Saw this on Reddit today.
![Image]()
New fix for cablegate.
2 reading
Jefe'sTRD
21 - 40 of 72 Posts
Joined
·
693 Posts
The only solution will be the next Gen having the connection on the top through the rear deck like the Corolla Cross HV. I don't trust this any more than the original completely sealed connector.
It looks to me that they want the water that originates from up top to drain from the clamshell but don't want any road spray to touch the exposed wires inside the clamshell. To me this looks no different than wrapping the wires. Maybe Toyota is doing this to give the perception that no wires are exposed since you can't see them but the real issue is with moisture entering the area up top where the clamp is.
I bet it is pretty well engineered, but don't know for sure
mine is open, and using acf-50 once a year, mine will last
I do somewhat not trust fully wrapped.... as indicated, it could trap moisture
w/o knowing if it is further potted or snotted, or just wrapped. at any rate, it is far
better than the original closed cover that trapped mung forever
Joined
·
18 Posts
Yes, this is exactly what I have on my '24 XLE. I went to apply ACF-50 and upon seeing the new design decided not to until I knew more. I still may apply some to the metal connectors.
easy to view but you need to get your face down low and look thru
the rear driver side wheel spokes or get on ground and stick
head under there
I suggest a large, clean piece of cardboard. It's more comfortable to lay on than the just the ground. It helps pad the pebbles, etc. And it's much easier to slide under then out from under the car. It's also helpful when changing the oil incase of the inevitable sailing of oil.
Not all 2024's. Mine has the older style.
Joined
·
419 Posts
So where does this leave us 2023 owners? The extended warranty only covers up to 2022, and the newest cable only starts with 2024.
Joined
·
874 Posts
I also have a 2023. Limbo. I am sure it will be extended for the 2023 MY as it looked like a fix/bandaid to this. Time can only tell.
Joined
·
874 Posts
I just fix problems. I don't make them.
Post #1 on this thread.
What is your manufactured date? And is it from Canada or Kentucky ?
10/23 made in Canada
Checked and mine is the same as pictured. Built 04/24 CA
I am not an expert, and am not making any recommendations, but I've done way too much reading and research for my own good and would like to offer for your entertainment purposes only, a perspective on the latest fix.
For clarity, when I say MGR, thats Motor-Generator Rear, the differential housing which has the rear motor in it.
There are in fact two separate parts which factor in here.
The first part is technically referred to by Toyota as the Rear Traction Motor Cable. This is actually a very short cable (less than 12" I'd say) which runs from the top of MGR down to the side of it, presenting us with what I will refer to as a receptacle/female connector which points DOWN. Why have an intermediate connection here on the side in the first place? Presumably in order for there to be an easy way to disconnect MGR. The top connection is quite involved: a trio of pretty rugged bolt-type lugs, one for each of the three power leads, sealed with an o-ring and cover, then an outer cover, both of which are tagged as "not reusable", not to mention you can only access this area by detaching MGR from the vehicle and lowering it using a transmission jack. So yea, there needs to be a simple way to disconnect MGR for maintenance etc.
The second part is technically referred to by Toyota as the HV Floor Under Wire Harness. This is the long cable which connects at the side of MGR and runs forward to join the rest of the high voltage wiring. Where it connects up at the side of MGR, this cable has what I will call a plug/male connector which points UP.
If you consult the TIS for the 2019-22 WEP (google it... you can find it), prerequisites notwithstanding (vehicle qualifies, exhibits either DTC, AM interference, or both, etc), it calls for the inspection of these two components and replace either just the HV Floor Under Wire Harness, or both the HV Floor Under Wire Hardness and Rear Traction Motor Cable (as case may be).
As some have pointed out, the choice of location notwithstanding, Toyota DID do the right thing in terms orientation: Because the receptacle/female portion of this connection points down (and has some depth to it) contaminants will not "gather" or pool in it. Any other orientation would have created a far worse situation.
It is important to note that the plug/male portion of this connection has an integrated black rubber seal which sets up inside the receptacle/female portion. That seal ensures nothing will reach the actual contacts deep up inside. But here came our first issue: The chamfered circumference of the mouth of the receptacle corrodes. I dont think corrosion here alone would be devastating, but it is so close to the aforementioned rubber seal that as the metal pits and the surface deforms, I imagine the seal is no longer perfect giving rise to contaminant ingress at this interface. For what its worth I notice the TIS instructions don't mention looking any further: if the chamfered circumference is pitting/corroded, it should be replaced.
The second issue is that metal mesh we've seen so many horrifying photos of, rusted to the point of being powder. Its actual role is still unclear to me. Lots of electric wire assembles have an outer shield of this type, usually grounded so as to be a barrier to EMI/RFI (Electromagnetic and Radio frequency interference). Thats probably why, when it breaks down, we get static on the AM Radio band (but I think that is just a convenient canary alerting us to impending deeper issues). The real problem here has I believe more to do with what we'll call the clamp, the metal sleeve which holds the splayed end of the mesh in place. My guess is that when this part corrodes and deforms, it allows contaminants to reach up inside the white plastic plug housing and eventually reach the critical parts: the terminations/connections of the three main wires. Be super interesting to dissect a failed one. Anyway...
My understanding is that the first "fix" Toyota implemented (2023?) was to add openings to the outer/orange plastic cover so that corrosive road spray can easily drain from the cavity. A single hole on the bottom makes sense, not huge 1/2" ones on the side. If you ask me this only serves to accelerate the corrosion as most of the time salt comes as an aerosol generated by cars rolling down the road and you've just given that an easier way to waft in. But I digress. Its worth noting that as part of the 2023 fix, photos show a "foam" gasket at the interface of the Rear Traction Motor Cable and the HV Floor Underwire Harness. More on that in a sec.
The second fix, lets call it the 2024, is FAR more interesting. Noteworthy to me is the new dark reddish-orange gasket/seal which appears at the metal interface of the plug and the receptacle (and replaces the foam one from the year before). I'm guessing that this is some sort of rubber or resilient material (if anyone has actually unplugged one of these new ones and can show us a better picture of this new gasket/seal, please share!). I'm guessing the intention of this newer gasket would be to prevent contaminants from reaching the rim/chamfer of the receptacle opening (remember, that is where the TIS instructs the technician to examine) which should in turn, one would hope, eliminate the issue at that interface. I wonder if, to compensate for the thickness of that gasket, the plug itself is slightly longer now. We'd need old and new side by side to know for sure but if that were the case, it would mean that one couldn't simply use the new gasket on an old plug.
On to the black wrap/sleeve, which I think is more than meets the eye. That mesh should have never been exposed as it was (the orange plastic cover was never a "seal", it just protects the wires from physical debris and curious fingers). Yes there is the black sleeve now, but there is also what looks like orange electrical tape wrapped around it at the clamp with what looks like a black zip-tie wrapped around that (hard to tell without seeing it first hand). There are even thin strips of foam: I can see one directly above the clamp on the metal housing (which may or may not extend down inside the wrap), and another just below the orange 'tape'. I can only guess at their exact purpose but what all this suggests to me is that this is not a hastily conceived bad-aid, but an actual effort by someone at Toyota to make the best of a bad situation: There are literally hundreds of thousands of affected RAV4s on the road, and especially now that Toyota is apparently on the hook for as long as the next 6 years (in the case of 2022s) I believe they are motivated to come up with solutions which will hold up, else they will, at considerable expense, be replacing wiring harnesses left and right, in some cases more than once per vehicle (and they certainly don't want to have to extend the WEP to 2023's and beyond).
But there is another aspect to this which is not being talked about enough. The location of the connection, for my money, is NOT the tragic flaw. There are innumerable exposed metal parts on the underside of vehicles, these RAV4s being no exception, including many electrical connections in far more vulnerable places. Think: wires running to the ABS sensors, to the electronic parking Brakes, or even the main connection on the top of MGR (which honestly is just as exposed to the elements as the connection on the side of it). Why doesn't every single bolt disintegrate? Its the material used for the exposed parts of the MGR connector (which include the previously exposed clamp) which is the real design flaw. I don't know what they consist of exactly, but whatever mix of metals they are, they seem unusually reactive to corrosive elements. Had they been cast/machined from something different (high impact nylon plastic perhaps? I saw a YouTube from Poland I think it was...) we might not be having this conversation. As it stands, even with the 2024 revision, those two metal plug/receptacle housings are still a liability (unless they changed the material and we dont know it).
All that said, at the end of the day what really puzzles me is why Toyota doesn't simply issue a service bulletin directing these exposed metal parts be sprayed with one of the inexpensive, widely tried and tested light oil based corrosion inhibitors (Rust Check, Krown, CorrosionFree, the list goes on), say, once a year as part of routine maintenance. I wish they would just be open and transparent on the topic. At <$10 for a rattle can I would think it could save them untold amounts of money in warranty and warranty extension program claims. My only guess is that if they did so, it would undermine the narrative that we've been fed by dealerships since the very first Pius: that horrible things will happen if you apply anything to a Hybrid. I had always thought that their original reason for screaming "do not undercoat a Hybrid!" had more to do with the dubious tar, wax, and silicone undercoating products of years past which, in addition to not being effective long term anyway, could conceivably obscure the telltale orange color of the HV components, which I accept is a safety issue. But any of the light/mineral oil based products I've ever seen are either clear or virtually clear. Granted they do accumulate a nice coat of dust/dirt which itself might obscure the orange, but I think there could be a measured approach here: Go crazy inside every panel and under the whole vehicle with rust inhibitor? No! Apply it to select vulnerable parts? I'd really like Toyota to tell us why not, once and for all.
For clarity, when I say MGR, thats Motor-Generator Rear, the differential housing which has the rear motor in it.
There are in fact two separate parts which factor in here.
The first part is technically referred to by Toyota as the Rear Traction Motor Cable. This is actually a very short cable (less than 12" I'd say) which runs from the top of MGR down to the side of it, presenting us with what I will refer to as a receptacle/female connector which points DOWN. Why have an intermediate connection here on the side in the first place? Presumably in order for there to be an easy way to disconnect MGR. The top connection is quite involved: a trio of pretty rugged bolt-type lugs, one for each of the three power leads, sealed with an o-ring and cover, then an outer cover, both of which are tagged as "not reusable", not to mention you can only access this area by detaching MGR from the vehicle and lowering it using a transmission jack. So yea, there needs to be a simple way to disconnect MGR for maintenance etc.
The second part is technically referred to by Toyota as the HV Floor Under Wire Harness. This is the long cable which connects at the side of MGR and runs forward to join the rest of the high voltage wiring. Where it connects up at the side of MGR, this cable has what I will call a plug/male connector which points UP.
If you consult the TIS for the 2019-22 WEP (google it... you can find it), prerequisites notwithstanding (vehicle qualifies, exhibits either DTC, AM interference, or both, etc), it calls for the inspection of these two components and replace either just the HV Floor Under Wire Harness, or both the HV Floor Under Wire Hardness and Rear Traction Motor Cable (as case may be).
As some have pointed out, the choice of location notwithstanding, Toyota DID do the right thing in terms orientation: Because the receptacle/female portion of this connection points down (and has some depth to it) contaminants will not "gather" or pool in it. Any other orientation would have created a far worse situation.
It is important to note that the plug/male portion of this connection has an integrated black rubber seal which sets up inside the receptacle/female portion. That seal ensures nothing will reach the actual contacts deep up inside. But here came our first issue: The chamfered circumference of the mouth of the receptacle corrodes. I dont think corrosion here alone would be devastating, but it is so close to the aforementioned rubber seal that as the metal pits and the surface deforms, I imagine the seal is no longer perfect giving rise to contaminant ingress at this interface. For what its worth I notice the TIS instructions don't mention looking any further: if the chamfered circumference is pitting/corroded, it should be replaced.
The second issue is that metal mesh we've seen so many horrifying photos of, rusted to the point of being powder. Its actual role is still unclear to me. Lots of electric wire assembles have an outer shield of this type, usually grounded so as to be a barrier to EMI/RFI (Electromagnetic and Radio frequency interference). Thats probably why, when it breaks down, we get static on the AM Radio band (but I think that is just a convenient canary alerting us to impending deeper issues). The real problem here has I believe more to do with what we'll call the clamp, the metal sleeve which holds the splayed end of the mesh in place. My guess is that when this part corrodes and deforms, it allows contaminants to reach up inside the white plastic plug housing and eventually reach the critical parts: the terminations/connections of the three main wires. Be super interesting to dissect a failed one. Anyway...
My understanding is that the first "fix" Toyota implemented (2023?) was to add openings to the outer/orange plastic cover so that corrosive road spray can easily drain from the cavity. A single hole on the bottom makes sense, not huge 1/2" ones on the side. If you ask me this only serves to accelerate the corrosion as most of the time salt comes as an aerosol generated by cars rolling down the road and you've just given that an easier way to waft in. But I digress. Its worth noting that as part of the 2023 fix, photos show a "foam" gasket at the interface of the Rear Traction Motor Cable and the HV Floor Underwire Harness. More on that in a sec.
The second fix, lets call it the 2024, is FAR more interesting. Noteworthy to me is the new dark reddish-orange gasket/seal which appears at the metal interface of the plug and the receptacle (and replaces the foam one from the year before). I'm guessing that this is some sort of rubber or resilient material (if anyone has actually unplugged one of these new ones and can show us a better picture of this new gasket/seal, please share!). I'm guessing the intention of this newer gasket would be to prevent contaminants from reaching the rim/chamfer of the receptacle opening (remember, that is where the TIS instructs the technician to examine) which should in turn, one would hope, eliminate the issue at that interface. I wonder if, to compensate for the thickness of that gasket, the plug itself is slightly longer now. We'd need old and new side by side to know for sure but if that were the case, it would mean that one couldn't simply use the new gasket on an old plug.
On to the black wrap/sleeve, which I think is more than meets the eye. That mesh should have never been exposed as it was (the orange plastic cover was never a "seal", it just protects the wires from physical debris and curious fingers). Yes there is the black sleeve now, but there is also what looks like orange electrical tape wrapped around it at the clamp with what looks like a black zip-tie wrapped around that (hard to tell without seeing it first hand). There are even thin strips of foam: I can see one directly above the clamp on the metal housing (which may or may not extend down inside the wrap), and another just below the orange 'tape'. I can only guess at their exact purpose but what all this suggests to me is that this is not a hastily conceived bad-aid, but an actual effort by someone at Toyota to make the best of a bad situation: There are literally hundreds of thousands of affected RAV4s on the road, and especially now that Toyota is apparently on the hook for as long as the next 6 years (in the case of 2022s) I believe they are motivated to come up with solutions which will hold up, else they will, at considerable expense, be replacing wiring harnesses left and right, in some cases more than once per vehicle (and they certainly don't want to have to extend the WEP to 2023's and beyond).
But there is another aspect to this which is not being talked about enough. The location of the connection, for my money, is NOT the tragic flaw. There are innumerable exposed metal parts on the underside of vehicles, these RAV4s being no exception, including many electrical connections in far more vulnerable places. Think: wires running to the ABS sensors, to the electronic parking Brakes, or even the main connection on the top of MGR (which honestly is just as exposed to the elements as the connection on the side of it). Why doesn't every single bolt disintegrate? Its the material used for the exposed parts of the MGR connector (which include the previously exposed clamp) which is the real design flaw. I don't know what they consist of exactly, but whatever mix of metals they are, they seem unusually reactive to corrosive elements. Had they been cast/machined from something different (high impact nylon plastic perhaps? I saw a YouTube from Poland I think it was...) we might not be having this conversation. As it stands, even with the 2024 revision, those two metal plug/receptacle housings are still a liability (unless they changed the material and we dont know it).
All that said, at the end of the day what really puzzles me is why Toyota doesn't simply issue a service bulletin directing these exposed metal parts be sprayed with one of the inexpensive, widely tried and tested light oil based corrosion inhibitors (Rust Check, Krown, CorrosionFree, the list goes on), say, once a year as part of routine maintenance. I wish they would just be open and transparent on the topic. At <$10 for a rattle can I would think it could save them untold amounts of money in warranty and warranty extension program claims. My only guess is that if they did so, it would undermine the narrative that we've been fed by dealerships since the very first Pius: that horrible things will happen if you apply anything to a Hybrid. I had always thought that their original reason for screaming "do not undercoat a Hybrid!" had more to do with the dubious tar, wax, and silicone undercoating products of years past which, in addition to not being effective long term anyway, could conceivably obscure the telltale orange color of the HV components, which I accept is a safety issue. But any of the light/mineral oil based products I've ever seen are either clear or virtually clear. Granted they do accumulate a nice coat of dust/dirt which itself might obscure the orange, but I think there could be a measured approach here: Go crazy inside every panel and under the whole vehicle with rust inhibitor? No! Apply it to select vulnerable parts? I'd really like Toyota to tell us why not, once and for all.
21 - 40 of 72 Posts
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
