wwest

Maybe I misunderstood this statement, "Timing is not longer used to adjust for fuel octane, not unless you have a carburator." This statement was dead wrong. If you said that the ECU controls both timing and fuel/air ratio to compensate for variations in octane...then I could understand that. You're the one that was told by a Porsche tech that ignition timing was not involved with making these adjustments by the ECU. I guess you were misinformed.:whistles: Timing adjustment was NEVER a satisfactory method of preventing engine knock/ping due to low grade fuel or the driver "lugging" the engine down beneath the power band for some reason. But with a carburated vehicle the more satisfactory solution was/is simply not available. Nowadays with such powerful ECUs, highly sensitive (non-resonant type)knock/ping sensors it simply makes a lot more sense, and provides a much larger adjustment range, to change the injector timing period to adjust the mixture ratio and thereby more easily avoid knocking/pinging. No, I was NOT misinformed, I have a full and complete set of Lexus shop/repair manuals for the 1990 LS, 1992 LS, 2000 GS300 & RX300, 2001 RX300, and the 2003 Toyota Prius, along with a set for almost every other vehicle (mostly Fords), airplane, tractor I have ever owned, own. The Lexus/Toyota diagnostic sections never bring up the issue of ignition timing in relation to the use of "improper" fuel grades. As a matter of fact when I bought my very first Lexus I had been unaware of the Premium Fuel ONLY requirement but I was subsequently assured that I could use regular fuel for the entire life of the LS and the only problem would be degradation of HP/Torque. Think about it in a little "more" depth. The reason you get knock/ping with a "too" low octane in a carburated engine is because the compression ratio along with the octane/mixture is either approaching the point of dieseling or due to the engine output torque requirement being lower than needed (lugging) to do the "work". In the latter case the explosive, EXPLODED, flame front is moving faster then the piston will/can move downward and so you get knock/ping (rattle??) And what can you do with timing to overcome dieseling in either case, advance? !Removed!? NOT...!!! In the olden days enrich the mixture by changing the carburator jetting...... Nowadays...... Oh, in them olden days the only real reason, cause, for adjusting the timing, fixed or dynamically, using mechanical or ECU techniques, was to get to, keep right on the "cusp" of dieseling/detonation/preignition without actually reaching it, I.E, get the MOST performance from the engine given the fuel grade its jetted for. And yes, there was sometimes an exception, pre-ignition due to engine over-heating, superheated carbon particles and the like remaining, lodging, within the combustion chamber. And while the timing could be retarded to alleviate some of the adverse effects from this and thereby lower (maybe) the explosive "rate", knock/ping from this source could not be in any way overcome via timing adjustment.

In these early models the fan controller consisted of two sections, an actual mechanical relay (the idea was to totally bypass the voltage drop, however small (~1.0 volts) by the solid state controller power transisor) for high, MAX, speed and a solid state controller for all the lower speeds. Obviously your low speed solid state controller is failed. And the LS series uses an airflow reheat/remix method to modulate, moderate, the system airflow temperature so the A/C compressor will cycle on and off all the time when "enabled" in order to provide a continous supply of liquid refrigerant.

Why would ANY GPS system need a speed input from the "carrying" vehicle? If the GPS cannot compute the vehicle speed in REAL TIME without such a connection then something is VERY wrong. I have a 2001 AWD RX300 with Nav but always rely on my portable Garmin as it is far more reliable in finding the most direct route whereas the RX's nav system only "finds" the new, correct, (shortest distance, etc.) route as I follow the garmin directions.

Wrong information!!! More advanced ECUs found on most modern cars also control the ignition timing, Variable Valve Timing (VVT), the level of boost maintained by the turbocharger (in turbocharged cars), and control other peripherals. Your statement beginning: "More advaned ECUs found..." is perfectly correct, but the way it was explained to me by the Porsche tech when I picked up my 2001 Porsche at the factory is that the adjustment to prevent pinging/knocking "under power, load" with lower grade fuels is done via controlling the mixture ratio. I was surprised when I was told that in my travels throughout europe all I had to worry about was to not fuel with leaded. Well, we're discussing Lexus ECU technology, NOT Porsche, so in effect, am I right to conclude that the information that you posted was wrong? No, I was not, did not, discuss any issue beyond the ECU control of the fuel injection timing being used to adapt the engine to the use of a lower grade fuel. All of the parameters you mention, plus others, are also controlled by the ECU but in more of an all encompassing manner. I. E., regardless of octane rating. And why would you, or anyone, assume that Lexus (NipponDenso, Denso US) control of this particular parameter, octane deviation/variation, would differ from Porsche (Bosch)?

As you move the control from HOT to COLD the servomotor should travel end to end accordingly. Follow the sound and if you can see/get at the servomotor then go for it.

Something is wrong, very wrong. I don't think it is possible to add that much "freon" to a normally sealed system without the compressor running to provide enough suction to move the additional freon from the low side to the high side. I suspect you were somehow adding freon into the great beyond via HUGE leak.

The RXh actually has a ~75HP electric (extraordinary low speed torque) drive motor dedicated to rear drive whereas the RX350 has a somewhat fluid viscous clutch/coupling for rear drive that mostly remains "flaccid" until a quite significant level, certainly tens of milliseconds, possibly hundreds, of front wheelspin ocurrs. The whole matter gets a bit confusing if you start to look at the history of the RX's AWD system. Up until 2001 a viscous clutch was used, mounted across the two outputs of the center diff'l, along with a mechainical LSD at the rear. A totally non-functional LSD since seemingly there was/is no way to get enough drive torque to the rear to result in rear wheelspin/slip. The fronts, recieving the clear majority of engine torque, at least at the initial instance of onset, would always be the first to develop wheelspin/slip and thereby significantly limit the engine torque level to the rear, but overall in reality. In 2001 VSC/Trac was added which mostly made the viscous clutch redundent (it was likely non-functional to begin with anyway) since the instant front wheelspin/slip was detected Trac would apply braking and dethrottle the engine. The mechanical LSD was also dropped in favor of a virtual LSD via use of Trac braking (Yeah, like that's likely to happen). On a 4 wheel dyno the most we could get from my 2001 was a 75/25 F/R torque split and that was only by disabling VSC/Trac (pulled the ABS fuse) and ~10-15 seconds of front "wheelspin" (overspeed vs the rear) developed by dyno braking of only the rear wheels. Otherwise it seemed to meaure ~95/5 F/R, if even that. Part of the mystery for me, but at the same time something of a confirmation of my theory, is that the use of the viscous clutch was discontinued for the entire RX330 product run but is apparently back in play/use for the RX350. I can only assume the Trac firmware was modified for the RX350 to provide a Trac dethrottling delay as they now have on the Trac system for the RWD Lexus models. While I'm stuck here at Eastside Group Health ICU for a least another day I'll likely be back at the office by Wednesday. Our offices are located directly behind the Redmond Brown Bag Cafe if you would like to drop by sometime and I can explain in far more detail, c-best options, flawed climate control design, hazards of FWD, 1-2 second engine/transaxle delay/hesitation, etc.

EEEEEKKKKKK............ a mini van??? No way (not that there's anything wrong with them - just not for me). I think the RX will be a good size. No kids to worry about, it's normally just myself or my hubby & I. I just like a little bit of a bigger vehicle. Thanks for all of your advise! Hey, give me a Sienna with the Lexus GS's DFI V6 drive train and its rear biased, definitely REAR biased, AWD system and I'd dump my AWD RX and its Ford AWD Aerostar true adverse condition "backup" so quick your head would swim. Chrysler Bionic "minivan", now there's a concept that should go into production. Say with a rear mounted Subaru boxter "4" drive train but electric hybrid drive/regen for the front.

Yes, disconnect the battery, mechanically block the throttle butterfly valve from opening fully, reconnect the battery and drive away. You have just derated the HP/torque output, fuel consumption of the engine to whatever level, 10-20-30-50%, you chose to block the throttle opening.

Wrong information!!! More advanced ECUs found on most modern cars also control the ignition timing, Variable Valve Timing (VVT), the level of boost maintained by the turbocharger (in turbocharged cars), and control other peripherals. Your statement beginning: "More advaned ECUs found..." is perfectly correct, but the way it was explained to me by the Porsche tech when I picked up my 2001 Porsche at the factory is that the adjustment to prevent pinging/knocking "under power, load" with lower grade fuels is done via controlling the mixture ratio. I was surprised when I was told that in my travels throughout europe all I had to worry about was to not fuel with leaded.

The gen one LS has a flawed headlamp design, if you adjust the low beam to the correct vision point the high beams will ne airmed well above the roadbed. Nice view of the night sky. I replaced my fogs with projector HIDs from ebay, use them for low beams and the OEM fixture for high beam only.

The cable that opens/closes the hot water control valve is itself driven by the reheat/remix servomotor inside the plenum area. The cable has undoubtedly slipped off the other end. Sorry, not good.

Timing is not longer used to adjust for fuel octane, not unless you have a carburator. The engine control ECU simply enriches the mixture slightly via longer injector "open" time to prevent ping/knock with a lower octane.

You can "normalize" the window full up stopping point by disconnecting the battery, insert a small object to keep the window from going full up and then hold the window up button depreesed for ~10 seconds after it stops against the object. I probably did this wrong but just today read wwest response. Two questions By normalize do you mean a new set point os created for the window in its full up postion? And second is the new postion where it stops againist the object? Yes, and Yes.

I would normally say that your shift linkage is malajusted... BUt there is no "shift linkage" anymore the shifter detents are malajusted or to much backlash/slop with the switch contacts that tell the ECU which gear you wish to be in. Something struck/hit the gearshift at the time of the accident?

Sure sign of burning/leaking intake valve(s), you need a valve job.

For some reason I have noticed that factory supplied tires are now getting quite noisy at ~8000 miles plus. My answer has been to buy a good quality undercoating in spray cans, steam or pressure wash the interior wheel well and then apply about three even coats of the undercoat waiting each time until the previous coat dries thoroughly. When you replace the tires give good consideration to bridgestone turanza summer only tires.

Pictures can't tell but my transaxle has some sort of tarry looking factory coating, looks like a sort of undercoating, I was told is was to aid in heat dispersion, radiating outward from the gearbox/diff'l.

The secret to the use of the earlier TC systems was to leave it on so it can "tell" you when the roadbed has no "sticktion" and then immdiately turn it off and do your own feathering of the throttle to accelerate while avoiding wheelspin/slip. The problem with my 92 LS is that it would INSTANTLY dethrottle the engine down to ZIP along with applying braking and then take several seconds to return throttle control to me. I noticed on a 2000 GS300 that I had that the dethrottling was delayed several hundred milliseconds to give the driver a chance to quickly feather the throttle. As a general I learned to religiously turn off TC when I started the car each time. If you don't already know how to drive, handle, a fairly powerful and heavy RWD vehicle in those conditions the LS is not for you.

"...let someone else do it....." Someone else...you can trust... That's why I do my own. "...pleasantly surprised...." "...so much pad material left..." Assuming normal useage and the "implied" mileage that would be strong cause for worry for me. Maybe I've said this too many times but I want brake pads that EAT rotors for lunch and vice versa. Braking HP means friction, lots of FRICTION.

In '92 heated seats and trac were a combined option.

Even if there is a fuel saving benefit, which I sincerely doubt, even at $4 it could NEVER be enough to pay back the "upgrade" cost.

Even if there is a fuel benefit, which I sincerely doubt, it could NEVER be enough to pay back the "upgrade" cost.

The only functionality the early Trac systems can or will provide is a warning of slippery roadbed conditions of which the driver may otherwise be unaware. In my 92 LS I quickly learned to always disable it, religiously turn it off each time I started the LS. On the other hand it may have failed ('91, miles??) and some "wise" dealer removed the Trac diagnostic icon bulb so you wouldn't know, notice.

It might be even nicer to have a way to disable the "electrics" entirely when on the freeway driving along at a reasonably constant speed.