How Toyota Perfected the Hybrid – And Why Rivals Still Can’t Catch Up

Seems simplistic and one sided. It doesn't go into how a power-split system is better than a parallel one, for example. In that matter, it ignored Toyota now making parallel systems with conventional transmissions. Also ignored the fact that Japan had a Low Emission Vehicle(LEV) program going back to the 1970s that Toyota was part of, and provided basic research into hybrids, to make it sound like the Prius came out of thin air.

 

I’ll give Toyota credit for sticking with it, even though they stole the idea from that russian engineer, and threw up all over themselves with hydrogen dreams

 

For a 5 minute read, the referenced article is significantly on point. Toyota's big win was the ecvt transaxle with almost zero reliability problems and their complex networked controls which are almost bulletproof. All at a very affordable price when the gen2 was released in 2003, 23 years ago. A few years later the gen2 had become a Hollywood status symbol and had long waiting lists due to high gas prices. I owned two of these with absolutely no problems.

Certainly Toyota had issues in other areas including their power electronics, brake by wire systems and their widespread low tension ring fiascos which hit a crescendo in gen3s. But Toyota stood behind those items for most new car buyers, leaving the current used buyers to suffer.

But those issues were largely gone by 2016 and today you can't buy their bread and butter Camry, Rav4 or Highlander vehicles without a hybrid system.

My prediction is the Tundra's Hybrid Max deviation won't last long and is primarily available for power rather than efficiency.

 

Many 2025 & 2026 Camry users (Gen 5 hybrid) would disagree. My 2025 is OK but many have had issues with front axles and axle seals becoming noisy. I believe there is a parts shortage on the axles now.

 

Agree to disagree

 

At how many miles does that happen? we never saw any problems in three hycams

 

It should last as long as the Toyota transmission paired to it.

The Lexus LC and LS had a power split system for power. They chose not to use it in their trucks or the Crowns. It likely couldn't compete with the parallel system on cost. Toyota likely didn't start with a strong parallel system, because the control tech wasn't capable of providing a smooth ride at that time. If they could have done a parallel system, Toyota would still have been successful. It was their commitment to hybrids that got them where they are today.

 

The axles? Here is a 21 page thread. Enjoy. At a quick glance, I saw one at 1800 miles.As expected, the issue is not trim specific.

https://www.toyotanation.com/threads/toyota-camry-le-2025-squealing-noise.1790972/

 

The Crown parallel drive is very nice. I recently rode along on a long road trip in one. The owner proudly said he was getting over 40mpg. I didn't tell him our 25 yo '01 Prius still averages over 40 mpg and can get over 50 mpg in the right driving conditions.

 

Also the Camry XLE is rated at 48 mpg with the lower trims even higher. I doubt the Crown is that much heavier than the Camry.

 

Toyota is using the parallel system in power hybrids. Others are using it for efficiency models.

Meanwhile Toyota is trying to sell their power-split tech to others,but those are choosing parallel. Mazda hybrids no longer use Toyota parts, and it looks like Subaru is developing their own system.

 

ford is probably wishing they were still licensing the Toyota system

 

Ford never used Toyota's system. There was potential overlap with some of Toyota's patents in the beginning, and neither company wanted to spend the funds to hash it out in court. Thus a patent swap for licensing.

The Escape and Maverick use power-split system, and it doesn't use any Toyota tech.

 

Ford licensed the Toyota patents back in 2004 to allow use of the same engineering concepts. They did not buy the components or specific engineering but had to license in order to avoid patent infringement lawsuits.

The reality is Ford used a very similar transaxle design while Honda did not license and continued their less efficient design as did GM.

Partial New York Times article

 

Since the side was business, it didn't need to. The reference to "can't catch up" is with regard to wide audience acceptance. Simplistic is key. Know your audience.

The "perfection" achieved is all about reliability, which is a major contributing factor to mainstream sales. As @rjparker pointed out, the transaxle has proven almost bulletproof. Sure, long ago we praised the designed predicting it would be as reliable as other unappreciated components, like the differential. That provided Toyota with the resources & encouragement to continue investing. It was such a wise choice, phaseout of traditional models became a reality.

At the same time, we've seen other automakers roll the dice on an abrupt transition. That gamble of technology aggressively advancing and their being no pushback to change was beyond reckless. Their massive writedowns from "all in" strategy having failed left them scrambling to figure out how to catch up to the tortoise. Irony of the hare losing is great material for our history books.

 

Honda and GM started with mild hybrid systems, thus being less efficient. They did come out with full hybrids in time that had nothing to do with Toyota. I think the market had more to do with the full hybrids not doing well when introduced. Honda had wrecked their hybrid reputation with how they handled the IMA system. Then most of GM's buyers where against hybrids.

I don't think Toyota was keen on licensing in the early days. There were supply issues involving batteries and transaxles back then. Nissan was the only one as they needed a compliance car for CARB. Mazda eventually followed that. Both have their own hybrid solutions separate of Toyota these days.

 

Toyota licensed to make the concept mainstream which, in time, made it acceptable to the general public. It was a long game strategy and worked.

 

That’s why I admire Toyotas persistence, whereas American car companies are tied to quarterly reports and political winds

 

So is Toyota US, unfortunately.