Crewcab Cd Player Off-road Clean Power Options Bedliner Trd on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Toyota's Bob Carter says far fewer stations needed in shift from gas to hydrogen

Toyota's Bob Carter has been talking about green cars for years, but it's only been recently that his comments have really caught widespread attention thanks to his disparaging remarks about electric vehicle supporters like Elon Musk and Carlos Ghosn and optimism about hydrogen. Speaking at the opening of the Chicago Auto Show this morning, Carter said that Toyota has claimed the "pole position on CAFE," thanks to its deep hybrid bench. The company's green car cred will continue to grow because of its upcoming hydrogen fuel cell car, due out next year. Carter is relentlessly optimistic: "I truly believe fuel cells will fundamentally change how we feel about transportation," he said. The reason, Carter said, is that a hydrogen infrastructure will be easier to install than people think. He referenced a study conducted by the University of California (which we've heard about before) that found that California would only need 68 hydrogen stations to refuel the roughly 10,000 H2 vehicles that Toyota hopes to sell in by 2016 or so. That's a lot more than the nine that exist today, but the state has already approved funding for 20 new stations by 2015 and then up to 100 by 2024. Then he said this: "If every vehicle in California ran on hydrogen, we could meet refueling logistics with only 15 percent of the nearly 10,000 gasoline stations currently operating in the state." "We could meet refueling logistics with only 15 percent of gasoline stations currently operating in CA" - Bob Carter This made us wonder: if the refueling time and range are roughly equivalent between hydrogen and gasoline – Toyota's hydrogen car is supposed to be able to go 300 miles on a five-minute fill-up - then why has the market decided that there should be 10,000 gas stations in California and why would 1,500 be sufficient for hydrogen? "If the locations are optimized," he said, "we don't need 10,000 stations." For example, at major intersections, instead of three gas stations, you'd really just need a single hydrogen one. "There are a lot of questions about the infrastructure, but it's coming. ... It's a hurdle that we've got to climb but it's not as steep as some may imagine." Toyota's Mike Michaels, the national manager, media and public affairs at Toyota Motor Sales, then stepped in to point out that there are gas stations closing and admitted that there might be too many gas stations in California.

Midsize Sedan Comparison | Honda Accord vs. Toyota Camry vs. Mazda6

The rumors of the midsize sedan's death have been greatly exaggerated. The 2018 Honda Accord and 2018 Toyota Camry together moved more than 262,000 units through May of this year, which is still a ton of cars. Then again, both are down year-over-year despite being completely, and quite impressively, redesigned for 2018. So yes, the midsize sedan's grip on family transportation is weakening. Ford certainly thinks so, yet this change in consumer preferences comes at a time when the current crop of sedans is sensational. They're bigger and more powerful, yet also more efficient. Safety scores are impeccable. They even look better than ever. So before running out to score one of the bajillion little SUVs flooding the market, why not ponder this trio of midsize sedan all-stars that might actually work better? Over the course of three consecutive weeks we tested the 2018 Camry XSE V6, 2018 Accord Touring 2.0T and the perennial critical-darling 2018 Mazda6 Signature. The latter was thoroughly overhauled and, perhaps as such, bucked the segment trend by actually selling more in June this year. Each was a range-topping trim level with all the bells and whistles, plus the most powerful engine available. Really, you couldn't find cars closer in power, price and feature content. View 57 Photos Performance and fuel economy Toyota bucked the turbocharged trend by sticking with naturally aspirated engines for the 2018 Camry, and when it comes to its 3.5-liter V6, it's sure hard to argue with that decision. For starters, it produces 301 horsepower. Let that sink in for a moment. A 301-hp Toyota Camry. That crushes the others, while its 267 pound-feet of torque is only 6 less than the Accord. This is a strong, smooth engine that only gets better when you realize it matches the 26-mpg combined fuel economy of the others. Honda, meanwhile, followed the masses by switching to a turbocharged four-cylinder for the Accord's engine upgrade (and its base engine, for that matter). Though its 252 hp is considerably down on the Camry and its 271 lb-ft is only a smidgen more, the Accord's torque arrives earlier in the rev range without feeling overtly turbocharged. It also has 143 fewer pounds to contend with. When wrung out, this new 2.0-liter belts out a beautiful, typically Honda song made possible by the smart 10-speed automatic (the base 1.5-liter is paired to a CVT that results in more drone than mechanical music) that thankfully doesn't draw much attention to itself.

Full-size trucks are the best and worst vehicles in America

You don’t need me to tell you that Americans love pickup trucks. And the bigger the truck, the more likely it seems to be seen as an object of desire. Monthly and yearly sales charts are something of a broken record; track one is the Ford F-Series, followed by the Chevy Silverado, RamÂ’s line of haulers, and somewhere not far down the line, the GMC Sierra. The big Japanese players fall in place a bit further below — not that thereÂ’s anything wrong with a hundred thousand Toyota Tundra sales — and one-size-smaller trucks like the Toyota Tacoma, Ford Ranger and Chevy Colorado have proven awfully popular, too. Along with their sales numbers, the average cost of new trucks has similarly been on the rise. Now, I donÂ’t pretend to have the right to tell people what they should or shouldnÂ’t buy with their own money. But I just canÂ’t wrap my head around why a growing number of Americans are choosing to spend huge sums of money on super luxurious pickup trucks. Let me first say I do understand the appeal. People like nice things, after all. I know I do. I myself am willing to spend way more than the average American on all sorts of discretionary things, from wine and liquor to cameras and lenses. IÂ’ve even spent my own money on vehicles that I donÂ’t need but want anyway. A certain vintage VW camper van certainly qualifies. I also currently own a big, inefficient SUV with a 454-cubic-inch big block V8. So if your answer to the question IÂ’m posing here is that youÂ’re willing to pay the better part of a hundred grand on a chromed-out and leather-lined pickup simply because you want to, then by all means — not that you need my permission — go buy one. The part I donÂ’t understand is this: Why wouldn't you, as a rational person, rather split your garage in half? On one side would sit a nice car that is quiet, rides and handles equally well and gets above average fuel mileage. Maybe it has a few hundred gasoline-fueled horsepower, or heck, maybe itÂ’s electric. On the other side (or even outside) is parked a decent pickup truck. One that can tow 10,000 pounds, haul something near a ton in the bed, and has all the goodies most Americans want in their cars, like cruise control, power windows and locks, keyless entry, and a decent infotainment screen.