Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Sedans Honda Civic Honda Civic vs Toyota Corolla vs Mazda3
879 messages, Last post on Nov 25, 2008 at 2:57 PM
You are in the Honda Civic Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens
|
Replying to: backy (May 22, 2008 7:48 am) Conversly, I really like my 08 Altima keyless fob key. It is slightly larger than other manufacturer fobs, but it has no key attached, and can simply saty in my pocket the entire time. |
|
|
Reading these posts I now know how so many car companies can stay in business - there are as many reasons to choose a particular car as there are models to choose from! I've owned a couple of Hondas and my wife has a Mazda 6 that she loves. I'm down to the Civic and the Mazda3 although I will have to say the price of the Focus was very tempting. But, as Warren Buffet said; "Price is what you pay, but value is what you get." After driving the above 3, I'd add that I've eliminated the 09 Corolla because of the steering. It felt like it would "hang" slightly when trying to correct for drift, resulting in a slight over-correction - very disturbing. Right now I'm leaning toward the Honda but that could change after I do a little more research. |
|
|
Replying to: smallcar1 (May 14, 2008 7:38 pm) Insurance 1. Corolla is the cheapest in Insurance compared to the Civic. The Civic is ranked #1 as the most stolen car in North America, and secondly it is considered as a sport sedan. The Corolla is one of the least stolen cars, and it is classified as a family mid-size sedan now. The insurance for a driver that has a clean driving record for 6 years continuously, has completed a governement certified driving school, and advance snow driving schools, University Grad, Engineer, does not smoke and is 33 years old, will be paying $150 a month for the Civic, in turn the same person would be paying $130 a month for the Corolla. All terms and benefits are exactly the same. GAS 2. Gas economy is almost identical, but with the Corolla, instead of racing down to the red light, let it cruise down to it by slapping it down to neutral. Saves at least another 30% gas, where the civic only saves 10%. Passengers,Luggage,and Packages. 3. It can fit all 5 people and at least 6 peices of fullsize luggages. In addition It can fit 3 child car seats in the back perfectly. 4. Would be able to haul a full kingsize mattress on the roof and the un-assembled bed frame inside the car with the seats folded down, but allowing only 1 passenger. MODIFICATIONS 5. Many aftermarket products available for both products. 6. Police would check civics more than Corollas. 7. Corolla's is like an appliance, where it is gauranteed to turn on. 8. A Corolla has more survivability and drivability after low velocity accidents compared to Civics. You can drive a damaged front end corolla at least 25km to a repair location with fluids dripping (just as long it is not the gas) safely. I have been driving Corolla's since 1998-2008. Driving my friends Civic for the least 4 years on and off.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: honshu (Jun 12, 2008 5:36 am) Based on what? You think more criminals drive Honda vs. Toyota? That's nonsense. Corolla's is like an appliance, where it is gauranteed to turn on. The Corolla IS like an appliance. It is as fun to operate as a Washing Machine. Both Civic and Corolla are reliable. A Corolla has more survivability and drivability after low velocity accidents compared to Civics. You can drive a damaged front end corolla at least 25km to a repair location with fluids dripping (just as long it is not the gas) safely. You mentioned the Corolla is better compared to Civics... this must mean you've driven both a Corolla and a Civic with wrecked front ends from the same speed and angle, with fluids dripping along the way; how else would you know? Gas economy is almost identical, but with the Corolla, instead of racing down to the red light, let it cruise down to it by slapping it down to neutral. Saves at least another 30% gas, where the civic only saves 10%. Another silly notion, that a Corolla saves 20% more gas idling than a Civic does. I hope you are talking about a manual transmission going into neutral. Dropping an automatic into neutral while driving = bad idea, for several reasons.
|
|
|
Replying to: thegraduate (Jun 12, 2008 6:12 am) Based on what? You think more criminals drive Honda vs. Toyota? That's nonsense Want the mega list of the internet websites that describe why? www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20071219/stol...71219/20071219?hub=- Canada www.canadiandirect.com/WorkArea/linkit.aspx?LinkIdentifier=id&ItemID=72 www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20071219.wstolen1219/CommentStory/Na- tional www.cisnb-srcnb.ca/downloads/WordOnTheStreet-V06.pdf Would you like to be educated more? There 2 major reasons why civics are checked. 1. They are the most stolen vehical 2. Illegal Modifications  The 2 major reasons why Corolla's are checked. 1. Why they turn on like an applice by pushing a button. 2. If they are doing the speed limit, there must be something wrong.  A Corolla has more survivability and drivability after low velocity accidents compared to Civics. You can drive a damaged front end corolla at least 25km to a repair location with fluids dripping (just as long it is not the gas) safely. You mentioned the Corolla is better compared to Civics... this must mean you've driven both a Corolla and a Civic with wrecked front ends from the same speed and angle, with fluids dripping along the way; how else would you know? Actually It was not me driving the civic at that time, but my friend did rear end a bus, after seeing a red 68 Mustang Convertable doing the same thing on the otherside. He couldnt turn on his car after that. Gas economy is almost identical, but with the Corolla, instead of racing down to the red light, let it cruise down to it by slapping it down to neutral. Saves at least another 30% gas, where the civic only saves 10%. Another silly notion, that a Corolla saves 20% more gas idling than a Civic does. I hope you are talking about a manual transmission going into neutral. Dropping an automatic into neutral while driving = bad idea, for several reasons. Well it did actually work for me. But I would like to hear your reasons for not to? That I would need to educated on.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: honshu (Jun 12, 2008 9:34 am) +Dropping an automatic transmission into neutral while in motion puts unnecessary wear on your transmission, and simply cannot be good for transmission life. +If going to a stop light, your car being in gear will help you slow down with engine braking, while still allowing you to coast and use little fuel. In neutral, your brakes must do more work to slow your car, causing the pads to wear quicker, the rotors to be hotter (especially in stop and go traffic), and could warp your rotors if you use the brakes a lot while they are hot. +In neutral, if you needed to make an emergency maneuver involving acceleration (a car coming too fast behind you, or an emergency vehicle perhaps) you couldn't promptly accelerate out of its way, and would instead waste precious seconds moving the car into gear, and waiting while the transmission electronically shifts from N to D. By then it may be too late; most emergency maneuvers don't allow for an extra 2 or 3 seconds; they are typically now-or-never. The 2 major reasons why Corolla's are checked. 1. Why they turn on like an applice by pushing a button. You imply that a Civic is relatively unreliable compared to a Corolla. I disagree, and say that both are reliable on the long-term, but the Civic is much more fun to drive, without the "appliance" feel. Also, a Civic that looks like a street racer may be checked. :  But tell the truth; most Civics don't look like this. Your average Civic that looks like this won't be a blip on a policeman's radar.:  You mentioned the Corolla is better compared to Civics... this must mean you've driven both a Corolla and a Civic with wrecked front ends from the same speed and angle, with fluids dripping along the way; how else would you know? Actually It was not me driving the civic at that time, but my friend did rear end a bus, after seeing a red 68 Mustang Convertable doing the same thing on the otherside. He couldnt turn on his car after that. Two different accidents = different parameters, bumper heights, speeds, angles. You can't compare two different crashes in this manner, which is why we use standardized crash tests. The current Civic received a score of Good in all categories in the frontal crash test from the IIHS. For the Civic, they can be quoted as saying : Measures taken from the dummy indicate a low risk of any significant injuries in a crash of this severity. The new 2009 Corolla did not receive a Good across the board (although it got it overall), receiving only "Acceptable" in the head injury category, saying: A high head acceleration occurred when the dummy's head hit the steering wheel through the airbag, indicating that head injuries would be possible. Personally, I'll take the safer car over the one that might be driveable after an accident (but not for long if you're leaking toxic chemicals everywhere you drive, as you said you were leaking fluids).
|
|
|
Replying to: thegraduate (Jun 12, 2008 9:58 am) |
|
| http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=126610 | |
|
Replying to: honshu (Jun 12, 2008 5:36 am) I think some of the sad things about the corolla are the very cushy driving feel and the damn 4 speed auto still. I can't believe a brand new 2009 redesigned car would still have a standard 4 speed. Honda is purely 5 and 6 speeds now, how come Toyota can't even compare on that? I'd most certainly recommend a Civic or Mazda3 over a corolla to anyone for any need. And if you want a non-sporty car with 4 speed auto like a Corolla, an Elantra is a better choice with a $2k+ savings. Also the lack of standard features is a pretty big turnoff as well. Honda also gets a negative on that regard though. And what's up with having an engine that's still 8hp less than the Civic that was designed a few years earlier? I thought Toyota was supposed to make good engines.  There's just nothing great about this vehicle at all. And reliability isn't a good reason with Elantra taking the CR reliability away and most other car makers being nearly comparable in recent studies. Toyota is sitting on their reputation of the past...and not catching up to the cars of the future. A Civic blows it away in every category and doesn't even cost more. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: moocow1 (Jun 13, 2008 11:50 am) I can't believe a Corolla XLE (the top model besides the sporty XRS) doesn't have Cruise standard. It has been standard on the mid-level Civic LX since something like the late 80s.
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Sedans Honda Civic Honda Civic vs Toyota Corolla vs Mazda3
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2011 Honda Civic
2010 Toyota Corolla
2010 Mazda MAZDA3
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
