2008 Toyota Fj Cruiser on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Next Toyota Prius coming in 60-mpg 'Eco Grade' version?

There's some mystery surrounding the fuel economy level of the next-generation Toyota Prius. The closest we've had to an official number is 55 miles per gallon, which was hinted at by Toyota Motor Corporation's managing officer, Satoshi Ogiso, last year. That number wasn't an official target, but the company even provided a graphic (above) showing how each next generation Prius beat the previous one by four or five mpg. Since the current, third-gen model gets 50, well, we have been left to guess that 55 is the next logical target. But, according to a new report in Automotive News, the new, fourth-generation Prius that's due next year will come in two versions, with one having a bigger ego – sorry, eco – than the other. AN says that the model will arrive with a standard nickel-metal hydride battery pack in a version that gets "about 55 mpg" and then a new "eco grade" version with a li-ion battery that "will be rated at more than 60 mpg." AN says this information came from company executives who were speaking at an August meeting with Toyota dealers. Our sources within Toyota say that they haven't heard anything about two high-efficiency models, so we'll take this with the requisite grain of salt. The current version of the Prius Plug-In Hybrid does use lithium-ion batteries, but this is the non-plug model the dealers are talking about. We think. The dual-battery strategy is certainly a rumor we've heard before. We had thought that the li-ion pack would be for an extended EV range (the current Prius has a barely noticeable EV-only range), but such a pack would be lighter and could boost efficiency, too. In other words, we look forward to hearing more during the upcoming auto show season.

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."

Automakers want to stop the EPA's fuel economy rules change, and why that's a shortsighted move

With a Trump Administration looming, the EPA moved quickly after the election to propose finalizing future fuel economy rules last week. The auto industry doesn't like that (surprise), and has started making moves to stop the EPA. Ford CEO Mark Fields said he wanted to lobby Trump to lower the standards, and now the Auto Alliance, a manufacturer group, is saying it will join the fight against cleaner cars. The Alliance represents 12 automakers: BMW, Fiat Chrysler, Ford, GM, Jaguar Land Rover, Mazda, Mercedes-Benz, Mitsubishi, Porsche, Toyota, VW, and Volvo. Gloria Bergquist, a spokesperson for the Alliance, told Automotive News that the "EPA's sudden and controversial move to propose auto regulations eight months early - even after Congress warned agencies about taking such steps while political appointees were packing their bags - calls out for congressional action to pause this rulemaking until a thoughtful policy review can occur." The EPA was going to consider public comments through April 2017, but then said it would move the deadline to the end of December. That means that it can finalize the rules before President Obama leaves office. The director of public affairs for the Consumer Federation of America, Jack Gillis, said on a conference call with reporters last week when the EPA originally announced its decision that it is unlikely that President Trump will be able to roll back these changes. Gillis also said on the same call that any attempt by the automakers to prevent these changes would be history repeating itself. "These are the same companies that fought airbags, and now promoting the fact that every car has multiple airbags," he said. "These are the same companies that fought the crash-test program, and now are promoting the crash-test ratings published by the government. So, it's clear that they're misperceiving the needs of the American consumer." There are more reasons the Allliance's pushback is flawed. Carol Lee Rawn, the transportation program director for Ceres, said on that call that the automotive industry is a global one, and many automakers are moving to global platforms to help them meet strict fuel economy rules around the world.