Toyota : 2006 4runner Limited V6 4x4 Leather Roof Low Mileage Clean Carfax Sharp on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Anti-EV messaging alive and well at Toyota, sort of

The folks at Toyota in Japan can be pretty blunt about electric-vehicle technology prospects as a viable transportation alternative to the internal combustion engine. Here in the states? Slightly more sanguine. Toyota global head of research and development Mitsuhisa Kato, according to Automotive News, discounts the potential of substantial EV sales in the near future because the appropriate technology that provides comparable driving distances and fill-up times relative to conventional vehicles doesn't yet exist. While Toyota has been conducting testing programs with shorter-commute-distance EVs in countries such as Japan and France, its only production EV in the US is the RAV4 EV, and Toyota sold just 546 of those in the States during the first half of the year. Toyota is much more excited about the debut of its first hydrogen fuel-cell production vehicle, in both Japan and the US, next year. Toyota Motor North America spokeswoman Jana Hartline was a little more charitable when discussing the EV's prospects in an interview with AutoblogGreen. "For shorter range, EVs serve a really great purpose, but as far as having equal mile range to an internal combustion engine, there's going to need to be some serious breakthroughs," Hartline said. "And that where the fuel cell comes in." Last month, Toyota said its fuel-cell sedan that will debut in Japan next April will be priced at about $69,000, though the company emphasized that it shouldn't be assumed it will be priced similarly in the US and Europe. Toyota hasn't released many performance details, though the sedan is expected to have a full (hydrogen) tank range of about 435 miles, or about five times that of a Nissan Leaf. Read here for Autoblog's First Drive of Toyota's fuel-cell sedan.

Toyota nears $40B cash reserve as calls grow for new investment, payouts

With the April 15 tax deadline just a few months away, our US readers will be faced with a decision should they get a refund: save or spend? It seems this issue is one many of us face whenever there's a windfall, trying to decide whether we should set the money aside in an account of some sort or use it as a down payment on a new car or a trip to the Apple store. Unsurprisingly, major corporations face a similar, albeit more complex, issue.
Take Toyota, for example. With President Akio Toyoda at the helm, the Japanese manufacturer has gracefully weathered recalls and natural disasters, all while turning beaucoup profits. Last quarter, profits quintupled to 434.4-billion yen ($4.3-billion USD), according to Bloomberg. Toyota also upped its forecast for the end of fiscal year 2013 (which ends on March 31 for Japan), to a record 1.9-trillion yen (about $18.8 billion). Now, the Japanese brand is reportedly sitting on a cash pile of nearly $40 billion, leaving Toyoda-san in an envious predicament - what should the company do with all that money?
Some think Toyota should be doing something, anything with that big stack of cash.

Jim Lentz exposes more details behind Toyota's move to Texas

Toyota's North American CEO Jim Lentz has already given us a rough idea of what prompted the company's surprise move to the Dallas suburb of Plano, TX from its longstanding headquarters in Torrance, CA. A new story from The Los Angeles Times, though, delivers even more detail from Lentz on the reasoning for the move, what other cities were considered and why the company's current host city wasn't even in the running.
Of course, one of the more popular reasons being bandied about includes the $40 million Texas was set to give the company for the move, as well as the state's generous tax rates. According to Lentz, though, the reason Toyota chose Plano over a group of finalists made up of Atlanta, Charlotte and Denver, was far simpler than that - it was about consolidating its marketing, sales, engineering and production teams in a region that's closer to the company's seat of manufacturing in the south.
"It doesn't make sense to have oversight of manufacturing 2,000 miles away from where the cars were made," Lentz told The Times. "Geography is the reason not to have our headquarters in California."