Topic: Toyota -- 600 million per year to make all Flex-Fuel?????

[1outlaw]

Oh Sure I believe Toyota just keeps losing credibility. AND- if it could possibly even cost $300 per vehicle with total engineering, parts upgrade, and warranty-- if all in a market have to have it then not only does the costs/unit go down but the selling prices even out totally negating the minimal added costs. Get with it Toyota before you lose what little consumer confidence you still have. OH- and BTW- what is your current problems going to cost you where you cut corners and influenced regulators while other manufacturers tried to "tow the line" with the higher costs of doing business as required while you stuffed your pockets and took advantage?

http://detnews.com/article/20100225/AUTO01/2250447/Toyota-concerned-flex-fuel-mandates-could-cost-it-$600M-yearly

Toyota concerned flex-fuel mandates could cost it $600M yearly
David Shepardson / Detroit News Washington Bureau
Washington -- Toyota Motor Corp. executives worried last summer about what it perceived as an emerging uneven playing field in the United States, and said new fuel requirements could cost it up to $600 million annually.

The concerns were included in the release by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee of what appears to be the complete, 28-page version of a now infamous memo prepared for the company's new North American president Yoshi Inaba in July 2009 -- on his second day on the job.

Other parts of that presentation became public earlier this week, and revealed the automaker as bragging about its success in avoiding or delaying costly regulatory actions, including widespread safety recalls.
 
The newly released pages reveal the depth of Toyota's concern over flexible-fuel vehicle mandates. Flexible-fuel vehicles can run on traditional fuel blends or E85, which is made of 85 percent ethanol and 15 percent gasoline.

Toyota said flex-fuel mandates could cost the company $200 to $300 per vehicle -- or $400 million to $600 million annually.

The presentation featured a photograph of President Barack Obama and included a quote from his campaign literature:

"Barack Obama and Joe Biden will work with Congress and auto companies to ensure that all new vehicles have FFV capability."

The presentation noted that Toyota had avoided the requirements so far.

It noted that Toyota had beaten back attempts to make last summer's "cash for clunkers" program apply to only North American-built vehicles. Toyota was the biggest beneficiary of the program that grew to $3 billion.

The presentation called the program a "conquest" for Toyota.

It also worried about the impact of a measure dubbed "card check," which would make it easier for workers to unionize. Toyota has managed to avoid unionization of its U.S. plants.

Delaying the legislation was chalked up in the memo as another "win" for Toyota.

Separately, Toyota's president Akio Toyoda and Inaba met with Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood for 30 minutes this morning at the department's headquarters.

The meeting, which included National Highway Traffic Safety Administration chief David Strickland, was "productive and focused on the importance of safety and working cooperatively to protect consumers in the U.S.," the department said in a statement.

One recommendation made by Toyota's Washington office, to accelerate decision-making in the United States, appeared to go unheeded. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration was critical of the inability of Toyota officials in the United States to make decisions, saying it often took too long to get decisions from Japan on recalls and other issues.

The Toyota internal presentation urged establishment of a "small senior exec. group in U.S. to make timely decisions," and initiate action on legislative and regulatory issues. It also noted the benefit of having engineers in Washington.

"Many issues require immediate (or near immediate) response," the presentation said. "Provide quick response based on daily communication with (Toyota in Japan) and ... to educate lawmakers to have reasonable legislation and regulation."

Toyota said this week it is adding more engineers in the United States and at least three new engineering centers.

Other newly revealed parts of the internal presentation explain the company's concerns about the $85 billion auto industry bailout.

"Government $ for GM/Chrysler," the presentation read. "Not a level playing field."

The presentation said there were "adverse implications" for Toyota of government support for bankrupt GM and Chrysler.

Ironically, Japan is considered one of the world's most closed markets for non-Japanese automakers.

The presentation noted that Ford Motor Co, Tesla Motors Inc. and Nissan Motor Co had received $7 billion in Energy Department retooling loans.

Toyota executives also were worried about "Buy American" attitudes being "on the rise," as well as import taxes, border tariffs and support for auto suppliers.

The company fretted over the impact of new consumer financial regulation on its lending arm, Toyota Motor Credit.

dshepardson@detnews.com (202) 662-8735



From The Detroit News: http://detnews.com/article/20100225/AUTO01/2250447/Toyota-concerned-flex-fuel-mandates-could-cost-it-$600M-yearly#ixzz0gfQdCJnb

[cessna]

Talking about conspiracy, propaganda against Toyota on the gas pedal problem----lots of Toyotas around my area and I've never heard of a problem. Is it something about the Midwest air? Is it a ploy to get people switched back to GM?

[fleebut]

Toyota wants to wants to portray themselves as spending their valuable corporate money on desires of U.S. government. The $300 figure probably an oranges and apples comparison to what GM stated. The devil is in the details. My guess Toyota took an estimate of hardware, labor burden rate to install, and spread the entire cost of overhead to administer, engineer, R&D, and testing over a year or two of production. GM was referring to hardware only.

Probably to easy and loose assessment to portray as a Left or Environmental current to the battering of Toyota. The event very sensational upon news and the Green web sites. The people who just a few months ago were condemning CEO Wagner and dinosaur GM, proudly proclaiming they would never buy vehicles from this company. They flipped. The ones proudly driving Prius with bumper stickers are now the most condemning of Toyota. What gives? I really don’t know? Think back on the Ford Firestone tire SUV rollover. More deaths attributed to this phenomenon. The press when nuts with that story too. I suspect it’s a Trial Lawyer phenomenon. Meaning since I was a kid the short narrow wheelbase of Jeeps were killing machines. Even experienced drivers. Like everyone knew cigarettes cause lung cancer and extremely bad unhealthy habit. But when Trial Lawyers forming a jury these news media stories go berserk with sensationalism. Likes it’s just a new discovery. I know the legal teams busy feeding the media tantalizing propaganda of some corporate world conspiracy. Is this too saucy and popular a story to not pump up? Kind of like a sex story?

I do follow some Green blog sites. Some good info. This may be the quazi political current hurting ethanol. Every Green site, with green in the label pooh poohs ethanol as a distraction. They quickly use ’95 stats to declare the whole planet would have to be planted with corn to fuel our vehicles….so don’t waste our time. Mostly these folks love solar, wind turbines and minimalist living. They “know” battery cars will be inexpensive in 10 years with drastically cheaper fuel. They don’t even like hybrids. We should ride the bus, walk, or drive an electric golf cart. Raising vegetables and some chickens. It’s the Mother Earth dream. And I do read and subscribe to mother earth, but lots of fantasy.

[SacramentoE-85]

I think fleebut meant more "environmentalist" than "lefty," though once he did say "left."  Fleebut, if you want to modify to remove "left" and leave as "environmentalist..."  Most readers are going to know which side of the aisle most self-proclaimed "environmentalists" seem to populate anyway...

As a fairly conservative person, I do take exception to anyone saying that I can't be environmental as well.  I "conserve" energy and water, recycle, use lower impact products, farm with no-till (small-scale with JD 3010 tractor using biodiesel and 6-row planter), do not use irrigation for crops, and of course use E85.  Actually I think that determines me as quite more "environmentalist" than someone that drives a Prius...   

Hey, more on topic--aren't the auto manufacturers actually getting an environmental $ incentive in the way of CAFE anyway, by making these FFV's?  Which Toyota is accomplishing through hybrids?  So they CHOSE to go with hybrids instead of FFV's, and are getting the same incentive as GM anyway...not out anything at all, compared to the competition, if they switch to FFV's, right?   

[Dan M]

Is it really that difficult to keep left right center politics out of every thread?
This isn't a  left right issue ..it is about Toyota claiming 600 million a year to make to put out FFVs.. Watch the Youtube Video of Video of GM's Tom Stephens ..he says " GM Spends $100 million a year on FFVs".  We all know Toyota is blowing smoke about the costs ..nice to hear GM stating more realistic numbers.


 As far as the recalls..I don't trust any of the Auto Makers.. they all have recalls ..recalls are nothing new.. they all try and hide and minimize their recalls. again nothing new, they all have made vehicles that if the "defect" occurs can and has killed drivers/passengers.. again ..it is Nothing new.

It isn't lefty ..it isn't righty.. it is corporations ..all of them trying to mitigate their risk exposure..so lets not  bring the same old political nonsense lefty right nonsense in ..

Lets just try and stay on topic..if people want to talk politics and blame lefty or righty .. feel free to do thatin Off Topics and Politcal Topics Category .. http://e85vehicles.com/e85/index.php/board,13.0.html

Ya, the cost isn't hardware. It's the testing and record keeping to appease EPA. It's the liability CYA  risk.  Auto manufactures regulated to standstill. Very risky to change. And don't forget when carping upon the U.S. market, ethanol mandates an easy target. IOW....you folks upon government costing us at Toyota people money.

But to my astonishment "What happened"

Toyota was the darling of the left environmentalist. Remember the condemnation of U.S. manufactures and how they built those
SUVs. The vitriol was constant. Toyota was the darling, those hybrid autos so sensible. Their quality and compassion of working folk superb. Most of the country (upon mainstream media) loved their Toyota's. The management of GM was ignorant and  backward. Yet, the product line the left so in love with was their creation. What the heck is going on? These people are hard to figure out?

[fleebut]

Ya, the cost isn't hardware. It's the testing and record keeping to appease EPA. It's the liability CYA  risk.  Auto manufactures regulated to standstill. Very risky to change. And don't forget when carping upon the U.S. market, ethanol mandates an easy target. IOW....you folks upon government costing us at Toyota people money.

But to my astonishment "What happened"

Toyota was the darling of the left environmentalist. Remember the condemnation of U.S. manufactures and how they built those
SUVs. The vitriol was constant. Toyota was the darling, those hybrid autos so sensible. Their quality and compassion of working folk superb. Most of the country (upon mainstream media) loved their Toyota's. The management of GM was ignorant and  backward. Yet, the product line the left so in love with was their creation. What the heck is going on? These people are hard to figure out?

[rusty70f100]

I wonder how much of that $300 / vehicle goes to getting new emissions certifications?  Don't they have to be retested when they go to a new or different fuel?

[TD]

The point that they (and you) are missing is that ALL the auto makers have had or will, have this same expense and it's a known technology, nothing new. They are all on the same playing field, it's just that a few have a head start.

[SacramentoE-85]

Very good point--why don't they mention how much it would cost to build ALL of their vehicles as hybrids/plug-in electric!!!...   

[rufus]

The Japanese made their anti-ethanol bets a few years ago.  If ethanol succeeds, now, they're behind. 

They bet on batteries, but it never occurred to them that all Americans don't live in L.A., or New York.

[1outlaw]

If every car in the market had FFV capabilities then the added costs will be passed on to consumers anyway- It is then not an added cost that is not passed thru. Why is Toyota howling- they have put less into than the old "big three" and likely feel disadvantaged- oh boo-hoo.

If the concern is that an extra $75 per vehicle cost will cause consumers pain- then this could only be an issue in the cheapest econo models if at all- put crank windows on the driver doors, leave out some of the minimal fancies that are in even this low level of vehicle base model.

If we get all to FFV production, we get more E85 stations, more competition in the E85 stations, and then we should get automaker competition/attention to efficient E85 engine tech. OH- and if they would ever make a dedicated E85 engine it would not be required to be flex-fuel anyway

[Dan M]

Simply add the lousy $100 to the cost of the car..

I say get rid of power locks and windows and add flex fuel. Probably save money. The 2000 Buick drivers power window doesn't work right now so when I go up to a mailbox or bank driveup I have to open the door. The very few times a year I do this isn't worth the effort to fix it. Wish it had cranks like the old days.

Just the opposite cessna..the Old Nissan Truck has the cranks ..and of course they dont work ..they bind and crud is in the tracks .. I'm missing good old power windows 


Obviously depending on the vehicle of course ..but the power window modules are fairly inexpensive (salvage yard picks) and easy installs..?   had to change one of the Chev Blazer once ..that seemed pretty easy anyways

anyway.. ..the bottom line is the cost is minor to add FFV in the over all costs of vehicles.....why don't they look at it as  opportunity to make money.. costs $100 .. charge $150 again on a vehicle costs tens of thousands no one is going to know or care about $100-150

[cessna]

 

Simply add the lousy $100 to the cost of the car..

I say get rid of power locks and windows and add flex fuel. Probably save money. The 2000 Buick drivers power window doesn't work right now so when I go up to a mailbox or bank driveup I have to open the door. The very few times a year I do this isn't worth the effort to fix it. Wish it had cranks like the old days.

[Dan M]

This isn't anything new ..ALL the Auto Makers have said the same thing in the Past including all the US Auto Makers...



Around 2 million Toyotas a year sold in the US if they all have to be FFVs..you are looking at roughly $100 per vehicle 200 Million a year ..   So yeah they fudged  a bit ...nothing new they all do it


The REALITY though is that is wont cost them or GM , Or Ford or any of them even 1 penny . ..

Simply add the lousy $100 to the cost of the car..


Anyone spending tens of thousands on a vehicle isn't going to care about a measly $100 ..

[SacramentoE-85]

Yeah, I don't get the "One World" or "New Order" aka U.N. philosophy.  Toyota once was involved with helping to kill our soldiers, only a handful of decades ago.  Hummer helps the U.S. kill enemy soldiers today.  Surely German autos were used against us in the past.  You can bet that China will build an immense auto industry in coming decades--will they turn it against us or our allies?  How about that tainted lead paint in our children's toys, melamine in food, etc.?

Look at what Toyota was doing to us even now--taking advantage of our government programs and killing off U.S. citizens while laughing all the way to the bank.  One can make an argument that they only put several factories here to gain "U.S.-ness" for their automobiles, gain U.S. political power, take a stab at the more costly unionized U.S. auto manufacturers, etc.

My how the times have changed?...   

One World?   

Now Toyota spews this lie about it costing $600 billion ($300 per vehicle) to manufacture EVERY car as FFV.  That's a heck of a lot of spin.  It's not like they have to have 100% FFV's.  And look at Californian Dave Stoltz--he converted his 1984 Toyota truck very cost effectively mostly with just larger jets in the carburetor.  He certainly didn't spend $300--and that's with 1984 technology!   

Youtube of Toyota (Lexus) accelerator stuck, killing U.S. citizens:

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03m7fmnhO0I" target="_blank" class="aeva_link bbc_link new_win">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03m7fmnhO0I</a>

A bunch of similar stories in the comments to this article.

http://www.autoevolution.com/news/four-dead-due-to-toyota-stuck-accelerator-pedal-11598.html

[James48843]

You would think that a company like Toyota would have more to be worried about than flex-fuel, or whether or not Unions get card check. After all, now with the recent Supreme Court ruling, corporations are going to be pouring a lot more money into politicians.

But that' s what your money goes if you buy a Toyota.  To fight flex-fuel, to fight workers rights, to fight safety investigations, and to make sure you get more than "your fair share" of any future cash for clunker program to haul all that cash back to Japan in wheel barrows.

But what more can you expect from a company that was a leading manufacturer of trucks during the Second World War?

Toyota trucks were primary movers of men and material in China and in the Phillipines, where they hauled ammunition to kill Americans, British, Chinese, and other assorted allied forces.