Toyota, which overtook struggling US rival General Motors in the first quarter of 2007 to become the world's top-selling automaker, aims to completely revamp its gasoline engine and transmission lineup by 2010 to reduce emissions.

Meanwhile GM puts it's energy into lobbying congress for relief from mileage and emission standards.

My point exactly!

http://cr4.globalspec.com/blogentry/2189/Big-3-CEOs-Fight-Fuel-Standards

Lobbying seems to be cheaper than R&D or a faster ROI

Jim C

The old British bike industry had a simiar philosophy,(folks wont buy Japanese bikes! It's not the done thing. Golf after lunch, old boy?) Thats why there isnt a British bike industry.

......improve the fuel efficiency of petrol-powered vehicles.

Well, that solves the global warming issue then! With just a tad more YEN manipilation lets tackle world hunger.

Ouch!

And what is the exact function of the air flow regulating valve?

Reduce the amount of air intake to regulate the power.

The only change is that this function is taken over by controlling the timing of the valves. And this will gain 5 to 10% in efficiency?

My idea is that it will enable to reduce the parts in a motor, freeing the money for a 5 to 10% raise in stocklevels. And someone made a bad translation from the original jamanese press release.

Its all about volumetric efficiency. How can you get more bang for your suck!

Like many recent advancements in automotive design, this one has been in the closet gathering dust for years. The design was evolved from controlled flow superchargers during the 1930's. Now with the fuel crunch on us in the U.S., Toyota will bring this to the table with a very healthy price tag, and we will suck it up like the conditioned pets that we are. For reference to the 1930's, see the history of Auto-Union and Tazio Novaluri (sp?).

It appears to me that they have done away with the cam and gone to solinoid operated valves, from the description. This will reduce the spinning weight giving slightly more horse power plus that advantage of varible lift and timing in the valve opening and closing times.

Don't forget about Nissan. Check it out:

Nissan Introduces New Engine Valve Control Technology - Variable Valve Event & Lift (VVEL)

Here's the link:

http://www.gizmag.com/go/7051/

-John

Any 'new advance' is usually just a reworking of something already played with. My point is, at least they are doing it. And yes, the consumer will buy, because they can see the savings, and they have had a scare over petrol prices. I see the US manufacturers being left further and further behind. And don't think it won't happen, the Japanese build in the US, so you are buying a 'Made in USA' product. If the big dogs don't wake up quick, there gone.

Here is where we in the west are unemployed: our bosses are accountant driven pussies. Expecting that others (= Japanese companies) wil invent it and they can buy it from them.

Oh I would love to work in a company with a real Research department and budget.

I feel we have a lot in common!

Oh, I once had the chance to do it: They expected me to move to a plant in Korea.

That was a bridge to far and expecting that my wife and kid would follow was even a bigger challenge.

As stated in another blog: the big challenge for this millenium: understanding women.

I don't claim to understand Women, but I do think you have to make the right choice! As a gender, we don't seem very good at that.

They're already gone. They died in the 70's. Their advertising departments just don't know it yet.

And it's a shame. I love the look of a lot of the US product - but I'm too much of an engineer to buy on looks alone. I just don't get why "we make the most reliable cars in the world" is an unworthy goal.

Are you stating that US made and engineered cars are the most reliable in the world?

Sorry, I just don't believe you.

US designs are indeed good, but they lack the proper maintenance. I speak from reality: our production in the US only act's when the stuff is thrown back over the Atlantic. And still they dare to state that the problem can't be the product when we can easely show the defects. We had a Korean manufacturing plant for some time and we naver had issues, then the US factory decided they didn't need the Korean's any more ..

But I can understand the statement: If we would want it and let the engineers do we could make much better things.

But would the customers pay the difference? A small group does. There are several examples known from very high quality products, that never fail: they went bankrupt as their customer base was not needing replacements.

It is valid for everywhere. But in our view a company goes bankrupt if the stock level goes to low. The eastern way of looking to such a problem is: oh let's by our own stock and when it goes up again ...

No, I'm saying just the opposite. American cars tend towards crap, and that's why Detroit is in trouble. Toyota designs and builds the most reliable cars on the planet, and customers pay nothing extra for it. And that's why Toyota is #1 in sales.

I agree bhankii. It's a shame but the free market will take care of it. Don't blame "Detroit" too much. The real blame (if blame is the right word) lies with the consumer. I guess I didn't phrase that too well. I'm really saying two things at once. A significant percent of the public continues to purchase these relatively unreliable, inefficient, automobiles, but increasingly more and more of them are migrating to Japanese, and other, non U.S. manufacturers.

I suppose I'm repeating what some others have said but it's just my spin on it. Best summed up by: "Detroit" remains stuck in that era of "what's good for General Motors is good for the U.S."

Built in obsolescence insures a better bottom line. Ain't that just plain weird? As in:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_obsolescence

Regards,

-John

I think there's two forces at work. One is the "Buy American" mythos, and the other is the American love affair with big trucks. Especially here in Texas.

Toyota is now building big trucks in a plant in Texas. And I'm seeing more and more of them on the road.

Did you know that Ford is now importing non-US made Ford branded cars into the US.

How many with broken cam shafts?..Toyota had more recalls last year than any auto manufacture. Yet they don't get a black eye because they know how to treat the customer. On the heat treat issues with the cam shaft, they just replace the entire engine rather than dink around with a repair effort, no real skawks from the customer then and its not in the news! So half the trick is image the other half public relations and the last half manufacturing..oops.

That's the point! People remember a problem fixed efficiently, quickly and politely more positively then they do if they had NO problem. Customer service, we used to call it. By the way, does that mean I can get hold of a load of engines cheap........

I believe it was only on there largest engine (5.7L) 1 of 3 they ofter and the handled the recall very well as usual, Other than that the truck is suppose to be awesome, I own a 2004 Trundra "double cab", the best vehicle I ever owned. I've owned a number of GM products & I always seem to go back to Toyota.

You can't beat a Toyota pickup. Ref top gear trying to destroy one.

http://www.youtube.com/v/h0Fzrsf4G2I

Would the US equivalent survive this treatment?

I work in the Auto Industry now (again). I had the 95 Toyota Supra twin turbo for 10 years, put 280,000 miles on the car (thats 466,000 Km) without any breakdowns or unscheduled service. Best car I ever owned, I sold it to a kid who rebuilt it and showed me pictures of the engine after he tore it down. You could still see the factory hone marks on the cylinders! WOW!

But, I warn you that the laws of diminishing quality will hit Toyota as it grows. Their workforce is a whole bunch more diversified now and quality will continue to nip at their heels. Also the world is watching closer now and as with me, my expectations of my next Toyota are probably unrealistic.

Hmmm, I disagree. Toyota set the standard for quality, and all sorts of controls and procedures in place to look after this. I just can't see them getting it that wrong.

The blame should be placed where it belongs, the US auto industry just like most of the BIg US corps will be victims of the efficency of their lobbying. you [ the government] can encorage anything through the tax code, it's just a matter of encouraging the "right" things not corp welfare for the big political donors. The Return On Investment for lobbying is better than producing quality products. The outsourcing of production capacity could be stopped if, the tax code were changed! to reflect true long term costs.

It could make a difference if the tax refund/benefit could be coupled to R&D investments and the outcome. Non innovative companies in divisions that could be innovative can be punished by not giving them the possibility to gain back TAV.

IF an investment resulted in less workforce: not TAV refund.

They can still do it but the benefit becomes a bit more positive for innovative companies.

Freedom must be guarantied but ..

"IF an investment resulted in less workforce: not TAV refund."

But wouldn't that punish increases in productivity?

We should encourage increased productivity [ efficiency ]

A sales tax [ consumption tax ], decreases the incentive to out source, you can presently avoid income tax by incorporating in say the cayman islands.

Free trade is only free if the playing field is level, requiring a living wage & comparable enviromental regulations no matter where goods are produced would be a start! This should be the policy of the EU & USA.

The problem is that all investments at the moment go to projects that pull up the productivity. No money is given to design new and better products.

At the end of the road you will have a nice factory with only one person running it: the boss and stakeholder. And no-one has the money to buy the products as we are all unemployed.

If you can enlarge productivity and free human resources for improving the quality of you productiuon: no one get's fired or those fired are replaced by higher skilled equivalents. Great.

But this is not what happens: large companies are split up so that the smaller can easly work with lower paid personel. This results in a lower quality of the final product. But who cares? the ROI is high.

Now GM and Ford see the results: their cars are no longer bought. Instead many buy Japanese cars.

Strangly it are the Japanese companies who take robots out of service to give everyone something to do when sales go down for a while.

It is a serious difference in culture, we can have a good laugh with the silly looking cars, but at the end they win. They know that they will have less field return, so they can free that part of the cost price for higher quality and lower end consumer price. And field return is costly.

Having been on both side of this issue, like many things the answers are not so simple.

A couple of years ago I helped implement an automated inspection system for garbonzo beans, the labor force went from 45 to 9 & quality was greatly improved. the remaining workers were much happier, as the horrible job of visually inspecting was eliminated!

automation & progress can't be legistated away.

How do we generate the political will, to make r&d a priorty, or I should say more profitable than out sourcing & downsizing

How do we provide the conditions for people to learn & thrive?

How do we balance that against the needs of the many?

underlying these questions is the ever expanding population, mostly due ever improving health care.

population control is 1 of those issues that is too dangrous to bring up in civilized political discourse, the religions will imediatly scream about their freedoms being curtailed.

Religions are the first to limit freedoms and own choice.

That is where I would lay the basic: it's your own choice. No legislation.

But if you want to invest in improvement and new things you can have more from the same money.

This morning it was again in the news: for years companies are closing production sites as they are to expensive. Now we run out of glass bottles for beer.

Thank you accountants, brewers have to close activities for periods as they can't buy the bottles they need.

Another nice story: they tried to relocate a local brewery last year: big trouble as the typical Hoegaarden white beer would no longer come from Hoegaarden.

Now they have to admit that there is a shortage: the moved facilities do not produce the same beer. The remaining installations in Hoegaarden are now fully functional 24/24 7/7 but can only produce 60% of what should be produced. And even nicer is that this old brewery should have been closed last January.

This is what complete freedom brings: you will not longer have the freedom to eat and drink what you like: diversity is to costly for the big companies.

I tried to sell a (fully) variable valve timing system to Ford in about 1985 (it's still the best system), but dealing with their legal department was more than an inventor could stomach.

I will eat my hat if a purely solenoid or hydraulic valve system does not use more energy than it saves, compared to a good mechanical fully vvt system.

Remember the fuss about actively controlled suspension, and the dismal mpg of the Citroen Zantia fitted with such a system.

Also Ford Bombed on thier PROCO engine (Prorgammed Combustion) in the late 70's. There are a lot of new wrappers on some "old" ideas.