Charging to 100%.  This advice continues to be an interesting topic, as well as a mystery: "lifepo4 should be charged to 100% at least once per week."  When you look of CATL cells online, as I have been doing for 1.5 years now, hits on automotive-grade choices are found that are not LFP.  Sales of NMC continue on some level, but that's a chemistry with expense & penalty.  The tradeoffs related to LFP are becoming more and more apparent.  The safety & longevity should be an obvious benefit, especially as energy-density improves.  It's that nominal voltage that's questionable.  When does 3.2 volts come into play?  We know that LFP matches the 3.7 volts of NMC and NCA while charging & discharging.  Is that all that's needed for vehicle operational differences to go unnoticed?  I honestly don't know.  Of course, not a single person can definitively tell me what chemistry from CATL is used in our bZ4Xs with AWD here.  There's the catch of it not truly mattering in the long run anyway.  My study of LFP use for vehicles in China prior to the patent expiring revealed a disarray of SOC level management.  Cold temperatures wreaked havoc on estimated range.  Seeing that Toyota hasn't nailed it for every possible scenario prior to delivery, before real-world data is available for that owner is available, shouldn't be a surprise.  In fact, it validates a slow rollout and exclusion of % from the instrument-cluster.  Anywho, I don't share much of that online... know your audience.  But you'll find plenty of that detail here.  So until we get something definitive, I'm sticking to the KISS approach too:  That recommendation could become a point of trivia later.  The workaround currently used came about due to the challenges related to accurately tracking voltage change as the cell charged.  If technology is developed & delivered to do that, routine charging to 100% would no longer be necessary.   Also, we still don't know what battery chemistry is used by the CATL supplied cells.

Official Word.  Again, someone claimed LFP without evidence.  It's not even a case hearsay, where they need to confirm what they heard.  This person gave the impression that this was the official word.  There was no reason to question it.  I wanted to know where the heck that came from.  Was it in some new document?  Was it from a dealer or salesperson?  Was it stated in some material found online?  That cold, hard reality of nothing to validate tells us the bigger story of people not really knowing.  They fill in blanks without even realizing that information could be false.  Remember, there are some people who will lie to support their cause.  Some want to undermine progress.  Some want to advance forward with false pretense.  It's why you don't just blinding accept what you stumble across online.  I stated the situation by asking:  As for a "100% recommendation", what was the source for that?  Back when Tesla first rolled out LFP, there was nothing.  It wasn't until 2 months later word charging should be routinely done to 100% came out.  Then, it took several months following for the reasoning of that difference to really sink in.  So far, we haven't heard anything from either Toyota or Subaru on the matter.

Only LFP.  This keeps coming up: "CATL only makes lifepo4 cells for automotive."  Not a single person has been able to prove it though.  It is becoming an enigma.  People want it to be true, so they don't interfere with that belief by trying to validate it.  They just continue to hope.  That's too much like Volt for comfort.  As much as I would also like LFP cells to have been used in my 4X, if it turns out we still are using NMC for awhile, that's not the end of the world.  In fact, such confidence in longevity with outgoing technology isn't out of the ordinary.  Upgrades to newer are often for a better trait... like safety... even if it means a small step backward.  Ultimately, you want a balance of traits rather than a truly outstanding trait.  That step back is painful for enthusiasts... hence the disastrous outcome for Volt.  That priority of "vastly superior" was their downfall.  Needless to say, every time someone brings up the assurance of LFP being used, I still request a means of validation.  How did that person come to that particular conclusion?  Sadly, not a single person has ever backed up their claim.  They all go silent when called up.  Ugh.  Here's the latest request:  The shift away from NMC in favor of LFP has been a major priority for CATL, but no one has been able to supply proof that Toyota's partnership with them since 2019 lead to such a proactive move.  That would be great!  Supportive evidence simply isn't available though.

Vehicles Compares.  It's like turning back time.  Comparing Honda Insight to Toyota Prius never made sense either; yet, some insisted those two very different vehicles were somehow the same.  It's a pointless endeavor.  Now, we are seeing both Teslas (Model 3 and Model Y) being compared to bZ4X.  Who thinks that is objective?  Knowing in the past, two very different vehicle being compared was common, we have a means to understanding why.  It's because those were looked upon as the current and continuing contenders.  Notice how ID.4 is simply ignored?  That seems rather odd considering how hard VW is striving to make those sales count.  There isn't anything else, that's why.  Seeing the Mach-E routinely mentioned, you'd think it would float to the top.  It doesn't though.  That's trapped in the realm of "sport" cars just like F-150 Lightning is a pickup, designed for a very specific audience.  The wide open market has very limited choices.  Heck, even as nice as EV6 appears to be for everyday consumers, it doesn't get attention either.  Low volume and a less familiar name is why, for now.  The retro-designed Ionic 5 fits into that smaller category too.  It makes you wonder why bZ4X is treated as wide appealing, doesn't it?  Toyota has taped into that RAV4 appeal, where there are many who take notice... away from Tesla.  Interesting, eh?

This is exactly what I routinely harp on... know your audience.  There is a lot more market learning & adaptation to come, especially with regard to region differences.  Sharing my own experiences should be starting in the next few weeks, then we won't have to rely on hearsay and third-party sources.  I now have a VIN number and it has arrived at port.

Resale Value.  An online friend is torn between bZ4X and RAV4 Prime.  He has a 4X ordered, but when his dealer had a Prime become available, he tossed his name into a hat (literally) but it wasn't drawn.  So, he consulted with us online.  This was his focus: " Toyotas generally have good resale value, but low demand does not bode well for the bZ4X holding its value..."  That was an interesting aspect of ownership to bring up.  But for those who replace their vehicle every few years, that is a sensible consideration.  This is what I contributed to the discussion:  History shows us that is a textbook trait with any new tech offering from Toyota, a pattern easily broken after inventory is finally established.  With the current supply a "long wait list" for a big chunk of the country, we are very much in that early rollout stage still.  There's also the reality of any BEV not being looked upon as a draw yet simply due to the lack of apparent public support.  Watch what happens as DCFC become a routine sight.  There is an ordinary wait-until-year-two delay, where people simply postpone any purchase decision until owner experiences are shared.   That situation is exacerbated by recall and winter efficiency concerns, both of which will have much clarity a year from now.   Complicating matters even more is tax-credit debacle.  It's all a mess that should pretty much just fade away as time goes on.

Peak ICE.  Like the indication of peak oil, different people have different measures.  The most sensible I have seen is when the nature of the market become unpredictable.  Financial upset coming from instability is a major disruptor.  Whether there is a possibility of sales growth later doesn't matter.  It's when that dependable aspect is lost that "peak" can be claimed.  We were clearly past that with oil.  With the sales of ICE (traditional vehicles without a battery-pack), that point is near.  Like it or not though, those sales are still dependable.  So regardless of what happens with plug-in vehicles, that market segment for ICE cannot just be ignored.  Enthusiasts like to focus only on what they find important.  For example: "The trend in China is even more pronounced.  Plug-in vehicles made up 26% of vehicle sales in 2022, while combustion models were off 28% from their 2017 peak."  This is the same mistake we have seen repeated for nearly a decade.  Ugh.  Yet again, I pointed out that perception problem:  Such an observation can be terribly misleading.  It suggests purchase habits will continue without acknowledgement of early-adopter interest or market saturation.  We have been witnessing increase of ICE prices while at the same time seeing incredibly cheap BEV flood that market.  Reaching a peak with that is entirely realistic.  We all know teeny-tiny BEV won't offered in the US. Heck, we don't even get the choice of ID.3 here.  In other words, there is nothing to support any type of purchase trend for large BEV.  The supposed hype for legacy pickup offerings and Cybertruck from Tesla is enthusiast hope.  Electricity guzzlers could potentially sour support for shared resources... battery supply and DCFC access... giving naysayers material for their anti-EV rhetoric.  To state the situation succinctly and on topic, the recognition of "peak" doesn't mean the path taken to follow will the shortest & easiest.  In fact, it would be naïve to assume victory.  Resistance to change could ramp up and stall efforts.  Undermining should be of upmost concern at this point.

Constructive Exchanges.  There were too many red-flags.  I ended up posting this comment to the "Didn't Make It" claim:  After a day with no replies, it looks like I'm going to call shenanigans on this.  Things just don't add up.  Why would the claimed owner of an EV already post such an obvious problematic comment anonymously?  How was the purchase dealership 160 miles from the nearest DCFC reached in the first place?  Why would any experienced BEV driver continue at 75 mph knowing distance was risky?  And with outside temperature 50°F, how come the heater was even used?  As an owner of a plug-in vehicle with a heat-pump living in Minnesota, that is plenty warm for just comfy-jacket driving.  Probable or not, such questions raise concern.  Far too often in the past, I have seen efforts to undermine following this very pattern... especially when no lessons-learned info is shared.  Seeing that the post concludes with "Not cool Toyota, not cool." there is good reason to be suspicious.  We want constructive exchanges.  This clearly was not.

Caught Off Guard.  This spin is quite common, from BEV purists: "Problem is, if a car maker has so little faith in their technology that they pre-emptively make their cars really bad."  Coming from a mindset of all-or-none, that is no surprise.  They don't see anything but an "all in" commitment as sincere.  Ironically, making such a vague promise without milestones & consequence is insincere.  They don't want to acknowledge that reality though.  It's only talking-points & empty-promises that matter.  Ugh.  That's the know-your-audience awareness importance.  Enthusiasts have different measures & values.  Something for the mainstream fundamentally contradicts that.  Anywho, this is how I replied to that supposed "really bad" problem:  Quite the opposite, if the car maker has so much faith in their technology that they are willing to take the risk.   Look around. How many high ground-clearance BEV with such decisive AWD are actually offered?  Rather than follow other automakers, Toyota felt confident and showed some leadership.  It's quite telling to see what happens when enthusiasts are caught off guard.

Didn't Make It.  He purchased a bZ4X, which required a road trip to get home.  Having already owned a BEV, it was conveyed as a trip that would push range to the limit but was favored by ownership experience.  Strangely, he wouldn't actually tell us what his previous BEV was or how he got to the dealership in the first place.  That seemed a bit odd, perhaps was even a red-flag.  Why wasn't he more forthcoming?  As state-of-charge dropped, he only shut off the heater.  Not reducing speed seemed strange.  That's a simple remedy to draw out range, an obvious next step when range-anxiety kicks in.  He didn't.  Hmm.  What stood out most though was the post was anonymous, using the "group member" option rather than revealing an identity.  Why?  I posted this, quite curious what the follow up would be:  YMMV applies to electric vehicles too.  That's why real-time efficiency is so important.  Like MPG, you watch MI/KWH, since estimates can be quite crude.  In this case, 160 miles of travel using 64 kWh of electricity would have required 2.5 mi/kWh.  Traveling 75 mph with the heater and new tires wasn't realistic.  Sorry, but we have seen many posts sighting lower efficiency.  Watching that value while you drove likely would have provided a better distance expectation.  Slowing down when anxiety kicks in is the suggestion I'd give, since speed kills efficiency.

Thanks.   It was nice to get a thanks from that RAV4 EV owner.  He appreciated the objectivity of my reply.  Exchanges like that are great.  It's what I look forward to as an owner.  Right now, I come from the voice of experience sharing the past.  Being able to translate that to current experience is something I really thrive on.  There is so much to convey once you finally have a means of collection lots of real-world data.  These little vicarious snippets into the observations of others is insightful, but being constructive with a challenge.  I need detail.  I have a great means of sharing that now.  It's like the past +20 years were practice in preparation for this opportunity.  For now, I provide observations and make my intent transparent.  This was how I replied:  I don't want to inadvertently provide naysayers with any material, so it's best to push for detail.  Knowing that Toyota offered CHAdeMO for Prius Prime at 22 kW was always an interesting bit of information I really couldn't do anything with.  I could however easily demonstrate a charge-rate of 7.2 kW even though the AC plug was only rated for 3.3 kW.  All that was necessary was to put it into Charge-Mode while watching ODB-II data.  So when topics like this come up, I get really interested.  With the opening of Tesla Superchargers, we are already seeing a bunch of owners trying to take advantage of the opportunity but seriously lacking detail to understand the experience.  Simple things, like what speed the vehicle requested and what temperature the battery was at, gets completely overlooked.  It's all anecdotal observation... which isn't that helpful.  Thanks for whatever you are able to contribute to the on-going discussions.