wwest

Sorry if I'm bursting someone's balloon but IMMHO the burned and "dark", contaminated ATF plus lack of metalic particles in the sump is indicative of clutch frictional surface wear. As is Toyota/Lexus "protect the drive train" solution, DBW to enforce engine acceleration delays during shifting.

My wife backed ours into a tree and I bought a complete set although only the passenger side "outside" was cracked, and not badly at that, still serviceable. Make an offer for the three good ones and I'll "gift" you the damaged one.

Just recently started noticing complaints of engine/transaxle(??) delay/hesitation symptom on Lexus GS300 forum threads, seemingly, at this moment, only the 2006 AWD version. Up until now I have thought this problem only occurred on FWD based Toyota/Lexus vehicles. At first I thought the AWD GS300 might be transaxle based but it is not.

Every "circuit", electrical or otherwise, needs an input and an output..... Bottom line.... it doesn't matter which one you "interrupt". But I wouldn't put the ATF cooler in front of the radiator and A/C condensor assembly where it will add additional heat to the "stack". Put the new ATF cooler, like the factory one, in the right front fender well, maybe with a 12 volt fan powered by a thermostatic switch. But the factory one in my 2001 AWD RX300 doesn't seem to have helped.

Put a drop of water on a glass table top and watch how long it takes to evaporate.. Now, squeegee another one of equal size "flat", into a thin film, and notice that it evaporates a whole lt quicker.

I disabled my DRLs..... The factory ones anyway. Wired a relay into the DRL circuit (dramatically lowers the DRL current flowing in the high beam bulbs) and used the relay contacts to energize the street/parking light circuit, lights front and rear. Used 1 watt Luxeon Leds with collimator lense in both headlamp assemblies to replace factory DRL effect.

Its true , once something has failed you its going to be tainted permanently in your mind. As for being a "girlie" car I'd say the RX is pretty neutral. It certainly isn't particularly "macho" but then again, the average Lexus owner is a bit more sophisticated than the average Pick-Up driver. Are you saying my NRA sticker is spoiling my RX image? I sure don't want my neighbors to look upon me as unsophisticated. No, it was the gun rack that was a dead giveaway...

Only problem is.... When did the Highlander first arrive in the marketplace...??

Use your imagination, the foot pedal is connected to the cable and the cable is connected to the rear brakes.

The Scheduled Maintenance Guide of Toyotas sold in America since about the mid-80's dscribes only the minimum service frequency intervals necessary to keep the new car powertrain warranty in effect, not the optimum intervals for really long component life. Ditto in regard to the note found on the RX, ES, LS, etc transmission fluid dipstick that says "Fluid does not require changing under normal driving conditions." The first scheduled automatic transmission service is at 30,000 miles at which time both the fluid level and condition must be checked and the fluid in the pan changed if it is visibly deteriorated. Same thing at 60,000 miles. In the vast majority of cases, this minimum amount of transmission maintenance will get a RX transmission over the 6 year / 70,000 mile powertrain warranty hurdle, hence from corporate Lexus's standpoint, the transmission is not defectively designed. Corporate Lexus does not have a "newly required 15,000 mile interval". That's simply a dealer suggestion. However, corporate Lexus DOES SAY, in the new car service booklet that "your dealer may suggest more maintenance services or more frequent maintenance." I think the 15,000 mile dealer suggestion is made in the spirit of helping RX owners obtain much longer transmission life than 6 years / 70,000 miles. I don't think it is made in the sprit of helping the dealer avoid a transmission warranty repair within the 6 year / 70,000 mile period. Virtually all car makers have a pretty much standardized maintenance schedule despite the reality that fluids and lubes and internally lubricated parts inside different transmissions deteriorate at different rates. NOT!! When my ATF started showing contamination and smelling burned at only 38,000 miles I immediately fired off an email to Lexus customer satisfaction inquiries. I recieved an immediate response indicating that I should contact my dealer for updated advice on servicing my transaxle. My immediate email response to that was " Yes, like I"m going to let the fox into the hen house". In return I was advised that the 15,000 mile flush and refill recommeded by the dealer was on the advice of corporate. Insofar as I am aware my mother raised no idiots and if GW is a relative he's a very distant one.

RX in NC, I agree with Bluestu when he wrote: "It's not a design flaw, but a service flaw. Just because it says Lexus, made by Toyota, doesn't mean it is maintenance free. Most transmissions will fail if you don't replace all the fluid on a regular basis." Also, I suggest you check the owners manuals of some American cars of the 1960's that had legendary reputations for durability. Example: 1965 Chevy Impala owners manual: "Drain and refill the Powerglide transmission fluid every 12,000 miles." Impala owners who obeyed those instructions obtained 250,000 + miles of troublefree automatic transmission service. In the late 60's and early 1970's Toyota owners manuals read as follows: "change automatic transmission fluid, manual transmission, differential gear oil and repack front wheel bearing grease every 24 months or 18,000 miles" "Change brake fluid every 12 months or 12,000 miles" In those days corporate Toyota recommended short (frequent) service intervals because they were best for maximum component durability. By the mid- 70's corporate Toyota started extending service intervals because they realized American consumers wrongly associate short (frequent) service intervals with weak mechanical designs. In other countries like Australia and Brazil where customers are less inclined to associate short (frequent) service intervals with weak mechanical designs, Toyota still recommends shorter (more frequent) service intervals than in the USA. Okay, just how do you address the obvious conflict between what the owners manual, written by and under the guidance of the factory engineering team, states vs the newly required 15,000 mile interval?? Absent an initial design flaw, how do you get from "no service required" to 10 ATF flush and drain actions in 150,000 miles? A typo in the manual, maybe...?? I drove two Ford full size Station wagons, a 68 and a 72, well over 200,000 miles each. The only ATF I bought was when I rebuilt the transmissions, the 68 at about 125,000 miles and the 72 closer to 150,000 miles.

I completely disagree with this statement. The dealer isn't going to do anything without Lexus corporate being behind it. The assistance will ultimately be given by the dealer, but they will be reimbursed by corporate. But there is "middle ground" however... If you have a long and steller reputation with one specific dealer, purchased a number of vehicles and always used them for service, that dealer is much more likely to go to bat for you than anyone at corporate. I have seen, experienced, dealers finding creative ways to get corporate to pay for things they didn't know they were paying for. Sorry for the redundent post.... But do keep in mind that most dealers would recommend ATF drain and flush at 10,000 miles if they thought it would "fly". Personally mine will not get changed out again until I again see or smell some indication of ATF degradation. But you better believe that I will be very watchful here-to-fore.

How often have you upshifted a manual transmission, or started out in too high a gear, to the point where there wasn't enough torque delivered to the drive wheels to move the vehicle so the clutch slipped...?? IMMHO that is exactly what is happening with the 99-2003 RX transaxles. The FIX that was instituted was the adoption of DBW in 2004 and beyond. Lexus even admits that DBW was adopted to "protect the drivetrain". In my 2001 if I pay carefull attention, I can "feel" the upshift (or maybe into neutral..??) as I slow with brakes applied prior to coming to a full stop. Feeling as if bumped slightly from behind. There ia also the feeling of the "slingshot" effect if I fully release the accelerator pedal at 35-45 MPH and the transaxle upshifts. It is not simple coincidence that these are the most common circumstances wherein owners of Toyota/Lexus vehicles with DBW complain of engine/transaxle delay/hesitation symptoms. In both instances if the driver suddenly decides to GO, rather than coming to a full stop or continuing to coast down, the transaxle is suddenly caught in the wrong, too high, gear ratio. For 99-2003 that means lots of clutch slippage for maybe tens of milliseconds until the downshift clutches fully and firmly seat. For 2004 and later it means a delay of engine torque development until the downshift clutches can fully and firmly seat. The ATF contamination isn't the base cause of transaxle failure, it is the result of undue HEAVY wear of the clutch frictional surfaces due to slippage beyond the original design parameters. Obviously it will help extend the working life of the transaxle if you keep the ATF more pristine. Basically you're asking how long will the clutch surface last in my 2001 Porsche C4... In my case probably over 100,000 miles... But for the majority of Porsche owners.....WILDCARD!

Just adjust, tighten, the steel pull cable underneath the car.

I rather doubt that there is anything you can do to prevent your tramsaxle from failing "prematurely". Changing the ATF will undoubtedly help, but only delay the inevitable.

In your "real world" just how many 2001-2003 RX300's do you suppose have upwards of 75,000 miles on the odometer...? And keep in mind that in the RX300 owner "class" there would typically be more than one answer to "so, what do I drive today..?" My 2001 was purchased early in the model year, is driven to/from work virtually every work day, a few trips to central MT and back, and still with only ~60,000 miles. There wasn't any noticeable ATF contamination until about 38,000 miles and took two drain and refills to clear up.

No, lets say, assume, that during the design phase the transaxle clutches, etc, were designed to go ~150,000 miles before worse case non-rough use failure due to clutch frictional surface wear. The aggressive shift logic white paper was published in 1999 so there is some reason to suspect these methods were adopted for the early RXes after the mechanical design was completed. A 9.8% improvement in FE is something no company can ignore. So, to the "numbers"... It seems pretty clear to me that the relatively few engine/transaxle hesitation complaints are arising as a result of the FIX. As you coast down to come to a full stop, brakes applied, the transaxle shifts into neutral. Now you suddenly decide to accelerate but the transaxle isn't in gear, ANY gear! Some call that a California Stop. In "our" RXes (99-03), with a "hardwired" accelerator pedal, the transaxle clutches just have to SUFFER, pop quickly into 1st gear and slip a bit until firmly seated. Whereas after 04 the engine simply doesn't respond to the movement of the accelerator pedal until the transaxle can complete the shiftdown into 1st. Think of what you might do were you driving a stick. As you coastdown for a full stop with the brakes applied you would disengage the clutch and shift down into 1st in preparation for the "go" signal. So, for the 1999-2003 the worse case wear rate has doubled making the transaxle failures ~75,000 miles.

Again... Pure and simple.. These failures are the result of a change in the shifting procedures adopted at the beginning of the RX300 production. There was an estimate that 9.8% fuel economy would result from these changes. 1. Aggressive upshifts: get the vehicle in the highest possible gear ASAP. 2. Eliminate engine compression braking, extend coasting distances, by upshifting upon throttle closure at normal roadspeeds. 3. Make use of the torque converter lockup clutch in gear ratios other than actual O/D. 4. During throttle closed coastdowns with braking below 10 MPH shift into neutral and then only into 1st gear after fully stopped. As one can see these would all add, dramatically in some cases, to the number of shifts involved in a typical city stop and go commute. This "coastdown shift into neutral" has resulted in the "bumped from behind effect" many drivers experience just prior to coming to a full stop. Unexpected upshifting has resulted in many drivers experiencing the "slingshot effect" due to upshifting during throttle closed coastdown at ~35-55 MPH. In 2004 DBW was adopted to "protect the drivetrain": Do not allow the engine to develop torque until these upshifts, and more importantly, DOWNSHIFTS, are fully completed with the clutches fully and firmly seated. IMMHO the RX series premature transaxle failures will continue through and to the 2004 model years.

First, it's spring time.... Remove your battery connections, clean and burnish the posts and the connection surfaces, interior of connection, reinstall an drive happy. Poor battery connections, just a few measly milli-ohms, will result in the alternation running at a slightly higher voltage than normal and then when the alternator output declines due to engine lower RPM, the battery cannot supply full voltage through the few milli-ohms of resistance.

Highlander came on the scene later....2001 I think. Highlander came on the scene later....2001 I think.

Night or Day......

Sent.............

And keep in mind that since this was a FWD platform with the engine and transaxle mounted sideways there is limited amount of space to put the "beefier" transaxle otherwise required of even a "light" SUV. And now they're talking a six speed transaxle...? Those are going to be really "thin" clutch packs.

Some of us are old enough to remember gas at $0.19 gallon, kerosene at 5 cents.

Ebay, $100. Surfin, I just tried another email but won't be in the office until Monday.