SW17LS

The lack of a full time system is the only reason I wouldn't purchase a Sequoia. My wife would never put it in 4WD, so essentially she'd be driving around a RWD vehicle all the time.

bigbwb

This is exactly my reason as well....the wife would be confused on when or when not to engage 4wd. Such a huge oversight IMHO.

TangoRed

Same situation. I'd gladly line up to buy one if there was a full-time system.

SW17LS

Hopefully Toyota reads this!

Motorola

Not everyone wants a body on frame truck with a fixed rear axle. The third row in the Seqouia takes a pretty massive space penalty because of this.

1111GS

Hopefully one day Lexus will put out a car like 4GS that can compete German's. This TX has been surfacing since.. before I got my GX. Lol. Seeing what they did with the LX, I can't see anything coming that can compete German's SUVs. IMO they target totally different groups.

Toys4RJill

The first and second generations of the Highlander and Lexus RX were full time awd. Always on. Much more special than the on demand systems.

geko29

This is technically true, but immaterial where actual driving is concerned. When all tires have equal grip, the first and second gen RX send 95% of power to the front wheels, and 5% to the rear. For the first generation, there was a viscous coupling capable of sending up to 25% of power rearward under perfect conditions. For the second generation, this was replaced with brake-based torque distribution controlled by the DSC system, which can get to approximately 50:50 by applying significant braking force to the front wheels--essentially an on-demand system. This is the reason that there is no "DSC Off" button on the AWD models, even though it is present on the FWD ones. It would have to be re-labeled "AWD Off"

If you compare this system to what was available at that same time from companies like Audi, Acura, BMW, Mercedes, Infiniti--or even non-luxury brands like Subaru and Mitsubishi--those all actually feel like they're AWD when you're driving them. The RX (which I owned for 12 years) almost never feels like anything other than than FWD Camry that it very nearly is.

Toys4RJill

There is definitely a way to turn off traction and DSC in a awd HL from that generation. At 5:10 you see the button. Both of my SUVs lack a traction/VSC button.


This really makes no sense. No possible way to turn off a full time awd system.

geko29

It was added right at the end of the 2nd generation, and at the same time added an "AWD Lock" button which forced the VSC to intervene to the maximum extent possible. But for the 2RX, only FWD models had the TC/VSC off button until at least 2008. Trust me, my 2007 did NOT have it. There was a blank where it should have been. Here is an excerpt from the manual (emphasis mine):

This is pedantry. Yes a completely immaterial fraction of engine torque is directed to the rear at all times, even without the VSC applying the brakes to the front wheels. On my RX350, at max engine output approximately twelve (12) lbft of torque went to the rear wheels absent any intervention from the VSC. The other 239 lbft went to the front wheels. So I stand by my statement that disabling the VSC system would have an effect not markedly different than fully disabling AWD. Again, if you want to split hairs, it is AWD all the time. But not in any way that actually matters once you leave the spec sheet and get into the driver's seat.

Back in the day, someone on here did an experiment where they stuck 1x2s through the spokes of both rear wheels of their RX while it was on a lift. With the transmission in drive, they had to rev the engine past 2500 rpm before even a slight creaking was heard from the rear drive applying pressure to the wood, front tires spinning happily the entire time. When they repeated the experiment with the front wheels similarly blocked, simply touching the accelerator pedal caused the 1x2s to shatter instantly.

Toys4RJill

Toyota listed “cut off” switch right in the brochure for the 2nd gen.

geko29

I didn't own a Highlander, and we are talking about the RX. But since you continue to press the issue, here is one of my posts from thirteen years ago:

Again, none of this changes the theory of operation of the RX's AWD system. It is 95:5 by default, and if the VSC system applies significant enough braking force to the front wheels, can shift to as much as 75:25. That is pathetic compared to pretty much any other AWD system available at the time. Audi was 50:50 by default, BMW was 40:60, Acura was 70:30. Literally no one (at the time, and perhaps in all of history) made a "full-time AWD" system that was so limited in how much power could be directed to the non-primary axle.

To put an alternate spin on it, my snowblower (a 24" Ariens) generates 25% more torque than my RX was capable of sending to the rear axle without manipulation by the braking system.

Toys4RJill

Here is the press release for the 2007 Lexus RX 350 awd. You said you had a 2007

https://www.clublexus.com/forums/car...s-release.html

The way you described it with 95;5 but VSC doing all the power transfers seems at odds with what Toyota used to do. But you are right.

for what it’s worth…I don’t have have any traction or VSC OFF button on either of my SUVs.

stlgrym3

iTrader: (4)

pretty sure it'll be a Lexus version of the current Highlander? i doubt Lexus R&D a new platform and powertrain for the TX. maybe offered with a plug-in hybrid trim and the 2.4T from the new NX lineup.

peteharvey

Wow, rumors that forthcoming high riding Crown SUV will be 3 row and V6 powered hybrid with RWD-based AWD.

Lexus TX the upmarket version.