 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Lexus Cars / June 2006Jerky ES Tranny
Ques.: Does the jerking transmission problem discussed frequently in this newsgroup shorten the life or cause costly damage to the transmission? > Ques.: Does the jerking transmission problem discussed > frequently in this newsgroup shorten the life or cause costly > damage to the transmission? Ans: No, it just diminishes the driving experience significantly. While some folks claim it's a safety issue, I think that's a stretch. No, but it does decrease your life expectancy. As you jerk your neck repeatedly, you wear down the bones protecting your spinal cord. Finaly you have no bone protecting your spinal cord, and when you jerk the car one too many times, you snap your neck and that is it!!!!! So you may want to talk to your life insurance agent. Oh yes - get some blood pressure pills from your cardiologist because your blood pressure will increase as you step on the gas and the car jerks or doesn't go anywhere. And you wouldn't want to stroke out before you snap your neck. And don't really drive it in heavy traffic cause when you step on the gas and the car just sits there, sometimes you can get crushed by an oncoming truck. Again, the crushing could end your life prematurely before the ultimate neck snap, and you wouldn't want that! So your worries are groundless becaue these cars are bullet proof - virtualy indestructible, barring unforseen crushing by trucks, of course. It is a safety issue, your opinion does not correlate with ES drivers' actual experiences. The jerking behavior will definitely diminish the life of the transmission, that's common sense. >> Ques.: Does the jerking transmission problem discussed >> frequently in this newsgroup shorten the life or cause costly >> damage to the transmission? > > Ans: No, it just diminishes the driving experience significantly. > While some folks claim it's a safety issue, I think that's a stretch. Uh, yeah, it is a safety issue. I have the ES300 (Especially Shitty). Do you own it? I wish it were a stretch to say that one's life is not endangered by this hesitation. If you put your brain to work for just 2 seconds and think about it, you can see how transmission hesitation = safety problem. That's about the amount of time it takes sometimes for the car to respond. >> Ques.: Does the jerking transmission problem discussed >> frequently in this newsgroup shorten the life or cause costly >> damage to the transmission? > > Ans: No, it just diminishes the driving experience significantly. > While some folks claim it's a safety issue, I think that's a stretch. > Uh, yeah, it is a safety issue. I have the ES300 > (Especially Shitty). Do you own it? Yes. > If you put your brain to work for just 2 seconds > and think about it, you can see how transmission > hesitation = safety problem. OK, let's review the logic. You believe it's definitely a safety issue and you still own it. And you're suggesting that MY brain needs to be put to work? Before this turns really ugly, please park the attitude. That's great that you've learned how to diminish the safety aspect of the poor transmission design and behavior, kudos to you that you are not an aggressive driver. But the reality is that there are times presented in the real world where you need to punch it to merge into a faster-moving lane of traffic, or at times where you didn't see another vehicle coming when you turned a corner. Those times require the vehicle to respond quickly. For many ES3xx owners, that quick acceleration does not happen the majority of the time, if ever. When presented that situation, if the vehicle doesn't move fast enough, there can be a rear-end collision anywhere in the line of traffic behind you, for obvious reasons. Now, regarding your deameaning someone for not getting rid of the car due to the safety issue, some of us aren't blessed with the huge budgets to be able to take such a large loss. It's easier, and cheaper, to learn to live with it by completely avoiding the driving situations that the car does not operate properly. My first priorities relate to paying all my other bills, taking care of my family, keeping a roof over their heads. I'd like to squander the bank account for my own selfish needs, but I learned more about the value giving to my family first after my son was born. So, anyway, chill out with the attitude, be a little more patient with people who are terribly frustrated with their ES3xx series cars, they may not have much choice but to live with it. The only way to get a large corporation to improve on something is to keep the issue alive and let the free market encourage change. >> Uh, yeah, it is a safety issue. I have the ES300 >> (Especially Shitty). Do you own it? [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > And you're suggesting that MY brain needs to be put to work? > Before this turns really ugly, please park the attitude. No attitude here. Take another look at the post I responded to. It drips with arrogant condescension. I simply pointed out the obvious hypocrisy in his logic. It's interesting that you saw that observation as MY attitude. > That's great that you've learned how to diminish the safety aspect > of the poor transmission design and behavior... I don't diminish the jerky transmission at all. I think you exaggerate it by calling it a safety issue. I was aware of the jerky transmission problem before I bought the car. After considering my alternatives, I selected the ES330 with full knowledge of this issue. > But the reality is that there are times presented in the real world where > you need to punch it to merge into a faster-moving lane of traffic, or at > times where you didn't see another vehicle coming when you turned a corner. > Those times require the vehicle to respond quickly. For many ES3xx owners, > that quick acceleration does not happen the majority of the time, if ever. I'm fully aware of this issue. From what I've read and from the various ES owners I know, most of them either don't see it as a problem or aren't even aware of the "problem." There's a guy with the same car who parks near me. When I asked him what he thought about the jerky transmission, he said "what are you talking about?" > When presented that situation, if the vehicle doesn't move fast enough, > there can be a rear-end collision anywhere in the line of traffic behind > you, for obvious reasons. The first time I experience the hesitation, it was disturbing. I soon learned that the harder I punched it, the more it hesitated. So, I learned to ease into the throttle until I feel the engine engage, and then push it. This technique reduces the hesitation tremendously. > Now, regarding your deameaning someone for not > getting rid of the car... Again, reread the post I responded to. It's fascinating that you interpret this interaction as ME demeaning HIM. That speaks volumes about your ability to fairly assess a situation. > ...due to the safety issue... Again, I disagree with this assessment. I suspect that you are overstating the problem in hopes that Lexus will do something about it. > some of us aren't blessed > with the huge budgets to be able to take such a large loss. It's easier, [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > selfish needs, but I learned more about the value giving to my family first > after my son was born. So, you let your wife and newborn son ride in this "safety issue" car? The point I'm making here is that, if the car had a REAL safety issue, like occasionally faulty breaks, you wouldn't drive it. And you certainly wouldn't let your family ride in it. > The only way to get a large corporation to improve on something > is to keep the issue alive and let the free market encourage change. I wish you luck. But I won't spin the truth to help you achieve that goal. > >> Uh, yeah, it is a safety issue. I have the ES300 > >> (Especially Shitty). Do you own it? [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > > > And you're suggesting that MY brain needs to be put to work? Um, no, again you've made the wrong assumption. The answer is "no", they don't ride in this car. The child seat is permanently mounted in my wife's car. When we go out as a family, we all ride in her car, not the defective ES300. There is no spin here. The transmission has 2 separate issues. First, it does jerk a bit, especially when driving in traffic. This extra jerkiness will shorten the life of the transmission. Second, the ECU has a programming design bug that involves not only the transmission, but the fuel system as well. This bug causes a hesitation on quick acceleration, most notably in the 0-20 mph range, but also in faster speeds. I would ask why in the world Lexus has wasted their time taking 3 or 4 stabs at getting the programming right in the past 4 years, especially if there was no significant problem with the car. Have you noticed how many more safety and performance related recalls Toyota has had in the past few years? My personal opinion is that this is a trend, and Toyota is having some quality issues in their engineering group. Lexus just recently added a new quality control position to their North American factories, because the defect list was getting voluminous on new design releases. They never needed to staff such a position because the quality was always impeccable. With the extra complication of the parts, and with globalized manufacturing, they have less control of the products that they need to slam out the door. Ah, screw it, I'm sleepy and it's not worth explaining any further. Your opinion is that it's not a safety issue. Great. My opinion is that it is a safety issue. Great. My opinion is that president (GWB) is a moron. Great. 30% of America thinks he's wonderful. Great. As always, opinions are like a**holes. Everybody has one, and they all stink. > So, you let your wife and newborn son ride in this "safety issue" car? > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > I wish you luck. But I won't spin the truth to help you achieve that > goal. > Um, no, again you've made the wrong assumption. The > answer is "no", they don't ride in this car. The child seat > is permanently mounted in my wife's car. When we go out > as a family, we all ride in her car... I made no such assumption. Reread my posting. My statement was hypothetical. And what's with your use of the word "again?" "Again" means there was a prior incident. Perhaps, YOU need to park your attitude? > The transmission has 2 separate issues... No need to go over all this again. As I said before, I understand the issues. > Have you noticed how many more safety and performance > related recalls Toyota has had in the past few years? My [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > complication of the parts, and with globalized manufacturing, they > have less control of the products that they need to slam out the door. I agree that the transmission design (a) is flawed, (b) sucks, and (c) is way below what I would like to expect from Lexus/Toyota. But my assessment, at the time I bought the car and today, is that, on the whole, the ES best meet my needs and desires for reliable transportation at the price I paid. Perhaps if other car companies made better products, I would consider buying another brand. Until then, I'll just have to choose from the products available. Your comments are irrelevent, the point is that your OPINION is the car's behavior is not a safety issue. There are others who disagree with your assessment. You can pound the fist and quibble over unrelated issues all you want to deflect the point, but your opinion is no better or worse than anyone else's who believes differently from you. >> Um, no, again you've made the wrong assumption. The >> answer is "no", they don't ride in this car. The child seat [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > buying another brand. Until then, I'll just have to choose from the > products available. > Your comments are irrelevent, the point is that your OPINION is > the car's behavior is not a safety issue. There are others who > disagree with your assessment. The bottom line is that if you really believe that it's a safety issue, you're a fool for keeping it. Your argument is that your safety is worth less than a few dollars. What does THAT say about your judgement? In fact, you could probably trade your ES for a Camry (or equivalent) and come out ahead financially. Further evidence that you haven't thought through these issues. I'll agree that I'm a fool, but not for the reason(s) you suggest. You have drawn conclusions about what I've thought about and what is within my ability to change, and all of this is from a few newsgroup postings. You must be the Second Coming if you're able to figure all that out. I'm pleased that you have a strong opinion, everybody should be as self-motivated to inflict on others what they think is right. I prefer to think that everybody is different, everybody has different issues and priorities, we all make decisions based on the facts as we are able to comprehend them. I'll certainly try to understand your perspective and see if any of it applies to my circumstances, although on the surface it doesn't seem like much of it applies. >> Your comments are irrelevent, the point is that your OPINION is >> the car's behavior is not a safety issue. There are others who [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > and come out ahead financially. Further evidence that you haven't > thought through these issues. You're in denial. > I'll agree that I'm a fool, but not for the reason(s) you suggest. You have > drawn conclusions about what I've thought about and what is within my [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > and come out ahead financially. Further evidence that you haven't > > thought through these issues. You could hear a pin drop when the almighty "Rumple Stiltskin" <rs@NOSPAM.com> addressed his adoring fans with these immortal words: >I'll agree that I'm a fool, but not for the reason(s) you suggest. You have >drawn conclusions about what I've thought about and what is within my [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >if any of it applies to my circumstances, although on the surface it doesn't >seem like much of it applies. Soooo..instead of wasting so much bandwidth talking in circles, why don't you say why you can't just sell the Lexus and get another (safer) car? > Soooo..instead of wasting so much bandwidth talking in > circles, why don't you say why you can't just sell the Lexus > and get another (safer) car? Because he knows it's not a safety issue. He's just trying to raise a stink about the problem because he thinks that if enough people do the same, Lexus will be forced to do something about it. The thing that really frustrates him is that he wants his ES and he wants the tranny to work properly, too. Unfortunately, in this instance, he can't have his cake and eat it, too. That's why buying a different car won't solve his problem. As a frustrated ES owner, I can relate to what he's going through. Particularly since the transmission on my 1997 ES was smooth as silk and solid as a rock. Davidz-- Only because your post dripped with stupidity. I'm not interested in a pissing match. You think the ES is a great car. I say the transmission is faulty and presents a safety problem. You don't respond directly to that assertion and instead infer what you think is the logical outcome of a determination that it is a safety problem, i.e. I should sell it. Since I still have the car, you deduce that I'm lying about the safety issue. Various reasons exist for not selling and that is beside the point and irrelevant to the safety issue. Your ad hominem attacks and other statements are typical schoolboy errors. Therefore I respond with one of my own and reply as follows: you're a moron. You think I'm a moron too, so let's call it a day. >> Before this turns really ugly, please park the attitude. > [quoted text clipped - 101 lines] >> > >> > And you're suggesting that MY brain needs to be put to work? > Davidz-- > Only because your post dripped with stupidity. Apparently, you define "stupidity" as logic you can't understand or, in this case, don't want to understand. > I'm not interested in a pissing match. Really? You could have fooled me. > You think the ES is a great car... I never said that, nor do I think it. > I say the transmission is faulty and presents a safety problem. > You don't respond directly to that assertion... Yes, I did. A few times, in fact. > ...and instead infer what you think is the logical outcome > of a determination that it is a safety problem, i.e. I should > sell it. Since I still have the car, you deduce that I'm lying > about the safety issue. Lying may be too strong a word here. Exaggerating is probably a better word. > Various reasons exist for not selling... Rationalizations? > ...and that is beside the point and irrelevant to the safety issue. Not it's not. It *IS* the point. Don't use the word safety if that's not what you mean. > Your ad hominem attacks and other statements > are typical schoolboy errors. I have made no such attacks. You have made many. Take a good, long look in a mirror. > Therefore I respond with one of my own and reply > as follows: you're a moron. There you go again. > You think I'm a moron too... No, I don't. I never said that. Those are your words, not mine. > ...so let's call it a day. That's what we were all doing until you brought the topic up again. > >> Before this turns really ugly, please park the attitude. > > [quoted text clipped - 101 lines] > >> > > >> > And you're suggesting that MY brain needs to be put to work? Anyone who has such a desire to try to create logic-based arguments concerning others' opinions and personal perspectives and experiences has a talent that should be exploited and capitalized on. I strongly encourage you to seek a career path in the legal profession if you haven't already made that consideration. I can't say that I agree with many of your opinions, or any of them for that matter, but I'll give you credit for having the tenacity to keep hammering your beliefs into the ground. You definitely need to capitalize on that ability, it could be a gold mine. >> Davidz-- >> Only because your post dripped with stupidity. [quoted text clipped - 174 lines] >> >> > >> >> > And you're suggesting that MY brain needs to be put to work? You could hear a pin drop when the almighty "Rumple Stiltskin" <rs@NOSPAM.com> addressed his adoring fans with these immortal words: >Anyone who has such a desire to try to create logic-based arguments >concerning others' opinions and personal perspectives and experiences has a [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >having the tenacity to keep hammering your beliefs into the ground. You >definitely need to capitalize on that ability, it could be a gold mine. why the personal attacks? I personally *like* our ES. Granted, it's a 2000, a year that's not affected by the transmission issues but I've driven more than one late model ES (loaner cars when one of our two Lexuses are in the shop for sched maint), and have not experienced the transmission problems in *any* of the cars we've driven. And, I might add, I deliberately tried to duplicate the problems reported in this newsgroup. So, I don't think it's a common problem across all late model ES'es. I'm still curious, (and I apologize if you've already answered this in a previous post), why you just don't trade the car in for something else if you feel it's so unsafe that you won't allow your own family to ride in it? It seems like a terrible waste of money to own a car you don't want. Personally, if I owned a car that I truly hated to drive or felt it was unsafe, I would do everything I could to get rid of it. No matter how much negative equity I may have in it. Kegler, you ask a VERY good question, and I say that with no sarcasm. I think about this frequently and may just have to take a financial hit so that I CAN feel that my car will respond correctly in emergency situations. The reason I'm so indignant is that I'm a cheap bastard and my ES is new and the expectation didn't match the reality and I'm just bitter. People who have the ES but not the transmission problem just don't understand. Buying a $35,000 piece of crap doesn't make you feel good and swapping it out for a car that works as designed is painful if you take the financial hit. I had bought the ES with the intention of holding it for its lifetime, which I estimated at at least 12 years. If I didn't have this goal, I would have bought a Camry or Accord. (Yes, I believed Lexus stuff was supposed to last longer because made in Japan and at supposedly higher quality.) > You could hear a pin drop when the almighty "Rumple Stiltskin" > <rs@NOSPAM.com> addressed his adoring fans with these immortal words: [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > was unsafe, I would do everything I could to get rid of it. No matter > how much negative equity I may have in it. That actually is a great representation of my experience with deciding on and living with my 2002 ES. Thanks for relating the issues so clearly, which I haven't done. > Kegler, you ask a VERY good question, and I say that with no sarcasm. I > think about this frequently and may just have to take a financial hit so [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] >> was unsafe, I would do everything I could to get rid of it. No matter >> how much negative equity I may have in it. That wasn't a personal attack. I pointed out that the poster has a unique talent that he could capitalize on, then went on to say that I have a different opinion. If you read back, the personal attacks have come from the other individual. > You could hear a pin drop when the almighty "Rumple Stiltskin" > <rs@NOSPAM.com> addressed his adoring fans with these immortal words: [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > was unsafe, I would do everything I could to get rid of it. No matter > how much negative equity I may have in it. > That wasn't a personal attack. I pointed out that the poster > has a unique talent that he could capitalize on... Interesting spin. You ought to consider a career in politics. LOL! > If you read back, the personal attacks have > come from the other individual. Nonsense. > >Anyone who has such a desire to try to create logic-based arguments > >concerning others' opinions and personal perspectives and experiences has a [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > why the personal attacks? When you don't have anything substantive to say in response, yet you feel the imperative to get in the last word, that's the only option left. I'm glad to know you have a clear understanding of that concept. >> >Anyone who has such a desire to try to create logic-based arguments >> >concerning others' opinions and personal perspectives and experiences [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > feel the imperative to get in the last word, that's the only option > left. > >> why the personal attacks? > > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > I'm glad to know you have a clear understanding of that concept. Thanks for proving my point. And thanks for proving mine. Cheers, mate! >> >> why the personal attacks? >> > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Thanks for proving my point. Just curious, why does it trouble you so much that people disagree with your opinions? I don't think I'm the only one to notice that, and I'm certainly not the first to post an opinion that the unpredictability of the ES3xx ECU presents a safety concern, and you've chosen to engage in a Republican-party-style personal attack filled with assumptions and inferences and an air of superiority, and still you accuse me of not having anything substantive to say. I have not participated in a personal attack debate, I simply have said I disagree with your opinion, and gave you positive feedback that you have the type of tenacity that you could capitalize on. Would you rather I put a negative spin on everything? Did you want me to actually attack you? Why should I? You've already represented yourself enough here to allow most to form an opinion. I've not shared my very succinct opinion of you. As with the ES issue, your opinion is no better than mine, and vice versa. I have a clear understanding of that concept. >> >> why the personal attacks? >> > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Thanks for proving my point. > Just curious, why does it trouble you so much that people > disagree with your opinions? You're attempting to rewrite history. Unfortunately, for you, it's all documented in this thread. You're certainly entitled to your own OPINION, but not your own FACTS. Reread this thread. I stated my opinion first. You challenged me. I simply defended my opinions, at first, and now, against your repeated personal attacks. Since you have nothing substantive to add at this point, you relentlessly continue to try to make it personal with me. So the question is best asked of you. Why does it MY opinion trouble YOU so much? And why are you so upset by it that you feel the need to make up you own history about it? > I have not participated in a personal attack... More historical fiction. You've attacked me repeatedly and continue to do so. So much so that another disinterested poster was motivated to ask you "why the personal attacks?" Yet you haven't responded to his question, nor have you responded to any of my substantive points. You prefer to dwell on personal issues that you fictionalize for your own purposes. You continue to attack me, while saying that you're not (untrue) and that I'm attacking you (also untrue). Repeating these falsehoods, does not make them any less false. Except in your imagination. I suspect that you've actually convinced yourself of your fictionalized version of history. > Did you want me to actually attack you? No, but apparently you keep goading me so that I'll attack you, so you can justify the attacks you've made on me. Sorry, but I'll decline that invitation once again. > You've already represented yourself enough here to allow > most to form an opinion. I've not shared my very succinct > opinion of you. This is yet another attack. Apparently, that's obvious to everyone, BUT you. > As with the ES issue, your opinion > is no better than mine, and vice versa. You're certainly entitled to your own opinion. But not your own facts. > I have a clear understanding of that concept. Not by a long shot. Boys! Settle down, now. Nobody cares. If you won't stop you'll both get timeouts. >> Just curious, why does it trouble you so much that people >> disagree with your opinions? [quoted text clipped - 54 lines] > > Not by a long shot. Ok, kids enough of this crap, get on with your lifes and get back to meanigfull contributions. ed b >> Just curious, why does it trouble you so much that people >> disagree with your opinions? [quoted text clipped - 54 lines] > > Not by a long shot. I'm reminded of Ann Coulter...everyone else is wrong, everyone else is the attacker, everyone else started it first, everyone else is the problem, my opinion is fact, I am the only one worthy of an opinion unless of course your opinion agrees with mine, blah, blah, blah. It's always so sad to see people experience that kind of frustration, but I guess it's just part of the human condition. > This is yet another attack. Apparently, that's obvious to everyone, BUT > you. Wow, this may be a simple misunderstanding here. An attack would be for me to actually state an opinion of you. If I'm mistaken, please tell me what my opinion of you is, I'm really curious to know. > So the question is best asked of you. Why does it MY opinion trouble > YOU so much? And why are you so upset by it that you feel the need to > make up you own history about it? You accused me of making up my "own history". Maybe you could have provided one of my quotes to back that up? >against your repeated personal attacks. I'd sure like to know of one. > You're certainly entitled to your own opinion. But not your own facts. I always said it was my opinion. To put it in your words, check the history. I'm also not sure anyone here is qualified to mandate that someone is not entitled to their "own facts". There could be many subject matter experts out there who may be taken aback by that assertion. But if you only meant me, then maybe that was a personal attack. > You continue to attack me, while saying that you're not (untrue) and > that I'm attacking you (also untrue). The assertion below was your FIRST direct reply to one of my posts. You could have chosen to ask me for clarity, but instead you chose to attack. >>That speaks volumes about your ability to fairly assess a situation.<< Hmmm, so I have no ability to fairly assess a situation. Was that an attack? Oh, that's right, I goaded you into that attack in your first post directed to me. Sorry, I need to take more responsibility for causing your actions. >I'm fully aware of this issue. From what I've read and from the various >ES owners I know, most of them either don't see it as a problem or >aren't even aware of the "problem." There's a guy with the same car who >parks near me. When I asked him what he thought about the jerky >transmission, he said "what are you talking about?" I'm not sure I agree with your evidence that this isn't a safety issue. The vehicle is reported to behave differently in different geographical areas, and the hesitation problem may be varied. Different gasoline formulations around the country can also cause the ES3xx to behave differently. Your anecdotal experience with the vehicle isn't enough to disprove the safety claims of other drivers. Similarly with the old model Audi, I don't remember what model it was, but it suffereed from an unexplained sudden throttle acceleration problem. Those who experienced the problem were convinced it was real, those who didn't experience the problem stood by their cars with great loyalty. And I guess there could have been personal attacks questioning the judgement of those who chose to keep it, in spite of the multiple reported problems that were never identified. >> Just curious, why does it trouble you so much that people >> disagree with your opinions? [quoted text clipped - 54 lines] > > Not by a long shot. > I'm reminded of Ann Coulter...everyone else is wrong, everyone > else is the attacker, everyone else started it first, everyone else > is the problem, my opinion is fact, I am the only one worthy of an > opinion unless of course your opinion agrees with mine, blah, > blah, blah. That's an excellent self-portrait. Rumple I for one do not care for your injection of politics into this group . This group is not the Daily Kos or some other land of Oz but rather a place where people of interested in Lexus automobiles regerdless of political affilations . Your references to Republican attack tactics, people who voted for George Bush and Ann Coulter are both childish and uncalled for. Please before you put me on you rave list step outside yourself and examine your behavior. I am sure you will accuse me of being a Skull and Bones opperative for the right wing forces of chaos and anarchy but this could not be farther from the truth. I am simply an ES owner [ with no trans lag] who thinks you have just beaten this into the ground and have nothing more of value to add . did you go to Princeton, Harvard, or Yale? And did you belong to any secret societies, or do you still belong to any secret societies? Time to get honest here, and just reveal the truth - are you realllllly an undercover agent for Boy George Bush??? And is it true that you NSA spies can not ony tap our phones and often do, the can also tap and record the computer conversations? did you go to Princeton, Harvard, or Yale? And did you belong to any secret societies, or do you still belong to any secret societies? Time to get honest here, and just reveal the truth - are you realllllly an undercover agent for Boy George Bush??? And is it true that you NSA spies can not ony tap our phones and often do, the can also tap and record the computer conversations? I wouldn't characterize a realistic assessment and comparison as "childish and uncalled for". They were contextually appropriate analogies. Let's "examine my behavior". I've not attacked, I've merely defended my right to an opinion. Your assumption that I will characterize you as an "operative for the right wing" could actually be considered by some to be pretty childish and uncalled for, to use your words. Others can decide that. >>I am simply an ES owner [with no trans lag] who thinks you have just >>beaten this into the ground If you don't have the transmission problem, then I believe your contributions to a transmission problem topic have ended. Thanks for your input. > Rumple I for one do not care for your injection of politics into this > group [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > and > have nothing more of value to add . excellent retort, you've risen to the occasion, my simple little friend. >> I'm reminded of Ann Coulter...everyone else is wrong, everyone >> else is the attacker, everyone else started it first, everyone else [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > That's an excellent self-portrait. I do not wish to get into the debate between David and Rumple, but I would like to tell you about my 2005 ES 330. It has 9200 miles on it. I have the jerk and hesitation, and, frankly, I'm surprised that Lexus would market a car like that. Shortly after I bought it last June, I noticed the jerk and hesitation. I didn't notice it in the demonstator. Apparently, it's not the same in all cars and for all drivers. The more aggressive drivers will experience it more. I heard there was a software update for the transmission that was supposed to improve this condition. So I made an appointment to have it installed last August. When I got to the dealer for the installation, the service rep told me that, once installed, it can't be undone and in some cases it made the condition worse. That made me change my mind since the jerk and hesitation, for my car, is not too bad. About a month ago, I called the dealer and asked if there was any revision to the software update since I last inquired. They said yes and that people weren't complaining anymore about the update making it worse. So I took the car back to the dealer to have the update installed. After sitting at the dealer for an hour, the Service Mgr. came out and told me that the car already had the latest software update. (It must have been amoung the first to get it.) He also told me they checked the car out and that everything is they way Lexus says it's supposed to be. They took it for a test ride and said it was OK. I then took the Service Mgr. for a ride to demonstrate the jerk, and, guess what - - it didn't jerk. I don't know what to make of it. Since taking it to the dealer it has jerked a few times at very low speed. On the highway it seems OK, but I notice, when you need immediate accelleration at highway speeds, its not always instantly there. There's a one or two second hesitation. I am a moderate driver (not too fast, not too slow). I notice when I drive gently it rarely jerks. I do not regard it as a serious safety hazzard, but I can see where in certain unusual cases it could be. I asked the service rep if this condition would shorten the life of the transmission and neccessitate a repair earlier than normal. He said no. I'm not sure, however, if I should believe him. After all, I can imagine that his employer and/or Lexus would not like it if he said yes. Other than this problem, its a nice comfortable car. However, if I was in the market for a car again, knowing what I now know, I think I'd get a car without this condition. Al Does transmission hesitation problem occur with ALL ES330 models, including the '05 model? Or is it limited to earlier models? > Ques.: Does the jerking transmission problem discussed frequently in > this newsgroup shorten the life or cause costly damage to the transmission? > Does transmission hesitation problem occur with ALL ES330 > models, including the '05 model? Or is it limited to earlier models? It started with the 2002 ES300 redesign. From the reports I've read, it was the worst in that model year and has gotten gradually better since then, but hasn't been eliminated. Apparently, Lexus/Toyota has been making improvements over the years, but the basic design concept is fundamentally flawed. Prior to the 2002 ES300 there was no such problem. The 2002 ES introduced an "intelligent" transmission design that supposed to "learn" the driver's habits and adjust accordingly. From what I understand, this "intelligent" transmission is the source of the hesitation and the jerkiness. A drive-by-wire system was also introduced in the 2002 ES design. Some posters claim that the drive-by-wire system is part of the problem or even the entire problem. But, I suspect that it's the "intelligent" transmission design alone that's causing the hesitation and the jerkiness. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2010 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.