Toyota Admits ‘Many Challenges' With Its Mid-Engine Sports Prototype
Mid-engine sports car development issues have occurred with other automakers, such as General Motors (GM), which encountered several problems with its Pontiac Fiero produced during the mid-1980s. The Fiero sports car used a three-quart oil pan instead of a four-quart one during its first model year, resulting in the engine sometimes running hot due to an oil shortage, according to MotorTrend. Pontiac's 1984 Fiero also had weak connecting rods and a wiring harness mounted too close to the exhaust manifolds, which increased the risk of engine fire. One in every 400 debut Fieros experienced a fire, and GM didn't recall the vehicle until 1987.
So, what makes a mid-engine car difficult to perfect? These vehicles have a low center of gravity, which aids stability but makes regaining control harder during spins. Mid-engine sports cars are also more expensive on average to make, posing challenges to companies like Toyota. In contrast, companies like Ferrari, known for using this configuration, aren't as restricted in this area. Since mid-engine parts are more difficult to access, repairs can also come at a higher expense. Rumors of Toyota using the GR Yaris M to help revive its mid-engine MR2 sports car have excited many, but this concept's slow development raises doubts about a near-future MR2 release.
Toyota hasn't yet pulled the plug on its mid-engine sports car testbed, but those waiting on an MR2 revival shouldn't necessarily hold their breath. The automaker has until mid-November to fulfill its goal of entering the GR Yaris M Concept into Japan's Super Taikyu Series, and whether this happens will likely influence release timelines for future mid-engine models. Toyota's current struggles with its compact mid-engine sports car concept underscore the challenge of striking a balance among performance, reliability, and affordability in these vehicles. Still, the manufacturer appears to be carefully navigating these obstacles to facilitate smooth debuts of future mass-market models using the configuration.
Copyright 2025 The Arena Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Verge
4 hours ago
- The Verge
How big trucks and SUVs gobbled up the entire auto industry
When I was growing up in the Midwest, everyone I knew drove small cars. My dad had a light pink Volvo 240, my mom drove a Dodge Dart, and my grandmother had a 1988 Honda Accord — which would eventually become my first car. We lived in the suburbs, so almost no one drove a truck, but if they did it was something small like a Ford Ranger or Toyota Hilux. Over time, those small cars were replaced by SUVs of increasing size. Today, anyone searching for anything smaller than a compact SUV will probably come up dry. Ford killed its sedan production in North America a number of years ago. GM took a little longer, but eventually, with the Chevy Malibu leaving the lineup in 2024, it got there as well. The decisions, the companies argue, were a reflection of shifting customer preferences. Four in five cars sold in the United States last year were either SUVs or pickup trucks. That's a far cry from the 1990s, when that number was closer to 25 percent of all sales. Americans just aren't that into sedans anymore, preferring higher riding vehicles that confer a sense of safety and dominance over the road. Small cars were out; big ones — and often really big ones — were in. But these big trucks and SUVs can be deadly. Vehicles with extra-tall hoods and blunt front ends are more likely to cause fatalities, according to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. There have been numerous studies and investigations examining how tall, flat-nosed trucks and SUVs are more likely to cause serious injury and death than smaller, shorter vehicles. Larger front ends mean pedestrians are more likely to suffer deadly blows to the head and torso. Higher clearances mean victims are more likely to get trapped underneath a speeding SUV instead of pushed onto the hood or off to the side. And front blind zones associated with large trucks and SUVs have contributed to the injury and death of hundreds of children across the country, studies have shown. As Americans flocked to these dangerously tall and heavy vehicles, the pedestrian death rate soared: between 2013 and 2022, pedestrian fatalities increased 57 percent, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration reports. In 2022, 88 percent of pedestrian deaths occurred in single-vehicle crashes. When confronted with these statistics, automakers usually point to the increasing use of technology in vehicles — cameras, sensors, blind-spot detection, automatic braking — to help reduce pedestrian deaths. But rarely do they address the role that vehicle design plays in crash fatalities. That's because big trucks and SUVs are not only popular but also better moneymakers than smaller vehicles. SUVs have a profit margin that's 10–20 percent higher than smaller cars because they command a higher price while costing only slightly more to manufacture. 'We're providing the vehicles that consumers want, and playing to the strength of the company,' Kumar Galhotra, Ford's then president for North America, told The New York Times in 2019. Many people have been sounding the alarm on this trend, notably David Zipper, senior fellow at the MIT Mobility Initiative and Verge contributor. In 2023, he wrote in Slate that the story of 'car bloat' can be explained by 'carmaker profit, shifting consumer preferences, and loophole-riddled auto regulations.' Those regulations, in particular, came into focus late last year, a few weeks before the November election, when NHTSA, perhaps a bit too optimistically, released a proposal that would strike at the heart of car bloat. Never in its 50-plus years in existence has the regulator issued new rules for automakers requiring them to change their vehicle designs to better prevent pedestrian fatalities — until now. The rules would update the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS), the government's bible for everything that's required in a new vehicle before it's sold — from steering wheels to rearview mirrors — to set testing procedures to simulate head-to-hood impact, with the aim of reducing head injuries. If enacted, automakers will have to test their vehicles using crash test dummies representing adult and child pedestrians for the first time. NHTSA says the changes could save up to 67 lives every year. The proposal drew over 5,700 comments, the vast majority of them enthusiastic. But safety groups argue that the rule could have a limited impact, given the focus on the hoods of vehicles and not the front-end design or height. Still, expectations are low that anything will move forward. NHTSA lost about 4 percent of its staff as part of DOGE's efforts to slash the federal workforce. And advocates I spoke to don't expect any meaningful safety rulemaking to advance under the Trump administration. Rebecca Neal, a spokesperson for NHTSA, would only say that 'the rulemaking is still active.' Most Americans aren't aware of the danger posed by these big, hulking vehicles. They think that by ascending into the driver's seat of a three-row, 4,000-pound SUV, they are not only better protecting themselves, but also their family. Because after all, isn't it other drivers that are the real problem? This is The Stepback, a weekly newsletter breaking down one essential story from the tech world. For more on cars and consumer safety, follow Andrew J. Hawkins. The Stepback arrives in our subscribers' inboxes at 8AM ET. Opt in for The Stepback here. Posts from this author will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed. See All by Andrew J. Hawkins Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed. See All Cars Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed. See All Column Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed. See All Tech Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed. See All The Stepback Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed. See All Transportation
Miami Herald
4 hours ago
- Miami Herald
Toyota Launches Remarkable 2025 Corolla Cross Lease Deal For August
The Corolla Cross isn't the most iconic Toyota model, but for August, it's one of the best values in the crowded and very competitive small SUV segment. You can lease one for just $259 per month for 36 months with a 12,000-mile-per-year limit, which means you could potentially lower that payment even more by opting for 10,000 miles per year. You'll need to come up with $2,999 due at signing, and the figure doesn't include taxes or fees, and it may not be available in all markets. For example, shoppers in the Southwest are quoted at $349 per month with the same terms, while shoppers in the New York metro area will need to fork over $289 per month. We always recommend checking out the deals and incentives on the Toyota website with your ZIP code for the most accurate estimates. Using our initial $259 per month offer with $2,999 down, we can get a rough idea of what a zero-down lease looks like for the 2025 Toyota Corolla Cross. Spreading the amount out over the 36-month lease term will add $83.30 to the monthly payment, bringing the new total to $342.30 before local taxes, fees, and other potential costs. This isn't an official quote, just an estimate. The 2025 Toyota Corolla Cross L - the base model for which this lease offer is valid - is the smallest and most affordable SUV in the Toyota lineup. It represents a decent enough value, with an MSRP that's technically under $25,000 and standard wireless Apple CarPlay and Android Auto. Just a few years ago, that would've been reserved for the highest trim models only. The Corolla Cross comes with a range of other goodies, including radar cruise control, lane departure alert, automatic high beams, and an eight-inch center display. The little SUV offers 46.9 cubic feet of cargo space with the rear seats folded down. While that trails the competition, it offers 95 cubic feet of total passenger volume, which is only five cubic feet less than rivals in the next segment up, like the Mazda CX-50. The Corolla Cross SUV arguably defines the subcompact SUV segment. It's small inside, outside, and under the hood, but if you can make it work for your goals, it's also a commensurately small portion of your monthly budget. Assuming the small SUV's few shortcomings aren't dealbreakers, we think this is a lease offer worth investigating further. It's simply hard to lease anything under $300 per month, let alone an SUV wearing a Toyota badge. *Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. The information presented herein is based on manufacturer-provided lease offer information, which is subject to frequent change and may vary based on location, creditworthiness, and other factors. We are not a party to any lease agreements and assume no liability for the terms, conditions, availability, or accuracy of any lease offers mentioned. All terms, including but not limited to pricing, mileage allowances, and residual values, require direct verification with an authorized local OEM dealership. This article does not constitute financial advice or an endorsement of any particular lease or vehicle. Copyright 2025 The Arena Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
Trump's tariffs are pummeling top automakers. The hit is $11.7 billion — and climbing
The auto sector is taking President Trump's tariffs on the chin. Toyota (TM), the world's largest automaker, was the latest to reveal the impact it's seeing from tariffs in its earnings on Thursday morning, with slightly over $3 billion wiped from its fiscal Q1 (June 30) operating income. Switch Auto Insurance and Save Today! Affordable Auto Insurance, Customized for You The Insurance Savings You Expect Great Rates and Award-Winning Service With Toyota's results in, the cumulative tariff hit from the largest automakers following the end of the June quarter stands at around $11.7 billion, per automakers' financial disclosures. Toyota had the largest exposure, followed by rivals like Volkswagen (VWAGY), GM (GM), Ford (F), Honda (HMC), and others. China's top automakers were excluded from the list as they do not operate in the US. Automakers, including Toyota and Honda, are not only seeing imports from their home market of Japan hit with tariffs (15%). They're also dealing with higher overall auto sector tariffs of 25% impacting operations from countries like Canada and Mexico. This also goes for the Big Three — Ford, GM, and Stellantis — which have significant operations with US-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) partners. Even Tesla (TSLA), which makes all of its vehicles in the US, had a significant tariff impact from duties on auto parts like batteries for EVs. "The cost of tariffs increased around $300 million with approximately two-thirds of that impact in automotive and less in energy. However, given the latency in manufacturing and sales, the full impacts will come through in the following quarters," Tesla CFO Vaibhav Taneja said on the company's earnings call on July 23. The knee-jerk reaction for automakers would be to raise prices while eventually moving toward more US production. But neither option is an easy fix to avoid tariffs. Read more: What Trump's tariffs mean for the economy and your wallet "Investment for new assembly plants is considerable and requires a larger rationale than a one-term presidential administration," AutoForecast Solutions auto manufacturing expert Sam Fiorani said. "Building a new factory requires three to five years of planning and, likely, one or two billion in investments. Even retooling an existing facility will need around half a billion dollars." Fiorani noted that the financial outlays for factory spending have to be weighed against the cost of paying tariffs over the next three years. Most high-volume models, which typically have lower profit margins, like the Nissan Rogue, are already built in the US. Moving some high-volume vehicles that are built at scale in a foreign location, like the Chevrolet Equinox, may not make sense to move to the US. On the flip side, building certain low-volume, high-profit vehicles in the US wouldn't make economic sense either. How automakers are responding For its part, GM said it will spend $4 billion to bring more truck and SUV production to the US. GM said it will add production of the gas-powered Chevrolet Blazer and Chevrolet Equinox, currently made in Mexico, to the US starting in 2027. GM will also begin making gas-powered full-size SUVs like the Chevrolet Tahoe and light-duty pickups like the Silverado at its plant in Orion, Mich. It will also shift EV production from that plant to the Factory Zero Michigan plant, which produces only EVs. Honda said this week it is considering adding a third shift to its US production facilities to blunt the effect of tariffs. Though Honda didn't say which models would be affected, it had reportedly considered moving Civic sedan production from Canada to the US, which Honda denied. Adding a third shift would enable the automaker to limit tariff exposure and avoid the cost of constructing a new factory or adding tooling for a new production line somewhere else. But Honda isn't out of the woods either. CFRA's Garrett Nelson believes its margins will remain "deeply negative due to unabsorbed EV transition costs and structural tariff headwinds," which Nelson wrote could worsen if Trump's tariff policies ramp up again. Even Tesla is looking to onshore some of its parts production. Tesla vice president of engineering Lars Moravy said during the Q2 earnings call that Tesla's use of LFP batteries from China was a major source of tariffs, and that the company's first LFP battery factory would be coming online by the end of the year to defray some of those costs. The other alternative to evading the margin-eating costs of tariffs would be to pass those costs to buyers. "In the short term, automakers did carry the costs and it showed up in the second quarter financial reports," Fiorani said, adding that at some point, something has to give, with prices rising. "While it will vary depending on the profit margin on luxury models versus the need to be price competitive on the lower end, consumers of all vehicles, imported or not, will find prices going up starting this fall and increasing more next year." Ford initially instituted an "employee pricing for all" campaign for most models, effectively cutting prices in the face of tariffs and likely eating into its pre-tariff inventory. That only lasted until the end of June. Ford has since moved prices higher, especially for products like the made-in-Mexico Maverick pickup. GM, for its part, said it hasn't had to discount at all to maintain its pricing power and that it did not have any specific actions in place to hike prices. One way, however, that automakers can raise profits without hiking retail prices is by removing incentives and charging more for financing. "We think automakers are doing everything possible to offset tariff impacts through a combination of cost cuts, pricing, and mix, but the fact is they're going to have to absorb a large percentage of the impact of tariffs," CFRA's Nelson said to Yahoo Finance. Nevertheless, even if automakers are able to move production to the US, cut unprofitable products, and streamline operations and costs, it seems one thing will remain true for the foreseeable future. "Everyone will pay more," Fiorani said. Pras Subramanian is the lead auto reporter for Yahoo Finance. You can follow him on X and on Instagram. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
