Last post on Nov 27, 2013 at 10:33 AM
You are in the Toyota Corolla
What is this discussion about?
Toyota Corolla, Sedan
#893 of 3104 I wouldn't pity...
Jun 08, 2007 (3:19 pm)
I mean, its still a solid entry in the class, and along with the Civic, posts some of the best MPG of any compact, which I'm sure is helping to fuel sales.
My issue is that there is no reason why SAB/SAC shouldn't be standard. It's MY 2008, for Pete's sake.
FWIW, eldaino, the last generation Elantra certainly wasn't a poster child for safety either, going several years with an IIHS rating of POOR, requiring several revisions to finally earning a GOOD in frontal offset, and earning a POOR for side impacts, even with a head/chest combo bag....
The last generation (read: '01 up through '05) Civic never offered more than a chest-protecting only side airbag.
Still, jacksan, and no disrespect to you - the whole "what did competitors do with their previous generation" is a LAME excuse for Toyota. Who cares about the previous generation? I'm talking about 2008 cars now, and its not acceptable that SAB/SAC isn't standard.
What is particularly interesting to me is that the Corolla was the first vehicle in this class to offer any type of supplimental side impact protection - in the form of a chest-only seat mounted airbag - in 1998.
#894 of 3104 Re: I wouldn't pity... [alpha01]
Jun 08, 2007 (5:07 pm)
Is it fair to criticize a car for crash test results when the crash tests had not even been designed when the car was designed? How many small cars with torso side bags (not curtains) received better than "Poor" in the IIHS side impact test when it was first run on small cars, I think in 2004? The Corolla got Acceptable with its optional SABs and SACs. I think there was only one other small car that got better than Poor, when it was equipped with optional side curtains.
Maybe the reason Toyota doesn't add side bags/curtains as standard to the Corolla is that lots of people buy Corollas without them. Perhaps to these people, a lower price is more important than this safety feature. Hard to fathom, but could be true.
#895 of 3104 Re: I wouldn't pity... [backy]
Jun 08, 2007 (7:17 pm)
The Matrix I just bought doesn't have SAC/SAB. I wouldn't have minded paying a bit extra for them, but they certainly were not a make or break feature for me. I would suspect that for many Corolla buyers the same is true. These cars are not the family minivan, they are probably more often than not doing duty as a solo-occupant commute car.
I think Toyota would be wise to make side bags and curtains standard on the next Corolla only because the market has rushed to standardize them, not because I think they are particularly worth the $300-500 they probably jack up the price of the car.
(And yes, I am aware of the crash test results out there, I just think we have reached the point of diminishing returns when it comes to safety gear. Already we have this mandate coming from the IIHS to make VSC standard, and that is going to jack up the cost of cars and trucks too)
#896 of 3104 Re: I wouldn't pity... [nippononly]
Jun 09, 2007 (6:41 am)
FWIW, the IIHS doesn't make safety mandates. The mandate for standard stability control came from the Federal government.
#897 of 3104 Re: I wouldn't pity... [backy]
Jun 09, 2007 (7:35 am)
Correct of course. The IIHS pressures vehicle makers through the press and other media venues and through weight of public opinion/perception. It can't mandate anything to the public.
#898 of 3104 crash tests
Jun 09, 2007 (9:11 am)
"Is it fair to criticize a car for crash test results when the crash tests had not even been designed when the car was designed?"
I understand your point, but the newness of the testing at that point in time does not invalidate comparisons. My statements re: the Elantra and Civic were made in reference to a point made by eldaino that those vehicles "have been doing it [ostensibly, safety] better". I simply argue/disagree with that.
Certainly, the new Civic is very impressive in its tests, due in part to a strong safety cage, and advanced/curtain airbags.
Nippononly- FWIW, when Toyota made SAB/SAC standard on the Camry for '07 MY, the price did not increase when comparing comparably equipped models.
I still feel that vehicles in '08 should have SAB/SAC standard, and I am still disappointed that Toyota fails to offer this on the Yaris, Corolla, and Matrix alone.
#899 of 3104 Re: I wouldn't pity... [backy]
Jun 09, 2007 (11:37 pm)
Oh yes, of course, I knew it was NHTSA mandating the stability control, I don't know why I wrote IIHS, which if course is a private concern.
alpha: Well, I hear you, but I am just saying that all these things we are standardizing in the cars cost money, which has to come from somewhere, whether it's more frequent and larger price increases during the first year of a new model to "catch up" with costs, or whatever.
And when you mention the Yaris/Corolla/Matrix as the models "alone" without standard SAC/SAB, I wonder if you have considered how hard it is to get those items on the Tacoma (is it even possible to get SAB in the extended cabs? And it is a very rare find indeed in the crew cabs). I don't know about Tundra - does it have standard curtains now?
#900 of 3104 AM I THE ONLY ONE WHO WANTS THE FOLLOWING!
Jun 10, 2007 (12:28 am)
I am glad Toyota isn't bumping the size of the engine past 1.8 liters, but I would personally prefer a smaller enine option.
Use the latest and greatest, (super VVTI, whatever that is) to increase power/liter and offer a 1.6 liter engine and super efficient CVT.
Such a car should be able to get 40+ mpg combined, even with the new EPA standards.
On top of that would appreciate a trip computer, (from the center monitor) that in a prius like manner, offers real time mpg, overall mpg for trip, mp for lie of car, and range remaining, as well as temp.
That would be perfect for me, who dosn't need my Corolla to go any faster!
I drive a 94 Corolla with 165,000 miles on it. I hope to make it to 250,000-300,000 which would have me buying a new car in the next gen or perhaps even the one after that.
My current acceleration is just fine, and I currently use a 1.6 liter. With current tech like vvti Toyota could probably replace my engine with 1.5 liters, and the 2009 could make due with 1.4 liters.
I never could understand the American obsession with speed. With traffic congestion so bad these days who cares about acceleration of 0-60 in 9 seconds vs 10? Is it really worth sacrificing 2-3 mpg for it?
#901 of 3104 Wishing...
Jun 10, 2007 (4:29 am)
Toyota would offer a poor man's sport sedan along the lines of the old BMW 2002. Something compact that feels solid; with great handling and feel; and has a sole purpose of providing driver enjoyment. Current designs weigh us down with luxury gadgets, safety features that surround us in air bags, and don't allow for "edgy" driving (ABS, etc.). The closest we get to this ideal nowadays is the Mazda Miata.
There weren't so many other cars on the road. Since I started driving 30+ years ago, the number of cars on U.S. roads has doubled, without a significant increase in the miles of lanes. As agalas says, why have a sports car with all this traffic congestion?
The roads were in better shape. Why have a sports car when what we need are SUV's to navigate U.S. roads?
#902 of 3104 Corolla LE with Leather
Jun 10, 2007 (10:35 am)
How do you get it, as it's not an option on Edmunds.
Also, someone wrote and said the Civic and M3 hAVE timing chains rather than belts.
How come you can buy a V Dub and a Focus with heated seats, but not a Corolla.
Usually that's how Toyota gets you with the extras .