Toyota Scion Braun Rampvan Entervan Handicap Wheelchair Van 1-owner 13k Miles on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2016 Scion iM Review [w/video]

Scion is all grown up. When the brand launched in 2003, it was as if Scion wanted to be the anti-Toyota. You could almost imagine it saying, "We aren't our parents, dude. We're different." Scion's decision to eschew mainstream vehicles was largely successful. The original xA, xB, and tC were affordable, economical, stylish, and – most importantly – different. But the brand's aging lineup couldn't keep the interest of the young, urban buyers it so coveted. Sales suffered severely after the 2009 industry collapse and have failed to return to their 2006 peak. So much like the bearded 20-something that's finally realized an artisanal headcheese startup isn't going to pay the bills, Scion has finally introduced its first truly mainstream model, the 2016 iM. You already know the basics on the iM, courtesy of Managing Editor Steven Ewing's testing in California in June. But since there's little substitute for more mileage and extra time with the car, we ventured out to Michigan's second largest city, Grand Rapids, for a second look. The iM is exactly the kind of vehicle Scion needs right now. Ewing spent most of his time on California's beautiful winding roads, but our second go in the iM was much more sedate, consisting largely of freeway cruising and some city driving. In short, these miles backed up our original assessment: the iM is exactly the kind of vehicle Scion needs right now. But that's not without a few problems. We spent almost all of our drive time behind the wheel of the continuously variable transmission model which, in many ways is better than the six-speed manual-equipped car we originally tested. Toyota's CVT works well; it's on par with the industry's best. The transmission keeps the revs low and responds quickly to throttle inputs, but at the same time, the tach needle is quick to retreat when acceleration isn't demanded. The stepped nature of the CVT is a bit off-putting at first – it feels a lot more sudden on the "upshifts" – but it's easy to ignore. Weirdly, there are no paddle shifters, but you can still pick your "gears" via the floor-mounted shifter. The iM doesn't hate a little bit of fun. We played with the CVT's sport setting, and while we wouldn't recommend using it on a regular basis, we liked the way it kicked up the revs upon corner entry. The engine never felt flat-footed midway through a turn, giving the impression that the iM doesn't hate a little bit of fun.

Toyota GT86 turbo, convertible, sedan variants back on the table

Okay Toyota, make up your mind. Figure it out. Quit playing games with our heart. Either build a bunch of variations of the excellent GT86 (also known as the Scion FR-S and Subaru BRZ) or don't. At this point, we're just tired of the back and forth. After no shortage of denials, an Australian website is claiming that Toyota is reconsidering convertible, four-door, turbocharged and all-wheel-drive hybrid variants of the GT86. Kindly pass all the salt.
It's not that we don't want to believe the Aussies; we do. But when the story lists the same "sources in Japan" as a lot of the other denials and confirmations about GT86/BRZ/FR-S variants, well, there's a certain sense of the "Boy That Cried Wolf," here. Ignoring all that, then, what does Motoring.com.au claim to know?
Sources claim the GT86 Convertible will arrive in October 2014, while the turbocharged and hybrid sedans are slated for 2016.

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.