Why?  Supposedly, the measure of Toyota's success is to rollout their first vehicle using the e-TNGA platform in high volume.  Taking it slow to ensure dealers, salespeople, and consumers are all well informed is unacceptable.  The market should be flooded with as many as possible as quickly as possible, according to enthusiasts.  So seeing this is causing quite a stir: "Toyota Only Expects to Sell 10,000 bZ4Xs This Year"  Why?  Knowing there is a smaller crossover and a sedan in the works, what's the problem?  Enthusiasts immediately want to slap on a "failure" label and move on.  Anything other than a mega-hit is unacceptable.  Ugh.  Their lack of patience is astounding.  Anywho, this is what I had to say in response to the article with that title, an obvious click-bait publish:  Limiting initial release volume is what we have seen in the past from Toyota. The approach ends up drawing the devoted, those who will share their own experiences and help newbies that follow. It has proven very effective. That also isolates problems, should something come up... which is this case with 4X, it happened twice during that first year.

Top Seller.  Remember all that boasting back in December, when haters of Toyota were celebrating that they had predicted coming up over 800,000 vehicles short of what was planned?  They were declaring victory, exclaiming VW would take the thrown for volume leader.  Instead, this happened: "Despite the chip shortage and Covid-related supply chain disruption, Toyota and its subsidiaries sold nearly 10.5 million vehicles last year, around the same as in 2021.  In 2022, Toyota sold 2.7 million electrified vehicles, around five percent more than the previous year. The vast majority of those -- 2.6 million -- were hybrid models."  That news today brought silence, a sucker-punch to troublemakers of all sorts.  They were not expecting that.  With near empty lots and waiting list, assumption was there would be an inventory shortage.  Toyota's ability to just-in-time deliver still holds true, for now.  The paradigm-shift for how vehicles are purchased and the status-quo shakeup related to plugging in will require a rethink.  What is wanted and when?  Knowing Tesla is being forced to survive with much lower profit-margin by lowering price of their luxury models and being well aware that upcoming economy models will be even less profitable to begin with, the competition will get interesting.  Easy sales are disappearing, which makes sense now that limited choice is giving way to a wide variety.  It will be very, very interesting to watch what happens with the new Prius.  That choice could be an incredible draw... just the right amount of range, power and creature comforts, along with well proven reliability.  A shift to the PHEV as primary focus makes sense.  That time has come... and is a great means of bridging the transition to BEV.  That's how you retain top-seller status.

CATL Thoughts.  Someone asking something constructive: "So what's people's thoughts on the Solterra US models having the lower charge rate CATL batteries?"  Yeah!  It makes sense with so many relentless attacks on Toyota that no information is this regard has been released.  No matter what the facts are, antagonists will find a way to spin it to be negative.  That's what they do... especially when the fact reveals advantage for Toyota.  Heck, even just confirming Toyota isn't actually "late" would be a devastating blow.  BEV purists are currently in a struggle for messaging.  A new twist like LFP is the last thing they are prepared to deal with.  Addressing that chemistry difference is vital though.  This is just like decades ago when the computer industry could no longer promote computers on basically just CPU speed alone.  That metric used to serve as a means of package recognition.  The faster the CPU, the better the associated components.  It's the role range had primarily served for BEV.  More tended to indicate a better vehicle in terms of performance & features.  Toyota is messing that up.  For that matter, VW is attempting that too.  This is why there's a looming mystery around the CATL offering.  What makes it different?  We see traits that closely mimic those of LFP... especially with regard to temperature.  Think about it.  Slower charging makes detecting voltage variance easier.  Charging to 100% for the sake of calibration wouldn't be necessary if Toyota invested heavily in software to accurate monitor changes.  In that case, SOC (State Of Charge) would be accurately depicted even without going to full from time to time.  Having mastered that would give Toyota an advantage, one they wouldn't reveal.  Toyota likes to be subtle and only reveals detail when pushed.  We may not find out for a long time.  Until then, there isn't much I can say in my replies:  The catch is finding out what kind of cell was actually used. If the CATL supplied is LFP, rather NMC, there's a different set of priorities being addressed.  You'll get greatly improved longevity and the ability to charge to 100% without penalty.  That would make a tradeoff of speed much easier to accept.

Clean Sheet.  People overlook clues, even when they are repeated many times.  Not seeking out detail is the problem.  They tend to be satisfied with basics.  Simplicity thrives.  Whatever stirs the most emotion becomes a talking point.  I knew Toyota's approach of continuous improvement was part of how bZ4X came about.  At some point though, you take everything you learned and start fresh.  In software, when a coding refactor becomes too big or yields too little of a benefit, you start over.  With a career of over 30 years, I have participated in that cycle several times now.  That's just a natural part of the process.  Having already witnessed that with Prius, seeing it evolve from sedan to hatchback, I knew the 5th generation requiring a fresh start was inevitable.  How can you keep ahead of the competition without eventually doing that?  Key to success is timing.  When is best to do that?  With the case of Toyota's BEV, why not learn as much as possible from a dedicated platform based upon existing opportunity first?  In other words, take advantage of the disruption avoidance opportunity by leveraging TNGA initially.  That way, you get priceless insight as to how to best invest the start fresh effort.  Look at how VW had to rush to commit.  They were forced into BEV production as a result of dieselgate penalties.  GM appears to have rushed with Ultium too, as a result of Bolt efforts having gone so bad.  Toyota can bide their time.  There is risk, but fallout from rushing can be costly.  Needless to say, I had to remind some of what we have known for quite some time now:  The plan all along was to upgrade to a "clean sheet" design at some point.  Recent choice was to accelerate that plan and limit the spread of e-TNGA.  We were told from the very beginning the initial rollout design was not optimized and would be prohibitively expensive for mass production (very high volume).

Not Again.  Ugh.  Looks like we have a repeat performance of "over promise, under deliver" from GM.  I wondered what was happening.  The silence has been broken by others curious too.  I piled on with:  Haven't noticed the problems with Ultium yet?  Delivery of only 72 Lyrics and 86 Hummers provides a clue there is something impeding rollout.  Expectation at this point was far more would be in the hands of owners, especially with so much touting about orders. And remember the fine-print in the Chevy television commercial last Fall?  Equinox EV delivery was supposed to start Spring 2023.  Making matters worse is the warning about "premature lock-in" for batteries is starting to sink in.  We're seeing a massive move away from dependency on nickel & cobalt.  Ultium didn't go in that direction.  Amount within was reduced, but not eliminated.  Benefit from elimination, as LFP has demonstrated, is becoming apparent.  Those tradeoffs appear to be worthwhile... just like other seemingly less competitive technologies ending up the choice for mass-market use.  It's the same old game of engineering by press-release and having minions spread hype.

Lobbying Spin.  Inevitably, it's back: "Toyota was among the top ten of companies lobbying against global-warming addressing policies."  The nonsense will never die.  Of course, that quote came from a well know troll.  So, simply ignoring the comment would have been perfectly fine.  I took the bait though.  It was an opportunity to provide a reminder of important detail intentionally omitted:  That is a twist of facts to reinforce the "behind" narrative.  Toyota wasn't against global warming, they were against the proposed approach.  Don't even try denying how terrible the policy has been either.  That battle is lost, as evidenced by the new tax-credits.  The reality that Toyota saw it coming and no one wants to admit their own error, we know have quite a mess to unravel.

What I find most intriguing about all this is the lack of patience on the part of enthusiasts.  Back when the original Prius rolled out, we saw similar outcry.  The mid-cycle upgrade showed dedication to the cause.  The next-gen upgrade confirmed solid commitment.  The rhetoric in the meantime though was intense.  Antagonists threw everything they had at the effort to undermine & mislead.  They had no idea how to play the long game.

Anywho, you now have my thoughts on the matter at hand.

Most importantly, keep in mind that the EVSE requires a 20% safety buffer.  So if you want to pull 32 amps continuously, you must have 40-amp capacity.  To pull 40 amps, you need a 50-amp capacity.  So when you decide to purchase a "32" or "40" amp EVSE, keep in mind that reference is for the pull-speed not line-capacity.