I'm in the market of buying a brand new car. Honda just released the 2006 Civic, while Toyota released its version of the Corolla back in 2003. In terms of value for the money and reliability, which car would you suggest? (safety as well).
FYI - Honda has a horrible reputation for tranny problems. I think I read in a recent news report somewhere that they're recalling like 600, 000 cars or something. The Civic 2006 already was recalled due to an accelerator gas pedal problem (not looking good). So far, I don't know of any recalls on the Toyota. However, the current generation of Toyota Corolla has been deemed one of the most unsafest cars on the market (forgot the linky)
I'm planning to purchase a new car (Civic / Toyota) and use it for about 5 years so I can sell it and purchase a new car again. Someone mentioned to me to buy used, but then the resale value wouldn't be as high.
I've heard that Honda got lazy over the years with their vcivic line (their 2001-2005 Series) had so many problems...people who bought them have told me time and time again never to buy a Civic. I think that Honda's quality is steadily decreasing, as such that they dont make better engines (smaller, compared to Toyotas0>
Also, a big problem in the long run about the Honda Civic is its LED Speedometer. LEDSs have a verrry limited lifespan.. I can't bare to imagine what would happen if it were to fail after the warranty expired.
it sounds like you've already made up your mind.
this may sound stupid but walk around a parking lot at a train station and just go up and ask people who own the car you're looking to buy. just go right up to them and politely ask them if they could spare a moment and explain what you're wonder and if they'd be willing to take a second and talk to you.
you can also goto dealer service departments and sometimes talk to the service advisor or a tech about what kinds of problems THEY see on the cars. you could try this with an independant shop, but since these are newer cars it may be hard to find one that's delt with many.
It could do with side curtain airbags standard. There is another thread on the board all about the new Civic you may want to dig up to help you in your comparison.
It is a big temptation to buy a newly designed vehicle, they are usually more appealing in design than one that has been around for several years.
But watch out on a first year design, they have to work out bugs in their design. It may take several years to get all of the parts tweaked in. Some makes never do get the job done. Honda and Toyota both are known to be reliable with good resale. And they both have few recalls, but it does happen.
I drive a lot of miles, and the maintainence on the Toyota is a lot less expensive than the Honda. Big reason is there is no timing belt to change every 60-100,000 miles.
As far as safety goes, any smaller car will probably not fair as well as a larger car with same quality of build. It is pretty safe to assume that both civic and corolla would not do well if a collision happened against a big truck. Do you plan on having rear seat occupants? I believe that is what took the rating down on the Toyota. Also none of the small cars faired very well on the side impact.
I haven't made up my mind yet. I was just seeking more opinions regarding this matter.
Toyota Corolla Safety Links (One of the Worst on the Road ?!)
neon, focus, corolla, all poor without the side airbags.
the only reason the civic is exempt is because they had the good sense to make such a vital piece of equipment STANDARD.
That we need this equipment standard, you have ford, chevy, and dodge to thank, along with each and every person who uses such large and inpractical vehicles as grocery getters.
Of course, SUVs are the only thing keeping GM afloat. Sometimes, you have to let a thing burn before you pick up the pieces and rebuild it sensibly (as in NOT what the govt. did to the airline industry, which took our handout, gave it to the exec's, and went bankrupt anyway).
(you can't see this but I'm doing this as hard as I can - ATHF)
G
So are SABs useless?
saying that the corolla is specifically one of the 'least safe' is lazy thinking on the part of forbes and msn.
any small car without side airbags is going to be less safe than the same car with those airbags.
neon, focus, corolla, all poor without the side airbags.
the only reason the civic is exempt is because they had the good sense to make such a vital piece of equipment STANDARD.
That we need this equipment standard, you have ford, chevy, and dodge to thank, along with each and every person who uses such large and inpractical vehicles as grocery getters.
Of course, SUVs are the only thing keeping GM afloat. Sometimes, you have to let a thing burn before you pick up the pieces and rebuild it sensibly (as in NOT what the govt. did to the airline industry, which took our handout, gave it to the exec's, and went bankrupt anyway).
(you can't see this but I'm doing this as hard as I can - ATHF)
G
So are SABs useless?
All my current Toyota's have side air bags, all had to be ordered that way - none came standard. Sure it will depends on what types vehicles get involved in an accident. You can't bend the laws of physics - get t-boned by a GM Hummer H2, Ford Excursion, even most minivans - SABs or not, you're going to be one holding the short end of a stick on that exchange. But like Garett pointed out - you have to compare apples to apples, a small car with SAB will have greater protection in government and insurance institutes controlled tests.
Also, a big problem in the long run about the Honda Civic is its LED Speedometer. LEDSs have a verrry limited lifespan.. I can't bare to imagine what would happen if it were to fail after the warranty expired.
On the contrary - LEDs have the exceptional lifespans. Compared to standard incandescent lamps - LEDs last 7-10 years, emit more light, and use ~85% less power. Highly resistant to chemicals, temperatures, and vibration - only reversing the polarity or running too much voltage will cause it to fail quickly.
On another note - the LED display in the new Honda will take some getting used to. I've always like standard gauges, too much "tech" will only distract the driver. Being a completely revamped model - 2006 Civic is bound to have problems (first year model). Same happened with first year Corollas in 1998 and Corolla/Matrix models in 2003. Once this initial teething is past - the product quality/reliability will be great.
I've owned both makes - both make excellent cars for entire different reasons. Hondas are a bit more sporty in driving characterists, a little bland in interior appointments. Engines are more easily tuned or modified - great gas mileage. Toyotas are more sedate in driving characterists, a little more upscale and grown up inside. Engines are tuned to require less "fussing" - optimized out of the box - also great gas mileage.
Best way - drive them both, if you can, see if the dealer will let you have it for the day (they did that with my old Honda CRX and recent Toyota Matrix - that is why I bought them).
Drive 2 3-4 year old Honda's and 2 3-4 year old Corolla's and see what feels newer. That's what we did and we drove off in a new Corolla.
You really can't go wrong with either of them, but I just think Honda's are over valued and people pay more then they should for new and used Honda's. The Corolla is just a cheaper car.
Honda's probably handle better stock vrs stock, but all it takes is a decent set of tires for the Corolla to drive like a much nicer car compared to stock. We installed barly used XRS rims and tires on our car and it was soooooooooooo much nicer to drive.
I recomend a LE and get a 5sp if you know how to drive one.
I just like the look of the 04 Civic and the look of the current 03-05 Corolla...I have never driven a Civic, but when I got my 99 it felt like my friend's 96 Civic...
I will keep my eyes peeled on the generations to come..I don't like the 06 Civic nor what appears to be the 08 Corolla...I plan to keep my Corolla for awhile tho'...then we'll see...
Drive 2 3-4 year old Honda's and 2 3-4 year old Corolla's and see what feels newer. That's what we did and we drove off in a new Corolla.
You really can't go wrong with either of them, but I just think Honda's are over valued and people pay more then they should for new and used Honda's. The Corolla is just a cheaper car.
I looked at a used Civic which was priced about the same as what I got my 05 Corolla for, and it felt...thin...like there wasn't much to it. Everything felt pared down, minimal...whereas when I sat in the Corolla, it enveloped me. :shrug:
Drive 2 3-4 year old Honda's and 2 3-4 year old Corolla's and see what feels newer. That's what we did and we drove off in a new Corolla.
You really can't go wrong with either of them, but I just think Honda's are over valued and people pay more then they should for new and used Honda's. The Corolla is just a cheaper car.
I looked at a used Civic which was priced about the same as what I got my 05 Corolla for, and it felt...thin...like there wasn't much to it. Everything felt pared down, minimal...whereas when I sat in the Corolla, it enveloped me. :shrug:
Ya, price is another part of it. We were able to get a new base LE 5sp for 14K even with the summer $500 rebate. Sticker was 15,800. It came with a CD changer, 6 speaker stereo, and a upgraded heater with rear vents. I got a cargo net and floor mats the next day. The asking price on used Civics were so high, it was laughable. The ONLY department Honda is probable better in is suspention, but you can fix the Corolla suspention for not too much money and new tires help out a ton cause the stockers on Corolla's SUCK!!!! Not that it's all about performance, but I think the Corolla is faster. At least the 5sp is. It has less weight to haul around. I don't go around racing Honda's, but the ones we drove felt slower then the Corolla.
If you spent a few buxs on TRD springs, shocks and sway bars with some decent tires, a Corolla would smoke a Honda in the corners and still cost way less.
Hi Guys,
I'm in the market of buying a brand new car. Honda just released the 2006 Civic, while Toyota released its version of the Corolla back in 2003. In terms of value for the money and reliability, which car would you suggest? (safety as well).
FYI - Honda has a horrible reputation for tranny problems. I think I read in a recent news report somewhere that they're recalling like 600, 000 cars or something. The Civic 2006 already was recalled due to an accelerator gas pedal problem (not looking good). So far, I don't know of any recalls on the Toyota. However, the current generation of Toyota Corolla has been deemed one of the most unsafest cars on the market (forgot the linky)
I'm planning to purchase a new car (Civic / Toyota) and use it for about 5 years so I can sell it and purchase a new car again. Someone mentioned to me to buy used, but then the resale value wouldn't be as high.
I've heard that Honda got lazy over the years with their vcivic line (their 2001-2005 Series) had so many problems...people who bought them have told me time and time again never to buy a Civic. I think that Honda's quality is steadily decreasing, as such that they dont make better engines (smaller, compared to Toyotas0>
Also, a big problem in the long run about the Honda Civic is its LED Speedometer. LEDSs have a verrry limited lifespan.. I can't bare to imagine what would happen if it were to fail after the warranty expired.
That article where the Corolla was rated "unsafe" is complete garbage. It was in Forbes magazine and was a horrible piece of journalism. The whole article was basically just a bashing of people who buy economy cars (it is Forbes afterall), the listed 5 cheaper cars which are supposedly "unsafe".
But, they didn't explain WHY they were unsafe, they just said they looked at IIHS ratings.
I looked at the IIHS ratings, and the Corolla got amazing results. The only issue was in low speed rear collisions where it got a poor rating, which means you have more chance of whiplash if you get hit from behind at low speed.
But, where it really counts, in frontal and side impact, the Corolla got all 4 and 5 stars. As good or better than any other cars in the class. It also got a low rating for side impact WITHOUT side airbags, but ALL small cars get low ratings in that area. The Corolla gets like 4 stars with the airbags.
That explains ALOT!!!! I couldn't figure out why my wife and I got so hurt when we got hit from behind early in the year. It was a low speed collision from some dumb bitch driving a early 90s crown vic who didn't see the red light. It only caused about 1,500 dammage to the car, but my wife took a ride in a ambulance to the hospital. She got HORRIBLE whiplash and she needed theropy for months and months. I smashed my wrist on the shifter and it just stopped hurting not too long ago. I got whiplash too, but it only hurt for about a month.
I only hope that in the future side airbags will become mandatory for all small cars...
but I know that's an issue about money...
These are two great cars. designed and engendered to be fuel efficient and safe. However you must consider the cost of insurance. I have learned that Civic is little bit more expensive to insure then Corolla. So if keeping the car for six years, then $250 per year extra for civic will add up to $1500. Which I am sure you have better use for it.
Also, a big problem in the long run about the Honda Civic is its LED Speedometer. LEDSs have a verrry limited lifespan.. I can't bare to imagine what would happen if it were to fail after the warranty expired.
Do you consider 10,000 hours a verrry limited lifespan? LED's will soon be everylight except headlights. They run cooler, hove virtually NO power draw, and a verrry LONG lifespan.
Why not headlgihts? It would take a good cluster of them, but I'm sure they could do it. Your headlights are bright and focused because of how the light is reflected, not just how bright the bulb is.
Why not headlgihts? It would take a good cluster of them, but I'm sure they could do it. Your headlights are bright and focused because of how the light is reflected, not just how bright the bulb is.
Depending on the local areas - some US municipalities only allow two sets (4 total) of lamps for "headlight" use. Any more and they don't consider them legal - depending on the state. One of those old antiquated laws that stuck around - once they get that straightened out - I'm all for LED lamps.
I thought it was all about a bulb being DOT aproved. Who counts the number of bulbs. Besides, LEDs are not bulbs. They would simply need a DOT rating. I'm sure it can and will happen. I'm looking forward to it.
That as well - funny thing is that all other lamps on the car (third brake lights, aux lighting, signal lamps that have LED counter parts) are already DOT approved. Lots of "headlamps" for other vehicles (personal watercraft, atv, aircraft) have DOT approved white beams. I guess we have to wait until the auto industry/DOT will wake up and apply it to the headlamps.
Why not headlgihts? It would take a good cluster of them, but I'm sure they could do it. Your headlights are bright and focused because of how the light is reflected, not just how bright the bulb is.
Power is certainly an issue; headlights are the most powerful bulbs and need to be fairly small so you can build a nice reflector to focus them properly. It's probably possible though.
I think cost of the LEDs themselves is the major issue. White and blue LEDs are expensive. Around 10 times more expensive than yellow or red last time I checked.
LED headlights also wouldn't have the same "cool looking" factor as LED stoplights do so the incentive might not be there from a marketing POV. HIDs are much better money makers right now ;-)
Also, a big problem in the long run about the Honda Civic is its LED Speedometer. LEDSs have a verrry limited lifespan.. I can't bare to imagine what would happen if it were to fail after the warranty expired.
LED's last much longer than regular incandescent bulbs. Mainly because they are more effecient.. i.e. generate less heat for hte same light output. THe number I typcially see is 100,000 hours which would come to over 2 million miles on most cars. Almost all new cars are using them for light sources on the instruments and some on the taillights. They are however much more expensive.
As for the rest of the concerns... I think Civics, like most small cars are driven by younger drivers and get abused. They are also much more sporty tha the Corolla a are a favorite amoung the tuner crowd. For that reason, you may see a higher number of transmission failures. Last I checked, the Honda Civic was outselling the Corolla. All failures need to be represented by a statistic or precentage, not a finite number.
That being said, I think Toyota probably does make a more robust automatic transmission, but it has a more mundane, mushy, impresise feel to it. It doesn't engage the driver. The Honda transmissions feel much more precise although not always smother.
