1997 Toyota Land Cruiser Base Sport Utility 4-door 4.5l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

The ugly economics of green vehicles

It's fair to say that most consumers would prefer a green vehicle, one that has a lower impact on the environment and goes easy on costly fuel (in all senses of the term). The problem is that most people can't – or won't – pay the price premium or put up with the compromises today's green cars demand. We're not all "cashed-up greenies." In 2013, the average selling price of a new vehicle was $32,086. The truth is that most Americans can't afford a new car, green or not. In 2013, the average selling price of a new vehicle was $32,086. According to a recent Federal Reserve study, the median income for American families was $46,700 in 2013, a five-percent decline from $49,000 in 2010. While $32,000 for a car may not sound like a lot to some, it's about $630 a month financing for 48 months, assuming the buyer can come up with a $6,400 down payment. And that doesn't include gas, insurance, taxes, maintenance and all the rest. It's no wonder that a recent study showed that the average family could afford a new car in only one of 25 major US cities. AutoTrader conducted a recent survey of 1,900 millennials (those born between 1980 and 2000) about their new and used car buying habits. Isabelle Helms, AutoTrader's vice president of research, said millennials are "big on small" vehicles, which tend to be more affordable. Millennials also yearn for alternative-powered vehicles, but "they generally can't afford them." When it comes to the actual behavior of consumers, the operative word is "affordable," not "green." In 2012, US new car sales rose to 14.5 million. But according to Manheim Research, at 40.5 million units, used car sales were almost three times as great. While the days of the smoke-belching beater are mostly gone, it's a safe bet that the used cars are far less green in terms of gas mileage, emissions, new technology, etc., than new ones. Who Pays the Freight? Green cars, particularly alternative-fuel green cars, cost more than their conventional gas-powered siblings. A previous article discussed how escalating costs and limited utility drove me away from leasing a hydrogen fuel cell-powered Hyundai Tucson, which at $50,000, was nearly twice the cost of the equivalent gas-powered version. In Hyundai's defense, it's fair to ask who should pay the costs of developing and implementing new technology vehicles and the infrastructure to support them.

Toyota renews Supra trademark, we renew frothing at the mouth

Enthusiasts have been begging for a new Supra practically since Toyota stopped selling its fourth generation in the US way back in 1998. We've been hearing rumors about a successor for years, but the Toyota FT-1 Concept from the 2014 Detroit Auto Show is the first tangible sign from the automaker that a new generation may be on the table. To temp us even more, the Japanese company reportedly filed with the US Patent and Trademark Office last week to renew its 2010 trademark for the name "Supra."
Granted, these kinds of trademark updates aren't uncommon, as automakers don't want to lose their rights to nameplates (even if they have no immediate plans to use them). However, Toyota briefly abandoned its rights to the Supra name entirely. According to The Motor Report, the original trademark was continually renewed until 2006, but the Japanese automaker let it lapse in the US until applying for it again in 2010.
The FT-1 Concept in Detroit was created at Toyota's Calty Design Research center in California and carries cues from the 2000GT, Celica and Supra in an ultra-curvy body. Officials did not disclose anything about its powertrain. Toyota is also co-developing a future sports car platform with BMW that will underpin models from both companies, but few other details are konwn, and it isn't yet clear that the joint venture has anything to do with a future Supra. Hope springs eternal.

Toyota settles complaints with states Attorneys General for $29 million

Toyota announced today that it has reached a settlement with the Attorneys General of 29 states and one US territory that will resolve their complaints relating to recalls performed by the automaker from 2005-2010, including those related to sticky accelerators and malfunctioning floor mats that may have contributed to cases of unintended acceleration.
The settlement includes a payout of $29 million to be divided among the states and US territory, as well as a commitment from Toyota "to take steps to make vehicle information more easily accessible to consumers to help them operate their vehicles safely and make more informed choices." The settlement also has Toyota continuing its rapid-response service teams and quality field offices that were put in place shortly after the largest of the recalls from 2010, as well as a "range of customer care amenities for owners of vehicles subject to certain recalls," though the press release below isn't specific about what those amenities might be.
This settlement marks the second major step in the last few months that Toyota has taken to settle legal disputes surrounding the unintended acceleration recalls, the first being a $1.4 billion settlement to address economic loss suffered by owners of current and past Toyota vehicles that may have lost value on account of these recalls.