1seeker1

I finally got around to looking at my VIN number in comparison to the new TSIB. Like BMT, I have a 10/06 build. While I note he/she notes his/her 10/06 build VIN number is within the applicable range, my VIN number is after the "Production Change Effective VIN." The VIN listed is:

JTHBJ46G#72064871
mine is
JTHBJ46G#72067___

As previously reported within another thread, my car developed the flare at 900 miles. My flare is not limited to 3/4 cold start first shift, though this is the most common situation. I have had a warm 2/3 flare and even a warm 5/6 flare, as other examples. My car flares randomnly. I can go a number of days without the flare.

In any event, I'm sorry to report that the production change VIN number does not match up with what I have experienced and certainly makes me wonder why they think they have solved the problem. Corporate is aware of my car since I reported the problem and brought it to the dealer in early Jan., before this TSIB came out. I also recall Oshnkt reporting that the transmission change was likely going to effective with either late December or January 07 builds, not October. Using BMT and my VIN numbers as bookends, if the change took place in October sometime, why do we have a TSIB that is dated January 19, 2007 and not one dated in October or November?

ES350Bob

Thanks for letting us know.

I had thought that all this newer TSIB was for was to change from doing the valve body, which was not working as reported by many, to just go straight to transmission change, which sadly is also not working in many cases reported.

wanderer99

1seeker1 - very sorry to hear about your trans.

For those who were around and have knowledge of the 2001 Acura TL transmission debacle, can you advise what and how Acura dealt with that?

The only thing we've seen officially from Toyota\Lexus to date has been TSIBs.... that don't work. Or in this case, a TSIB that gives a VIN cutoff, yet we have a problem car built beyond that date now. I guess we did also have TMSUSA come onto the forum when someone posted about an official recall, and that flushed TMSUSA out into the open.

dunnojack

I just started to notice tiny 2/3 flares on mine.

I don't think people should rush to get a fix on the transmission. Although definitely abnormal, and not even showing up in cheap american cars, it doesn't really affect the drivability. I'll bet toyota will take care of our transmission free of charge for the next 150,000 miles Hint hint, toyota......

ES350Bob

It will affect our trade or resale value and in the meantime at times spook the heck out of us or our passengers, driving circumstance depending.

onsknht

The TSBs will state a VIN cutoff based on the best information at that time... In seeker's case he falls out of the VIN range (after) and still has the flare, what this tells me is that the cutoff attempted to confine the potential costs of the fix. Think about it, they're (Toyota) basically playing a game where they're accepting only chunks of responsibility at a time with hopes new cases take time to surface.... The TSB will soon be revised to include seeker's car.

Next we need to consider before saying the "new replacement trans is not working," that we've yet to see anyone actually have a replacement under the week old TSB.

Finally... Dunnojack is correct that the problem isn't the end all be all of being left stranded while out driving. I bet everyone with the flare will go thousands of miles before anything catastophic occurs (if you don't get rear-ended first) and that's been my basic attitude all along.... I however decided to bail before the used market got wind of the issue and/or had my "new car" mangled and reconditioned by a dealership.

ES350Bob

Ons,

The week old TSIB says nothing about using a specific version of a transmission. It does imply some change taking place in October in the minds at Lexus regarding the transmissions before and after a point in October.

Since 1seek's is hosed up, produced after the implied change if there even was a change, and since we have had quite a few people getting their's replaced long after that point in October it is safe to surmise this TSIB is nothing more than telling dealers to stop wasting time and money by doing the valve body and instead go straight to transmission replacement and those are not working in many cases as recent as this month January per swobro's input here and input elsewhere when doing a google search keying in ES350 Transmission. And we have had several report their's from November and December replacements failed as well, all of these are after some implied change in the transmissions.

Word on these is getting out if BobBass's Toyota contact told him Lexus got all the hosed up transmissions as he shared in BMT's thread.

BobBass

As a point of clarification, when my Toyota salesman made that statement, I had the feeling he was just handing me a "line" that would ease my fears about buying a new Camry with the 6-spd. transmission. Just like the "sometimes it takes 1,000 miles for these transmissions to 'learn' your driving style."

As we all know, many car salesmen will do and say anything to sell you a vehicle. I suspect this was the case with his comment about "Lexus getting all the bad transmissions."

As we can plainly see by one of the videos posted on this site, the Camry is sadly NOT immune to transmission flare(s).

The lesson here is...do your own research and take ANYTHING a salesman says with a grain of salt.

NJLEXES

In response to Wanderer99 from yesterday, I was one of the owners of a 2001 Acura TL during the debacle. My car developed the problem at around 12000 miles. However, in speaking with the dealer at the time (who I was on very good terms with), there was no rhyme or reason as to when the transmissions actually failed. It was seemingly random. At the time, they said they were replacing about 4 transmissions every week! I asked him what was the earliest failure they had seen.... he said he had one outside with 35 miles!

In any case, they replaced the transmission with no complaints.... however I was not convinced that ACURA had fixed the issue permanently and feared it could happen again. At the time, if you fought with ACURA corporate, they would give you an extended warranty on the transmission (100k miles if I recall). However, I did not want to drive a car waiting for the transmission to fail again, so I traded it in on 2002 ES300. Lo and behold, months later ACURA/HONDA gave extended warranties to all owners which even included my cousin who owned an accord with a 4 speed auto trans......

No such failures with the 2002 ES300 trans, but we all know it didn't shift that great (Sluggish). Now I own the 07 ES350 with a little flare at times....
These transmissions are getting more and more complicated. FYI My wifes 2002 4 cyl Camry with the 4 speed auto shifts great ! No flare, no nothing.

dunnojack

I'd rather have a permanent fix rather than an extended warranty. I hope lexus comes up with a failproof trans to swap in. Extending warranties to 100,000 is shirking responsiblity too. Our transmission should be warranted to 250,000 miles considering that even old camrys can reach 200,000 and beyond without replacing the transmission under normal driving conditions.

Is a transmission that complicated? the one in the 1997-2000 V6 camry shifts great too. Why can't toyota make good transmissions anymore.......

1seeker1

Onskhnt,

Are you able to dig some more for us given my post and find out what they supposedly fixed with these new transmissions? Did you ever look into why the new transmission would have the same part number? Or is Bob right and the only thing this was meant to do was to make sure the valve body was no longer part of the repair? It's just not making a lot of sense.

ESsearch

I previously posted that my car has had only three incidents of the flare and none in the last couple of weeks. Regardless, I took it to the dealer this evening to have them check for the issue. I wanted to be on record with a complaint although I do not want them replacing the transaxle at this point. Now here is the intersting part. The service writer claims that they had a tech in for training last week and he told them the fix is an ECU reflash. Lexus was to have the new program out shortly. Any thoughts? I think it is BS. The service writer seemed honest and knowledgeable on the flare issue. He tried to downplay the prevelance, but when I asked him he said they are seeing an above average number of reports on the problem. I also asked about the recent update to the TSB and he said it is not a fix because many of the new trannys had the same problem. I just cannot believe they would still be replacing transaxles if all that is or will be required is an ECU reflash.

Pete

ES350Bob

Pete,

I do not believe a reflash is in any way going to fix the classic 3 to 4 many report and as well 2 to 3 several report.

I noticed something very interesting in what the service advisor said to you, he said the replacement is not a fix because many new transmissions had the same problem------>as those being replaced with them.

So, not only is he seeing an above average number of transmission issues as he told you but he has also seen, or been made very aware of, an above average number of second failures too, hence, his ability to state many new ones have the same issue. This is reflected here and elsewhere in number of second failure reports.

A reflash will likely address the hesitation, esp. rolling hesitation psych describes in the one review thread, I and others have experienced, it will likely also address the odd downshifting when at steady 35, but it will not fix the otherwise classic slipping of these.

onsknht

I am still curious... Things kinda blew up at work the past week, I haven't dug deeper. In my previous experience, updated parts do not typically supercede the prior part number, they instead look for a date or an add on like an -a or -b or -c etc. I still have it in the front of the filing system, I'll let you know as I hear more.

Believe it or not a reflash as I originally mentioned could fix the problem... Even if it is a mechanical issue!

You see, if they can reprogram the TCM to avoid conditions under which the slip/flare is exhibited, the problem "appears" to be solved... This is quite common in my line of work, for example I have data quality issues where thousands of records are incorrect because I have about 250 people that don't know any better, much less that care. Looking through the data I noticed that another value equates to the correct value for the incorrectly input information and it is done by a more reliable group than the 250 slackers we have. So I make a decision to use "either/or" to define what I want done, send the data out and everyone is happy.... But I didn't really solve the problem.

So to paralell this, maybe they reprogram the TCM to "pump up" the offending 3rd to 4th solonoid actuation thereby "priming" it before the transmission calls for 4th gear? Problem solved? Maybe they lower the shift-speed from 31 MPH to 25 MPH... Yeah the engine may lug a little, but now the shift sequence is so low that only baby slip/flares are present and they for the most part go unnoticed? Perhaps they increase the shift timing between 3rd and 4th to "force" fluid into the mechanism thereby slamming the gear, but avoiding the slip/flare... Perhaps they bypass 3rd gear altogether below a certain operating temperature? Whatever the solution is, I would bet there is a way to mask (thereby fixing) the problem with a reprogram.

wanderer99

An ECU flash could potentially mask (fix) the problem. I'll agree with that. The problem then comes in what is the trade-off for that change? With something mechanical, changing the way it functions to mask a problem usually has some further consequences at a later date.

Volvo apparently got 'tricky' with the new-for-2001 XC70 and decided to electronically put the vehicle into neutral when you stopped the car. As the trans was a smooth one, customers didn't really notice this and obviously there was a fuel efficiency benefit. Unfortunately most (all?) of these transmissions failed as a result. For 2002 it was back to normal operation for that trans with it not electronically shifting into neutral when stopped.

NJLEXES - Thanks for your input on the TL experience... also from 2001! It's interesting to me that the competitor for the ES is generally seen as the TL. Acura changed its trans for 2001 and had problems. Lexus changed it in 2002 and had customer complaints and issues the entire way through that ES model. 2007 has arrived for the ES with a new 6 speed... and there are more customer complaints and issues. I don't think I've ever seen two competing in the same class cars also have transmission problems at the same time!