What is "The Truth About Toyota"?
We've covered the fact that Toyota has seen some negative press recently regarding their line-up of cars and trucks in America. While the Prius is often the first vehicle thought of when the subject of green cars or hybrids is brought up, not everybody is smitten with the green credentials that Toyota claims to carry.
Irv Miller has already shot back once regarding negative press. Let's ask some questions of our readers here: How is Toyota doing when it comes to the vehicles they offer for sale in America? Are they green enough as it is? Are they just looking to capitalize on the success of their hybrid system for monetary gain? Does it matter?
[Source: Truth About Toyota]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Tim Russell 1:41PM (10/15/2007)
I'm not a Toyota fan and have not drunk their Kool-aid about how green they are. All I needed to do was get stuck behind one of their Sequoia SUV's to relize that.
That being said this Truth About Toyota campaign has it's facts wrong in singling out Toyota. It is the Auto Alliance http://www.autoalliance.org/ of which Toyota is a member that its against this CAFE bill. The members are:
BMW Group
DaimlerChrysler
Ford Motor Company
General Motors
Mazda
Mitsubishi Motors
Porsche
Toyota
Volkswagen of America, Inc.
I guess now that Toyota is the #1 selling brand it's easier to just single them out.
Reply
i hate trolls 1:43PM (10/15/2007)
Its about as intelligible as google watch (googlewatch.com) or wikipedia watch. Some whining kid who hates google and wikipedia who writes all his articles himself and quotes himself in them, while using pure ignorance to prove a point. As for Toyota, a useful (american useful that is) truck/suv will not achieve an mpg rating that will raise average mpg. Truth is, regardless of CAFE standards, consumers will always buy the option with the most power they can, then proceed to complain to their politicians about how it doesn't get 50 mpg. They would rather pay extra to get the v6 camry than the hybrid version, despite being people who accelerate like grannies. And while toyota probably likes having their green image one must remember that they are in the auto industry for profit, not to save the environment so they will attempt to create decent utility vehicles for the sake of sacrificing fuel economy. Bottom line is that americans are hypocrites who blame others for their decisions.
Reply
Tim Russell 1:48PM (10/15/2007)
I should add this is a great read on Mr. Friedmens NYT article that demonized Toyota.
http://www.autoextremist.com/index.shtml
It'll change on Wed but for now it's up. I Autoextremist required reading to follow the auto industry.
Reply
Kardax 1:48PM (10/15/2007)
Does it matter? No. Gas prices are only going up and will eventually reach the point where a few miles per gallon makes a big difference in one's personal finances.
Whether they like it or not, people are eventually going to migrate to more efficient cars.
Reply
BlackbirdHighway 1:59PM (10/15/2007)
I've always thought that the CAFE standards, while better than nothing, are a back-asswards way to improve fuel economy. The more direct approach is to raise gasoline taxes. That doesn't work in America because everyone hates taxes. Ironically, that's also exactly why it works; everyone hates taxes, so they will buy more efficient vehicles to avoid the high taxes.
Reply
why not the LS2/LS7? 2:35PM (10/15/2007)
The real Toyota is the one that made it their goal to be the biggest automaker. With this goal, you have to make cars even for those who want to waste gas, and hence Toyota has made these new guzzlers to fill that market.
Yes, Toyota is somewhat green, they do make several vehicles which stand out in their classes for efficiency. But now their defining characteristic has to be not their commitment to greenness, but their commitment to being perceived as green as a way to sell more cars, regardless of the greenness of those models.
Does this make them the worst company in the world? No. Does it even make them worse than Ford, who can't seem to find fuel efficiency on a map? No. But it does represent a fall from green ideals in my mind.
Reply
Tim Russell 9:47PM (10/15/2007)
BlackbirdHighway you are correct on all fronts. I agree CAFE is wrong headed. A gas tax, engine size tax (registration cost tied to engine size) etc. would go much further than CAFE to save fuel. The Europeans drive smaller cars with smaller engines due these taxes. They'd probably work here too. What we might see is a CO2 tax in a few years if enough of the American people buy into global warming.
Reply
why not the LS2/LS7? 10:41PM (10/15/2007)
Previous "engine size" taxes have used displacement as a measure of engine size, which is dead wrong. This leads to favoring 4-valve DOHC engines, when these take more materials to make, are larger, heavier, more expensive and have more internal friction than a good pushrod design.
Taxing engines by displacement makes no sense to me. Favoring the BMW 5.0L M5 engine over the smaller, lighter, cheaper, as powerful, more fuel efficient GM 6.0L LS2 is a mistake.
Reply
fawgcutter 7:15AM (10/16/2007)
I think that the environmental groups figured that if they can get Toyota to tow their line on CAFE, they can get the rest of the automakers to follow.
Reply
RockStoneSteel 8:03AM (10/16/2007)
It boggles my mind the love that some people have for fuel taxes in the hope of conserving fossil fuels. The taxes are pointless and are just one more gullibility in handing over control of your personal resources to the government. Why anyone would voluntarily do this is assinine.
The fact is, necessity is the mother of all invention. The alternative to the tax is to simply let people use up the fossil fuels. The worlds oil reserves will not disappear overnight, but rather over a period of years. It will naturally become more expensive on the free market as it becomes more scarce and more difficult to extract. People will gravitate toward more efficient vehicles as it becomes necessary. Alternatives to fossil fuel will also slowly and more logically get a shake down in the true market place.
There is no point in creating a wealthier, more dependent government, with an even greater sense of entitlement than it already has.
I guess this blog is really about Toyota, so I should at least mention them! Not sure why they are such a target, but they have taken more risk and initiative than most manufacturers in bringing efficient vehicles to market. They also have a much longer history of it than any of the major American brands. It wasn't until the past decade or so that they started trying to compete in the larger vehicle segments. And while I don't care for Toyota styling much, they certainly can't be slammed for making an effort toward fuel efficient vehicles, and I can't say that it was necessarily self-promotion on their part. My biggest gripe is that Toyota has become obsessed with building stodgy 4 door family haulers. In past decades, they made wonderful 2 door coupes and 2 door hatchbacks that were practical and attractive. I would love to get a 2 door Celica (prior generation) or 2 door Corolla, but Toyota totally abandoned that segment. Now they offer bulky, awkward, slab sided vehicles like the Solara, or totally funky and unattractive like the most recent Celica. They need to quit thinking of 2 door vehicles as specialty coupes, and simply offer 2 door variants of their more popular vehicles.
Reply
td284 8:37AM (10/16/2007)
A gas tax is absolutely right, the only way to get Americans to buy more efficient vehicles. Plus the income can be used to upgrade mass transit alternatives and new technologies, instead of the billions we spend on more and more inefficient roads. Start electing forward thinking politicians instead of the flabby, backward dinosaurs we now have and we can move this country out of the dark ages. Cities like New York and young people everywhere are making big changes in their attitudes towards cars--we all need to change too.
Reply
Drake 12:31PM (10/16/2007)
Quite simply, if you want to people to stop doing something, you tax it. If you want people to start doing something, you incentivize it.
To reduce America's consumption, reduce CO2 emiissions, and reduce our dependence on oil, we need to increase taxes on gas and use those funds to pay for tax credits on hybrids, alt fuel, and small fuel efficient vehicles.
Reply
Tim Russell 2:06PM (10/16/2007)
Just to explain "why not the LS2/LS7?" I wrote that thinking of the European model but you are correct. Engine size alone does not = MPG. A fuel/carbon tax makes more sense as fuel burned = carbon released.
Reply
motosaurus 3:06PM (10/16/2007)
Getting back to Toyota's surprising support for Detroit's (IMO) really braindead position on CAFE standards:
I think they see themselves as far more able to produce efficient cars than the Big2.5 ( and who wouldn't agree) so by having a lower CAFE standard, Toyota will increase their competitive advantage over the short-time thinkers in Detroit.
Why is Detroit's position braindead? Because higher CAFE standards force a level playing field for their domestic rivals, so they can shed pounds and increase mpg without being blindsided by more Hummers, Expeditions and Avalanches.
John
http://www.jawfish.net
Reply
Jim Garberina 4:28PM (10/17/2007)
I presently am the owner of 3 Camry's 1990;2000;2007. All are 4-cylinder. The best mpg I still get is the 1990 Camry. 2d best is the 2000 Camry. Last is the 2007 Camry. It has been my experience that Camry's mpg rate has gotten progressively lower. I have complained to Camry about this lowering of mpg rate. If auto companies do not make progress in lowering the use of gasoline then there should be Federal Regulations dictating the rate.
Reply
Jim 11:51PM (10/17/2007)
I love my 2006 Prius. I love TOYOTA. We used to buy fleet Dodge trucks, then G.M. auto's, then VW...never had a good service job on any of them. Changed to Toyota (cars, vans and trucks) and never had another problem with service. Sold the 1990 Previa this year and it was still running great. Someone out to stab Toyota. Sounds like Democrats?
Reply
Jimmy 10:25AM (10/19/2007)
In regards to td284's comments on using gas tax funds to pay for mass transit instead of road construction - yes, a higher tax will push consumers to eventually want to buy a more efficient vehicle. It will also raise the current coffers while the auto makers shift their CAFE's to a higher level. After the national FE is higher, the government will be taking in the same amount of taxes once more.
Bottom line is without a tax raise the gov't doesn't want to raise CAFE's either because it will reduce the amount of money to fix roads. Automakers won't raise their CAFE because they then pay penalty taxes because of the difference generated.
My main question - when a larger number of hybrids, EV's, and other AEV's are on the road how will the roads be paid for? Without revenues from gas taxes, will the gov't start taxing the electricity rates to pay for the EV's share of wear? Or tax tires to the max since wear is related to time driven (usually)?
The point is there is not going to be a large corporate or gov't push for more efficient vehicles without some way to at least stay even in the cash flow.
Reply
middleoroad 8:47AM (10/25/2007)
Toyota received the number two spot from the Union of Concerned Scientists for greenest car company.This while producing full sized trucks which number one (Honda)does not.Toyota is obviously producing alot of efficient vehicles as they have for many decades,long before it was in vogue.If they do not fight,the next round of regulations may be too tough.On the tax front,I tout feebates that do not add to the governments bottom line.These will help the lower and middle class get out from under their gas guzzlers.Some studies conclude that the manufacturers could actually make more profit with a feebate system than without.
Reply