Whence Toyota?!?

  • Active since 1995, Hearth.com is THE place on the internet for free information and advice about wood stoves, pellet stoves and other energy saving equipment.

    We strive to provide opinions, articles, discussions and history related to Hearth Products and in a more general sense, energy issues.

    We promote the EFFICIENT, RESPONSIBLE, CLEAN and SAFE use of all fuels, whether renewable or fossil.

woodgeek

Minister of Fire
Jan 27, 2008
4,773
SE PA
There are some cases where BEVs are going to be a challenge, like extreme northern climates and rural areas of the west. I mean, how much infrastructure will be practical to put in for Wyoming or western Kansas, or Nebraska?

The cost of DCFC units are falling rapidly as more units are going into the field. And then the number of units required will scale with the local population or traffic on the interstate. So there might never be as many DCFC in Wyoming as in California, but there could easily be as many as needed.

A DCFC unit is a very simple and durable device (in principle) with lower upkeep than a gasoline station. And there are enough gasoline stations in Wyoming to support the need.
 

EbS-P

Minister of Fire
Jan 19, 2019
3,518
SE North Carolina
As a western Kansas native I never lived more than 100 miles from a Walmart. I haven’t looked but I bet every Walmart has a charger within 10 miles.

I’m not ready to be an EV only family. Might never get there but for every day driving even those in western Kansas could get by just fine. EV adoption is political so they won’t. It that simple.
 

peakbagger

Minister of Fire
Jul 11, 2008
7,683
Northern NH
I don't spend my time looking at Walmart's but I've never seen one in NH with a charging station. It's odd as plug ins and BEVs are starting to show up in the area. The only nearby chargers are at campground, and a local resort hotel. The local utility wants 2 million dollars to upgrade the power system in my small town just to get ready for charging stations (not including the charging stations).

All of the generation in the area is renewable (its net exporter to the ISO New England grid 24/7). About 40 MWs run of river hydro with a big Tesla battery bank going in, a 70 MW biomass plant with at least 30 days of fuel on the pad, a 99 MW wind farm, a 5 MW wind farm and a few small community solar farms going in soon. IF there was a better connection to the grid, there would be another 160 MW wind plant built.

I do get a kick that the local ATV rental business which is usually frequented by folks with big pickup trucks is desperate to get a Tesla Supercharger station at his business to draw in more traffic. The closest Tesla supercharger is 30 miles east or about 40 miles south.
 

EbS-P

Minister of Fire
Jan 19, 2019
3,518
SE North Carolina
I dont send my time looking at Walmart's but I never seen one in NH with a charging station. Its odd as plug ins and BEVs are starting to show up in the area. The only nearby chargers is at campground, and a local resort hotel. The local utility wants 2 million dollars to upgrade the power system in my small town just to get ready for charging stations (not including the charging stations).

All of the generation in the area is renewable (its net exporter to the ISO New England grid 24/7). About 40 MWs run of river hydro with a big Tesla battery bank going in, a 70 MW biomass plant with at least 30 days of fuel on the pad, a 99 MW wind farm, a 5 MW wind farm and a few small community solar farms going in soon. IF there was a better connection to the grid, there would be another 160 MW wind plant built.

I do get a kick that the local ATV rental business which is usually frequented by folks with big pickup trucks is desperate to get a Tesla Supercharger station at his business to draw in more traffic. The closest Tesla supercharger is 30 miles east or about 40 miles south.
I agree but N H just isn’t wester Kansas. My point is that Walmarts are roughly 100 miles apart. Goolang Hays, Great Bend, garden city, liberal. I’m not saying that every Walmart has a charger they just have a population center near a Walmart that manny people travel to. Looks like we’d be making trips to Goodland in a Tesla. And everyone’s favorite destination Lamar CO;). We lived right on the KS CO border. Then later in hays.

Yeah it’s pretty bleak out there if your not heading to an interstate in a Tesla.

21F8E501-17B8-4816-B002-3E0FB1560637.png 8A5D78BC-E4E2-4851-84F0-7A6F3A5191D6.png
 

EbS-P

Minister of Fire
Jan 19, 2019
3,518
SE North Carolina
Ok is Toyota on to something? Hybrids smaller batteries may be more cost competitive?

And economics is just like physics only harder…… (wait for it).
 

stoveliker

Minister of Fire
Nov 17, 2019
6,202
Long Island NY

LogCabinFever

New Member
May 24, 2021
59
CT, USA

15 purely EV models by 2025 is not bad?
Again, others may laugh and criticize, but it just makes sense. Akio Toyoda is not putting all his eggs in one basket, and instead diversifying his powerplant portfolio. He knows where his bread and butter is and he knows his customers. It’s hard to argue against that, seeing Toyota‘s success. He puts his head down and ignores all the hysteria. And believe me, I’m definitely not a Toyota fan boy.
 

woodgeek

Minister of Fire
Jan 27, 2008
4,773
SE PA

15 purely EV models by 2025 is not bad?

Its a good article, and echoes the speeches and public statement Toyoda has been making for the last 2 years.

Of course, all large corporations do PR, and that PR is more about making shareholders happy than about the truth. The other car makers also promised XX new BEV models by some year, and none of them met their targets.

Also, makers like GM were fielding EVs for many years, and making profound statements about their investments in EV and hope and change, and then delivered tiny volumes of these vehicles, with power trains built entirely by a Korean sub-contractor. The other legacy makers were being even MORE disingenuous, and selling even tinier volumes of hastily designed conversion cars. Or tiny volumes of luxury EVs at eye-watering prices.

And then when Trump got elected in 2016 ALL OF THEM signed a letter asking for weaker CAFE standards and saying the EVs wouldn't work or weren't ready for prime time.

So ALL of the legacy makers were singing the exact same tune as Toyoda is until a few years ago. Toyoda's companies (he represents the trade group of all the Japanese makers) are just a few years behind the other legacy makers, like 3 or 4. Just like how those legacy makers are still about 3-4 years behind Tesla, in terms of production scale.

Being an early adopter in tech can get you killed, if you enter before the customer value proposition is there....

Did the non-Japanese legacy makers enter too late (as the Tesla fans assert), all doomed to bankruptcy as Tesla (and maybe other startups) take over? I very much DOUBT that.

Will the US legacy makers be able to scale EV production over the next 3-5 years to meet exponentially growing demand in the US and EU? I bet they CAN, and will compete with Tesla with (most) folks that like a more traditional car/model and like/trust an existing US brand.

China looks like a death match right now between BYD, Tesla and a bunch of chinese BYD startup clones.

Toyoda is betting that the value proposition for the customer (due, e.g. a higher than expected cost of batteries say 3-5 years from now) will not be there to allow for high demand. In this case the US/EU makers scale their products, and don't turn a profit or enough profit on them, while Toyota continues to make a healthy profit on ICE models. In this scenario, Toyota then enters the market later when BEVs DO become favorable. Its not clear how or when that would happen, but Toyoda likes to talk about solid state batteries, like a technological 'deus ex machina' that puts/keeps them on top of a BEV world. 5-10 years from now.

I'm skeptical. Costs (like with batteries) are reduced by learning curves. By building LOTS of batteries. True, some OTHER battery chemistry might magically appear that then eats conventional lithiums lunch, and all that learning and production infrastructure becomes obsolete, and then Toyota swoops in, laughing, with a Japanese govt bankroll to boot!

But honestly, that seems like wishful thinking to me. There is a lot to this EV transition OTHER than battery cells. Winning over customers, building infrastructure, working out the kinks of building electric drivetrains cheaply, restocking spare parts networks and repair techs, etc. If a new cell chemistry appears, it seems more likely that it will emerge by a series of steps at the existing BEV makers (Tesla or a legacy maker) and be quickly reverse engineered by the others, with a little retooling. Which is what is happening now.

Toyoda is betting the farm. We will see in a few years if he was right.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sloeffle

stoveliker

Minister of Fire
Nov 17, 2019
6,202
Long Island NY
Well, Toyota argues, and correctly so, that the others are betting the farm too. Just on the other side.

If Toyota is not disingenuous with their professed EV planning, I don't think they are wrong. In fact, every new product will have reliability issues, leading to trust issues. Not discounting individual experiences here, Toyota has for a long time been a very reliable and trustworthy brand . If they come in a bit later, they will still have that association. The trick is to time it well because too late will hurt them.
 

woodgeek

Minister of Fire
Jan 27, 2008
4,773
SE PA
If Toyota is not disingenuous with their professed EV planning, I don't think they are wrong.
Toyota IS being disingenuous. That is the point of this thread. They are actively advertising and lobbying AGAINST BEVs at home and abroad, while Toyoda is giving this PR speech to shareholders. (Just like the other makers did in the past)

That is the definition of disingenuous.
 

stoveliker

Minister of Fire
Nov 17, 2019
6,202
Long Island NY
Toyota IS being disingenuous. That is the point of this thread. They are actively advertising and lobbying AGAINST BEVs at home and abroad, while Toyoda is giving this PR speech to shareholders. (Just like the other makers did in the past)

That is the definition of disingenuous.
I think it is not.
Their philosophy is that a *pure* BEV world is as of yet not achievable. That is consistent with their business approach of not giving up ICE yet. And it is consistent with their arguing (to policy makers) that going purely BEV is not the right move right now (in their view).

They are NOT saying "don't do BEV's". They are saying, "we can't ONLY do BEV's right now".

I find their behavior utterly internally consistent.

The BEV world is not as black and white as the extremes on both sides want to make it...
 
  • Like
Reactions: boomfire

boomfire

Member
Jun 9, 2022
54
PA
I think it is not.
Their philosophy is that a *pure* BEV world is as of yet not achievable. That is consistent with their business approach of not giving up ICE yet. And it is consistent with their arguing (to policy makers) that going purely BEV is not the right move right now (in their view).

They are NOT saying "don't do BEV's". They are saying, "we can't ONLY do BEV's right now".

I find their behavior utterly internally consistent.

The BEV world is not as black and white as the extremes on both sides want to make it...

+1



I traded my Toyota corolla for Ioniq 5 (BEV), don't get me wrong, i like my ioniq 5, but the moment Toyota comes out with a BEV that I like (tacoma/tundra), I will be in line for one
 
  • Like
Reactions: woodgeek

stoveliker

Minister of Fire
Nov 17, 2019
6,202
Long Island NY
I'm quite pro EV's too. I'm just not seeing something wrong with proclaiming "all BEV is not the right path at this time" and acting like "all BEV is not the right path at this time".

The next car I'll buy is going to be an BEV for sure. My drive-to-end-of-life mode just makes that event a while out.
 

peakbagger

Minister of Fire
Jul 11, 2008
7,683
Northern NH
Keep in mind that with self driving tech, it is not impossible that folks may not own a car, they will just dial up an EV service provider and the charged car will self drive to their house for their use until they done with it. It will drop them off and head back to the "barn", which may be a neighbor that is willing to rent out their car.
 

woodgeek

Minister of Fire
Jan 27, 2008
4,773
SE PA
I think it is not.
Their philosophy is that a *pure* BEV world is as of yet not achievable. That is consistent with their business approach of not giving up ICE yet. And it is consistent with their arguing (to policy makers) that going purely BEV is not the right move right now (in their view).

They are NOT saying "don't do BEV's". They are saying, "we can't ONLY do BEV's right now".

I find their behavior utterly internally consistent.

The BEV world is not as black and white as the extremes on both sides want to make it...

Not black and white. A growing curve. Some makers are ahead on the curve, others are bringing up the rear.

And for the record, the other legacy makers are still making a chit-ton of ICE vehicles and will be doing so for a long time, they are still at the beginning of the curve, not at the top. They are just all-in with actually scaling BEV production and putting many models on the market. But the transition will take time. They obv think they can sell the BEVs they are making now at a good price that will move.

Toyota is not scaling production right now. They are doing the same lip service the other makers did years ago. They are fielding a single, not very good or well priced BEV now, not at scale. Kinda like GM did 5 years ago. They appear to be acting like there is no money to be made in 2022 or 2023 selling BEVs. So they are not gonna. Despite other companies making millions of BEVs, apparently to heavy demand.

And yeah, I still think its disingenuous to give speeches about how EVs are the future, while lobbying against incentives for BEVs around the world. I guess we'll have to disagree on that one. Ofc, all the other legacy makers did the same thing.... like 4-5 years ago.
 

stoveliker

Minister of Fire
Nov 17, 2019
6,202
Long Island NY
I guess you and I disagree about advocating against pushing to make EVs the sole option. I concur with Toyota it is not the right approach to go all in now.

That is what they are lobbying against. And their actions are consistent with that. Nothing disingenuous there.

So they may think others (including govts) are going too fast. That is not an opinion that is without merit. They may be wrong, and if so they will suffer the consequences. But it's not disingenuous.
 

woodgeek

Minister of Fire
Jan 27, 2008
4,773
SE PA
I guess you and I disagree about advocating against pushing to make EVs the sole option. I concur with Toyota it is not the right approach to go all in now.

That is what they are lobbying against. And their actions are consistent with that. Nothing disingenuous there.

So they may think others (including govts) are going too fast. That is not an opinion that is without merit. They may be wrong, and if so they will suffer the consequences. But it's not disingenuous.
They are not running against making EVs the sole option at some future date. They are running ads and lobbying against incentives to reduce current BEV sales TODAY, period. As if the current sales of BEVs to happy customers is a regretful MISTAKE.

The only thing wrong with selling a few BEVs today is that it reduces Toyota's profits. They are not selflessly trying to save the world from making a bad policy decision.
 

EbS-P

Minister of Fire
Jan 19, 2019
3,518
SE North Carolina
Not black and white. A growing curve. Some makers are ahead on the curve, others are bringing up the rear.

And for the record, the other legacy makers are still making a chit-ton of ICE vehicles and will be doing so for a long time, they are still at the beginning of the curve, not at the top. They are just all-in with actually scaling BEV production and putting many models on the market. But the transition will take time. They obv think they can sell the BEVs they are making now at a good price that will move.

Toyota is not scaling production right now. They are doing the same lip service the other makers did years ago. They are fielding a single, not very good or well priced BEV now, not at scale. Kinda like GM did 5 years ago. They appear to be acting like there is no money to be made in 2022 or 2023 selling BEVs. So they are not gonna. Despite other companies making millions of BEVs, apparently to heavy demand.

And yeah, I still think its disingenuous to give speeches about how EVs are the future, while lobbying against incentives for BEVs around the world. I guess we'll have to disagree on that one. Ofc, all the other legacy makers did the same thing.... like 4-5 years ago.
It’s a hedge. And when done correctly you come out on top and worst case you don’t loose the farm.

I would like to see Toyota North American operations are operating with a different perspective.
 

NewGuy132

Member
Jan 22, 2021
159
Central MA
I point this out to my Tacoma and Tundra driving friends. Toyota came out the Prius. 50+ mpg. While the Taco and Tundra get 20-23 on a good day with a tail wind.

Toyota sells Tacoma and Tundra like cord wood on a cold November day. Think they would adapt it from the Prius?

And... wait for it... biggest donor to the Republican Party. Ain't saying that's good or bad. You can make up your own mind.
Cam here days late just to correct you. I drive a Tundra and get 15 MPG highway. That being said I don't see a hybrid Tundra being a big seller. People are already spending $50k+ on Tundra's, and they know what they are getting themselves in to. I don't think that adding another $20k to the price to get an extra even 20 MPG is going to have many people chomping at the bit.
 

begreen

Mooderator
Staff member
Nov 18, 2005
96,254
South Puget Sound, WA
The hybrid option is $3000 more for the Highlander SUV. Why would it cost $20k more for the Tundra? I would think it would be more like $5k for the Tundra. The hybrid version of the Highlander gets 50% better gas mileage than the non-hybrid. It's probably a fair equivalent of what the Tacoma would see.
 

EbS-P

Minister of Fire
Jan 19, 2019
3,518
SE North Carolina
The hybrid option is $3000 more for the Highlander SUV. Why would it cost $20k more for the Tundra? I would think it would be more like $5k for the Tundra. The hybrid version of the Highlander gets 50% better gas mileage than the non-hybrid. It's probably a fair equivalent of what the Tacoma would see.
I imagine the highlander shares the i4 hybrid with the Sienna. The twin turbo V6 for the tundra/sequoia definitely is more expensive. Number of v6 hybrid units will definitely be less than the i4. Market segment of the tundra and sequoia is different than the highlander.

Tacoma has in the past not shared power plays with the sienna and highlander. I don’t thick them hybrid Tacoma’s mileage will increase as much as the highlander. Drag Coefficient will be higher. Can’t remember the towing capacity of the highlander but I recall the Tacoma’s was higher. I’m think the highlander is now a CVT don’t think they would put that in the Tacoma.