Lexus EV conspiracy theories

pretty clever eh? Yes - that's just like the their Scion EV. Over $40,000 MSRP w/ a 30+ mile range. 3hr recharge.
Toyota proved their point that electric cars are too expensive and don't have enough range. Imagine that.

Scion iQ EV - Actual Sales Versus Toyota's Initial Expectations
Think of it like the story of the King's new wardrobe. Some will see the king's clothes as the most beautiful thing ever, even as some dumb kid will say, "hey how come that man's naked"

.

 

63 kWh = Ariya
62 kWh = ID.4
58 kWh = ID.3
58 kWh = Ioniq 5
58 kWh = EV6
53 kWh = Ioniq 6
45 kWh = ID.3

Offering a lower capacity battery-pack has become common practice.

 

Of course, labeling that as "unusable range" is somewhat of an insult to anyone who purchased a Leaf.

 

that only works so far - a point Toyota proved all too well

12kWh = Scion IQ

 

Still wasting our time with cherry-picked examples...

 

The Volt, Spark EV, Ioniq Electric, and maybe the i3 capacity increased through the first gen's life cycle. This seems to have been the industry's common approach as technology and cost improvements facilitated larger capacities.

It isn't wild that using a pack with the same architecture saves on production costs. The Ioniq Electric gained a bigger battery when Hyundai switched to a trimmed down Kona pack for it. IIRC, the Ioniq's pack is the one from the shorter range Kona that was available in Korea.

As for quietly playing the game, why sticking with CHAdeMO when the EU has made CCS its standard years ago? CHAdeMO isn't used on the Chinese version.

Are you saying Lexus will continue selling the smaller battery along side the new pack?

What is common practice is a company announcing a selection of ranges will be available for an upcoming model, and having those range options roll out within a reasonable time of each other. Switching to a higher capacity battery was only common in the beginning of this new EV era, as battery costs dropped.

It is an example of Toyota's preconceived and wrong notions of what the public wanted in a BEV. The iQ EV was the car Toyota designed while Tesla was doing Rav4 EV conversions. The shorter ranges and slower fast charge speeds of their current BEVs shows they still aren't listening to the public, but their own internal ideas for a car type executives still speak out against.

 

Suggested edit:

Bob Wilson

 

BM, is that you?

While hybrids can reduce emissions, it sounds like Toyota was selling more of the their old, dirty, less efficient ICE models in Australia, as they did in the US. Yeah, hybrids can be part of the solution, but not if they aren't available. We get it, you're a business, and need to show profit, so couldn't rush in with hybrids. Fine, you can't point to hybrids when called out on your BEV efforts, when you weren't quick with hybrids either then.

Toyota is fine with BEVs. As long as they are short range. Research* shows that is all people want.

*From the EV1 era or earlier when most BEVs were running lead acid. Maybe some got NiMH.

 

People did want that, as sales confirmed.

3 years later... just like any other mid-cycle update... the vehicle will get some improvements, including a range increase.

 

Don't forget that you can buy the car but must lease the batteries. That way you can pull a "GM" and kill their electric cars.

Bob Wilson

 

Where?
Looks like Toyota/Lexus sales are buried in the other segment
European sales 2021 Electric Vehicles - carsalesbase.com
2021 (Full Year) Europe: Best-Selling Electric Car Models and Brands - Car Sales Statistics

2022 isn't looking any better for Toyota plug in sales

EV-Volumes - The Electric Vehicle World Sales Database

They could no longer be bothered to build cars there anymore. I think Scion was more about selling older technology engines and transmissions than to the youth.

From the comments I gather Australia doesn't have a fleet rating like CAFE in the US.

 

The only Chinese companies in the US are Volvo, BYD, and Kandi. BYD sells buses, but might not currently sell a car here. The past one didn't sell well. And Kandi, is only selling low speed models.

Honda is one of the big believers in hydrogen with Toyota and Hyundai. It was lease only, but the first gen Clarity was available years before the Mirai. Suzuki doesn't sell any cars in the US anymore. They, with Subaru and Mazda, might be too small to make the switch on their own. Mazda has said it was their size that was the issue for even hybrids; it was develop the SkyActiv suite or hybrids, and hybrids only go so far without efficient engines. They went to Toyota for hybrid help before Toyota got a big stake in them. It is pretty much the same with Subaru, Toyota, and hybrids. Though I think Subaru started on an EV platform on their own, but it got co-opted by Toyota.

CAFE, and the CARB ZEV credits, are basically the same to the EU's in regard to credit trading. Also the loopholes. In its later years, Ford's Crown Victoria was 'foreign' built car. This was so its poor economy would be counted in the CAFE import fleet, which was mostly small, fuel efficient models, instead of the domestic fleet with the other, larger, lower efficiency models. I wouldn't say meaningless, as it got somebody to other fuel efficient models here.

 

I refuse to buy a car that won't allow me to operate some of its features while the car is in motion. Last time I checked that's what cars do, they're in motion. And I refuse to let someone else dictate when it is safe for me to do something. I'm an adult and I expect to be treated like one. The days of answering to a parent or long gone and I refuse to revert back

 

Interesting position, and one I understand.
However, how are auto companies supposed to deal with lawsuits claiming they we’re negligent because they allow people to do unsafe things. For example, allowing videos to be played while the car is in drive?

I’m also a firm believer in personal responsibility as well as The Darwin Awards. But lawyers are doing their best to convince prospective clients that it is always someone else’s fault.

 

Does a radio in the car. That drowns out The sound of sirens. That should be taken out of the car. And your cell phone should not permit you to talk on it while you're in the car. And Prius shouldn't allow you to adjust the control on a touch screen while driving. In fact you shouldn't be allowed to adjust the climate control while driving. You shouldn't be able to low allowed to move the seat. And you shouldn't be allowed to move the mirrors. These are all distractions. None of this should be allowed. In fact you should have a wall around you as a driver preventing you from talking to your passengers. We can make this wall out of thick soundproof glass sit at they cannot distract you.

Toyota was trying to lease the remote start service to the purchaser of the car until people revolted. You might accept living in a nanny state but I do not.