Toyota Mirai Fuel Cell

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

RegGuheert

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 19, 2012
Messages
6,419
Location
Northern VA
It doesn't seem to have a name yet, but there is already approximate pricing!?

Anyway, here is a new article in TransportEvolved.
TransportEvovled said:
After months of hype, Toyota has unveiled its 2015 Hydrogen Fuel Cell Sedan, the first mass-produced fuel cell vehicle to go on sale in the world. Based on the Hydrogen Fuel Cell concept car unveiled by Toyota at last year’s Tokyo Motor Show, it will go on sale in Japan next year at an approximate price of ¥7 million (£40, 464, $68,703, or €50,482).
 
TomT said:
Could they have made it any less attractive?! It's almost as if Toyota doesn't WANT anyone to buy it...

haha. At least people will finally stop bitching about how the Leaf looks.
 
TomT said:
Could they have made it any less attractive?! It's almost as if Toyota doesn't WANT anyone to buy it...

But it costs as much as a Model S! Sure, it probably has a 12-second 0-60 and looks like an econo-box, but it's in the same class because it costs the same! Just wait for all the press comparing the two as equals.

EDIT: Oh, and be prepared for the range comparisons, with this thing's 430-mile Japanese test cycle (where the Leaf get's like 140 miles) vs Tesla's 260-mile EPA rating.
 
RegGuheert said:
I'm betting they will never sell a single one in the U.S. but will rather only lease them.
It would be interesting to see what they'll do.

With RAV4EV - they could have easily done just leases - but chose to sell it as well (perhaps reverberations of EV1 saga).
 
evnow said:
RegGuheert said:
I'm betting they will never sell a single one in the U.S. but will rather only lease them.
It would be interesting to see what they'll do.

With RAV4EV - they could have easily done just leases - but chose to sell it as well (perhaps reverberations of EV1 saga).
Perhaps with the Rav4EV they have an agreement with Tesla to supply parts for the future. It might be a much more difficult proposition to maintain parts for the "Fuel Cell Sedan".

I hear the technology is advancing very rapidly! ;)
 
The "big six" Large Vehicle Manufacturers (LVM) auto manufacturers of the world (Toyota, Honda, Nissan, GM, Ford, Fiat/Chrysler) were required to begin the modern day CARB-ZEV rules, starting in 2012. That's is exactly what Toyota did with Rav4 EV.

They will produce 2600 Rav4 EV's for model years 2012-2014. Toyota sells about 300,000 cars per year in California, therefore over three years, there are 900,000 oil burner cars sold.

The current 0.79% credits rule of Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) sales means 7110 credits over three model years. Each Rav4 EV earns 3 credits each, so 2370 battery electric cars solve that over the three model years.

But, the 9 credit hydrogen car need only 790 individual sales over three model years, or 263 per each model year during 2015 - 2017.

Things will get more dire by 2025, however if the 9 credits for hydrogen are retained (they are scheduled to disappear in 2018), then Toyota would only have to sell 5,333 hydrogen cars per year IN CALIFORNIA ONLY (none in the several other CARB-ZEV states) without any battery electric cars sold, even at 16% of total credits in model year 2025!!!!

That's about the current 2 month sales of the LEAF in the USA, and perhaps 3-6 months of the current California only LEAF sales. Again, I'm talking about 2025 model year ZEV compliance with nothing but a hydrogen car with California tax payer funded refueling stations.

Hydrogen is WIN - WIN for Toyota and others in the hydrogen camp that really don't wish to be in the ZEV game.

Model year ---- ZEV Credit % of total annual sales

2012 ------------ 0.79%
2018 ------------ 2.00%
2019 ------------ 4.00%
2020 ------------ 6.00%
2021 ------------ 8.00%
2022 ----------- 10.00%
2023 ----------- 12.00%
2024 ----------- 14.00%
2025 ----------- 16.00%
 
Better keep selling RAV4EV as that FCV will be lucky to sell 2 per month after the market is saturated with the first dozen.
I thought the look was just the concept... it looks bad when it needs to look futuristic or even just average.
JMHO
 
smkettner said:
Better keep selling RAV4EV as that FCV will be lucky to sell 2 per month after the market is saturated with the first dozen.
I thought the look was just the concept... it looks bad when it needs to look futuristic or even just average.
JMHO

I'm confident they can find 263 buyers per each model year during 2015 - 2017. That could be one fleet sale to the state of California, or some university, or a utility, or Google, etc.

Easy Peasy
 
TonyWilliams said:
The "big six" Large Vehicle Manufacturers (LVM) auto manufacturers of the world (Toyota, Honda, Nissan, GM, Ford, Fiat/Chrysler) were required to begin the modern day CARB-ZEV rules, starting in 2012.
<snip for brevity>
Tony, thanks for your persistence in posting information about how CARB rules work! It really helps me to understand some of the motivations behind the actions that these car companies take!
 
TomT said:
Could they have made it any less attractive?! It's almost as if Toyota doesn't WANT anyone to buy it...
I think that's just the concept car they've been schlepping around to auto shows. I can't imagine Toyota producing anything so awkward looking in this day and age, although I can remember Toyota Crowns from the late '60s/early '70s, when they did.

That Japan price presumably includes VAT, 8% this year and 10% next, plus whatever other taxes Japan imposes.
 
I actually don't think the concept car looks so bad in person. :oops:

What Tony said, re CARB-related motivations. Much smaller programs required if OEMs take the FCV route, and reports of H2 lobbying have been particularly intense in recent months...

(As an aside, the ED of the CA Fuel Cell Partnership just moved back into CARB staff: http://cafcp.org/getinvolved/stayconnected/blog/cafcp’s_catherine_dunwoody_moving_new_role_arb )

Like Reg, I too, expect they'll be lease-only, which will allow them to fabricate an attractive lease payment if they choose. CARB is also considering boosting the CVRP rebate for FCVs because they're so expensive, which would be magnified if applied to a lease as cap cost reduction. (I can only imagine if Tesla had made that case!)
 
RegGuheert said:
TonyWilliams said:
The "big six" Large Vehicle Manufacturers (LVM) auto manufacturers of the world (Toyota, Honda, Nissan, GM, Ford, Fiat/Chrysler) were required to begin the modern day CARB-ZEV rules, starting in 2012.
<snip for brevity>
Tony, thanks for your persistence in posting information about how CARB rules work! It really helps me to understand some of the motivations behind the actions that these car companies take!

It's one thing when the general public asks why a car like the Rav4 EV isn't sold in their state (except California) and it makes sense to them that if they just shipped them everywhere, they would "sell more" and make money. But, that's not going to happen, and the California ARB (CARB) and to a lesser degree the EPA are the reasons why.

What's frustrating is hearing those sentiments from regular (mostly informed) posters on the various forums. That's what keeps me going, because if you understand the "enemy", you know how to defeat the enemy.

Toyota has publicly stated that they don't expect hydrogen cars to be on par with electric cars until 2030. That's their best case scenario. If you think how far batteries have come in the past 15 years, it's pretty exciting to think where they'll be in 15 more.

At the low volume of ALL hydrogen cars through that period (2020-2030), I think it would take a MIRACLE (or four miracles, if you believe the former Secretary of Energy) to even be in the running with battery cars.

Wait until the subsidizes disappear from "free" hydrogen, and folks have to pay the equivalent of $6 per gallon of gas. Those "free" Superchargers that BMW, Nissan and Tesla are using are going to look REALLY good.
 
evchels said:
CARB is also considering boosting the CVRP rebate for FCVs because they're so expensive, which would be magnified if applied to a lease as cap cost reduction. (I can only imagine if Tesla had made that case!)


Hydrogen gets numerous regulatory benefits that battery electrics won't share:

It has been proposed to reduce the CA Battery EV rebate to $2000 (from the current $2500) for Fiscal Year 2014-2015, which starts on July 1, 2014.

The hydrogen car state rebate will be $5,000.

The staff (CARB) is proposing to limit lifetime rebates to two for individuals, retroactive.

However, they're also proposing an exemption for anyone who wants to upgrade to an FCEV but has otherwise maxed out their rebates.

Also, as a contingency measure to keep from running out of money, they suggest giving the Executive Officer "the ability to reduce or eliminate rebates for some PHEVs based on all-electric range, if necessary, to help align expected demand with remaining budgetary constraints". No such option to limit hydrogen.

And, of course, the most CARB-ZEV credits for hydrogen cars with 9 credits each, while battery electric cars typically get 3, up to a maximum of 7.

CA ARB will consider the funding plan on June 26. More info here:

http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/aqip/fundplan/fundplan.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
 
evchels said:
I actually don't think the concept car looks so bad in person. :oops:
If this article

http://insideevs.com/toyota-reveals-70000-fuel-cell-sedan-sales-japan-april-2015-shortly-after-in-europe-us/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

is correct, that really IS what it will look like. If accurate, I'm almost speechless. Even Subaru, in their worst days (I'm talking waaaay beyond the B9 Tribeca), never put into production anything with such oddball proportions and polarizing styling for so many people.
 
GRA said:
evchels said:
I actually don't think the concept car looks so bad in person. :oops:
If this article

http://insideevs.com/toyota-reveals-70000-fuel-cell-sedan-sales-japan-april-2015-shortly-after-in-europe-us/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

is correct, that really IS what it will look like. If accurate, I'm almost speechless. Even Subaru, in their worst days (I'm talking waaaay beyond the B9 Tribeca), never put into production anything with such oddball proportions and polarizing styling for so many people.

What evchels means is that in person it doesn't look that bad.

In any case, why would Toyota care - if they just want to lease a few hundred a year ?
 
evnow said:
GRA said:
evchels said:
I actually don't think the concept car looks so bad in person. :oops:
If this article

http://insideevs.com/toyota-reveals-70000-fuel-cell-sedan-sales-japan-april-2015-shortly-after-in-europe-us/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

is correct, that really IS what it will look like. If accurate, I'm almost speechless. Even Subaru, in their worst days (I'm talking waaaay beyond the B9 Tribeca), never put into production anything with such oddball proportions and polarizing styling for so many people.

What evchels means is that in person it doesn't look that bad.
I know what she meant, and I'll have to take her word for it for the moment (just as I have to take some people's word that the i3 isn't as butt ugly in person as it appears in pictures, because I haven't seen one yet). Besides, looks are all subjective.

evnow said:
In any case, why would Toyota care - if they just want to lease a few hundred a year ?
The market for them at that price, and with the current limited infrastructure, is going to be small in any case, so why limit it even further by using some extremely unusual, not to say bizarre, styling cues? I mean, what exactly is the point with that whole 'hood lifted off the fenders' gimmick? And the nose side intakes look like they were stolen from a F-18. Then someone apparently decided that one side crease wasn't enough, so it's got two, the second curving down the rear fender and extending across the fuel filler door, and looking at the video I realized those fenders reminded me of the Echo/1st Gen Prius, not a good thing.

The steeply dropping rear roof line looks like backseat headroom is going to be limited, and only the rear view doesn't make me gag or cry "what the hell were they thinking?!" To me it's a mish mash, a camel designed by a _drunken_ committee. YMMV.
 
GRA said:
Besides, looks are all subjective.

This is really the point, re aesthetics. Just about any car on the road will be deemed good-looking or ugly by someone. The LEAF has been pretty polarizing itself, especially early on. As was the Prius. The Juke. And oh my goodness, the Cross Cab Murano....the list is endless.

But I agree with evnow that when production is limited as much as this one is likely to be, an automaker can take more risk in this regard. They only have to find a small number of people who find it attractive (or don't care what it looks like, as is the case for some EV drivers too). And a hydrogen vehicle will only be an emotional/values-driven purchase/lease in the near term; there's not much chance that it'll be a more pragmatic choice than its alternatives. So those who choose it are likelier to want it to be very distinctive looking so that it gets noticed.

And to put an even finer point on it, I'm not convinced Toyota cares how many people like its looks or want to buy it.
 
Back
Top