Those aren't reasons why Toyota has no EVs to sell.
Those are taking Talking Points® they're handing out for dealership sales people to study and recite and point at to scare any EV-curious customer into sticking with them and their ICE products.
Those aren't reasons why Toyota has no EVs to sell.
Those are taking Talking Points® they're handing out for dealership sales people to study and recite and point at to scare any EV-curious customer into sticking with them and their ICE products.
It sounds to me like they're saying "We're choosing not to make things that require scarce, expensive materials in large quantities (because that's hard to make a profit on)." This seems like a profit maximizing strategy, especially if they're developing EV tech in the background.
It sounds to me like they're saying "We're choosing not to make things that require scarce, expensive materials in large quantities (because that's hard to make a profit on)." This seems like a profit maximizing strategy, especially if they're developing EV tech in the background.
Regardless of their reasoning, they've got media relations and other avenues to get messaging out, but this PDF being sent directly to dealerships with the fancy graphics and "thoughtful" headines smells like an attempt to reset the narrative when the customer says "I'm cross-shopping the Rav4 Prime with Niro / Kona," especially since we know Toyota is doing an about-face on their EV strategy and full-on embracing it moving forward.
I had a Gen II RAV4 EV for many years before I got the ID.4. At the time it was made (2012-2014) it was one of the best EVs on the market. Good specs and was big enough to do Home Depot runs without worry. It was only until the ID.4 was released that there was an SUV EV that was a worthwhile replacement.
If Toyota had just continued updating and improving the RAV4 EV, I'd probably still be a customer. They really lost out on that.
Of course the document is for the sales team to respond to customers' questions why their pure EV model lineup is weak. The headwind points, however, are valid.
For many areas of the US, hybrids still make more sense than EVs, particularly if one has only one car and often drives longer distances at times.
The costs to get into EVs, from buyer perspective, are significant and the overall charging infrastructure is relatively weak compare to China and Europe. This why we will see a leveling off of EV growth in the not-too-distant future followed by an increase in growth as the cost penalty for EVs is reduced and the infrastructure is improved.
We will definitely see state governments back off of their "EVs only" sales requirements by 2035.
The 1:6:90 rule is fun! Toyota is still very firmly in the combustion era, they treat batteries as if we are using them up like fuel and disposing of the remains. If they believe their own hype, that is.
I had a Gen II RAV4 EV for many years before I got the ID.4. At the time it was made (2012-2014) it was one of the best EVs on the market. Good specs and was big enough to do Home Depot runs without worry. It was only until the ID.4 was released that there was an SUV EV that was a worthwhile replacement.
If Toyota had just continued updating and improving the RAV4 EV, I'd probably still be a customer. They really lost out on that.
Toyota was in a partnership with Tesla and at the time there was talk they would buy Tesla. Of course that ship sailed around the globe and into outer space. But Toyota was the chosen one and they dropped the ball.
Regardless of their reasoning, they've got media relations and other avenues to get messaging out, but this PDF being sent directly to dealerships with the fancy graphics and "thoughtful" headines smells like an attempt to reset the narrative when the customer says "I'm cross-shopping the Rav4 Prime with Niro / Kona," especially since we know Toyota is doing an about-face on their EV strategy and full-on embracing it moving forward.
I mean it's a document for sales people to convince shoppers to buy a Toyota hybrid instead of a competitor's EV. And points 1 and 3 are valid. Seeing as my ID.4 is doing fine on level 1 charging and on pace for 15k+ miles/ year, point 2 is pretty laughable. But a lot of people will be better off with a RAV4 hybrid or PRIME than an ID.4 or bZ4X (lol).
I was a loyal Toyota owner for 20+ years, first with a Camry, then 2 Priuses, then a 2016 RAV4 hybrid. The cars were rock solid reliable, and with the hybrid versions, they were reasonably green as well - for their time. When the RAV4 hit 5 years old, I approached my dealer with what seemed like a reasonable request: upgrading to a RAV4 plug-in hybrid. I was told that Toyota wasn't selling them in WA state, and to be prepared to pay $10k over MSRP if I wanted to buy one in OR or CA. I took it as a kind of big raised middle finger.
In a span of about 10 years, Toyota went from a leader in electrification to way behind the curve when it comes to green transportation. This is the case even if Toyota makes certain valid points in its PR piece.
Toyota's primary point, it seems to me, is that there are limits on our global ability to build EV batteries, so the batteries we do build can be more effectively deployed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. There's truth to this. If you consider EV monsters with batteries storing 100+ kWh of energy that are being used primarily for 20-30 mile drives ... that's a lot of energy storage capacity that's not needed for the use of that EV. One might imagine instead a world where we're mostly driving light weight aero-designed EVs with 40-50 kWh battery packs that would deliver us 200 miles of range, along with a robust public DC fast charging infrastructure that would allow us to go wherever we wanted to go. And where our combined EV storage capacity would be connected to a smart grid where we could buy and sell electricity to meet the varying supply of and demand for renewably generated electricity. And where heavy duty vehicles like buses and trucks would run on electricity supplied by overhead lines, mostly or entirely eliminating the need for these vehicles to rely on battery storage. We could all agree to drive more slowly.
In other words ... there are any number of potential ways to address an EV battery bottleneck short of capitulating to the Toyotas of the world and saying that we're stuck with fossil fuels forever.
And ... yes. A lot of what I talk about is a considerable reach, and some of it is unrealistic. But the same holds true for Toyota's PR vision of the way things should be. We're not going back to hybrids as the best we can do to address global warming. We're not going to power more than a handful of passenger cars with hydrogen. We're not going to adopt Toyota's vision of the way we should power the personal transportation industry.
Depends on climate change. The way things are going, by 2035 there will more likely be a “no combustion of anything anywhere for any reason” requirement.
These are BS arguments in this day and age. They obviously cannot make all their cars BEV overnight, but they could have started conversion a few years ago and be at least at the same percentage as VW or Stellantis by now. They chose not to do it, and when decided to do it their lack of technology and experience was evident in lackluster BZ4x, which is a first gen EV at the same level as what other manufacturers had in 2015-2016 or so.
For comparison, Tesla makes about 1.5 million cars per year currently, they use about 100 million kWh batteries for these cars. That is enough battery to make 60 million hybrid cars, which is 6 times Toyota's production. So Toyota's argument that they don't make BEVs so they can make hybrids is simply a lie. If they had the same battery capability as Tesla they could make all their cars hybrid and about 20 percent full BEV, or about 50% PHEV, or any other combination in between.
Depends on climate change. The way things are going, by 2035 there will more likely be a “no combustion of anything anywhere for any reason” requirement.
I've been looking for a place to post the following, and since this topic is about Toyota, it'll do.
I live in an area where there are lots of EVs. I'd say I've seen at least one of just about every EV currently on the market around here, with the exception of the bZ4X/Solterra twins. Well, that changed the other day when I finally saw a bZ4X in the parking lot at work no less! I will say it is not as butt-ugly in person as it typically looks online. I took a few photos:
Yeah, I also see tons of EVs around here (SoCal). I finally saw a BuzzyForks last weekend. It looked far more angular than the pictures. Also a lot bigger (on the outside) than I expected. I suppose I need to look at the inside of one at some point, but the lousy Tech Specs ensure I won't buy one ever.
I've been looking for a place to post the following, and since this topic is about Toyota, it'll do.
I live in an area where there are lots of EVs. I'd say I've seen at least one of just about every EV currently on the market around here, with the exception of the bZ4X/Solterra twins. Well, that changed the other day when I finally saw a bZ4X in the parking lot at work no less! I will say it is not as butt-ugly in person as it typically looks online. I took a few photos:
It sounds like there’s a lot of but in there and the but is always the deal killer. I have had two Toyota’s a 1991 pickup that later evolved into the Tacoma and a 2005 Matrix .I drove the truck over 210,000 miles and the Matrix for 117,000. The only thing wrong with the truck was broken AC of the verboten variety of coolant. The Matrix would have driven forever and it would have seemed like 4 times as long to me. Frankly I was sick of the underpowered motor and antique 4 speed automatic transmission. Twice I investigated going to a Prius and twice the local thieves had a $3000 surcharge on it. Well Toyota is in my rear view mirror now and I’m not going backwards.
VWIDTalk.com is a forum community dedicated to Volkswagen ID owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about Volkswagen ID. 4 and ID.3 Vehicles and more!
