Changing Tide.  Not quite right, but outcome is the same: "Toyota is right on and the tide may be changing in their favor, as people are coming to grips with the fact that our grid cannot handle all the BEVs anyway."  Toyota worked hard to refine their EV system.  Getting a lot of flack for putting it in a PHEV first could turn out to be the ultimate burn.  Had those upset by limited scope and slow rollout of BEV will have their own words come back to haunt them.  Claims were that Toyota was resting on its laurels, neglecting opportunity to establish the necessary technology.  Refusing to acknowledge it was already in real-world use and was being refined by an army of engineers was their stance.  If you just deny the existence of all-electric drive being available by misleading people to believe Toyota plug-in hybrids used its gas-engine most of the time, there will never been any regret later... unless the tide chances.  Remember how the promotion of Volt, the nearly 4 full years prior to rollout, focused entirely on "range anxiety" as a selling point?  Think about why that was.  Nothing has actually change since then.  Proving the technology doesn't change the fear of running out of electricity before reaching your destination.  Absence of high-speed charging-stations is still very much a problem.  In fact, I won't be able to make it our routine trip up north with the bZ4X conveniently.  I would have to go way out of my way and hope for the best trying to reach that popular tourist destination.  There are no DCFC to speak of available yet, only a few experiments in awkward locations.  The main corridor here cutting across Minnesota, highway 94, will be first to get IRA funding.  That means by the end of 2024 a series of stations every 50 miles will be established.  My destination up north (a large city, with lots of lake resorts nearby) is 80 miles from the closest potential DCFC from that project.  All it has is a set of level-2 ChargePoint stations and a Tesla SuperCharger.  By the end of 2024, it is reasonable to expect CCS for my bZ4X too.  That's not encouraging for those looking to purchase now.  However, my wife will still have her Prius Prime.  That makes the decision of which vehicle to use a no-brainer, especially since it gets such awesome MPG even without plugging in.  Anywho, that's the point of PHEV sales.  Only now, some are taking a closer look at that opportunity.  It's why we are expecting several more choices from Toyota, including a rumored small pickup... something to take on Ford's new Maverick.  Imagine Toyota getting back into the small pickup market again, only this time with a PHEV.  Since the TNGA platform was designed for exactly such flexibility and we already see how well it works for RAV4, imaging a lighter weight body with a less expensive interior sitting on it.  The size & power, combined with such a great hybrid system offering a plug, would be a very compelling draw.  Don't forget, that system offers the ability to tow.  Toyota's effort to quietly plan ahead would indeed put things in their favor.  We'll see.  In the meantime, here's what I had to say in that regard:  Reality is the grid will be fine.  You are correct though, there will be response based on that trigger.  PHEV is what they'll be drawn to, since you can still have daily EV driving but there is no grid dependency.  It's what GM had marketed a decade ago... a solution to range anxiety.

Electric Assist.  The 2 perspective battling it out online is that hybrids are either "electric assist" or "self charging".  For those paying attention, that's essentially the same thing.  Their point is to create a diversion, preventing you from noticing there are actually other options.  It's just like the republican party here.  They invent controversy as a distraction.  So you don't see what is really happening, they just make feed narratives.  It's so frustrating that this form of blatant deception is not questioned.  People just take it in as if that so-called news is a presentation of journalistic fact.  That information is a series of lies, omissions and misleading formulated to spin a story of an alternate reality.  It's what they do.  When you cannot compete honesty, that's what you do... right?  Ugh.  Anyone, all I can do is post the corrections... especially when the spin is in the form of a comment posted in response to what is clearly a propaganda video:  Toyota's system is reverse of that.  The big electric-motor provides propulsion power and the gas-engine can join in when needed; otherwise, it will remain at zero RPM due to the planetary arrangement.  That's what made adding power so easy for the plug-in.  By adding a clutch to disconnect the gas-engine entirely, the smaller motor (which is usually a generator) is used to contribute to propulsion power instead.

Measuring Progress.  Enthusiasts are quick to serve judgment of progress, but unwilling to share how that is being measured.  All we get is range is "too short" and charging is "too slow".  How is that constructive or even useful?  It doesn't tell you anything.  It's just bragging rights, like we saw endlessly from Volt enthusiasts.  They simply didn't care about actually making a difference.  I was nothing but post after post starting just like the one today: "If Toyota is really committed to electrifying their cars..."  How do you respond to someone who just plain does not care?  They would cherry-pick to push their narrative.  I kept forcing the bigger picture, exactly like I did in this case:  Sienna & Venza no longer have ICE-only models, they are hybrid only.  Prius always was hybrid only.  Tacoma & Crown are phasing out ICE-only this year.  RAV4 is close to the tipping point here with sales at 45.6% hybrid.

How Dare They!  I was quite amused to see that sarcastic post.  It backed antagonists into a corner.  Jumping into this discussion was too good to resist:  There's a sense of panic growing among some, as they watch a paradigm-shift taking place.  It's easy to spin a tale of doom & gloom when there's struggle with a recall, even when it has nothing to do with the EV propulsion system.  There's no defense against owner's sharing personal videos though.  It's especially irritating for those hoping for Toyota to fail when early review of their first dedicated-platform BEV were quite favorable.  Whether you agree or not about range & power, there's no denying those positive statements about how well refined the EV propulsion system was already.  Evidence of that is how abruptly the "laggard" narrative ended immediately after reviews began.  Toyota's multiple powertrain options is destructive to the narrative BEV purists have been pushing for years.  Having a PHEV delivering +40 miles of EV per charge positions it in a very competitive stance, without any range anxiety, and still delivers on both carbon & smog emission reduction.  Ironically, those multiple powertrain options give consumers more automaker understanding, a recognition of wanting choice. Shoppers despise being told what to purchase... which is exactly the message "all in" conveys.  Notice the resistance to acknowledgement of consumer hesitance & intimidation.

Pattern Recognition.  A big part of learning from history is recognizing signs of it repeating.  Recognize this pattern?  "The quality is down the prices are up and the technology is old.  Toyota is the next Kodak.  All of their studies are biased rubbish and they know it.  The CEO bet the farm on hydrogen and got it wrong.  He needs to save face.  Toyota is in trouble."  It is the same old nonsense of claiming obsolete and an impossibility of catching up.  When you see that level of desperation, it gives good reason for hope.  Panic about bZ4X is becoming obvious.  Toyota wasn't suppose to deliver something well refined already.  Arguments of having to rush don't work when happy owners are sharing their experiences online... which is about to begin soon.  Voices from owners overwhelm rhetoric.  Those trying to undermine simply cannot compete.  All those hoping to stop Toyota have left is to attack the automaker itself... since focus on the technology is futile.  You cannot argue with delighted owners writing lengthy posts and publishing personal videos.  Seeing this next stage on the verge is awesome.  In the meantime, I still have to deal with the nonsense.  So, that's what I keep doing:  That's what the narrative would like you to believe.  With Toyota's first PHEV offering full electric-drive now 6 years old, their second over 2 years old, and their next-gen system about to be revealed, it is a very difficult argument claiming the farm was bet on something else.  Toyota's fuel-cell effort was always going to result in commercial & industrial use.  Whether or not the starter platform used to refine the technology would continue was just a bonus.  Those EV propulsion components, as well as the vapor-injected heat-pump), used for FCV have been shared with PHEV and BEV offerings.  That's exactly what you want when striving to achieve economy-of-scale benefit in addition to spreading risk.  Toyota is being realistic about barriers.  Toyota knows how difficult final holdouts will be to reach.  Toyota understands it will take longer than those wearing rose-color glasses assert.

History Reminders.  We have returned to that stage in the cycle where the past is unknown.  They don't bother studying history and don't think there are parallels to what is happening now.  It is a naive and reckless attitude.  Yet, it is still quite prevalent: "But Toyota is balking at going all EV in places like California, not Tanzania.  Can you explain that?"  That was the example I got today.  Looking elsewhere for a basis of understanding didn't work.  He brought the discussion back to here.  I don't think he will like my reply:  California won't have anywhere near the scale of infrastructure challenges as Tanzania, but that doesn't mean they still aren't a problem.  What is the plan from California for apartment renters?  How is the state going to support landlords with installs?  How will reasonable pricing be guaranteed?  Who will pay for maintenance?  Who will cover liability?  In other words, Toyota doesn't want to go "all in" when there is nothing of substance to back such a request?  Heck, we don't even know what the goal actually is.  If automakers just wimp out and offer electricity guzzlers, how is that an effective means of reducing carbon emissions?  There are unintended consequences from being so vague and Toyota is well aware of the history reminding us of that.

That identical capacity to bZ4X isn't just a wild coincidence.  Toyota has had a partnership with CATL for years.  It makes sense they had been quietly assembling a puzzle all along, not revealing plans.  In such a highly competitive & volatile market, there's a lot more benefit to quietly playing the game than to hype about winning.

Revival of Behind.  That narrative of Toyota being a laggard that so desperately behind bankruptcy is inevitable has been revived.  Clearly, antagonists have run out of idea.  Of course, the whole thing is absurd.  GM went bankrupt too.  What exactly is the consequence for the automaker?  Our government lost a ton of money on the stock purchase, without any fulfillment of obligation.  Remember all the "too little, too slowly" concerns?  That was indeed the outcome for GM, yet Toyota somehow got that label instead... despite having made far more progress changing their dealership stance.  It ultimately doesn't matter.  None of the troublemakers are willing to actually define how to evaluate automaker status.  It's all just a game of perception.  That's how I know they're are just gambling on hope... the same thing Volt enthusiasts did.  It was a terrible idea then and still is now.  I put it this way today, asking:  The concept of "behind" is flawed.  How is that progress measured?  VW is struggling with software updates.  GM is replacing all Bolt battery-packs.  Toyota already delivers trouble-free EV driving.  That hardware & software to control all-electric vehicle operation started over a decade ago with the first PHEV.  Rollout of Prius Prime 6 years ago was the next-gen upgrade.  Its success resulted in another upgrade 2 years ago, delivered in RAV4 Prime.  At the same time, that EV tech was used in BEV converts for China & Europe.  Tesla isn't a good comparison anyway.  Those vehicles remain within the premium market still. It's far more difficult selling lower-priced vehicles with razor-thin margins to an audience unwilling to tolerate quality issues.

Still Annoyed.  Another response to the "Self charging hybrid" nonsense came to me.  It was a short & sweet way to callout the obvious trolling.  That is what happens when they push too much.  You end up with an idea emerging out of no where.  In this case, it was the association of "self" when a comparison was made between Toyota and Tesla.  It was about FSD, the "full self driving" option people had been paying an extra $10,000 for but getting very little in return.  That price has since been increased to $15,000.  It's worth is very difficult to justify.  Teslas has been using that money to help keep finances from getting to ugly.  Watching Tesla prices continue to rise is bad enough.  But for that to be compared to Toyota makes no sense.  Toyota doesn't have any such offering, especially one so vague.  What exactly are you paying for?  That uncertainty could easily result in a customer feeling they were tricked.  Anywho, this was my follow up.  I asked:  To be objective, tell us your take on "full self driving".

Fighting Back.  Sometimes, you have to take the time to come up with a clever reply.  Rather than ignoring obvious troll bait, I did exactly that.  It took awhile to figure out how to be brief while also setting up the post to end with a burn.  This was the comment on an active wide-audience topic about what Toyota said recently related to PHEV verses BEV: "Toyota and Honda pushing "Self charging hybrid" working need to be sued for lying to the public.  I can't imagine how many people got tricked by this ridiculous claim."  I'm sure that will only serve to anger the poster.  That's only a benefit.  The point was to provide exposition for lurkers, give them the missing context.  Far too often, trolls will get away with their undermining simply because they are allowed to imply and feed assumption.  I can only take so much of that before fighting back, like I did today with:  There was a brief advertising campaign back in 2017 for Europe that trolls like to refer to but then back away from when any type of detail is requested.  So much has happened in the world of electrification since then, who would sue and for what outcome?  Proving the on-board charger doesn't automatically charge the battery-pack isn't possible... which would explain the problem with your imagination.

Nonsense Continues.  In the weekly update from a popular EV video news source, there was a short segment on the recent Toyota comment.  They got it wrong too, not even bothering to consider the context of what the comment was actually referring to.  It was a look forward, what the next 300,000 deliveries could be.  Instead, the same old Toyota anti-EV nonsense was conveyed.  That narrative is what people watching those videos want to see & hear, an unbreaking theme they come to expect.  An objective take, what journalists thrive to deliver, remains absent from such videos.  It was just 47 snippets of info information crammed into 26 minutes.  Getting information right clearly doesn't take precedence over making their weekly deadline.  Regurgitating sentiment others have conveyed is their approach.  Ugh.  I respect the effort to make coverage so comprehensive.  After all, there is a lot happening in the market lately.  Spreading material that is clearly misleading is just plain wrong.  We have witnessed this history already.  The outcome causes harm.  No critical thinking.  Ugh.  Anywho, I ended up this morning posting a simplified version of what I posted late last night about the same nonsense:  The context was Toyota having just delivered its 300,000th hybrid to Australia with focus shifting to PHEV offerings.  Do the math.  Using 80 kWh each for 90k BEVs equates to 7.2m kWh available for PHEV.  That would give each of the 300k PHEV a battery-pack size of 24 kWh, which is roughly 50 miles of EV range.  You can't just ignore the goal of delivering 300k vehicles.  An offset of 210k ICE for the 90k BEV would be required to bring the total up to 300k.  Think about the resulting emissions of ICE/BEV compared to all PHEV.