2011 Toyota Tundra Sr5 Crew Cab Pickup 4-door 5.7l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Toyota's Bob Carter says far fewer stations needed in shift from gas to hydrogen

Toyota's Bob Carter has been talking about green cars for years, but it's only been recently that his comments have really caught widespread attention thanks to his disparaging remarks about electric vehicle supporters like Elon Musk and Carlos Ghosn and optimism about hydrogen. Speaking at the opening of the Chicago Auto Show this morning, Carter said that Toyota has claimed the "pole position on CAFE," thanks to its deep hybrid bench. The company's green car cred will continue to grow because of its upcoming hydrogen fuel cell car, due out next year. Carter is relentlessly optimistic: "I truly believe fuel cells will fundamentally change how we feel about transportation," he said. The reason, Carter said, is that a hydrogen infrastructure will be easier to install than people think. He referenced a study conducted by the University of California (which we've heard about before) that found that California would only need 68 hydrogen stations to refuel the roughly 10,000 H2 vehicles that Toyota hopes to sell in by 2016 or so. That's a lot more than the nine that exist today, but the state has already approved funding for 20 new stations by 2015 and then up to 100 by 2024. Then he said this: "If every vehicle in California ran on hydrogen, we could meet refueling logistics with only 15 percent of the nearly 10,000 gasoline stations currently operating in the state." "We could meet refueling logistics with only 15 percent of gasoline stations currently operating in CA" - Bob Carter This made us wonder: if the refueling time and range are roughly equivalent between hydrogen and gasoline – Toyota's hydrogen car is supposed to be able to go 300 miles on a five-minute fill-up - then why has the market decided that there should be 10,000 gas stations in California and why would 1,500 be sufficient for hydrogen? "If the locations are optimized," he said, "we don't need 10,000 stations." For example, at major intersections, instead of three gas stations, you'd really just need a single hydrogen one. "There are a lot of questions about the infrastructure, but it's coming. ... It's a hurdle that we've got to climb but it's not as steep as some may imagine." Toyota's Mike Michaels, the national manager, media and public affairs at Toyota Motor Sales, then stepped in to point out that there are gas stations closing and admitted that there might be too many gas stations in California.

Lexus LX to get diesel engine?

Australian consumers appear poised to get another diesel-burning luxury SUV in the near future, and word is it's coming from Lexus, of all automakers. Sean Hanley, chief executive of the company's branch in Oz, recently told Aussie website Drive that he's "pretty confident" that the new engine for the LX is getting the green light.
Like in the US, the LX in Australia is currently only offered with a 5.7-liter, gasoline-burning V8. However, sales of the big SUV are presently minuscule Down Under, with Drive reporting just 153 LX570s sold in all of Oz last year. Hanley is negotiating with Japan to get the new diesel in hopes of boosting flagging sales. If his efforts are successful, it would be the first diesel engine offered in a Lexus there. Hanley didn't specify exactly which mill the SUV would get. However, given the LX's close relationship with Toyota Land Cruiser, the diesel 4.5-liter twin-turbo V8 already available in the Toyota in markets outside of North America seems like a natural choice.
Don't expect the variant to be hopping across the Pacific, though. Lexus spokesperson Allison Takahashi tells Autoblog she has heard "nothing" about an oil-burning LX coming to the US. That's not a huge surprise, though, because neither Toyota nor Lexus offer any diesels in their lineups today. Also, Lexus has only sold 1,981 LX570s through June, which only placed it ahead of the LFA supercar in the brand's sales. It's probably just not worth certifying the engine for such a low-volume model.

Tier 1 suppliers call GM the worst OEM to work with

Among automakers with a big US presence, General Motors is the worst to work for, according to a new survey from Tier 1 automotive suppliers, conducted by Planning Perspectives, Inc.
The Detroit-based manufacturer, which has been under fire following the ignition switch recall and its accompanying scandal, finished behind six other automakers with big US manufacturing operations. Suppliers had issues with trust and communications, as well as intellectual property protection. GM was also the least likely to allow suppliers to raise their prices in the face of unexpected increases in material cost, all of which contributed to 55 percent of suppliers saying their relationship with GM was "poor to very poor."
GM's cross-town competitors didn't fare much better. Chrysler finished in fifth place, ahead of GM and behind Dearborn-based Ford, which was passed for third place this year by Nissan. Toyota took the top marks, while Honda captured second place.