Faster Level-2 Charging?  He backed himself into a corner with his reply: "Not everyone has 8 hours overnight, so that is short sided thinking on a OEM."  I haven't seen anyone ever provide an argument to validate the need for faster level-2 charging.  The reasoning simply isn't there... unless you own an electricity guzzler, but that's an entirely different problem.  This is about the perception that what Toyota provides isn't good enough.  He was asserting a claim of lacking commitment.  Supposedly, deliver more speed & power is the only way to gauge progress.  Ugh.  I was happy to point out how that stance fell apart:  Most don't need to routinely charge for 8 hours.  The daily average in the US is less than 40 miles.  That's easy to recover in just 2 hours.  At 7.2 kW/h times 3.5 mi/kWh efficiency, you get 50 miles.  Do you really think those who live in an apartment or condo will ever have dedicated parking spots with level-2 that offer faster?  It simply makes no sense economically to provide that.  Think about the current position PHEV hold, those models able to deliver EV drive with electric heating.  Lots of all-electric miles can compete well in a market currently unable to provide convenient DC fast-charging... which is the very reason you are advocating for faster level-2, right?

Slower Level-2 Charging.  This was the reply I got from the making a point post: "Every Japan OEM is lacking on its EV's Nissan and the Ariya are another example.  Both choose slower on board chargers for AC which baffles me."  It was just a senseless chest-pounding comment.  Without any facts to support such a claim, I went on the offensive to provide them... disproving the speed narrative and drawing attention to numbers revealing diminished return:  As for the belief that on-board chargers for AC need to be faster than the current "6.6" category (actual max is 7.2 kW, which is 240 volts * 30 amps), there's simply no substance to back that.  Toyota wants to promote overnight charging, to take advantage of off-peak opportunity. 8 hours of recharge at that rate delivers 200 miles.  Faster doesn't provide cost/climate/resource benefit.

Disregarding Facts.  I liked reading this: "I don't think Toyota is in the EV game to win at this point.  The CEO made a point of pointing out how many hybrid batteries it takes to make one EV."  It came from an ID.4 owner, someone who clearly doesn't want to acknowledge that VW is working to deliver several PHEV choices in addition to their BEV choices.  If the CEO of VW doesn't point out the same fact, it apparently isn't true for VW... only Toyota.  Ugh.  Reality is, VW was forced into their current stance.  Dieselgate turned that automaker's world upside-down, force a commitment to heavy investment in BEV.  Forced to aggressively be in the game isn't exactly a winning formula.  Toyota is choosing a different path to the same goal.  So what if it takes longer initially.  This is a marathon, not a sprint.  Anywho, I have pointed that out countless times already.  So, I kept my reply short:  Why would you believe short-sighted nonsense being spread online?  The new CEO clearly stated they were not interested in selling loss-leaders during the transition years, that they are investing in a "clean sheet" platform targeted for Lexus brand in 2026 and Toyota brand in 2027.

It was a good video overall.  Thanks for sharing.

Bolt Rumors.  And so it begins: "The Bolt probably will not stay dead for long; Mary Bara already dropped hints that they plan to redesign it to bring back on their Ultium platform that will be cheaper and faster to build."  The discussion was about profit, a complaint about high-profit vehicles getting priority.  It needed to be pointed out that Bolt doesn't make any profit at all.  There's a big different between some & none.  That fact was clearly being dismissed as unimportant.  So, I attempted to draw attention to that fact:  The devil is in the detail. She also said vehicles priced less than $40K aren't expected to be profitable until the end of the decade.  That makes a next-green Bolt very low priority.  GM will feed hype for years, milking next-gen hope exactly like what happened with Volt.

Useful Feedback.  It took me awhile to find a means of conveying useful information in response to this: "The bz4 if they fix the charging problems and give it better range and drop the price is a great EV.  But the charging on that car is just to much to overcome right now if it were me."  It the reply to my one-year anniversary post.  I was annoyed by the vague nature of the reply.  It's not constructive to use "fix" and "better" and "drop" when exchanging information among a well-informed audience.  The online groups know what those numbers means.  Avoiding use of them is rather blatant rhetoric.  So, I came up with this to see what kind of feedback I could stir:  That "right now" is key.  You are not the intended audience.  Heck, none of us here are.  Toyota plays the long-game, skipping enthusiast appeal for the sake of focusing on mainstream consumers.  DC fast-charging speed has already been improved with the latest software update.  VW offers a 209-mile version of ID.4, negating claims that more range is truly a priority.  And price will naturally drop from ramp-up, moving production, and platform upgrades.  Seeing VW strike a better balance "right now" is awesome.  They made the best of their emissions penalty, with a lot of struggle along the way, but will also do well in the long-game.

In other words, the ownership experience is what you make of it.

NACS Decisions.  Indication of desperation have emerged.  Ford needed to do something to draw attention away from growing interest in GM offerings.  Hype for Equinox EV is slowly growing while the on-again/off-again plans for Bolt stir.  When Ford made their NACS adoption announcement, there was a "me to" that almost immediately followed by GM.  What that actually meant for either remains a mystery.  Access to the Supercharger network is a big concern for current Tesla owners, many who purchased their Tesla on recognition of exclusive advantage... having something other BEV owners did not.  The convenience of both that vast network of chargers using that propriety connector is undeniable.  Plugging in is effortless.  Finding stations along the way was brainless.  It was always a pleasant experience, rarely requiring any wait.  Having to share access changes the equation, souring appeal for Teslas... both new & used.  What exactly will Ford & GM being doing anyway?  Will existing BEV owners get a DCFC adapter?  Will upcoming vehicles have both types of port?  What about level-2 charging?  Even without getting into the mess we'll see related to the chargers themselves or related software, confusion & uncertainty for the vehicle is likely to get ugly.  This was quite predictable though.  When Tesla made the promise to deliver 7,500 chargers offering CCS for the sake of becoming eligible for government funding, it was a last-ditch effort.  Even though "Magic Dock" worked, there was concern about durability and the massive problem of cords being too short.  Needless to say, many more decisions will have to be made long before adoption really become true change.  Right now, it's all hype.

Brainless Trolling.  Sometime, the troll simply doesn't care.  I was surprised to see this pop up on a discussion group specifically for plug-in hybrids: "How lame does someone need to be to tie up a charging station with a plug-in hybrid?????"  Origins of that vastly superior attitude date back to Volt's inception.  Enthusiasts pushed a belief of a single solution for everyone.  Seeing PHEV co-exist with BEV was totally unacceptable.  The promotion of "range-anxiety" depended entirely upon battery-capacity remaining heavy & expensive.  Chemistry & Production improvements didn't exist as a possibility in their world.  The idea of a household owning PHEV to support ownership of BEV for the other vehicles sharing the driveway & garage was impossible.  There was always a purist mindset.  Diversity was not an option.  Ugh.  Needless to say, some are still stuck on that close-minded approach.  My choice for dealing with that was to reply by asking questions:  Failing to understand the benefit of plugging in?  Not informed how a proper PHEV operates?  Clueless who the competition is?  I thought we were past the fight-amongst-ourselves stage.

Video Propaganda.  There are particular sources that are pushing rhetoric really hard, feeding propaganda by overwhelming online content with their own misleading messages.  This was a classic example of that today: "Toyota, after launching its first fully electric-car called the bZ4X, withdrew it from the market just a few months after its launch due to some defects - something like that can have a significant impact on Toyota's reputation known for its high reliability and efficiency that could have been avoided if Toyota had started manufacturing electric cars early on."  It's the kind of nonsense we'll be getting for years.  They shape perception by being extremely vague, setting up the opportunity for incorrect assumption.  They want those who never bother to do any research of their own to believe the sentiment expressed without question.  People are told Toyota is struggling without any substance to support it.  It's how the narrative is sustained.  Quite annoyed and knowing my comment would simply fall on dear ears, I posted:  Measuring status upon low-hanging-fruit sales, portraying Toyota's electric-drive experience as new starting with bZ4X, and misrepresenting the recall as somehow related to the propulsion-system tells the real story.

Toyota Innovation.  We're hearing about innovations coming from Toyota, a trait uncharacteristic of the automaker.  Toyota tends to be extremely quiet, not saying anything until rollout is imminent.  This time though, there are several technology improvements on the way and the industry is showing favor for those who pound their chest.  Ugh.  So, we are getting a flurry of announcements.  It's not like we haven't seen late delivery from Tesla, GM and VW.  In fact, it's quite common to get more bark than bite.  That helps to put this in perspective.  Toyota will be adopting "giga-castings", an obvious path forward in production that Tesla gets credited for.  This is where the vehicle chassis is created in large pieces instead of lots of small ones.  Reducing the amount of parts, connections and connection-material is a huge cost savings & time reduction (much shorter assembly line).  The same type of innovation will come with regard to solid-state batteries.  There is potential for those cost savings (roughly 40%) and time reduction (faster than lithium ion), with the added benefits of roughly a 20% range increase (due to weight & size improvements) and the obvious safety (due to elimination flammable liquid electrolyte).  Knowing Tesla is now facing the realities of growth beyond their niche and challenges related to lack of diversity, things will get interesting.  This is no longer an early-adopter market.  Technology related to BEV is now well-proven.  Experience that Toyota has applies well to long-term viability.  These innovations address dealing with this next stage.

PHEV Only Inventory.  I came across article with this strange title today: "Stellantis Only Shipping PHEV to ZEV States".  Right away, a BEV purist posted this comments: "I wish those companies were sending pure EVs to those states instead of plug-in hybrids.  Plug-in hybrids are not a solution to climate-change."  It was a great example of being completely out of touch with reality.  It is also a testament to how gullible they are to click-bait.  We have far more problems than just climate-change, specifically carbon emissions.  I know of no BEV available and only Chrysler Pacifica and Jeep Wrangler & Grand Cherokee available as plug-in hybrids.  What else will that automaker group sell here?  Not stepping back to consider the bigger picture is a chronic problem for enthusiasts.  They get way too hung up on their specific interest, failing to recognize how complex the market actually is.  To them, I keep replies brief:  Plug-in hybrids are a bridge to get us there, something BEV naysayers, those with charging challenges and those with range-anxiety can buy in the meantime.

We'll see a lot of that hardware/software intermixing in the months to come.  Oversimplification is an endless problem when it comes to new technologies.