2004 Toyota Corolla XRS Preview @ TCC

[NFS4]

http://www.thecarconnection.com/index.asp?article=7227&sid=180&n=157

The current Corolla is basically a mini-Camry. In fact it's not even all that mini as, at 178.3-inches long, it's exactly the same length as original 1983 Camry. Available only as a four-door sedan, it's solid (like a Camry), staid (like a Camry), it's front-drive (like a Camry), extremely well built (like a Camry) and pretty boring (like, yup, a Camry). And it looks like a Camry too.

The Corolla sells well in base CE, slightly luxurious LE and slightly sporty S trim and all three perform about identically since they're all powered by the same 1.8-liter, all-aluminum, DOHC, 16-valve four equipped with Toyota's VVT-I variable valve timing system. Making 130-horsepower, it's not a bad powerplant and generally comparable to those in the mainstream Honda Civic and Nissan Sentra models. Whether backed by a five-speed manual or four-speed automatic, the engine is a fine companion, but never an exciting one.

On the outside there's little that distinguishes the XRS from the S (grille texture, larger five-spoke wheels and 195/55R16 Michelin Pilot Primacy tires are the big things), but the car in fact has a completely different heart: A new 170-horsepower version of the 2ZZ 1.8-liter, DOHC, 16-valve, engine used in the Celica GT-S. While this engine shares nominal displacement with the one used in other Corollas it is in fact a completely different beast and it features the VVTL-i system that includes variable valve lift alongside variable timing.

Toyota lopped ten horsepower off the 180-horsepower rating the 2ZZ carries in the Celica and Matrix in order to improve torque through the low- and mid-range in the Corolla. The torque peak now occurs at 4400 rpm instead of the 4800 rpm it does in the Celica. But this is still no V-8 with the peak 127-pound feet of torque actually down three from the 130-pound feet in the Celica. Beyond that the ordinary 130-horsepower Corolla makes its peak 125-pound feet of twist at an even lower 4200 rpm.

As in the Celica and Matrix, the 2ZZ is wed to a six-speed manual transmission and its throws are both short and precise. Unfortunately engaging reverse brings with it (as in the Celica) an annoying warning beeper.

Keep the simmering 2ZZ below 6000 rpm and the XRS drives like any other Corolla. It's only past 6000 rpm, as the engine heads to its 8400-rpm redline, that it begins to wail. This is smooth engine that loves to rev, but it has a rougher edge than the K20 in the Acura RSX Type-S. And it's no less fun to open this Toyota's throttle than that Acura's - even though it gives up 30-horsepower.

According to Toyota the Corolla XRS will waltz from 0 to 60 in less than eight seconds and mid-sevens feels right. But drop out of the sweet spot between 6000 and 7600 rpm and the acceleration curve flattens instantly. This is a quicker Corolla, but it's not a particularly easy car to keep on the boil. If you want brainless speed, buy a Mustang or Corvette.

 

[RagingBITCH]

Originally posted by: NFS4
http://www.thecarconnection.com/index.asp?article=7227&sid=180&n=157

The Corolla sells well in base CE, slightly luxurious LE and slightly sporty S trim and all three perform about identically since they're all powered by the same 1.8-liter, all-aluminum, DOHC, 16-valve four equipped with Toyota's VVT-I variable valve timing system. Making 130-horsepower, it's not a bad powerplant and generally comparable to those in the mainstream Honda Civic and Nissan Sentra models. Whether backed by a five-speed manual or four-speed automatic, the engine is a fine companion, but never an exciting one.

An understatement about a Toyota if I ever saw one.

 

[NutBucket]

Heh, this sounds like one car the Civic Si could actually keep up with

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: RagingBITCH

Originally posted by: NFS4
http://www.thecarconnection.com/index.asp?article=7227&sid=180&n=157

The Corolla sells well in base CE, slightly luxurious LE and slightly sporty S trim and all three perform about identically since they're all powered by the same 1.8-liter, all-aluminum, DOHC, 16-valve four equipped with Toyota's VVT-I variable valve timing system. Making 130-horsepower, it's not a bad powerplant and generally comparable to those in the mainstream Honda Civic and Nissan Sentra models. Whether backed by a five-speed manual or four-speed automatic, the engine is a fine companion, but never an exciting one.

An understatement about a Toyota if I ever saw one.

But that's talking about the base engine...

 

[Apex]

Perhaps now someone will make a reasonably reliable and compact FI system for the 2ZZ, thus un-screwing all of the Elise buyers.

 

[jagec]

Originally posted by: NFS4
http://www.thecarconnection.com/index.asp?article=7227&sid=180&n=157

The current Corolla is basically a mini-Camry. In fact it's not even all that mini as, at 178.3-inches long, it's exactly the same length as original 1983 Camry. Available only as a four-door sedan, it's solid (like a Camry), staid (like a Camry), it's front-drive (like a Camry), extremely well built (like a Camry) and pretty boring (like, yup, a Camry). And it looks like a Camry too.

Yet another dead reliable Toyota...those guys are the kings of the econobox.

 

[DougK62]

It's still too skinny and too tall - like a lot of newer small cars are. They just look weird to me.

 

[flexy]

Originally posted by: DougK62
It's still too skinny and too tall - like a lot of newer small cars are. They just look weird to me.

I really like our 2003 Corolla S, the mileage and everything about it...but it has a big disadvantage:

Its extremely sensitive to windgusts and once you go over 60 and it is only *slightly* windy the car is all over the road like a f****g sailing-boat. These cars seem to be extremely light.

otherwise nice, as said

 

[Bassyhead]

Originally posted by: flexy

Originally posted by: DougK62
It's still too skinny and too tall - like a lot of newer small cars are. They just look weird to me.

I really like our 2003 Corolla S, the mileage and everything about it...but it has a big disadvantage:

Its extremely sensitive to windgusts and once you go over 60 and it is only *slightly* windy the car is all over the road like a f****g sailing-boat. These cars seem to be extremely light.

otherwise nice, as said

i think it has something to do with the steering. I've driven my dad's 03 corolla and know what you mean, but i have a 95 protege that is about the same weight and doesnt do that in wind.

 

[NutBucket]

Originally posted by: Bassyhead

Originally posted by: flexy

Originally posted by: DougK62
It's still too skinny and too tall - like a lot of newer small cars are. They just look weird to me.

I really like our 2003 Corolla S, the mileage and everything about it...but it has a big disadvantage:

Its extremely sensitive to windgusts and once you go over 60 and it is only *slightly* windy the car is all over the road like a f****g sailing-boat. These cars seem to be extremely light.

otherwise nice, as said

i think it has something to do with the steering. I've driven my dad's 03 corolla and know what you mean, but i have a 95 protege that is about the same weight and doesnt do that in wind.

Nah, its the aerodynamics. As previously stated, because it is so tall. It looks so damned out of proportion to me.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: NFS4 The torque peak now occurs at 4400 rpm instead of the 4800 rpm it does in the Celica. But this is still no V-8 with the peak 127-pound feet of torque actually down three from the 130-pound feet in the Celica. Beyond that the ordinary 130-horsepower Corolla makes its peak 125-pound feet of twist at an even lower 4200 rpm.

they upgrade the engine and manage to make it ever so slightly more boring to drive in normal situations. good job toyota :thumbsup:

 

[HiTek21]

I'd buy one.

 

[NutBucket]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: NFS4 The torque peak now occurs at 4400 rpm instead of the 4800 rpm it does in the Celica. But this is still no V-8 with the peak 127-pound feet of torque actually down three from the 130-pound feet in the Celica. Beyond that the ordinary 130-horsepower Corolla makes its peak 125-pound feet of twist at an even lower 4200 rpm.

they upgrade the engine and manage to make it ever so slightly more boring to drive in normal situations. good job toyota :thumbsup:

:laugh:

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: HiTek21
I'd buy one.

I'd buy this instead for the same money:

http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview.cfm?catid=38&threadid=1316740

 

[JulesMaximus]

Woo Hoo! Another boring Toyota!

Snore snore snore....

 

[Pocatello]

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: HiTek21
I'd buy one.

I'd buy this instead for the same money:

http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview.cfm?catid=38&threadid=1316740

So the Mazda 3 has fallen out of favor ?

 

[Crappopotamus]

toyota makes the most boring cars ever...

 

[cressida]

Originally posted by: Crappopotamus
toyota makes the most boring cars ever...

That's not true!

Toyota Supra 93' - 98'
Toyota MR2 (whatever years the last model was)

 

[NutBucket]

Originally posted by: cressida

Originally posted by: Crappopotamus
toyota makes the most boring cars ever...

That's not true!

Toyota Supra 93' - 98'
Toyota MR2 (whatever years the last model was)

Uhm, that's just two models. Their cars are far more boring to drive...........

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: Pocatello

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: HiTek21
I'd buy one.

I'd buy this instead for the same money:

http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview.cfm?catid=38&threadid=1316740

So the Mazda 3 has fallen out of favor ?

tC offers a lot more for the money

 

[jagec]

Originally posted by: cressida

Originally posted by: Crappopotamus
toyota makes the most boring cars ever...

That's not true!

Toyota Supra 93' - 98'
Toyota MR2 (whatever years the last model was)

Three generations; mk1's were from 85-89, mk2's were from 91-95, Spyders were from 2000 on.

I own a mk1, I WILL get a supercharged mk1 someday.

 

[Corporate Thug]

170 hp corrolla, NOT BAD!

 

[Banana]

Here's
a review (not preview):

Corolla XRS Review Conclusion: "Lively, likable, little lump"

.

 

[CrackRabbit]

Not bad, but if I was going to give my money to Toyota I would get a Scion Tc, they look better than the Corolla and have the option to add a supercharger.


CrackRabbit