2012 Toyota Yaris Le 4dr White On Black Navigation Camera Traction Remotestart on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Audi, Toyota land on MIT's list of 50 Most Disruptive Companies

MIT Technology Review, a magazine all about innovation, has announced its list of the 50 most disruptive companies in 2013, and both Audi and Toyota made the cut. While the term "most disruptive" may carry a negative connotation in most uses (especially in the classroom), the acknowledgement in this case is an accolade, signifying that the company is at the forefront of its industry. In a nutshell, a disruptive company is a business whose innovations force other businesses to alter their strategic direction.
Audi made the list for "pushing autonomous cars closer to fruition with a laser-scanning road detector that fits in a vehicle's front grille," and Toyota for "expanding its dominance of the hybrid-car market with its new plug-in version of the Prius." Click on the image above to be taken to the original graphic at MIT Technology Review, where clickable colored squares reveal information about each of the 50 winners, compiled from a variety of industries.

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.

Jaguar solution to keyless start could save lives

UPDATED: An earlier version of this story indicated the Jaguar keyless start function was meant as a safety feature, when in fact, it is meant as a convenience one and will not work as described if automatic stop/start is not engaged. Today, The New York Times published an article about more than two dozen deaths related to drivers accidentally leaving their cars running, closing their garages and later succumbing to carbon monoxide that flooded their homes. The reason has been identified as "keyless start" features, or proximity entry and push-button start, where owners don't need to physically handle a key or fob to gain entry into the vehicle or start it. It is the latest, and deadliest, issue raised with this system after those related to security and simple inconvenience (for instance, leaving the car at a valet or car wash with the fob in your pocket). From my personal perspective, The New York Times had a rather harsh "evil carmakers" tone throughout the article. This is not a matter of a known faulty component, as with the GM ignition switch recall. This has as much to do with user error where people leave their car without pressing the "off" button and without noticing the engine is still running. About half of the cars in question are produced by Toyota and Lexus, brands that have offered keyless start longer than most. They are also brands with high rates of elderly owners, who seemingly made up a majority of reported deaths and injuries. One fire department in Florida even started a campaign alerting those in the area of the dangers of leaving your car running when it noticed a correlation between an increase in cars equipped with keyless start and calls related to carbon monoxide poisoning. I see several contributing issues at play, most of which go well beyond this particular issue. First is insufficient training of owners by dealers and/or owners not paying close enough attention during this training. Cars are complicated, but you should at least know how basic functions work. Second, woefully inadequate driver training in this country. Third, and with apologies to the AARP, insufficient testing of elderly drivers and/or insufficiently low standards for elderly drivers. If you don't know you have to shut the car off or cannot hear that an engine is running, perhaps you shouldn't be driving. Fourth, re-examining keyless start systems.