Talk:Toyota RAV4 EV

message: I am all for electric or alternatively powered cars and all that, but this article is very biased, and reads (as mentioned below above) like an ad for the RAV4.  I am removing the bold and, if I have time in the future, will take a more critical look at the wording and choice of statistics.Njerseyguy 22:49, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bias 

message: I've fixed the performance section to be more objective.  0-60 performance of the RAV4EV is around 18 seconds.  Although this beats the 4-cylinder version in some 0-60 tests, (20 seconds) The comparison is not neccessary. Dw09577 20:22, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Performance 

message: For more objectivity, I've removed the comparison to amt of time used to connect a standard fuel pump and the RAV4EV's charging cable, and simply stated the time it takes to plug it in. Dw09577 20:27, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Charging 

message: Where did 27 MPG for the non-EV RAV4 come from?  According to
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/sbs.htm
the 2003 RAV4 2WD manual was 24 MPG, and the automatic (the more appropriate point of comparison) was 23 MPG.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by EarlKillian (talk • contribs) 01:49, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mileage Costs 

message: I've removed more comparisons to the gas RAV4EV, added in actual figures from articles written at the time of vehicle's release.  http://www.evworld.com/archives/testdrives/rav4ev.html  Dw09577 20:43, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wearable Items 

message: There was a patent infringement lawsuit filed by ECD against Matsushita, Toyota and Panasonic in 2001. Jeff Carr 17:04, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lawsuit over NiMH 

message: I'm having trouble with this:
This paragraph is claiming is that a full charge amounts to 30 kilowatt hours applied to the car. Let's assume 80% efficiency in the charge/discharge cycle, so we have 24 kWh to use from the battery. That is the energy equivalent of about 2-2/3 liters of gasoline - about 0.7 gallons! (Gasoline is around 9 kWh/liter)
Given the EV's superior efficiency this might be equivalent to almost 1.5 gallons. Still... that's a "full charge"?  
Some clarification and sources are needed here. My guess? Maybe it CAN be fully recharged in about five hours... but not from a 6000-watt feed? Jeh (talk) 00:00, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Edit: Ok, elsewhere it says the full capacity of the battery pack is around 27 kWh. That's consistent with the claimed charge time.  But it isn't at all consistent with a claimed 80 mile minimum range. Again, this is the energy equivalent of just about 3 liters of gasoline. Jeh (talk) 00:10, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Charging, again 

message: I liked the cut-away picture of the Rav4 EV better.  It showed that the batteries didn't take up any space inside the vehical because they were under it.  I have heard many anit-EV people say that you cant have any trunk space in an EV because of the batteries.  Do we really need to drop that image?  Thanks Bluetd (talk) 02:31, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  New versus Old Picture 

message: The article contains the statement: "Chevron had inherited control of the worldwide patent rights for the NiMH EV-95 battery when it merged with Texaco, which had purchased them from General Motors. Chevron's unit won a $30,000,000 settlement from Toyota and Panasonic, and the production line for the large NiMH batteries was closed down and dismantled. Only smaller NiMH batteries, incapable of powering an electric vehicle or plugging in, are currently allowed by Chevron-Texaco."
This appears to be factually incorrect.  In fact, according to the Cobasys wikipedia page, "Cobasys is currently contracted to provide NiMH battery systems for the GM's Saturn Vue Green Line SUV, GM's Saturn Aura Green Line sedan, and GM's Chevrolet Malibu Hybrid Sedan." To clarify, Cobasys is the company that actually owns the patent in question.  This statement is fully supported by the references on that page.  Further, I think the facts would be much clearer if references to Chevron in this article were to be replaced with Cobasys.  We can still clarify that Cobasys is owned in part by Chevron (though news articles recenty seem to indicate GM may purchase the company outright, so that may not even be accurate for long!).
Please forgive me if I use this talk page inappropriately, it's my first effort to contribute to wikipedia.  
Defiancecp (talk) 15:09, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accuracy of Chevron Claims 

message: I moved the sales table from the article here, for the purpose of keeping a record, because:
* no citation/reference;
* includes estimates that are possibly original research;
* contradicts to total sales reported by Toyota.
---North wiki (talk) 19:41, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sales table 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Toyota RAV4 EV. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ovonic.com/PDFs/Financial_Reports/form_8k/8k_mbi_patent_infringe_settlement_7july04.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 18:31, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Toyota RAV4 which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 16:30, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress 

message: Regarding this edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Toyota_RAV4_EV&diff=next&oldid=1063477995
The North American electrical grid is 120 volts, not 110 volts, with a maximum deviation of ±5% (114 to 126 V). Refer to ANSI standard C84.1. Calling it "110 V" is a common mistake and should be fixed in all articles, even if the source states "110 V". This is simply a notation mistake and should not be carried over from the source, the same as if a source mixes up "kW" and "kWh". — Glenwing (talk) 18:49, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The US grid is indeed nominally 120 VAC. But that doesn't mean your plug will have 120 VAC on it. The grid is actually 120 VAC +/- 5% (ie 114-126 VAC) with infrequent occurrences to 120 VAC -13% +6% (ie 104-127 VAC). As more appliances are turned on, the voltage tends to drop to the lower end of the allowed range. Thus, a vehicle that is advertised as charging at 120 VAC for, say 40 hours, will take longer if the actual voltage at your plug is 110 VAC and you might be tempted to sue the manufacturer for false advertising. Therefore, some manufacturer protect themselves by supplying the pessimistic charging time at the lower volts. See https://www.pge.com/includes/docs/pdfs/mybusiness/customerservice/energystatus/powerquality/voltage_tolerance.pdf  Stepho  talk  20:35, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  120 Volts