Since 02 is the last model year before any major redesign, do any of you think Toyota have fixed some of the common issues? Are you better off to get an 03? I don't mean to compare all the new options, I am talking about mechanical reliable wise.
Comparing 2002 LC to later model LC
- Thread starter 2garfields
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2003
- Threads
- 10
- Messages
- 180
I do not see any major changes reliability wise, for me the only important one is the 5 speed transmission, which should give you slightly better MPG and posssibly some better throttle response due to more gears.
My 98' with 100k on the clock feels like new.
My 98' with 100k on the clock feels like new.
What I sense from reading hundreds of threads on MUD is that Toyota has not "fixed" any of the common problems in the newer 100 series. Starters still die young and exhaust manifolds still fail. The main "new" concern I see is with the newer models and the nav-system controling everything, when it fails it costs you $5K to have it fixed and you have to have it fixed since it controls air/heat etc.. Depending on your budget buy the lowest mileage newest 100 series you can afford and count on needing the starter contacts replaced and the manifold cracking some day.
I have a '06 and have never used the navigation for a/c or heat needs - there are external buttons that control radio/cd, a/c temp, etc. Do you lose control of the external functions if nav fails? To date, I do not recall going into the navigation to address basic needs. Matter of fact, I use the navigation as seldom as possible.
Did not know that. From what I've read and with earlier years if the Nav goes your screwed. On my Lexus SC430 the Nav is completely separate so if the Nav goes it does not impact the other driving functions.