Corollas2019-23ToyotasTech

Search Corolland!

By Cherry128, October 9, 2005

See every reply in these pages:



I have some bad news for you folks with Corollas. I test drove a '06 Civic 2 door coupe, and the ONLY things the Corolla does better is the following:

1) Larger truck

2) lower sticker price

3) 2mpg better mileage

4) more headroom

5) better visibility

6) 100lbs lighter

7) More ground clearance for off road use

That's about it.

Toyota needs to get their act together quickly to catch up. I don;t think there has ever been this big of a gap in the compact car class.

Here's what the new Civic does better:

1) Instruments are very slick without being over the top. The digital speedo above the sttering wheel is easy ot read and no too distracting, but looks really cool. IT would take a little getting used to. I still like traditional gauges, but this was pretty neat.

2) Materials of construction rival or exceed my '04 Accord.

3) Feel. the steering wheel is small and has lots of feel. You instantly are thinking forumual 1 race car.

4) Handling - incredibly stable, very smooth, excellent feel, jsut the right amount of paower assist. Feels like a good European car.

5) Refinement - ride quality, and sounds deadening, is as good or better than my Accord. Thsi doesn;t feel like a compact car. Even at 3500RPM on the freeway, there is no engine buzz.

6) Endless legroom. I had at least 2-3 inches ot spare on the adjustment. The 4 door might have a little less. The tilt and telescoping steering wheel and 6 way seat adjustments allowed me to find a perfect postion.

7) Navigation is an option. It's XM sattelite ready. The coupe offered a 350 Watt 7 speaker stereo system including a subwoofer.

8) Performance was on par with the Corolla. The new engine makes 140HP, but has a little less meat in the midrange, but a little more top end hit. There is less valve clatter and a sportier exhaust note.

I'm expect this car to hands down win the magazine comparison test next year. First impression is that this thng is a winner and has set the new standard for compact cars. I personally still like the larger size and better freeway ride of my Accord, so I'm not trading it in. But if you can spend an extra $1000 on a compact car, right now this Civic is the way to go.

I too drove an 06 Civic sedan yesterday, I agree that they are way ahead in the tech department. the sedan auto 5 spd was rated 30 city and 40 hwy. I was going to buy the Toyota S yesterday but didnt so far, the Civic has me thinking now. The Honda has standard side air bags, anti lock brakes, and lot's more!

My 2 cents

Well it's a newer design from a good company so of course it's going to seem better. The same cycle happens all the time:

- focus comes out, lots of them sell

- '03 corolla comes out, lots of them sell

- mazda 3 comes out, lots of them sell

- '06 civic comes out, lots of them sell

You can bet than in a year the roads will be flooded with new civics. A few years later it's going to be the new corollas again and so on. I'd also add:

- The new civic is ugly. I know this is subjective but it still matters: it's a design which will draw a lot of buyers but will also push many more away.

- Digital instruments suck. I'm not pulling this out of nowhere as I've driven a car with a digital speedo for many years. Digital requires more concentration to read and seeing the (huge!) last digit constantly change is distracting.

- No feedback on actual build quality yet. I sincerely hope we won't be seeing more of the decreasing quality trend (this seems to affect all manufacturers btw).

With that said, toyota still has some serious work to do for the next corolla:

- Fix the ergonomic issues. ALL of them. This is ridiculous.

- Improve sound deadening.

- Drivetrain choices: either a more efficient engine, a hybrid or a diesel. Just give us what the rest of the world already has damn it.

- 5 speed automatic (I'm pretty sure this will come as the camry got it not long after the accord got it).

One problem I have with Honda, is they seem to be way more pron to rust. Also, I think quality has slipped, but maybe they fixed a few issues with the new Civic.

Civic still cost more, but also the EX coast way more then a corolla LE.

I'm not 100% happy with my Corolla because it does have a few rattles that started around 5K miles, but I don't have any problem with the seat, or view, or anything like that. I must be the ideal height for the car. at 5' 8". Overall the car is great and ever since I put XRS rims and tires on it, I've enjoyed it even more because it corners more like a sports sedan instead of a econobox.

For the price, you still can't beat the Corolla. The LE doesn't sticker much more then the starter Civic. The main problem I have with the civics is the price. We looked at Civics and when we found ones we liked, the price was too close to 20K. Way too high for a economy car.

I think Honda is just riding on a bubble (being that they hold so much value) that will bust because it can't last forever. Honda isn't anything that great, and I'm sure the new ones are much nicer, but they needed to be because for 05, you had to get a EX to get the vtec engine. They finally got a clue and put the same engine in all the civics. Also Honda took out the front sway bars for the DX model a few years ago. Talk about a cheap way to save money. Honda's overall high cost not really that much value has turned me off for life. If I'm going to spend close to 20K for a car, it's not going to be a econobox. Mustangs and SRT-4s aren't much more.

It's intersting how Honda is upsizing he Civic and chaning the segmentation in it's classes of cars. I believe there a low cost, subcompact comming out that will be their new entry level car. teh base civic is too expensive, but it's a good lower cost alternative to a Camry or Accord... and much sportier too.

Rmember, although the Civic costs $1,000-2,000 more starting than a Corolla, the resale valve makes up for it. You still pay the same NET amount at the end of ownership.

On that same subject, most people don;t realize that these employee discounts are a total joke because 1) you get less on your trade-in and 2) the resale on your new car will be garbage when you go to buy a new car in 4 or 5 years. The $3000 you save up front, will probably cost you $4000 or more over the life of the vehicle. Meaning that despite the discount, a Japanesse car would have still cost you less money.

I'll still take the Corolla. Overall, Toyota reliability is a bit better than Honda. Also, working on Toyotas is usually much easier than Hondas. Something as simple as oil changes are really easy on most Toyotas, but much harder on the Hondas I have seen (have to use ramps, oil filters buried behind other stuff, etc.) Wait until the new Corolla comes out - I am sure that it will blow everything else away, just like it did when the '03's came out. I am also very doubtful that a 1,000 to 2,000 higher price will be made up for in resale value, especially after 150,000 or 12 years.

Someone mentioned the Toyota being easier to work on . .

. . just looking at the space available in my engine compartment, and comparing that to the cram-job of the pictures I've seen of the new Civic, I'd say working on that thing will be a comparative nightmare.

But I'd still pick the Civic in its second model year.

Considering that the current generation Corolla debuted in the US in early 2002, it's no surprise that the new Civic beats it hands down with almost four more years of engineering. When the next generation Corolla comes out in early 2007, let's compare again.

Why does Toyota need to get their act together because a Corolla that came out in 2003 isn't as good as a Civic that came out in 2006?

I would HOPE that the Civic is a better, being 3 years newer, or else Honda would be in some trouble.

I haven't driven the new Civic yet, but I've sat in it, and it is not much better than the Corolla fit and finish wise. The Mazda 3 is still better than the Civic in this area. A lot of people would say the Corolla is better too if they don't like the Starship Enterprise interior that Honda decided to go with on the 2006. I didn't mind it, but I know a lot of people don't want to feel like Mr. Sulu every time they get behind the wheel of their car.

I also found one area where the Corolla STILL blows the new Civic away. Did you try sitting in the back seat? I'm 6'2, and can adjust the drivers seat the way I want it in the Corolla, then get out and still fit comfortable in the back seat. In the Civic, I adjusted the drivers seat the way I like it, then could barely get in the back seat, and when I did get in my legs were spread wide open and knees were jammed against the hard plastic that they for some reason put in the backs of the seats. Thumbs down Honda.

The new Corolla is supposed to be out for the 2007 model year. Come back and do the comparison then.

I also disagree that the gap in the compact class has never been bigger. The gap was biggest in 1995 or so, when Honda still had double wishbone and the Civic was lightyears ahead of the Corolla, Protege, Cavalier, and the other competitors. Right now, the compact class is as competitive as its ever been, the Civic, Mazda 3, and Corolla are VERY comparable in every respect, and even Ford and Chevy have compact cars that are worth consideration (for the first time in 20 years).

Why does Toyota need to get their act together because a Corolla that came out in 2003 isn't as good as a Civic that came out in 2006?

My point is that the '06 Civic isn't merely the next evolution as the '03 Coralla was from the '02. I was suprised that it's such a large jump in refinement. Economy compact cars are supposed to feel like cheaper small cars right? This one doesn't to me.

2 reasons the Corolla has a large rear seat 1) I has less front seat legroom. 2) The civic doesn't use a simple struct rear suspension set-up. That set-up saves space, but doesn't corner or brake nearly as well on rough pavement. I will mention that the new 4 door civic has a 1 inch longer wheelbase than the '03-'05 Accord and I'm guessing wil lcose the gap on rear seat leg room. Yes headroom has always been limited on Hondas... it's gives them sportier lines and a sportier feel.

  • 1,424 posts
Economy compact cars are supposed to feel like cheaper small cars right? This one doesn't to me.

Economy cars are supposed to be less expensive to operate, not cheap pieces of s%$&. This is where the American car companys got it so wrong and the Japanese car companys got it so right. A Corolla, Civic, Sentra, or Mazda 3 is as well put together and has materials that are of the same quality as more expensive cars within the same make, espically the Mazda3. They sell for less because they are smaller and have fewer standard features, optioned up, they are darn nice cars. A Focus is a piece of s^&*, option it to the hilt and you have a cheap car with vinyl looking leather seats and a sunroof that comes off the track so often there is a 5 page write up in the owner's manual on how to get it back on. It isn't a smaller Taurus quality car with less features. Everything about it screams "I'm a cheap POS econobox." Don't get me started on the Cavalier or the Neon they're worse.

I looked at a new Civic in the showroom recently. It is much nicer than any Corolla I've driven. A much more refined feeling, and way better legroom. If I was buying a new car today, I wouldn't even seriously consider a Corolla. Not even close. Toyota has some work to do - they better do a good job on the redesign, for 2008 or the Corolla may go the way of the Taurus. The Taurus was Canada's most popular car about ten years ago and now it is not even made anymore. In my opinion, the Mazda3 and the Civic are nicer cars than the Corolla. The Cobalt isn't that bad. Chrysler is coming out with a new product in the area. The competition is fierce!

Ti-Jean

Lots of good comments on this topic. I test drove an EX 4 door automatic because my GF is considering trading her 01 POS Protegé ES auto.

Things I might add;

-The automatic works seamlessly and the engine spins only 2000 rpm at 100 km/hr (62.5 mph) while the manual sits at 2700 at the same speed as reported by a friend who test drove one. So the slushbox model might be better on gas on the highway.

-I'm a bit disappointed that they sacrificed back seat and trunk room in the name of swoopier styling and lower stance while the new iteration has a much bigger footprint (wheelbase and track). That wouldn't prevent me from buying one if I wanted to except that the car is not as roomy as it's size suggests. Curb weight has also gone up considerably while mileage has decreased a bit.

-Like many, I am not fond of digital instrumentation and a 20 minute roadtest is not enough to assess this 2 level combo analog/digital gauges.

-Call me retro but I don't agree with the inclusion of all the security features that marketing is now imposing that we all should buy as standard equipement. Namely the half dozen airbags and ABS.

-If you want cruise on the new Civic (in Canada), you have to shell out for the LX and get the aforementioned security features that I don't want/need/care for, alloy wheels and 16" tires.

-And on that count, the Corolla CE with the C package represents a strong alternative and a better value. So that will keep it going for a year or so untill the next gen comes along with less controversial styling inside and out and possibly roomier interior to cater to long time Toyota aficionados.

-Call me retro but I don't agree with the inclusion of all the security features that marketing is now imposing that we all should buy as standard equipement. Namely the half dozen airbags and ABS.

-If you want cruise on the new Civic (in Canada), you have to shell out for the LX and get the aforementioned security features that I don't want/need/care for, alloy wheels and 16" tires.

 

Just curious, but what is you affliction with safety features. I can understand why you might not like ABS... but for the airbags, testing and statistics are very clear that these features greatly reduce injury. Yes they add probably $1000 to the vehicle cost, but save 2 or 3 times that amount in reduced medical and insurance costs taht we all pay.

All tese fancy electronics are pretty impressive. Most newer 300+HP RWD luxury sedans will put a typical 4WD SUV to shame on gravel or snow covered road with their stability and traction control systems. You can finally buy a sports car that's as safe or better to drive as a FWD sedan.

Ti-Jean

 

-Call me retro but I don't agree with the inclusion of all the security features that marketing is now imposing that we all should buy as standard equipement. Namely the half dozen airbags and ABS.

-If you want cruise on the new Civic (in Canada), you have to shell out for the LX and get the aforementioned security features that I don't want/need/care for, alloy wheels and 16" tires.

 

Just curious, but what is you affliction with safety features. I can understand why you might not like ABS... but for the airbags, testing and statistics are very clear that these features greatly reduce injury. Yes they add probably $1000 to the vehicle cost, but save 2 or 3 times that amount in reduced medical and insurance costs taht we all pay.

All tese fancy electronics are pretty impressive. Most newer 300+HP RWD luxury sedans will put a typical 4WD SUV to shame on gravel or snow covered road with their stability and traction control systems. You can finally buy a sports car that's as safe or better to drive as a FWD sedan.

Most of these safety features were pushed down in our throats by the insurance lobbies and safety advocates at a time when americans refused to buckle up and didn't want to hear about seatbelt laws. Such was not the case here as Quebecers and Canadians in general vastly complied to seatbelt laws long time ago.

And now, it seems, many people (especially in the US) will not consider buying a small car unless it has the full array of safety features that don't make the car drive or handle any better but to protect them from their bad driving and/or against a hit with behemoths SUV's and trucks. Where I live, small cars have been selling on their own merits for years, before the advent of airbags and ABS.

It is beyond me why someone would want stability and traction control on a Corolla or similarly low power vehicle and I drive on snow several months a year. If they are needed on powerful vehicles, could it be because those same vehicles are now getting too powerful? Why 300+ hp if only to rein in all that power with electronic nanies? Maybe the interface between the seat and steering wheel lacks proper skills in controlling such a vehicle.

I was in Walkerton ON this summer installing one of our kilns and I really noticed how many Echo's were in that town, and smaller cars in general in the area. You might see one or two Echo's a week here in north-central PA, but there were Echo's everywhere in ON!

I owned a 95 civic before I bought my 2004 corolla. Both great cars. I really resented having to change that honda timing belt every 60-90k. I like my 2004 corolla's timing chain and I think that toyota makes a smoother shifting, better tranny. Again, both great cars.

It's intersting how Honda is upsizing he Civic and chaning the segmentation in it's classes of cars. I believe there a low cost, subcompact comming out that will be their new entry level car. teh base civic is too expensive, but it's a good lower cost alternative to a Camry or Accord... and much sportier too.

Rmember, although the Civic costs $1,000-2,000 more starting than a Corolla, the resale valve makes up for it. You still pay the same NET amount at the end of ownership.

On that same subject, most people don;t realize that these employee discounts are a total joke because 1) you get less on your trade-in and 2) the resale on your new car will be garbage when you go to buy a new car in 4 or 5 years. The $3000 you save up front, will probably cost you $4000 or more over the life of the vehicle. Meaning that despite the discount, a Japanesse car would have still cost you less money.

unless toyota redesigns the ergonomics like the civic,

If I had to buy a car now, I would buy the civic because comfort

is very important for me.

Guest johnny ro

Any details on next gen corolla?

Rest of world gets smaller cars. Honda Fit/Jazz and VW polo for example. We drive what is are midsize cars to rest of world. Smaller being betterdown to a point.

Waiting to see the new sub-sentra Nissan (how about a new sentra please, a coupe with no rump tail thank you), think its called March. Saw it in MNunich, maybe last gen, square shaped little retro thing smaller than a Mini. US Focus is last gen vehicle, rest of world gets next gen.

I think Taurus and Focus are made of same stuff, sorry, this is why Taurus is gone, nobody would buy it anymore. Focus is at least shaped and styled as a good car. 1989 Taurus is a better car than 2004 if you ask me.

Ford is finally, finally waking up, the taurus replacemenet is a good car at long last. Same for GM with Cobalt and the 2 seater. Bob lutz is right, takes 5 long years for market perceptions to catch up to reality, hope Ford and GM last that long.

Guest delerium75

I know this topic is over month old but...

Just bought '06 Corolla LE this past week and I too drove an '06 Civic. I was actually leaning towards the Honda however what swayed me was the fact the dealer advertised the wrong price on my car (18K sticker, advertised at 16.5K while full MSRP listed on others in stock) plus a $1000 rebate that ended on Wednesday. The Civic LX I was looking at could not have been bought at the same price and insurance would have been about $250-300 more a year. So, looking purely at costs, a Civic would have been $600-1000 more per year to actually own (good 16" tires are easily $100/tire).

Yes, the added front legroom would have been nice but I noticed within 3 minutes that the e-brake handle hit my leg in an uncomfortable spot. The stereo didn't sound as good to me...like the speakers had some kind of padding over them muffling frequency ranges the audio adjustments couldn't bring out. I also had to duck under the windshield more to see stoplights. Both cars have their pros and cons and in the end, it came down how much flows out of my wallet per month.

My 2004 Corolla has a timing chain. I think the Civic has a belt with a 60k change advisory . Since I'm a "no frills" high milage driver, I still like Corolla better.

Honda makes a great car, but a well maintained Corolla with a timing chain and an auto tanny is a tank. They go forever. A civic is done at 180k.

Just my 2 cents

Tonight on Speed TV there is a program launching the new Civic with test drives. Danika Patrick will be one of the test drivers. It will be mostly a big Honda advertisement, but it might be interesting to watch.

2000 LE owner.... considering buying a new car in 5-7 years... it should be exciting then. Can't wait for the next iteration of the Corolla, but from everything I've read... the new Civics are pretty nice. Maybe the Corolla will put me back on it's side in a few years. I can't wait to get a new car in 5 years.. woohoo.

Maybe for my 30th birthday. I'm 26.

Tonight on Speed TV there is a program launching the new Civic with test drives. Danika Patrick will be one of the test drivers. It will be mostly a big Honda advertisement, but it might be interesting to watch.

 

Ya, that was kind of neat, but it was purly for the new Si. The last gen Si was a major joke. It didn't look that good, it wasn't that sporty, and the shifter was in a really strange place.

It looks like they fixed everything for the new one. Toyota needs to do a little work with the XRS to keep up. For one, Honda was getting about the same HP on a car that ran on 87 octane, and the XRS wants 91 or better. They need to get close to the 200HP mark and add LSD. The new Si wants 91 or better gas, but it gets 197HP now, but it has a 2.0l engine. They finally figured out that larger displacement isn't a bad thing. default_wink

The XRS is a 4 door and the Si is a coup and maybe not really in the same class, but the XRS is all toyota has. They need to step it up a notch. I'm not really in the market for either one, but if I was, I would drive off in the new Si for sure. I only wish Honda sold them without a spoiler cause it would be a really sharp care without it.

I just wish I was making some money to change my corolla for

a civic.

Corolla is an uncomfortable car, although it seems to be more

durable.



Topic List