From: Mike Hunter on
That is only partially correct, Toyota is licensed to use Ford patents, as
well. They are cross licensed to the same technology developed jointly with
Volvo and a Japanese electronic company, subsequently owned by Toyota.

Check the CAFE Guide and see whose hybrid SUV get the greater mileage ;)


<mrv(a)> wrote in message
> On Jul 3, 10:50 pm, "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <e...(a)> wrote:
>> In article <1183513496.126153.143...(a)>,
>> "m...(a)" <m...(a)> wrote:
>> > Sorry, I don't have data on the Ford Escape hybrid/Mercury Mariner
>> > hybrid, for the relevant other group...
>> Ford licenses Toyota's HSD, do they not?
> <quote>
> Is Ford using the Toyota hybrid system?
> Although the Ford hybrid system is very similar to Toyota's, Toyota is
> not directly supplying any components to Ford. Toyota and Ford have
> entered into a licensing agreement allowing Ford to use technology
> that had been patented by Toyota. Toyota welcomes the introduction of
> the Escape hybrid and Ford's effort to demonstrate and gain acceptance
> of this important environmental technology.
> </quote>

From: Mike Hunter on
See previous posts ;)


"witfal" <nospam(a)> wrote in message
> On 2007-07-05 12:39:36 -0700, "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop(a)>
> said:
>> So to sum it all up:
>> yes, Ford licenses Toyota technology.
> So, what about that, Mike? :-)

From: Mike Hunter on
As one might expect you have it wrong because you did not do proper
research. If you did you would discover Ford had a hybrid Escape ready for
market when they purchased Volvo. Volvo was partnered in a joint venture
in Japan with Toyota, a Japanese electronics company and another Japanese
company that was developing a more advanced system. Ford held off the
hybrid Escape for a year or more in deference to the newer more efficient
system. ALL of the companies in the joint venture are cross licensed, to
all of the resulting technology. Subsequently Toyota bought the Electronics


"Jeff" <kidsdoc2000(a)> wrote in message
> Mike Hunter wrote:
>> Actually both Toyota and Ford are likened to each others technology,
>> since it was developed under a joint venture, via Volvo.
> Actually, this article implies that Toyota developed the technology, and
> Ford licensed the technology, apparently after working independently. That
> is not a joint venture. It sounds like Ford and Toyota developed similar
> technology and crossed licensed the technology to avoid legal problems.
> This paragraph supports this idea: "Ford also licensed Toyota hybrids
> patents after its engineers realized that the system Ford had developed
> had features similar to ones patented by Toyota. (Honda developed a
> different hybrid system.)"

From: DH on
"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2(a)> wrote in message
> Are you really that slow witted? Of course the dealership can screw you.
> How do you think you could screw the dealership?

If I want a new car, then the dealership will get the opportunity to make a
profit on the sale. But, since I own highly desireable cars that resell
well, I'll sell them privately and avoid getting taken on the trade.

The key, of course, is to have a highly desireable used car to sell. Those
unfortunates who bought new Fords will find their cars take a long time to
sell, for poor prices and very likely to leave them upside down on any loan
they may have taken. Consequently, they go back to the dealer, accept the
trade offer and sink into a worse deal.

> We did not expect you to understand the difference. You have it backwards,
> the sucker is the ones that will accepts the selling price as what he is
> paying for the car and does not obtain a "Drive Home Price" which is the
> total price one pays to drive it home, dummy.
> mike

Exactly. "Drive home price" as in the dealer tells the customer, "bend over
and I'll show you the 'drive home' price."

I'll continue to look at "expense." Let's see... 4 perfectly reliable 7 to
8 year-old Toyotas, low depreciation, good fuel economy, no repair bills,
low maintenance costs... overall my expenses are low; far lower than when I
was foolish enough to drive a Ford.

> "DH" <dh(a)> wrote in message
> news:468d2585$0$16315$88260bb3(a)
>> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2(a)> wrote in message
>> news:WcqdnVy9JcjctRDbnZ2dnUVZ_jmdnZ2d(a)
>>> MSRP is meaningless. Forget the on line searches and get out in the
>>> real world and you will discover with any vehicle purchase, one must
>>> compare the "Drive Home Price," not the MSRP or even the selling price,
>>> among dealers or brands.
>>> Dealers add all type of fees and other smoke and mirror packages to the
>>> cars on their lots and their deals. If there is any rebate, or dealer
>>> or factory discounts they will be greater on the conventionally powered
>>> car than on any hybrid. The value of ones trade varies from dealer to
>>> dealer as well.
>>> mike
>> I imagine that, in your dealer days, you had a pretty good name for the
>> people that compared the "drive home price:" "Suckers."
>> Remember when you said, "we [the dealership] were the ones doing the
>> screwing?" I remember it. A rare moment of candor from "mike hunter."

Posted via a free Usenet account from

From: B A R R Y on
Bill Putney wrote:
> Ha ha! But Toyota slipped up by uncluding in that article that it would
> not even go a mile on battery only.

I don't know what you mean. I've driven the car in 25-30 MPH traffic
where the car didn't start for a good amount of time.