more (technical) info about the Mirai

2016 Toyota Mirai Fuel-Cell Sedan: 312 Miles Of Range

Toyota also says the Mirai will achieve 67 MPGe combined, putting it behind all battery-electric cars currently on sale, and even most plug-in hybrids.

When it does go on sale, the Mirai will carry a sticker price of $57,500, and will be be available to lease for $499 per month (with a $3,649 down payment).

Toyota will offer drivers three years of unlimited free hydrogen fuel, as well as a three-year subscription to its Safety Connect and Entune telematics services.

Source:http://www.greencarreports.com/news...ai-fuel-cell-sedan-312-miles-of-range-67-mpge

So the only important thing is range ?
:lol:

Not really 312 usable as some is needed to get to/from the filling station that is probably a bit out of the way.

I'm going to a Mirai event in Santa Monica in a couple weeks. I live about 2 miles from one of the free refueling pitstops, so that's no problem for me.

Since my lease is up in about a year, I'll look seriously at the Mirai. The lease price is pretty close to what I got for the RAV 4 EV, and the free fuel and double range is a huge plus. I'd say about 2-3 times a month I have to use my ICE vehicle because of range issues.

I also like the fact that it is new design, instead of cut and paste job. Don't get me wrong, I love my RAV and it has treated me very well. But onward and upward is good too.

bruin nut said:

I'm going to a Mirai event in Santa Monica in a couple weeks. I live about 2 miles from one of the free refueling pitstops, so that's no problem for me.

Since my lease is up in about a year, I'll look seriously at the Mirai. The lease price is pretty close to what I got for the RAV 4 EV, and the free fuel and double range is a huge plus. I'd say about 2-3 times a month I have to use my ICE vehicle because of range issues.

I also like the fact that it is new design, instead of cut and paste job. Don't get me wrong, I love my RAV and it has treated me very well. But onward and upward is good too.

Click to expand...

Go for it,
but don't buy, lease so you can return it after 3 years ;-)

How many miles on your rav4ev so far ?
Will you be driving the mirai a lot ?

I'd say about 2-3 times a month I have to use my ICE vehicle because of range issues.

Click to expand...

you're still going to be relying on your ICE'er because there's no long term plan in place for Hydrogen stations.

If you think they are going be approved, and built faster then L2/L3 EV stations... :lol:

Guess again..

Plus did you see the latest writeup on Insideevs and GreenCar Reports? That test drive seems pretty sad. Pump noises, water tank issues, slow acceleration, etc,etc..

And it's an UGLY ass car! :lol:

Ohh.. excuse me.. FUGLY

P.S. Didn't know the SantaMonica station was in operations now...
http://www.cafcp.org/stationmap

If I get it, I will definitely lease.

As for using the ICE vehicle, I don't see why I would need it with the Mirai. As I said, I'm very close to a refueling station.

I'll report back after the test drive. Personally, I like a sedan better than an SUV and don't see the Mirai as being ugly at all. In fact, I am not too thrilled with the plane jane looks of the RAV 4EV.

bruin nut said:

If I get it, I will definitely lease.

As for using the ICE vehicle, I don't see why I would need it with the Mirai. As I said, I'm very close to a refueling station.

I'll report back after the test drive. Personally, I like a sedan better than an SUV and don't see the Mirai as being ugly at all. In fact, I am not too thrilled with the plane jane looks of the RAV 4EV.

Click to expand...

Taste is something personal.
The mirai needs a lot of cooling for the process, so there is a large radiator in the front.
Hence part of the front looks. I am not charmed by the way it looks.

For me an SUV is way more practical with 2 dogs and often hauling stuff.
I think I am really spoiled by finding a full car every morning in my garage and don't have to worry about going somewhere to get fuel. And with the QC add-on, if I do have to charge, it max takes 40 minutes max to either get home or to the next QC station.
Yes, more range in the rav4 would be great. After my lease is over, I am probably looking at a model X.
I will never go to anything but battery electric again.
But that is just personal

Excess cooling would mean wasted heat and efficiency. It would also be limited to a local car for many because of fueling. I think Toyota made this ugly on purpose.

4EVEREV said:

Excess cooling would mean wasted heat and efficiency.

Click to expand...

Hence only the 67 MPGe I presume vs the rav4ev's 76
I assume it has more problems with driving in a 110+F environment than a BEV has.

It would also be limited to a local car for many because of fueling. I think Toyota made this ugly on purpose.

Click to expand...

[/quote]
My guess is that if you use your vehicle to go somewhere and back, 100 miles might be miss sometimes. Being able to do 300+ will be great to go back.
But i you run out, or have to take a diversion "out there" and you are not able to get back you have a problem. Means getting a tow to the fill station.

Musk described the range problem like this:
"If we wanted to, we could create a 500 mile battery pack right now, but the marginal utility from going to 400 mile range to 500 mile range is pretty low. The sweet spot is from 250 mile to 350 mile range, that's really ideal."
I prefer a smaller range but being able to charge about everywhere if needed , even though it would mean having to wait hours.

Like this article

Can Hydrogen Fuel-Cell Vehicles Compete With Electric Cars?
http://www.popsci.com.au/tech/cars/can-hydrogen-fuelcell-vehicles-compete-with-electric-cars,380574


Plug-ins have head start

But for the moment, this much is clear: Global automakers will start to build and offer very acceptable hydrogen-fueled vehicles, in numbers from dozens to thousands a year, between now and 2020.
Those vehicles will only be usable in areas where a sustained effort to cover the region with hydrogen fueling stations is already underway. Today, in the U.S., that means Southern California and nowhere else.
Meanwhile, U.S. plug-in car sales are likely to come in around 90,000 this year - of which more than 15,000 will be Tesla Model S electric luxury sedans with more than 200 miles of range.
We expect there to be multiple fuels in the decades going forward; the hegemony of gasoline and diesel will slowly erode as more ethanol, more natural gas, and probably a lot more electricity makes its way from the grid into more vehicles.
Will hydrogen have a place in the mix?
Perhaps not surprisingly, electric-car advocate Chelsea Sexton, to whom we often turn for perspective, thinks not.

No natural constituency?

But in responding to our question, she raised an interesting point.
"There’s never been a pent-up market for hydrogen vehicles," Sexton said, "even a small one."
And that contrasts with the thousands of drivers who'd already experienced electric cars in one form or another by the time the first Nissan Leaf and first Chevy Volt were sold in December 2010.
"I don't see either the market or the infrastructure materializing" in any way that will put meaningful numbers of hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles on the road over the next decade, she said.
And she suggested that a double standard exists: "The same carmakers who claim that no market exists for electric vehicles" still expect "to have to build one for hydrogen vehicles

What really matters?

In other words: What's the constituency for a hydrogen-powered vehicle? Who's the market?
And does it matter that you can't drive your electric car outside a given radius (your home plus any available DC fast charging stations) if you can't drive a hydrogen-powered car outside a 150-mile range of the 40 fueling stations California hopes to build by 2015?
None of these are simple questions, and the answers promise to be a complex mix of consumer desires, government policy, energy politics, and automaker jockeying.
Which is why we think it'll be hellacious fun to cover over the next decade.

fromport said:

Taste is something personal.
The mirai needs a lot of cooling for the process, so there is a large radiator in the front.
Hence part of the front looks. I am not charmed by the way it looks.

Click to expand...

I totally agree also.. but Toyota seems to be going down this route with their styling now and new 2016+ models....

Mirai.....


And the new Camry... UGH...





And you remember that movie Predator with Arnold from back in the 80's?? :lol:



Car is always looking MAD :evil:

I attended the Mirai event in Santa Monica today. It was a very nice rollout. After the video presentation, I was allowed an extended test drive, which lasted about 20 minutes. I went on surface streets and a couple of miles on the freeway. All in all I was very impressed. The pickup was very similar to the RAV 4 EV. It was certainly not as peppy as our Sport mode, but much better than a prius or other subcompact. The dash and instrument panel was first rate, as are the lines of sight and seating configurations. The back seat is very similar to the Rav, but much more comfortable. Both rear seats adjust and have individual heaters and AC vent controls. There's also a USB port and 12v port for the back seat passengers. But there's only two seats back there. That reminded me of the Chevy Volt.

Best features:

Very quiet inside (and out). It's much quieter than the RAV; not because the motor is quieter, but because the insulation is better. I think the "cardboard" doors on the RAV are the worst feature on the car (along with Entune).
Lexus quality interior, including solid doors and windows, and JBL kick ass sound system.
Dedicated ground up build.
Every tech gizmo
excellent range
speedy fueling capability
7 days of rental car per year, to be used any way desired
free gas
5k CARB rebate

Worst features:

Tiny trunk
range issues (related to lack of H infrastructure)
Car leaks water after drive (although there is a nifty "flush" valve that will empty reservoir prior to reaching destination)
Higher lease cost than RAV 4EV
lack of middle seat in rear
no moonroof


I've decided to send in my application and see what happens. I think I check all the right boxes, so it's just a story of supply and demand. The range issue is not a concern since there are sufficient stations near my house and work, and near the places I'll be driving. In fact, this will eliminate the need to use my ICE car from time to time, or have the anxiety of a trip that exceeds my current range when I don't know if the chargers I need will be available.

The other issue is I have a year left on my RAV lease. Hopefully I can time in right, since delivery is promised between 2 - 10 months from order time.

well i checked, there are exactly zero stations between Fremont and my house in the mountains. I *could* (probably) drive up there and back without refuelling on the 312 miles of range, although i dont know how notional that will be (undoubtably driving in the mountains will decrease the range, just like it does for the Rav4EV). There'sa big Toyota dealer in Fremont, i'm surprised they're not getting a station for this thing.

Theres ONE station in Sacramento the rest are in the bay area up here it looks like. Nothing along I-5 except maybe at Harris Ranch. (thats probably ok for getting to/from LA though). Its not finished yet of course.

Itd be really cool to have a car that runs on the same fuel as the Space Shuttle, but it'd be nice to not get stuck with it. (having done that exactly once with my Rav4EV...)

You might want to look into this report regarding the reliability of the hydrogen stations...
http://www.greencarreports.com/news...-hydrogen-fuel-unavailable-stations-dont-work

Might want to look at the Tuscon FCHV group and all their problems and fueling issues.... :roll: https://www.facebook.com/groups/513010068843714/

UPDATE ON FUELING STATIONS.. http://www.greencarreports.com/news...-hydrogen-fuel-unavailable-stations-dont-work

And BTW...

Speaking at the JP Morgan Auto Conference in New York, Toyota’s senior vice president Bob Carter said that Department of Energy estimates suggest that a full tank of compressed hydrogen will cost around $50. This will fall to $30 in time, he claimed.

($50 / 300 = 17 cents/mile. $30 / 300 = 10 cents/mile.)

http://ecomento.com/2014/08/13...

How does Toyota expect to attract buyers to a car that costs 2x to 3x as much as a Camry and costs far more per mile to operate?

Their FCEV isn't a zippy car like the entry level Tesla, even though the price is not much different. It doesn't have the interior room of a Tesla nor does it aspire to be a "luxury" car. And at 17 cents per mile it will cost 4x to 6x as much per mile to drive.

Who will buy one of these? Where's the market? How does Toyota sell 100,000 or so in order to bring the price down?

Who's going to build the fueling system so that it's safe to drive further than ~100 miles from your city hydrogen station?

(And it's an ugly puppy.)

Good luck with that thing!

It's truly amazing the hostility to FCV among EV drivers. I really don't get it.

I've read that article and the comments are really brutal. But much of the article is antidotal and not completely believable. For example, the Torrance station has never been "down" and has never experienced waits with multiple fueling. The infrastructure is being built and that's a good thing. That will reduce costs in the long run and provide a more convenient and reliable fueling infrastructure. I really love my RAV 4 EV but I don't drive it if my round trip is over 120 miles, even if I know there are charging locations. That's because I've been ICE'ed too many times, the chargers have been down, or the spots are occupied with other EVs. With the Mirai, I can drive (or soon will be able to drive) anywhere I want (Bay Area, San Diego, Palm Springs) without worry. That can't happen in and EV unless I buy a Tesla.

I like the prospect of excellent range and speedy refueling, even if it's not in my garage. I drove the Mirai and it is very quick, incredibly quiet, and much nicer inside and out than the RAV. It is really purpose-built and it shows.

As for fuel costs, why should I care? It's free for the 3-year lease. After that term is up, then I can decide whether to explore another FCV and the price will be more predictable (and lower).

The price of the Mirai is much different than the Tesla, even entry level. It is loaded with options, so that comparison does not work. You get at $5k rebate from CARB, and if you buy it, a $7.5k reduction in price. And the lease deal is heavily subsidized (much like the one I have on my RAV).

I think there's room at the zero emission party for lots of folks.

No, the Torrance station has been down PLENTY of times as has been all the other stations. Out of fuel scenarios, etc. One look on the multiple "FCHV" groups shows that already so don't live in denial or try to force that here.

They are disgusted at the QoS they are receiving from the CAFCP and it shows. They have to inform each other when stations have enough or are empty. Plenty complain that there's not enough for "round trip" sessions for work and then have to drive back again a day or 2 later.

Sure its free, but who's footing the bill?? We all are. And these 8 (YES 8 operational stations) can't even hold up the Tuscon owners let alone the Mirai wave that's about to sweep.

I hate it when people say "it's free".... nothing is for free. :roll: and the fuel you're using... well we all know that it consumes 4x more energy then what the Rav4ev or a BEV would have. (you know you have to drill, frack, process, compress, store, transport-burn oil, then re-compress.. then fill your magical Mirai up to 10k-psi)

I guess that's all free? And there's plenty of room at the ZEV party... as long as you're inviting all your oil company buddies?

Right?

bruin nut said:

It's truly amazing the hostility to FCV among EV drivers. I really don't get it.

Click to expand...

I don't think that is to be called hostility

I've read that article and the comments are really brutal.

Click to expand...

I haven't read all the comments but the one I read seemed polite and actually logical.
Like: you will be always be able to charge your EV at home, maybe aided with solar to make it truly zero emission.
You cant' ever say that for a FCV. you will always have to go to a fuel station. And currently there hydrogen comes from fossil fuels.
So you can go greaner with EV's than with FCV's. I didn't see any hostility in that conversation, did you ?

But much of the article is antidotal and not completely believable. For example, the Torrance station has never been "down" and has never experienced waits with multiple fueling.

Click to expand...

How do you know ? do you drive an FCV ? do you know people who do ?
From the rapport on http://www.energy.ca.gov/2015publications/CEC-600-2015-004/CEC-600-2015-004.pdf

Station Overview
This is a dedicated hydrogen-only refueling station that was opened to the public in
May 2011 and is owned and operated by Shell. It is located adjacent to Interstate 405 at
Western Avenue. The station uses pipeline-fed hydrogen from the Air Products
Wilmington and Carson hydrogen production facilities. Air Products designed, built,
and maintains this station.
The Air Products pipeline supplies the station with hydrogen at 60 bar, which contains
carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, and methane levels up to 15 parts per million. These
contaminants are removed using membrane purifiers upstream of the compressors. A 50
kg/day PDC Machines diaphragm compressor increases the hydrogen pressure to 448
bar, and a Hydropac hydraulic booster compressor further raises the pressure to 1,000
bar. Hydrogen is stored in two banks, with 120 kg at 448 bar and 32 kg at 1,000 bar.
There are two dispensers, each equipped with two nozzles; one nozzle for 350 bar and
the other for 700 bar fills. A mechanical chiller precools the hydrogen to -20° C at the
dispenser to enable fast fills.
With a capacity of 50 kg/day, the station can fill 10 to 12
vehicles per day.

That sounds like a serious bottleneck to me, but I don't know from experience.

The infrastructure is being built and that's a good thing. That will reduce costs in the long run and provide a more convenient and reliable fueling infrastructure. I really love my RAV 4 EV but I don't drive it if my round trip is over 120 miles, even if I know there are charging locations. That's because I've been ICE'ed too many times, the chargers have been down, or the spots are occupied with other EVs. With the Mirai, I can drive (or soon will be able to drive) anywhere I want (Bay Area, San Diego, Palm Springs) without worry. That can't happen in and EV unless I buy a Tesla.

Click to expand...

I recently drove 2600 miles in 12 days, rav4 with quick charging.
Yes, certain area's are challenging, but eg in Oregon I never had to think about getting a charge, every 25-40 miles there are QuickChargers for a fixed price of $20/month.
The upcoming BC2BC rally is another example.
You won't be able to go from canada to mexican border with an FCV car any time soon.
I will be doing that with my RAV4EV

So it is really how a person wants to look at it.

I like the prospect of excellent range and speedy refueling, even if it's not in my garage. I drove the Mirai and it is very quick, incredibly quiet, and much nicer inside and out than the RAV. It is really purpose-built and it shows.

As for fuel costs, why should I care? It's free for the 3-year lease. After that term is up, then I can decide whether to explore another FCV and the price will be more predictable (and lower).

The price of the Mirai is much different than the Tesla, even entry level. It is loaded with options, so that comparison does not work. You get at $5k rebate from CARB, and if you buy it, a $7.5k reduction in price. And the lease deal is heavily subsidized (much like the one I have on my RAV).

I think there's room at the zero emission party for lots of folks.

Click to expand...

I am looking forward to your review after you've driven the Mirai for 3-6 months.

I agree with bruin nut about the ev hostility towards hydrogen. I don't get it. Mind you, I think electric vehicles are the ultimate answer. I'm just for exploring all options. Let the masses decide. And hopefully there will be masses turning away from oil.

I look at some of the hate towards hydrogen and wonder what some ev owners are afraid of. It's not like the RAV4 EV has been the flawless answer. The same people hating hydrogen seem to be also complaining about the RAV4 EV. As in Lemon Law talk.

I think the RAV 4 EV is a GREAT car for around town. 98 percent of the time it fits my needs. I suspect a hydrogen would also fit the bill for 98% of the time. The difference for me is having solar and getting the power for free now without having to go anywhere to get it. Going to a station to get fuel seems old school. But stopping every 130 miles on a long distance trip for a recharge no matter how quick also seems a waste of time. Public recharging is nice to have as safety net but isn't the solution If I want to go to Canada, an airplane seems to be the right tool for that job.

To each his own. May the best solution win. I did chuckle at the Hindenburg reference. Sort of reminds be of the uninformed talk of battery fires in the Teslas a while back.

If Toyota is smart, they will delay the Mirai launch until there are more Hydrogen stations opened. The CAFCP.org stations site was recently updated and they pushed back all the station in the SF Bay Area 2 or 3 quarters. Some sites have changed too. The Cupertino location was moved to the nearby edge of Los Altos and the Palo Alto station was moved further down El Camino. I don't think Toyota will have a reasonable launch conditions in the Bay Area until Summer 2016. This is the new schedule in chronological order:

2015-Q4
---------
Hayward
San Jose
South San Francisco

2016-Q1
---------
Campbell
Mill Valley
Rohnert Park
San Ramon
Saratoga
Woodside

2016-Q2
---------
Foster City
Los Altos
Mountain View
Palo Alto
Redwood City

2016-Q3
---------
Oakland