Enthusiast Blindness, bias.  Endless rhetoric comes from claiming something is unbiased, when it clearly is.  Audience should be a dead giveaway in this case: "I said I wanted to see unbiased testing. Sure enough, Motor Trend."  How is an enthusiast publication not bias?  Vehicles selected for testing are cherry-picked.  Imagine including a Camry or Corolla Cross into the mix.  They don't.  Tests are intentionally particular, to highlight the best of the best... not at all what a showroom shopper is going to seek.  Yet, that's what this troublemaker is spinning.  Ugh.  This was my response to his latest attempt to mislead:  Motor Trend is bias.  They have been catering to the automotive culture since 1949.  They are an excellent source of performance & trend information and awards, a trusted source for enthusiasts.  As you point out, enthusiasts are not "ordinary consumers".  That confirms a bias.  This is why other Consumer Reports offers such strong automotive testing results of their own.  They have an entirely different audience because ordinary consumers have very different purchase priorities than enthusiasts.  In short, you're celebrating a hollow victory.  Know your audience.

Enthusiast Blindness, full of it.  The refusal to open ones eyes always fascinates me.  It intentional blindness.  He doesn't want to acknowledge a mistake, that the data may reveal something he had overlooked.  That's how I get stuff like this: "You're full of it.  Full of crap all along.  2026 was a dud despite all your hot air.  Must burn to see that Motor Trend review, huh?"  It was the classic drawing of a conclusion about success, before sales even begin, reply... attacking the person pointing out that data from actual owners tells the real story.  Not only will that day-to-day usage contradict outcomes determined by enthusiast reviews focusing on enthusiast interests, it also highlights the reality that ordinary consumers purchased the vehicle.  That's why he's freaking out.  In fact, this attack is happening on a thread about Toyota's new software to help encourage owners plugging in their PHEV as often as possible.  Trolling such a topic with BEV review information is a clear act of desperation.  That's why I was delighted to point out my real-world interactions with ordinary consumers:  That's hysterical.  Claiming it is a dud, yet spending an enormous amount of effort fighting it, is a blatant contradiction.  btw, there are 2 more EV events I'll be attending... one this Sunday and another 2 weeks later... where I will get more opportunity to chat with ordinary consumers about their EV interests.   Your continued effort to disparage Toyota's approach is becoming so out of touch, it's helping to feed misinformation arguments.  Having such a great source of rhetoric examples is very useful.  They say enthusiasts end up their own worst enemy, but detail as to why is usually difficult to come by.

Enthusiasts Blindness, moron.  Obsession with range continued: "Only a moron would choose the second worst range (and the second worst overall vehicle as judged by the unbiased professionals at Motor Trend), based on these efficiencies."  Notice how he referred to distance as a measure of consumption.  That's not blindness, it either stupidity or desperation.  He's not going to win the argument.  Who's the moron?  At times, it does make me wonder how his perspective came about.  Not being aware years ago is one thing, but to actively dismiss evidence showing you made a mistake is another.  He refuses to see what's right in front of him.  Oh well.  I continued with:  Cost per mile includes vehicle cost... and we know how much you fear automaker offerings with the smaller pack option.  Not only does that lower cost and increase efficiency, it also highlights automaker recognition of range not being as important as you portray it.

Enthusiast Blindness, size fear.  Exactly like Volt... it's amazing how much history repeats... there's a deep down fear that a small battery offering will become popular.  Every time the "lite" version was suggested, someone would freak out.  As an enthusiast, they were well aware that a smaller battery would equate to less power and slower charging.  This nightmare was realized with the confusing mess GM rolled out with Bolt.  It simply couldn't charge fast and they only way to make it seem fast was allowing high RPM on the tires.  That made it terrible for driving in the winter, which is why many owners seasonally switched to winter tires.  Anywho, all these years later, new approaches & chemistries enable more power and faster charging despite being smaller.  Again, that point stands out with GM... as we see with the slower DC charging.  Ugh.  A means of avoiding that messy situation entirely is to focus on what ordinary consumers want to know about.  I put that this way:  Cost per mile includes vehicle cost... and we know how much you fear automaker offerings with the smaller pack option.  Not only does that lower cost and increase efficiency, it also highlights automaker recognition of range not being as important as you portray it.

Enthusiast Blindness, calculations.  The lurker followed up with another question: "Why aren't you using the calculation the car gives you?  Why are you goosing the numbers?"  That was evidence of already being confused.  It becomes a mess trying to clear up the misunderstanding when you have a troll actively working to twist & undermine.  When that happens, I try to follow up with a question.  Asking for clarification keeps the person engaged, as well as providing something else to work with.  Seeing their perspective is difficult.  Introducing a new measure makes it even more so.  Most new owners struggle to recognize how efficiency works in their own EV.  Sharing such insight with someone who doesn't even have a EV is nearly impossible to get right with only one or two posts, especially when images are supported in the discussion.  So, I asked:  What calculation?   mi/kWh is a measure of energy consumed.  Size of the battery (which equates to range) makes no difference... which is why you-know-who is in a state of panic.  His fear is that BEV with smaller packs will become popular.

Enthusiast Blindness, ordinary consumers.  Recognition of audience has clearly been a burning point.  My use of "showroom shopper" completely derails his automaker comparisons, since that doesn't involve crossing brand.  When a loyal customer walks into the dealer, there is a very high probability that customer will purchase another.  Replacing aged vehicles with the same brand is Toyota's target audience.  He knows that is becomes quite angered when I point it out.  His rebuttal falls flat though: "You don't know what 'ordinary consumers' want."  Trying to make it personal doesn't change anything.  He cannot argue that's what Toyota is doing.  So, I called it out on it:  After months of dismissal, you finally acknowledge existence of a different audience.  Woohoo!  That was the point of the seemingly endless exchanges... recognition that the early audience doesn't share priorities of the audience to follow.  Toyota history overwhelmingly confirms that disconnect between enthusiast and mainstream.  We have seen that pattern repeat with each major introduction.  Each time, reviews gloated subjective wins end up proving to not be objective representation of what showroom shoppers (ordinary consumers) actually want.

Enthusiast Blindness, usable.  Hope is always that lurkers read these exchanges I get into and learn something from it.  On rare occasions, one will actually break their silence by asking a question.  In this case, it was: "Why are you adding the buffer to the bzx4?"  He obviously feel for the enthusiast deception, believing I only applied a calculation to bZ4X.  That's why this enthusiast avoids detail.  Replying with the numbers, rather than only a claim I lied, would reveal he's the one actually being dishonest.  I took advantage of this opportunity as a teaching moment, hoping to convey some insight as to why all automakers do the same thing:  Interesting that this is your first encounter with usable battery.  What all automakers do is leave a portion of the battery untouched, where 0% dashboard (and no more propulsion) is not the true level when you inspect ODB-II data.  There is still some stored electricity remaining.  The purpose is for longevity, since deep discharging is very stressful on batteries.  For example, 2021 Mach E extended-range RWD has a stated battery capacity of 98 kWh, but the usable portion is actually only 91 kWh.

Home Charging (document).  From many years ago, way back in 2017 the photos for this new document were taken.  I'm so glad I took the time to preserve some of that history.  It is now long.  It feels that way too.  A lot has happened since then for me, but is brand new for most everyone else.  Funny how that works out.  Everyone gets exposed to things at different times.  Being able to share something memorable as a teaching opportunity is great.  In this case, it was plugging in my 2017 Prius Prime.  The garage was so neat & clean then.  It's not bad now, but this setup was just after the installs were complete.  So, there's no clutter and it all looks new.  Anywho, it was more content to share.  Check out what was able to create... Plug-In Vehicle: Home Charging

Enthusiast Blindness, cost.  He didn't care.  He struggled to direct attention elsewhere.  It was a lame attempt: "range is what really matters."  That's all he had.  I remember years ago when reviewers didn't have anything either.  They literally identified "efficiency" in terms of range.  That's where some of the blindness comes from.  Enthusiasts learned from incorrect information.  That's why some get downright hostile.  Some remain clueless to this day, not seeing beyond thinking the largest battery is the best solution.  Sound familiar?  We heard the same from Volt enthusiasts all those years ago.  Squeezing in more battery was their solution too.  Raising efficiency instead simply wasn't thought of a viable.  They didn't know how capable Toyota was at overcoming challenges like that.  It shouldn't matter though.  Ordinary consumer priorities are what matter.  They look at factors like cost-per-mile calculations.  How much they spend per-mile has been a topic of interest for decades.  Why would an EV enthusiast suddenly think that doesn't matter anymore?  Ugh.  I kept my reply brief, since dismissing such a topic borders on idiotic:  Cost per mile has always been based on efficiency, not capacity.

Notice where bZ is positioned, the vehicle with a clear aerodynamic disadvantage offering so much higher ground-clearance.

Enthusiast Blindness, he returned.  That guy that attacked Toyota non-stop for an entire month during the summer is back.  He was the typical enthusiast, blinded by engineering.  No matter what I did to draw attention to business & audience, he simply didn't care.  All he wanted was to prove Toyota had failed with the upcoming next-gen offering.  But instead of actually quoting 2026 data, he kept focus on 2023 specs.  No matter what I tried, it made no difference... until I hurt his feelings.  Constant personal insults and misleading portrayals don't bother me.  I refrain from returning the sentiment until a long drawn out exchange takes place.  In this case, the "showroom shopper" messaging finally cut through.  He felt offended as an enthusiast who suddenly realized he was arguing the wrong thing all that time.  So when this new opportunity to attack came about, he wasted no time.  I was surprised he mentioned the 2026 as a "new" model in his flurry of disparaging remarks.  So, I replied with:  Nice that you are finally acknowledging the second generation.  Enjoying milking the early-market review.  History has shown us that once owner experiences start getting posted, all lead-up rhetoric gets drown out by reports about everyday driving.

We need to focus on what the benefits of PHEV, emphasizing level-2 upgrades at home and off-peak charging discounts.  Anything we can do like that as BEV owners can help them easily transition to being BEV owners too.

OTA Updates.  Antagonists tend to just take a topic and run with it, not actually thinking through all the possible scenarios & exposures first.  Since all they want is talking points, that works.  Hope is that no one will validate their assertion.  It's simple.  They imply.  You assume.  Not everything is a binary situation though.  An extra step may provide an unforeseen benefit.  I pointed out such a possibility should be obvious:  Visual inspections are not possible from over-the-air updates.  Some recalls require mechanic confirmation the preventative is all that was needed.  In some cases, it is too late and the part needs to be replaced.  A software update isn't enough to achieve that, especially when NHTSA is involved.

Feeling Let Down.  Not everyone like the situation with that recall: "I know, my brother is a lean six sigma black belt (Toyota help start those quality control standards).  I am not happy with app and how long it's taking for Toyota..."  Having such close ties to this topic on several levels, I chimed in with:  I'm just a green belt, but have been studying their process since 1999.   It comes down to audience.  Toyota's target consumer isn't someone who would put much emphasis on the app.  We learned this from the simplicity success of the screen in Prius.  Toyota has been able to sell complexity without it being intimidating.  That required the KISS tradeoff. It's why enthusiasts have been able to take advantage of ODB-II data.  Toyota doesn't restrict, but you have to take steps yourself to access those extras.

Stop Sale.  The recall brought about this: "A stop-sale on EV's less than 3 weeks before the tax credits end seems problematic."  It was an opportunity to stir trouble he clearly couldn't resist.  Fortunately, I checked inventory right away.  Curiosity got the best of me.  Since most recalls start with random fixes, then lead to discovery of a pattern, it made sense that details were worked out awhile ago.  You just don't know if there should be a special service campaign or an full recall.  The scope seemed to be current production only.  I needed to confirm if rhetoric was justified.  What Toyota really caught off guard and stuck with inventory that would be harder to sell later.  Turns out, that answer is no.  I made that clear with what I found:  Nope. With next-gen rollout only 2 months away, inventory is almost entire gone... almost nothing to stop-sale.  A quick lookup shows only 122 bZ4X available in the entire United States.