1996 Toyota Camry, No Reserve on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Scion was slain by Toyota, not the Great Recession

Scion didn't have to go down like this. Through the magic of hindsight and hubris, it's easier to see what went wrong. And what might have been. What the industry should understand is this: Scion wasn't a losing proposition from the get-go. Its death is due to negligence and apathy. This is more than just the failure of a sub-brand. It's the failure of a company to deliver new and compelling products over an extended period of time. Toyota will point to the Great Recession as the reason it hedged its bets and withdrew funding for new vehicles, instead of using that as an opportunity to redouble efforts. This was as good as a death warrant, although myopically no one realized it at the time. Sadly, GM's Saturn experiment was a road map for this exact form of failure. No one at Toyota seemed to think the Saturn experience was worth protecting their experimental brand from. Or they weren't heard. Brands live and die on product. Somehow, Scion convinced itself that its real success metric was a youthful demographic of buyers. It seems like this was used to gauge the overall health of the brand. Look at the aging and uncompetitive tC, which Scion proudly noted had a 29-year-old average buyer. That fails to take into account its lack of curb appeal and flagging sales. Who cares if the declining number of people buying your cars are younger? Toyota is going to kill the tC thirteen years [And two indifferent generations ... - Ed.] after it was introduced. In that time, Honda has come out with three entirely new generations of the Civic. Scion wasn't a losing proposition from the get-go. Its death is due to negligence and apathy. At launch, the brand could have gone a few different ways. The xB was plucky, interesting, and useful – a tough mix of ephemeral characteristics – but the xA didn't offer much except a thin veneer of self-consciously applied attitude. That's ok; it was cute. Enter the tC, which managed to combine sporty pretensions with decent cost. It took on the Civic Coupe in the contest for coolness, and usually managed to win. More importantly, an explicit brand value early on was a desire to avoid second generations of any of its models, promising a continually evolving and fresh lineup. At this point, the road splits. Down one lane lies the Scion that could have been. After a short but reasonable product lifecycle, it would have renewed the entire lineup.

Toyota takes aim at Musk's criticism of hydrogen 'fool cells'

Tesla's Elon Musk has called hydrogen fuel cell cars "a load of rubbish" and "fool cells," and he's nowhere near alone in his disdain for the technology. Toyota has been fighting back waves of condescension for years now, and did so again when Senior VP Bob Carter took the stage at the recent J.D. Power Automotive Summit this month. His target was comments that Musk made at the Automotive News World Congress at the Detroit Auto Show, when Musk said an FCEV was an "extremely silly way" to store energy, that "the best-case hydrogen fuel cell doesn't win against the current-case battery" and that hydrogen's failings will become obvious in the next few years. Carter's response was that the fuel cell initiative isn't about the next few years. "This is not a 24-to-36-month play, but when you start looking into the 2020s," then you can see the necessity of hydrogen fuel cells, which Toyota considers an extension of EV technology, he said. The Toyota Mirai will begin its defense of the FCEV industry in the US later this year. The Hyundai Tucson Fuel Cell is already available in California and Honda's hydrogen car will arrive in 2016. Until then, we can let some more of Carter's words ring in our ears: "If I was in a position where I had all my eggs in one basket," he said of Musk's BEV-only focus, "I would perhaps be making those same comments." News Source: Automotive News - sub. req. Green Tesla Toyota Electric Future Vehicles Hydrogen Cars toyota mirai fcev bob carter

Jim Lentz exposes more details behind Toyota's move to Texas

Toyota's North American CEO Jim Lentz has already given us a rough idea of what prompted the company's surprise move to the Dallas suburb of Plano, TX from its longstanding headquarters in Torrance, CA. A new story from The Los Angeles Times, though, delivers even more detail from Lentz on the reasoning for the move, what other cities were considered and why the company's current host city wasn't even in the running.
Of course, one of the more popular reasons being bandied about includes the $40 million Texas was set to give the company for the move, as well as the state's generous tax rates. According to Lentz, though, the reason Toyota chose Plano over a group of finalists made up of Atlanta, Charlotte and Denver, was far simpler than that - it was about consolidating its marketing, sales, engineering and production teams in a region that's closer to the company's seat of manufacturing in the south.
"It doesn't make sense to have oversight of manufacturing 2,000 miles away from where the cars were made," Lentz told The Times. "Geography is the reason not to have our headquarters in California."