwd hatchback). Got about halfway up and then the tc kicked in. I just stayed on the gas and let the electronics do it's thing. Pretty wild actually. It made all kinds of strange noises, but slowly, and in a controlled manner walked right up the hill. Could I have gotten up it without it? Maybe, but remembering the days of my '67 camaro in the snow, I'll take traction control over fishtailing and spinning tires anyday.

Also, I honestly think alot of people underestimate the importance of good tires. Not saying expensive, but good. There's only 4 contact points with the ground (hopefully :)), and it amazes me everytime I see people driving around on bald, or worn, or summer, or underinflated tires complaining about bad wet and snow traction. There's a girl at my work who sold her C230 coupe, exact same car as my wifes, because the car was terrible in the rain and snow. I wanted so bad to tell her that a $300 investment in new tires would have totally transformed her car. But no point now. I just always get a chuckle when people blame a car or truck for bad traction when 90% of the time it's the tires.

Sorry for the rant...bored at work. lol

Anyway, good luck with your search as I'm also picking up an '02 RX300 soon. ;)

Well, all I can say is next year I'll let you know if I change my opinion on this one. I've never run into a situation like that, so until then, I'm sticking with my proper tires and tc are better than any other option.;)

[LexKid630]

I would still get the AWD if you'll be driving in snow.

[SW03ES]

wwest, didn't know they were two different engines. Makes sense though...

[wwest]

Yeah, I can understand your point. But once you come to terms with traction control, it's really nice. I remember last year trying to get up my hill in my wifes C230 coupe (rwd hatchback). Got about halfway up and then the tc kicked in. I just stayed on the gas and let the electronics do it's thing. Pretty wild actually. It made all kinds of strange noises, but slowly, and in a controlled manner walked right up the hill. Could I have gotten up it without it? Maybe, but remembering the days of my '67 camaro in the snow, I'll take traction control over fishtailing and spinning tires anyday.

Also, I honestly think alot of people underestimate the importance of good tires. Not saying expensive, but good. There's only 4 contact points with the ground (hopefully :)), and it amazes me everytime I see people driving around on bald, or worn, or summer, or underinflated tires complaining about bad wet and snow traction. There's a girl at my work who sold her C230 coupe, exact same car as my wifes, because the car was terrible in the rain and snow. I wanted so bad to tell her that a $300 investment in new tires would have totally transformed her car. But no point now. I just always get a chuckle when people blame a car or truck for bad traction when 90% of the time it's the tires.

Sorry for the rant...bored at work. lol

Anyway, good luck with your search as I'm also picking up an '02 RX300 soon. ;)

Well, all I can say is next year I'll let you know if I change my opinion on this one. I've never run into a situation like that, so until then, I'm sticking with my proper tires and tc are better than any other option.;)

Keep in mind that traction control will time out after about 45 to 60 seconds of semi-continous use. All of the VSC/Trac{LSD/AWD}/BA/EBD functionality is based on the ABS pumpmotor's ability to pressurize and replenish the brake fluid to the capacity of its useage. The ABS pumpmotor is a fractional HP 12 volt DC motor roughly the equivalent of your windshield wiper motor. More than about ~45 seconds of operation at this torque/load level and it will overheat and fail. Once the ~45 second timer disables the ABS pumpmotor it will take at least one new drive cycle of about 100 yards (2001 AWD RX300) before it will again operate.

And personally my RX rides on nice quiet and comfortable summer tires all the time, all year around. For the fairly rare exceptional times I need traction on slippery surfaces (NOT LOOSE SNOW) I keep at least one set of tire chains on board. Today we're leaving for Dayville OR and the second set will go in the tire well before we leave.

"Winter" tires only help if the surface is such that they have bite, can dig into, the surface. They are no help on packed snow or ice. Summer tires, with more surface contact, less siping, will always have more grip on a solid surface, even a slippery one. Be all that as it may, my chains go on the instant I discern a shortcoming in adequate traction.

[Topshelf]

Well, I don't want to argue any of the traction control operations because I honestly don't know that much about them. So for now I'm going to believe all that info. :P

However, if you are claiming that dedicated summer tires are better than a well designed all season tire, then we certainly have a disagreement here. If we throw out the dozens of tests that have proved this fact over and over again, there's still a very basic feature that would prove that theory wrong. Tire compound. If you were to take your summer tire with it's "superior" tread design and duplicate it using an all season compound, and a winter compound, there would be no doubt be huge traction increases as the compound became softer with each design. Summer tires are very hard compared to the other types since they are strictly designed to cope with higher ground temps as well as higher cornering forces. As the road gets cooler, the summer tire will not be able to get to optimal operating temp and will have no grip whatsoever. I've been racing motorcycles for over 5 years, and I have first hand experience of how important it is having the proper tire for the conditions. In the same manner, a winter tire on a hot day would simply overheat and become greasy, causing a massive loss of traction. Tire compounds are just as important as the tread design, and summer tires are not designed for winter whereas the all-season obviously takes both extremes into consideration. All season tires on a luxury awd suv is the ideal compromise since you don't need the high grip levels of a summer tire for cornering, or the extreme grip of a winter tire unless you are in an area that gets alot of snow and ice. Driving on a summer tire on a cold day, let alone a snowy or icy day, is not only dangerous to the driver, but to everyone around him who could possibly get caught up in the mayhem that will ensue once that performace tire lets go due to improper operating temps. Without heat, there is zero grip on a high performance tire. Trust me, riding around at 150mph on 2 wheels teaches you alot about your tires. I'll agree that chains on an icerink might be better than a winter tire, but how often do you drive on an icerink? Not to mention the damage it does to roadways and the loss of traction when not on pure ice. Personally, a good all-season and a smart head is the best choice, but that's just my useless $.02. B)

[wwest]

Well, I don't want to argue any of the traction control operations because I honestly don't know that much about them. So for now I'm going to believe all that info. :P

However, if you are claiming that dedicated summer tires are better than a well designed all season tire, then we certainly have a disagreement here. If we throw out the dozens of tests that have proved this fact over and over again, there's still a very basic feature that would prove that theory wrong. Tire compound. If you were to take your summer tire with it's "superior" tread design and duplicate it using an all season compound, and a winter compound, there would be no doubt be huge traction increases as the compound became softer with each design. Summer tires are very hard compared to the other types since they are strictly designed to cope with higher ground temps as well as higher cornering forces. As the road gets cooler, the summer tire will not be able to get to optimal operating temp and will have no grip whatsoever. I've been racing motorcycles for over 5 years, and I have first hand experience of how important it is having the proper tire for the conditions. In the same manner, a winter tire on a hot day would simply overheat and become greasy, causing a massive loss of traction. Tire compounds are just as important as the tread design, and summer tires are not designed for winter whereas the all-season obviously takes both extremes into consideration. All season tires on a luxury awd suv is the ideal compromise since you don't need the high grip levels of a summer tire for cornering, or the extreme grip of a winter tire unless you are in an area that gets alot of snow and ice. Driving on a summer tire on a cold day, let alone a snowy or icy day, is not only dangerous to the driver, but to everyone around him who could possibly get caught up in the mayhem that will ensue once that performace tire lets go due to improper operating temps. Without heat, there is zero grip on a high performance tire. Trust me, riding around at 150mph on 2 wheels teaches you alot about your tires. I'll agree that chains on an icerink might be better than a winter tire, but how often do you drive on an icerink? Not to mention the damage it does to roadways and the loss of traction when not on pure ice. Personally, a good all-season and a smart head is the best choice, but that's just my useless $.02. B)

I would wholeheartedly agree that tread rubber compounds can make a significant difference in traction levels of winter use tires vs summer. That being said, stated, I will be the first to say that was all in years, many years, gone by.

Back in 1963 you could even buy winter tires that had walnut shells embedded within the tread rubber to improve traction on ice or packed snow. I'll let you guess how many winters it took, even in MT, to wear those out.

And that's where your argument falls apart.

These days the level of "guarranteed" mileage the manufacturers state for summer tires is much the same as for winter tires. Some of that is accomplished by having deeper tread blocks on the winter tires but in reality that only makes up for the mileage loss due to having less surface contact area on the winter tire to begin with.

So, the question to you is, "If today's tread rubber compound is different for winter tires vs summer tires how can the mileage "life" be the same?". Yes, I know, agree, that if what you say is true, "the soft rubber will harden with cold but not to the level a summer tire would/will", and given that the majority of the time these winter tires run on only wet or dry pavement, how can that be?

And by-the-by, the only motorcycle racing I have ever witnessed in the type of conditions discussed here was on a frozen lake in NH and I seem to remember the motorcycle tires had some serious traction SPIKES punched through the tread area.

"....but how often do you drive on an ice rink?..."

My point exactly.

Not often enough to justify switching to winter tires ALL WINTER, which is why I feel tire chains are a much better solution overall. I don't think anyone will question that tire chains offer a phenominal level of traction on ice or packed snow as opposed to ANY winter tire.

Not by any means saying that proper tire surface and compounds aren't EXTREMELY important in the racing venue. As with everyone else, our race team uses electric "blankets" to keep the tires warmed when not on the car.

[tmhtmh]

umm....yeah...... I'm not following some of this. If someone said "summer tires grip ice better than snow tires" then he'she doesn't live in the northeast where there's snow and ice.

Also, chains are illegal on most roads in most states. As are spiked snow tires which were the standard when I was driving my dad's car 20 yrs ago. Chains destroy the roads which is why they are illegal most places.

Snow tires are the answer if you live in snow/ice areas. Or, just use a second car with snow tires and leave the RX for nicer weather driving.