Jump to content
William Maley

Toyota News: Toyota's R&D Boss Believes Internal Combustion Engines For Cars To Be Gone By 2050

Recommended Posts

Most vehicles sold feature an internal combustion engine running some type of fuel, but a Toyota executive believes this engine will be gone for vehicles by 2050.

“We expect that by 2050 we will have reduced CO2 emissions from vehicles by 90% compared to the figure in 2010. To achieve that from 2040 simple internal combustion engined cars will not be made, but they may be the basis of some hybrid or plug-in hybrid cars,” said Seigo Kuzumaki, Toyota’s head of advanced R&D and engineering.

Kuzumaki's reasoning for this comes down to governments tightening regulations on emissions. This, in turn, will cause automakers to accelerate development of alternative powertrains such as electrics.

Toyota's a latecomer to electric vehicles, instead choosing to focus on hydrogen. But the Japanese automaker is working on a new family of EVs that will launch in 2020. The models will use lithium-ion batteries and have a range of 300 miles. But Toyota hopes to launch solid state batteries only a few years later for their EVs. Solid state batteries use solid electrolytes instead of liquid to hold a charge. This will provide better performance and a smaller size than the lithium-ion battery packs.

Source: Autocar


View full article

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think in the modern 1st world nations New ICE will be gone by 2030 to 2035 as a for sale option. It is possible they could be gone world wide for new Auto sales by 2050. Hybrids I think will still be around for 3rd world places that have lousy electrical grids.

I do agree with Toyota R&D, the best batteries I ever had in an auto were solid state. Sears for a while sold a platinum solid state battery, expensive and had a 7 year warranty. Loved them, but when I went to buy another, they had discontinued selling them due to poor sales. Was told they were more expensive than majority of people were willing to pay. 

I suspect technology will bring this cost down greatly over the next 5 years on top of breakthroughs like Toshiba has with their rapid charge batteries.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Notice those two words... "...from VEHICLES".  There is still the problem of CO2 from ALL THOSE OTHER SOURCES THAT ARE NOT BEING REGULATED ONE BIT.

Sly insertion to show his displeasure.  And there are millions of people just like him.  This is being forced on people who do not want it, and it will not solve a problem because there is no problem to be solved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, ocnblu said:

Notice those two words... "...from VEHICLES".  There is still the problem of CO2 from ALL THOSE OTHER SOURCES THAT ARE NOT BEING REGULATED ONE BIT.

Sly insertion to show his displeasure.  And there are millions of people just like him.  This is being forced on people who do not want it, and it will not solve a problem because there is no problem to be solved.

Where is this fantasy planet that doesn’t have regulations?

 

And your last paragraph sound like the words of the horse and buggy business over a century ago. Say hello them. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok... not sure why... but "hello them".

Livestock CO2 emissions are not regulated.  People exhale CO2.  CO2 is generated all over the place and the car is the fall guy because of some misguided vendetta against fossil fuels.  Where are all these metals going to come from to manufacture all these batteries?  And how will they be transported to industrialized countries that will be making them?  By ship most likely and are there emissions standards for ships?

11 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

hello them

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, ocnblu said:

Ok... not sure why... but "hello them".

Livestock CO2 emissions are not regulated.  People exhale CO2.  CO2 is generated all over the place and the car is the fall guy because of some misguided vendetta against fossil fuels.  Where are all these metals going to come from to manufacture all these batteries?  And how will they be transported to industrialized countries that will be making them?  By ship most likely and are there emissions standards for ships?

 

Newsflash, you can’t control the CO2 emissions of living creatures. You can with everything else. 

 

What is amsuing is the “well there’s all the other sources of pollution so why bother with cars?” argument. It’s amusing and foolishly ignorant. 

 

And yes, say hello to the horse and buggy industry while you fight the obvious evolution of technology. 

Edited by surreal1272
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would say it is much easier to crack down on CO2 pollution on power plants first, then go after cars.  One coal-fired plant will pollute more than thousands of cars at any one time.  2030 may well be the beginning of the end of the ICE in vehicles, but I would rather see no more power plant emissions first.  Afterwards, then the zero-emission vehicle mandates can start.

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:lol:

 

Not going to happen.....now can I see not so many- Yes. I think we will still have choices, though I think the popular one will be electric. Which is okay. There are still going to be cases that good ol' gas engines will need to be used....plus, I think people will still enjoy them....and not everyone is going to retrofit a classic car either....

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, ocnblu said:

 Where are all these metals going to come from to manufacture all these batteries?  And how will they be transported to industrialized countries that will be making them?  By ship most likely and are there emissions standards for ships?

First off China leads the world in recycling metal of all types, we ship it to them after we dump it on ships.

Second, Marine Ocean Going ships do have CO2 regulations, all new ships are EV Ships using LNG or super clean low sulfur bunker fuel to run generators thus reducing emissions and improving efficiencies. Cost of fuel is a bitch, EV ships are far more efficient and maneuverable.

For your reading pleasure:

http://www.ics-shipping.org/docs/default-source/resources/environmental-protection/shipping-world-trade-and-the-reduction-of-co2-emissions.pdf?sfvrsn=6

This was a report put together and approved by the global marine industry to reduce polution and it is from 2006, you can find this going back to the 90's as they looked for ways to reduce CO2 output, reduce cost and clean up the ships used to move cargo around.

http://www.martrans.org/docs/publ/REFEREED JOURNALS/WMUJMA EMISSIONS 2009.pdf

Our own Government signed off on this and President Bush signed this into law with approval of our house and Senate in 2000 with reductions in CO2 and cleaning up the marine fuel industry and the ships.

https://www.epa.gov/regulations-emissions-vehicles-and-engines/international-standards-reduce-emissions-marine-diesel

Sorry to bust your Amish thinking, but our own country and everyone else around the world has been focused on reducing the pollution and CO2 production from the Marine shipping fleets.

Need more reading, here is a Bing Search for you to have more documentation:

https://www.bing.com/search?q=Commercial+ship+emission+regulations&qs=n&form=CHRDEF&pc=U480&sp=-1&pq=undefined&sc=0-21&sk=&cvid=C14899805E194460B76A04978A519516

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, riviera74 said:

I would say it is much easier to crack down on CO2 pollution on power plants first, then go after cars.  One coal-fired plant will pollute more than thousands of cars at any one time.  2030 may well be the beginning of the end of the ICE in vehicles, but I would rather see no more power plant emissions first.  Afterwards, then the zero-emission vehicle mandates can start.

Actually @Drew Dowdell had posted some info that showed the huge reduction in Coal power Plants as they switch to much cleaner Natural Gas which North America sits on the world's largest reserves.

Here is a 3rd party story that shows the big change over:

http://www.power-eng.com/articles/print/volume-119/issue-6/features/coal-to-gas-plant-conversions-in-the-u-s.html

A research story by The Guardian that shows the dominate production of Electricity in the US will be by Natural Gas by 2020.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/jul/14/gas-surges-ahead-of-coal-in-us-power-generation

Here is our own government details showing that Natural Gas Production of Electricity surpassed Coal in 2016 4 years ahead of original expectations.

https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=25392

2/3rds of CO2 output by Dirty Coal has been removed since they started the switch to Natural Gas production in the 90's.

Now is the time to start the transition to EV Auto's.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While all of that blather up there is good, there will NEV.ER. be an appropriate time to "start the transition to EV Auto's" (sic)

(You kill me with your funny non-grammatical apostrophes)  :lol:

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, surreal1272 said:

And your last paragraph sound like the words of the horse and buggy business over a century ago. Say hello them. 

We ahve a really cool house in Columbus built by people in that business....ten years after it was built, they went broke...

https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/1330-Bryden-Rd-Columbus-OH-43205/33846110_zpid/

Image result for 1330 bryden road columbus ohio

It is slowly being rebuilt by a very determined individual...no one else has been in the house for something like 30 years...

Scientists warning to humanity about global climate change and other things that will happen if we keep using fossil fuels;

http://scientistswarning.forestry.oregonstate.edu/sites/sw/files/Ripple_et_al_11-3-17 Scientists main text.pdf

Who do i believe...13,000 plus scientists or an automotive body shop estimator from Lancaster PA with an admitted bias against electric cars?

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ocnblu said:

While all of that blather up there is good, there will NEV.ER. be an appropriate time to "start the transition to EV Auto's" (sic)

(You kill me with your funny non-grammatical apostrophes)  :lol:

However, the amount of fossil fuel is indeed finite, there will be a very painful end to life as we know it if we do not transition to renewable energy.  I like to deal with unpleasant things before they bite me in the ass, not after. Just sayin.

6 hours ago, dfelt said:

Actually @Drew Dowdell had posted some info that showed the huge reduction in Coal power Plants as they switch to much cleaner Natural Gas which North America sits on the world's largest reserves.

Here is a 3rd party story that shows the big change over:

http://www.power-eng.com/articles/print/volume-119/issue-6/features/coal-to-gas-plant-conversions-in-the-u-s.html

A research story by The Guardian that shows the dominate production of Electricity in the US will be by Natural Gas by 2020.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/jul/14/gas-surges-ahead-of-coal-in-us-power-generation

Here is our own government details showing that Natural Gas Production of Electricity surpassed Coal in 2016 4 years ahead of original expectations.

https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=25392

2/3rds of CO2 output by Dirty Coal has been removed since they started the switch to Natural Gas production in the 90's.

Now is the time to start the transition to EV Auto's.

And to Solar and Wind and away from even natural gas as a fuel.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone armchairing the future has been talking about the banning of IC, but I can see plenty of room for co-existence way into the future. Once IC in new vehicles becomes a minor percentage (for conversation- let's say IC gets to 20%), there's no longer a reason to ban them; they'll become a statistical non-factor. Regardless, I still believe the following 2 general things; that new EV vehicles WILL become a majority of vehicles sold, and that this 'flip' will take 50 years minimum.

Again I remind; we've had a 'successful' PHEV from a major OEM for 15 years now, there are currently 3 dozen PHEVs/ EVs on the US market, and the marketshare is still only 1% at the end of this year.
Those saying 'most of the market will be EVs in 12 years' are being woefully ignorant of the trending.

A plethora of relevant examples exist; look at set belts- mandated for front passengers since January 1966, in everything built since (initially front outer passengers only), takes 2 secs to apply, has empirical evidence of effectiveness, most states (if not all) assign fines for non-use.... but only at (it's historical high) 90% useage in 2016. That's 50 years of trying to instill a habit that takes 2 seconds.

Edited by balthazar
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, riviera74 said:

I would say it is much easier to crack down on CO2 pollution on power plants first, then go after cars.  One coal-fired plant will pollute more than thousands of cars at any one time.  2030 may well be the beginning of the end of the ICE in vehicles, but I would rather see no more power plant emissions first.  Afterwards, then the zero-emission vehicle mandates can start.

And they have been cracking on power plants. That’s the point that Mr. Anti-EV does not get while talking about cows and other non-related crap. There have been efforts almost accross the board to reduce CO2, yet he says “why bother” just because of his half baked hang up of EVs. The horse and buggy industry would be proud of him. Oh wait. They don’t exist anymore.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

And they have been cracking on power plants. That’s the point that Mr. Anti-EV does not get while talking about cows and other non-related crap. There have been efforts almost accross the board to reduce CO2, yet he says “why bother” just because of his half baked hang up of EVs. The horse and buggy industry would be proud of him. Oh wait. They don’t exist anymore.

They do in Amish Ohio, Pennsylvania and Indiana.  Thriving, actually.  But a tiny percentage of the actual transportation market.

Just like ICE in 2065.

30 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Everyone armchairing the future has been talking about the banning of IC, but I can see plenty of room for co-existence way into the future. Once IC in new vehicles becomes a minor percentage (for conversation- let's say IC gets to 20%), there's no longer a reason to ban them; they'll become a statistical non-factor. Regardless, I still believe the following 2 general things; that new EV vehicles WILL become a majority of vehicles sold, and that this 'flip' will take 50 years minimum.

Again I remind; we've had a 'successful' PHEV from a major OEM for 15 years now, there are currently 3 dozen PHEVs/ EVs on the US market, and the marketshare is still only 1% at the end of this year.
Those saying 'most of the market will be EVs in 12 years' are being woefully ignorant of the trending.

A plethora of relevant examples exist; look at set belts- mandated for front passengers since January 1966, in everything built since (initially front outer passengers only), takes 2 secs to apply, has empirical evidence of effectiveness, most states (if not all) assign fines for non-use.... but only at (it's historical high) 90% useage in 2016. That's 50 years of trying to instill a habit that takes 2 seconds.

Agreed...but we should be continuing the transition.  I want everyone to enjoy the same freedom that I do in owning a car.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, balthazar said:

 

Again I remind; we've had a 'successful' PHEV from a major OEM for 15 years now...

Yes, and the last time I was in NYC all of the dirty, polluting inefficient crown vics had largely been replaced with vehicles like the Prius....same thing in LA when my wife was there just recently, lots of hybrids on the road...

At some point when fuel prices spike cars like the Prius will become the norm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, ocnblu said:

Notice those two words... "...from VEHICLES".  There is still the problem of CO2 from ALL THOSE OTHER SOURCES THAT ARE NOT BEING REGULATED ONE BIT.

Sly insertion to show his displeasure.  And there are millions of people just like him.  This is being forced on people who do not want it, and it will not solve a problem because there is no problem to be solved.

Some/Many of the other man-made sources are targeted for regulation as well. 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only thing that I think Toyota has wrong here is the timeline.  First off, existing cars will not be gone. But new production cars will likely be down to EV only.

2050 is only 33 years away.

Today, the most technologically advanced cars on the road are PHEVs and EVs like the S-Class PHEV, CT6 PHEV, Chevy Bolt EV, and Tesla Model-S.  This is the powertrain diagram for the CT6 PHEV. Aside from the CT6's transmission which is the most advanced hybrid transmission available, the concepts and technologies of this car are the same as the Fusion Energi or Pruis Prime.... I only picked this picture to show the technology, I realize it is not an average person's car.

6a00d8341c4fbe53ef01bb08bc4f49970d-800wi.png

 

33 years ago the average midsize car was powered by a carbed V6 or V8.  The 1984 Thunderbird was one of the most advanced average person car. It had Central Fuel Injection... which was basically a glorified carb with a single fuel injector instead of vacuum operated jets. Numerous manufacturers were still running carbed engines for an additional 8 years.   In another thread here on C&G we are talking about the new Corvette V8 that has two different kinds of fuel delivery systems, and in that regard it is about 3 or 4 years late to the party. Think about the level of technological difference between a 1984 Thunderbird and a 2017 CT6 PHEV or Pruis Prime.

605878_1.jpg

33 years prior to that Thunderbird was 1951 and this was one of the most advanced average person's car on the road.  Think about the technology difference between a 1951 Olds with its "High Compression V8" and the 1984 Thunderbird.

3601455266_cba1f434f9_z.jpg

33 years before that and you were in a Model-T.

122_97aa066dcc42404e7602768333af5659_m.jpg

33 years before the Model-T, you could get a Studebaker with between one and four horsepower.

5e10d5d0586407969eb6faa7a4850a50.jpg

The point of this thought exercise is to help you keep in mind what is possible in the span of 33 years.

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like the computer industry and Moore's Law that explains the doubling of computer power every 24 months, battery technology is in the early days of where CPU technology was in the 90's and we have blown way past that. 

Battery tech is also ramping up fast from Air batteries and the first one to prove 1,100 miles on a single charge to various other forms. What happens over the next 2-3 years will truly change the way people live life and get around.

http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/130380-future-batteries-coming-soon-charge-in-seconds-last-months-and-power-over-the-air

This story is recent and covers the whole battery industry, the various options and the amazing size and density that is just now going to production. Samsung has finalized a solid state battery that will out last their current Li batteries by a factor of 3.

If we did not have the Internet and the advanced technology we have today, I would agree with Balthazar that we are looking at 50 plus years to transition much like how the auto industry started from 1876 to 1915 when ICE auto's clearly won the battle. Yet we no longer live in a years to get info out to humanity and I actually expect this to change much faster than many here will realize. Look at how fast people change phones, computers and just about everything else. Humanity likes to have the best, sooner and faster than others the Jones - Jones competition will allow a faster change over to EV's than the PHEV has done.

Simpler, less maintenance cost and easy to use as it blends with today's modern technology.

We know it is not a matter of if but when. I believe the start is this year 2017 and by 2030+ we will see a majority of new auto's be EV and the death of new auto sales from ICE will be over by 2040-2045.

Few Charts to show the growth:

BatteryDensity.png

DensityCells.png

DevelopmentOfLithium.png

EnergyDensity.jpg

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, A Horse With No Name said:

We ahve a really cool house in Columbus built by people in that business....ten years after it was built, they went broke...

https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/1330-Bryden-Rd-Columbus-OH-43205/33846110_zpid/

Image result for 1330 bryden road columbus ohio

It is slowly being rebuilt by a very determined individual...no one else has been in the house for something like 30 years...

Scientists warning to humanity about global climate change and other things that will happen if we keep using fossil fuels;

http://scientistswarning.forestry.oregonstate.edu/sites/sw/files/Ripple_et_al_11-3-17 Scientists main text.pdf

Who do i believe...13,000 plus scientists or an automotive body shop estimator from Lancaster PA with an admitted bias against electric cars?

Yeah Chris, I'm the ONLY ONE out here with this opinion.  Bull crap.

There is not that much difference between the 1951 Oldsmobile and the 1984 Thunderbird though.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a real world, industry comparison:

toyota prius prime, overall length 183", MSRP $27100, projected 2017 sales : 20,018
toyota corolla, overall length 183", MSRP $18500, projected 2017 sales : 347,928

Seems like it would be easy-peasy to nudge their customer base into an PHEV the same size; despite the maybe 2 price tiers higher buy-in, it has an eMPG rating of 133.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, ocnblu said:

Yeah Chris, I'm the ONLY ONE out here with this opinion.  Bull crap.

There is not that much difference between the 1951 Oldsmobile and the 1984 Thunderbird though.

No you are not the only one but you are part of an ever shrinking minority that wants to cling to the past and bitch and moan like what you are saying is going to change a single thing about progress and technology. All I have to say is “buck up” becuase it’s not changing just becuase you can’t or won’t see the writing on the wall. 

  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

    • By William Maley
      Toyota isn't immune to the falling sales of passenger vehicles as more buyers trend towards trucks and SUVs. In the first ten months of this year, cars are down 11.1 percent. Meanwhile, trucks are up 7.7 percent. This has the Japanese automaker considering dropping some models.
      "We are taking a hard look at all of the segments that we compete in to make sure we are competing in profitable segments and that products we sell have strategic value," said Jim Lentz, Toyota's North America CEO after the automaker reported an increase in quarterly profits.
      Unlike Ford which is revamping its lineup to changing consumer tastes, Toyota isn't planning to "abandon passenger cars," instead "scrutinizing offerings in some areas, such as convertibles or coupes." No mention was made of the models on the chopping block, but we have a possible few candidates.
      Yaris: Sales have dropped 38 percent this year Prius C : Not big a seller and hasn't really been updated aside from the 2018 model Pruis C we reviewed last month. Lexus RC: Sales down 52 percent so far in 2018 Lexus GS: Been long rumored to be heading to the gallows
    • By William Maley
      Toyota isn't immune to the falling sales of passenger vehicles as more buyers trend towards trucks and SUVs. In the first ten months of this year, cars are down 11.1 percent. Meanwhile, trucks are up 7.7 percent. This has the Japanese automaker considering dropping some models.
      "We are taking a hard look at all of the segments that we compete in to make sure we are competing in profitable segments and that products we sell have strategic value," said Jim Lentz, Toyota's North America CEO after the automaker reported an increase in quarterly profits.
      Unlike Ford which is revamping its lineup to changing consumer tastes, Toyota isn't planning to "abandon passenger cars," instead "scrutinizing offerings in some areas, such as convertibles or coupes." No mention was made of the models on the chopping block, but we have a possible few candidates.
      Yaris: Sales have dropped 38 percent this year Prius C : Not big a seller and hasn't really been updated aside from the 2018 model Pruis C we reviewed last month. Lexus RC: Sales down 52 percent so far in 2018 Lexus GS: Been long rumored to be heading to the gallows
      View full article
    • By William Maley
      When Toyota introduced the Prius C back in 2012, it served two purposes. It was the entry-level model for then growing Prius family (Prius, Prius Plug-In, and Prius V). Plus, it was part of a small group of vehicles that could achieve almost 50 mpg if driven efficiently. But Toyota really hasn’t made any changes to the Prius C since it was launched, only making minor changes to the feature set for the past few years. Meanwhile, the rest of the Prius lineup has undergone significant changes with models either being dropped (Prius V) or being redesigned (Prius). 
      For 2018, Toyota has decided to take the Prius C out of its deep freeze and make some changes. But is that enough considering larger hybrid models return higher fuel economy figures, and are slightly more expensive? The answer is no.
      Toyota has given the Prius C a much needed exterior update with a revised front end (new hood shape and slimmer grille), crossover-esq design touches (black wheel arches, faux skid plates, and a set of roof rails), and a set of 15-inch alloy wheels. The Prius C is one of the few Toyota models that come in a number of vibrant colors like the Tangerine Orange on this tester. It did make it look like a giant Jack-O-Lantern, but it also gave this small model some personality. The Prius C’s interior design is a bit odd. While it lacks some of the craziness found in the standard Prius (see the Storm Trooper inspired center console and stack), there are some decisions that left me scratching my head. For example, there is a storage shelf behind the steering wheel. I not sure what you can put in there aside from spare change or snacks to eat while on the move. Almost all of the materials used in the Prius C are hard plastics. Usually, I would be giving this pass considering it is a subcompact vehicle and this one of the sacrifices needed to meet the low price. But this particular Prius C has an as-tested price of $26,479. For that price, I do wish Toyota had stuck some soft-touch material to ease some of the pain on the wallet. The manual adjustments weren’t the smoothest and it took me a few days to find a position that didn’t have me constantly fidgeting around. This is disappointing considering the seat itself is nice to sit on with soft padding and decent support for long trips.  In the back seat, headroom is surprisingly good due to the tall height of the roof. Like other subcompacts, the Prius C’s rear legroom is on the tight side. All Prius Cs come with a 6.1-inch touchscreen with Toyota’s Entune infotainment system. Higher end models like my Four tester come with navigation. The screen is a bit on the small side, which makes it hard to hit some of the touchscreen buttons. At least the screen is easy to read and bright. One slight disappointment is the slowness of the system. Compared to other hybrid vehicles, Entune is a few ticks slower when going through the various screens. The Prius C’s hybrid powertrain is comprised of a 1.5L Atkinson Cycle four-cylinder, 45 kW electric motor, Nickel-Metal Hydride battery pack, and a CVT. Total output is rated at 99 horsepower. If your driving takes place mostly in urban areas, then the Prius C is a fine car. At speeds under 45 mph, the powertrain gets the vehicle moving a decent clip. But there is a fair amount of buzzing coming from the engine and CVT. On rural roads and highways, the limited performance of hybrid powertrain makes itself known as the model records a 0-60 mph of over 12 seconds. Passing is best done when there are no vehicles appearing in your eyesight. EPA fuel economy figures for the Prius C are 48 City/43 Highway/46 Combined. The figures are disappointing when you consider the likes of the Toyota Prius and Hyundai Ioniq return higher figures - 54/50/52 for the Prius and 55/54/55 in the Ioniq. My average for the Prius C was 49.6 mpg, very disappointing when compared to the 60 mpg in the Prius and 62 mpg in the Ioniq Blue I have reviewed previously. The reason for the poor fuel economy showing in the Prius C comes down Toyota not making any changes to the powertrain since its launch in 2012. Handling in the Prius C is quite surprising with excellent body control and feeling quite nimble around the corners. The low-rolling resistance tires will complain if you decide to push it. Where the Prius C shines is in an urban area where the compact size and tight turning radius make it easy to navigate tight spots. Ride quality is about average with most bumps being smoothed over. One item to be aware of is the abundance of road and wind noise. Be prepared to crank the radio up to drown out most of the road noise. We come now to the Prius C’s big problem. The base C One begins at $20,630. My Four tester begins at $24,965, which already makes it a tough sell when you consider that the larger Prius Two is only $280 less and returns higher fuel economy figures. With a couple of options and destination, the as-tested price came to $26,479. Again, you can get into larger Prius or the Hyundai Ioniq that not only offer better fuel economy figures but more features for a similar price. Gallery: 2018 Toyota Prius C Four
      Disclaimer: Toyota Provided the Prius C, Insurance, and One Tank of Gas
      Year: 2018
      Make: Toyota
      Model: Prius C
      Trim: Four
      Engine: Hybrid Synergy Drive: 1.5L DOHC 16-Valve VVT-i, Electric Motor, Sealed Nickel-Metal Hydride Battery Pack
      Driveline: eCVT, Front-Wheel Drive
      Horsepower @ RPM: 73 @ 4,800 (Gas); 60 @ 0 (Electric)
      Torque @ RPM: 82 @ 4,000 (Gas); 125 @ 0 (Electric)
      Fuel Economy: City/Highway/Combined - 48/43/46
      Curb Weight: 2,530 lbs
      Location of Manufacture: Isawa, Iwate, Japan
      Base Price: $24,965
      As Tested Price: $26,479 (Includes $895.00 Destination Charge)
      Options:
      Special Color - $395.00
      Carpet Floor Mats/Cargo Mat - $224.00

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      When Toyota introduced the Prius C back in 2012, it served two purposes. It was the entry-level model for then growing Prius family (Prius, Prius Plug-In, and Prius V). Plus, it was part of a small group of vehicles that could achieve almost 50 mpg if driven efficiently. But Toyota really hasn’t made any changes to the Prius C since it was launched, only making minor changes to the feature set for the past few years. Meanwhile, the rest of the Prius lineup has undergone significant changes with models either being dropped (Prius V) or being redesigned (Prius). 
      For 2018, Toyota has decided to take the Prius C out of its deep freeze and make some changes. But is that enough considering larger hybrid models return higher fuel economy figures, and are slightly more expensive? The answer is no.
      Toyota has given the Prius C a much needed exterior update with a revised front end (new hood shape and slimmer grille), crossover-esq design touches (black wheel arches, faux skid plates, and a set of roof rails), and a set of 15-inch alloy wheels. The Prius C is one of the few Toyota models that come in a number of vibrant colors like the Tangerine Orange on this tester. It did make it look like a giant Jack-O-Lantern, but it also gave this small model some personality. The Prius C’s interior design is a bit odd. While it lacks some of the craziness found in the standard Prius (see the Storm Trooper inspired center console and stack), there are some decisions that left me scratching my head. For example, there is a storage shelf behind the steering wheel. I not sure what you can put in there aside from spare change or snacks to eat while on the move. Almost all of the materials used in the Prius C are hard plastics. Usually, I would be giving this pass considering it is a subcompact vehicle and this one of the sacrifices needed to meet the low price. But this particular Prius C has an as-tested price of $26,479. For that price, I do wish Toyota had stuck some soft-touch material to ease some of the pain on the wallet. The manual adjustments weren’t the smoothest and it took me a few days to find a position that didn’t have me constantly fidgeting around. This is disappointing considering the seat itself is nice to sit on with soft padding and decent support for long trips.  In the back seat, headroom is surprisingly good due to the tall height of the roof. Like other subcompacts, the Prius C’s rear legroom is on the tight side. All Prius Cs come with a 6.1-inch touchscreen with Toyota’s Entune infotainment system. Higher end models like my Four tester come with navigation. The screen is a bit on the small side, which makes it hard to hit some of the touchscreen buttons. At least the screen is easy to read and bright. One slight disappointment is the slowness of the system. Compared to other hybrid vehicles, Entune is a few ticks slower when going through the various screens. The Prius C’s hybrid powertrain is comprised of a 1.5L Atkinson Cycle four-cylinder, 45 kW electric motor, Nickel-Metal Hydride battery pack, and a CVT. Total output is rated at 99 horsepower. If your driving takes place mostly in urban areas, then the Prius C is a fine car. At speeds under 45 mph, the powertrain gets the vehicle moving a decent clip. But there is a fair amount of buzzing coming from the engine and CVT. On rural roads and highways, the limited performance of hybrid powertrain makes itself known as the model records a 0-60 mph of over 12 seconds. Passing is best done when there are no vehicles appearing in your eyesight. EPA fuel economy figures for the Prius C are 48 City/43 Highway/46 Combined. The figures are disappointing when you consider the likes of the Toyota Prius and Hyundai Ioniq return higher figures - 54/50/52 for the Prius and 55/54/55 in the Ioniq. My average for the Prius C was 49.6 mpg, very disappointing when compared to the 60 mpg in the Prius and 62 mpg in the Ioniq Blue I have reviewed previously. The reason for the poor fuel economy showing in the Prius C comes down Toyota not making any changes to the powertrain since its launch in 2012. Handling in the Prius C is quite surprising with excellent body control and feeling quite nimble around the corners. The low-rolling resistance tires will complain if you decide to push it. Where the Prius C shines is in an urban area where the compact size and tight turning radius make it easy to navigate tight spots. Ride quality is about average with most bumps being smoothed over. One item to be aware of is the abundance of road and wind noise. Be prepared to crank the radio up to drown out most of the road noise. We come now to the Prius C’s big problem. The base C One begins at $20,630. My Four tester begins at $24,965, which already makes it a tough sell when you consider that the larger Prius Two is only $280 less and returns higher fuel economy figures. With a couple of options and destination, the as-tested price came to $26,479. Again, you can get into larger Prius or the Hyundai Ioniq that not only offer better fuel economy figures but more features for a similar price. Gallery: 2018 Toyota Prius C Four
      Disclaimer: Toyota Provided the Prius C, Insurance, and One Tank of Gas
      Year: 2018
      Make: Toyota
      Model: Prius C
      Trim: Four
      Engine: Hybrid Synergy Drive: 1.5L DOHC 16-Valve VVT-i, Electric Motor, Sealed Nickel-Metal Hydride Battery Pack
      Driveline: eCVT, Front-Wheel Drive
      Horsepower @ RPM: 73 @ 4,800 (Gas); 60 @ 0 (Electric)
      Torque @ RPM: 82 @ 4,000 (Gas); 125 @ 0 (Electric)
      Fuel Economy: City/Highway/Combined - 48/43/46
      Curb Weight: 2,530 lbs
      Location of Manufacture: Isawa, Iwate, Japan
      Base Price: $24,965
      As Tested Price: $26,479 (Includes $895.00 Destination Charge)
      Options:
      Special Color - $395.00
      Carpet Floor Mats/Cargo Mat - $224.00
    • By William Maley
      The Toyota Land Cruiser and Lexus LX 570 are part of an endangered species: SUVs designed with the purpose of going off-road. It may seem somewhat mad to describe most SUVs as not off-road oriented, but most buyers don’t really take SUVs off the beaten path. Automakers have responded in kind by providing a minimum four-wheel capability while improving on-road behavior. The Land Cruiser and LX 570 haven’t gone down this path as they have a small, but loyal owner base that would cry foul if Toyota/Lexus decided to do this. But as I found out during my week with them, Toyota and Lexus need to do some serious thinking about the future of these models if they want to keep them around.
      Exterior
      Both the Land Cruiser and LX 570 share the same boxy shape with a slightly angled front end, large area of glass, and a split opening tailgate. Where the two differentiate is in the details. Toyota plays it safe with a large rectangular grille and chrome bars that separate the front headlights. The set of 18-inch alloy wheels look somewhat small on the Land Cruiser, mostly due to the large size of the off-road tires. The LX 570 is very extroverted as evidenced by the front end styling. It features the largest version of Lexus’ spindle grille that gives it an intense look. A set of LED headlights with a unique lamp design sit on either side. Multi-spoke 20-inch wheels are standard and seem suited to fit the large size of the SUV.
      Interior
      Considering the $84k+ price tag of this Land Cruiser, it is slightly disappointing that Toyota went for a very utilitarian look. It doesn’t have the flash or elegance and you’ll find in competitors such as the Range Rover or Mercedes-Benz GLS. Material quality is what you expect for the price with an abundance of soft-touch plastic, leather upholstery, wood trim, and faux metal used all around. 
      The Lexus LX 570 takes a different approach with the interior, feeling more like a real contender to the likes of the Germans and Range Rover. The dash design is very modern with a short center stack, a widescreen display for the infotainment system, and glossy wood trim. Both models have a button-ladened center stack, but I found the LX 570’s easier to use as the buttons weren’t tightly packed.
      Getting inside either SUV is somewhat tough due to the tall ride height. But thanks to doorsteps and pull handles, entering both models becomes easier. The front seats are some of best I have sat in, offering plenty of cushioning and support for any trip length. Power adjustments and memory come standard on both models. The second-row offers plenty of head and legroom for passengers. You can slide the seat to either increase legroom or cargo space. The third-row should only be used for small kids as there is only a minuscule amount of legroom. The lack of padding also makes third-row best for short trips.
      One quirk about the Land Cruiser and LX 570’s third-row is that the seats don’t fold into the floor. Instead, the seats flip towards the side. Not only does it make it slightly awkward to load cargo into either model, but it also makes for a small cargo area. Measurements for the two models are 16.1 cubic feet with all three-rows up, 44.7 with the third-row folded, and 81.7 with the second-row folded. For 2018, Lexus did introduce a two-row version that increases space by 5.8 cubic feet - bringing the total to 50.5 cubic feet.
      Infotainment
      Lexus has fitted one the of largest infotainment screens in the class into the LX 570. Measuring 12.3-inches, this allows for a split-screen capability where you can have various functions up at the same time. For example, you can have navigation on one side and audio on the other. Some of the configuration options Lexus offers are strange to say in the least like having two maps of the navigation system up at the same time. Where the LX 570 falls short is the Remote Touch controller. The joystick controller is a pain to use as it feels quite vague when moving around and causes you to overshoot when trying to select something. This is very problematic when you’re driving as you’ll find yourself paying more attention to the system than the road.
      In the Land Cruiser, you’ll find a smaller 9-inch infotainment system with Toyota’s Entune system. Thankfully, Toyota had decided to use a touchscreen instead of a frustrating controller. Moving around in Entune is easy thanks to a simple interface with large touchscreen buttons and a set of physical shortcut buttons underneath. I did notice that Entune was a few ticks slower than the system found in the LX 570.
      Apple CarPlay or Android Auto is not available on either model.
      Powertrain
      Under the hoods of the Land Cruiser and LX 570 is a 5.7L V8. The Land Cruiser gets 381 horsepower and 401 pound-feet of torque. The LX 570 features 383 horsepower and 403 pound-feet of torque. This is teamed with an eight-speed automatic and a full-time four-wheel drive system. Interestingly, the Land Cruiser feels slightly faster than the LX 570. Outlets who have timed both models say the Land Cruiser is about 0.5 seconds quicker to 60 than the LX 570. This is a bit surprising considering the two models are nearly identical in power and weight. But the LX 570 has a noticeable pause when accelerating. It feels like the engine was asleep and was startled by the throttle being prodded, before realizing it needed to get to work. The eight-speed automatic delivers rapid and smooth upshifts, but stumbles somewhat when it comes to downshifts.
      Both models come fully-equipped to take on whatever Mother Nature decides to dish out. This includes a two-speed transfer case, locking center differential, crawl-control system, terrain selection system, and an adjustable suspension system. Sadly, I didn’t get the chance to take either model off the paved road to see what they are capable of.
      Fuel Economy
      EPA rates the 2018 Land Cruiser and LX 570 at 13 City/18 Highway/15 Combined. My average in both vehicles landed around 14.9 mpg in a 50/50 mix of city and highway driving.
      Ride and Handling
      These SUVs prefer the roads to be straight as there is significant body motion when cornering. Blame the tall ride height and soft-suspension tuning. Steering feels very numb and slow, making it somewhat tough to figure out how much input is needed when turning. When the road is straight, both vehicles provide a smooth ride. I did find that on the highway, I needed to make constant corrections with the steering to keep it in the middle of the lane.
      One major difference between the two is braking. The LX 570’s braking system felt very discombobulated. It was very difficult to modulate the pedal to provide a smooth stop. Either the vehicle wasn’t slowing down or the braking system would enter panic stop mode and passengers being thrown from their seats. I thought this was an issue that was limited to my LX, but other people who have driven different LXs have reported similar behavior. The Land Cruiser didn’t experience any of this during my week.
      Value
      The 2018 Toyota Land Cruiser begins at $83,665, while the LX 570 begins at $85,630 for the two-row variant and $89,980 for the three-row model. Both models come generously equipped with a number of standard features such as adaptive cruise control, blind spot monitoring, heated and ventilated front seats; power tilt-telescoping steering wheel, and three-zone climate control. The vehicles tested here came lightly optioned. The Land Cruiser featured a set of optional floor mats, bringing the as-tested price to $85,185. For the LX 570, it came with a rear-seat DVD entertainment system and center console cool box to bring its as-tested price to $93,350.
      The best value of the two models has to be the two-row LX 570 as you get a nicer interior and more cargo space, for not much more money than the three-row Land Cruiser. But if you really want three-rows, then the Land Cruiser is your best bet.
      Verdict
      Unless your daily commute includes traversing the Rocky Mountains or driving through Death Valley, I cannot recommend either of these SUVs. They have a number of flaws such as middling fuel economy, small cargo area, and needing constant steering corrections on the highway. But the LX 570 comes off slightly worse as it has some issues with the powertrain and brakes need to be addressed quickly. Besides, the Land Cruiser offers many of the features of LX 570, albeit in a more utilitarian package for a couple of grand less.
      But for some people, the off-road capability and legendary reliability of these two models are more than enough to excuse the faults. That group of people though we have to think is getting smaller as time goes on and makes us wonder if the next-generation of the Land Cruiser and LX 570 will go through a dramatic change or not.
      Disclaimer: Toyota Provided the Vehicles, Insurance, and One Tank of Gas
      Year: 2018
      Make: Lexus
      Model: LX 570
      Trim: N/A
      Engine: 5.7L 32-Valve, DOHC, Dual VVT-i V8
      Driveline: Eight-Speed Automatic, Four-Wheel Drive
      Horsepower @ RPM: 383 @ 5,600
      Torque @ RPM: 403 @ 3,600
      Fuel Economy: City/Highway/Combined - 13/18/15
      Curb Weight: 5,815 lbs
      Location of Manufacture: Toyota, Aichi Prefecture, Japan
      Base Price: $89,980
      As Tested Price: $93,350 (Includes $1,195.00 Destination Charge)
      Options:
      Dual-Screen DVD Rear-Entertainment System - $2,005.00
      Cool Box - $170.00
      Year: 2018
      Make: Toyota
      Model: Land Cruiser
      Trim: N/A
      Engine: 5.7L 32-Valve, DOHC, Dual VVT-i V8
      Driveline: Eight-Speed Automatic, Four-Wheel Drive
      Horsepower @ RPM: 381@ 5,600
      Torque @ RPM: 401 @ 3,600
      Fuel Economy: City/Highway/Combined - 13/18/15
      Curb Weight: 5,815 lbs
      Location of Manufacture: Toyota, Aichi Prefecture, Japan
      Base Price: $83,685
      As Tested Price: $85,185 (Includes $1,295.00 Destination Charge)
      Options:
      Carpet Floor/Cargo Mat Set - $225.00

      View full article
  • My Clubs

  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Reader Rides

About us

CheersandGears.com - Founded 2001

We ♥ Cars

Get in touch

Follow us

Recent tweets

facebook

×