Paying Attention.  People generally don't pay attention.  Some of that emanates from trust, they simply don't need to.  Unfortunately, that presents an opportunity for exploitation.  That invites problem logic.  This time, it came from that CH-R rhetoric.  He claimed "better".  I pointed out that was subjective and requested actual numbers.  Response to that was a double down by adding "much bigger" and "more luxurious" rather than any specific.  When I asked for number again, I got: "You have internet, find it."  That's a psychological play, where the troublemaker attempts to shift the burden of proof onto you.  I was paying attention.  It's a sign that you'll never win.  I used it in the past to shake out weakness.  Eventually, an antagonist will mess up and accidently expose a vulnerability they were trying to conceal.  That's why I'd keep my replies short.  It would frustrate them that I wouldn't play along with their game and accept defeat.  Today, I dealt with it by replying with:  Make a claim, but unwilling to support it.  I called your bluff.

Strategy.  This was the type of feedback I had been hoping to get: "It was a long game strategy and worked."  That's a move toward closure, quite the opposite of status quo.  It was an easy follow up too:  Which puts us at the awkward position some here are not ready to address.  The point of Prius was to promote & refine hybrid technology so it could be spread throughout the fleet.  Not only has that been achieved, it was so successful (hence this article & discussion), that the most popular Toyota vehicles have phased out traditional models.  Hybrids being ubiquitous means Prius has served its purpose.  That means going forward it will either become a niche offering with enticing unique features or it will be discontinued.

At the same time, we've seen other automakers roll the dice on an abrupt transition.  That gamble of technology aggressively advancing and their being no pushback to change was beyond reckless.  Their massive write-downs from "all in" strategy having failed left them scrambling to figure out how to catch up to the tortoise.  Irony of the hare losing is great material for our history books.

CH-R Rhetoric.  It was only a matter of time before this was posted: "With those specs and price, their are may other options that provide better value.  Are this doing this just to show everyone else that they are not ignoring EVs?"  It came about on an EV blog website well known to have an anti-Toyota bias.  That could come back to haunt them, as yesterday's article seemed to reveal.  It was a nice CH-R review.  Most of the information was objective, sticking to numbers and avoiding opinion.  Unfortunately, the commenting audience there feeds on rhetoric posting opportunity.  They wait for new opportunity to undermine.  So regardless of how much that publisher strives to escape from its history, the audience will keep dragging them back.  Fortunately, I have lots of opportunity to play offense.  I didn't even need data this time.  Here's how I responded to that nonsense:  Not actually providing any detail to support that claim is a big tell.  Know your audience.  Toyota is targeting their own showroom shoppers.  Whatever you subjectively define as "better" may not make any difference at all with their purchase decision.  Entry market buyer don't share priorities with ordinary consumers.  That's why sharing detail is vital.

Your thoughts?  Wisdom to share?

Rear Wiper.  Today, I got a thoughtful question: "How's life in snow without the rear wiper?  I use my rav's rear wiper a lot in Vermont, but the BZ has a different shaped hatch."  A first, I was perplexed.  Different shape?  Perhaps the reference was to angle.  Whatever the case, it wasn't important.  Focus didn't need to be on the wiper anyway.  Purpose of the question was directed at visibility... which I was all too happy to post about:  I never missed not having a wiper with my 2023.  Snow rarely came down so fast the window wires couldn't keep up with the melting.  Of course now, it's a compete non-issue.  The digital mirror works fast better than a wiper.  You get a wider, unobstructed view with a squirter to keep it clean.

Shopping Research.  Figuring out the background & intent of those online is always difficult.  Stuff like this makes it even more of a challenge: "Further research has shown that as long as it's more of a commuter car and not for road trips, it should be a good match."  It implies comprehensive background and a provides what appears to be a recommendation.  In reality, it's usually utter nonsense.  All you have to do is push for detail and their story falls apart.  Of course, that's when you are playing defense... which is an early stage.  We're past that now.  I have real-world data at my disposal, so I'm playing offense.  In this case, I fired back with:  That implies you were researching gen-1 models (2023-2025), not the gen-2 just rolled out (2026).  I had a 2023.  It worked fine for weekend warrior trips, where you drive out to the cabin.  1 recharge anywhere was enough and it didn't need to be particularly fast.  I now have a 2026 and know that any claim of not being for road trips is simply an effort to mislead.  It's a tough market and people have lots to lose, so be aware.  My observations with the 2026 is that taking advantage of the preconditioning, you can most definitely hit the 30-minute estimate for 10%-80%.

Zero Funds.  Stories about infrastructure build up are taking a weird turn: "Charging will stop if funds reach zero."  That was supposedly the new policy being widely adopted for charging stations.  There was a letter claiming that was what would happen if your preloaded account was emptied.  Without detail or context, no one should have accepted that at face value.  I suspect it was something setup without a credit-card, but vital information of that nature was missing.  So, people were freaking out about being stranded or wasting time not getting a charge.  Reaction was blown way out of proportion.  I tried to bring some sanity to the posting with:  This is one of the problems Plug & Charge (ISO 15118) is designed to solve.  By standardizing connections, you can have your own provider (like GM or Toyota) manage payments.  You just plug in the vehicle and the account attached to that VIN automatically draws payment from the wallet associated to it.  No more individual apps.  Those providers will also negotiate discounts on your behalf.  In fact, we saw an example of that start on March 1 from GM, offering at 10% price reduction for charging at Ionna locations.

Different Paths.  Portraying Toyota as pro-hybrid & anti-EV is becoming very difficult now.  Some are still trying though: "I don't think it is loaded to suggest that Toyota has taken a different path with more focus on hybrid and plug-in as opposed to pure EV."  That particular wording made me curious though.  Was there an attempt to create some other narrative?  I can't imagine what could be considering new & original anymore.  So many attempts to undermine & mislead have been made over the years, they're all exhausted.  There's nothing left.  So, I just went for the leadership angle to see if anything emerged:  Not sure what paths you are comparing.  Toyota is phasing out traditional ICE with hybrids, while at the same time rolling out 3 new EVs.  We see Ford, GM, Stellantis and VW taking massive write-downs, scaling back their EV push.  Focusing on pure EV failed.  Notice how "EREV" (which are really just glorified PHEV) are getting attention now?  That's why the topic of "leading" didn't offer constructive discussion.

Watch 2026.  Holding onto the past.  Familiar behavior, looking backward expecting the same: "It's great that you like your BEV, but neither Toyota nor Subaru broke into the top 10 manufacturers for BEV sales in the US last year. Toyota's model, the BZ4X, is largely seen as a compliance model."  There are some who are in for quite a surprised, as I pointed out to the individual who posted that:  Since when is it constructive to base ranking on sales of an outgoing generation?  2026 bZ is a greatly improved next-gen offering, with upgrades across the board.  Sales only began in late November of last year.  Timing of the transition worked immensely well in Toyota's favor too.  Rather than being forced to deal with EV write-downs like other legacy automakers, those losses were avoided entirely.  Now, we see some of that financial advantage playing out in the form of cash back deals.  Watch what happens in 2026.

Progress Setbacks.  The question was asked about our market (United States), is the EV future dead?  After making some random comment saying no, I got this: "If people want to buy a gas-guzzling beast, who has the right to tell them they can't?  No judgment here.  It's their money, and their right to pay $5 a gallon if they want to.  Oil, gas, and the petroleum industry IS the catalyst for economic opportunity that allows the world to build things."  I get attitude from time to time from my comments and some lashing out just because I can serve as a target.  That doesn't make any difference.  Progress is slow and there are many setbacks.  That's no reason to declare failure though.    I responded with:  What was the political messaging.  Quoting it is confirmation of effectiveness.  What actually happened was states started adopting CA rules, which required a minimum EV inventory to be provided.  There was no mandate to eliminate.  Some implied there was to stir fear of loss to protect the status quo.  Here in MN, I participated in the effort to get those CA rules adopted.  It was quite clear EV purchases would be impaired by absence of anything readily available for purchase.  With regard to a catalyst, we have seen solar, wind and storage make major strides recently.  That has stirred fear of loss from those fossil-fuel sources. They see expensive gas as an increasingly less appealing choice.   Their audience is shrinking as charging becomes more convenient.

More Expensive.  This came about from my Prius to RAV4 post: "Since when are PHEV more expensive than BEV?  That is what you are implying."  I jump back in and volleyed this in return:  That shift is just now starting to become apparent.  Base model RAV4 PHEV is expected to start at $41,500.  Base model for bZ is $34,900.  So coming from a pure "this is my budget" perspective, which is how the youngest generation tends to manage financial decisions, it's an interesting sales pickle.  With our economy tanking and world power related to oil dramatically changing, we can't realistically do apples-to-apples comparing anymore.  This is a true paradigm shift taking place.

Unfortunately, this knowledge isn't something most owners will have or understand.  That is why marketing has instead focused on 10-80% charge times.

Prius to RAV4.  He was asking if it was blasphemy to consider upsizing his plug-in hybrid.  This was included in his long post: "What I like about the car is the way it drives, smaller size, great mph and especially that I can do most of my daily driving on the EV with easy plug in to household outlet, yet still have gas engine for weekend longer trips."  That strong argument for his Prius (on the big Prius forum) was what brought about the question of wanting larger with more range & power.  I replied by asking:  Weekend longer trips... like what?  My trips up north (175 miles each way) and my trips out to my wife's parents (120 miles each way) are covered by DC fast-chargers, even before this year's NEVI funded builds.  I went from a Prius Prime to a bZ4X then to a 2026 bZ.  So, I know the real question comes down to what you are paying extra for to get a PHEV rather than a BEV.  Since most of your driving is already electric miles, it begs the question how much a gas engine would really be used.

In other words, what substance can you provide supporting a "behind" narrative?  What would "catch up" achieve?

65,536 km.  The new battery status screen, introduced in the 2026 bZ, is confusing the heck out of new owners.  Many respond to it this same way: "Mine says the same thing, I think it is a bug."  That's not thinking.  Imagine if it said zero, rather than any other value.  Not incrementing for 6 months would really be upsetting.  That would also give the impression of something being wrong, perhaps also being interpreted as a bug.  Instead, it say 65,536 when view in kilometers.  When viewed in miles, 40,727 is the value.  Both have become a source of confusion.  I'm beginning to really enjoy pointing out what's going on and expected that to be quite rewarding later.  In the meantime, this is my post in response to the currently belief:  It's a feature, not a bug.  The seemingly strange number stands out, drawing attention to the new screen providing information that will be very useful later in the vehicle's life.  Until then, you'll be monitoring it on a regular basis wondering when it will finally update then waiting for it to change again.  The number is an interesting value.  Using zero-based counting, those viewing kilometers will notice it is 2 to the 16th power.  Converting over to miles, you get very close to the value shown.  In other words, Toyota left us an easter egg of sorts.