wwest

There are three c-best options of which you will likely have an interest. 1. an option exists to disable the operation of the A/C compressor indefinitely just by turning it off once. It will only run again in automatic mode if you turn it back on. 2. An option exists wherein the A/C can be unlinked from operating automatically, with no indication to you, in defrost/defog/demist mode. 3. An option exists that will prevent the system from automatically switching from heating, airflow primarily from footwell outlets, to cooling, dash airflow. Now only would cooling airflow be discomforting on a COLD winter day but in cooling mode no airflow goes to the windshield to keep it warmed and hopefully above dewpoint. Google for wwest and demist for even more information.

My guess would be that your dad would perfer an LS a lot more than an SC with only two doors. As a matter of fact my bet would be that an SC is YOUR choice, not his.

The VSC just helps you have better control of the car in the snow. However, if you get in a position where you are stuck, you have to cut off the VSC because it wont allow you to spin your wheels fast enough to get out of it. There is also a snow switch by the gear shift, but I don't use it because all it does is make it harder for you to press the throttle, which would probably be excellent if you don't have VSC or for a female driver. No offense ladies. You're confusing VSC with TC, Traction Control. VSC will only activate with over-stearing or understearing. TC will activate anytime there is wheelspin/slip as a result of engine torque. I could've swore the VSC and TC work together with each other. When you try spinning your wheels in the snow the TC won't allow it, right. But when you hit the VSC button to turn off the VSC, voila, you can spin in a circle in snow. There is no TC button on my LS so these two do work together for assisting control. But thanks for the insight. I prefer the Lexus VSC. My 95 Mercury Cougar had just traction control and would get stuck in the snow and automatically shut off the traction control. I hated that. You can turn off VSC...?? One of the new '08 models has a single button wherein the first depression turns off TC and a second LONG depression will turn off VSC. But other than that I have never heard of a Toyota or Lexus with a VSC disable function. FWD is "better" only with regards the fact that the front weight bias results in more traction for getting the vehicle in motion initially on ice or packed snow. Otherwise everything about FWD represents a DANGER on those same surfaces as opposed to RWD.

Well, you're wrong, and luckily not DEAD wrong. "B" mode most definitely enables engine braking. Engine braking on a FWD vehicle on slippery LEVEL roadbed can be faught with hazards. But on a downhill slippery slope, run, you are damn lucky you didn't lose control on one of those downhill turns. Granted, "B" mode is to be used to prevent the friction brakes from being overheated and fading in almost EXACTLY the circumstance you describe. The exception is NOT on a downhill SLIPPERY roadbed! In that case it would probably be best to use the e-brake judisously, lightly, to provide the light REAR braking you need to keep your downhill speed within reason. Advice from someone having accrued THOUSANDS of miles in MT winters. And by the way, that BMW-7 was RWD, a totally different animal on the downhill side of a snowy/icy mountain pass. All he has to do is lift the throttle slightly to attain light rear braking and "pull" the car back into "line" should it begin to wonder. And even better if it had a manual transmission. Golden rule, never follow a "LION" into its natural habitat. Oh, and one more thing. Those "rigs" were most likely stopping at the top to remove the chains from the tractor, driving, wheels where they would be inherently unsafe, but for an even improved safety factor leave them on the rearmost axle of the trailer to provide "drag" braking on the downhill side, just as you might wish to do with the e-brake. I followed the 7-series, a RWD vehicle, same as my BMW 528i and Z3, thru the hole he found between the rigs. From my vantage point, I couldnt see there was a clear path between the trucks. Tho my RX-400h is labeled AWD, it has Michelin all season tires, or more accurately, NO SEASON tires. I had no intention of trying to keep up with the 7-series, who prob had real snows on and knew how to drive in those conditions, as I didnt see his car in the ditch or piled up on the guardrail. I've only put a couple 1000 miles on my RX400h and am still figuring out what's what. I crawled along (in retrospect, my speeds were 1-5-10 mph thru the worst of the storm, and gradually increased as conditions improved). After I got past the stopped big rigs, I stayed in "B" till the road surfaces improved. I didn't see anyone on the top of the pass mounting chains, but it was apparent they weren't going anywhere without them. In a mile or two, the snow stopped falling, and the road surfaces were getting better. I was white knucked, going slow -- and taking hands off the wheel to do e-braking is out of my skill set. I'll give the e-brake technique a try when I find a nice safe slick place to play with it. On my '01 RX the e-brake would latch into a braking position once applied, until I removed the latching mechanism that is.

Actually I have overhead salespersons tell customers that "B" mode stands for battery and it increases the hybrid battery recharge rate. In the few cases I have stepped in and challenged this statement there was one time that the salesman called a service technician who verified the salesman's statement to be true. Page 414, left column of the 2006 RX400h drivers manual... "{B} Using engine braking. (picture) To use engine braking intentionally, downshift the transmission to "B" position and take your foot off the accelerator pedal. During high speed driving you may feel that engine braking is less effective than that of an ordinary vehicle. Do not continue normal driving with the transmission in "B" for a long time. This may cause decreased fuel economy." While not exactly explicit the last sentence clearly implies that the use of "B" mode will degrade the ability to use regenerative braking for recovering energy.

You won't be able to convince rlpiv that's true because he didn't have to drive backwards in his non-hybrid ... and in his/her mind that means it must be the car. Prius owners make the same "no it isn't yes it is" a problem comments. For those who haven't tried mongo snow tires, they'll never know. We drive Mt snow / ice / hilly terrain and the snow / stud tires make all the difference. "...You won't be able to convince..." I dunno, not too sure. Driving backwards very significantly reduces the level of HP/Torque available and would have made it much easier, a whole LOT easier IMMHO, to "feather" the throttle to simulate a snow mode type driveline.

Well, you're wrong, and luckily not DEAD wrong. "B" mode most definitely enables engine braking. Engine braking on a FWD vehicle on slippery LEVEL roadbed can be faught with hazards. But on a downhill slippery slope, run, you are damn lucky you didn't lose control on one of those downhill turns. Granted, "B" mode is to be used to prevent the friction brakes from being overheated and fading in almost EXACTLY the circumstance you describe. The exception is NOT on a downhill SLIPPERY roadbed! In that case it would probably be best to use the e-brake judisously, lightly, to provide the light REAR braking you need to keep your downhill speed within reason. Advice from someone having accrued THOUSANDS of miles in MT winters. And by the way, that BMW-7 was RWD, a totally different animal on the downhill side of a snowy/icy mountain pass. All he has to do is lift the throttle slightly to attain light rear braking and "pull" the car back into "line" should it begin to wonder. And even better if it had a manual transmission. Golden rule, never follow a "LION" into its natural habitat. Oh, and one more thing. Those "rigs" were most likely stopping at the top to remove the chains from the tractor, driving, wheels where they would be inherently unsafe, but for an even improved safety factor leave them on the rearmost axle of the trailer to provide "drag" braking on the downhill side, just as you might wish to do with the e-brake.

For those of you north of the snow line the AWD RX350 has a VC for "soft" locking of the rear driveline into the drive system. For some unknow(n,able) reason the VC was dropped for the entire RX330 product series and therefore it relies on ONLY the TC braking capability for maintaining engine torque at a "high" level therefore a substantial level of torque for allocation to the rear.

"...I don't believe our cars came...." Don't be too sure about that, "non-tangiable" running changes to software/firmware, say TC, can be non-obvious except in certain circumstances. Given the industry's seeming current attention to the hidden hazards of FWD vehicles I wouldn't be surprised if running changes have been made to TC in order to reduce those hazards somewhat.

Your 99 doesn't have TC nor VSC, but probably does have a rear mechanical LSD. So yes, YOU were probably more "in control" of the 99 than of the RXh with VDIM, etc. Maybe the '08 RXh will also have the ability to disable TC and VSC, although I really don't see a need for disabling VSC.

=================================================================== Gosh …. There are a few comments above that I must respond to. Foremost, I DID NOT HAVE A TRACTION PROBLEM so TIRES ARE NOT AN ISSUE !! 1. My problem with the '07 RX400h-AWD was not traction (static or dynamic friction) of the new factory tires to the snow surface. Remember that I could back up the driveway (all electric) but it just wouldn't go up frontward (multiple demonstrations each) in an inch of snow that became packed. My problem was that a combination of VSC, TRAC & VDIM was totally constricting the engine power to the front wheels (engine and MG2) and electric power to the MGR. It would not apply enough power to break the static friction of the tires to the snowy surface at a very low speed. 2. As stated in my initial writing, my new '07 RX350-AWD is awesome, as was my '02 RX300-AWD. These vehicles meet my entire expectation of AWD and will accept increasing ("feathered") engine power to all drive wheels until ALL FOUR tires break static friction on a snowy / icy surface. I couldn't ask for a better AWD performance … and if I needed more TRACTION, I know that I could (and would) move to a Snow Tire. 3. NET: The RX350 will climb my snowy driveway without any wheel spin but the RX400h just stopped due to an uncontrollable restriction of engine and electric to the drive wheels. I was, and am, really very disappointed that the RX400h-AWD cannot yet meet an AWD performance expectation easily demonstrated by the other RX models. Ron Pierson "..It would not apply enough power to break the static friction of the tires to the snowy surface at a very low speed.." If that statement is true then some real majic was going on. Since TC has no method of determining that the surface is slippery "beforehand" then TC will NOT apply "traction" braking unless wheelslip/spin has already been detected using the 4 ABS wheelspeed sensors as "cross" references. Since power is applied only to the front on initial gas pedal depression it will almost always be the front wheel(s) that develop wheelspin/slip should the surface be slippery enough. Another shortcoming of this technique is not so obvious. Even if only one of the front wheels slips then BOTH will be braked by the traction control system. To do otherwise might result in the stearing wheel being yanked from the driver's hands (can you say "broken thumbs??) with the resulting extreme torque stear. I notice the new RAV4 has an "auto LSD" function (enables differential traction braking at the front) that can be activated in these instances but with the appropreate "broken thumbs" caution note in the owners manual. And yes, because there is no mechanical coupling to the rear for use of braking to maintain a high torque level AND apportion it to the rear engine dethrottling will be absolutely simultaneous with traction braking, just as with the FWD only version of the RX or RXh. So, why did your RX400h develop enough wheelspin/slip so as to dethrottle the engine(s)...?? Not enough "static" traction between the tire tread and the packed snow or icy surface...!!!!! Had the aforementioned event happened to me my first reaction would have been to get out and put the rear tire chains on. Were I to own an RX400h I guess that would mean installing all four tire chains as I consider tire chains only on the front to be a patently UNSAFE practice. Is it possible that the RX400h has such an abundance of TORQUE (in SPADES!) at initial startup that it becomes impossible to feather the throttle to a low enough level so as to not develop wheelspin at initial startup on a slightly slippery surface? Might that abundance of TORQUE have been the real problem you encountered? Does the RXh not have a SNOW mode..? ----------- Later thoughts... I wonder... Does the RXh have so much low end startup torque that TC must be very, SUPER, quick acting? Traction braking and engine dethrottling the very instant even the slightest level of wheelspin/slip occurs? I know that my 2001's VSC has activated even though my "seat of the pants" sensor never even detected an "out of whack" circumstance. It was only in retrospect, looking back at the circumstances, fast/tight turn and a water puddle, that I came to realize why VSC had activated. Is that what happened here, your RXh had such a quick and brief, brief due to TC, instance(s) of wheelspin/slip that you thought there was no cause for TC's activation?

I had the problem and it was not the taillights. In fact i have all the original taillights. It's far easier to look at the lights instead of switching them out If the brakes lights do not work, or if you have upgraded to LED lamps, the cruise control will not work. When you step on the brakes the cruise control detects the brake light voltage and terminates operation. There is a "failsafe" bleeder resistor in the brake light circuit that always supplies a "keep-alive" voltage (current actually) to the brake lights and if there is no bulb filament to keep the voltage from this fairly low the cruise control will think the brakes are always applied. LED lamps are diodes and therefore ALWAYS drop a minimum voltage, sometimes as much as 1.6 volts and that will also prevent the cruise control from engaging.

Sorry, but some bad news. Your RX350 has basically the same VSC/Trac..VDIM system as does the RXh. The only real difference is that since the RXh has no mechanical coupling to the rear drive the RXh has the 2WD/FWD version of TC. And your problem was actually with TC, Traction Control, the portion of VDIM that prevents wheelspin/slip by moderately braking the slipping wheel(s) in order to sustain a high level of engine torque for apportioning to the wheel(s) with traction. The engine dethrottling is to prevent the brake rotors from overheating due to the need for continual braking otherwise and eventual rotor warpage. The only advantage the RX350 might have is the VC, Viscous Clutch, used to apportion a higher level of engine torque to the rear with semi-continuous slippage at the front. I think you may very well have traded one "pig in a poke" for yet another "pig in a poke". None of these vehicles, RX, HL, Sienna, should be advertised as AWD. The only front drive "host" based AWD system that I know of that works is the Acura/Honda SH-AWD system. And I would say the RXh actually comes in second to SH-AWD. As of 2008 the RX350 is getting an off button for TC and VSC. One push turns off TC and a second long depression turns VSC off. In the meantime you might want to practice feathering the throttle yourself, just lightly on the throttle, just enough for a little front wheelspin/slip to give the VC time to heat up and "lock" the rear wheels into driven mode. That's the way it seems to work best on my 2001 AWD RX300.

Actually, if done correctly I believe it can work. The problem is that the MAF/IAT module sensors are (re)calibrated while/whenever the engine idles for an extended period. The engine control ECU uses the upstream oxygen sensor to adjust the A/F mixture to optimal (only insofar as emissions are concerned), ignoring the MAF/IAT sensor signal entirely, then records the operational parameters of these two sensors. When the engine is accelerating under load the mixture is typically enriched to ~12:1 resulting in the oxygen sensor output signal being "off-scale", out of range, for contributing any usefull information. So ONLY the MAF/IAT sensors are relied upon for running an enriched mixture, ~12:1, for acceleration under load. If "this" IAT signal's modifying resistor is out of the circuit anytime the engine is at or near idle and then ONLY switched into the circuit upon an opening or open throttle then the engine ECU will be "fooled" into thinking the incoming intake airflow is COLDER than reality and thus the mixture might run as high as 10:1. 20% more fuel at WOT and peak torque RPM would most certainly result in an increase in peak HP. The only detriment might be early catalyst failure with lots, an inordinant level, of lead-footing.

Done.. Although I'm not a moderator.

Not to be too much of a wet blanket but those brighter fog lights will result in your having less distance vision at night on low beams. Fog lights are aimed low and wide, below the low beams and so their "close in", CLOSER-IN, brightness will cause your eyes to close up more than with just the low beams. The effect is a lot like having the dash in front of you lit up from the courtesy/map light. Impressive, potentially blinding, actually, to oncoming traffic but raises the possibility of your being 6 feet under sooner than otherwise. A more creative use of your time, and a lot less money, would have been to revise the fog light circuit such that they can be used alone without the low beams to interfere when you actually encounter foggy conditions. Hmm, you sure make alot of @SSumptions without having experienced it, and my only concern is your lack of knowledge on the matter as you are trying to relay information that is completely inaccurate. Unfortunately some may read your "opinion" and base what you are saying as fact. The focal point has not changed, thanks to the quality and type of fog light projector. Therefore the fog lights do not interfer with the main headlamps... why would they? LMAO. Fog Lights are designed for the intended purpose to focus light wide and low, and not reflect back the "moisture" particles (i.e. snow, fog, rain) back into the drivers eyes. HENCE, the fog lights do just that, only much, MUCH Better in that they light up the part of the road due to inclement weather BETTER. No oncoming drivers are blinded because the fog light projectors are designed like the same pencil width aspect of the driving lights. Hence, there is no spurious light, much the way when a fellow enthusiats tries to take a conversion kit for a Halogen setup headlamp and stuff HID intensity bulbs and candescent power. Then yes, in this case one would blind oncoming traffic because the headlamp cannot focus the massive quantity of improperly focused HID light. Wrong again, buddy. Not to throw a wet towel again on another wrong assumption. The effect has nothing to do with driving with the console / dash lights at full intensity. Saying that is liking to saying that one should drive with all there lights off since one's intensity to light increases due to a lack of exposure to light. I would imagine one should drive using the "Force", eh LukeSkywalker? Modifying the driving lights to remain off while the fog lights on would be a benefit is some cases, yes, in inclement weather (fog, snow). But would be totally useless when needing additional light such as when driving in pitch black, and in remote rural areas. In that case you would definitely take advantage of much better driving conditions and hence you would see more of the road. Your analogy is really shortsighted, pardon the pun. Too bad you cannot see for yourself how wonderfully successful this mod happens to work out for the RX 400H. By the way, this is not my 1st, 2nd, nor 3rd attempt at improving or implementing «HID» conversions. Cheers, MadloR First, would you agree or disagree that the brighter your field of view is the more the iris in your eyes closes up? If you disagree, fine. But if you agree you are acknowledging the correctness of my statement/position. The brighter the foreground is the poorer your distance vision will be at night.

Given that women live longer and for numerous other reasons thereby control 70% of the funds available in the US...... Of course...!

The VSC just helps you have better control of the car in the snow. However, if you get in a position where you are stuck, you have to cut off the VSC because it wont allow you to spin your wheels fast enough to get out of it. There is also a snow switch by the gear shift, but I don't use it because all it does is make it harder for you to press the throttle, which would probably be excellent if you don't have VSC or for a female driver. No offense ladies. You're confusing VSC with TC, Traction Control. VSC will only activate with over-stearing or understearing. TC will activate anytime there is wheelspin/slip as a result of engine torque.

Not to be too much of a wet blanket but those brighter fog lights will result in your having less distance vision at night on low beams. Fog lights are aimed low and wide, below the low beams and so their "close in", CLOSER-IN, brightness will cause your eyes to close up more than with just the low beams. The effect is a lot like having the dash in front of you lit up from the courtesy/map light. Impressive, potentially blinding, actually, to oncoming traffic but raises the possibility of your being 6 feet under sooner than otherwise. A more creative use of your time, and a lot less money, would have been to revise the fog light circuit such that they can be used alone without the low beams to interfere when you actually encounter foggy conditions.

The primary purpose of the MAF/IAT, Mass Air Flow and Intake Air Temperature, combined module is to control the enriched mixture level that is typically used above idle, and especially at or near WOT. The "upstream" exhaust oxygen sensor is used to control the mixture at idle but with the mixture enriched above idle and outside the range of the oxygen sensor the MAF/IAT is used. At idle the MAF/IAT and oxygen sensors are cross-checked against each other, but the oxygen sensor signal RULES at idle. Go back and plug the MAF/IAT sensor in while the battery is disconnected, wait ~5 minutes and then reconnect the battery and the engine should now start and run.

Due to poor, TIGHT, tire/suspension clearance in the rear (the reason you can only use tire chains on the front) you will likely need wheel spacers to go to wider tread. I added 1.5" wheel spacers and upgraded to 17X8 wheels all around on mine. Now instead of the patently unsafe method of using tire chains only on the front I put them on the rear first and then add the fronts if it becomes necessary. Also, I run on summer only Bridgestone turanzas all year around due to their comfort and quietness. Use the tire chains for the low traction exceptions.

Bad news, REALLY BAD NEWS, it's very likely you have a BLOWN head gasket. IN that case the coolant wasn't boiling, what you saw was more likely bubbles of exhaust gas resulting from the power stroke forcing gas into the coolant chambers of the engine which in turn pressurized the radiator. Sorry.

The carburator is GONE...! With the advent of Fuel injection and knock sensors the need for premium fuel is basically obsolete. If the engine tends to knock or ping the mixture is simply enriched slightly, enough to prevent it. Except for knock/ping due to lugging the engine with a manual transmission. well, technically that's not true. The knock loop retards the ignition timing in steps, and it does not touch fueling. and it should also be noted, that except for pure race bread OEM engine management systems (see Bosch's), or aftermarket EMS. knock sensor loops only operate at a relatively small, high rpm range. Normally it would be 3500rpm'ish to 5500rpm'ish. Anytime you're not in that rpm range, the loop is not active. (which is also why most engines can still be made to ping at part throttle accelleration under certain circumstances. the knock loop is simply not active at that point) but yeah, premium fuel is still needed on some engines, but you can get away with it now-a-days without any damage inccured. I wouldn't want to run a newer engine rated for 91octane on 87 for it's entire life, but the occational tankfuls in a row of a lower octane are not going to give any particularly wear to the engine. over time, there would be some pitting on the piston face if you were pinging during the process, but that's obvious. :) Long, LONG, ago, when carburators ruled, A/F mixtures were FIXED, absent changing the jets, so the only avenue for preventing engine knock due to pre-detonation was to !Removed! the timing. But with the advent of electronic fuel injection that all changed. When I took factory delivery of my 2001 Porsche C4 the factory rep explained to me that in my travels throughout europe I had to be certain I did not inadvertently fuel the car with LEADED gas, otherwise the on board computer would "handle" most any octane level I would be likely to find during my travels. I asked how can that work and he explained that for quite a number of years, for most marques with SFI the engine ECU had been tuned to adjust the mixture first, not timing, to prevent engine ping. And why not...? And by the by, pre-detonation is not always due to too early ignition, especially in high compression engines that normally require premium fuel grades, it is more often due to dieseling, in this case a result of a too lean mixture or a too low fuel grade. The solution? enich the mixture.

The carburator is GONE...! With the advent of Fuel injection and knock sensors the need for premium fuel is basically obsolete. If the engine tends to knock or ping the mixture is simply enriched slightly, enough to prevent it. Except for knock/ping due to lugging the engine with a manual transmission.

Why "MUST" they be hooked up in parallel? I just put a resistor in line(series), and it always worked fine. Lets say the old bulb drew 1.3 amps at 12 volts and the new 168 draws only 0.3 amps (I'm guessing). In order for the turn signal flasher relay to work properly the resistor must draw an additional 1.0 amps and you can't increase current draw by adding resistance in series, only in parallel with the 168 bulb.