Automotive News [AN, sub] reckons it’s got the inside line on Toyota’s “new U.S. plan.” They’re so chuffed with the scoop that their article presents the bulleted battle plan in both the body text and a little gray box. And here it is: “Review and possibly trim the lineup of full-frame trucks; Skip midcycle vehicle enhancements to focus on bigger launches; Introduce more hybrids to North America; Give U.S. engineers a bigger voice in r&d.” AN reckons the headline is the potential truck trimming and hybrid adding bit. Which is certainly important news for a company with a “tattered image” (Toyota, apparently, not the American zombies clinging to profits via pickups, who’ve yet to produce a single large-volume hybrid vehicle). But what of ToMoCo leaving existing vehicles as is for longer?
Toyota will drop minor model changes and make a bigger deal of model changes when they do occur. That will happen more, even if it means delaying launches, said Yukitoshi Funo, an executive vice president who now oversees emerging markets. He formerly headed North American operations.
“We are going to have a smaller number of production actions so that each of those has more impact,” Funo said in a separate interview. “Instead of cosmetic changes, we may have more fundamental changes, though it may require a little longer time.”
Executives cited midcycle face-lifts to items such as grilles, headlamps, bumpers and interior colors as tweaks that might get passed over.
Oh dear. Is this cost-cutting run amok or a fundamental misunderstanding of the American automotive business? Yes. By sacrificing cosmetic changes for cost savings, Toyota fails to see the importance of fashion in their core demographic. Maybe they’ve bought into the motorhead meme that their products are appliances, and nothing more. If so, Toyota has just opened the door a bit wider for their American competition. Well, any automaker fast enough to outpace them with regular style updates.
Sounds like a wrong move... unless they are willing to refresh each car every 4 years rather than 5 or 6 years. A mid model change can be a game changer sometimes... just look at the Ford Fusion.
Sounds like a wrong move... unless they are willing to refresh each car every 4 years rather than 5 or 6 years. A mid model change can be a game changer sometimes... just look at the Ford Fusion.
Ford is actually the wrong example to use, the 2010 Fusion isn't really a mid-cycle refresh, its a new design using the same platform. The prime example of a mid-cycle refresh being done extremely well is by...Hyundai and Kia.
I thought the 2007 and 2008 Hyundai Sonatas were really mediocre cars with the Kia Magentis being extremely bland, I didn't like driving the 2007 Elantras, the 2007-2008 Kia Rio in my mind were terrible all around. Now...I actually think the 2009 Sonata is a good car with a significantly better interior, improved driving dynamics and a much better stereo. On the outside it looked pretty similar but the differences inside were much more profound. Same story with the Accent, Rio, Magentis and Elantra, the 2009 and 2010 versions of these are so much better. On originally flawed cars, these mid-cycle refreshes can help make cars much better.
Toyota's mid-cycle refreshes barely change the car much, maybe a slight styling change but even in the old days most of these changes barely made a difference overall. Other than the silly plastic pieces on the steering wheel and a mild exterior change...my dad's 2004 Avalon is exactly the same as his 2000. If this means more money for better cars, I wouldn't mind Toyota just leaving the current version of the car the same in order to engineer a better next version.
"Yes. By sacrificing cosmetic changes for cost savings, Toyota fails to see the importance of fashion in their core demographic."
I thought this quote from Farago was a bit stupid. I've never found a Toyota car that had a refresh version massively better looking than the previous design. I thought the main criticism of Toyota's styling was it was mostly bland...if so then mid-cycle refreshes have not been the solution since Toyota has done this well over 25 years ago.
Jegan_V: Maybe its semantics but the 2010 Fusion is the same car as the year before but with a modified front and back styling. The middle section remains unchanged. The interior is significantly updated and new engines/transmissions were added. Its a relatively major mid cycle refresh but its still considered the same Fusion... Ford wants a replacement in a couple of years. The 2010 Fusion refresh is similar to the 2009 Sonata refresh as far as I can tell. Maybe I'm missing something you're trying to say... if so I apologise! But I don't see the difference between what Ford did and Hyundai did.
Either way those were excellent updates to cars they already had. Much needed ones too. You are right that Toyota has failed at the mid-cycle refresh game somewhat. A few cosmetic tweaks... here and there. The 2010 Camry was a pretty good one mind you... updated engine and transmission was definitely needed. I still think they need to stay in the game and update halfway through the run.... But I suppose if it means that they can roll out a redesign a year sooner or something like that then the plan could work. Toyota does have some work ahead of it... I get the feeling that in some areas they have fallen behind the competition.
Jegan_V: Maybe its semantics but the 2010 Fusion is the same car as the year before but with a modified front and back styling. The middle section remains unchanged. The interior is significantly updated and new engines/transmissions were added. Its a relatively major mid cycle refresh but its still considered the same Fusion... Ford wants a replacement in a couple of years. The 2010 Fusion refresh is similar to the 2009 Sonata refresh as far as I can tell. Maybe I'm missing something you're trying to say... if so I apologise! But I don't see the difference between what Ford did and Hyundai did.
Either way those were excellent updates to cars they already had. Much needed ones too. You are right that Toyota has failed at the mid-cycle refresh game somewhat. A few cosmetic tweaks... here and there. The 2010 Camry was a pretty good one mind you... updated engine and transmission was definitely needed. I still think they need to stay in the game and update halfway through the run.... But I suppose if it means that they can roll out a redesign a year sooner or something like that then the plan could work. Toyota does have some work ahead of it... I get the feeling that in some areas they have fallen behind the competition.
Now that I read a bit more into it...my assumption that the 2010 Ford Fusion used the CD3-2 was incorrect leading me to think it was a new design instead of a massive update. They really fooled me, I know the 2010 drives more differently than the older Fusion. I guess its like the 2008+ Focus still using the C170 instead of the C1.
As for engine, transmission updates I would hope they continue development and just add them onto the existing cars when they're ready for production. Of course I prefer if they set a goal of getting them ready for the next gen of the car to make the new version of the car a better deal than the older one.
Now that I read a bit more into it...my assumption that the 2010 Ford Fusion used the CD3-2 was incorrect leading me to think it was a new design instead of a massive update. They really fooled me.
C'mon, anyone could tell its the same Fusion just by looking at the sides
If it means a product gets replaced sooner, I'm all for it. I want a new Camry under the Akio Toyoda leadership.
__________________
1994 Toyota Pickup Xtra cab 4x2 22R-E 44,000 mi
1998 Toyota Avalon 1MZ-FE 137,000 mi
2005 Chevrolet Silverado Crew Cab 49,000 mi
2006 BMW 330i Sedan 85,000 mi
2007 Toyota Camry Hybrid 2AZ-FXE 62,000 mi
C'mon, anyone could tell its the same Fusion just by looking at the sides
So you make an assumption that the car is exactly the same because it looks similar in the side profile? Gee I guess the 2009 Toyota Corolla is the exact same as a 2004 or maybe even a 1998. Maybe the Dodge Caliber is completely different from the Jeep Compass and Patriot because their profiles look totally different. That's how absurd your statement is.
I prefer to drive them to see a difference, not assume by looking.
It's the best decision to hear this year. Knowing that Toyota's not wasting money on design of trivial changes to headlights, tail lights, trim, etc...and spending engineering efforts on quicker full-model refreshes. Today's buyer doesn't perceive minor refreshes as different anymore so it's wasteful efforts.
The industry in the second decade of this century will be heavily focused on a few areas - one of which is the ability of manufacturers to replace their product faster and cheaper. I sense that the days of 4-5 year model refreshes will soon drive to 3-4 years.
In general, all new products (1-2 years old) sell themselves with minimal marketing & almost not incentive efforts. Old product (3-4+ years) requires significant marketing & incentive dollars - and everyone's tired of pumping tons of money into old product with negligible sales impact. Solution: Save the incentive dollars & pump it into building new product faster.
It will be an interesting decade to see if GM & Chrysler will be able to reorganize AND put themselves into a position where they can also launch new product in less time - while maintaining quality levels. I'm a skeptic primarily since they retain the same people with the old way of thinking (so I'll keep my taxpayer chequebook handy). On the other hand, Toyota still retains much of the core values that made it successful which should position itself well to manage this challenge. Time will tell...
Oh dear. Is this cost-cutting run amok or a fundamental misunderstanding of the American automotive business? Yes. By sacrificing cosmetic changes for cost savings, Toyota fails to see the importance of fashion in their core demographic. Maybe they’ve bought into the motorhead meme that their products are appliances, and nothing more. If so, Toyota has just opened the door a bit wider for their American competition. Well, any automaker fast enough to outpace them with regular style updates.
Their core demographic wants a reliable comfortable car, not a fashion statement on wheels. If Toyota really do consider their car as appliances they wouldn't put more emphasis on engineering to have their cars emotionally connect with the driver. This is a great move, may be challenging but necessary for the company's turnaround.
__________________
Last edited by toyotaholic; 11-07-2009 at 04:22 AM.
It will be an interesting decade to see if GM & Chrysler will be able to reorganize AND put themselves into a position where they can also launch new product in less time - while maintaining quality levels. I'm a skeptic primarily since they retain the same people with the old way of thinking (so I'll keep my taxpayer chequebook handy). On the other hand, Toyota still retains much of the core values that made it successful which should position itself well to manage this challenge. Time will tell...
Ford is starting to make in-roads. I'm actually proud of them which is a 360 view I had before. Before I was hostile towards Ford when everyone was predicting they would go the way of the do do. I'm still that way towards Chrysler cause they suck. But we'll see if they can redeem themselves with the new product although i don't know how effective it will be since it will be 2 to 3 years.
Anyway back to Ford. It will be interesting to see what they do.
I agree with the small minor refreshes are a waste of money. Unless it has to be a significant update. But I guess shorter life-cycle will take that. Toyota just needs to be passionate about cars again. Not just making appliances and be one of those companies that tries to be everything to everyone, yes I know they are a mainstream carmaker but still.
__________________
U.S. media is a systematic censorship on free speech. They don't like what they hear they don't report. Don't want to upset the political and advertising sponsors. Its so corrupted. While they don't have to agree with certain views, its their job to report and let US decide.
It will be an interesting decade to see if GM & Chrysler will be able to reorganize AND put themselves into a position where they can also launch new product in less time - while maintaining quality levels. I'm a skeptic primarily since they retain the same people with the old way of thinking (so I'll keep my taxpayer chequebook handy). On the other hand, Toyota still retains much of the core values that made it successful which should position itself well to manage this challenge. Time will tell...
GM will have a better chance than it did before. Now they can actually spend money on marketing one car instead of attempting to market 3 cars for the same market. We all know the Chevrolet Malibu is the one GM wanted to sell the most of, that of course sacrificed the G6 and the Aura both Delta platform cars like the Malibu. Its basically down to whether GM allows their bean counters to design the cars or let their engineers design them and I'm sure GM fans know exactly when the bean counters were ruining GM's car lineup. There's less excuses this time around.
Chrysler...because of how screwed up its current lineup is will be a former shadow of itself. The truly bad cars are certain to disappear those being the Patriot, Caliber, Compass, Commander, PT Cruiser and the Dakota. The Liberty, Sebring and Avenger will retain their names but be replaced by Fiats and other gaps the disappearing cars will be filled in by Fiats. Staying will be the Wrangler, Grand Cherokee, 300, Charger, the Caravan/Town & country, Nitro and Journey. I personally think the Nitro and Journey should be scrapped since they're pretty bad, perhaps they'll be scrapped later. There is no mention of whether the Fiats replacing these cars would also include Lancia or Alfa Romeo. Chrysler's fate is really in the hands of Fiat, the worse Fiat does the more certain the Dodge and Chrysler names are done for.
The AutoGuide.com network consists of the largest network of enthusiast-owned enthusiast-operated automotive communities.
AutoGuide.com provides the latest car reviews, auto show coverage, new car prices, and automotive news. The AutoGuide network operates more than 100 automotive forums where our users consult peers for shopping information and advice, and share opinions as a community.
ToyotaNation.com is an independent Toyota/Lexus enthusiast website. ToyotaNation.com is not sponsored by or in any way affiliated with Toyota Motor Sales, USA, Inc. The Toyota, Lexus and Scion names and logos are trademarks owned by Toyota Motor Sales, USA, Inc.
:
1984 Toyota Cressida
1994 Toyota Pickup
1998 Toyota Avalon
Linear Mode
