2011 Toyota Corolla S on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Scion was slain by Toyota, not the Great Recession

Scion didn't have to go down like this. Through the magic of hindsight and hubris, it's easier to see what went wrong. And what might have been. What the industry should understand is this: Scion wasn't a losing proposition from the get-go. Its death is due to negligence and apathy. This is more than just the failure of a sub-brand. It's the failure of a company to deliver new and compelling products over an extended period of time. Toyota will point to the Great Recession as the reason it hedged its bets and withdrew funding for new vehicles, instead of using that as an opportunity to redouble efforts. This was as good as a death warrant, although myopically no one realized it at the time. Sadly, GM's Saturn experiment was a road map for this exact form of failure. No one at Toyota seemed to think the Saturn experience was worth protecting their experimental brand from. Or they weren't heard. Brands live and die on product. Somehow, Scion convinced itself that its real success metric was a youthful demographic of buyers. It seems like this was used to gauge the overall health of the brand. Look at the aging and uncompetitive tC, which Scion proudly noted had a 29-year-old average buyer. That fails to take into account its lack of curb appeal and flagging sales. Who cares if the declining number of people buying your cars are younger? Toyota is going to kill the tC thirteen years [And two indifferent generations ... - Ed.] after it was introduced. In that time, Honda has come out with three entirely new generations of the Civic. Scion wasn't a losing proposition from the get-go. Its death is due to negligence and apathy. At launch, the brand could have gone a few different ways. The xB was plucky, interesting, and useful – a tough mix of ephemeral characteristics – but the xA didn't offer much except a thin veneer of self-consciously applied attitude. That's ok; it was cute. Enter the tC, which managed to combine sporty pretensions with decent cost. It took on the Civic Coupe in the contest for coolness, and usually managed to win. More importantly, an explicit brand value early on was a desire to avoid second generations of any of its models, promising a continually evolving and fresh lineup. At this point, the road splits. Down one lane lies the Scion that could have been. After a short but reasonable product lifecycle, it would have renewed the entire lineup.

Toyota and Suzuki are looking at an R&D partnership because they admit they're behind

The Chairman of Suzuki Motor Corporation, Osamu Suzuki, and the President of Toyota, Akio Toyoda, have convened at Toyota's Tokyo offices to declare plans to join hands regarding research and development. According to Toyoda, Toyota "hasn't been good at creating alliances," and its partnership with the small carmaker Daihatsu has been the most well-known collaboration so far. Perhaps the comment has a tinge of regret from Toyota and GM's NUMMI days in Fremont, especially as the statement released by Toyota says that "Toyota is conscious of the fact that it may be behind competitors in North America and Europe when it comes to the establishment of standardizations and partnership with other companies." But as different technologies advance at breakneck speed and it is difficult for companies both big and small to stay competitive, let alone ahead of the game, Toyota is accepting the need for collaboration. Toyoda referred to passenger safety, environmental issues, automated driving, and hydrogen technology, all of which are key challenges for any carmaker looking to stay relevant, and all expensive to experiment with. Spreading the cost over more vehicles should help. "We received an offer from Suzuki regarding collaboration possibilities on advanced and future technologies such as in information technology. Suzuki made a frank proposal to us, and in understanding that Toyota is facing the challenges which I had mentioned earlier, we thought that with the relationship between both companies, there is an opportunity for a business partnership to help solve such challenges. As such, we decided to explore such possibilities together," said Toyoda. In the future, Daihatsu will still be Toyota's tool in emerging markets, but now Toyota could have access to Suzuki's small-car know-how. Osamu Suzuki acknowledges that "Suzuki's current business focuses on minivehicles in Japan and India," as Suzuki withdrew from the US and Canada in 2013. A joint effort will help Suzuki remain relevant, and as a manufacturer of predominantly small vehicles it has been focusing on competitive pricing more than cutting edge technology. Related Video:

2013 Toyota RAV4 earns 'poor' rating in IIHS small overlap crash test [w/video]

When the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety tested a batch of SUVs in its small overlap frontal crash test earlier this year, it held off on putting the Toyota RAV4 in the blender because the new, 2013 model was due to arrive shortly after the test. The new crossover might be better than it was before, but it could still only manage a rating of "Poor" in the test that has been a bugbear for a number of manufacturers.
Among other issues, the IIHS noted that the steering column moved seven inches to the right causing the crash test dummy to practically miss the airbag, the dummy's left foot was trapped in deformed sheetmetal and the dummy's head hit the instrument panel.
The 2013 RAV4 earned the Top Safety Pick rating by scoring well in the Institute's four other tests. A good score in this particular test would have earned it the Top Safety Pick+ rating that is so far only claimed by the 2014 Subaru Forester and 2013 Mitsubishi Outlander Sport in the SUV category. There's a press release below with more details and a video of the test.