The Toyota Prius Funding Quote

Jim Press misspeaks

by Frank de Leeuw van Weenen
April 3, 2008 3:38 PM
Filed Under: Chrysler, Green, Industry, Toyota

Jim Press, ex-Toyota US executive, current President at Chrysler and avid hybrid supporter, has caused a little stir by being quoted in last week's BusinessWeek article on the new CAFE standards.

US car manufacturers are having difficulties in finding ways to reach the new 35mpg levels with their current technologies. Bob Lutz was quoted saying: “We cannot get to 35 miles per gallon with anything resembling the current product portfolio, or with anything resembling current technology.”

Seems that the fuel-efficient technologies are lacking at GM, Ford and Chrysler, so this technology needs to be developed. GM has stepped up and started their Volt Project, but the target sales price of the Volt has just risen by 60% to USD 48,000 from initial estimates of USD 30,000, or at least 33% to USD 40,000 if GM decides to not make any profit on the car.

Which leads us to the Toyota Hybrid technology, where BusinessWeek insinuates that it is unfair that Japanese government (financially) supported the development of alternative technologies and quotes Jim Press saying: “The Japanese government paid for 100% of the development of the battery and hybrid system that went into the Toyota Prius.”

Irv Miller, Group VP at Toyota, responded to this statement by clearly pointing out that: The truth is that the development of Toyota’s Hybrid Synergy Drive system, and the batteries that go with it, was accomplished entirely by Toyota’s in-house R&D and its partner, Panasonic EV, without outside support. Mr. Miller kindly continues to say that Jim Press, after scrolling back through the pages of his memory, will come to the conclusion that he misspoke.

Not much later, thefirehouse, Chrysler's in-house blog, published a post clearing the situation up even further. What Jim Press tried to say was that the Japanese government strongly supports the development of alternative technologies but does not foot the bill, and went on to say that he would like to see similar cooperation in the United States in order to find technological improvements that help give U.S. companies a competitive advantage.

In short, GM, Ford and Chrysler are going to have to spend some big money in order to reach the 35 mpg CAFE standard by 2020 while some of their competitors will have a much easier time reaching the target.

Source: Toyota, Chrysler and BusinessWeek

share | email to a friend | print | add a comment

Comments

another repeat of the 70's. The Japs had small cars and the domestics were heading in the opposite direction with the muscle cars. Foreign companies have higher safety standards including stronger roofs and active and passive roll bars. Domestic companies had to be forced by the federal government to require safety belts, airbags and recently ESC. Now there want help with alternative energy just like the oil companies.

Reply | Report Abuse

by eddie | April 3, 2008 5:55 PM

lol at picture. But to the article. GM wants to continue making big vehicles. Why? Because their target demographic likes to buy big vehicles, I like big vehicles and so do most people I know (yes I live in a hick part of the world). The prius isn't super "technology" its just a frickin small car with a tiny engine, if they cut the weight of the batteries and motors by removing the hybrid system I wouldn't be surprised if it had the same or even better fuel economy/performance. That being said, it's not the car companies that have to change. It's peoples buying habits and views as to what makes a good car. Once that changes, GM will realize it can't keep building big. But until then, long live the American muscle car! I know I will be consuming my fair share of fuel until it becomes over $5 a liter.

Reply | Report Abuse

by Joe_Limon | April 3, 2008 6:02 PM

...or we can take advantage of clean diesel engines just like Europe does...many 4cyl diesel engines in small cars meet and a few exceed the mpg of the hybrids with pollution equal or less than their gasoline engine counterparts. Diesels or the new Diesotto engine technology needs to be advanced quickly until we can make further progress on fuel cell/batteries tech. The other answers are obvious but painful for the US automakers in particular. Lower the weight of your vehicles using stronger/lighter metals and increasing carbon fiber technology. ...and as Chrysler has said so often lately - Rightsize your vehicle portfolio. Trucks and SUVs will always have a place in America but they cannot make up more than probably a third of your entire vehicle line. That is Detroit's problem. Too many trucks/SUVs and not enough smaller, fuel efficient...interesting...cars. It's a new day for automakers due to the petroleum reserves shrinking. GM, Ford, Chrysler had better create a vehicle line that is heavy on smaller/midsize cars with fuel efficient engine options or they will end up being owned by Toyota. It's going to hurt lets get it over with now so that american car companies can remain competitive. My next car will be a clean diesel with lots of torque...after that hybrids/electric cars will most likely be reliable enough and priced right so that they are in more & more driveways...

Reply | Report Abuse

by Benzian | April 3, 2008 7:43 PM

You can point to Diesotto as the holy grail of engine techs, yes it is cool but man thats going to take a lot of money to perfect. I doubt North American automotive companies are willing to go with this technology. On the basis of how much it will cost to implement. Those engines are crazy, the amount of variable features is just asking for something to go wrong. Unless you pump hundreds of millions of dollars into research and development you won't be able to produce a diesotto engine that is reliable and cheap (to manufacture). If these engines aren't reliable or cheap, could you imagine the repair bill "yes I was wondering how much it would cost to replace my variable geometry turbo"... But as for diesel. That would be a technology worth pursuing in the short term, but with diesel prices higher then gasoline prices in North America, the average consumer would rather own a gasoline powered car.

Reply | Report Abuse

by Joe_Limon | April 3, 2008 7:24 PM

It is interesting that middle east is investing billions with Spain's Solar thermal tech in Europe and the USA, so they have an ideal what is going to happen to oil in the future. The USA wants to continue to make gas guzzlers and minimal investments in alternative energy. I was recently in France and could not believe all the wind generators as well as clean efficient Bullet trains traveling 200mph. Where is the USA in all of this!

Reply | Report Abuse

by eddie | April 3, 2008 9:47 PM

you should check out the wind fields in southern alberta. There are thousands and thousands of them. And they are freakin huge. http://offthegrid.1337hax0r.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/11/albertawindfarms.jpg

Reply | Report Abuse

by Joe_Limon | April 3, 2008 10:43 PM

Take a drive on the 81 from New York to Philly and you'll find plenty of wind mills. My former employer engineered a solar heating system in 70's. Seams like they are many more high horse power gas guzzlers from Europe, they are paying multi-million dollar CAFE fines since 2000. BMW and M&B are the worst offenders. No US or Japanese auto makers have ever been fined for this type of violation

Reply | Report Abuse

by dcars62 | April 4, 2008 2:47 AM

The vehicle Jim Press is standing next to is taller than him! Sure people like to drive big cars but it's time to get real. Plenty of these 'trucks' are used for supermarket and school runs where as a Ford Mondeo or Minivan (preferably with a high efficiency diesel) is the way the US needs to go ASAP. The addiction to big vehicles = more dead US service people (not to mention the poor locals) in oil rich countries and/or higher food prices for the world's poor as more food crops are poured into the biofuel tanks of monster SUVs.

Reply | Report Abuse

by Lutzie | April 6, 2008 12:56 PM