Grab our RSS Feed

Toyota Denies it Denigrated the Volt

November 21st, 2007 | Posted in: Competitors, Public Opinion

An article was just published in the New York Times about the green tint of the L.A. Auto Show.

The article discusses comments Bob Lutz made about Toyota. He referred to “a showdown at the O.K. Corral”, referencing an “unnamed” Asian automaker’s presentation at the Tokyo auto show in which the Volt was dismissed as a PR scam, having lithium-ion batteries that won’t work, and being car that will never come to market.

Now there is a new response from Toyota: “That never happened — it was never said,” responded Mike Michels, corporate manager for external communications at Toyota. “We aren’t trash-talking anyone.”

Of course, since we have been following Volt news since the concept was first revealed, there is plenty of evidence of negative Toyota comments:

Source (New York Times)

Popularity: 3%

(No Ratings Yet)

Loading ...

Posted by: Lyle

45 Responses to “Toyota Denies it Denigrated the Volt”

Mike756 Says:
November 21st, 2007 at 10:29 am

If Toyota was smart they would develop a car like the Volt. While I am rooting for the Volt, my loyalty extends only as far as it being the first viable PHEV.
ChargedUp Says:
November 21st, 2007 at 11:10 am

I am looking forward to a range extended PHEV and I think Volt is the best candidate out there (watch out for Mitsubishi). It is trash talk from Toyota, but Toyota if you look on the road, you will see a lot of Prius’ on the road. I can’t afford a $100K options, and Jetson-esque 3-wheelers are a little too far out for me. GM does have some competition - they need to get to market first with this design or they will get left behind again.
Brian M Says:
November 21st, 2007 at 11:15 am

Maybe Toyota is learning from the Bush administration… All you have to do is say it never happened, and *poof* magically it didn’t!
jrcase Says:
November 21st, 2007 at 11:17 am

I think one of GM’s problems is the public knowledge of what a series hybrid is. Without exception, everyone I have talked to so far in discussing the Volt is completely clueless on how it works. They all assume it is a typical hybrid. The selling point for GM is the design. I can only assume and hope that the sales team will make the point clear to “Joe and Judy Sixpack” on what the Volt really is. Public knowledge and being first will be key. There are going to be lot’s of entries soon to this market. Hurry GM!
kent beuchert Says:
November 21st, 2007 at 11:18 am

Maybe Hillery Clinton is advising Toyota these days - she can deny the sun is shining and her “constituents” will believe her while they put on their sunglasses.
noel park Says:
November 21st, 2007 at 11:37 am

Who cares what Toyota says?

Show us the hardware.

Everything else is just smoke.
Nick D Says:
November 21st, 2007 at 11:53 am

[quote comment="15694"]Maybe Toyota is learning from the Bush administration… All you have to do is say it never happened, and *poof* magically it didn’t![/quote]

Not just the Bush administration - I think this is a power reserved for all Presidents…

Memorable Quote - “I did not have sexual relations with that woman.”

Anyway back on topic, I am really routing for the Volt too but I am starting to consider a Regular EV - I really like the Mitsu iMiEV - and since I already have a petrol powered car, maybe a straight EV would be the way to go if its feasable. Either way toyota needs to stop telling the world that this car is not practical and jump on the serial hybrid/EV train if they plan to remain a world leader in this industry.

Go GM!
SRSCHRIER Says:
November 21st, 2007 at 12:21 pm

Add to the mix Chrysler’s new EVs and PHEVs to compete with the Volt and Toyota? The Detroit News published the Chrysler announcement on November 20, 2007. http://detroitnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071120/UPDATE/711200444
Grizzly Says:
November 21st, 2007 at 12:25 pm

I think that a good start at making the distinction WRT the Volt’s design is to stop calling it a “hybrid”. It is not a hybrid, it’s an EV with extended range.
MC Says:
November 21st, 2007 at 12:40 pm

Better yet, just call it an EV with on-board generator. I think “extended range” or “range extended” doesn’t translate to most folks. For instance, one might think it’s just a bigger battery (but then the 40-mile stat sounds impossibly limited)… Dunno, just a thought.
Mike756 Says:
November 21st, 2007 at 12:50 pm

There is a lot of momentum with the plug-in hybrid electric (PHEV) term. I imagine some people will be confused if you tell them it is not a hybrid. I think the “plug-in” is a pretty good clue that some of the fuel will be electricity. That is the important point, its all electric range. I think adding the mileage suffix is a good idea, i.e. PHEV-40.
Scott H Says:
November 21st, 2007 at 1:09 pm

The Japanese have a history of pretending things never happened that really did.

1. The slavery of ten of thousands of Korean and Chinese “comfort” women for the sexual pleasure of their armed forces.

2. The slaughter of countless civilians in every country they conquered.

3. The millions they put into slavery to run their war industries.

I could go on, but what’s the point? But, because of their denials, I will NEVER own a Japanese car.
Tim Says:
November 21st, 2007 at 2:34 pm

E-Flex is NOT a “hybrid”. It is a Battery Electric Vehicle (BEV-40) with 100% electric drive and an onboard generator extend the range by recharging the battery.

GM must drive this point home and NEVER let anybody confuse it with a “hybrid” like the Prius. Apples and oranges!
AES Says:
November 21st, 2007 at 2:38 pm

Two quick points:

1) Irv Miller, Toyota’s VP for corporate communications, did not one, but TWO blog posts trash-talking to Volt:

http://blog.lexus.com/2007/09/irvs-sheet-hybr.html#more

http://blog.lexus.com/2007/09/hybrid-tech-par.html#comments

And he got ripped on both of them. Mike Michels sounds like he has almost exactly the same title and role at Toyota, but obviously the two men don’t communicate.

Thus, as I have said before, this is rapidly turning into a PR debacle for Toyota, and they have only themselves to blame.

2) A GCC article quoted Lutz as saying that GM has a patent law team working to protect GM’s intellectual property with the Volt.

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2007/11/lutz-gm-to-laun.html#more
GXT Says:
November 21st, 2007 at 3:40 pm

Toyota and Honda’s stance is that the volt is an electric vehicle that hauls around a lot of batteries to get a relatively short range and has to compensate for this by hauling around a gas engine and tank.

Toyota and Honda use much fewer batteries to get relatively consistent fuel economy regardless of distance travelled. The more the distance you drive deviates from the 40 mile range of the volt the less sense it makes… and I suspect that applies to the majority of people. Toyota and Honda’s solutions do not have this problem.

Toyota and Honda argue that their method is better for more people. I think the sub message is that the volt is a bastardized mistake. It is a half-assed grab at an electric car; perhaps promising more than can be done, but even at that falling well short of what such a car should be.

I would not buy a 40 mile range volt (without accessories on) for 30K that gets sub 50 MPG on gas (150MPG equiv on elect) over an 18K hybrid that got 60 MPG regardless of distance travelled and doesn’t need to be plugged in.

To say that the Volt (even if it meets specs) is the clearly superior choice is questionable.
bruce g Says:
November 21st, 2007 at 4:01 pm

GXT,
Eighty percent of the US drivers, driving a Volt, will make it home on no gasoline useage.
The range extender removes the concerns about a flat battery.
I like the volt, mechanically simple and promises low emissions.
I particularly like the fexibility around the range extender.
I see along life for these cars, like the american cars in Cuba.
pstoller78 Says:
November 21st, 2007 at 4:13 pm

#15 GXT

“The more the distance you drive deviates from the 40 mile range of the volt the less sense it makes… and I suspect that applies to the majority of people. Toyota and Honda’s solutions do not have this problem.”

Average miles travel per year
12000
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/rtecs/nhts_survey/2001/tablefiles/page_a03.html

12000/365 = 32.88 Miles per day

It seems to me that the volt would meet the majority of drivers needs without using any gas. Could you please supply your evidence to the contrary.
AES Says:
November 21st, 2007 at 4:13 pm

GXT/our resident troll:

“18K hybrid that got 60 MPG regardless of distance travelled and doesn’t need to be plugged in.”

And where is this phantom 60mpg hybrid? The Prius gets 45mpg in real life.

If it meets specs, the Volt gets Prius mileage while in hybrid mode, and 150mpge in electric mode.

I also think you underestimate the impact that electric mode can have on emissions. That will go a long way towards selling the car to consumers AND companies.

Also, PHEV tax credits should be far above those of regular hybrids, thus further whittling away at the price incentive.
Hercule Says:
November 21st, 2007 at 4:17 pm

Gxt, who are you and where do you live? I have a relatively long 35 mile commute in the 3rd most congested US city (though I go early to beat Rush Hour). If I plug in at work (which I am told will be permitted, maybe with a fee), I won’t need to use any gas for my weekly commute. While there are a few commuters in the area who come from further away, virtually everyone has less than an 80 mile commute. For those who drive more (taxicars, salespeople, etc.), the volt may not be their best option.
noel park Says:
November 21st, 2007 at 4:37 pm

I would buy a Volt, or a 60 mpg 18k (or 25k) hybrid right now if either was made by Chevrolet. Either one.

I would buy neither if it was an import.

If we don’t support our American companies and workers, we are all going to have our quality of life substantially degraded in the end. Write it down.

Sorry if I’m preaching to the choir. If anybody gets this, it must be you guys.
Jim I Says:
November 21st, 2007 at 4:39 pm

GXT:

If the Volt was “THE CAR” for everyone, then all other auto manufacturers would cease to exist. To even think that is ridiculous.

If you do not feel that the Volt will work for your driving needs, then buy something else. It really is that simple. But why do you consistantly say that “the volt is a bastardized mistake”, or some other variant of those words.

For me, I have already worked out the numbers, and this car will drop my gasoline consumption by 90%, if the design specs are met. And from what most other people on this site are saying, they feel the same way.

For me, I would never buy a Tesla or a Prius, so does that mean they should stop making them? Of course not. But you seem to think that GM should abandon this effort, because YOU would not fit in with what this vehicle is trying to accomplish.

I wish the world would consider revolving around me 0.1% as much as you think it already revolves around you….

If you do not like the idea and design of the Volt, that is your opinion, and you are entitled to it. But why do you continue to post here?
john1701a Says:
November 21st, 2007 at 4:55 pm

[quote comment="15731"]And where is this phantom 60mpg hybrid? The Prius gets 45mpg in real life.[/quote]

+60 MPG from a Prius have been around for awhile now. The augmented design boosts MPG, the concept of electric-only range does not apply like with Volt. The more plug-in battery-capacity you add, the higher the resulting MPG.

http://www.google.org/recharge/ documents Google’s mini-fleet, which is currently averaging 66.2 MPG.

And that 45 MPG is Classic data. The real-world data average for the Prius HSD model is 48 MPG.

JOHN
Jimmy Says:
November 21st, 2007 at 5:03 pm

GXT:

Mark my words …”the Chevy Volt will win the auto of the year award in 2010 or 2011″. Maybe it will even win the auto of the decade or century award. Bob Lutz should also win the Nobel Prize for his efforts on the Volt.
Anti-Oil Jihadi Says:
November 21st, 2007 at 5:07 pm

Some of you focus only on the financial aspect. I beg of you to consider how much more there is to driving a car than how much money you spend on fuel. Consider where your gas money goes, what it’s used for (nuclear weapons, Hezbollah, the spread of Wahhabi Islam, etc), and of course the environmental aspect.

I will buy and drive a Volt, even if it’s financially the wrong choice.

I will do so just to reduce my consumption of oil, because that will put a smile on my face knowing I’ve (insignificantly) reduced demand for Iranian and Saudi oil.

I want nothing more than to see Saudi Arabia and Iran and some others, bankrupt and poor by the end of my lifetime.

Thus my declaration of Jihad against oil.
http://www.oiljihad.org
Jimmy Says:
November 21st, 2007 at 5:11 pm

John1701a #22:

It is currently not possible for the public to buy a “plug-in” Prius. I assume it will probably be available about the same time as the Volt is produced. Volt sales will blow away the Prius. I can eliminate my gas usage entirely with the Volt which will not be possible with the “plug-in” Prius. I understand you love the Prius you currently own but is going to go the way of the buggy whip in the future.
Van Says:
November 21st, 2007 at 5:23 pm

It looks like the Volt will blow the Prius off the road. In 2011, when the Volt comes out, gas will cost around $4.50 per gallon.
Both cars will get about 55 miles per gallon when burning gasoline. But since instead of burning 30 gallons of gas a month, the Volt will only burn about 10 gallons. The other 20 “gallons” will come from the plug and cost about $1.00 per “gallon.” So while the “mileage” will be the same, the fuel cost of the Volt will be about half the Prius.
AES Says:
November 21st, 2007 at 5:35 pm

Anyone notice how GXT never comes back to actually debate a point? He/she just attacks and runs.

There must be people who the car companies hire to spread misinformation on the blogs…
Jimmy Says:
November 21st, 2007 at 6:34 pm

The base spread between the Prius and the Volt will not be $12,000 as GXT suggests. It will be probably be closer to 3 to 5 thousand dollars. GXT likes to stir the pot with no follow up because he knows his argument is weak.

Volt benefits over the Prius:

1. Less oil consumption equates more money in our pockets
2. Less pollution
3. More US jobs to build the car
4. Lower trade deficits from oil - equates to lower inflation, interest rates, and US jobs
5. Less money going to countries that hate us
6. Electricity pollutes a lot less than gasoline even if 100% of it is produced from coal.
7. The Volt will be more quite
8. The Volt will have lower maintenance cost because it will fewer moving parts
9. The Volt will be able to run on bio fuels
10. The Volt will look a lot better than the Prius

Prius benefits over the Volt:

1. The Prius may cost a few thousand dollars less than the Volt
DG Says:
November 21st, 2007 at 6:42 pm

Wow I cant believe there are actual Volt/Prius fanboys! You guys are about as pathetic right now as Toyota with your PR BS slander.
john1701a Says:
November 21st, 2007 at 7:54 pm

[quote comment="15756"]Volt benefits over the Prius…
[/quote]

Taking the situation seriously means moving beyond just a single vehicle, one size does not fit all.

Will the technology in Volt scale up well, so there will a Malibu using it able to compete directly with Camry-Hybrid and Fusion-Hybrid? What about a midsize AWD vehicle? A small SUV? What will people buy not wanting to spend more than $17,000?

And how about those without an outlet available at home?

Say what you want about “full” hybrids. Reality is, they’ll reach a much wider audience much sooner. So, they’ll coexist with “series” hybrids for quite some time… especially when considering the worldwide market, not just America.

+999 MPG is fantastic, but even Lutz says that’s unrealistic for the fleet.

Volt will be worthy of praise, but the majority of new vehicles will be another technology for quite some time still.

JOHN
BlackSheep Says:
November 21st, 2007 at 8:03 pm

I am not sure what GTX’s issues are with the Volt, however I can tell you his agenda is to get everyone off topic with everyone of his posts. All he contributes to this board and to the Volt is to stop intelligent discussion and brain storming about GM’s future product. I propose an idea, Lye will not stop anyone from posting and he shouldn’t, however if GTX will not contribute any thought provoking posts and only insults then we should just ignore him. I have read just about every post on this board and he rarely says anything encouraging or thought provoking. His sole purpose is to divert the entire thread which he has done. I call on everyone to just ignore GTX’s posts unless he changes his ways.
Scott H Says:
November 21st, 2007 at 8:12 pm

To BlackSheep:

I did that long ago. There’s a few others I ignore also.
Jimmy Says:
November 21st, 2007 at 8:47 pm

BlackSheep #30:

I will ignor GXT in the future as well.
Jimmy Says:
November 21st, 2007 at 8:59 pm

John1701a #29:

You make good points. In post #28 …I was just trying to compare the two cars. GM’s new dual hybrid is getting rave reviews. They made it with BMW and Chrysler. GM is going to release something like 15 cars with it each over the next 3 or 4 years. In January 2008 the big GM SUV’s will be able to get 21 miles a gallon as well as one of their big trucks. There are a lot of people that need a big vehicle and this hybrid will help with fuel economy. GM is making these hybrids and the Volt as a result of seeing the success Toyota was having with the Prius.
mykallb Says:
November 21st, 2007 at 9:10 pm

G.X.T = G.rand X.ecutive at T.oyota. Sorry you’re not interested in the Volt. Don’t forget your coat and hat on the way out, and hang in there pal!

M.
RB Says:
November 21st, 2007 at 9:14 pm

Toyota seems to me to be genuinely unsure of what to make of the Volt. On the one hand, they seem to genuinely think that the Volt goes down the wrong track, and on the other hand, they are worried that the Volt might be the right track. Whichever track it is, Toyota is distressed by the good buzz that GM is getting right now. So we have this range of conflicting public statements.
wirenutjd Says:
November 21st, 2007 at 10:54 pm

According to Volvo, one way to strategize about how to use this new technology is to drive the lower speeds in the electric mode and when on the highway run the extended range on-board generator. When exiting the highway at the other end you may be re-charged for the full range of the electric mode again and turn off the generator. This is why the Volvo re-charge has a manual start function for the on-board gen-set even if the batteries are full or not. This makes sense if you live in California where most people commute to work on the freeway and typically drive 20 to 60 miles to get to work, one way.
mykallb Says:
November 21st, 2007 at 11:03 pm

This is actually not a bad idea, whether or not you live in Ca.. It’s been said that you would never want the ICE to charge the batts because you want to leave that to the grid for more efficiency. If cycling is not a problem, I like this option especially if you have considerable city driving after a highway ICE session.

Regardless, it’s scenarios like these that demonstrate the amount of work needed to test implement and engineer this car. No small task and I understand that.

M.
Anti-Oil Jihadi Says:
November 22nd, 2007 at 12:02 am

Don’t forget that GM has 2 mode hybrid technology they’ve developed for city buses. In my city there are new buses which utilize it. I believe they use GM’s technology, anyhow.

The next step is to see if diesel tractor trucks can utilize this technology. Around the Los Angeles area, there’s so much gridlock I’m sure those guys are wasting lots of fuel. Electric motors have lots of torque, so I could imagine this technology being useful for the tractors.

death to oil
james Says:
November 23rd, 2007 at 4:02 am

man, i’m late to this party, i need to read all the way down the emails, and not just click on the first link, or i miss stuff like this.
i’ve got nothing to say here, it seems to have been mostly already stated above.
love the thought provoking posts, and as for the others, i just iggy (ignore and scroll by) them, lol………
james Says:
November 23rd, 2007 at 4:03 am

oh yeah, anti oil 39 i agree
Death to Oil!
law Says:
November 25th, 2007 at 12:33 pm

post 31
“am not sure what GTX’s issues are with the Volt, however I can tell you his agenda is to get everyone off topic with everyone of his posts….”

His post here seems to have brought about some good posts. I like the one comparing the benefits to the volt vs prius. I think it’s clear that the volt would be superior vehicle to the prius. His posts also show that a lot of people are willing to defend the volt when attacked.

I think it’s important for americans to support GM on this because if the dollar loses another 50% of its value your imported hybrids are going to double in cost. It’s america’s obsession for importing everything (such as cars) that helps sink the dollar. Even the “foreign” cars built here leads to billions of dollars being sent out of the country every year. So the 80% of american morons who don’t want to buy american made cars can enjoy some nasty inflation and expensive trips out of the country thanks to their desire to import everything they own. Let them dump all of their money on foreign products, while in 2010 I have the feeling the volt will be cheaper than the prius.
law Says:
November 25th, 2007 at 12:39 pm

Anti-Oil Jihad, they already make electric tractors. Some farmers in California are using them and they came up with a list of advantages of electric tractors

1. The heavy batteries can be placed low between the rear tires where needed rather than just dead weight.
2. Lots of torque on start up without the need for strain on the transmission or torque converter
3. Doesn’t use energy while not working, no noise, not dangerous while in idle
4. Low maintenance
5. Put a solar roof on the tractor so you can trickle charge the battery all day and have shade.

Advantages for oil burning tractor:
1. Internal combustion engine technology is well developed already.

The oil fuel burning tractor has no more advantages
Mark in Wisc Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 12:42 pm

Anyone catch this before? Toyota thinks that lithium batteries are not ready. Diamler thinks they are “right around the corner.” Also, suggests that we may need to start lobbying for electric charging stations in our communities. The race is definitely heating up.

Smart ForTwo Electric Charges Up for London Trial

By Matthew Phenix November 26, 2007 |

9:04:37 AMCategories: Electric Vehicles
London’s Financial Times is reporting that Mercedes-Benz parent Daimler AG plans to start urban testing of its Smart ForTwo Electric Drive models during December, in plans for a retail debut for 2010. The program calls for the lease of some 100 of the plug-in electric two-seaters to corporate and public-sector users, including the London Police, for a period of four years. Daimler chose the London because of its growing network of free electric-vehicle recharging stations. The company says it is prepping similar trials in other European cities, but has no plans for an American test program. At least not yet. The ForTwo Electric Drive uses a 40-horsepower electric motor juiced by a bank of nickel-metal hydride batteries (Smart insists a lithium-ion version is “right around the corner”). Daimler says the car is good for about 70 miles on a charge, with a top speed of close to 70 mph.

Source: Financial Times
ug Says:
November 27th, 2007 at 8:01 pm

This is why the patent office is bullsh*t:

http://www.cracked.com/article_15693_10-most-ridiculous-inventions-ever-patented.html

Toyota Denies it Denigrated the Volt

45 Responses to “Toyota Denies it Denigrated the Volt”

Leave a Reply

Recent Posts