Featured Slightly Toyota funded coalition calls for weaker CAFE

I don't think that alone will be enough to help the manufacturers with CAFE targets; hybrids and plug ins are still a small part of sales. Getting more on the road will help, but not as much as giving people a reason to not upgrade to the thirstier V6 or 8.

I do agree on making the plug in incentive point of sale, or direct to the manufacturer. Perhaps we should remove the number sold limit with ramp downs, and just set an expiration date. The point of the incentive was to help establish the plug in battery industry. Why award those that waited on bringing out a plug in more because they'll see a greater return on the incentive since battery prices have dropped, than those that took more risk by committing from the beginning?

 

The Tundra is a USA only model. I believe in a world with other 180 countries where Tundras and Tacomas don't exist.
Honda tried little to stay in the hybrids, if you mean to point out eco-ethical moves by other manufacturers.

Other manufacturers would follow the carrot, but haven't.
Toyota would be very profitable in keeping diesel going on in Europe, but insisted in dropping it from the Lexus portfolio. Can you name a manufacturer that went away from diesels in the European Market?

And about FCV, Toyota has leased their FCHVs since...2002, and so did the others. Mirai may not be the better car out there, but is the first FCV model to have a tag and sold like every other car. Why would anyone deny that?

 

Autos are wondering if they can meet the aggressive CAFE regs in the face of low gaso prices and increased sales of SUV's etc. So they are trying to "cry uncle" (after all it's a review year to make a reality check on the targets) ...but EPA will likely not listen. EPA has been "full speed ahead, damn the torpedos" for example, on cellulosic ethanol mandates, even when it was impossible to make cellulosic ethanol. I am expecting EPA will hold firm even if the target appears to be the impossible dream. We will deal with fallout when the target is not met.

 

As soon as the review is over, the Saudi will jack up the price, again.

Bob Wilson

 

ok yea it's all of 'em, true . . . . but the others aren't publishing retarded commercials, "hum hum hum . . . . . . (little birdies & trees & sunshine etc)" enviro-type commercials with a monster rag doll happily traipsing around, made up entirely of humans all twisted & knotted together, either. Ok the more recent cop chase commercial probably offset all the sunshine hum hum goodness ... so perhaps now it's a wash. still, you know what I mean.

.

 

right, and toyota doesn't make a tundra, land cruiser, etc., etc., etc. someone's been drinking the cool aid, or maybe just showing a little more anti toyota bias than they meant to.

 

Oil Is Still Heading to $10 a Barrel - Bloomberg View

Gary Shilling is my econmics guru...he has been right about just about everything since 1980. I think we're talking <$1/gal gaso by Feb 2017 in some states with lower gaso taxes...last year I prediced $1.00 by Feb 2016, I was low by about 25 cents, but get ready for sub $1. How did I predict $1 for Feb_2016, almost 12 months before it happened? Following Gary Shilling. Bisco as my witness.

I suspect a recession may be in the cards also, but I leave that prediction to Shilling.

 

And neither does the Hilux presumably. Nor Land Cruisers.

Making hybrids is not the sole criteria to judge a car companies eco cred. As I stated, Honda was founded on making fuel efficient engines, and their engines are in far more than cars. Their lawn equipment and various sized generators are some of the most fuel efficient. They resisted making V6s, despite people asking for them because of that founding principle. It's why they don't have a V8.

Toyota sells a lot more hybrids, but they also sell a lot more FSPs. When the Camry hybrid came out, they did not stop selling the V6 model. They are going to convert Australian coal into hydrogen, in Australia, and ship it to Japan for greater expense, because it makes Japan's carbon books look better. These are not eco-ethical motivated decisions. They are profit and public perception motivated ones.

They have come realize the FCEV carrot isn't worth the investment. Even Toyota partnered with BMW to help control their own R&D costs on FCEVs.

My understanding was that Toyota didn't have the greatest reputation in Europe, and they were going to source them from BMW. While that might be a selling point for a Toyota, like a Craftsman mower with a Honda engine, using a direct competitor's engine probably isn't for Lexus.

Then Lexus has a small market share in Europe. Them dropping diesels is not to the same scale as it would be for BMW, Mercedes, or Renault to do so.

Not denying it. Just saying it is no big deal as long as the car needs heavy subsidies to get the price down to a point where the very well to do can afford it.

By offering a BEV and PHEV version of the next Clarity, Honda has acknowledged that a FCEV is too pricey, and still needs improvements before it is truly ready for commercialization.

 

I've read carrot for hybrids somewhere in your post. Where were the other manufacturers back in 1997?
Regarding diesel dropping, one may ask why the C-HR will not have a diesel engine, probably you have a guess for that regarding commercial aspects rather eco-based ones. C-HR is not a Lexus, remember.

OTOH, also the manufacturing at Toyota has a ethical concern, like the bio-plastic used in 3Gen Prius, or the recent 2050 near-zero impact challenge...
Toyota Global Site | Toyota Environmental Challenge 2050

 

Ultimately, Toyota's problem is that while they sell a fair amount of efficient cars, they also sell plenty of inefficient cars (things like Camry V6s and such, and a lot of the Lexus lineup), and lots of inefficient trucks and SUVs. And they're even one of the automakers that does better on CAFE... but their efficient stuff is offset.

I would also not be surprised if things like the Prius are relatively low cost here, due to an attempt to get people to buy them to offset the trucks more. It doesn't help if you've got fuel efficient vehicles if nobody's buying them, after all (which is also what things like gas guzzler taxes and CAFE fines are for, to discourage sales of the inefficient vehicles...) Mind you, Toyota could also start applying hybrid technology to their more inefficient vehicles, to try to improve their efficiency.

 

I think much of this thread has become pissing in the wind.

We know that toyota, honda, sanyo, and panasonic gained a great deal of hybrid technology through miti's BEV program. MITI only after toyota lobbied with the prius, provided hybrid incentives. About 14 months after the prius, honda released their hybrid the insight which were helped by those government incentives carved out for the prius and cars like it. The insight had to be pretty far along when toyota released the prius. No one else was close even though ford had tried to get the US PNGV more like the miti program, it was focused on much more expensive and much more efficient vehicles.

Toyota and Honda started exporting hybrids to the US in 2000. In 2001 the US government started providing hybrid incentives. Ford joined the hybrid movement with a patent swap with toyota and the escape in 2004.

Hybrid's have sold poorly outside of the US and Japan. Through April toyota has reported over 88% of the 3.7 Million prii sold have been sold in Japan and the US. Europe is now catching up with the US in hybrid sales, not because sales are good in europe (less than 1.6%), but because US sales are falling.

The cash for hybrids has expired in the US. The cafe bonuses are still there, but with hybrid sales in the US on the decline, ford and toyota are going to get fewer of those hybrid bonuses than they expected when cafe was passed. Toyota is selling more of those tundras and tacomas (a modified hilux sold in north america and bolivia) and highlanders that need those hybrid bonuses, or need to increase efficiency.

 

Toyota ought to partner with Honda for a next generation Prius where Honda will have control and block any weird exterior design cues and Honda should definitely do the entire interior design. I think it would increase Prius sales. Scion and Subaru made the FR-S and BR-Z.

Meanwhile, the Civic family will continue to sell 35k units a month here while Prius will sell around 10 to 12k. Maybe some would be Prius buyers will go for the Civic hatchback coming in the Fall, we'll see.

 

I read an article recently that suggested that Honda was losing money on every Civic sold to undercut the competition and build a solid base for servicing for years to come.

 

if toyota partners with honda, no one will be able to afford it.

 

Is that what Honda typically does with the Civic? If you have link let me know. Still solid cars and I bet their turbo will hold up well.
I could hardly believe my nieces 2002 Civic was still running at 180,000 miles while poorly maintained.

Anyhow, I still don't see an alternative fuel vehicle I would buy. I need value for the money and a great design. Unfortunately I could not tolerate being in this new Prius and I don't need a 2017 Accord Hybrid with a trunk full of battery and no pass through.

So, I continue to spew out twice the CO2 and burn twice the gas. That's life.

 

No one? How so?
Toyota could build Prius in Japan and Honda could build their named copy in Ohio. ....
For the good of the environment.

anyhow, my main point is I think Toyota should outsource Prius interior design, 2016 Prius tiny glove box, white plastic, no hidden storage and very little of it, not good, and I'll skip the seat lack of wheel scope complaint.

Honda took a floating bridge type design for the NEW Civic and made it sports sedan like, useful and attractive.

IF Toyota had made, for sake of argument an verbatim copy of new Civic interior in the new Prius, and Prius shoppers complained about now having a center gauge and 'boring conventional' interior, I would roll my eyes and say oh brother to no end...

And back to topic, wouldn't more gains be made by increasing MPGs of the lowest scoring vehicles? They burn the most gas don't they?

 

I read that in either Motor Trend or Car and Driver; I don't think it has been Honda's practice to sell under cost.

My daughter has a 2003 Civic Hybrid with 275k miles (it used to be mine before I got my first Prius in 2004). Still going strong; her dealer keeps trying to sell her a new car every time she visits; but her requirement is for him to beat her current monthly car payment (zero).

 

toyota is the leader in cost reduction. sometimes to a fault. i think a honda exterior/interior might add 5k.