Years To Come.  This caught my attention: "It will become more interesting in years to come when folks start choosing pure BEV over PHEV, HEV vehicles in the future."  That was posted in an article summarizing 2023 sales for Toyota/Lexus.  I obviously had much to say on the topic.  Here's what I posted:  Until production (battery & vehicle) in the United States gets established, there's more of a benefit for Toyota continuing to rollout software updates and phaseout ICE models.  Seeing 100% of Camry sales becoming hybrid this year paves the way for a PHEV model, adding to the 4 choices in various markets (Prius, RAV4, C-HR, Crown).  After all, each legacy automaker needs a better transition plan... which should be obvious, already seeing GM and Ford having to re-evaluate their approach.  As for that BEV preference, we are likely to see a different outcome.  BEV growth will stimulate interest in plug-in vehicles. PHEV offers huge advantage in that regard.  For those with limited charge opportunity, the PHEV with more than enough capacity to cover daily driving will grow in appeal.  For households with a BEV already, looking to dump their ICE but still requiring gas-engine range & convenience, PHEV is their choice too.  Toyota's HEV design makes the step to PHEV very easy... for consumer, for business, for production.  Seeing their fleet now over 29% no longer ICE, the topic of interest should be how other automakers will address the paradigm shift.

VIDEO:  Route Planner (coffee part 2).  Returning from the coffee shop also resulted in footage I could share. I took a different way home, for variety and extra distance. That went well. Like with part 1, my goal was to confirm this capture process would provide useful information related to route planning with the ABRP app...  Toyota bZ4X - Route Planner (coffee part 2)

VIDEO:  Route Planner (coffee part 1).  In search of a means of capturing the dashboard map used for EV route planning, I made the best of a drab day during our almost snowless winter.  Hanging a camera from the bZ4X roof and zooming in as much as possible, this first attempt turned out nice.  I could effectively share what I see while driving.  In this case, I planned a short drive to the coffee shop.  The ABRP (A Better Route Planner) app reads live data from the vehicle via ODB-II connection to provide very accurate battery-level estimates, in addition to giving you turn-by-turn directions.  I hope you find it informative...  Toyota bZ4X - Route Planner (coffee part 1)

New Years, justify.  He tried to justify has offensive comment and dismiss Toyota priorities as not making sense.  From the perspective of an enthusiast, such inability to see beyond their immediate focus is nothing new.  Those who portrayed Volt as vastly superior did that to an extreme.  It was quite perplexity how they would limit their scope of reach to such a tiny audience.  Some seriously believed there was no other way.  It's all quite telling  I called him out on the use of "pathetic" and he just changed to using "garbage" instead.  Then he moved on to deny what we already know.  That is a sure sign of worry.  Toyota is not supposed to "catch up", especially as such an expeditious pace.  I fired back at his rhetoric with:  I completely ignored that nonsense, responding with:  Since you are following me elsewhere, you already know.  I have pointed out how software update rollout began prior to 2024 model production starting and that Toyota already confirmed no hardware change.  You also know there is a battery-heater in the 2023 capable of delivering much higher temperatures.  The fact that some lack patience is not my problem.

New Years, attack.  It was only a matter of time before the attack would come.  He was trolling and didn't like the fact that I was able to fight back: "So you're gonna defend on here like you do on Facebook.  Common John, just admit it's a pathetic programming by Toyota.  They had the ability to study for years what Tesla and others were doing and this is what they released.  If you plug in a Tesla without telling it to pre-condition (or any other EV) they will all perform better than this at this high of a stage of charge.  That's what's pathetic.  That they thought this was good and proper to release."  Not getting validation is the source of this contrition avoidance.  It's wasteful to heat the battery-pack up to the extreme Tesla does.  Enthusiasts would label that as vampire draw, spinning the situation as something unintentional.  Finding out the system was actually designed to do exactly that and a competitor refused to play the same game is maddening.  They cannot proclaim their antithesis as being years behind when the same strategy is not taken.  I find it quite amusing... and ironic.  Toyota did study for years.  They learned from others what not to do.  It's sad that there are those who choose to attack rather than exercise critical thinking.  Oh well, to them I reply:  Posting an offensive comment and not expecting any type of defensive response is rhetoric, an obvious attempt to declare superiority.  Toyota's priorities are different. They carefully choose when & how electricity is consumed and favor longevity.  Don't pound your chest about software updates for others, then turn a blind-eye toward Toyota when they do the same.  You know all too well some other automakers didn't rollout pre-conditioning initially either.

New Years, insult.  First notification of the new year was an insult: "God this car sucks at charging. 30 mins to go from 72-84.  I know it charges faster at lower percentage but that's still pathetic."  It was a comment posted on my video from using MagicDock back in early October.  I expect that type of rhetoric to ramp up as the new model-year for bZ4X rolls out from Toyota.  Coordinating the software update to coincide with the rollout in Australia will help to snuff out many of the outdated reviews.  It's quite hypocritical for others to downplay updates after their own EV as unimportant.  They expect Toyota's rollout to be absolutely perfect and to not use real-world feedback to do what they do best, continuous improvement.  Enthusiasts act like Tesla came up with that approach.  They also expect perfection from Toyota due to their hybrid experience, but absolutely refuse to acknowledge what that experience provided.  I replied to that short-sightedness with:  That is exactly what you should expect from a system designed to strive at keeping the battery-pack cool.  You want faster, you have to enable pre-conditioning (the software update for that is expected in a few months).

Charging Performance.  With an article about Cybertruck charging slowly from DC, it was only a matter of time before the hypocrites show up.  I jumped on an article addressing the growing concern, commenting on this quote from the article itself: "There are two explanations for this abysmal performance.  One is that the 4680 cells are still not good enough, although Tesla stubbornly insists on using them.  The other is that Tesla is limiting performance in software before it gathers enough data about their long-term performance."  Use of the word "abysmal" is what caught my attention.  Supposedly, only getting 150 kW is far too slow to tolerate.  Ugh.  True, with such a giant battery on an electricity-guzzler, faster is desirable.  But to call that with a dreadful expression is beyond contempt.  Quite curious what I would get for replies, I posted:  Ironically, Tesla's push for heavy 4680 investment came with a warning about the business risk of premature lock-in.  Such an innovative approach made a lot of sense from a production perspective.  Performance was still theoretical back then though. The industry moved in a different direction since then too, embracing LFP upon patent expiration.

In other words, what a button does isn't relevant in the "behind" narrative.  Yet, that's the way keyboard warriors treat it.  Again, ugh.  That's why most of these discussions never make any progress.

Continuous Improvement.  It has been the secret to Toyota's progress.  They look way into the future and deliver many small upgrades along the way, spread across the fleet.  That example which always comes to mind is the second power-split-device.  Adding it eliminated the reduction-gear, creating a two-speed hybrid system.  Business change is subtle that way, great for both the dealer & consumer.  Since neither understands or would even recognize the technical difference, why bother?  Supporters (like me) care though.  I knew that technology first introduced in Camry hybrid would be rolled out to Prius as some point.  It indeed was too.  Swapping out the inverter is exactly the type of mid-cycle update we could expect later for bZ4X.  Start with Lexus.  Follow with Toyota.  That's why proving reliability first has been the priority.  Ramping up production following that is a good long-term business plan, something enthusiasts have no patience for.  It's why Toyota has been so successful.  They don't cater to short-term hype.  They stick to a continuous improvement approach.

Finding that a new inverter taking advantage of this advancement discreetly rolled out in a particularly low-key model of Lexus is exactly the type of subtle move Toyota would make... an automaker who has a history of rollouts of that very nature.

Water Engine.  I frequently come across videos on YouTube for Toyota titled "No More EVs".  I knew it was some type of propaganda, but curiosity got the best of me.  The narrator started by introducing a revolutionary new technology that would replace EVs, ending the fear of fires and concern about precious metals in expensive batteries.  That immediately raised my concerns, since LFP chemistry addresses all of those problems.  By eliminating use of nickel & cobalt, risk of fire is dramatically reduces as well as cost.  No mention whatsoever about battery advancements should have been the end of my watching.  I wanted to know more though.  What the heck was a water engine?  The b-roll footage showed a combustion engine, but the diagram that followed showed a fuel-cell stack.  Those are mutually exclusive devices.  The fuel-cell consumes hydrogen to generate electricity.  By combining with oxygen to achieve that chemical reaction, you would indeed get water.  Why was the combustion engine shown then?  The narration made it sound like there was osmosis equipment on-board, using water as the fuel source and electricity as the energy source to create hydrogen to feed the engine.  That makes no sense whatsoever.  Such a process is energy intensive and it wouldn't be fast enough or compact enough for propulsion needs.  And where exactly would that electricity come from?  Batteries?  There's also the problem of what to do with the oxygen as a by-product.  The video didn't make any sense at that point.  Then we were shown a hydrogen pumping station and Mirai, yet "water engine" was repeated over and over again.  It was truly a bizarre & confusing mess.  I feel sorry for the victims watching such propaganda.  It was clearly created to undermine BEV progress, using Toyota as the supposed leader abandoning the technology.  Ugh.

Route Planning.  We are finally starting to see some posts where owners are actually aware of their efficiency.  Posting results only based upon miles is almost worthless, even for that owner.  What does a maximum distance inform you when you want to stop somewhere along the way and you are traveling at a different speed in a different temperature?  There's no basis to adjust estimation.  People aren't that good with math either.  An app that provides route planning is though.  The catch is you need to leverage efficiency data to get anything fairly accurate.  Paying attention, you could provide that yourself.  Most people don't.  They can connect an ODB-II reader though.  Allow that to collect data for them.  When I bring up car details in ABRP, it shows me that information.  Currently, it says "2.98 mi/kWh @ 65 mph" for my calibrated reference consumption.  It automatically does that for you.  That makes it an easy recommendation, which is what I posted:  You should determine the efficiency you will be getting and have whatever route-planner you use base stops upon that value.  Assuming you are going to get a higher mi/kWh (kWh/100km) value than you actually get is a big mistake most people me.  Thankfully, those who take advantage of live-data (like what ABRP enables) makes adjustments while en-route much more realistic.  In other words, I would highly recommend a test run prior to the real thing... some outing with similar driving circumstances... to get that real-world data for planning.

Update Source?  I'm glad someone finally asked this question: "Just curious, where are you getting the info that there is another upcoming update?"  With the Christmas surprise, what I knew when is already starting to become a blur.  I have to scramble to both document my findings and to convey them to others in a useful manner.  For that matter, it takes time to give it some critical thought.  The situation is a massive puzzle or a mystery to solve.  You're never really sure what you are working with until looking back.  I try to connect the dots well ahead of that... always hoping for that "Aha!" moment.  That happens from time to time too.  It is one of the reasons I document my findings in such detail.  You never know how many years will go by before that stored away information will finally have some relevance.  That's especially true in this market, where you must remain agile.  It means having flexibility in mind when plans are made and being willing to revise or even abandon along the way.  It's a journey, not a trip.  Anywho, this is the reply I shared:  I got that from 2 sources.  One was just a basic news feed from Toyota mentioning the update available in Japan.  And since 2024 production still hasn't started, it's a good bet that will apply to 2023 models.  The other source was a 2024 preview in Australia.   It specifically mentioned software updates and confirmed no hardware changes.  That adds to the good bet.  After all, we know the battery-heater is already in place and that charging-curves can be manipulated.