Toyota vs Tesla autonomous vehicles strategy

[eatSleepWoof]

I did two road trips from Boston out west and back. 5000 miles one summer. 6500 miles another summer. Driving the interstate through Nebraska, Kansas, eastern CO, etc, is boring as all hell. I would gladly have more autonomous features for that.

I can understand that, but really, that sounds no different from a morning commute. Point A to point B. That's transportation, not a road trip . When we go traveling I make it a point to avoid boring interstates whenever possible. We're on the road for the experience of the trip, and turning it into a commute is not part of the experience we're after.

But if you had to go from home to, say, an area like Moab, and had to spend a few days on the interstate to get there, I can see the appeal of having the car drive you while you sleep.

 

[Reckless]

The Toyota Land Cruiser is the ultimate vehicle. It is just missing the ultimate feature: Self Driving even partial highway. It seems like all the other manufacturers are starting to include versions of this but Toyota decided to skip that feature.

I don't think CyberTruck is going to be as nice as the 200 Land Cruiser is even with the bulletproof windows, armored exoskeleton with armored vault made of space age steel driving itself around larger than a hummer and large tires. Tesla do come off as being slightly soulless with no organic petrol in its veins and oxygen supplying air to its lungs- only electric current powering the motor with a lifeless battery (Frankenstein with no heart). I think Tesla is going to make more logical sense but the 200 is passion and heart.

 

[eatSleepWoof]

The Toyota Land Cruiser is the ultimate vehicle. It is just missing the ultimate feature: Self Driving even partial highway. It seems like all the other manufacturers are starting to include versions of this but Toyota decided to skip that feature.

Toyota has historically been behind the technological curve. Part of that (intentional) decision is why Toyotas are as reliable as they are. Toyota waits for other manufacturers to play with ground-breaking technologies, iron out the kinks and issues, and then implements the well-tested, reliable solution to the same problem some 10-15 years later than others.

Look at the German manufacturers - from VW to Mercedes - they are always pumping out cars with the latest and greatest, most innovative tech. But when a BMW headlight leaks water and you end up with a $2000 replacement bill, (not a joke - have seen this first hand) you'll be trading it in for a Toyota with 15 year old headlight technology real quick.

And keep in mind that every dollar spent on fancy tech is a dollar that can't be spent on making a reliable, bullet-proof drivetrain. What's more important to you is a personal decision.

 

[mcgaskins]

Autonomous vehicles are for people who think of their cars as appliances. I can see the appeal if you're in the car commuting to work, but I can't see the appeal on a road trip, or any other type of driving. I enjoy driving my vehicles, and will not give it up until I'm forced to (which I believe will happen sooner or later in my lifetime).

I have no qualms about the performance an electric vehicle can deliver. This thread is specifically about autonomous vehicles, and thus the autonomous driving experience.

And what is the most autonomous vehicle available today? Tesla. Which again, I'm saying if someone hasn't spent any time in one, their opinion really doesn't hold a lot of merit about how exciting they are to drive or whether they are an "appliance". How would a 200 owner feel about an EV owner saying body on frame SUVs are bloated, slow, inefficient, outdated, and pointless if said EV owner had never driven one?

I can understand that, but really, that sounds no different from a morning commute. Point A to point B. That's transportation, not a road trip . When we go traveling I make it a point to avoid boring interstates whenever possible. We're on the road for the experience of the trip, and turning it into a commute is not part of the experience we're after.

But if you had to go from home to, say, an area like Moab, and had to spend a few days on the interstate to get there, I can see the appeal of having the car drive you while you sleep.

You say you can't see the appeal in road tripping in a car that has autonomous features, then someone says they'd like autonomous features for long road trips, and then you pivot and call that transportation not a road trip... I wholeheartedly disagree with the assertion autonomous features make road trips less enjoyable. I have driven a Tesla from SoCal to Denver right through the heart of Utah and Colorado, and it was by far the most relaxing and enjoyable road trip I've taken through Utah because of the autonomous features. When you're driving, you should be focusing on the road and not letting your eyes wonder, snapping pics with your phone, etc. When you're in a car with autonomous features, you can actually relax, take in the scenery, snap a pic or two with your phone and enjoy the scenery around you while the car does 95% of the work. And then when you want to drive, you just simply deactivate the autopilot and then you're in control. I don't understand how having a feature you are not required to use would make road trips less enjoyable. I feel the vast majority of people who have no real world experience with EVs and autonomous features would change their opinion about them very quickly after spending just a little time in something like a Tesla.

 

[White Stripe]

I'm not sure about auto pilot driving. I for some reason every so often find myself in very precarious and odd circumstances on the road where I have to make a quick decision between what's a somewhat bad move, and what's a very bad move. Like when I came around the corner of a mountain highway to find a sheet of ice and a plow truck just stopped on the highway on the ice. I could either crash into the guard rail, hit the plow truck, or go into the oncoming lane. Which would the auto pilot choose? However on a low traffic highway, in Nebraska, in nice weather it would be nice. But I dont do those drives everyday.

 

[eatSleepWoof]

I feel the vast majority of people who have no real world experience with EVs and autonomous features would change their opinion about them very quickly after spending just a little time in something like a Tesla.

"I don't need to be a helicopter pilot to know that if a chopper is sitting in a tree, somebody f*cked up."

Look, you are completely (time after time) missing the point I'm making, so I'll try to explain it one last time, and I'm out:

This thread is about autonomous driving. That means hands off, disconnected from the vehicle. I view that type of driving as being no different from sitting on the bus; it's a commute. I hate even being a passenger in a vehicle being driven by someone else, much less in a vehicle that I'm supposed to be driving. To me, driving means being engaged in the handling of the vehicle, and yes, focusing on the road. Sleeping, playing with your phone, reading a book, and cooking a steak while being automatically driven by your car is fantastic, but it is not driving, it is getting driven, no different from being in a bus.

I enjoy focusing on the road, and taking in the road. I enjoy getting out of the car as often as possible, and seeing & experiencing new things. I sure as heck do not enjoy sitting on the interstate for hours on end, and do not do that unless I'm - wait for it - commuting. For a commute? By all means, bring on the automation.

 

[LCtwohundred]

Interesting timing: this morning Doug DeMuro explained how he would have bought an LC200 (which he describes as one of his all time favorite cars) if only it had adaptive cruise that could handle stop & go traffic, instead of turn itself off under 20mph.

And because Toyota isn't able to meet even this (low) bar in 2020, they lost a potential customer.

 

[mcgaskins]

"I don't need to be a helicopter pilot to know that if a chopper is sitting in a tree, somebody f*cked up."

Look, you are completely (time after time) missing the point I'm making, so I'll try to explain it one last time, and I'm out:

This thread is about autonomous driving. That means hands off, disconnected from the vehicle. I view that type of driving as being no different from sitting on the bus; it's a commute. I hate even being a passenger in a vehicle being driven by someone else, much less in a vehicle that I'm supposed to be driving. To me, driving means being engaged in the handling of the vehicle, and yes, focusing on the road. Sleeping, playing with your phone, reading a book, and cooking a steak while being automatically driven by your car is fantastic, but it is not driving, it is getting driven, no different from being in a bus.

I enjoy focusing on the road, and taking in the road. I enjoy getting out of the car as often as possible, and seeing & experiencing new things. I sure as heck do not enjoy sitting on the interstate for hours on end, and do not do that unless I'm - wait for it - commuting. For a commute? By all means, bring on the automation.

No, I'm not missing the point. This thread is about autonomous driving - and there are differing levels of autonomous driving as defined by the SAE as levels 0 through 5. You're talking about full autonomy which is level 5, and that does not exist in the real world today and likely will not for a very long time, if ever. It only makes sense to talk about what exists today and what is likely to exist in the relatively near future. Tesla offers basically level 3 autonomy today, whether people want to call that autonomous or not, that's is what the Society of Automotive Engineers call it. PS - I don't think you're going to find a single person on this forum who owns a 200 and does not like to drive. We all like to drive ourselves or we wouldn't be here

SAE International Releases Updated Visual Chart for Its “Levels of Driving Automation” Standard for Self-Driving Vehicles

www.sae.org

 

[M1911]

I can understand that, but really, that sounds no different from a morning commute. Point A to point B. That's transportation, not a road trip . When we go traveling I make it a point to avoid boring interstates whenever possible. We're on the road for the experience of the trip, and turning it into a commute is not part of the experience we're after.

But if you had to go from home to, say, an area like Moab, and had to spend a few days on the interstate to get there, I can see the appeal of having the car drive you while you sleep.

Not a road trip? Boston to South Dakota to see the Badlands National Park, Mount Rushmore, and the Mammoth Site. From South Dakota to Yellowstone (staying in Jackson Wyoming) and the Grand Teton National Park. From Jackson down to Breckenridge for a LCDC event. From there, a quick trip to Rocky Mountain National Park. Finally, another four days back to Boston.

I call that a road trip.

This is a big country. If you are traveling across a significant part of it, it will take multiple boring days on the interstate, unless you can spend a month on the road.

 

[TeCKis300]

Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Some opinions are made up from assumptions. Some from experience. I agree with others here that have tasted the future.

I enjoy driving. All forms of it. So much that I've invested time and money to get good at it on a race track. I own arguably one of the rawest analogue missiles out there.

I also have a Tesla. Which I find utterly fascinating and satisfying in its own way. It can be a drivers car. It can be an autonomous car. Point is the driver has the choice in how they want to engage the car depending mood. Don't believe in autonomy, just as my wife doesn't? Still reap the active safety features that flow from it.

It's not just Toyota that's behind. Whole swaths of legacy manufacturers, after decades inching forward on traditional metrics, dismissing a little startup, are being caught flat footed. With market share eroding out from underneath them. Why? You can't rely on just legacy qualities anymore. To be competitive, they have to be competitive on all fronts. A Tesla is not just great at many of those, but at the autonomy and safety too. The product bought today also has relevancy going into the future with seamless updates. That's only one quality where they are slam dunking on other manufacturers. Tesla's are becoming more and more competitive on every front.

Cybertruck 3-motor

- Tow capacity 14k lbs
- Payload 3,500 lbs
- 800 HP
- 1000 lb-ft
- 0-60 2.9 seconds
- 500 mile range
- 35" tires
- Powertrain warranty 8 years (no mileage limit)
- Level 3 Autonomy with the benefits of active safety features that flow from that? With potential for higher levels going into the future?

For $69k starting.

Will the 300-series do any of that? For $80k++?

 

[HRTROB]

Interesting timing: this morning Doug DeMuro explained how he would have bought an LC200 (which he describes as one of his all time favorite cars) if only it had adaptive cruise that could handle stop & go traffic, instead of turn itself off under 20mph.

And because Toyota isn't able to meet even this (low) bar in 2020, they lost a potential customer.

And this is the reason why you folks in the US get a $90k 200 with all the bells and whistles with no option for a stripped down base model. Citing lack of adaptive cruise as the reason why he didn’t get a 200 just makes me glad I unsubscribed from that clown’s channel a long time ago.

 

[Willie G]

I agree with eatSleepWoof, at least as I understand his posts.... Many years ago, I always wanted to be the driver on family trips. I progressed to driving commercially and probably have passed the 1M mile mark. Now that I am semi-retired I still drive commercially part-time and average 200-300 miles a day in the metro Denver area. I say this to explain my point of view.

I am not a fan of the technological advances that have been incorporated into automobiles and trucks over the past 30+ years. They do what they were designed to do very well for the most part - make driving easier and safer for the motoring public. What they have also done, IMHO, is lessen the personal responsibility that comes with getting behind the wheel. They have, in many cases, become an excuse for the poor driving - an additional failure point if you will - that can be used to deflect the blame away from the driver.

So, no, I won't be driving a Tesla or any other autonomous vehicle. (And I also enjoy driving across Kansas. Even on I-70)

 

[TeCKis300]

Interesting timing: this morning Doug DeMuro explained how he would have bought an LC200 (which he describes as one of his all time favorite cars) if only it had adaptive cruise that could handle stop & go traffic, instead of turn itself off under 20mph.

And because Toyota isn't able to meet even this (low) bar in 2020, they lost a potential customer.

The 2016+ has All-Speed Dynamic Radar Cruise Control. LCs DRCC for 25mph and up. Stupid differentiation.

 

[LCtwohundred]

And this is the reason why you folks in the US get a $90k 200 with all the bells and whistles with no option for a stripped down base model. Citing lack of adaptive cruise as the reason why he didn’t get a 200 just makes me glad I unsubscribed from that clown’s channel a long time ago.

I don’t know how traffic in your city compares with SoCal, but I think his concern is reasonable for where he lives. If you spend 2+ hours a day in slow moving traffic on something like highway 405, adaptive cruise turns those 2 hours from agonizing gas-brake-gas-brake into something much more relaxing. Traffic goes from 0mph to 65mph and everything in between like 40 times per hour. It’s maddening.

The 2016+ has All-Speed Dynamic Radar Cruise Control. LCs DRCC for 25mph and up. Stupid differentiation.

I’m not quite following this. What is the difference between those 2 systems?

 

[TeCKis300]

Those that own 2016+ models can correct me if I'm wrong. As I understand it...

LCs have Dynamic Radar Cruise Control (DRCC), which is a system designed for 25mph minimum and up. It's useful on open roads.

LX adds an All-Speed function on top of DRCC, aka All-Speed DRCC, allowing it to handle any speed from 0-110mph. Good for stop and go traffic as well as open roads.

For an $80k luxo-barge that the LC is, it should also have come with the all-speed function.

 

[HRTROB]

I don’t know how traffic in your city compares with SoCal, but I think his concern is reasonable for where he lives. If you spend 2+ hours a day in slow moving traffic on something like highway 405, adaptive cruise turns those 2 hours from agonizing gas-brake-gas-brake into something much more relaxing. Traffic goes from 0mph to 65mph and everything in between like 40 times per hour. It’s maddening.


I’m not quite following this. What is the difference between those 2 systems?

Wanna know how the traffic in my city compares to SoCal? Google “Waze worst traffic” and you’ll see SoCal doesn’t even come close.

 

[LCtwohundred]

Wanna know how the traffic in my city compares to SoCal? Google “Waze worst traffic” and you’ll see SoCal doesn’t even come close.

Yeah it is totally possible Adaptive Cruise might not make a whole lot of sense in Manilla. If you are often just at a stand still, it is not as valuable, because most systems "give up" after a minute or so of being stopped.

But in SoCal traffic I have found it incredibly helpful. Takes 80% of the hassle out of driving in traffic.

 

[stonepa]

Interesting timing: this morning Doug DeMuro explained how he would have bought an LC200 (which he describes as one of his all time favorite cars) if only it had adaptive cruise that could handle stop & go traffic, instead of turn itself off under 20mph.

And because Toyota isn't able to meet even this (low) bar in 2020, they lost a potential customer.

Amen to that. We have a older Subaru Outback and a new BMW, both with driver's systems that allow 0-top speed cruise control that works extremely well in stop and go traffic. The 300 better have that capability or I won't bother buying it.