The success and impact of this will come down to pricing, the state of charging networks, and production quantity.
It looks like it has roughly "table stakes" as far as capabilities go, at best, beating neither the Model Y or Mach-E on range, but likely costing less to compensate.
In my humble opinion, the name is horrendous. May they have the wisdom to change it when they start selling it in the U.S.
Tesla said it's releasing a CCS adapter and they may open up their charging network to other brands. If all the charging networks are combined then that might resolve issues for 95 percent of all drives
This would probably drive me away from buying a Tesla. They can't even keep up with demand for their superchargers when they're only serving Teslas[1]. Opening them up to any random EV would make make their charging network a complete mess.
There are a lot of people who like Toyotas because they just work. If they can put out a mid-spec EV that doesn't have GM's fire issues or Tesla's missing fasteners issues, they'll get customers.
I am one of those people. Driving a decade old Toyota Yaris with 210,000km, have performed <$500 in unplanned maintenance (had a ground fault that affected the wipers, cost ~$250).
I'm planning to upgrade to full electric sometime in the next three years, whenever something compelling comes up. If I had to switch today, it'd be a Leaf (doesnt suit my distance needs), a Model Y (doesnt suit my budget), or a Bolt EV (doesnt suit my no-active-recalls-due-to-fundamental-fire-risk requirement). Hyundai and Kia are out due to bad past experience with them (engine totally died just outside warranty, known issue, no option other than a $9000 engine replacement with no guarantees the same thing wouldn't happen 31 days thereafter). If Toyota or Honda had a compelling option I would buy in in a heartbeat
I do not think it contributes to link a different future product without adding any context.
If I had to guess, this is made in partnership with Toyota, like a handful of other products (the Subaru BR-Z, Scion FR-S, and current Toyota 86 are an example.)
EDIT: Ah you edited to include that it's a sibling vehicle. Thank you!
> Toyota fixed the major problem with Tesla’s wheel by introducing its “wing-shaped” steering wheel with a steer-by-wire system enabling what Toyota calls a “one motion grip”: Lock-to-lock is set at around 150 degrees.
I’ve always assumed most cars have mechanical steering with power assistance, so they’ll work in the event of a power failure. But a Lock to lock of 150 degrees sounds like it would be impossible to move even if there is a mechanical connection from steering to wheels.
Most manufacturers have already moved from hydraulic to electric motor steering systems, and steer-by-wire is the next step. It's not very common today, but the pace is picking up because the advantages (far fewer mechanical parts, automation) are tempting.
Reliability is going to come down to implementation. In some cases you actually have advantages in control-by-wire (less mechanical parts to fail). You can also implement mechanical overrides for emergency situations.
Yup. This idea that companies like Toyota are intentionally not selling products that consumers want but other products that consumers don't want is very common and very wrong.
It just means that not everyone has the same taste, and some peoples' tastes are in a minority, even if they don't know it.
"This idea that companies like Toyota are intentionally not selling products that consumers want ..."
This is, in fact, the case.
If Audi launches electric A4/A6/A8 tomorrow, that will be (roughly) 100% of their sales and they know it.
But they have billions sunk into ... (see my comment downthread about manufacturing and tooling).
So consumers need to wait for their lifetime ROI to satisfy the incumbent manufacturers such that they are willing to jettison those investments and electrify their actual lineup.
The worst offender, by far, is Volvo whose marketing pedigree, target audience and models produces are a perfect match for 21st century electric car buyers ... and yet we're two full model cycles past the Tesla Model S and I still can't get an electric V90 wagon ...
But you're not quite nailing the reasons behind the EV versions not selling well.
The Honda Fit EV had an 82 mile range, and could only be leased. (And Honda Fits were neat, but never sold that well, and even the gas version was pulled from the United States market.)
The Golf, on the other hand, is very popular, but the Golf EV had a 125-mile range, and was only sold in very limited markets/quantities.
What EV version of a popular vehicle had competitive range, produced in sufficient quality, and priced competitively? I can't think of any.
IMO, short-range EVs are actually bad for the EV market as a whole.
You'd think "Not everyone needs a car that can do long trips, so an EV that trades range for affordability is just satisfying a market segment!", and you'd be right...if consumers were rational.
Range anxiety is one of the top hurdles for EV adoption. Manufacturers that produce cars with only ~100 mile range, that only support charging at <20 kW only perpetuate the mentality that EVs don't have the range to be viable for anything other than commuting.
People who aren't EV enthusiasts and don't follow car or tech news specifically are likely to miss the memo that not only do long-range EVs exist, but they can be charged FAST. Obviously, they still don't charge as fast as a gas tank can be filled, but fast enough that day trips are quite viable, and road trips only require a little extra planning.
Not all families should have long range car. Short range cars should be the best for second car that never used for trip. It's also best usage of EV for now because it uses less batteries.
The electric F150 will primarily consume the market share of the Tacoma, Honda Pilot and other four-door people haulers that are staples of high class suburbs and gated communities. Being able to check the EV box will give it the proper image and they'll buy it in droves.
That's largely because you do actually need a new platform for your EV. The component packaging needs are significantly different, so EVs stuffed into conventional platforms need to make a lot of compromises.
But that's all under the skin. The styling and interiors can look as mundane or wild as the maker chooses.
I'm really looking forward to the insider stories coming out in 30 years, where they explain why every major legacy car manufacturer releases electric cars in a way that makes them undesirable.
EDIT It just occurred to me that this has already happened once: comparing the cars of the 50s/60s to the 80s, it is clear that there is a lot more going on than one would think. Is it inflation? Regulation? Corporate politics? Zeitgeist?
"I'm really looking forward to the insider stories coming out in 30 years, where they explain why every major legacy car manufacturer releases electric cars in a way that makes them undesirable."
We already know the answer - they have billions invested in supply chains, manufacturing and tooling that are all sunk costs with diminishing ROI if they actually make their cars electric.
We are witnessing a (frustrating) balancing act wherein the incumbent manufacturers attempt to squeeze as much return as possible from these old-line investments while simultaneously attempting to remain relevant and hedge their future bets.
I too believe its political. They release these shitty tech demos to gain experience and ensure that they can actually switch to EV once they really have to, but they'd really rather not sell too many of them right now.
But thats just a theory, and there are other plausible ones.
Their suppliers are changing, too and have been for years. Supply chain skills such as selecting partners, handling logistics and optimizing trade finance aren't becoming irrelevant because of a switch to EVs.
Well, perhaps "uninspiring" isn't the word I should've chosen.
The Pontiac Aztek and Toyota C-HR are hideous and polarizing. The only people that want them want to demonstrate that they don't care what their car looks like. That takes more commitment than taking on a bland, uninspiring vehicle like a Camry.
In my opinion, the bZ4X is also kind of "alternate powertrain" hideous. In a way, that worked for the Prius. You could clearly tell that the driver was an eco-warrior driving something "different." I think Toyota might actually be trying to hint at Lexus with this styling, which has a similar edginess to it.
> “bZ” stands for “beyond zero,” which is Toyota’s latest electrification strategy and a sort of sub-brand for its upcoming electric vehicles, starting with the bZ4X
I thought the whole value proposition of a 4Runner/Tacoma is the drive train has so many years and miles of being proven to be bulletproof that buyers know exactly what they are getting. An ICE car that will last a few hundred thousands miles with just maintenance. And they are so simple they are easy to work on and customize.
And you've just answered why Toyota has been so hesitant to move the conversion from ICE to electric motor forward. It's a key market advantage they are about to lose.
You think owners of EV cars don't care about reliability? They are even in a worse spot, needing to pay $1000 for a door handle failure because they can only get all their service from the dealer.
A rock solid EV that doesn't need a lot of repairs, and when it does, is simple/cheap to repair would be a huge win for EV buyers.
I am not into cars, but I can only assume the Lead/Volt/whatever else out there is bad quality or has some other drawback that causes them to basically be non existent on the roads.
Chevy needs to get that price down to $25k-$26k (their Trax ICE vehicle that the Bolt EUV looks like is $21k base).
The Ford Mustang EV will sell 20k units this year, or just over that.
The Volkswagen ID.4 will sell maybe 13k-14k units this year.
Nissan Leaf 10k units; Audi EVs 8k-9k units; Hyundai EVs 8k-9k units; Porsche Taycan 8k-9k units (the Taycan is now outselling the 911 in the US market).
If you're not into cars, I doubt you'd recognize a Chevy Bolt if it came up and tapped you on the hind end. Hell, I'm not only "into" cars, I bought one of the first Nissan Leafs, so I know my electric cars. And I have to take a second look to make sure it's a Bolt and not a Chevy Spark. Even the new Leafs aren't the odd-looking, bug-eyed beasts they used to be, and look almost normal these days.
So unless you've actually been looking, it's likely the body styles just haven't stood out enough for you to notice.
Assuming the car says "Leaf" or "Volt" on the back, I would have noticed. And I have seen a few of them, just far, far fewer than Teslas. The drastic difference in how often I see those makes me think there is something wrong with the value proposition though to make them so uncompetitive with Teslas.
About 79% of EVs in the US are Tesla. They exist, but Tesla certainly absolutely dominates the market.
The major drawback to other brands has many facets:
- Reputation for low range. The first Nissan Leaf made in 2011 had an EPA range of only 73 miles. In 2016, they started giving a bigger battery, but it still only had a paltry 107 mile range. It wasn't until 2019 that they started offering a battery with a 226 mile range, but by then, the reputation as a short-range EV was essentially set in stone.
- Slow charging speed. Teslas can charge at up to a whopping 250 kW, which can grant 75 miles of range in only 5 minutes. Meanwhile, the Leaf only supported up to 50 kW until 2019, and even now only does 100 kW.
- Lack of charging infrastructure. This is related to the previous note. If you go to a site like PlugShare.com, you can see TONS of chargers in any metro area, but the problem is, the extreme majority of them are J-1772 plugs that charge at <10 kW. At that speed, it takes an hour to get just 30 miles of range.
All that is compounded by the fact that car dealerships are often disincentivized to sell EVs. Dealerships make a significant portion of their money in the repair and maintenance bays. Since EVs require far less maintenance, and so far are proving far more reliable, dealerships don't want to sell them.
The Kia e-Niro is fantastic, at a fraction of the price of a Tesla. It's been so popular that it's been selling out in a lot of places.
I also hear good things about the Hyundai Kona, which is quite similar in terms of build and features. (They share a bunch of tech, I believe.)
Volkswagen's newest model, ID.4, is now being sold in the US. It's great.
The Chevy Bolt is not the latest tech, but I hear a lot of people are happy with it.
In Europe, of course, the variety is much greater: In addition to the above, you also have the Peugot e-208, Nissan Leaf, Opel Corsa-e, Škoda Enyaq, Ford e-Mach, Audi e-tron, Jaguar I-PACE, Polestar, etc.
You read something into my comment that I simply didn't say.
What I did say:
> It's a key market advantage they are about to lose.
Toyota has a key market advantage among ICE power trains. They do not have a key market advantage with electric power trains. (Though they should, given their decades of Prius production.)
Their market advantage is in manufacturing. They make quality products. Honda makes better, more reliable engines. But Toyota is great at manufacturing.
An electric drivetrain should have more of all of that. The motors can last much longer and the only part that degrades is the battery that's on a steeply descending cost curve. Toyota could make an EV truck that lasts forever mechanically with a battery that's easy to replace with new technology at a third of the price years down the line. Toyota's value proposition of longevity could easily be reinforced in an EV world and they've squandered the brand head start from the Prius too.
Yes, I am waiting for a Toyota EV simply because I trust Toyota’s quality, and I want something with CarPlay without that giant screen Teslas have.
I just would not expect them to waste the 4Runner/Tacoma branding on an experimental product due to the ICE 4Runner/Tacoma’s spectacular reputation as one of the most reliable cars available.
It's still a Toyota. What sub-brand are you referring to?
> Tron-car / iMobile / eMachine styling ? Check.
No more or less than every single crossover wanna-be SUV for the last 15 years. Cars have pretty much visually converged to looking the same, due to aerodynamic requirements.
> Dumping ground for UI/UX experiments ? Check.
The wing-shaped steering wheel is optional. What else is being dumped here as an experiment?
> We don't want your "electric car" - we want your car, electric.
If you have a driving pattern with short trips, you can already drive any single Toyota PHEV as an electric car.
Also, pure EV Camries and RAV4s are sure to follow this in the next couple of years.
Styling-wise, I think it's a derivative of the Lexus NX and UX.
The wheel arches, panels, mirrors, lights etc all look very familiar just a little bit more angular I guess.
The interior cabin looks very wide (based on the centre console) so perhaps more in line with the RX in terms of size.
Likely. I have (and like) a Prius Prime PHEV, hoping to drive it for years, but I would hope my next vehicle is fully EV, and I'd rather not have to get an SUV to do that. It'd be nice if Toyota could also bring a sedan or even compact EV to market.
Why is Toyota so late to the EV game when the Prius was such a huge deal?
I just leased my first EV and it ended up being a Volkswagen, a brand I had no prior relationship with, simply because Toyota didn't have anything to offer outside of PHEVs.
Maybe institutional memory: "Whether or not Toyota wanted to continue production [of the 90s all-electric RAV4], it was unlikely to be able to do so because the EV-95 battery was no longer available. Chevron had inherited control of the worldwide patent rights for the NiMH EV-95 battery when it merged with Texaco, which had purchased them from General Motors. Chevron's unit won a US$30,000,000 settlement from Toyota and Panasonic, and the production line for the large NiMH batteries was closed down and dismantled. This case was settled in the ICC International Court of Arbitration, and not publicized due to a gag order placed on Toyota."
Somehow Toyota has managed to blow the 20 year lead they had on electric vehicles with the Prius by not innovating in this space at all since the original Prius. They instead focused on hydrogen with the Mirai, which turned out to be the wrong bet. It's surprising to see that even GM, BMW and Mercedes have "regular" electric cars in the market while Toyota has nothing more than a Tron-car sub-brand concept.
I know your comment is tongue-in-cheek but ha! I don't know about that. The Prius, even if it's just a hybrid, probably led to more aggregate fuel/carbon emission savings than every (non-tesla/chinese manufacturers) EV model combined.
"Old school" manufacturers like BMW and VW may look like they are doing better because of the dozens of models they've released but the actual sales numbers are so tiny that their impact is basically 0.
The Prius on the other hand was a massive sales success, and it really was what made hybrids a thing.
I think it's just a case executive incompetence/severe tunnel vision: Toyota has been in hydrogen lala-land for a good long while now. Now they have some serious catching up to do.
Similar in South Korea: its president is promoting hydrogen as next-generation "clean energy" (a claim that I find very questionable), while Korea's hydrogen is 100% generated from fossil fuels.
Coincidentally, public opinion in both countries are staunchly against nuclear power, which I suspect played a role. When you eliminate a proven, stable source of power, you end up campaigning for everybody to use less electricity "to save the Earth." Once you buy that argument, EVs start to look less palatable. (Better to peddle hydrogen and don't look too close at how it's made.)
...on the other hand, they hung back with their successful compromise and let others do all kinds of innovation for them, such as battery-sizing, motor/tire layout, UI, steering-wheel shape, and innumerable smaller details.
Their first electric car was a RAV4. It, along with any broader potential, was completely trashed by an American oil company and patent fuckery, costing them an absolute fortune.
And its (or was it a different generation?) battery pack was developed by Tesla.
> Toyota worked together with Tesla Motors to develop the second generation RAV4 EV, and the electric SUV was released in the United States in September 2012.
I have a Prius Prime. It's a really solid economy vehicle with a lot of tech. It's plenty fast and a lot more affordable than a Tesla. The Prius Prime also had a heat pump system years before any Tesla models had them. If I could comfortably afford more car, I would want a Model Y over a RAV4 Prime. But, I would probably get a RAV4 Prime because it's a lot cheaper.
>Somehow Toyota has managed to blow the 20 year lead they had on electric vehicles with the Prius by not innovating in this space at all since the original Prius. They instead focused on hydrogen with the Mirai, which turned out to be the wrong bet.
Japanese government as part of climate change efforts bet on hydrogen. The theory being that it's clean burning and such. However, the realization that hydrogen was already a mature industry and it's entirely derived from fossil fuels... that was a very dumb move on their part.
>It's surprising to see that even GM, BMW and Mercedes have "regular" electric cars in the market while Toyota has nothing more than a Tron-car sub-brand concept.
Everyone except Japan. Hyundai ioniq 5 is a crossover that can drag race against mclarens. Teslas are beasts. New Hummer is epic. The new Mustang mache is better than the regular mustang. VW id4 is perfect for what it is supposed to be. GTX performance is coming?
Worse yet, this toyota is kind of trash. Who made the decision that the base model has 150kw motor in 1 and then 2x 80kw in AWD. As opposed to the correct decision of 2x 150kw. The base model of 150kw, ok i get it. The top end being 160kw? Nope. wrong decision.
Toyota has the Toyota 86, which is very very similar to the Subaru BRZ. Before clicking I didn't have the two model names straight & thought this might be a BRZ related car. Which probably wouldn't really make much sense for where one would want to ship an electric car: a tiny low weight little thing.
For an SUV, looks pretty good. The dark grey around the wheels works well with kind of blocky squatness it has. A more serious grown up Scion xB feel. Definitely has a bit of a Jaguar iPace feel, but less swooshy & with a little more squat, atop the road solidity of a feel. Not a big fan of the Jag's haunches & this has similar-ish geometry but the style feels better, more direct to me.
I'm very interested to see testing on the solar panel, specifically if the benefits offset the added weight and cost.
Their quote:
> generates electricity equivalent to 1,800 km of driving distance per year
Is too vague. Is this taking away the distance lost from added panel weight? What are the assumptions (e.g. how many hours of light/day)? Is this electricity-distance at exit of the panel or after storage<->release from the batteries? What is the panel efficiency curve over the vehicles' life (e.g. do you have to replace/refurb the panel)?
Obviously we would all love for this to work, we get cooler cars in the summer and bonus driving range. But it isn't exactly the first time vehicle makers have tried it and have been panned (or it has been outright vaporware) previously.
EVs work. We know they work. They can work from renewables, including solar. The questions here are around onboard solar specifically and if they actually make sense (and frankly if this is a marketing gimmick).
If it's in their marketing, you can assume it's based on ideal weather conditions, and low-latitudes. I've done some solar-energy calculations for vehicles before as part of student engineering design teams, and I recall the results were pretty dismal. I seriously doubt a car solar roof would produce significant benefit in a place like Canada or Northern Europe as a practical range extender or a cost saver.
But maybe I could see the solar panel as a useful tool for camping excursions? The solar-panel use case appears (to me at least) to be when I want to drive somewhere far away, off grid, and where the car is going to be idle for a few days. Camping is the only use-case that I can think of that fits that bill. Although I'm sure other people might have some ideas.
My "best case" math says it is a ~60W panel. Let's just say it's 100W to be generous. Ten hours gets you a kWh. In my 2011 Nissan Leaf, that will get you four miles on a good day. So don't drive too far off into those woods.
"While Toyota has offered all-electric vehicles in China in the past, the bZ4X could be considered its first battery-electric vehicle since it’s the first to use a BEV-dedicated platform and to be available globally."
This is gibberish.
So... NOT its first all-electric car by any means.
One of the reason I choose a Tesla was because of the superchargers that are everywhere in California, and because of their long range: I only need a 30min intermediate recharge to get from the Bay Area to Lake Tahoe.
When I google for superchargers for other brands, I get very ambiguous results. There has been chatter about Tesla opening up its supercharges in the future (the selfish part of me would rather not see that happen, its I-80 charging lots before climbing to Tahoe are already pretty busy), but I've never seen another brand, so I guess it's not a thing yet.
So what's the situation then? If you're a non-Tesla EV owner in the Bay Area, how do you make it to Lake Tahoe in a reasonable amount of time?
Others have mentioned an electric RAV4 but in the more immediate past, is there a reason the Mirai shouldn't be considered "all-electric"? It's not a widely successful electric car but it is a production electric car.
Why does that rule hydrogen fuel cells out? How are FCEVs any less "all-electric" than BEVs? Both kinds of vehicle are driven by chemical reactions that directly generate electricity.
98 comments
[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 175 ms ] threadIt looks like it has roughly "table stakes" as far as capabilities go, at best, beating neither the Model Y or Mach-E on range, but likely costing less to compensate.
In my humble opinion, the name is horrendous. May they have the wisdom to change it when they start selling it in the U.S.
[1] https://www.thedrive.com/news/31274/more-teslas-on-the-road-...
And they did have a 79% market share of all EVs sold in the US last year (though, that is expected to be lower this year, and the EV market segment is growing very fast). Cf. https://www.thedetroitbureau.com/2021/08/as-ev-sales-double-....
In Canada, Tesla is deploying supercharger stations with separate, dedicated chargers for all other brands to take advantage of government subsidies.
I wouldn't put it past them to prioritize their own cars in some way when they finally open up to other makes.
I had always assumed these were like gas stations where you can bring any car to fill up.
If each manufacturer is going to have their own network, this doesn't seem like a good path forward.
Though this is reportedly going to change, with Tesla switching to CCS and opening up their charging stations to it.
https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/tesla-...
https://www.forbes.com/wheels/news/ev-reliability-varied-as-...
I'm planning to upgrade to full electric sometime in the next three years, whenever something compelling comes up. If I had to switch today, it'd be a Leaf (doesnt suit my distance needs), a Model Y (doesnt suit my budget), or a Bolt EV (doesnt suit my no-active-recalls-due-to-fundamental-fire-risk requirement). Hyundai and Kia are out due to bad past experience with them (engine totally died just outside warranty, known issue, no option other than a $9000 engine replacement with no guarantees the same thing wouldn't happen 31 days thereafter). If Toyota or Honda had a compelling option I would buy in in a heartbeat
is its sibling, evidently
If I had to guess, this is made in partnership with Toyota, like a handful of other products (the Subaru BR-Z, Scion FR-S, and current Toyota 86 are an example.)
EDIT: Ah you edited to include that it's a sibling vehicle. Thank you!
The RAV4 EV was only ever a compliance vehicle, with very little practical use.
I’ve always assumed most cars have mechanical steering with power assistance, so they’ll work in the event of a power failure. But a Lock to lock of 150 degrees sounds like it would be impossible to move even if there is a mechanical connection from steering to wheels.
Reliability is going to come down to implementation. In some cases you actually have advantages in control-by-wire (less mechanical parts to fail). You can also implement mechanical overrides for emergency situations.
Tron-car / iMobile / eMachine styling ? Check.
Dumping ground for UI/UX experiments ? Check.
...
God forbid they would just give us an electric Camry. Or a forerunner. Or a Tacoma.
Do they not understand ?
We don't want your "electric car" - we want your car, electric.
The EVs that ended up selling well ultimately were Tesla vehicles, which were closer to this thing than an electric Camry.
It just means that not everyone has the same taste, and some peoples' tastes are in a minority, even if they don't know it.
This is, in fact, the case.
If Audi launches electric A4/A6/A8 tomorrow, that will be (roughly) 100% of their sales and they know it.
But they have billions sunk into ... (see my comment downthread about manufacturing and tooling).
So consumers need to wait for their lifetime ROI to satisfy the incumbent manufacturers such that they are willing to jettison those investments and electrify their actual lineup.
The worst offender, by far, is Volvo whose marketing pedigree, target audience and models produces are a perfect match for 21st century electric car buyers ... and yet we're two full model cycles past the Tesla Model S and I still can't get an electric V90 wagon ...
The Honda Fit EV had an 82 mile range, and could only be leased. (And Honda Fits were neat, but never sold that well, and even the gas version was pulled from the United States market.)
The Golf, on the other hand, is very popular, but the Golf EV had a 125-mile range, and was only sold in very limited markets/quantities.
What EV version of a popular vehicle had competitive range, produced in sufficient quality, and priced competitively? I can't think of any.
But yes, these are exceptions.
You'd think "Not everyone needs a car that can do long trips, so an EV that trades range for affordability is just satisfying a market segment!", and you'd be right...if consumers were rational.
Range anxiety is one of the top hurdles for EV adoption. Manufacturers that produce cars with only ~100 mile range, that only support charging at <20 kW only perpetuate the mentality that EVs don't have the range to be viable for anything other than commuting.
People who aren't EV enthusiasts and don't follow car or tech news specifically are likely to miss the memo that not only do long-range EVs exist, but they can be charged FAST. Obviously, they still don't charge as fast as a gas tank can be filled, but fast enough that day trips are quite viable, and road trips only require a little extra planning.
But that's all under the skin. The styling and interiors can look as mundane or wild as the maker chooses.
Perhaps. But the Leaf alone is a significant counterpoint to that. Contrast with the abject market failure of the electric-from-the-ground-up i3.
EDIT It just occurred to me that this has already happened once: comparing the cars of the 50s/60s to the 80s, it is clear that there is a lot more going on than one would think. Is it inflation? Regulation? Corporate politics? Zeitgeist?
We already know the answer - they have billions invested in supply chains, manufacturing and tooling that are all sunk costs with diminishing ROI if they actually make their cars electric.
We are witnessing a (frustrating) balancing act wherein the incumbent manufacturers attempt to squeeze as much return as possible from these old-line investments while simultaneously attempting to remain relevant and hedge their future bets.
But thats just a theory, and there are other plausible ones.
(But I agree with the rest - it's hideous, poorly named, thoroughly uninspiring, and overdue.)
The Pontiac Aztek and Toyota C-HR are hideous and polarizing. The only people that want them want to demonstrate that they don't care what their car looks like. That takes more commitment than taking on a bland, uninspiring vehicle like a Camry.
In my opinion, the bZ4X is also kind of "alternate powertrain" hideous. In a way, that worked for the Prius. You could clearly tell that the driver was an eco-warrior driving something "different." I think Toyota might actually be trying to hint at Lexus with this styling, which has a similar edginess to it.
The BMW 3-series is a model, not a sub-brand, even if variations all get a "3xx" name.
An electric version would not have any of that.
A rock solid EV that doesn't need a lot of repairs, and when it does, is simple/cheap to repair would be a huge win for EV buyers.
Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but this isn't an EV thing, it's a Tesla thing.
I am not into cars, but I can only assume the Lead/Volt/whatever else out there is bad quality or has some other drawback that causes them to basically be non existent on the roads.
A few. Chevrolet will sell ~30,000 EV units this year in the US.
And this is getting some attention:
https://www.caranddriver.com/chevrolet/bolt-euv
Chevy needs to get that price down to $25k-$26k (their Trax ICE vehicle that the Bolt EUV looks like is $21k base).
The Ford Mustang EV will sell 20k units this year, or just over that.
The Volkswagen ID.4 will sell maybe 13k-14k units this year.
Nissan Leaf 10k units; Audi EVs 8k-9k units; Hyundai EVs 8k-9k units; Porsche Taycan 8k-9k units (the Taycan is now outselling the 911 in the US market).
So unless you've actually been looking, it's likely the body styles just haven't stood out enough for you to notice.
About 79% of EVs in the US are Tesla. They exist, but Tesla certainly absolutely dominates the market.
The major drawback to other brands has many facets:
- Reputation for low range. The first Nissan Leaf made in 2011 had an EPA range of only 73 miles. In 2016, they started giving a bigger battery, but it still only had a paltry 107 mile range. It wasn't until 2019 that they started offering a battery with a 226 mile range, but by then, the reputation as a short-range EV was essentially set in stone.
- Slow charging speed. Teslas can charge at up to a whopping 250 kW, which can grant 75 miles of range in only 5 minutes. Meanwhile, the Leaf only supported up to 50 kW until 2019, and even now only does 100 kW.
- Lack of charging infrastructure. This is related to the previous note. If you go to a site like PlugShare.com, you can see TONS of chargers in any metro area, but the problem is, the extreme majority of them are J-1772 plugs that charge at <10 kW. At that speed, it takes an hour to get just 30 miles of range.
All that is compounded by the fact that car dealerships are often disincentivized to sell EVs. Dealerships make a significant portion of their money in the repair and maintenance bays. Since EVs require far less maintenance, and so far are proving far more reliable, dealerships don't want to sell them.
They were a battery innovator and supplier for formula-e and now started they own car production.
I also hear good things about the Hyundai Kona, which is quite similar in terms of build and features. (They share a bunch of tech, I believe.)
Volkswagen's newest model, ID.4, is now being sold in the US. It's great.
The Chevy Bolt is not the latest tech, but I hear a lot of people are happy with it.
In Europe, of course, the variety is much greater: In addition to the above, you also have the Peugot e-208, Nissan Leaf, Opel Corsa-e, Škoda Enyaq, Ford e-Mach, Audi e-tron, Jaguar I-PACE, Polestar, etc.
What I did say:
> It's a key market advantage they are about to lose.
Toyota has a key market advantage among ICE power trains. They do not have a key market advantage with electric power trains. (Though they should, given their decades of Prius production.)
I just would not expect them to waste the 4Runner/Tacoma branding on an experimental product due to the ICE 4Runner/Tacoma’s spectacular reputation as one of the most reliable cars available.
> Launched under a sub-brand ? Check.
It's still a Toyota. What sub-brand are you referring to?
> Tron-car / iMobile / eMachine styling ? Check.
No more or less than every single crossover wanna-be SUV for the last 15 years. Cars have pretty much visually converged to looking the same, due to aerodynamic requirements.
> Dumping ground for UI/UX experiments ? Check.
The wing-shaped steering wheel is optional. What else is being dumped here as an experiment?
> We don't want your "electric car" - we want your car, electric.
If you have a driving pattern with short trips, you can already drive any single Toyota PHEV as an electric car.
Also, pure EV Camries and RAV4s are sure to follow this in the next couple of years.
NX Exterior: https://inchcapecdn.azureedge.net/cdn-images/stock/f/fn19yuj...
UX Exterior rear: https://cdn.carbuzz.com/gallery-images/840x560/498000/900/49...
RX Interior: https://www.carscoops.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/2021-Le...
Prius begat hybrid Corolla.
This is all very much how Toyota rolls these things out.
I just leased my first EV and it ended up being a Volkswagen, a brand I had no prior relationship with, simply because Toyota didn't have anything to offer outside of PHEVs.
Seems like they might have been in petroleum's back pocket this whole time.
"Old school" manufacturers like BMW and VW may look like they are doing better because of the dozens of models they've released but the actual sales numbers are so tiny that their impact is basically 0.
The Prius on the other hand was a massive sales success, and it really was what made hybrids a thing.
Please find year to date (2021) EV sales by car group here: https://eu-evs.com/bestSellers/ALL/Groups/Year/2021
Volkswagen is outselling Tesla.
Adding the Volkswagen entries in the Model column gets to about 102k.
Is the left column all cars? Or includes hybrids?
Adding the Models, VW is slightly ahead at about 102k vs about 95k for Tesla.
I think it's just a case executive incompetence/severe tunnel vision: Toyota has been in hydrogen lala-land for a good long while now. Now they have some serious catching up to do.
Coincidentally, public opinion in both countries are staunchly against nuclear power, which I suspect played a role. When you eliminate a proven, stable source of power, you end up campaigning for everybody to use less electricity "to save the Earth." Once you buy that argument, EVs start to look less palatable. (Better to peddle hydrogen and don't look too close at how it's made.)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent_encumbrance_of_large_...
> Toyota worked together with Tesla Motors to develop the second generation RAV4 EV, and the electric SUV was released in the United States in September 2012.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_RAV4_EV
Japanese government as part of climate change efforts bet on hydrogen. The theory being that it's clean burning and such. However, the realization that hydrogen was already a mature industry and it's entirely derived from fossil fuels... that was a very dumb move on their part.
>It's surprising to see that even GM, BMW and Mercedes have "regular" electric cars in the market while Toyota has nothing more than a Tron-car sub-brand concept.
Everyone except Japan. Hyundai ioniq 5 is a crossover that can drag race against mclarens. Teslas are beasts. New Hummer is epic. The new Mustang mache is better than the regular mustang. VW id4 is perfect for what it is supposed to be. GTX performance is coming?
Worse yet, this toyota is kind of trash. Who made the decision that the base model has 150kw motor in 1 and then 2x 80kw in AWD. As opposed to the correct decision of 2x 150kw. The base model of 150kw, ok i get it. The top end being 160kw? Nope. wrong decision.
For an SUV, looks pretty good. The dark grey around the wheels works well with kind of blocky squatness it has. A more serious grown up Scion xB feel. Definitely has a bit of a Jaguar iPace feel, but less swooshy & with a little more squat, atop the road solidity of a feel. Not a big fan of the Jag's haunches & this has similar-ish geometry but the style feels better, more direct to me.
https://passwordsgenerator.net/
Their quote:
> generates electricity equivalent to 1,800 km of driving distance per year
Is too vague. Is this taking away the distance lost from added panel weight? What are the assumptions (e.g. how many hours of light/day)? Is this electricity-distance at exit of the panel or after storage<->release from the batteries? What is the panel efficiency curve over the vehicles' life (e.g. do you have to replace/refurb the panel)?
Obviously we would all love for this to work, we get cooler cars in the summer and bonus driving range. But it isn't exactly the first time vehicle makers have tried it and have been panned (or it has been outright vaporware) previously.
EVs work. We know they work. They can work from renewables, including solar. The questions here are around onboard solar specifically and if they actually make sense (and frankly if this is a marketing gimmick).
But maybe I could see the solar panel as a useful tool for camping excursions? The solar-panel use case appears (to me at least) to be when I want to drive somewhere far away, off grid, and where the car is going to be idle for a few days. Camping is the only use-case that I can think of that fits that bill. Although I'm sure other people might have some ideas.
This is gibberish.
So... NOT its first all-electric car by any means.
When I google for superchargers for other brands, I get very ambiguous results. There has been chatter about Tesla opening up its supercharges in the future (the selfish part of me would rather not see that happen, its I-80 charging lots before climbing to Tahoe are already pretty busy), but I've never seen another brand, so I guess it's not a thing yet.
So what's the situation then? If you're a non-Tesla EV owner in the Bay Area, how do you make it to Lake Tahoe in a reasonable amount of time?
I was seriously considering cancelling and ordering the BZ4X but I am very disappointed with the specs on this car.
I bet it'll be AU$70-80k as well (top of the range rav 4 hyb is only 53k).
I like Toyota and it would take a lot for me to switch brands but I think they really dropped the ball on this one.