Mike Floutier

Hi, Am I right in thinking that I can read my DTCs by jumping the DLC3 (4&13)? I think I have a failing ignition coil and I am wondering how to read the codes. Has anyone done this successfully? Thanks Mike

Hi all, My front wheel bearings sound like they're on the way out and I'm just about to order the new hubs to swap - It's done 170,000 miles so I guess that's not bad. I'm just wondering how to get the speed sensors off the hubs. In the manual there is an SST that looks like it grips the sensor carefully but I don't have access to that kind of tool. Is there another way I can get the sensor off (eg. using a normal puller or carefully with a screwdriver) or should I leave it to the workshop people. Any suggestions would be welcome - especially from those who have done it. Kind regards, Mike

I had a look at the pedal sensor but it looked ok. I then removed the multi-plug and replaced it, it also looked fine. However, following this the problem has completely gone away. I can only presume that there was a bad contact in the multi-plug. It's interesting that there are so many wires going to the pedal sensor!!

Thanks for that Dino, unfortunately my situation doesn't invlove a time-lag and it's intermittent. Regards, Mike

Hi all, I've had the car for around 6 months now and generally I'm really happy with it. One thing that's puzzling me though is the behaviour of the accelerator. What I would call normal behaviour is a healthy response of the engine as soon as the accelerator pedal is touched - I'm not talking about time lag here but rather the amount of depression required for any given amount of revs/power. Half the time I get this healthy response but the other half it's different. This is how I'd describe it - It's as if the "zero" point of the pedal (ie without your foot on it) has moved to the half-way point. So, to get any response from the engine you need to push the pedal halfway down. After that it carries on accelerating normally. Only trouble is that you hit the floor too early but that doesn't worry me 'cos I'm a very gentle driver. However, I'd like to understand what's going on here and hopefully fix it. Has anyone had this happen or have any ideas. Many thanks, Mike

Simon, That's a good point about the lpg tank. I do try to keep the petrol low. However the lpg tanks are very thick and heavy and, in addition I usually have many passengers and heavy luggage. Although this shouldn't affect a working active suspension, I've just realised that it will exacerbate any wear situation simply by virtue of pressing harder on the tyres. Another good reason for getting the geometry correct. Thanks Mike

Thanks Pete, a picture is certainly worth a thousand words, I'll have to relook at the geometry if I'm to understand it properly - I certainly don't think I'll lower the rear to the spec. though (it's now 2.5cm high) as it seems that this will only worsen the active camber. Returning to the toe-in, I see that it's presently showing a total of +0deg 03' as against the spec of 0deg 18' +/- 12'. I think I'll simply get the toe set to a total of say +0deg 20' and see what the effect is. Thanks for all this input! Kind regards, Mike

Thanks Pete, I understand that this may apply to some cars HOWEVER I think the geometry of the LS430 at the back is such that it will be the other way round. I am very much a novice at this sort of thing but I think my specific reasoning here is sound. I am open to being proved wrong though, so I anyone can refute my suggestion logically I'd be more than interested to hear the reasoning - especially since I'm thinking of making adjustments to the suspension accordingly. Thanks! Mike

This is so interesting! I just checked the ride height against the specs. As I suspected, in spite of the back appearing much lower than the front (judged by the gap between tyre and wheel arch) the reality is that the back is actually higher than the front (using the Lexus definition). But the really interesting bit is that back left is 3cm higher than spec. with the left being 2cm higher. The front is also higher by the same amount. I've just checked to make sure I hadn't left the ride-height in "high" btw - lol! Pete, perhaps you could help me here. You mentioned in your photo that lowering the position of the bolt lowered the suspension on the rear. Do you know if shortening the link length on the front has the same effect or is it the other way around? Thanks Mike

This morning I tested the air ride system and it does indeed raise and lower the car within the specs - this is a good start! Next I need to check the vehicle height (as defined by the specs) because, as stated in my previous post, I feel that too high a rear will give camber wear on the inside. I know it LOOKS low at the back but that's only in relation to the front - also, it's bound to be low at rest because of the gas installation, this is corrected by the air-ride when it's running. Then I want to experiment to see how ride height affects camber by adjusting the height and observing the resulting alignment. Finally, I realised that I had been focussing entirely on GEOMETRY so far. I then considered that although my inside rear wear may have been caused in some part by incorrect toe-in and maybe some extra camber this would have probably been exacerbated by the extra weight of the lpg tank installation and the fact that I mainly have the car fully loaded with passengers and luggage - air-ride may correct the geometry BUT the weight is still there and must surely increase any wear effect that is present. Mike

Thanks Pete, I'm trying to understand the effect of raising or lowering the ride height on the rear camber. At present my understanding is - that as the upper arm is considerably shorter than the lower No.2 any alteration in ride height will cause the upper part of the hub to move more than the lower, thereby affecting the camber. And, further, because the upper arm is angled downwards (towards the wheel) a lowering of the ride height will push the upper part of the hub outward more than the lower part, hence reducing the negative camber. The upshot of this view seems to indicate that by lowering the ride height the wheels will be more upright and cause less wear on the inside. Does this make sense? Mike

Tomorrow morning I'll take some measurements of the gaps between the wheel arches and the tyres with and without the engine running. I agree that the car is sloping uphill when stopped without the engine running. Is this normal for this model; I wouldn't have thought so? Not cosmetically attractive! What could be causing it? I've just had a look at the "air-ride" section of the manual and it gives precise details/specs. of how to measure the height of the vehicle at the front and back, ie. ground to centre of lower arm mountings (presumably inner mountings). Also specs of allowed differences between front and back (around 1 inch). It then gives the procedure for adjusting the vehicle height (front and rear seperately) by altering the adjustable "height control sensor links" that, unsurprisingly, link the lower arms to the ride height control sensors. It also gives a scheme for testing the operation of the air-ride system generally. I'll try to go through all this in the next few days and decide the best way forward. This is suddenly starting to make sense. Many thanks again for all the input. Mike

Thanks Guys, Yes it is interesting that they haven't commented on the fact that it has air-ride suspension, because, thinking about it, as you say Pete, if it's working correctly the camber shouldn't be affected by the load. However, that doesn't mean that the camber is correct, simply that it wont be affected by the load. A question that springs to mind is: "should the camber be measured with the engine (air-ride) running" or "cold"? It's not mentioned in my manual; simply that there are different camber specs for air-ride and non air-ride models. According to WIM's equipment, the camber on the rears is -1deg 44' (left) and -1deg 57' (right). This compares with the spec for air-ride which is -1deg 33' +/- 45'. This is a little splayed of the spec but well within the recommended tolerance. The toe-in however is -0deg 03' (left) and +0deg 06' (right) Totalling +0deg 03'. The spec is for a total of 0deg 18' +/- 12' so the toe-in is obviously well out (so to speak). My feeling is that I should get the toe-in fixed and observe how the wear goes with the new tyres. Does that make sense? Kind regards, Mike PS Are you saying that it's a common feature for LS430s to wear rear tyres on the inside?

Hi All, I just did a service on my LS430 2002 (air-ride suspension) and whilst underneath I noticed that the extreme insides of both rear tyres were badly worn - a feature that was missing when I bought it - around 6 months ago and before the lpg conversion. I took it to WIM (Wheels in Motion), who just happen to be on my doorstep. As soon as they felt the tyres and saw the lpg filler the diagnosis was camber. This is probably exacerbated by the fact that I'm a private hire driver and usually have several passengers with copious quantities of luggage. Pete, you'll probably know the answer to this but I believe that a full gas tank can weigh around 90 kg? Anyway, they replaced the tyres but we quickly realised that it would not be possible to adjust the camber without replacing the No. 2 lower arms with the shorter versions mentioned in the manual. We did notice that the toe-in needed increasing and this will have contributed slightly to the wear but the main culprit appears to be camber. I don't really have a specific question, I'm just fishing for any info. in this arena so feel free to chip in with anything relevant. Many thanks Mike

Thanks Pete, unfortunately I didn't read your reply in time and, having looked at other posts that said "it doesn't matter" I left it charging overnight. By the morning the charger had given up the will to live and the battery was completely flat. The car however responded perfectly to being jump-started and I've since removed the battery and I'm monitoring it carefully as it's charged by my new charger. Regards, Mike

Ok, so I've got the car open and now I've put the trickle charger on to charge it. Thing is that it's making this deep clicking sound from near the front of the bonnet in time with the charger going on and off - is that to be expected or should I disconnect the charger? Thanks Mike PS Steve, re your point about the Smart system, I recently discovered that there's a button underneath the bonnet release catch (next to that knob that I asked about the other day) that you can press to disable the smart system. Very useful if leaving the car for any length of time. It's on p.48 in my manual in the "keys and doors" section.

Many thanks for that S Face, I have it open now. Thanks again, Mike

Hi All, I hadn't used the car for a couple of weeks and when I went to get in this morning the door wouldn't open. I think the battery is flat - niether of the red or green lights on the dashboard is flashing. Does anyone have any idea how to get it open? Suggestions would much appreciated. Thanks, Mike

Many thanks guys!

I was feeling around under the dashboard the other day when I felt this knob below the bonnet release. It's like a volume control and it clicks when you turn it fully "off". Anyone know what this is, it doesn't appear to do anything but I guess it must do? Thanks Mike

Thanks guys, that's also very useful. Much appreciated, Mike

Mike Pete Thanks Pete, you're a star!

Thanks Guys, Yes WIM are just around the corner from me, in fact we moved here from Chesham a few years ago and our old house is literally a stone's throw away. I have spoken with WIM recently and will be getting the whole geometry/bushing thing looked at probably around 250,000 miles which should be in 2010 as I'm only on 155k at the moment. I think I'll buy some long, strong spanners and have another go the next time I have the car up in the air; BTW, speaking of jobs while car is in the air, can anyone tell me how to change the diff. fluid? Is there an easily accessible drain plug or does it need to be syphoned out? REgards, Mike

Thanks Guys, Chunkz, the last time I took a car (my old Scorpio) to have it done "properly" they set it by the right amount but "toe-out" instead of "toe-in" - wore the tyres out in no time but on the inside so harder to spot. That was when I decided to learn how to do it myself and was amazed at how accurately and effectively I could do it with just a long straight piece of wood and a ruler. Tell me, do the experts take measurements with the wheels in different rotational postions to get an average - I think not. NEV72, I too was concerned about extension bars doing damage, in any case my 19mm was starting to open so I guess I need to invest in some "professional" spanners. Madasafish, I'd like to try the Hammer technique BUT I'm a bit puzzled about what to hit against. I didn't want the ball joint taking strain AND couldn't see how else to brace the track rod end OR the inner track rod against the hammer blow. ADVICE needed here please. Thanks again. Mike

Sorry to butt in on this thread but I'm trying to adjust my tracking and I can't loosen the locknut on my track rod ends (using wd40 and a pair of spanners); I've tried so hard I've got bruises in my palms today. Any ideas? Would heat help? THanks Mike