When China-made vehicles do enter the US market, Toyota would have established a foothold in the arena they have thrived in... low-margin sales.  It has become incredibly difficult to sell vehicles returning little profit lately; however, that is a market segment Tesla has been a laggard in.  So, it's anyone's' game.  Ford's choice to endorse NACS will stirs things up too.

Surprise, They Do.  It was fun replying to this: "Toyota does not warrant the bZ4X for 1 million kilometers.  They only warrant it for 160.000km bellow 70% capacity remaining."  Viewers of that video where the bZ4X 12-volt battery failed is stirring opportunity for spreading information.  Many have no clue what the bigger picture is or what history has already taken place.  Assumption is leading the way.  That can become a very bad thing if not capitalized upon.  I was delighted to do exactly that with:  Some markets do indeed provide a 1,000,000 km warranty.  Toyota started that years ago with their Lexus EV, which has worked so well we haven't heard a peep about that online.  It simply works . Notice how rhetoric stirs from bZ4X instead?  Toyota has more experience than enthusiasts online want to acknowledge.  Enthusiasts favoring charging speed hope to mislead & undermine.  Thankfully, that rhetoric isn't stopping progress for the overall market.  States following California rules (CARB regulations) adopting 2026 updates will enforce 80% capacity for 10 years / 150,000 miles (241,000 km).  Stress from DC charging could come back to bite automakers at some point.  The never-fast-enough approach sets a self-defeating precedent.

Owner Experiences.  A reviewer got a bZ4X for review.  It wouldn't start after having been parked for several hours.  I posted a comment, pointing out it was likely just a bad 12-volt from having endured a long duration unused due to the recall.  Sitting completely drained will damage that small battery.  This is nothing new.  We found the same thing happening with Prius over the years.  You can only allow a vehicle to 2 stay active (running communication & security) for so long before there simply isn't any more electricity available.  Deep discharges damage lead-acid batteries, the energy source used to start the vehicles computer and reconnect the battery-pack when you push the power button.  Anywho, this is one the comments posted about the video the following day: "I've thought about the day when my parents might transition to electric. They'd probably want a Toyota, but not if it has problems like that."  I'm always curious what viewers have to say, after the rhetoric from enthusiasts has settled.  This is how I replied to that, hoping to stir the importance of sharing owner experiences, since reviewer rarely provide any type of insight into actual ownership:  How many people jump on any first-year vehicle from any automaker?  There are many who just naturally wait until it has been out for a year or two before jumping on board.  There are naturally kinks to work out.  In this case, it may not even be that.  It simply could be a weakened 12-volt battery from the recall from sitting parked for months while waiting for the fix.  I went on vacation shortly after getting my bZ4X.  It was not subject to the recall.  It sat for 4 days unused & unplugged.  There was no startup issue.  There hasn't been any at any time.

Quick Summary.  It is nice being able to have a normal exchange, simply sharing ownership experience with some random person online.  In this case, it was a random person who brought in their RAV4 Prime for routine maintenance and ended up driving away with a bZ4X.  That is exactly Toyota's target audience, a loyal customer who has had great ownership experience with prior Toyota vehicles.  In this case, it's that early stir benefit.  When a purchase opportunity is jumped on like that, a used vehicle suddenly ends up becoming available.  It's a win-win Toyota has taken advantage of many times over the years.  They will release something mid-cycle, getting those looking for a chance upgrade to pounce.  For this situation, he was super excited about the chance decision.  So, I provided some feedback to have stir some more excitement:  They are all still 2023 models.  Mine (AWD Limited) has been flawless.  I have driven it in a blizzard, hauled wood twice and less from the nursery twice.  Just got 2" hitch installed for carrying bikes too.  No glovebox is a compete non-issue; the radiant heater in its place is awesome.  Software updates have been a nice follow-up.

Fun Fact.  It is always titillating upon encountering a statement like this: "Fun fact, the bz4x is one if the most efficient EVs in EPA."  With such obsession on range, actual efficiency isn't talked about.  Just about everyone focuses on distance you can travel, even though they have no clue how much their daily travel actually is.  That's an interesting perspective getter.  When someone asks you about range, you ask them about what they think they need.  Inevitably, the feedback will be some distance destination they travel to from time to time.  They always look at it as a necessity, being able to travel there without stopping to charge anywhere along the way.  I get annoyed.  They look at BEV ownership as never getting any better than what the state of charger availability is at that very moment.  Ugh.  Anywho, this is how I decided to respond to that fun fact:  The topic of "mi/kWh" is rarely discussed.  In fact, I have watched some reviews where "efficiency" is referred to in terms of "range" rather than actual energy consumption.  Since bZ4X holds back a large buffer, making the smaller battery provide even less usable capacity than most, it gets slammed for being impractical.  All vehicles have strengths & weaknesses.  If the owner rarely takes road-trips or has another vehicle in the household, so what if the AWD delivers only a sustain 60 kW rate?  It's not like Leaf & Bolt owners weren't able to travel.  Neither had the size or capability of bZ4X. It's not like people aren't paying a premium on other vehicles already.  It's not like Toyota hasn't shown smaller choices are in the works... which will clearly be more efficient than a large, boxy SUV that delivers efficient mi/kWh anyway.  All those years of learning to squeeze out motor & inverter efficiency, as well as EV operation software, from hybrids really helped.  Now, it's a matter of delivering a "clean sheet" platform too.

Toyota Strategy.  This is a common claim, a carryover from the days of EV1 which GM ended up destroying: "Toyota's strategy is pretty clear.  Convince the many Toyota customers that EVs are not worth it, and better buy their hybrid models."  This is where the values of that know-your-audience mantra becomes evident.  Who is trying to be convinced?  Toyota customers tend to follow what happens on the showroom floor, not participating in discussions online.  They see new vehicles available, like Crown and the next-gen Prius.  They notice RAV4 hybrid has a model with a plug.  Then they stumble across bZ4X.  With that the extent of their exposure, how would the "not worth it" belief come about?  Those shoppers will recall seeing DC fast-charger stations.  They'll recognize the value of level-2 charging opportunities at the mall or grocery store.  It will be a positive association with progress forward, knowing their will naturally be bumps along the road to adopting new technology.  Where would those supposed negatives come from?  Knowing enthusiasts couldn't care less about that perspective, it's difficult figuring out what to post in reply.  This ended up being the comment I shared to that supposed clear strategy:  No.  It's the same as Toyota has been saying for years... you'll have to pay a premium to get a BEV.  It's a simple situation.  Toyota doesn't want to sell a loss-leader.  Unlike other legacy automakers who have no choice, since they don't have competitive PHEV tech, Toyota isn't stuck having to beat their transition a on big jump straight to BEV being sold with little to no profit.  That "worth it" part comes from the same process Prius took... owner endorsements, ordinary people sharing their real-world experiences.  Reviews from enthusiasts are for enthusiasts, quite valid for their niche but unlikely to match priorities of mainstream consumers.

Raising Awareness.  His attempts to downplay & dismiss were failing.  I grew intrigued by his struggle.  The thought was by bringing up this argument again here, in a new venue, he would someone shut me up without having to provide any proof.  This is how the nonsense takes hold.  I saw it over and over and over again with Volt enthusiasts.  Remember that daily blog?  Countless attempts were made to lie about how Prius PHV actually worked.  They were misinformation campaigns based upon fear that Toyota had come up with an innovative solution.  That's why evidence of Toyota having been innovative again is stirring fear, resulting in new antagonism.  Ugh.  I was absolutely delighted to point that out:  It's quite telling how upset you have become discovering Toyota has delivered something advantageous, an energy-saving feature other automakers have no equivalent to compete with.  Go ahead, argue all you want about the INFRARED HEATER.  Each time, you're helping to raise awareness about it and inviting others to share their real-world experiences with it.

Actual Facts.  He tried again, attempting to reinforce the narrative with rhetoric.  Just like before, no substance.  All heat-pumps require some type of supplemental feature for when temperatures drop below the ability to extract heat from surrounding air.  The pump is nothing but an energy redistribution device.  If that energy is absent, you have to use something else instead.  The concept is simple, run in reverse it is an A/C device.  Cold air comes out of on side and hot on the other.  Absent of that, resistance heaters are used.  They aren't as efficient, but they do work well in much colder temperatures without adding to much cost.  So, like many other automakers, that is what Toyota is using.  No big deal.  The claim was though, Toyota used a heat-pump so small, the supplement wasn't enough either.  I repeatedly asked for proof to support such a claim.  He just kept referring back to a video he refused to provide a link for.  So, I tried to just blow him off with:  Nope.  The heat-pump is supplemented by a resistance, like many other BEV to deal with temperatures below the -10°C (14°F) threshold.  The infrared-heater is an optional feature for those wanting to squeeze out greater efficiency.

Upsetting Enthusiasts.  Someone became very upset about my callout to the infrared heater.  He was an individual who attacked me on the big Prius forum.  I recognized his id and confirmed the profile was brand new, clearly made to shut me up.  Drawing attention to a possible distinct advantage Toyota may have was unacceptable.  His post made it obvious too.  It was the same vague reference to a "Toyota mechanic said" video, which he absolutely refused to provide a link for.  It was bizarre.  If you have proof of something, why would you withhold it when confronted?  He tried to put the burden on me, saying I needed to prove that advantage wasn't actually compensation for a shortcoming.  It made no sense.  I replied:  Nope.  Quite the opposite.  This is a warming option more efficient than heat-pumps, transmitting energy directly to your legs rather than wasting it to warm air.  With the heated steering-wheel, heated seats and the infrared heater, there are times the heat-pump doesn't even need to be turned on.  As an owner, I know this firsthand.  It's an energy-saving advantage Toyota has delivered ahead of other automakers.

Infrared Heater.  It finally brought up in a video, more than just a vague point out.  That sure was a change for the better.  In the past, the only hint of it was complaining about the absence of a glovebox without explaining why.  Reviews tend to be shallow and without research.  The person gets the vehicle for a short time and makes the best of the opportunity having it to create a video.  I took advantage of today's to draw attention to this change of focus:  It was nice to hear the INFRARED HEATER being mentioned.  Most reviews just complain about the absence of a glovebox, failing to notice the extra large 2-level center console storage.  That heat the device provides is radiant warming, directed at your legs.  That's awesome for the winter.  When you experience it firsthand, you immediately understand the tradeoff Toyota made.

Unwanted Attention.  There are some who hate the attention bZ4X continues to get: "I'm not sure why people even talk about this car anymore."  They know any publicity is really good publicity, since being ignored spells death.  Reviews, like the one that comment was posted in, raise awareness.  The idea of being anti-EV has fallen apart.  Now, it looks like the "behind" narrative is too.  Toyota isn't supposed to appear to catch up so quickly... or worse, people realize Toyota wasn't actually a laggard at all, that a different path was taken instead.  Since this particular review was from a popular video channel, it meant a much wider audience than the usual blogs.  So, I made sure the response was thorough without being too long:  Simple, they fear that Toyota knows their audience.  Appealing to enthusiasts, those who watch videos like this and participated in related discussions, are not who the vehicle targets.  This isn't much different from when Prius rolled out.  Becoming a big seller which spawned a variety of other popular hybrids equates to enthusiasts no longer having anything special.  The technology became common. Hyping a vastly superior product is much more exciting promoting something for everyday use by ordinary consumers.  What made EVs special isn't the priority anymore.  In other words, this marks the beginning of the end of that introduction chapter.  They are just trying to hold onto that narrative of Toyota being the antithesis.

Attack Backfire.  It felt good to see an antagonist post this: "It just would have been great if they had engineered the heat pump adequately and given drivers a proper glovebox, right?  At least they made lemonade out of their limes."  He clearly didn't understand the technology.  Assuming the feature was to compensate for a shortcoming was a huge mistake.  I gladly pointed out why to, making sure that attempt to attack backfired on him.  He's how I replied to such desperate rhetoric:  Nope.  Quite the opposite.  This is a warming option more efficient than heat-pumps, transmitting energy directly to your legs rather than wasting it to warm air.  With the heated steering-wheel, heated seats and the infrared heater, there are times the heat-pump doesn't even need to be turned on.  As an owner, I know this firsthand.  It's an energy-saving advantage Toyota has delivered ahead of other automakers.