Rental corolla- my thoughts

[Hokiefyd]

Originally Posted By: Bill in Utah
Originally Posted By: odie
I believe the COROLLA has a timing chain . So ,no need to worry . Long as you change the oil .


It has since 2000.


I think it's been since '98. '98 was the first year for the 1ZZ-FE engine. 2000 is when it got VVT.

 

[odie]

Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
Originally Posted By: Bill in Utah
Originally Posted By: odie
I believe the COROLLA has a timing chain . So ,no need to worry . Long as you change the oil .


It has since 2000.


I think it's been since '98. '98 was the first year for the 1ZZ-FE engine. 2000 is when it got VVT.
you are correct , since '98 .

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: CBR.worm
The corolla, like many toyotas, is a perfect utilitarian vehicle. It is not sold to the same audience as a focus or fusion.

They are extremely reliable, if boring. But if you drive one with 200k, they still feel exactly the same - perfect and boring.

My sister in law has one with about 150k. She just drives it and gets the oil changed when the dash light comes on. She was upset when it needed brake pads at 80k and then she was upset when the dealer suggested a timing belt and plug change at 105k. She didn't do it because she heard that toyotas don't need expensive maintenance and it was a scam. So she just keeps driving it. It still drives just as it did the day she picked it up.

I would never buy one - I prefer a car with character, but for basic, smooth, reliable transportation they are an excellent choice.


Interesting. A buddy of mine picked-up a 2002 Corolla-S. It was indeed boring and utilitarian. It also however, had a mad thirst for oil. He figured he'd never need to check it because....

DUHN DUHN DUH!

It was a Toyota.

When he found it went through 2L in like 5,000Km or something ridiculous, he sold it and bought a 5L Explorer. And he got good money for the Corolla because.....

DUHN DUHN DUH!

It was a Toyota.

So obviously, nothing could go wrong with it. And that thirst for oil it had was just part of the Superior Japanese Engineering.

BTW, it had plenty of squeeks and rattles. The transmission shifted like garbage (but then, I find most FWD transmissions do, so it was probably perfectly fine) and it was in dire need of shocks (which I don't fault it for, I imagine this is the case with any car from the GTA, which is where it was from, since the roads are HORRIBLE). I believe it had 150,000Km on it?

 

[ItsuMitsubishi]

I have to believe Nick when he says he was trying to be unbiased about his experience. After driving one of those things myself, I kind of thought to myself "geez, the wave of marketing psychology and brand prestige can really last for ages, no matter how badly the company betrays it's original values". And I sir, pride myself in being among the first to spot pretension.

 

[Hokiefyd]

2 quarts of oil over 3100 miles for a vehicle with over 100,000 miles isn't a ridiculous amount. That's within the tolerance of most every NEW vehicle that I know of. And with 150k clicks on it.

All manufacturers market their wares. At some point, the consumer has to do his own research and find out what's a good risk and what isn't. Anyone who bases an automotive purchase on a brand's marketing or "prestige" is only fooling himself.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
2 quarts of oil over 3100 miles for a vehicle with over 100,000 miles isn't a ridiculous amount. That's within the tolerance of most every NEW vehicle that I know of. And with 150k clicks on it.

All manufacturers market their wares. At some point, the consumer has to do his own research and find out what's a good risk and what isn't. Anyone who bases an automotive purchase on a brand's marketing or "prestige" is only fooling himself.


That is 150,000Km; 93,000 miles. See, I consider that type of consumption excessive. Whether the manufacturer does or doesn't (and probably all of them wouldn't) is the case because they have warranty claims to deal with. My old Lincoln doesn't go through near that with more than twice the mileage on it. Even the little Fungus (Focus) I got my wife doesn't seem to go through any discernible oil.

Again, I think a lot of this is personal opinion; there are many Saturn S-series out there that drink oil faster than gasoline and still drive around reliably, but it is not something I would consider healthy operation. And definitely not something he was used to experiencing with his past vehicles.

I'm sure it would have been a reliable car. But that consumption was a red flag for him, and it would have been for me too. If any of my vehicles used that much oil I would be actively looking for the reason why and then how to fix it.


Your last point rings true. But sadly, there are many who base their purchases on brand reputation and marketing alone. And will take something like "it won't ever need work" from a friend or family member, or even a salesperson as gospel. And these are the people that end up on the side of the road with their wheel sideways because a tie-rod end let go; a part impossible to fail because it was a "insert brand here" and these cars never need repairs!

 

[ItsuMitsubishi]

Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
And these are the people that end up on the side of the road with their wheel sideways because a tie-rod end let go; a part impossible to fail because it was a "insert brand here" and these cars never need repairs!

Wow, you've noticed that too eh?? A certain automaker who shall remain nameless, has had it's vehicles caught poised like this for well over 10years that I can think of..not to mention two personal experiences.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: ItsuMitsubishi
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
And these are the people that end up on the side of the road with their wheel sideways because a tie-rod end let go; a part impossible to fail because it was a "insert brand here" and these cars never need repairs!

Wow, you've noticed that too eh?? A certain automaker who shall remain nameless, has had it's vehicles caught poised like this for well over 10years that I can think of..not to mention two personal experiences.


Yup, saw one on the side of the 401 last week, LOL

 

[Hokiefyd]

Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL

Again, I think a lot of this is personal opinion; there are many Saturn S-series out there that drink oil faster than gasoline and still drive around reliably, but it is not something I would consider healthy operation. And definitely not something he was used to experiencing with his past vehicles.

I'm sure it would have been a reliable car. But that consumption was a red flag for him, and it would have been for me too. If any of my vehicles used that much oil I would be actively looking for the reason why and then how to fix it.


Fair enough. And he could have chosen the same path. He didn't, and we don’t know what the problem is. Heck, it could've been a plugged PCV system. Is it really fair to make an example out of an automaker, which appeared to be the point of your post, based on one used car with 150,000 kilos on the odometer, that may not have had a problem that a $10 PCV valve couldn't fix? He took a risk and bought a used car. Frankly, he stood as much of a chance of getting an oil-burning as he did getting an oil-burning Corolla. Sometimes a used car purchase is nothing more than a used car purchase, and we all know the risks associated with that. Then again, the early ZZ engines are known to have consumption issues. Just like Saturns, just like older Cadillac Northstars, etc. He bought one and it used some oil. Not much else to say I guess.

And again, regarding buying based on prestige or past reliability, we all have to do that to some extent. Cars are machines, and none are perfect. People like to hold some automakers to a higher standard, simply because they have a good historical record, or how Consumer Reports might rate them. Anyone expecting a perfect vehicle or experience from ANY manufacturer is deluding themselves. No automaker has a perfect track record. All have had large recalls, and they all build cars that break. I've seen cars from every make broken down on the road. Ironically, sometimes it's we who are setting standards for certain automakers that none could hope to meet.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
Is it really fair to make an example out of an automaker, which appeared to be the point of your post, based on one used car with 150,000 kilos on the odometer, that may not have had a problem that a $10 PCV valve couldn't fix?


It wasn't really to "make an example" more to simply "give" an example of a less than perfect experience with a Toyota product and to show that they can, and DO have issues just like any other brand.

Your last statement rings true to that effect. No automaker has a perfect track record indeed. None are perfect.

Going by some people's posting about Toyota on this board, it shouldn't have needed a PCV valve either

 

[Hokiefyd]

Yes, of course it'll need maintenance. It's a car!

I agree that I've read "my favorite automaker is perfect" statements on here, spoken about pretty much every major brand. I try to ignore them. My dad taught me something early on that seems to always ring true: you can't argue opinions; you can only argue facts.

 

[Kaboomba]

I rented a 2008 Corolla S for a 600 mi business trip in Dec '08.

I was not impressed.

It was gutless, bouncy, wandered on the freeway, and seriously lacked elbow room (I am 6' 2"). Later, on slick snowy roads in Ann Arbor, MI, I discovered that it did NOT have ABS!

At that point I finally officially regretted not driving my 1994 Taurus GL.

2008 Corolla S OWNED by 1994 Taurus GL