Toyota unveils redesigned Corolla

[Jett Rink]

Gentlemen,
I see lots of Corollas on the road. Usually it is a senior citizen or a young really homely looking female behind the wheel. Make of that what you wish.

It really just comes down to how you view driving. If you really don't enjoy it at all, then these appliance point A to point B cars with minimal hassle obviously have some appeal. If you really like to drive, then as already noted, a used Subaru Impreza would be an option.

For those who just really don't enjoy driving, I often wonder if they have ever driven a car which was really fun to drive. Go test drive a certified used Subaru or BMW with a manual tranny sometime. Will they end up costing you more than that Corolla? Yeah, probably. Maybe you'll think it is worth it though, it if it makes driving that much more enjoyable.

I yield the balance of my time to the next BITOG senator.

 

[JHZR2]

Quote:

---

Why isn't the fact that the EPA changed the way that it arrives at its estimates sinking in here???? It's been stated over and over. You can not directly compare these new EPA estimated mileage figures to those of a few years ago.

The new Corolla has more power and is likely to get the same or better gas mileage than the current model, despite the fact that the new EPA method generally results in lower MPG ratings.

---

But you just stated the exact issue - the new corolla has MORE POWER. The reality is that the new EPA numbers are garbage. In fact, the older ones were too - we relatively easily exceed the EPA highway numbers by 4 MPG in mixed driving... So what is so special about them?

Car makers have two choices, induce more efficiency and gobble it up with a bigger/more powerful engine, or use the gains in a same size, same powered engine to up the economies. They always do the former, because idiots compare hp numbers and engine size, above all else.

The reality is that the existing corolla was powered well enough, IMO, in the AT version that Ive driven. Why add more power? why enlarge the engine? Heck, why enlarge the vehicle at all?

Unless there is significant changes, e.g. higher crash safety ratings requirements, much higher emissions regulations, etc., shame on them for not inducing higher efficiency in their so-called 'green' vehicle lineup... There may not be enough data to confirm for now, but time will tell, and experience indicates where they likely went - not the way Id like to see. So, EPA is a convenient excuse. Toyota has the engineering capability to offer the 41 MPG type numbers, from the 'new' epa system, if they wanted to design it into a clean slate vehicle such as this.

JMH

 

[The Critic]

Quote:

---

The reality is that the existing corolla was powered well enough, IMO, in the AT version that Ive driven.

---

The current Corolla is far from adequately powered if you load the vehicle with 5 passengers (total) and luggage, and try to pass on the highway with the A/C on. Of course, I think I can say this about many four-cylinder NA economy or midsize car on the market right now.

 

[surfstar]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

The reality is that the existing corolla was powered well enough, IMO, in the AT version that Ive driven.

---

The current Corolla is far from adequately powered if you load the vehicle with 5 passengers (total) and luggage, and try to pass on the highway with the A/C on. Of course, I think I can say this about many four-cylinder NA economy or midsize car on the market right now.

---

IMO the Corolla is not designed for that type of duty. If you must use it that way, be prepared to drive slow and give yourself enough time/space to brake and accelerate with all the added weight.

 

[Anduril]

Quote:

---

The current Corolla is far from adequately powered if you load the vehicle with 5 passengers (total) and luggage, and try to pass on the highway with the A/C on. Of course, I think I can say this about many four-cylinder NA economy or midsize car on the market right now.

---

You're driving the wrong car. Go buy a Camry with the V6.

 

[The Critic]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

The current Corolla is far from adequately powered if you load the vehicle with 5 passengers (total) and luggage, and try to pass on the highway with the A/C on. Of course, I think I can say this about many four-cylinder NA economy or midsize car on the market right now.

---

You're driving the wrong car. Go buy a Camry with the V6.

---

I'd buy the Camry V6 if the transmission worked properly.

 

[JHZR2]

I was going to suggest moving to a camry or accord 4-cyl MT if it was such an issue. Regular duty filled with people and cargo doesnt make for happy corolla riders, for that kind of use, the bigger car is justified. An MT 4-cyl camry or accord put out decent power and decent fuel economy numbers... And I cannot imagine them to be underpowered. Granted, my saab has a superior power/torque curve to those engines, but from 2L, 175 hp and 195 lb-ft, filled with 5 people and cargo it is not exactly working up a sweat on all but the hilliest roads. So the camry/accord shouldnt be that bad either. 2.4L is what we have in our previa (non supercharged), and while not fast, isnt a safety hazzard either when loaded down.

JMH

 

[The Critic]

Quote:

---

I was going to suggest moving to a camry or accord 4-cyl MT if it was such an issue. Regular duty filled with people and cargo doesnt make for happy corolla riders, for that kind of use, the bigger car is justified. An MT 4-cyl camry or accord put out decent power and decent fuel economy numbers... And I cannot imagine them to be underpowered. Granted, my saab has a superior power/torque curve to those engines, but from 2L, 175 hp and 195 lb-ft, filled with 5 people and cargo it is not exactly working up a sweat on all but the hilliest roads. So the camry/accord shouldnt be that bad either. 2.4L is what we have in our previa (non supercharged), and while not fast, isnt a safety hazzard either when loaded down.

JMH

---

First, the car must have an automatic. Period.

Second, the 0-60 and 1/4 mile times for a 4-cyl Camry and Corolla are relatively similar, so how would one be more powerful?

Lastly, the Previa is much, much slower than any four-cylinder than any 4-cyl Camry/Corolla from my experience.

 

[javacontour]

I don't know about calling the EPA numbers garbage. They probably reflect how many/most people drive.

Both my former wife and my current wife would not match my fuel economy when driving.

I'm not talking about she drives in town and I only drive her car on road trips.

My wife takes the tC to work, and has a mostly highway commute, without heavy traffic. She has been getting BELOW my average fuel economy as I've been tracking it for the past 22K miles.

So while I believe one can easily beat the EPA estimates if they drive smartly, the EPA numbers are probably very accurate for what they are trying to measure, which is TYPICAL fuel economy observed by motorists.

 

[refaller]

I actually like the new look. However, cars are more functional than fun for me. While I agree that the new EPA numbers probably will reflect more "typical" numbers, it makes it harder to compare across model years. I have seen many commercials lately advertising 07 model cars and their fantastic gas mileage. Of course, comparing it to an 08 will be very misleading. In addition, for people like me, it makes it harder to determine what I should actually get. I have always beaten the EPA numbers.

ref

 

[gregmp]

I think that's the car they use in those funny new Chevy Malibu commercials.

It's definately the car you CAN ignore.

boooooooOOOOoooorrring.

 

[gregmp]

The Matrix looks like a Scion. Probably comes with a big fartpipe. A lot more interesting though.

 

[Schmoe]

that thing is still ugly, period.

 

[wapacz]

From what I have seen its pretty much 2 to 3 mpg less between 2007 and 2008. My mom picked up a 2007 saturn aura xr. It is ratted for 28 on the highway, in 2008 it is rated for 26. Thought my mom just made a road trip in it and did 29 to 30mpg going 70 to 75. So who knows.