Last post on Jan 08, 2013 at 9:04 PM
You are in the Toyota Matrix
What is this discussion about?
Toyota Matrix, Wagon
#2132 of 3315 Bets anyone?
Jun 23, 2003 (4:58 pm)
Hurler, yes, what I meant was fake carbon, it is easier to get, because of the demand. Some think it looks cooler than fake aluminum and it should be definitely more scratch-resistant. But I do not see why someone would not make more traditionally looking panels. The only question is, does demand for such a panel would justify the production? Do not think so
Now, anyone in the mood for the bets? Edmunds discussions live pretty long life, I often read old ones and it is interesting to see how things really happened. So, I just want to throw in couple of ideas which I think are most likely to be introduced on next year Matrix. Maybe someone wants to argue or to add something?
First, the engine. Focus has 2.0 (and it is probably the biggest point in favor of Focus instead of Matrix). Protege5 has 2.0 and upcoming Mazda3 will have 2.3 as an option (the same as the base engine on Mazda6). Golf/Jetta has 2.0 as a base and has 1.8T with good low-end grunt and high power on the top. Elantra, Neon, Lancer, Sentra, RSX and Si all have 2.0 engine. Even this funny Suzuki box has it. Neon even has 2.4 as an option. Base Impreza comes with 2.5. So, the point is: Toyota just have to put bigger engine into Matrix just to play along. This is why I am betting that for 2005 Toyota will add 2.0 (at least, but I think it will be enough) as an option, or will use it instead of base 130-hp 1.8. I was hoping they would do it for 2004, but... did not work out. I will wait It took about what? 3 years for Mazda to get from 1.6 to 1.8 and to 2.0 engine on Protege. TRD done some job creating supercharger for a base engine, but TRD is not part of Toyota Co., so I don't think that R&D and production done by TRD will affect Toyota plans.
Another thing is AWD. Currently Matrix is the only Toyota car which has AWD (new Sienna? whatever, not interested), so it is reasonable to suppose that if Toyota will decide to ante up the stakes, it will be Matrix AWD with manual gearbox and bigger engine. I think that Toyota can live pretty good without better AWD car, but if they put engine and transmission from good old Celica All-Track into the Matrix, it would be really swell, and we would receive a decent WRX rival (STi is in a totally different league).
Independent rear suspension. New Golf will have one, and afaik Protege5 already has one (not sure). Matrix has one on AWD version. So, Toyota will need to spice things up, and I am pretty sure that for the next model year we well see independent suspension on FWD Matrix as well, maybe not on the base one, but definetely on XRS.
So, my bet for 2005: bigger engine, independent rear suspension on fwd, awd with bigger engine and the stick. Hope they get rid of fake aluminum as well
Jun 23, 2003 (8:51 pm)
Here are my bets, in order of priority:
1) AWD comes with bigger motor and manual tranny as standard equipment by 2005
2) Base Matrix remains with the 1.8L Corolla engine, but upped in hp a tad (maybe 10% more hp and torque)
3) XR gets the bigger motor on the AWD trim as an option. Base 1.8L engine remains standard.
4) XRS trim gets upped low-end torque with a bigger motor, maybe the AWD engine or a different one, as standard equipment, with manual tranny. XRS w/auto tranny is dropped.
5) Faux aluminum gets turned down a notch, but still present.
6) Optitron gauge gets a white backdrop like the one on the Corolla LE.
These are my predictions. Most to start showing up by MY '05 (mid '04 timeframe), that will be in line with the 3-yr turn around tweaks that Toyota does.
For me tho', I don't much care what Toyota does with the Trix. I am content enough with my '03. Same situation with my purchase of the then new release '01 Sequoia in Dec/2000. I like it for whatit is TODAY, not what it could be tomorrow.
BUT, my money is on the '06 LS. Now, that is one re-design I cannot wait to see and drive off the lot ....
Jun 24, 2003 (6:32 am)
with most of that. First of all, Toyota most likely won't change anything until MY '06 - it lets all the models run three years before offering the mid-cycle revisions.
The history of celica will tell the whole story of what Toyota thinks of large-engine power: early 80s celicas had 2.4s, late 80s had 2.0s. In the 90s they had a 1.8 and a 2.2, now with the current gen they have only the 1.8. They are getting smaller, not bigger, and that is in their sport coupe!
So, forget engine size. They are very into fuel economy on the smaller cars. The only part of the above I think they may change is they could probably shoehorn in the RAV engine under the hood for the AWD Matrix, since it has been universally criticized by the press as being slow. That would be a 2.0 with 148 hp. In RAV it comes with both auto and manual (although just TRY to find a manual in AWD!), so I suppose they could do the same in the Matrix without a LOT of trouble.
The indy rear suspension on the AWD is necessitated by the AWD hardware taking up extra space. I don't think they will offer it on the FWD models because it costs more and this is at its heart an economy car.
As to interior trim, yes, that could change easily - they will probably "freshen" lots of visuals inside and out with the '06 update.
As to the XRS powertrain, I don't know why they don't just drop the auto on that right now - torque and power below the 6000 rpm crossover is just too low. In fact, rumors always seem to circulate that they are doing just that. But if they were to put in a new high-power engine, where would it come from? I doubt it would be a 6-cyl, which would make it nose-heavy anyway, and would require engineering mods to fit under the hood, I will bet. If they use a 4-cyl, well, what do they have? Their highest power 4-cyl is the Camry engine at 157 hp, and that is a 2.4 that may be hard to fit under Matrix's hood also. Even if they could, that is still a power drop from the current one, even with its limitations. I guess it might be OK if they could tweak the intake and exhaust to get another 15 hp or so from it, and you would then have the torque of the 2.4 as well.
I don't know what they are planning for the next celica GTS (due out '05) but I would like to see them tweak the engine to cross over a little lower (5000 rpm maybe?) and have 20 more hp - that would be cool to have in the Matrix for the XRS.
And BTW, the XRS above for $15,5? How do you do 51K miles in one year? That seems way overpriced. If it has the sunroof, that means it only has the 16" rims too.
#2135 of 3315 carbon fiber
Jun 24, 2003 (7:49 am)
Does anyone have any pictures of the carbon fiber trim? I might get the carbon fiber, and paint the chrome rings to match the charcoal interior of my Matrix when it comes in...
#2136 of 3315 My reasons
Jun 24, 2003 (2:08 pm)
> They are getting smaller, not bigger, and that is in their sport coupe!
They _were_ getting smaller. Now big is back.
> So, forget engine size. They are very into fuel economy on the smaller cars.
This is laughable. My 3.0 Camry is 22/27, and 1.8 XRS is only 22/29? You call this a fuel economy? How about 30/35 for the ZX3/ZX5, or 31/36 for Protege5? They both have 2 liter engines. I don't even speak about Honda. The point is, that bigger engine will _not_ be a perfomance engine, it will be _economy_ engine. The Matrix would have 2.0 in a base version, and 1.8 high-rev Yamaha engine for XRS. Look at VW to see what I am talking about. 2.0 will have more torque, but less fun on the top, and 1.8 will deliver that screaming fun which young crowd likes. Adding 2-liter engine for a base model will add needed torque, while keeping Matrix in 3x-mpg zone. Ford and Honda did wise: Ford has three engines for the Escort/Focus family: 2.0/110hp (8 valves but enough power for small family car), 2.0/130hp (ZX3/ZX5), and 2.0/170hp (SVT). This covers pretty much everything, and keeps spending low. Honda did even better with its 2.0 engine (160, 200 and 225 hp). Imho 2-liter is the optimum size.
> The indy rear suspension on the AWD is necessitated by the AWD hardware taking up extra space. I don't think they will offer it on the FWD models because it costs more and this is at its heart an economy car.
Independent suspension is better for handling, but again who needs that, the plastic skirts are so much cooler. And XRS is not an economy car (if you mean price). Almost 20K for a shoebox? My Camry is cheaper, and it has V6 and independent rear suspension. Anyway, even semi-independent setup may be good, no wonder that Golf used torsion beam up to Golf4.
> But if they were to put in a new high-power engine, where would it come from? I doubt it would be a 6-cyl, which would make it nose-heavy anyway, and would require engineering mods to fit under the hood, I will bet. If they use a 4-cyl, well, what do they have? Their highest power 4-cyl is the Camry engine at 157 hp, and that is a 2.4 that may be hard to fit under Matrix's hood also.
Hope no one will decide to squeeze fat V6 into Matrix. Damn VW with its "lets put V8 into A4" ideas. Big engine does not mean performance. XRS engine will remain small-displacement, high rev screamer, may be with turbo or supercharger. Bigger engine should go on base version.
> I don't know what they are planning for the next celica GTS (due out '05) but I would like to see them tweak the engine to cross over a little lower (5000 rpm maybe?) and have 20 more hp - that would be cool to have in the Matrix for the XRS.
It is very hard to get more than 100hp from one liter, look at Honda. So I doubt that Yamaha engine will get more power unless they increase the displacement. And this will be pretty hard too, because Yamaha engine is actually built using base 1.8 engine block, but with bigger bore. I do not think there is a lot of block to increase the bore. They can try to increase the stroke, though. Can run into the problems with this as well with the compression ratio this high.
Jun 24, 2003 (2:54 pm)
ended up lost a little, maybe due to poor writing...in general Toyota likes smaller engines, one of the reasons for which is fuel economy - I was thinking of the 29/36 rating on the manual base/XR (28/33 in the auto) - both of which have 30% or more better fuel economy than your Camry and better fuel economy than either ZX5 of Pro5 (the numbers you quoted were both for smaller versions of the car, not the EPA numbers for the five-door hatch versions).
As to it being an economy car, you have to remember that the basic structure of the car (things like, hmmm, SUSPENSION, for instance) is scaled to the base price of the base model, which is going out the door right now for less than $15K...if that is not an economy car, then I guess Hyundais are pretty expensive.
As for the driving experience of that "semi-independent" rear, drive one before you slap it in the face...you may find that the ride is similar to your much-vaunted fully independent rear in the Camry - this is not a car with a lot of axle hop like live axle rears of old.
Of all the things Toyota is probably planning for the corolla/matrix/celica family, I would say it is most likely that they will offer the new S/C package TRD has come up with as a factory option, and as the "energy boost" for future XRS models.
But who knows? By this timne next year we should probably know what powertrains they plan to put in the next-gen celica, and that will probably be mimicked by the next matrix XRS, since it is cheaper for Toyota than having separate powertrains for each model.
#2138 of 3315 Thanks you guys...
Jun 24, 2003 (6:20 pm)
Thanks alot for replying to post #2128. Well I am in NH. I went to the Pontiac dealer looking for any GT Vibes and I was able to find two. I have never bought a Pontiac before, so I am still considering this. But for the XRS w/ 51K miles, it is obviously highway miles, and after negotiating with the dealer, he quoted me $14,000. And there is a 3yo, 36mo warranty. The car is in perfect condition, and is clean. Thanks you guys!
#2139 of 3315 Nudontknow -Warranty on XRS
Jun 25, 2003 (3:37 am)
If you get the high mileage Matrix make sure that the warranty is from Toyota ( as opposed to a 3rd party ) and that BOTH the mileage and time run from date of your purchase, not it's 'in service' date.
If I remember right, new Toyota's come with a 3 year/36K new car warranty and 5 year/60K power train warranty. Since the warranties expire on which ever comes first, you'll shortly be out of warranty all round.
Toyota extended warranties typically have to be put in place before the 3/36K runs out. So this might be hard.
3rd party warranties are often a hassle for both the consumer and the service shop.
Jun 25, 2003 (3:52 pm)
Thanks for the info. I checked and the warranty IS from a third party. Is this bad?
Its a reputable company offering it, and it starts from the date of purchase. Is this bad?
#2141 of 3315 51K miles?
Jun 27, 2003 (11:46 am)
Let's think straight here.
I can get a new 2003 XRS/Vibe GT with these Edmunds numbers -
After $2000 GM rebate - you're at $18,000 MAX.
If you're still thinking $14000 is still $4000 less. Read on...
A 2003 XRS Trix has this pricing:
A car lease is usually base on 15,000 miles per yr, so low ball place hides the 12k/yr in the find print (pun intended)
I think Toyota is advertising lease rates specials now at $159 per month + $1800 down = $7524.
So Toyota is valuing their 3 yr old car with 45,000 miles at about $12,500.
Cars depreciate real fast the closer they are to 100k miles.
The XRS is not a fast mover - about 10% of anticipated sales.
Questions to ask:
Are the tires new?
Are the brakes new? A good way to confirm highways miles or not - the brakes will have a little wear if they are original...
What other items need to be considered at 60,000 miles?
Good Luck in your decision.
Kinda funny how the Vibe $ after rebate is similar to the Trix TMV...