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: 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.
|
|
|
Replying to: thegraduate (Jun 13, 2008 11:54 am) How come Honda can make a 5 speed fit and still keep it affordable?
|
|
|
Replying to: moocow1 (Jun 13, 2008 11:50 am) And also the Corolla gets exemplary FE with the 1.8L engine (32 mpg overall on CR's recent tests), but that's not all that much better than the Civic or Mazda3i. Other than that, I don't see any big plus for the Corolla over the Civic or Mazda3i. The Corolla probably has a smoother/quieter ride than those cars, but at the expense of handling, and as you said, if you want a non-sporty small car the Elantra is a less expensive alternative. I'd like the Corolla more if it had a higher-quality interior with a more comfortable driving position, less vague steering, and a bit more rear seat room. Standard VSC (ala the Elantra SE) would be nice too, but VSC does seem pretty easy to get on the LE trim.
|
|
|
Replying to: backy (Jun 13, 2008 12:11 pm)  Gotta drop that ridiculous 50k per month corolla purchasing streak. Get everyone into those Mazda3, Civics, Rabbits, Elantras, etc! http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=126610
|
|
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
