1993 Toyota Land Cruiser Base Sport Utility 4-door 4.5l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Toyota, Lexus will offer low-cost automated braking system

First, a technology gets better, then it gets a lot better, then it gets less expensive, then it gets a lot less expensive. Advanced driver safety and convenience systems are about to make that last step thanks to Toyota. Centered around a pre-collision braking system, there will be three suites of driver aids known as Toyota Safety Sense C (TSS C) for compact cars, Toyota Safety Sense P (TSS P) for midsized and premium cars, and Lexus Safety System+ (LSS+) for the luxury brand. TSS C pairs a camera with laser radar to provide a pre-collision system that prompts the driver to brake if it detects an impending accident, and can supply additional braking force and automatically brake between seven and fifty miles per hour. There are also Lane Departure Alert and Automatic High Beam. TSS P pairs a camera with more precise millimeter-wave radar. Starting with the three functions in TSS C, it adds pedestrian pre-collision capability and adaptive cruise control. This one will be available first, coming on the new RAV4 Hybrid and Avalon. TSS - either C or P - will expand to three more vehicles by the end of the year. The wallop is in the price: TSS C will be a $300 option, TSS P will cost $500. Compare the Ford Fusion SE, for instance - it's Driver Assistance Package comes with Lane Departure Warning, Automatic High Beams, it has Lane Keep Assist, Blind Spot and Cross Traffic Detection that neither TSS has, but doesn't have any autonomous braking feature. It costs $1,200, but requires you to add the Technology and Luxury Packages for a total price of $3,165. If you want Autonomous Cruise Control, that's another $995, for $4,160 in total. Instead of $300 or $500 on the Toyota. Lexus' LSS+ will come first on the new RX then spread to four more models by the end of this year, and cost between $500 and $635 to add as an option. It also uses a camera and millimeter-wave radar for its vehicle and pedestrian pre-collision system, lane departure warning and lane keep assist, automatic high beam, and auto cruise control. The similar package on a BMW X5, with no pedestrian component, is $1,200. Toyota says both safety suites will eventually be on "nearly all" of it products and all trim levels by the end of 2017.

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.

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.