- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: 2024-2025 Land Cruiser
Posted on 12/5/24 at 3:59 pm to billjamin
Posted on 12/5/24 at 3:59 pm to billjamin
and in 4 years, there is strong possibility of a new administration reversing Trump's reversal...
Car makes may not like the rules, but I bet they prefer stability in whatever those rules are...
Car makes may not like the rules, but I bet they prefer stability in whatever those rules are...
0
Posted on 12/5/24 at 4:01 pm to billjamin
quote:
It wouldn't change anything CARB and others would just impose their own standards and the OEMs would have to comply or risk losing the market. Not worth it when it was big a big re-tool expense anyway.
Not that it'll happen, but one of Trump's proposed policies is not allowing states to have their own localized standards beyond the federal guidelines. Not sure how that would work, states rights and all, but just pointing out that it is a target of the administration.
Posted on 12/5/24 at 4:01 pm to tide06
quote:
The current gen turbo 4 cylinders for Toyota/Lexus aren’t making it 30k which is why they have one of the biggest recalls in company history going on right now.
There is this too. Toyota has cut corners and rushed their new line of EPA compliance motors out. Now they have to replace 100,000+ Toyota and Lexus turbocharged motors.
Posted on 12/5/24 at 4:03 pm to RolltidePA
quote:
Not that it'll happen, but one of Trump's proposed policies is not allowing states to have their own localized standards beyond the federal guidelines. Not sure how that would work, states rights and all, but just pointing out that it is a target of the administration.
I'd love to see more standardization and not letting states go off own their own and especially large markets dictating what the rest of the country can do but I think that ends up in a USSC case that the feds would lose.
I'd like to be wrong about the OEMs getting to revert back to the tech i prefer, but i think we're stuck with what we have best case scenario.
This post was edited on 12/5/24 at 4:05 pm
Posted on 12/5/24 at 4:09 pm to billjamin
quote:
I'd love to see more standardization and not letting states go off own their own and especially large markets dictating what the rest of the country can do but I think that ends up in a USSC case that the feds would lose.
I'm not going to pretend to understand what all the details of a case like this would look like, but it seems that there might be some sort of intentional restriction of trade with their inconsistent standards. Honestly, I have no idea what the end result would be, but it would be nice to not have Los Angeles, San Francisco and NYC deciding what our future looks like from a transportation standpoint.
Posted on 12/5/24 at 4:13 pm to member12
quote:
There is this too. Toyota has cut corners and rushed their new line of EPA compliance motors out. Now they have to replace 100,000+ Toyota and Lexus turbocharged motors.
Toyota is incredible when allowed to advance at their own pace.
The new powertrain wasn’t ready/tested, they fought the new fleet efficiency standards, lost and consumers and shareholders are now paying the price.
Posted on 12/5/24 at 4:16 pm to billjamin
It is already the case that states are not permitted to have more stringent regs than the feds set. HOWEVER, the feds granted CA an exception, hence them doing their own more stringent regs. I believe this was an end round to getting more stringent regs passed federally because if it's required in CA, everybody else will eventually follow suit. I read somewhere that Trump admin is expected to overturn the exception. No I am not sourcing this you can google if you like.
Posted on 12/5/24 at 4:16 pm to billjamin
It is already the case that states are not permitted to have more stringent regs than the feds set. HOWEVER, the feds granted CA an exception, hence them doing their own more stringent regs. I believe this was an end round to getting more stringent regs passed federally because if it's required in CA, everybody else will eventually follow suit. I read somewhere that Trump admin is expected to overturn the exception. No I am not sourcing this you can google if you like.
Posted on 12/5/24 at 6:06 pm to TarheelPete
The new GX looks fantastic
Posted on 12/5/24 at 6:26 pm to When in Rome
quote:
The new GX looks fantastic
Meh, to each their own...
I think the LC with the round headlights looks better.
This post was edited on 12/5/24 at 6:27 pm
Posted on 12/5/24 at 6:32 pm to NoBoDawg
quote:
People complain about 4 banger but have zero clue that Toyota been building reliable turbo 4’s/Hybrids for decades now . I never buy first year of anything but this is Japanese-built & will be very reliable & rugged.
I understand why people have issues with smaller displacement FI engines because in the car industry perception lags significantly behind reality. One thing people miss is how far superior FI engines power delivery is. Compare the power traces of an small FI engine with those of a much larger displacement NA engine, the advantages especially in low end torque are vastly superior. Also gone are the days when turbo lag could be measured with a sun dial. The power is near instantaneous and much better than a NA engine unless you are using a high revving performance NA engine with a low reciprocating mass in comparison.
People also rightly note the increased complexity and potential for higher long term repair costs. While this is accurate it avoids several realities. Despite everyone on tOT looking for a vehicle that will last 500k miles with near zero repair costs the average new car buyer dips out before 150k. The view also neglects the amount of money saved on gas can pay for a lot of repairs over 500k, and still be in the black though I agree having repairs done is a bit of a PITA. Also if denizens of tOT were truly so fixated on reliability and durability the only discussion should be around which Toyota or Lexus to buy and while there are a lot of people here that acknowledge that statistical fact we still get threads like we had where people were trying (probably from confirmation bias) that this reputation is overhyped.
In the end peoples issues with turbos in general are usually founded on outdated perceptions.
Posted on 12/5/24 at 6:39 pm to lsujro
quote:
It is already the case that states are not permitted to have more stringent regs than the feds set. HOWEVER, the feds granted CA an exception, hence them doing their own more stringent regs. I believe this was an end round to getting more stringent regs passed federally because if it's required in CA, everybody else will eventually follow suit. I read somewhere that Trump admin is expected to overturn the exception. No I am not sourcing this you can google if you like.
The CARB special dispensation is a fun topic. They originally got it to fight smog issues but not only kept it but actually just got the epa to adopt their standards, which then got blown up in Trumps first term. The waiver could be removed, and they would have to align with federal regulations, but it brings up and interesting concept because then what can California do under intrastate commerce law to basically ban sales from OEMs that don’t comply to whatever they think is better. It’s a huge market to gamble with so idk what would happen for sure but I think most OEMs would just hold the course on current tech and wait and see because it’ll change whenever the country flips back eventually and that’s just too much money to spend for a short term solution. Especially when there are still V8 options out there for die hards.
Posted on 12/5/24 at 6:51 pm to TDTOM
They look good but are overpriced by probably $20k.
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News