by Braddale, November 22, 2006
There is a website www.carspyshots.net that has pictures of the 2008 Corolla that will be released in Asia, seems interesting because the North American version of the Corolla now is very similar to the Asian one. The thread is under the new car section, and has some really good images, looks like a smaller version of the new Camry.
Max
I like it. It is like a small Camry, or a larger Yaris.
The 'Rolla can park itself? and has rear view camera? What 'da hell! Not like there aren't
enough incompetent drivers on the road already. I'm gravely concern this new technology,
if it becomes pervasive, will mean more incompetent drivers. I mean, if you cannot parallel
park a 'Rolla, you don't deserve the privilege of driving. If you can't turn your head around
to see if someone or something is behind you, you don't deserve the privilege of driving.
Sorry if I'm ranting, but I am still hot from the news that the Fed is requiring every single
car on the road to have electronic-stability system. Next thing you know, the Fed will
be make illegal for not having rear view camera and auto-park. Before too long, car makers
will come up with another gadget to take our attention away from driving while the number
of accidents and fatality keep climbing.
The 'Rolla can park itself? and has rear view camera? What 'da hell! Not like there aren't enough incompetent drivers on the road already. I'm gravely concern this new technology,I agree. The self parking system takes like 3 minutes! They have had it in Japan for a while now.
if it becomes pervasive, will mean more incompetent drivers. I mean, if you cannot parallel
park a 'Rolla, you don't deserve the privilege of driving. If you can't turn your head around
to see if someone or something is behind you, you don't deserve the privilege of driving.
Sorry if I'm ranting, but I am still hot from the news that the Fed is requiring every single
car on the road to have electronic-stability system. Next thing you know, the Fed will
be make illegal for not having rear view camera and auto-park. Before too long, car makers
will come up with another gadget to take our attention away from driving while the number
of accidents and fatality keep climbing.
Bikeman982
Self-parking suggests that people are lazy, or incompetent.
Rear view cameras is a bit of overkill. People should turn their heads and look.
It's not only laziness, it's also garbage design that gets kids killed each year by being backed over by parents who may never recover from the loss.
Test drove a Prius and it was 100% blind to the rear because of a high window and enormous side pillars.
Why can't NHTSA require that style yield to safety? These trash designs will just keep killing our kids. Cameras aren't the answer here.
It's not only laziness, it's also garbage design that gets kids killed each year by being backed over by parents who may never recover from the loss.Test drove a Prius and it was 100% blind to the rear because of a high window and enormous side pillars.
Why can't NHTSA require that style yield to safety? These trash designs will just keep killing our kids. Cameras aren't the answer here.
I am rather dissappointed that the car companies worry about style and sacrifice on
visibility in newer cars.
Rear visibility has been poor and getting worse.
The 2003 corolla has rather poor one compared to earlier versions.
The 'Rolla can park itself? and has rear view camera? What 'da hell! Not like there aren't enough incompetent drivers on the road already. I'm gravely concern this new technology,
if it becomes pervasive, will mean more incompetent drivers. I mean, if you cannot parallel
park a 'Rolla, you don't deserve the privilege of driving. If you can't turn your head around
to see if someone or something is behind you, you don't deserve the privilege of driving.
Sorry if I'm ranting, but I am still hot from the news that the Fed is requiring every single
car on the road to have electronic-stability system. Next thing you know, the Fed will
be make illegal for not having rear view camera and auto-park. Before too long, car makers
will come up with another gadget to take our attention away from driving while the number
of accidents and fatality keep climbing.
Agreed, have not been in the US long enough to travel abroad to other States.
But the driving down here in Utah is pretty shocking, dont know what these kids are been taught, mabey this tech is for such drivers?
Cheers
Sheldon
That's kind of ironic. Everyone at my "Bigger is better...why?" topic is saying that cars are getting bigger for safety reasons. Now it sounds like its making it unsafe.
Personally, I think consumers should be able to have the choice of buying a car without all these little gadgets. This is one of the things that turns me away from automobiles today. I see my friend's Audi with all the annoying buttons on the steering wheel, and an audio/airconditioning system with about 80 buttons. Now we got rear cameras, bluetooth, weight-activated seatbelt alarms, and alot of other needless weight. It's a car, not a god damn video game!. What next? Are we going to have joysticks? Has anyone seen the new Lexus LS? Some of the features on that car are just absolutely useless and annoying like the Driver Monitoring Syatem and Lane Keeping Assist. No wonder the LS weighs 4400 lbs.
I prefer my simple old Corolla with a solid steering wheel and a very basic console, before all this crap came into popularity.
Bikeman982
Obviously somebody wants those features, otherwise the cars won't sell and you won't see them next year.
Somebody must like this stuff, but Corolla wasn't really designed for that market segment.
It will be nauseating if this crap is made standard and the list price increases correspondingly. That will only leave the Yaris for those of us who don't want these gizmos and certainly don't need the expensive repairs they can create, especially junk like special keys and security systems.
If this stuff gets on the Corolla, Toyota has changed this model's focus and customer orientation.
We need a good solid economy car. There are plenty of luxury models for those customers desiring them.
Bikeman982
It seems like it is getting more and more difficult to find a "basic" model.
I think the majority of people want good, reliable, dependable, transportation for their daily commute.
All the luxuries are fine, but not if they put the price of the car out of reach for the average consumer.
Another website www.toyotanation.com has a very good article on the 2008 European Corolla, it looks identical to the 2008 Asian model, which in turn is close to what North America gets.
I am starting to think that for North America we will get a new Corolla sedan, (very similar to the 2008 Asian model, not the Japanese one though) and to replace the Matrix we will get a version of the 2008 Auris, which is based on the Corolla.
Also, with the new Corolla coming out in spring of 2008 here in N.A., would it not then be considered a 2009 model? This fall they would have to continue the present version as a short run 2008 model?
Bikeman982
Another website www.toyotanation.com has a very good article on the 2008 European Corolla, it looks identical to the 2008 Asian model, which in turn is close to what North America gets.It seems like the newer models are coming out sooner every year.I am starting to think that for North America we will get a new Corolla sedan, (very similar to the 2008 Asian model, not the Japanese one though) and to replace the Matrix we will get a version of the 2008 Auris, which is based on the Corolla.
Also, with the new Corolla coming out in spring of 2008 here in N.A., would it not then be considered a 2009 model? This fall they would have to continue the present version as a short run 2008 model?
I see my friend's Audi with all the annoying buttons on the steering wheel, and an audio/airconditioning system with about 80 buttons. Now we got rear cameras, bluetooth, weight-activated seatbelt alarms, and alot of other needless weight. I prefer my simple old Corolla with a solid steering wheel and a very basic console, before all this crap came into popularity.
Those buttons on the steering wheel are really convenient, and they keep you from having to use the 80 buttons on the stereo and climate control. Rear cameras give you a view of something you physically can't see if you drive a SUV. Bluetooth allows handsfree dialing and talking while driving. Weight sensing seatbelt alarms are annoying as all get out.
As I look at, these items are all good. The steering wheel controls keep your eyes on the road and not on the stereo or console when you adjust the temperature or change the radio station. Rear view cameras in SUVs allow their drivers to see what is behind them that is below their rear window. Those cameras will keep many small children from being killed. Since even legislation can't make people stop talking and driving at the same time, anything that makes dialing your phone and talking on it so easy that you can focus almost all of your attention on driving is a really helpful feature. Finally, those seatbelt sensors are life savers. My friends won't wear seatbelts in a car, however, when they ride in my car, they always wear them. Know why? I have a weight sensing seatbelt monitor that is relentless in making you wear that belt, the chime will not quit, not even after 15 minutes of continuous sounding.
You all can take that "Technology and Feature Content is Bad" standpoint if you want, but I'll make this simple statement: Your Corollas are high tech, feature laden cars compared to economy cars of the 1950's. If everyone took your mentality, we would still be driving around in cars with carburetors, 4 wheel drum brakes and bias ply tires.
Bikeman982
I see my friend's Audi with all the annoying buttons on the steering wheel, and an audio/airconditioning system with about 80 buttons. Now we got rear cameras, bluetooth, weight-activated seatbelt alarms, and alot of other needless weight. I prefer my simple old Corolla with a solid steering wheel and a very basic console, before all this crap came into popularity.Those buttons on the steering wheel are really convenient, and they keep you from having to use the 80 buttons on the stereo and climate control. Rear cameras give you a view of something you physically can't see if you drive a SUV. Bluetooth allows handsfree dialing and talking while driving. Weight sensing seatbelt alarms are annoying as all get out.
As I look at, these items are all good. The steering wheel controls keep your eyes on the road and not on the stereo or console when you adjust the temperature or change the radio station. Rear view cameras in SUVs allow their drivers to see what is behind them that is below their rear window. Those cameras will keep many small children from being killed. Since even legislation can't make people stop talking and driving at the same time, anything that makes dialing your phone and talking on it so easy that you can focus almost all of your attention on driving is a really helpful feature. Finally, those seatbelt sensors are life savers. My friends won't wear seatbelts in a car, however, when they ride in my car, they always wear them. Know why? I have a weight sensing seatbelt monitor that is relentless in making you wear that belt, the chime will not quit, not even after 15 minutes of continuous sounding.
You all can take that "Technology and Feature Content is Bad" standpoint if you want, but I'll make this simple statement: Your Corollas are high tech, feature laden cars compared to economy cars of the 1950's. If everyone took your mentality, we would still be driving around in cars with carburetors, 4 wheel drum brakes and bias ply tires.
Bring on the technology!!
I guess I'm a maverick.
My opinions are:
1. Design vehicles with rear visibility as a mandate - no need for cameras.
2. Prohibit phone use while driving except for emergencies
3. Give the customer the buy or omit on gadgets that can cause expensive repair issues
Take the steering wheel buttons, for example. If you have an issue with your horn switch in some gadget ridden vehicles, the labor involved will make you cry and you won't pass inspection until you fix it.
My buddy at a Saturn dealer had a Buick on the used car lot that he couldn't pass for sale w/o fixing the horn switch in the wheel. Guess what, it was integrated into the airbag assy with a retail replacement cost of (hold on to your shorts) $1,200 US.
Just venture the price if some of these integrated controls are also part of airbag assy.
For me, I want an option list where it's possible to deselect stuff that isn't desired.
Just my opinion for what it's worth (or maybe the ramblings of an old fart).
I guess I'm a maverick.My opinions are:
1. Design vehicles with rear visibility as a mandate - no need for cameras.
2. Prohibit phone use while driving except for emergencies
3. Give the customer the buy or omit on gadgets that can cause expensive repair issues
1) Your can't make an Expedition or Suburban with windows large enough to see a 3'6" tall child behind the vehicle while you're backing up, thus cameras are the only viable solution to that problem for SUVs
2) Prohibit phone use all you want, it won't stop people. In Ohio we have mandatory seatbelt laws that issue you a $100 fine for not wearing the belt, but at least 1/3 of the drivers I see on any given day aren't wearing theirs.
3) The solution to that is to just buy cars that you can get equipped like you want. IE, you want a Miata, but you don't like the fact that they put all those fancy steering wheel controls, ABS, side airbags, power windows, mirrors, locks and AC on the car as standard features. So buy a Pontiac Solstice instead. It has 4 wheels and a steering wheel. No standard power windows/locks/mirrors, no AC, no ABS, no side airbags and no steering wheel controls either.
Bikeman982
I would like more options, rather than making everything standard.
Too many high-tech gadgets cause more maintenance costs.
Any law is meaningless, unless it gets enforced - seat belt use, cell phones, etc.
I would like more options, rather than making everything standard.Too many high-tech gadgets cause more maintenance costs.
I'll state this FACT one last time.
The more options available on a car, the more combinations of options there are for a given car. That leads to many different configurations of the same car being available. While that sounds good, it is not from a manufacturing standpoint. The more different configurations a car line has, the more it costs the manufacturer to build each car, and they pass that cost down to you, the buyer.
For example, a car with a manual window has a different door trim panel, different wiring, different interior door substructure, and a different window regulator than a car with power windows. If the manufacturer just makes power windows standard, they can buy a lot more switches and motors, which makes them less expensive per unit. Also, the cost savings is seen when they can order all one door panel, wiring harness, and window regulator. This cost saving is so advantageous to the manufacturer that they can actually put power windows on every car and charge you very little for it as compared to what the manual windows cost them to put on such a low number of units.
That was Honda's idea with Acura. Acuras are less expensive than Lexus and Infiniti models for a number of reasons, but the main one is that Acura makes cars 2 ways, with navigation and without. Everything else you could want is standard. By doing this and only offering 5 exterior colors and one or 2 interior colors with each exterior color, they reduce the number of different cars for any given model they make to 20 down from several hundred over at Lexus and Infiniti. That cost is passed directly down to you.
I welcome the opportunity to pay less for a better equipped car. Again, if you don't want a car with "toys" then buy another model that doesn't have them. No one is forcing you to buy a car with $100 keys or steering wheel controls. Like I said in my last post, if you want a Miata and don't want the "gadgets" buy a Solstice instead.
Bikeman982
You mean - like the model T Ford,
you can get it any color you want - as long as it is black.
You mean - like the model T Ford,you can get it any color you want - as long as it is black.
No, I'm not claiming that all cars should be identically equipped. What I'm saying is that a high level of standard equipment is better for the consumer overall.
Lets face it, go to any dealer lot and you'll find virtually identically equipped Camrys and Corollas. There are just certain features that so many people want that even if you make them options, they are essentially standard equipment because of the number of cars that have them. If your car is less than "typically equipped" as determined for your model, when you go to trade it in, they give you less for it than if it was typically equipped.
That was one thing that made Saturn attractive before GM grabbed it more tightly.
You could go from the base SL with manual steering, tranny, and windows to the SL2 with every gadget Saturn offered.
Most cars are ordered by dealers according to a formula that picks what most customers want. However, if you were willing to wait a few weeks, you got exactly what you wanted the factory to build for you. The Dell of cars was Saturn.
Yes, standardization is more efficient. However, there may be a market for custom orders.
I only wish you didn't need to order a police/taxi version to get durable rubber flooring instead of carpeting. More from an old fart.
Most cars are ordered by dealers according to a formula that picks what most customers want. However, if you were willing to wait a few weeks, you got exactly what you wanted the factory to build for you. The Dell of cars was Saturn.Yes, standardization is more efficient. However, there may be a market for custom orders.
Let me tell you about special orders: They are a pain in the dealer's butt. Dealers don't readily do them in most cases. I special ordered my car to get exactly what I wanted, and it took over 3 months to come in and when it did the wheels were not what I ordered. This experience isn't unique to Toyota either. Everyone I've ever known to special order a car has had problems. Most of them didn't get what they wanted because the factory screwed up when putting the car together. Those who got exactly what they wanted waited 3 to 4 months for it, despite being promised 2 months or less.
When you special order a car, it by definition doesn't have what is considered a standard level of equipment. Otherwise you'd just buy one off the lot. Special order cars are slated to be built along with cars with similar features. I'll give you an example. Since not many Corolla LEs are built with ABS, sunroofs, and alloy wheels, my car was not started until Toyota got a lot of orders for cars with those features. What that meant is that my Toyota dealer got 4 shipments of Corollas that they ordered after my car before my car was ever started. It took less than 2 weeks from date of manufacturer to delivery of my car, but it took 2.5 months for them to build my car. Meanwhile they completed and shipped a lot of 15k Corollas that were ordered a month after my car.
As a consequence, I will not special order a car again. When I'm in the market for my next car and I want ABS, alloys, etc. I'll just buy a car with them standard or buy a model where those features are common for cars you find on the lot.
I will be the type of person to buy a Miata over a Solstice because the Miata has standard ABS, side airbags, cruise, tilt, AC, keyless, alloy wheels, and power windows/locks/mirrors.
When I first saw this post, I was hoping to find an Asian Model. 
Instead i just found a car... 
Oh well, its a car forum... should have expected it...
haha
tdk
Topic List: Go to Toyota Corolla, Chevy Prizm (1998-2008)
