Sometimes you need to upset your applecart. Change can be good as well as highly enlightening.
This article started out in the vein similar to my highly sarcastic piece on a 2014 Ford Focus I rented some weeks ago. While temptation toward snarky and caustic remarks presented itself, the bigger picture is that any change will inherently alter your perspective. Let’s just say of my recent rentals, this is Number 2 of 3 and it has tempered my opinions. My venom is being saved for the very deserving Number 3.
I am not a fan of Toyota products and never have been. None of their physical traits has ever appealed to me. We each respond differently to the same input, so your results may vary.
Having said that, I am also not completely unfamiliar with Toyota. As a child, my aunt and uncle had a circa 1975 Corona coupe. While a novel car that had remarkably quick steering for the time, it rusted at a prodigious rate compared to the early ’70s Fords elsewhere in the family. It was a Toyota of its time, a decent car that was good for little else than being recycled into a culvert pipe when finally traded off.
The Corona went away in 1981 for a Fox bodied Mustang which hung around for a decade with nary a sign of corrosion. Since then, I have driven a first generation Prius and a 2010 Camry. Neither provided me with any sort of mental, physical, or visceral excitement.
Two weeks ago, another Toyota entered my life when I rented a compact car for Mrs. Jason to take to St. Louis. Renting a car is a lot like opening a Christmas present from an eccentric aunt–you don’t always know what you will get. This time it was a 2013 Corolla.
Mrs. Jason made the observation that she has been driving legally for well over half her life, but has never driven a Toyota. She, like me, does not believe that Toyota manufactures automotive nirvana, since nirvana does not require recalls. However, she was curious to drive it to see what all the hype is about. As I stated in the Focus article, we are realizing the need to adjust our automotive fleet and renting has been a great way to take test drives for a cost less than or comparable to what fuel alone would cost for my pickup or her van.
Before I delve into details of our subjective analysis of this gray Corolla, I need to set the stage. We lived in the self-proclaimed “America’s Hometown” of Hannibal, Missouri, for five years. Due to the draw of novelist Mark Twain having both grown up and basing several novels there, Hannibal is a popular tourist attraction.
image source: www.addins.whig.com
This was the Hannibal experience for a couple of tourists. It happened in August 2009, before the Toyota sudden acceleration ruckus began in 2010. The events of this specific instance are odd; parked where the tow truck is, this car had to jump a 6″ curb and gain enough speed to break through the safety fence just behind where the three people are standing. This car was quickly scrapped without investigation into the cause.
The sudden acceleration investigations were harmful to Toyota with fines levied and various lawsuits pending. Even if one did not stay abreast of these events, newspaper articles and television reports about old ladies driving over a cliff do stick in ones mind and will associate themselves with a brand. Nearly five years later, the non-automotive minded Mrs. Jason still remembers this event and wanted me to verify whether the car in question was a Corolla. It was not; it was a Camry.
Again, it is unfortunate how some things stick in one’s mind. A second item she asked about was whether or not this particular Toyota was one of the 6.4 million cars Toyota has recently recalled. Thankfully, it was not.
This size of car is quite appealing to my wife and she said there were various elements of the Corolla that reminded her of both her ’85 and ’96 Escorts – which is highly complimentary coming from her. The ’85, purchased new by her father, died via Jeep Grand Cherokee at 259,000 miles; during its life it required only two timing belts, a voltage regulator, and a set of tie-rods. My wife purchased the ’96 new and we sold it to her brother in 2004 with 70,000 miles; never requiring anything under our ownership, her brother used it beyond its abilities for another 165,000 miles before it recently died of a dead cylinder at 235,000 miles.
For its intended purpose of getting Mrs. Jason to St. Louis and back, the Corolla did so and returned just over 35 miles per gallon in the process. The fuel mileage is quite admirable.
The day after she returned from St. Louis, I piloted the Toyota for a family outing to a town forty minutes north.
The first thing that struck me about the Toyota was the abnormally high positioning of the steering column. Even with the steering wheel adjusted as far down and as close to me as possible, my arms were uncomfortably high. Had I driven the Corolla a distance comparable to what my wife had, my arms would have quickly tired.
The second item of note was the sound of the engine. While the engine in the Focus sounded as smooth and mellow as possible for a four-banger, the engine in the Corolla had a distinctly nasal quality to it. For comparison purposes, think of it as the contrast between smooth and vibrant Waylon Jennings and the nasal cacophony of Willie Nelson (auditory comparison here). It simply was not an endearing sound. In this regard, Toyota could learn a lot from Ford.
It should also be noted the Ford has a twenty-eight horsepower advantage as well as an additional two forward gears.
I found the console in the 2014 Focus to be an irritant; I heartily applaud Toyota on the design of the console in this car, as it was minuscule in comparison and helped make the interior feel more expansive than it really is. It served its function without being an insidious invasion of ones personal space. It also allowed me to reach over and rub Mrs. Jason’s leg without having to navigate around some large, physical barrier. For this, Ford could learn a lot from Toyota.
Bright colors tend to make people more upbeat; the trend of automotive interiors with such dark colors is counterproductive to facilitating a happy owner experience. I do not know if this darkness is a predominant Toyota theme, or a reflection of the LE trim level. This coal black interior did conspire to make the cabin inordinately warm on a temperate day. Mrs. Jason said she is unaccustomed to running the air conditioner when the ambient temperature is only 70 degrees Fahrenheit; she said it was like a greenhouse above that temperature. Such absorption of heat likely doesn’t help with the longevity of the interior. Are dyes other than black so prohibitively expensive?
Styling is very subjective, but let’s face it, many of our choices on our automotive purchases possess a certain degree of subjectivity. For being a compact car, I do find this generation of Corolla to be preferable to most of its competition; the redesigned 2014 models aren’t offensive in appearance, a mild evolution of this 2013 model. While I still prefer the styling of the Jetta amongst the compact car field, the Corolla does look more appealing than the four-wheeled jelly bean design utilized by some its competitors.
So has Toyota succeeded in making a convert? No. While a decent car, the Corolla did not exhibit any quality that makes it truly unique. It simply did its thing with less overall irritation than what two competitors have.
Being the least offensive does have advantages, something Toyota has certainly been masterful in exploiting. It could be argued that this generally inoffensive demeanor is the strong point for this Corolla and Toyota’s in general. However, I liken it to the student who consistently earns B’s and C’s; he is consistent, yet not a standout. How could he ever expect to graduate at the top of his class?
Sticking to tried and true engineering is one thing. Designing a car to the lowest common denominator is another. I wouldn’t have a problem with the Corolla if its soft suspension and four-speed auto were housed in a better proportioned body, or if it didn’t suffer from tacky design details like mismatched interior illumination, unsupportive front seats, metallic finish accents, a weird driving position and a general air of cheapness. I always liked Toyotas for being conservative and predictable, but their more recent attempts to capture what they see as “style” are disappointing. Being conservative and being cynical are very different.
Instead of wearing its dowdiness with pride, Toyota is going for cheap attempts to make its C-segment staple exciting, and that money could be better spent on improving the fundamentals. The no nonsense appeal has been replaced by fake “jazziness.” If this car were a band, it’d be Black Eyed Peas (gag).
Well, the point is that the attempts at styling excitement are a lot cheaper than most other changes they could make. Adding more content, nicer materials, better seats, etc., does cost money. (I do wish they’d found better seating positions, though. I don’t know if the new model improves things on that front.)
The dilemma Toyota is facing is that the Corolla sells best in markets that are very price-sensitive and the exchange rates of the yen are really not in Japanese automakers’ favor. The Corolla has been on the decline for a while in the home market, so much so that with the current generation Toyota opted to just make the JDM Corolla essentially a stretched Vitz/Yaris. (The new U.S. car retains the same platform as the previous E140.)
That said, I do miss the vibe of the E90 and E100 cars of the late ’80s and early ’90s. Except for the coupes, they were not enthusiast vehicles by any stretch (although the 4A-FE engine was fun with a manual transmission) and I wouldn’t say they felt upscale, but they gave the feeling that the money had been spent in the right places. There’s a lot to be said for unpretentious cars that deliver where it counts.
I’m not unaware of these factors, Aaron, but there’s something to be said for sharing technology and other components across platforms. Mazda, despite its precarious position, has managed to distinguish the last several iterations of its C-segment cars with decent materials and somewhat up-to-date engineering. Even the current Yaris shows a more honest approach.
I understand the way exchange rates work, and I also understand the need to market a car as fresh and exciting. There’s little excuse for the tone-deaf efforts at style Toyota has been making with recent US market staples, the Corolla being the worst example. The newest car has thankfully been toned down a bit and is a step in the right direction, despite its proportions.
I’m not defending their styling — the new Corolla is more palatable, but I’m having difficulty thinking of another current U.S.-market Toyota or Lexus product whose styling I wouldn’t characterize as “overwrought.”
Of course, I would say that of a lot of current automotive offerings. I look around and end up muttering, “Look, just because you CAN create all these compound curves and sharp creases doesn’t mean you SHOULD.”
The Corollas made for US and Canada from 2003 through the currently redesigned model were actually ALL based from a shortened and modified Camry chassis/platform dating back from 2001 and still currently used by the 2014.5 slightly redesigned Camry.
Umm; no. Can you provide some back-up to that claim? The Corolla has been sharing its platform with the European Auris, but it’s not the Camry’s. I’ve never heard anyone suggest this.
@Paul, read this entire article from Jalopnik and it will mention somewhere in the middle of the article regarding the MC Platform mentioning the Corolla and Camry using this identical chassis. Here is that link: http://jalopnik.com/how-toyota-screwed-up-the-2014-toyota-corolla-1187863687
Pedro, you’d better read it again, because it specifically says that the Camry doesn’t use the MC platform. And the Wikipedia article also makes that clear. You must have mis-read it.
Paul, I have read it and this is what the quote on that story says: “The Toyota MC platform dates back to 2006, when it debuted in the US under the RAV4, of all things. The 2006 Japanese-market Corolla was also on the MC platform, along with the Prius, the Matrix, the Scion xB, the Lexus CT. The current 2009-2013 Corolla (the red car in the pictures) is on the MC platform reports Automotive News, despite the fact that it looks just like its 2003-2008 predecessor. Some sources claim the 2007 and up Camry is MC-derived, but I believe there are significant differences between the Corolla and Camry under the skin, and Mark Rechtin, Automotive News’s specialist on Toyota in America, agreed with me.” If there was a confusion on my part it probably had to do with the “some sources claim” statement as the one with the quotations were copied and pasted here. In addition, the Camry platform is designated K so I stand corrected in misunderstanding this article in Jalopnik. Also the Avensis (which is a variation of the Scion tC or Toyota Zelas sports coupe and the discontinued Lexus HS250h or Toyota Sai Sedans) is sized in between the MC Platform Corolla and the K Platform Camry but more related to the Corolla than the Camry.
Ever since the Corolla got rid of the hatchback and station wagon in this country they have gotten quite boring in my opinion. Then again, I have never driven a Corolla so for all I know all of them are dull as dishwater. Personally, owning a newer Corolla to me screams “I know nothing about cars!” I very much dislike the styling of the 10th generation it is lumpy in all the wrong ways looking like a 9th generation with saline injections. Another reason I dislike the Corolla is because it is a sedan which makes cargo hauling not that easy and often comes in depressing colors such as this dark grey. I’ve never warmed up to New York’s plates so that does not help either. Some people though have roof racks on their Corolla to haul snowboards and the like or a trailer hitch to make dump runs.
I’ve never particularly been a Corolla fan either, but my parents recently purchased a 2011 Corolla (they usually tend to consult me but this one came out of left field; I didn’t even know they were in the market.) It’s essentially a new 3 year old car with all of 6000 miles on it, so that’s good, but even as Corollas go it’s boring–middle trim level, white, with gray interior. Maybe the appliance color suits such an appliance car though. I haven’t driven it yet so I’ll reserve judgment there, and of course reliability and resale wise you can’t go wrong with a Toyota. Dad claims to really like it, but it’s the first small car they’ve owned in about 6 years, so it might just be a refreshing change from the Grand Marquis and the Crown Vic.
As to the newest model, I think the styling changes are for the better, but that’s subjective of course.
Disagree on being dull as dishwater. I recently rented this car for a trip from Houston to Lubbock. That included plains and small mountains. It’s a lot of fun to drive a slow car fast and the mountains were fun even in a Toyota.
You know what you are getting. It’s going to last a long time. I got almost 40mpg and the only problem was a tire pressure sensor which I learned to ignore. I would kill myself with a corvette and so would a lot of us (you know who you are). I could hoon this all day long and have nothing happen to keep me from turning it back in. Sales may suffer in the states but I bet they just count their money elsewhere. Suzuki is a good example of that and I reckon Mitsubishi as well. I think the corolla will outlast them.
+1 on my mum’s base spec 08 hatch. Slow car fast is the perfect description for inner city driving with these. Suppose that makes me an Outlaw. Bob Wills is still the King.
When I had a Corolla rental for a couple of days, one thought stood out in my mind. I thought it was strange that the US manufacturers routinely got dinged for cheap interior materials, but everyone seemed more than happy to ignore the pile of crap that Toyota used for the Corolla’s interior.
Very good observation. In my original, sarcastic version I referred to the seat material as the love child between velcro and mouse fur. It did not work in the cars favor.
well, IMO I don’t get hung up over seat material since I almost always drive fully clothed 😉 I’m talking more about the narrative that the US automakers just put out cheap plastic interiors (and let’s be fair, there were plenty of those) but give Toyota a pass when their interiors are just as creaky and cheap. I drove a brand new 2013 Prius and not only was the interior made of nothing but bland hard plastic, the squeaks and rattles in that interior were execrable.
The same is often said of Subaru. The automotive press dings them for cheap interiors, (especially in comparison to other Japanese makes), but many among the traditional “Birkenstocks and bumper stickers” customer base wouldn’t have it any other way. They consider the cheap, non-descript interiors in base model Subies to be part of the charm that “….makes a Subaru, a Subaru.”
just like “Don’t own one without a warranty” is what “makes a BMW a BMW.”
I rented the generation prior to this one for a week a few years back. Completely unremarkable in every way and far inferior to the Civic we had at the time. I wonder how many buyers actually test drove the competition? The only noteworthy quality these have is resale value. At least there are no glaring faults I suppose.
I sat in a Corolla rental and was shocked at the volume and lack of quality of the interior plastics. There were huge panel gaps and vast expanses of cynically textured shiny grey plastic. The painted silver plastic trim just amplified the feeling of cheapness. The ride was soft, yet poorly controlled. The antiquated 4 speed automatic groaned and relentlessly hunted for the right gear, which it never did find. The front disc and circa 1908 rear drum brakes would squeal in protest when asked to do their job. I have ridden in a Focus and a Mazda 3, both are vastly superior to this former standard bearer. Toyota has become the new GM. Even out GMing GM at certain things, like building cars that meet a bare minimum standard, and trying to pass off 20 year old technology as “proven”. Only that even stubborn old GM has moved on to 6 speed transmissions.
Been in a Nissan?
I haven’t been in any of the recent models with the CVT, but I’ve heard and read bad things.
Traded a Nissan with a six speed manual for an identical one with a CVT. Runs good. Probably accelerates faster than I can slap a gearshift and gets better mileage. Not sure what’s going to happen when the warranty is gone. Bought an extended one for 75k just because of the CVT.
If it doesn’t break it’s great.
Our old ’04 Murano had the factory warranty on the CVT extended to 100k miles, so obviously Nissan believes they will last. Check into yours, it may be warrantied longer than you think.
I traded in a Malibu with GM’s attempt at the 6 speed transmission for a 2012 Altima with the CVT. Got tired of the Malibu being at the Chevy dealer more than my driveway. No problems with the Altima in the first 50,000 miles (other than a tree limb falling on it this winter), but we’ll see as far as the durability goes. I do like the pickup that the CVT has over regular autos, and gas mileage is great.
My only complaint about the Altima are the stiff seats and cheap interior. But all I really want out of my daily driver is no good driving dynamics, good gas mileage, and no drama. Knock on wood, but this car has been perfect so far.
Chevrolet made a lot of money selling cars like this in the 1960s. Competent, good looking and with a rep for quality. Bad ergonomics, cheap interior materials, flaccid suspensions and too few gears in the transmission did not penalize the cars among their huge customer base back then, and Toyota has been managing fairly well up to now.
Now, Jason, you have me wondering what is behind door No. 3. A Dart?
Yes, I’m curious also. I’m curious to know what the Dart is like in daily service. I drove a 500 Abarth and really enjoyed it; I know the Dart is much heavier, but I’m still surprised it’s as bad as the magazines say it is.
What bugs me isn’t the soft suspension or four-speed auto, but the money spent on vulgar decoration. It’s not what attracted me to Toyotas in the past.
It isn’t. The mainstream automotive press is about as useless as can be. They’re basically a cadre of whores; they won’t bad-mouth any car unless it’s safe to do so and just go from media drive to press event and do little more than wordsmith press kits after being well-fed. So they feel safe attacking the Dart because the Caliber was a clear miss. Even though the Dart’s biggest problems were 1) too many manual-trans cars built at the launch, and 2) one of the three available engines was underwhelming. Oh wow, what a piece of junk /sarcasm.
or the Chrysler 200. It’s a decent car, though a bit goofy looking thanks to inheriting its greenhouse from the Sebring. But it was another safe whipping boy for the worthless autojournos; like that idiot Scott Burgess from the Detroit News, he wrote a scathing review of the 200, referencing how crappy the Sebring was. Except his review of the Sebring from a few years prior was just this side of glowing.
Auto writers and sports writers regularly trade places for “least useful but most arrogant.”
Back then you could only choose among 3 or 4 manufacturers if you count AMC. Today there are more than a dozen. There are new threats coming from the Koreans and soon the Chinese. Car companies can no longer phone it in. Like GM in the 60’s, Toyota is big enough that they can coast for a decade or two, but eventually it will catch up to them if they don’t start caring about competing. Marketing can only take you so far. Just ask GM, Chrysler, Suzuki, Saab, Isuzu, and in a few years Mitsubishi.
In the long term reputation beats marketing every time. And that works both ways. In recent years Toyota has made a point of stating that they need to be more competitive and “exciting”. I think they will succeed at that over the long term. The readers of this site are by default more involved and interested in cars than the general population (and thus more critical).
I dunno, if the FR-S is any indication, they still don’t have a clue.
The write-up on Number 3 began this morning. All I will say about it is:
a) It was red.
b) It had 7,400 miles
c) The working title is “POS Does Not Mean Pride of Service”
Hope it is something cool, Is it a Lada Priora? 🙂
While the new model is clearly a Corolla, overall the shape is much more modern when seen in person. The one you rented is clearly aimed at being very mundane and MOR and not intimidating any customers with any hint of style. Maybe you could rent one of the new ones next for comparison purposes!
I was somewhat surprised this was a 2013, but it was likely at the end of its service life as it had 24,000 miles on the odometer.
Still breaking it in. Dad’s job uses a fleet of these Corollas as delivery vehicles, and they won’t sell them off until they are at the 200,000 mark and 3ish years old. They still seem to have a bit of life left in them, too.
It’s hard to envision many of the larger rental fleets keeping cars beyond 25,000 to 30,000 miles. No doubt one can get a bunch of miles from one, it just won’t be with the current owner.
I’ve routinely had rentals from Hertz, Enterprise, and Budget with 50,000 to 60,000 miles on them. Had a Cadillac CTS with 52,000 a few years back. It’s not 1985 anymore and replacing new cars that don’t break anyway is expensive. Although as far as actual calendar age goes, two years seem maximum. They are always the current model or the tail end of the previous generation (or in the case of Chevrolet Impalas & Malibus – the “old” version that is brand new, just for Hertz/Enterprise/Budget!)
While the last time I rented a car, in Jan it was a 2014 that only had 7K on it. That was the cream of the vehicles in the lanes that I could pick from. The two times before that I got Fusions that had 40K some odd miles on them and were on the verge of being 2 model years old. The fact is that since the rental car companies aren’t owned by auto mfgs anymore and many of the car companies have strict contracts on what the company must purchase to get the lowest prices and which versions they will buy back the rental companies keep some of their cars a fairly long time.
Enterprise Car Sales had a Saturn of some sorts or a Cobalt I forget which or both, but a few nearly five year old cars for sale with mileage around 40-60K.
One thing I have noticed or been told by friends is the rental companies do not want to pay for tires it seems because the higher mileage cars have nearly bald tires and/or unevenly worn tires.
I read that article about the lady driving over the cliff…holy cow was she lucky. A single tree, 3-4″ thick, the only one around, is what saved her from plummeting 200′ to the bottom.
I’ve spent a fair bit of time in a ’09 Corolla, which is the same as the ’13. I found it to be well put together and nicely appointed, but rather soulless. The previous generation appeals to me more stylistically, but bad luck with an oil burning 1ZZ-FE in my wife’s old ’98 Prizm have precluded me from seriously considering anything with that engine.
The 93-97 Corollas (and Prizms) are the best of the bunch imo. A little basic compared to today’s fare, but a great overall package. Make mine a ’97 with the high level trim and a 5 speed 🙂
My father has had both these generation Corollas, as well as the current Focus as company cars at his work. I’ve driven both, and also owned a 2001 Focus myself. That said, Dad and I are in agreement. We’d take a Corolla WAY before a Focus, any day of the week.
As for the Corolla, many of the negative things on paper aren’t noticeable on the road. The 4-speed auto is always looked down on, but in actuality, it’s a smooth unit and doesn’t draw attention to itself anywhere near the Ford’s power shift unit does. As Lee Wilcox pointed out, it’s surprisingly nimble (because its only 2800 lbs) for a car with skinny 65 series rubber. Lots of little things add up to make the car very enjoyable; good ergonomics, smooth operation of the switchgear like turn signal stalks and climate control dials, etc. The best part? As mentioned, they will get good milage figures in real world driving. Appliance it may be, but it’s certainly more Cuisinart than Kitchen-Aid.
The Focus, on the other hand, definitely tries to portray itself as sporty, and it’s fairly successful in this regard. But those larger, stickier tires crash more on rough surfaces and make more noise doing so. As I already mentioned, that power shift transmission is not well programmed. Odd sensation at takeoff, and lots of clunkiness between mid-shifts. It’s faster, at the sacrifice of efficiency. Biggest let down is the rear seat; not particularly roomy or comfortable. Both my Dad and I aren’t really sure if this Focus really improves upon the 2001 I owned. Faster and more economical it is, but not any more sporty, not as smooth, and (rear seat especially) not as comfortable. Let’s hope reliability has improved since mine, as it was awful. So awful, in fact, I only owned it for 2 years and dumped it before the warranty had run out :-/ A real shame, as at the time that Focus was near the head of the subcompact class (I should have bought a Protege).
Blaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
If I were to compare these Corollas to a student it would be an A student that excels at the three Rs but struggles to pass shop class and gym. B and C students are generally willing to cut class or skip homework once in a while, therefore they’re much more interesting than a Corolla, who would gladly remind a substitute teacher that the class had a big project due that day.
While I like the Corolla for what it is, that’s a fantastic and spot-on analogy.
I havent driven a Corolla newer than 08 but was unimpressed with that one I returned from a job
using my work beater a 84 Civic for a weekend and returned by rental the following Monday a 08 Manual Corolla same red as the Honda east coast of NorthIsland NZ to West coast so a good trip Napier to NewPlymouth it took the same amount of time both cars returned 45mpg but the Honda was better to drive, at the time we also owned a 93 toyota Corona 2.0L with Amon suspension so I’m hardly anti yota but the newer car had nothing to recomend it over the one at home except better gas mileage, Having bought several Toyotas over the years I found them to be reliable if dull cars mostly with mediocre handling other than that Amon kitted Kiwi model, it drove great though gutless.
A Corolla is the perfect car for people who hate cars. Nothing says “I don’t give a damn” better than a clapped out Corolla with no hubcaps that hasn’t been washed since the Bush administration, if ever. Most of the Corollas I see that are more than a couple of years old are in this condition or headed that way.
I last drove a Corolla in 2006 as a rental. No matter how many ways I adjusted the seat or the steering column, it was impossible to find a comfortable driving position.
I’ll second the observation that Toyota has somehow gotten away with chintzy interiors for years. The 95 and 99 Honda Accords I previously owned weren’t fancy, but they had nice touches like chrome door handles and shift levers that brightened up the interior. In a Camry of the same era, it’s all monochromatic plastic. Dour and cheap looking.
Pretty much my thoughts. The kind of car for folks who just want something to get them from point a to point b with no thoughts that a car could be anything but mere transportation. The types who hate driving, wouldn’t go for a cruise to save their lives.
I rented a 2010 one for a day when my 2002 Explorer was in the shop and I needed my own transport. I absolutely couldn’t wait until I got my Explorer back. When you go from a tricked out leather and sunroof Eddie Bauer with a V8 to a Corolla, its quite the let down in the performance and comfort field.
That first paragraph nailed it.
I have driven, and driven in, a number of Corollas over the years, and while it is one of the most popular (if not the most) popular car here, I find it strangely anodyne. They’ve been OK to drive, but has ever compelled me to buy one (maybe it’s seeing myself coming and going a little too often?) However, I must note that each generation was better than the other (I have driven an E80, AE91, AE100 and AE110).
As it would happen, the Corolla my parents recently purchased was not the first they considered. Way back in the mid 80’s, when shopping to replace our ailing ’79 Fairmont, the final two contenders were an ’81 Corolla sedan (E70) and an ’83 Ford Escort. I remember liking the Corolla better–it seemed nicer inside, had very pleasant stying, and even a vinyl roof! (I guess I always had Broughamtastic tendencies). But the Escort was newer and cheaper so it got the nod. It wasn’t a bad car…made it until ’94 before the timing chain snapped and the engine grenaded. I wonder how much longer that Corolla might have lasted if they had been willing to spend a few extra bucks…
Seems like the ones back then had more character, but perhaps I’m looking at it through rose-colored (or, in the case of that car, gold-colored) retro glasses.
As a child, I never pondered a car could be compared to an appliance.
What a piece of absolute garbage.
That’s a little strong, isn’t it? At the end of the day, the car started every time, got good gas mileage, didn’t break down, and will likely retain a significant part of its value for longer than most other cars in its class. Sure it was not the most exciting car in the world to drive and dynamically near the bottom of its class, but calling it a piece of garbage is not true. There are MANY other cars featured on this site that really outperform it in that particular aspect. While I’m not really a Corolla fan or a buyer of one, I can appreciate the positive aspects that it does possess.
From the perspective of a ‘car guy’, I think he nailed it. If your requirement for a car is ‘goes point a to point b cheap’ then I guess you wont be disappointed.
I received this car as a rental several months ago. Never have I driven such a soulless, strained, and miserable vehicle. I’ve never really hated a car before this one, and I’m absolutely shocked that people pay actual money for them.
This car screams “I’m without agency in a greige world of contented servitude!”
+1
It does have decent size windows you can actually see out of. I would want a 5 speed stick. Looks better than some of the “Bloated Bangle” car’s that need a camera just to back up. If I was still driving a lot of commuter miles to work, if it was reliable and economical as Toyota’s tend to be, I don’t think it would be a poor choice.
While I am not a fan of these Corollas I have to say they got the C-stack just right. A/C vents at the top, which is the perfect place for keeping your face cool, a simple-to-use audio system below that and then three classic knobs for the HVAC. There is a clock at the tippy top separate from the radio, a nice touch. I also appreciate the gated shifter and 3-spoke steering wheel.
When you get these basics right there is little need for any more controls on the steering wheel.
I can agree with that, steering wheel controls are gimmicks IMO. I had a Mustang that didn’t even have a horn on the steering wheel. Once I got used to it I didn’t mind it at all.
My last trip back to TN, I met up with my baby sis and her then-fiancée. We landed in Nashville and had an hour and a half trip west towards just north of Jackson, TN where my family is located. Our rental was a beige ’10-ish corolla. My sister, who isn’t really a car person was the first to ridicule this sad pathetic little turd. “Its the Crayola….it runs on hugs and love!” she said as this thing waddled around under our beef eating American frames. Granted, Scott and I are pretty big dudes at 250-ish a piece. My sis is prolly 140 or so. The flea circus under the hood which passes for an engine over at Toyota wheezed and huffed and groaned to get to 65mph and hit a wall of marshmallow every time we tried to pull a grade. When I closed the door it had a chintzy ‘ping’ that is the usual tinny report of all Japanese cars when you do so. The ‘mouse fur’ comment sums up the interior feel. Cheap rental fare, with no personality, no fun, no excitement and no soul whatsoever. If you could take the stereotypical bean counter–a middle aged IRS bureaucrat, for example–and try to capture the essence in a car, then a corolla is what you might come up with. Although to be fair, that could be ANY econobox sedan.
Its true, I have little good to say about these cars. But as I replied above to another post, this is from a car guys perspective. As someone who enjoys driving, loves cars, and wants the maximum experience from every dime he spends on a vehicle…a corolla doesn’t get a first look, much less a second. Hell, Id argue that it, and its competition aren’t even really ‘cars’ at all…more like transportation devices. And as a rental, or as a shapeless pod that hums its occupants from point a to point b, it does what its meant to do. And that’s what the sedan is really for. Others here knock this car for its lack of performance, style, handling, personality, the lack of distinguishing features in the interior, antiquated technology, etc etc. But that’s what cheapskates and car haters are buying. That’s who this is FOR. And that’s really all a sedan should ever try to be.
I think car makers should pool resources so that there was one common design each for cars like this at the subcompact, compact, and midsize levels using common and proven if not cutting edge tech. Someone spending $12K for a new car probably could give a crap how many speeds the slushbox has, if there are interior color options, etc etc. Design it once, design it right, sell it cheap and keep it in production as long as there is a profitable market for bottom feeder wheels. Save the development $$ for cars people actually WANT to own such as the muscle cars, 4x4s, hot hatches, pickups, etc. People who shop cars like this don’t buy the ‘best car’ in terms of the things gearheads want. They buy whatever is cheap and wont cause grief.
I would agree with everything except the “And that’s really all a sedan should ever try to be.”
I’m no sports car fan, but I do love a tricked out flagship-and that sort of car sure as hell isn’t a Corolla. Whether its a Caddy Fleetwood Brougham, a Lincoln Town Car, a Lexus LS 460L, a Bimmer 7 or a Benz S that sort of isolated living room on wheels has its own place. Personally, I find no end to the enjoyment out of driving my work car “sleeper” Deville. Plenty of snort to get around anyone so brash as to think they can cut me off in something like the aforementioned Corolla. There’s also something very satisfying about driving something that puts you in that “I’m in no hurry” sort of mindset. I’ve got nothing to prove and hell, all I need is money to beat the speed/handling freaks anyway.
As a commuter car, it would be fine. Then on the weekend and on vacations, it just makes you enjoy your “fun” or “hobby” or “road trip” or “toy” car that much more. If it’s your only car, then I agree it would be boring to live with 24/7. Who want’s to destroy the “other’ car by driving it back and forth to work every day?
I get the idea but disagree. My commute sucks: unsynched lights across a highway-less city of awful roads and (like everywhere) idiot drivers. Being stuck inside a hateful box of apathy is not what I need. Ideally, and just as a reminder that Toyota hasn’t always sucked, I’d drive an early 90s, fuel-guzzling celica gt4. If the modern corolla was thrown into my life…well, society would prefer that didn’t happen. Being working class, I prefer that I enjoy the obligatory as much as possible–i have little else.
As I earlier stated, I don’t hate cars–even cars that I disrespect and dislike working on usually have some redeeming quality if you squint hard enough. Not so with the corolla. That said, a stick might improve things. Toyota has never made an automatic that I’ve found tolerable.
While this is probably the cheapest generation they ever sold (including the new one, thank god), I don’t understand the typical “car guy” venom for the Corolla. It is not exciting. It’s not supposed to be. It’s generic. It’s a car. If you could buy 2014 COMPACT SEDAN off the shelf at Costco this is what you’d buy.
If you don’t like it, don’t buy it. I don’t think I would, not because is bad, just because there are so many other choices. But words like “garbage” and “horrible” are pretty off-base. A Chevette is garbage and horrible. A Geo Metro is garbage and horrible. This is a comfortable, reliable, simple machine for someone who wants that.
I personally don’t find them THAT bad to drive, given that it’s well, a Corolla. They ride Ok for a small car with limited wheelbase. My dad test drove a 2010 and ended up leasing a Civic because he preferred the firmer feel. YMMV.
I also find it funny when people on car sites lament the 1990s generations, because having extensively experienced both, those were cramped, loud, low-roofed penalty boxes compared to any of the 2003+ versions. Apart from the crappy plastics (which weren’t that great back then, either) this is a luxury car vs. the 1992 Corolla DX that I grew up in the backseat of.
+1. And in twenty years we’ll be oohing and aahing when we see pictures here of one with moss growing on it but still daily driving…
Hey, I love the 80s corollas. Theyre not, you know, sports cars but they are responsive and actually sort of sleek. The current incarnation feels like its made of rubber bands, the engine sounds unhappy through the entire range, acceleration is inexplicably delayed, and the steering, while technically accurate is impersonal and robotic. The car also looks like a chubby girl with poor-self esteem vainly attemoting to go unnoticed by slouching.
I don’t know if I’m a “car guy,” but I think that, on a site devoted to finding the merits in older cars, it is within reason to expect people to dislike the automotive equivalent of a Lean-Cuisine microwave enchilada. The car is not so much generic (that is, so typical as to be indistinguishable from the crowd) as it is a standalone category of suck.
The Civic is the same price range, and I have nothing bad to say about it–though, admittedly I have not driven a post-2006 example. I have driven a new fiat ### (I forget) and while I found the interior repugnant, it was actually fun. Notably, I have driven the 2013 (?) Yaris, which is just as miserable as the corolla.
My own Toyotas are early 90s 4×4 truck (which is glorious) and a 91 celica gt 2wd (which is an engaging commuter). So, I don’t hate toyota, I just find their current horde of compacts to be an offense to the value of our flicker-short mortality.
/rant
Sorry 🙂
I just rented a brand new Hyundai Elantra and was pretty pleased. I have driven the new Corolla and found the Hyundai to have a little more soul and better build quality. And I’m not a Hyundai fan by any means, because I’m watching a work fleet of older models fall to pieces.
All that Corolla is is transportation. People buy them because they always buy them. “Meh” on wheels.
Boe-ring with a capital zZzzzzzzzzzzz.
I love my 2013 Dart. I loved my Astra. I could never love a Corolla.
Post any piece about a Corolla and you’ll get a hundred posts about how awful it is. I mean, if it’s so awful, why does it elicit so much resonse?
Because it’s everywhere. Everyone knows it. If that isn’t a symbol of success, then what is?
I had a Corolla rental one of the times my POS Pontiac Wave was in the shop. It was unremarkable in every way. I never felt it underpowered or poorly handling. It always started and was cheap on gas. They are reliable and easy to fix. In fact Corollas are all over the world. They sell for all of $19,000 and have power everything.
It’s an appliance pure and simple but a good one.
Don’t mess with the Daewoo!
Post any piece about a Corolla and you’ll get a hundred posts about how awful it is. I mean, if it’s so awful, why does it elicit so much resonse?
Because it’s everywhere. Everyone knows it. If that isn’t a symbol of success, then what is?
Well that must mean GM made fantastically successful cars in the 80s, because they seem to elicit even more response when they’re posted!
Outside of some seat time in your rentals at new car shows, I have little experience with these cars. But, I think your observations to be spot on. I’m a home team guy, but the practical choice in this segment seems to Toyota / Honda. But, I believe Chevy Cruze is decent for consideration.
Despite what so many people say about it, I see the market for it. For one of your parents or grandparents to drive; because of the reputation for dependability and reliability. You know, because not everyone that age has adapted to cell phones, should their car break down somewhere. For your high school or college child, especially a daughter who likely knows little about cars should one break down.
Maybe you’ve got a sports car or muscle car that isn’t practical as a DD to get to work and back. You could drive something like this which is supposed to be both economical and reliable. Or, if you’ve got a cool car as a DD to get to work and back, maybe your wife or SO should have something practical like this, which could also be a backup car for you, because your cool car might end up in the shop more than you’d like.
Personally, the interior and exterior seem quite OK to me. Well, aside from the fact I’m none too partial to gray or black interiors. So, as long as the seat is reasonably comfortable and things are ergonomically accessible, it could work. Personally, the restyled Corolla doesn’t look a bit better to me, and actually looks far worse. Who might turn to something like this might be somebody who has been burned by Brand X, Y and/or Z a few too many times. With Brand X, Y and Z being any brand other than the supposedly ultra-reliable Hondas and Toyotas. And, having said that, I suspect we all know at least one person, or have read about one or more online, who has indeed had a few or more problems with a Honda or Toyota.
That looks almost identical to the Corolla sedan rental we had last year, and overall I think my impressions were very similar – nothing wrong with the car but not much to inspire a purchase other than the prospect of long reliable service – which is not to be lightly dismissed. Get enthusiastic on a winding road and it gives very clear messages when you are pushing things, but gets along well. We also had Chrysler 200 and Ford Focus rentals (along with a Mazda CX7 for 2 days), guess which one was better and which one was worse than the Corolla?
A telling point about the Corolla is the highly derided 4 speed auto, that doesn’t stop the car from getting very good fuel economy. Mind you, it doesn’t help performance with large gaps between ratios.
Most of my experience with the just-superceded Corolla is the hatch version sold in Europe as the Auris. Again basic competence with a ‘bridge’ centre console that is a ridiculous design frippery. A colleague has the new model Corolla with the CVT that he doesn’t like because it is very slow to take off from rest.
The earlier generation (2000-2006) I thought was the low point in terms of interior quality and equipment levels, also with the tall body and narrower track handling suffered. Subsequent ones have been wider in the track which helps.
Not a bad word about Willie, but Waylon, man. Waylon.
Waylon Live is a very good record. Pick up the tempo…
I don’t drive these type of cars very often. I really don’t like them much, but my car is in getting collision repairs done, so I had to rent something. I was approved for a full sized car, but they were out of full and mid sized, so I was given a Chevy Cruze. It’s equipped pretty decently, and other than being too small for someone like me who is built like a Gorilla, it’s by far the best rental car I’ve ever had. Vastly better than the Galant I had last time, and I like it a lot better than a friend’s son’s new Mazda 3 Sport, which has pretty uncomfortable seats and seems a little slower then the Cruze. I drove the Mazda when it had about 4000 miles on it, versus the 55K the Cruze had. Everytime I drive one of these kinds of cars, I have to be happy I don’t have to drive them very often.
Well, first let me offer you my congratulations on wringing anything over 60K miles out of an 80s Ford Escort. My experience with my 86 Escort GT was somewhat different, and while I won’t go through all the gory details, let me just say the paper napkin left in the A/C system at the factory that clogged up the condenser was my “last straw”..
After that experience I had a three Toyota Cressidas, a Previa, JDM Crown, and a JDM Sprinter (Corolla variant). None of these ever saw a service bay for anything other than oil and filter changes. The Previa had over 180K miles and never needed anything other than regular service (timing chain good for life of vehicle) and though I sold it over 10 years ago I I have no doubt it is still chugging around Dayton Ohio somewhere.
Just recently I rode in the back seat of one of these and the roar from the tires was almost deafening. Is it the tires they put on new cars or is there no insulation? I have also had a ride in a ’92 Honda Accord and it was quieter and smother riding with over 150,000 miles on it. You would think after 20 years there would be some improvement in noise control or is it just Toyota.
I just rented a ’14 Corolla for a biz trip to North Carolina and while bemoaning the minimalist interior finish which reminded me of a econobox Versa I rented recently, the car ran admirably through the Tar Heel State’s grades and byways, furnishing an impressive 35 MPG overall. From the standpoint of reliability, durability and modest cost of ownership, I’d consider this machine although if that registers me in the “I hate cars” club, so be it.
I’d rather walk.
I drove a couple of Corollas during my college years, so I wasn’t opposed to owning another one. I drove one if the new ’14 models, and it’s a vastly nicer car than the older one. It was roomy, the seats felt good and the materials were nice. I ended up buying a new Civic. Why? Because the Toyota dealer I visited I didn’t care for. I wanted to talk OTD price, and all he would come back with was payments…drove me crazy! I like my Civic, it’s quiet, nicely equipped and averaged between 38 and 43 mpg on a trip out to western Pennsylvania last week.
Joy can be found in lots of cars, even cars like these, you just have to be willing adjust expectations and look for those joys, IMHO.