2006 Toyota Tacoma Base Crew Cab Pickup 4-door 4.0l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Toyota RAV4 EV lease gets cut in half to $299/month

If you're in the market for a new electric vehicle, now is definitely the time to buy or lease. Following price drops on just about every other EV on the market, Toyota is looking to push a few more all-electric RAV4 crossovers out the door over the Labor Day weekend. The Detroit News is reporting that, through September 3, anyone looking to get into a RAV4 EV in Los Angeles or San Francisco, can get a deal: a $299 a month lease (no word on down payment, though) or zero-percent financing for 60 months for buyers.
The $49,800 RAV4 EV normally leases for twice as much - $599 a month - so this move could be an attempt to sell more of the 2,600 units Toyota has planned to produce. Or maybe, if you thought $599 was a fair price, you can now get two RAV4 Evs. Although temporary, the price drop comes at a time when many other EVs on the market have had their prices reduced, including the Nissan Leaf, Chevy Volt, Smart Fortwo ED and Honda Fit EV, not to mention already low prices for the Fiat 500e and Chevy Spark EV.
*Note: 2012 RAV4 EV pictured here

Does Scion's LA concept presage a US Auris?

When the doors open at the LA Auto Show in a few weeks, Scion will be on hand to showcase its new iM Concept. But considering what little Toyota's youthful brand has revealed about the concept so far, it's led to rampant speculation. And the prevailing wisdom seems to point towards a production iM arriving as a Scion-badged version of the Toyota Auris.
For those unfamiliar, the Auris is to European (and other) markets essentially what the Matrix is (was?) to ours: a hatchback version of the Corolla. The model line was first introduced in 2006, looking in its first iteration like an overgrown version of the contemporary second-gen Yaris, and was replaced with the current model in 2012. It's available as a five-door hatch or wagon, with a range of gasoline, diesel and hybrid powertrains available.
If the rumors - spurred by the similarity of the iM concept's nose depicted in the teasers - prove accurate, and public reception to the idea ends up spurring Toyota to put it into action, it wouldn't be the first overseas Toyota brought over as a Scion. The Scion iQ was sold as the Toyota iQ overseas years before it arrived here.

Ford fights back against patent trolls

Some people are just awful. Some organizations are just as awful. And when those people join those organizations, we get stories like this one, where Ford has spent the past several years combatting so-called patent trolls. According to Automotive News, these malicious organizations have filed over a dozen lawsuits against the company since 2012. They work by purchasing patents, only to later accuse companies of misusing intellectual property, despite the fact that the so-called patent assertion companies never actually, you know, do anything with said intellectual property. AN reports that both Hyundai and Toyota have been victimized by these companies, with the former forced to pay $11.5 million to a company called Clear With Computers. Toyota, meanwhile, settled with Paice LLC, over its hybrid tech. The world's largest automaker agreed to pay $5 million, on top of $98 for every hybrid it sold (if the terms of the deal included each of the roughly 1.5 million hybrids Toyota sold since 2000, the company would have owed $147 million). Including the previous couple of examples, AN reports 107 suits were filed against automakers last year alone. But Ford is taking action to prevent further troubles... kind of. The company has signed on with a firm called RPX, in what sounds strangely like a protection racket. Automakers like Ford pay RPX around $1.5 million each year for access to its catalog of patents, which it spent nearly $1 billion building. "We take the protection and licensing of patented innovations very seriously," Ford told AN via email. "And as many smart businesses are doing, we are taking proactive steps to protect against those seeking patent infringement litigation." What are your thoughts on this? Should this patent business be better managed? Is it reasonable that companies purchase patents only to file suit against the companies that build actual products? Have your say in Comments.