mikey00

Fairly common problem on RX. If you use the search function (bottom left) and search on "P0770" or "transmission failure" you will get a lot of info. Or see post #99 by lenore which pretty much sums up your problem. It's located here: http://us.lexusownersclub.com/forums/index...28020&st=90

One bulb illuminates the area you are referring to. It is a Sylvania 2721 available at Autozone. You have to remove the trim piece above the console to get at the bulb. Here is a link that will lead you to directions with pics for removing the trim piece. http://www.clublexus.com/forums/rx300-foru...eplacement.html

Just be aware that Lexus cost minus Lexus goodwill equals the cost at a reputable transmission shop. And Lexus rebuilds do not have that good of a track record. After going through all this with both Lexus and Toyota I ended up using a local shop.

I doubt very much if you could find someone willing to replace just the plantary gears with the upgraded part without rebuilding the whole trans while it is apart and out of the car. It just doesn't make good sense. If you insisted I am sure someone would do it for a price amd most likely want you to sign something noting that the trans is your responsibility. However, if your trans made it to the first fluid replacement at 60K with the fluid looking new and again to 78K, I would be willing to bet that you have a good trans and maybe even already have the upgraded part. Most of us with failed transmissions in 2001s and older noticed that the fluid was dirty and smelled burnt by 40K. If yours is clean you may have something there. I would just keep an eye on it and do a fluid replacement about every 30k just to be sure. I know the transmissions are failing in 2001 and older and believe that they will continue to fail in 02 and 03 years but I could be proven wrong.

I wish I knew. During our discussion he claimed he does a lot of RX transmissions and none of them return. He then went on to say a lot of the parts he was using were upgraded parts but we never got into what they actually were. If I had known about the planatary gear then I would have asked.

Great find on the planatery gear info. My rebuilder said that is what failed in mine. I think Toyota has a lot of failed transmissions out there that they are not stepping up to. If you check any of the Rav4 sites it looks like they had the same problem. Many trans complaints at this site: http://www.aboutautomobile.com/Complaint/2000/Lexus/RX300

Wait a minute, my dipstick says something like: Lifetime fluid, never needs replacing. They may be right, if it wasn't for the design problem. I bet mine would have failed even if I did a flush or drain and fill every week.

I remember an old post about a 330 owner accidently switching his NAV langauge to French. And as expected NAV voice changed to French and metric. He then switched backed to English but measurments remained in metric. Anyone care to try this? I have a 2001 without NAV and no need for metric but some odd reason remembered this old post.

You most likely just need a zero point calibartion. It is a common problem on Highlanders that when a CEL and VSC light come on and the repair is done the VSC remains on until a zero point calibration is done. It's not as common on the RX but does happen. Primarily on 2003 RX. Follow the links in my posts here: http://us.lexusownersclub.com/forums/index...ero+point\

It's definetly not just 2 or 3. If CR doesn't get enough surveys for a particular model it is listed as "insufficient data". You will see a number of models listed as such in the latest annual car issue. I do find it interesting that they continue to list the RX as a "Good Bet" for a used car but when you look at the "Trans Major" category the older models are well below average. All other areas are at least average with most coming in well above average which i guess is why it keeps it's good rating. Even the with the engine sludge issue, the engine maintains an above average rating.

I didn't mean to insinuate that VSC caused any trans problems. I am just saying that it has nothing to do with the trans discussion same as increasing the gas tank size in 01 has nothing to do with it. I did do some searching as you suggested looking for "well documented changes" and did read the links you provided but everything seemed to indicate no trans change was made in 01 except for 1 speculation by wwest. He even goes on to claim the change causes overheating of the ATF causing more failures. But I guess that's a whole different discussion. Also the link you provided above suggests that no change was made until DBW came along in 04. NHTSA numbers also suggest that 01 trans are failing at the same rate as 00 trans were failing a year previously. I didn't post the Consumer Reports numbers for the 99-03 RX but they suggest the same. I think this discussion went from "00 to 01 changes are well documented and anyone who disagrees is going against established facts" to "maybe they made some changes to the trans in 01 because they made other unrelated changes and might have seen some warranty trans failures by then". I do agree with that and hope they did make some changes, I am just saying we have no facts to support it. If I were looking for a used RX I would definetely not get anything older than 02, just in hope that they don't follow the same failure pattern as the previous years.

I surmise they changed them because they noticed an unusual amount of tranny problems coming into the dealerships. They also changed the AWD system in 01 to the VSC system just to show that they were perfectly willing and to change major aspects of the vehicle. But hey, as I said before I don't have any vested interest in changing your minds, believe what you will, others can make up their own minds. It's hard to believe that they had enough time to recognize the problem and implement a design change given the small number of tranny failures early on. And even if they did why is there still a high failure rate in 01? And yes VSC was added in 01 which has nothing to do with the tranny. I am still searching for that "well documented" changes to the 01 tranny.

I took your idea, but instead of looking up one car in NHTSA complaints, I used Consumer reports data based on over 1.4 million surveys on all cars. The data supports your theory. Average Problem Rates for all cars -----------------99-----00----01----02---03-----04----05----06-----07----08 Trans Major-----3------3-----3-----3-----2-------1-----1------1----<1----<1 Trans Minor-----4------3-----3-----3-----2-------2-----2------2------1------1 Drive System---6------5-----5-----5-----4-------4-----3------2------2------1

I don't find this odd at all. As cduluk already pointed out, it's just because these years are not old enough yet. I prefer to use the Consumer Reports surveys, which are based on over 1.4 million surveys, compared to less than 200 RX trans failure complaints of NHTSA data. But since you started with NHTSA data lets stick with that. The complaint numbers you posted for 02 and 03 are through the end of 2008. So to do an accurate "point in time" comparison for 99 and 00 we need to look at all complaints filed through 2005. But NHTSA data doesn't list the filed date, only the date the filer claimed the failure occurred. So we have to use the failure date, which will skew the data in your favor somewhat, but not enough to keep me from making my point. The number of complaints for 1999RX trans failure through 2004 is "13". The number of complaints for 2000RX trans failure through 2004 is "0". I wonder if anyone back in January 2005 tried to make the case the RX trans problem was fixed in 2000 using this data?

Here is what you missed. You have to add this to what you didn't miss for each respective year.

Well you should have been paying more attention to the transmission problems posts back in 05 and 06. WWest had a number of posts detailing the changes. OK, so maybe that doesn't jibe with your definition of "well documented" but the trans problem threads are among the most viewed and the most posted to threads on this and the CL forums. Not trying to be a wise-guy but here are some snippets I found in less than 10 min. "The Engine/transaxle ECU control firmware in the 2001 models, use an ASL, Aggressive Shift Logic, technique wherein the transaxle is always kept in the highest gear ratio possible." wwest also "as of about the year 2000 Toyota began adopting these techniques, for the 2001 Model year" I don't have any vested interest in this being true, its just what I remember from dozens of posts and thousands of replies regarding transmission problems and from being on this forum for 5 + years. I have a theory that some (maybe many) of the 01's got the 00 version trannys until stocks were used up then the modified versions went into the rest of the 01-03's. Thats purely my theory , and I don't have much to back it up. There is this however NHTSA complaint numbers for transmissions in the relevant years of RX's. 1999: 60 complaints 2000: 54 complaints 2001: 35 complaints 2002: 01 complaint 2003: 0 complaints Maybe the change was made in 02 and not 01 as reported? Either way an 03 model is plenty old enough to have the miles on the clock that would reveal transmission woes, the majority of failures seem to happen in the 60-120k mile window. So I guess it's safe to assume your "Well documented" changes are just some speculation from wwest without any facts. You also may want to re-check your NHTSA numbers. Last time I checked 2001 was up to 45 trans failures. If cduluk sends you a PM, I think it will be with his address so you know where to send the check.

I've been a active member of the forum for over 4 years now and this is the first I am hearing about 'WELL documented" transmission changes between 00 and 01. I also tried mining the site as you suggest and found nothing. I have both model years and believe the trans is exactly the same.

What Year? How Many Miles?? 2000 with 160K on the odometer. I pick up my car from the transmission shop today. Both clutch and transmission were repaired. It seems the transmission is not as smooth as it was. What shop did you end up using and what did you think of them? Did they do a trans rebuild or was it a repair?

To get the maximum reliability for around 10K in an area that really does not get much snow, I would not be looking at older luxury SUVs. A slightly used Toyota Corolla would most likely best fit your needs. Moving up the chain a little you have used Toyota matrix, Rav4, Pontiac Vibe. Somewhere between your needs and wants you will find a compromise. A used 99 RX has 3 major issues. Potential engine sludge, potential trans failure, plus very expensive parts and service for Lexus specific items. If you were lucky enough to hit just 2 of these it could easily double your purchase price.

Flickering and pulsing lights have been discussed before and I am not sure there was ever any resolution to the problem. It seems like a common problem on the RX. You can search this forum for "flicker" and see what others have said in the past. Here is also a discussion from another forum: http://www.clublexus.com/forums/rx300-foru...00-problem.html Light flicker may be a little subjective and tough to pin down but your battery dying every couple of days isn't. My first thought would be do you have any wiring changes or aftermarket accessories (alarm?) that may be causing the drain? Are you sure it's not your brand new battery? The RX does have some minimal current draw when off and your battery may not be up to it. New batteries cause strange problems even though they load test fine. Do you have another car you could swap batteries with for a test? Did the mechanic check the current draw on the battery when the car is off to see if anything was abnormal there?

code58: I agree with you on the club. I have always heard it was easily defeated. Some thevies have even resorted to just cutting a small piece out of the steering wheel to remove. The fuel pump switch sounds like a really good idea. I don't know if it is really necessary with the engine imobilizer in the RX, unless you run into a situation like this where someone has the key. I am sure someone somewhere has stolen an RX but I have never heard of one being stolen without having the key. gal: The more I think about your situation it sounds like kids or really low level thief. But it doesn't take much for someone like this to sell the key for $100 to someone who really does want to steal you car. Do you know anyone who may have contact with these type of people in your neighborhood? If so, have them put out the word they want to buy a Lexus key for $100. You may get lucky and your problem will be solved for just $100. If this doesn't work, you could try code58s suggestion of having a switch put in to cut off the fuel pump. This will ensure that you car can't be moved even though they can still get in unless you have locks re-keyed. I don't think the dealer would get involved with the switch type of thing so you would have to use a repair shop for this. But dealer could accomplish the same thing by programming your ECU to accept just your existing keys. What I think is going to be the most expensive part here is getting locks changed or re-keyed so thief can't get in. Maybe the most cost effective way out is to have ECU programmed so your car can't be started with the stolen key and just add a very basic alarm system in case the thief returns and opens the door. As far as the static type noise goes, I bet it is just something to do with a dead battery and wouldn't worry about it unless it persists after everything is straightened out. Good luck and whatever you do be sure and post back with the results.

Be careful! The thief now has a key that will unlock your car and start it. I would hide it in a friend’s garage until you can come up with a solution. Even if the dealer de-activates all present keys, that only means that the present keys won't start your car. It will still unlock the doors and then make the thief angry when he finds he can no longer start the car. I don't think there is an inexpensive solution for this. Most dealers would want to change all the locks, cut new keys, program the keys to start the car, and then program the remotes in the keys to operate the locks. My guess is about $1500. A good locksmith that understands Lexus could save a little by re-keying the locks instead of changing them. I don't know how many keys you have left, but the electronics could be moved over into new keys saving the cost of new electronics and some programming. But if they do this make double sure they do the necessary programming to remove the stolen key from both starting the car and the remote from opening the doors.

Denville Transmission, Denville NJ

The bulb is a Sylvania 2721 from Autozone. You need to pull the center console and flip it over to get at the ash tray mounting bolts. Not to bad, but it may not be worth it for a ash tray light. If you still want to go for it check here: http://www.clublexus.com/forums/rx300-foru...lumination.html Also use the links within the post for more directions and pics.

Check Kelly Blue Book (kbb.com) for trade in value, retail value, etc. You can also research cars to buy and find listings for all cars. If you get 10 to 15K consider yourself lucky. I have a 2001 RX Silver Sport I have owned since new in excellent condition with all maintenance records and it looks like it is worth about 8K on trade in. The RX is an excellent SUV and mine has served me well but I don't think I would buy a used one. You have the RX trans failure problems and the engine sludge potential. If you are not familiar with either of these just do a search anywhere. Also add to that the very high price for any other Lexus specific parts that may fail which can't be sourced aftermarket. As long as you understand the potential failure of these very expensive items and you still want an RX go for it. For the amount of money you are talking take a look at a new Suzuki SX4 or a Toyota Matrix.