« UQM Technologies Orders for EV and HEV Propulsion Systems Doubled in First Quarter | Main | Rolls-Royce and British Airways Launch Alternative Fuel Trial »
Toyota to Build Prius in US, Temporarily Suspends Tundra and Sequoia Production
10 July 2008
Toyota announced that it will begin building the Prius in the US in a plant under construction in Blue Springs, Mississippi, with production scheduled to begin in late 2010. Prius will be the second Toyota hybrid built in North America, joining the Kentucky-built Camry Hybrid.
Toyota said the move will enable it to better respond to increasing consumer demand for hybrid vehicles.
Other production shifts in the face of the changing market include moving production of the Highlander mid-size SUV, originally scheduled to be built in Mississippi, to Princeton, Ind., beginning in Fall 2009. Furthermore, production of the Tundra full-size pick-up truck, currently built in Indiana and Texas, will be consolidated at the San Antonio plant in Spring 2009.
In addition, Toyota will temporarily suspend Tundra and Sequoia production beginning August 8 due to the declining overall market for full size trucks and SUVs. Production is scheduled to resume in early November. Team members at both facilities, as well as the Huntsville, Alabama plant that builds Tundra and Sequoia engines, will continue to be provided work.
The truck market continues to worsen, so unfortunately we must temporarily suspend production. But this good news about production mix demonstrates our long-term commitment to our North American operations and to our team members, supplier partners, and communities where our plants are located. By using this downturn as an opportunity to develop team members and improve our operations, we hope to emerge even stronger.
—Jim Wiseman, vice president/external affairs for Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing North America (TEMA)
Toyota established operations in North America in 1957 and currently operates 13 manufacturing plants, with new plants under construction in Ontario, Canada and Mississippi.
July 10, 2008 in Brief | Permalink | Comments (19) | TrackBack (0)
Comments
Posted by: Henrik | July 10, 2008 at 07:35 AM
more good news for energy conversion devices as they'll collect a royalty on every Prius made in the US.
Posted by: ECD4ME | July 10, 2008 at 07:58 AM
Tundra and Sequoia production show me that even Toyota can persuade themselves that the truck and SUV market is a good one to go after. I know it is business and the truck market looked profitable, but it does not really go along with the green image they are trying to project now.
I would like to see Ford have a separate line for hybrid Escape and Mariner SUVs. If they could double, triple or even quadruple their output of 24,000 vehicles per year it might make Ford more profitable, so they could start losing less money every day.
Posted by: sjc | July 10, 2008 at 08:04 AM
Shifting production from conventional ICEs to Hybrids (and eventually PHEVs and BEVs) is something we're going to see more often in the near future.
Too bad that major production shifts take soon long to implement.
I thaught that Toyota's production lines were more flexible.
Posted by: HarveyD | July 10, 2008 at 08:51 AM
So, the question remains - how will all the truck buyin' folks get along without their trucks? Could it be they never needed a truck to begin with?
Posted by: Sulleny | July 10, 2008 at 10:06 AM
Sulleny:
Your assumption may be 90% + correct.
Many would like to see those monsters off city streets and parking lots.
Too bad we didn't have $5/gal gas five to ten years ago. Many would not have appeared.
Since carbon taxes will never politically fly,
a much higher progressive registration fee based on weight + HP + fuel consumption could help to accellerate the extinction of those harmful dinausors.
Posted by: HarveyD | July 10, 2008 at 10:22 AM
"Could it be they never needed a truck to begin with?"
Oh, c'mon, that will only bait the truck-buyers to call you names like "Communist" and "unAmerican". Buying "whatever you want" is a RIGHT and any legislation, even to save fuel, is a socialist/liberal agenda!
Of course, we should HATE the government for everything in life, but then when there's not enough fuel to feed the Trucks, the government got to do something about it...
...cause y'know, "free market" isn't really working for the common folks right now...
Posted by: Charles S | July 10, 2008 at 10:33 AM
Charles S -
Easy there big fella. They can't help it if they feel the need to compensate for something...
Posted by: A. Powers | July 10, 2008 at 06:12 PM
Charles S -
Easy there big fella. They can't help it if they feel the need to compensate for something...
Posted by: A. Powers | July 10, 2008 at 06:13 PM
Charles S -
Easy there big fella. They can't help it if they feel the need to compensate for something...
Posted by: A. Powers | July 10, 2008 at 06:13 PM
Charles S -
Easy there big fella. They can't help it if they feel the need to compensate for something...
Posted by: A. Powers | July 10, 2008 at 06:13 PM
Charles S -
Easy there big fella. They can't help it if they feel the need to compensate for something...
Posted by: A. Powers | July 10, 2008 at 06:13 PM
Buying a gas guzzler ain't the problem. Driving them is the problem.
Posted by: tom deplume | July 10, 2008 at 07:02 PM
Don't know what you mean by "compensate" but I definitely am making a point about people who believe in the "right" to drive 8-mpg SUVs.
During the cheap gas days, any time someone was critical about trucks and SUVs, and if the truck-lovers were losing the logical arguments, then the debate will turn into a name calling contest.
Any form of regulation on trucks and SUV is considered "social engineering by the liberal elite" and then it goes down hill from there. Catalytic converters are just government intrusion to people's lives and CAFE standards forces automakers to make "unsafe" small cars, but never mind that air quality improved and that at that time, truck sales was at an all time high.
I have a chip on my shoulder is because all the rhetoric of yesteryears were energy wasted on a culture of twisted ego-trips. Now that some people actually realized that they didn't "NEED" a truck? It's too little, too late.
Posted by: Charles S | July 10, 2008 at 07:50 PM
I've read that Toyota is working on highly-advanced turbodiesel engines that meet even the CARB 2009 standards for diesel emissions, which means the Tundra pickup and Sequoia large SUV could get such an engine within the next 18 months. That means about 28-32% better fuel economy than now, and better towing capacity, too.
I'm not surprised that Toyota will build the next-generation Prius here, since the USA market is by far the largest market for the Prius model anywhere in the world. The Europeans may claim better fuel economy with their diesel engines but no European diesel car now could meet the current EPA Tier 2 Bin 5 standard, let alone the stricter Tier 2 Bin 3 standard coming by 2010!
Posted by: Raymond | July 10, 2008 at 08:08 PM
Oh look... using the back button causes duplicate postings. How handy. :-/
Posted by: A. Powers | July 11, 2008 at 04:18 AM
I cannot speak for anyone but myself, but my goodness that Tundra's V8 is an amazing engine. I would say its at the top of a very short list of my best-liked engine designs.
I don't mind it drinks like the England Cricket Team, its still a great engine. Toyota outdid themselves on its build.
I cannot bash anyone for wanting to own one of those trucks. They are comfortable, well mannered and very quick off the line. If someone wants those attributes in a vehicle, I say, 'more power to them.' I certainally wouldnt pick on anyone or ruin anyone's day saying they don't "need" a truck like that.
You just don't get those things in eco-friendly cars.
And besides, Americans don't "need" to eat buffets, and have no "need" for any drink besides water. They certainly have no "need" for TV. Or nice clothes. Or shoes...the list goes on.
Its about quality of life being based on free will. That is coming to an end. You should be more worried about free will being snatched away from you or another than about how much fuel someone's car uses.
We all spend money on things we don't "need." Thats what choice is all about.
Nate H.
Dover, Ohio
Posted by: Nate H. | July 11, 2008 at 07:04 PM
Free will. To consume 25% of the world's oil and a similar proportion of other natural resources - timber, textiles, metals, food - for only 300M out of 6000M?
To spend more or military activities than the rest of the world put together - remember the PNAC agenda too - to ensure the flow of all those resources - and US house builders and people think a chipboard shed covered in PVC is a house??? It's a Hollywood set, like the rest of what the poor country has been reduced to.
I don't think it would really be stretching it to call it Terror against the Globe. Most US citizens were/are oblivious of course. They are the prime victims of this terror too and they do not even realise, as their souls were destroyed and the soulless ones replaced them to breathe in those SUV fumes.
Posted by: Emphyrio | July 12, 2008 at 01:26 PM
Sulleny and Harvey D:
If you've ever driven around Detroit Michigan, Orlando or Miami Florida, you'll understand how much safer you feel in a full size truck. While some white trash need a full size truck to compensate, a lot of folks simply feel safer in a full size SUV or truck. If full size trucks were affordable to buy and drive (were BEV's or were able to run of some kind of cheap fuel) I'd own one because of the road presence.
Posted by: ejj | July 12, 2008 at 05:02 PM
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c4fbe53ef00e553930bf08833
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Toyota to Build Prius in US, Temporarily Suspends Tundra and Sequoia Production:

Twitter headlines



The low USD may be blamed for much but it has one clear advantage for the US and that is to attract production in the US such as this announcement. Higher oil prices are also stimulating more production in proximity to the consumers for products where transportation costs to consumers matters.