halt

I am in the process of replacing my '99 RX300 and am doing a comparison to the QX4, the Toyota Highlander and the Buick Rendezvous. Can anyone help?

willard west

Yes, drop your consideration of the RX and the HL if you want or need anything like "true" AWD. I absolutely hate the idea of recommending BMW or MB to anyone but they do seem to be the only "players" in the luxury AWD market that knows what they are doing.

It should be against the law for Toyota and Lexus to sell what is basically a FWD vehicle as AWD. The Lexus Nav/GPS is about as useless as **** on a bull.

I ruled the QX4 out after finding I couldn't be comfortable in the back seat.

maybe there is room for the Cayenne in this market.

LexRX

willard, it amazes me how strongly you are holding on to the RX's AWD system. Haven't you considered the VTM-4 system on the Acura MDX. It operates in AWD mode only at speeds below mph when slippage occurs. Also, please don't put down Lexus's Nav system. It, along with the system Acura uses, is among the best of the Nav systems. If you don't like it, you must not like Nav systems in general. You really seem to object to and question many, many things. Just simma down na!

Speaking of the Acura MDX, halt, have you considered the MDX? IMO, it's a great compromise in an SUV. If you don't need the extra size I would choose the RX over the MDX. The MDX is a great SUV, but lacking in some quality areas. I wouldn't go Buick, because it is...well...buick QX4 looks great, but that's about it for me. I agree with willard on the back seat. Not very roomy overall. It has a somewhat dated platform.

Can't go wrong with a new Highlander, they are great and mechanically similar to the RX and a roomy, functional, price effective SUV. But really, Check out the MDX...

-Nick

satxrx

LexRX - The one thing I really dig about the "newest" QX4 is the rear LCD screen to view DVDs. I've got a little boy who'd love nothing else than to see "Kipper - the Dog" while cruising 'round town.

As for the MDX, I've seen more and more around. The look has grown on me, but I still think it lacks the beautiful lines of the RX. And as for luxury amenities? Fugettaboutit! RX hands down!

And I agree with LexRX about the Buick - Tiger Woods or no Tiger Woods - it's still a Buick. One look at the GM-looking ovoid grill and well... I even saw one from the back and seeing all the suspension components exposed and hanging extremely low to the ground with an overly large backside yelled "MINIVAN"!!!

And finally, Highlander. Yes, it shares a lot with the RX. But when you really add up all the upgrades in the Limited - you might as well negotiate for the RX. And the boxier shape has yet to really impress me. Some angles look decent but again mostly, for me, it screams "MINIVAN"!!!

LexRX

satxrx, you make a good point about the QX4's DVD movie player. When I traveled with my family as we had a Chevy van with a TV/VCR - priceless - kept us kids quiet. If you have about $2400 (yeah, pricy) one can be installed into the RX, very nicely too. The Lexus dealer closest to me installs flat panel tv's in the headrests of the front seats and a VHS or DVD player in the cargo area in front of the power plug. Looks very clean. There are also AV jacks to quickly hook up a game system...forget the kids, I would want to ride in the back!!! The setup also comes with wireless headphones.

About the Buick, I thought the exact same things when I was behind one the other day. I was surprised at how much the rear suspension was exposed and how close to the ground it was. It looks like a car with a raised bumper showing the suspension. I still don't know how they crammed three rows of seats in that thing! Overall, I still love my RX I don't need anything bigger, love the styling, and quality is excellent. I think if I needed something bigger I would go with the MDX. Too bad they didn't add HID for 2002.

-Nick

wwest

LeoRX

Checked out the new 2002 MDX just last week. Still no HID, VSC, or Trac! Check me on this, but I believe the MDX is "always" in AWD mode, torque biased heavily to the front unless slippage occurs and then goes to 50/50.

Here again, a FWD SUV, extremely dangerous in adverse roadbed conditions.

The saleperson's explanation for no HID was that the vehicle sets too high and that would put too much glare into on-coming motorists eyes. Aren't Manufacturers required to use an auto-leveling system with factory HIDs?

Nav...

"The relentless pursuit of perfection"

If they truly believe in their own motto then why would they not
encourage being told of flaws in their product?

Had I not noticed this latest software flaw I would have driven over an hour out of my way. And frankly I only noticed it because I knew to check and make sure the other flaw didn't exist somewhere along my, its, computed route.

Oh, IMO even though the MDX is biased toward FWD its AWD setup is much better than the RX or HL. In the MDX there is always torque delivered to the rear axle, In the RX or HL, there isn't enough to roll the vehicle forward on a flat dry surface if the front wheels are tractionless.

The MDX would be on the top of my list if it had HID, VSC and Trac.

The X5 is the best overall IMO, but the unwarranted additional expense would put it below the MDX.

LexRX

Acura's website stated that the MDX is always in FWD mode unless there is slippage, then torque will be sent to the rear wheels. There is also a VTM-Lock button on the dash that temporarily holds the rear wheels engaged. This may be what I remember reading only works under 18mph. Above that speed the MDX will remain FWD, unless there is slippage - or as the Acura's site says "...anticipates the need for AWD..." which is a bunch of mush.

This is what I gather from reading about it - I wouldn't go asking dealers about it. They proabably have no clue. As for the HID's: the bit about them being too high up on an SUV is crap. I hate when salesmen feed people stuff like that. I was told the same thing about the RX in 2000. I told the salesman that the QX4 has them. Also, the X5 has them, RX, GMC Enoy had them. I'd bet the MDX will have them before long. As the requirement for an auto-leveling feature - I don't know. I thought there was a requriement, but don't think Acura has this on the TL or CL, so i'm not sure. HID equipped Inifini's have manual adjusting HID via a button on the dashboard.

-Nick

willard west

----- Original Message -----
From: Customer_Satisfaction_Inquiries@lexus.com
To: Willard
Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2001 11:03 AM
Subject: [Incident 011031-000003] tire chains


Recently you submitted a question to the Lexus Customer Satisfaction Department.

Subject:
tire chains


At 11/06/2001 10:49 AM we wrote -

Dear Mr. West:

I am following up with you regarding your inquiries. Customers will elect to install snow chains on the front tires only for short periods of time (ex. a short ski trip). Customers will elect to install snow tires on their vehicles if they will be driving for longer periods of time in the snow.

Lexus does not recommend installing rear tire chains on the vehicle since there is not a sufficient amount of clearance. Installing rear tire chains can cause damage to the body, tires, and chassis.

It the responsibility of the driver to have sufficient control of the vehicle in order to drive in a safe manner.

Your Question:
Dear Sirs or Ms,

Tomorrow morning we head out on our first wintertime trip in our 2001 AWD RX300. We will be traveling from the Seattle area to the eastern Oregon border. Our return trip will be via central Oregon, over several mountain passes.

In preparation for our trip I just reviewed the owners manual regarding snow tires and tire chains, and came away a bit puzzled. On page 283 regarding snow tires you make the following cautionary statement.

"Installing snow tires on the front wheels only can lead to an excessive difference in road grip capability between the front and rear tires which could cause loss of vehicle control"

And on page 284 with regards to chain installation you state, in BOLD:

"Install the chains on the front tires as tightly as possible. Do not use chains on the rear tires."

Since the AWD RX300 has the engine torque biased predominantly to the front axle I can readily understand the need for installing chains on the front wheels, but I cannot understand why you state that they should not be used on the rear wheels also.

You clearly acknowledge, justifiably in my opinion, that installing snow tires only on the front wheels might lead to loss of control. Wouldn't putting tire chains only on the front also increase the potential for loss of vehicular control, rather dramatically over snow tires only on the front?

I have heard many people complain, upon taking their FWD vehicle in to have studs installed, that the shop insisted on installing studs on all four wheels, otherwise they wouldn't do the work at all. My explanation to them has always been along the lines of your own statement, increased traction in the front vs the rear will very likely lead to loss of control, especially in downhill braking circumstances.

Isn't this even more true of the RX300 and your recommendation of tire chains only on the front?

Shouldn't you have an even stronger cautionary note in this case?

But, more to the point, the RX300 is a "luxury", relatively expensive, SUV, I would think the very best suggestion you could make is to advise the RX300 owners to ALWAYS use tire chains on all FOUR wheels.

But my questions are:

1. What harm would be done, if any, to the RX300 AWD drive train if I were to install tire chains on only the REAR wheels?

2. What if I am willing to go to the expense of putting tire chains on all four wheels? What would be your advice?

As for 1, above, I am aware that installing tire chains only on the rear wheels would create a disparate, or differential turning rate, lower at the rear axle than at the front axle, that could not be overcome by the resultant viscous clutch "tightening up". But isn't that also the case with tire chains on the front only, a differential turning rate front vs rear that cannot be overcome and thus the viscous clutch's temperature would continue to climb higher and higher?

The only apparent difference, to me, would be that tire chains only on the rear would result the viscous clutch "tightening up" to the very same level as chains only on the front, but would result in a much safer, dramatically so, overall operational configuration.

But the only question I really and truly need an answer to is number 2.

Thanks,

Willard West



If your issue remains unresolved, please update this question here.

You may also update this question by replying to this message. Because your reply will be automatically processed, you MUST enter your reply in the space below. Text entered into any other part of this message will be discarded.

[===> Please enter your reply below this line <===]

I agree with you 100%, I just went out and looked and there is less than 1" of clearance between the top of the tire tread and the bottom of the coil spring suspension.

But, given the increased level of traction provided by snow chains only on the front and the much greater likihood of downhill or braking loss of control due to this "reverse" traction "offset", wouldn't you agree that it would be even more advisable, especially for those of us who swicth to snow tires/wheels in the wintertime anyway, to switch to a lower profile tire/wheel setup all around so one could balance things out by installing chains all around, if needed?

I am also somewhat disturbed by your suggestion that "short-term" use of snow chains only on the front wheels is "safe", while at the same time acknowledging that long term use of snow tires only on the front is not. It seems to me that the use of snow chains only on the front increases the potential for loss of control so dramatically over "snow tires front only" that even very brief use might, statistically, even out the safety issue.

[===> Please enter your reply above this line <===]




If you have any further concerns, you can also reach the Lexus Customer Satisfaction Department at 1-800-255-3987, Monday through Friday, 6:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Pacific Time. Sincerely, Kevin Saylan Customer Satisfaction Representative

dvarapala

Is this still true of the 2002 RX?

I'm in the process of deciding whether to get an RX or an MDX. It's a tough choice, but currently I'm leaning toward the RX because of its better styling and better availability (some people are waiting MONTHS to get an MDX).

However, if what you say is still true, it might tip the balance back the other way...

LexRX

dvarapala, I wouldn't let the AWD setup of either the MDX or RX be the deciding factor. For what each are used for the AWD won't make much of a difference. Willard has a big chip on his shoulder about the RX's AWD setup, among other things. Where the '01-02 RX does have an advantage over the MDX is having the stability control system VSC. Very hand, safe, stability control system to keep you from sliding around.

Both the MDX and RX are great SUV's, you do have a tough decision. If you haven't already, check out http://www.acuramdx.org to help get info on the acura. You can't go wrong with either SUV.

halt, if your still around, I hope we haven't run you off.

-Nick

willard west

Has any of you driven any distance in Wyoming or Montana on ice and snow covered roads?

It is not at all unusual here in the pacific Northwest to have to drive hundreds of miles on ice and snow covered roadbeds. (Californians, are you listening?) Then there is the issue of the need for tire chains on our many mountain passes.

If you don't expect to encounter any of these conditions then you don't need an SUV, except for personal dislikes or preferences get a minivan.

But if you think you might need a vehicle that delivers torque to any or all of the four wheels it has, then stay the hell away from the RX300 and the Toyota Highlander.

If you need an AWD setup that really WORKS, and if you can afford it the BMW X5 is likely the best choice, with the ML320 as a close second.

I can't answer your question with regards to the MY2002 RX300, but you could ask the dealer to demonstrate that the engine drives the rear wheels with the front wheels tractionless.

The MDX will drive away, the Rx will not.

vicpai

......the RX is still the best choice. I agree with you that the Acura and RX Navis are possibly the best in the business. In fact, until recently I believed the Acura unit was a notch above the Lexus, but now, after a lot of research, I think their about the same. Each has a few advantages over the other!!, but overall they both rule!!. However as an ex-owner of an Acura product ( a 2000TL/Navi), I would definitely think twice before recommending the MDX. For starters, Acura customer service is AMONG THE WORST. I think even a company like Hyundai takes better care of their customers. Another reason to stay away from the MDX (at least for now) is it's reliability!!! - If you're expecting a typical Honda, FORGET IT!!! - It's just like the first year Odyssey, with reliability issues galore!! Noise, Vibration and Harshness (refinement) which was a big issue in the first year model has been supposedly taken care of for 2002. However, it's hard to imagine a luxury car experience when you know that the company backing that claim does not understand or for that matter care about the first thing about customer service, let alone a "luxury" customer service experience!!!.......So if you buy an MDX and it works well, and you don't have to interact with Acura or it's dealers after that you're O.K.......but if you happen to have any problems whatsover, then you'll be very sorry when you realize you're pretty much on your own!!!

vicpai

........as concerns the "traction issue" of the RX (or lack thereof) mentioned above, I believe it refers to the 1999 and 2000 models. For 2001 the addition of 4-wheel-traction contol effectively puts the RX 300 All-wheel-drive system pretty much on par with the MDX's VTM-4 system!

vicpai

The RX 300 is being completely redesigned for the 2003 model, which should be available in the fall of 2002. I am almost sure this new model will have the "minor" flaws of the current model fixed (very wide turning circle etc.) with awesome new options.....Mark Levinson etc. etc. and a tomb-quiet interior ride.

So, if you have the flexibility to wait a year this might be a good option, however reliability will probably be a question because it's a first year design, but more so because it will be built in Canada, not Japan, for the first time. Even so, I'm positive given Lexus' reputation for quality and excellence, reliability will get back to near-perfect levels in subsequent years of production and I'm also sure it will not be quite as bad as the first year MDX or Honda Odyssey. When I say reliability will not be as good, what I mean is it will probably not be up to the usual LEXUS STANDARDS, but still pretty good when generally compared to other vehicles

redjeeper

After my past experience with Lexus, I am considering other options for a new vehicle. I am trying to narrow my options on the following vehicles: BMW X5, Lexus RX300 and MB ML. Can you give me some pros and cons on these vehicles. I am going to buy something in the next month and I would really appreciate some other people's viewpoints.