wwest

Fuel pump or FP voltage dropping resistor (connections??) mounted on the inside of the fender just to the right of the battery.

But I still consider it a real shame that with the HH and RXh they went for performance rather than FE. I'll wait for the Lexus HSD version of the RAV4 or the RX230H using the I4. Meanwhile with gas at $4.00+ our 93 Ford Ranger with the 2.3L I4 is geeting more duty than normal. When we got our 400h 2yrs ago, I too, lamented over Lexus' emphasis on power versus FE. Ever since '03 I'd been reading up on the quickly ending fossle fuel issue, even as 3rd world countries are ramping up usage to equal our own wastefull ways. But posting here about de-emphasizing power, hoe-my-God. You'd of thought I had the plaque. :P Now that fuel is over $4/gallon & quickly set to double again w/in a couple years, only the staunchest SUV / land barge operators still 'love' the whole 'image' ... and 'I need big' thing. More folks are getting on the 'practical' bandwagon. It's sad that the U.S. has waited so long to prepare for higher economy because it's killing the majority of folks that can't afford high costs for fuel (as well as food, heating, and realisticly, everything else, as the cost of everything else is tied to cheep fuel). And they can't afford to buy a hybrid as well. Our next door neighbor bought the limited hyhi. But 'she-who-must-be-obeyed' wanted the Lexus 'name' over the less expensive hyhi, because for business purposes, she felt it looks more financially sucessful. IMO, I get that 'success' feeling by having the difference sitting in the bank. :D Next car for us will come next year, when Mitsubishi sells it's pure EV here in the U.S. ... it's bye bye Prius. I feel so disloyal. Still, better to recharge our transportation off a bank of photo panels than PI$$ away $100 bill or more, each week. If by "pure EV" you mean plug-in to the commercial power grid you may need to read up on just how both our power grid and generating capacity is already currently "over-stressed". We may soon be looking to Canada as the more forward-looking Canadians are already in the process of abandoning fossil fuels. Methinks the next step, most practical step all things/aspects considered, might well be CNG powered cars refueled at night via "home-brewing", compressing, of CNG using PHILL. Screw the Arabs AND rid ourselves (for the moment) of the state and federal gasoline taxes.

With gas at $4.00 and raising rapidly should the engine fail in my '01 AWD RX300 I would most likely look for a late model HL I4 engine to install, and then maybe even convert that I4 to Atkinson, or even Miller, cycle.

In the olden days, days of yore, running the A/C with the engine idling and the car motionless would quickly result in the coolant overheating, beginning to boil, and soon thereafter the engine would stop, SIEZED. But nowadays, for most modern vehicles, if the coolant begins to approach (not "reach", nor exceed) the level of overheating then the engine/transaxle ECU firmware will simply disable the A/C (as it does with WOT) until the engine water jacket cools back down again. If you really wish, or need, to run the A/C continuously in this situation you might get away with it using the following procedure. First, activate the air recirculate mode so the system isn't having to continuously COOL the incoming outside HOT air. Next, turn the system to maximum cooling. In maximum cooling mode the HVAC system's reheat/remix mode is bypassed and not even a small portion of the system airflow will be reheated after being first cooled via first flowing through the evaporator. Now use the manual blower speed control to moderate the cooling level and thereby sustain the cabin comfort level. To go even a bit farther to improve the system's cooling efficiency I have installed a manual water flow shutoff valve in the engine compartment so I can shut off the hot water flow to the heater core ENTIRELY during the summer months. I also had the dealer set the available C-best options such that when I turn the A/C off via the PB it remains off FOREVER, plus a day, (disabled even in defrost/defog/demist mode) unless I turn it back on. Once the cooling season is over I turn the A/C OFF and it remains off until the next spring.

There is a specialty plastic polish available for this, most readily found/located on ebay.

It is entirely possible, actually more probable then not, that those non-OEM components come from the same factory as the OEM. I haven't replaced many oxygen sensors, maybe three, but I can assure you I didn't pay the dealer markup, and with easily over 150,000 miles and maybe 25 years accrued aggregately and I have had no adverse results.

All-in-all it might be a bit cheaper, less expensive, to simply pay $100 for enough time on a dyno to "blow the carbon out". Or quickly, from a full stop, accelerate up a steep hill about twenty times in a row... But who am I to "talk", ~5 hours at legal speeds puts me in MT.......

A 24 hour subscription to techinfo.toyota.com will give you access to all the documentation you need. Why the LARGE font, are you implying that most of us need reading glasses..??

"..take off the clamps..."....??? If you did exactly what that statement implies then IMMHO you now need to HURRY (RUN don't walk..!!) out and buy/install 4 new rubber/flexible brake lines. I'm sure the brake pedal height issue can be eaasily addressd mechanically. The pedal "softness" is the result of VACUUM power assist and the relatively high volume of fluid that needs to be moved into the brake cylinder bore(s) when you initially apply braking. The LS is a relatively heavy car and an upscale one to boot, TOP of the HEAP upscale. It has/REQUIRES POWERFUL braking and thereby requires STRONG application forces that cannot be reflected (luxury aspect) in the owners need for heavy brake pedal foot pressure. I don't know at this time if the '98 had BA, Brake Assist, but if it does then under certain instances you will get even more than vacuum boost to aid in depressing the brake pedal. If you really desire a hard pedal then simply remove the vacuum line from the brake booster. Is there such a thing, device, that can be used to reduce the level of engine vacuum that reaches the brake booster..??

Had you bought the kit w/gauge it has directions on charging to the proper level. But yes, it does sound as if the compressor is "slugging", liquid refrigerant is reaching the compressor intake, and it only takes a short time of this to compromise the compressor mechanically.

Were you to bother to monitor the IAT (Intake Air Temperature) signal with and without the CAI, ANY CAI, you would discover NO difference. And modifying exhaust flow can have a long term adverse effect on the catalytic converter life. Unless there is a CAI kit out in the marketplace that actively cools the intake air, say using A/C refrigerant with a secondary evaporator. Uh, I think you're taking that a little too literally... I'm not suggesting a person actually chills their intake air with refrigerant (although they make cool-cans for racing)... the idea of using a performance CAI is not only to take the "cooler" air from outside the engine compartment, but more importantly to take in more of it... less restrictive flow. Less restrictive when, during the times, RARE times, the throttle is wide open and therefore NOT the MAJOR restriction to intake airflow...??? I know the factory airbox has a little bit of ductwork to take in some ambient air, but it's very restrictive. A performance CAI would open up the air flow and reduce restriction, after all, these are naturally aspirated engines and have to 'suck' the air into them for operation. The easier you make that air intake flow, the better it can 'breathe', and the more performance you get out... more than you'll get from a resistor mod. Were the IAT resistor modification designed to actually work, it would/could enrich the mixture even with partial throttle, not just with/at WOT. In regards to exhaust modification, that would be a cat-back application, and wouldn't affect converter life at all... it would just allow the exhaust to flow out a little better. Normal exhaust restrictions downstream of the converter would aid in pre-heating the catalyst to operational temperature and keeping it there. Removing exhaust restrictions might even result in a catalyst mal-function fault code. But all this discussion is moot, for there are no CAI's for the RX3*0 application, and there are not cat-backs... in fact, there isn't even a K&N filter that fits in the factory location. Why? Because these are grocery-getters... glorified Camry's... and seriously, who wants to modify a vehicle for a power gain when the vehicle has a transmission of questionable strength (speaking of the earlier years). Google for: rdx cai cpe wwest For the "who wants to modify.." Apparently lots of 'boy-racers" are attracted to the "turbo" in RDX. Idiots all.

delete...

235 lbs...Me Her....Unpublishable.

Yes, I would LOVE to see a Ridgeline w/SH-AWD but of the "size" of my '93 Ford Ranger. capable of carrying 4 people comfortably plus just enough PU bed. Supercharged(***) (Miller Cycle engine) small(1L..??) I4, HSD but fuelled with "home-brewed (PHILL) CNG. *** Turbocharging isn't a viable option for an Atkinson/(Miller cycle) engine, not enough heat/energy left in the exhaust path, ALL used up in the power stroke. Or even better a SMART car with the above features. Or even a 4-two with a small PU bed that could be converted to two extra seats. With a single (swivel) wheel tag-a-long trailer for the extra CNG tank for long trips.

I think the roof rack has a 75lb weight limit, probably more against increasing the potential for rollover vs mechanical strength. The 2005 RX330 Manual states that the roof rack can support 75kg (165 Lbs)... Which is good... My Thule Atlantis 1600 fits perfectly and the box itself is about 35-40lbs, which leaves about 120lbs of cargo possible. My recommendation isn't to max out the weight you put in the top of the car, or you may be looking out the drivers side window and seeing the ground close-up. Making the vehicle too top heavy is never a good idea. I use my cargo carrier for trips. Usually baby stuff (strollers, chairs, shelters, etc. go up there.). Heavy suitcases and other items definitely stay in the cargo area inside the SUV. I want as much weight as possible low in the vehicle if I'm loading up the thule box on top. Think of a rack top cargo box as a place to put bulky items.. not heavy ones.. and you'll be ok. If you want another heavy storage area, get one of the Thule trailer hitch mounted boxes. Yes, but all means, put the HEAVY load out beyond, behind, the rear axle, bumper even, that will only result, WORSEN, the potential for loss of directional control on a vehicle already highly subject to same, FWD, F/AWD understearing/plowing. They work extremely well on these light trucks. (especially since the trailer hitch on these things really can't tow much.) My opinion, worth 2 cents. -Chris330 I'll give you a penny for the good advice, heavy low loading with light Thule roof loading, but with-hold the second penny for the POOR rear loading advice.

I agree that "measuring" the change can be performed on a dyno, however, "feeling" the change can be very real. For example, there are a number of "changes" that an experienced race driver can tell his crew chief about throttle response that a Superflow SF-902 or an SF-600 Flowbench CANNOT. "..experienced race driver..." I agree... But how many of those do we have amongst the overall RX ownership populace. 5...?? Sorry, perhaps I used an inappropriate example. My point is that "changes" in throttle response can be "felt" very often by an average driver. There are literally hundreds of posts right here on this site that describes "seat-of-the-pants" (butt dyno) experiences. :D "..literally hundreds of posts...." Yes, and I'm willing to bet good money that the clear majority of those "seat-of-the-pants" judgments of improvements were significant biased due to the fact that the "judge" had already spent a not insignificant amount on the modification. I'd bet that in the majority of those "posts" you could have told the owner that the modification had been done when actually it was not and the owner judgment would have remained the same, POSITIVE. CAI, Cold Air Intake, K&N, simple 10 cent 1/4 watt resistor in the IAT circuit, etc. wwest, Granted, we all want our goodies to perform after spending our money. You said "The only way you'll be able to tell is on a dyno, with and without the mod." I said, no, that's NOT the only way. How many of the modifications that you are proposing have YOU had dyno tested? NONE. But the intention of my mods have NEVER been to increase HP/torque but to increase FE, and I can check THAT with a pencil and pad. On how many modifications have you seen any certified dyno test results? Have you ever experienced a change with one of your modificatons WITHOUT a dyno test? Yes, see above.. Again, my point is simple, I've made modifications to enhance engine performance on a variety of engines, both race and street, "both race and street.." Aha, so you acknowledge that your "butt" meter has been sensitized (calibrated..??) via racing mods.... and was able to "notice" improved (sometimes worse) throttle response and I didn't need a dyno test to experience the change. During flight training, private pilot, the instructor kept on me to pay more attention to keeping the airplane's center of gravity "correct" in a turn, I simply didn't get "it". Then I started taking my wife along on trips. I soon figured out that my "butt" meter need to be calibrated, sensitized, to the center of gravity NOT being "vertical" for my, her, body. As far as... "you could have told the owner that the modification had been done when actually it was not and the owner judgment would have remained the same, POSITIVE." I agree, but a "placebo" has been known to cure a disease. :P Hmmm... Are you implying that a "placebo" engine modification might actually result in a performance improvement...? "I hereby withdraw the question.." You also said "So your idea should work but the HP gain may be only 10-15% and therefore might not be really noticeable." In my experience, a 10 to 15% gain in HP would be VERY noticeable. I agree, but each of us differs in the level of butt sensor sensitivity, and some have even been "trained" to increase that sensitivity. In fact, I've heard some very experienced engine builders state that experiencing (via your butt dyno) a change as little as a two or three numbers in torque in not unusual. On my Toyota truck at 110 HP, a 10% gain would be 121 HP with a similar gain in torque number. This gain would mean the difference between driving down the freeway at 65 MPH in 4th gear max, or being able to cruise down the freeway at 80 in 5th gear If you got that level of gain with a 110HP (MAX HP) toyota engine then the WORLD needs to know. "cruise (as in CRUISE..!!) down the freeway at 80 in 5th gear." For most of us, " 65 MPH in 4th gear max" would imply WOT, actually using the full 110HP, whereas "CRUISE" would imply partial, or even "light" throttle. If you got that level of gain at light/partial throttle, starting out with a 110 max HP engine, then the world needs to know how you did it. Or was something wrong, VERY wrong, with the engine to begin with..?? Ask me how I know. I'm asking, but BOTH questions, how do you know and how in hell did you do THAT..?? If the native 110 HP only got you up to a maximum speed of 65 MPH then you had to be producing upwards of 150HP, at only partial throttle yet (Cruise, remember..??), to get to 80 in 5th gear. Assuming even 1/2 way open for CRUISE, partial throttle, then the maximum HP after your mod might have been upwards of 250HP. That's over a 200% gain, not 10-15%. At the end of the day, 5 pulls on a dyno is WAY more interesting than anything my "butt dyno" can deliver. I take back my thought that you have racing experience, 3 spins around Daytona in a GT3 to calibrate/check my butt dyno is WAY more interesting than standing by and watching a dyno run. A $100 chassis dyno test provides some really interesting data to consider. A $1,000 engine dyno test sheet is even better to review and stare at, especially the numbers! How did you get from a "$100 chassis dyno" to a $1000 engine dyno test sheet. Oh, engine vs chassis. I hereby withdraw the question.

Almost all rear diff'ls have a moisture/vapor "vent". The idea is if water does happen to get into the diff'l it will vaporize under heat and the pressure will drive the vapor out of the vent, just like EVERY headlight and tailight assembly. Look for a small rubber hose (like for engine vacuum) coming out of the diff'l case and often ending into some body or suspension structure such that there isn't likely to be any reverse flow if you drive through a puddle, stream, river. (river...??) In the alternative you might have a small spring and ball checkvalve to let vapor escape under pressure. These would be near the top of the diff'l somewhere and covered (hidden...) by a metal cap to prevent the checkvalve from getting contaminated with roadway debris. If the spring/ball checkvalve were to fail "open" you might very well end up with no lub in the diff'l, eventually. And by the way the fallacy, minor fault, in converting tailights to LEDS is you will get no heat/cool pumping action to remove moisture inside the taillight (headlight..??) assembly.

In the parts breakdown picture provided above the power transistor might be represented by part # 88630A, shown "removed" and just to the right of the squirrel cage blower, air mover, part. The power transistor is mounted on the passnger kickwell side of the evaporator plenum case, to the left of the fresh/recirc/blower/blower motor case, normally unseen in the pictorial.

I agree with the "glow red" (sometimes only obvious at night) part but why the fuel smell......???

But I still consider it a real shame that with the HH and RXh they went for performance rather than FE. I'll wait for the Lexus HSD version of the RAV4 or the RX230H using the I4. Meanwhile with gas at $4.00+ our 93 Ford Ranger with the 2.3L I4 is geeting more duty than normal.

Were you to bother to monitor the IAT (Intake Air Temperature) signal with and without the CAI, ANY CAI, you would discover NO difference. And modifying exhaust flow can have a long term adverse effect on the catalytic converter life. Unless there is a CAI kit out in the marketplace that actively cools the intake air, say using A/C refrigerant with a secondary evaporator.

No. Engine cooling control thermostats are reliable enough that most cars arrive at the wrecking yard with the factory originals. But I suppose that you might as well if you get to 250,000 miles and want to finally change the original timing belt and maybe even the water pump.

Do you mean 'leaking'? If so, how do you know? Are there spots-if so, where? The obvious cheap 1st step would be to go to autozone or some such and buy the 134 recharge kit w/gauge so you know where levels are. Get one w/dye. If you've lost freon you've lost oil. Make sure to get some oil into the system or the compressor may go next. I would avoid any of the 'stop leak' additives as they are a last ditch move. At least you might be able to stay cool short term and pinpoint the leak saving ' diagnostic dollars' at Lexus as they add up PDQ. Not that familiar w/r-12 replacements, but someone here may help w/ some other tips. Assuming the A/C compressor is actually running, is it cycling on and off as it should..?? Your LS has a dual mode refrigernat hi/lo pressure switch to prevent the A/C compressor from running and being damaged with refrigerant too low and also shuts it off once a sufficient level, "reserve", of liquid refrigerant is available on the "high" pressure side. Also, you can check the sight glass for the existence of refrigerant. IMMEDIATELY (two person task) after A/C clutch engagement observe the sight glass for the beginning of the transition from clear gas, to liquid w/bubbles, and then to clear liquid refrigerant. After the clutch releases the reverse should happen, liquid to bubbles to clear gas and then the compressor should restart, possibly with some delay. As someone cycles the temperature setpoint between max heat and max cool watch and observe that the HOT water flow control valve in the engine compartment at roughly the top center of the firewall moves smoothly between fully closed to fully open. This valve is operated by the remix/reheat vane/door servomotor inside the dash/plenum area via a push/pull cable. If the water valve is stuck (it happens), say in the fully open position, the system will always be in max heat mode. Do you get cooling before the heat coolant heats up but not after..?? Once you get the system back working you may want to slip the push/pull cable off of the valve and wire tie it into the fully closed position. That will result in your A/C being dramatically more efficient, observeable/measureable FE improvement, during the summer months. But remember to reverse the procedure come fall. Put the cable back on the valve but open the A/C clutch compressor circuit.

Yes, if it fits my '92 LS then I'm interested.

Many of you have undoubtedly noticed just how "busy" these new transaxles have become. Oftentimes, seemingly, virtually continuous down/upshifting as we drive along on to us, relatively smooth and level roadbeds. That continuous up/downshifting is a direct result of the modern technological improvements available to the automotive manufacturers of today. These newer 250-300HP V6 engines can now be safely operated at extraordinarily low RPMs, RPMs that in the past, "near" past, would have put the engine's service life at risk to inadvertent (undetectable) knock/ping from, due to, lugging. CVTs, coming soon to a car near you, will help. *** There are now, often, due to the wider useful RPM range of these new (over-powered??) V6 engines, two actual O/D "hard" gear ratios available. Plus the O/D lockup clutch might be optionally used in the top 3, or even 4 "hard" gear ratios, resulting in a 9 or 10 speed gearbox. Use of the O/D lockup clutch now only changes the drive train's final drive ratio, but also results in sigificantly increasing FE due to the removal of the highly lossy torque converter being out of the loop. What you are speaking of is "spark knock" caused by, as you explain wordily, ignition timing. I am speaking of knock caused by BMEP, which is the kind of detonation that destroys engines, and is caused by combustion chamber pressures exceeding the octane value and hence the knock resistance, of the fuel. Your career in rocket science has failed you. Pilotguy undestands BMEP as he is a pilot, like me. I woke up at 2AM this morning and then couldn't get back to sleep because I got stuck thinking about your engine "detonation", high RPM and WOT. Finally came to realize that with aircraft engines there ARE times you can go WOT with the engine already in a high RPM range. Constant speed prop..... A constant speed prop allows an aircraft engine to "idle" (virtually no engine load) near or even at maximum engine RPM. And yes, an aircraft engine would probably self-destruct pretty quickly were you to move the prop from "cruise" to FULL bite without first enriching the mixture. But I don't see how that translates into anything useful regarding fuel grade in automotive engines.