Honda Car Forum

"Saintor" <saintor1@REMOVETHIShotmail.com> wrote in message news:<NJyTa.674$Rl3.18956@wagner.videotron.net>...
> (2004 Corolla) has much more zest than previous generation.

I hope that by 'zest' you are not simply referring to 'power', as it
is only marginally better...

2002 model
125hp @ 5800RPM
125ft-lb @ 4000RPM
2410lbs curb weight

2003+ model
130hp @ 6000RPM
125ft-lb @ 4200RPM
2568lbs curb weight


These numbers were taken from Edmunds.com from the CE model w/AT. As
you can see, the power numbers are slightly higher, but at also a
slighter higher RPM and a bit heavier vehicle. In effect, it is
mostly negated.

But FWIW, I find the styling much nicer. ;-)

- Kevin

gezz did anything else change like the trans?


"Kevin Sargent" <kevin_sargent@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:f2c0c21.0307231306.77699121@posting.google.co m...
> "Saintor" <saintor1@REMOVETHIShotmail.com> wrote in message
news:<NJyTa.674$Rl3.18956@wagner.videotron.net>...
> > (2004 Corolla) has much more zest than previous generation.
>
> I hope that by 'zest' you are not simply referring to 'power', as it
> is only marginally better...
>
> 2002 model
> 125hp @ 5800RPM
> 125ft-lb @ 4000RPM
> 2410lbs curb weight
>
> 2003+ model
> 130hp @ 6000RPM
> 125ft-lb @ 4200RPM
> 2568lbs curb weight
>
>
> These numbers were taken from Edmunds.com from the CE model w/AT. As
> you can see, the power numbers are slightly higher, but at also a
> slighter higher RPM and a bit heavier vehicle. In effect, it is
> mostly negated.
>
> But FWIW, I find the styling much nicer. ;-)
>
> - Kevin

Given that both are great cars I'd lean towards the Toyota because its
engine won't crash like the Honda if the timing belt breaks.

Robert wrote:

> We are thinking on buy a new car. I had several civics and I was looking at
> the new corolla. Toyota has $500 rebate, but Honda has a 1.9% interest rate.
> Both look like good cars, and I know Toyota is as dependable as the civics.
> I am looking for opinions on the corolla, what do you think about both cars?
> I know invoice price on corollas, but all of them include extra "packages"
> which is hard to know what's a good price for the packages.
> I need a dependable car which I will keep for around 6 years, and of course
> residual value is important.
> Thanks for your opinions.
>
>
>

Robert wrote:
> We are thinking on buy a new car. I had several civics and I was looking at
> the new corolla. Toyota has $500 rebate, but Honda has a 1.9% interest rate.
> Both look like good cars, and I know Toyota is as dependable as the civics.
> I am looking for opinions on the corolla, what do you think about both cars?
> I know invoice price on corollas, but all of them include extra "packages"
> which is hard to know what's a good price for the packages.
> I need a dependable car which I will keep for around 6 years, and of course
> residual value is important.
> Thanks for your opinions.

I don't know. I test-drove both recently and was unimpressed with
both. Just felt cheap. Then I drove a few other cars and the
Sentra and Jeta also felt cheap.

Still looking for a good econobox.

Philip® wrote:
> Ummmmm ... you better reconsider. The Corolla starting in 1998(?) has a
> cam CHAIN. If the chain breaks, valves and pistons collide. But you'll
> will have some pretty high mileage by that time and LOTS of chatter
> warning sounds beforehand.

Belts are a cost-saving measure that gives more money to the mechanics
down the road - both bad things for the consumer. A chain? I've
never owned a car with a chain that even needed replacing. Maybe
check it every so often to make sure it isn't stretched. As in
every 3-4 years.

Interference designs with a belt are asking to implode if that
things breaks. Poor engineering as well.

Of the two, I'd go for a chain and interference over a belt and
non-interference if I had to choose.

"Robert" <rsvn@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<GZwTa.102701$TJ.6119668@twister.austin.rr.co m>...
> We are thinking on buy a new car. I had several civics and I was looking at
> the new corolla. Toyota has $500 rebate, but Honda has a 1.9% interest rate.
> Both look like good cars, and I know Toyota is as dependable as the civics.
> I am looking for opinions on the corolla, what do you think about both cars?
> I know invoice price on corollas, but all of them include extra "packages"
> which is hard to know what's a good price for the packages.
> I need a dependable car which I will keep for around 6 years, and of course
> residual value is important.
> Thanks for your opinions.


They are similar but I would say that the Civic has more engine noise,
is made to rev a little higher, and has a better clutch if you want a
manual transmission. It's thought to have a better suspension, dual
wishbone, etc.

The Corolla is quieter, mine can't really be heard at 60-70 mph.

I have an older Corolla though. The new ones have a high door, so you
kind of feel like a little old lady behind the wheel. I like to have
windows open and have my upper arm resting on the window well, with my
forearm vertical and fingers on the upper part of the door. I
couldn't do that in the new Corolla, so I didn't like it.

Plus the new Corolla looks ungainly and awkward.

George Macdonald wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Jul 2003 06:27:59 GMT, Joseph Oberlander
> <josephoberlander@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>> Philip® wrote:
>>> Ummmmm ... you better reconsider. The Corolla starting in 1998(?)
>>> has a cam CHAIN. If the chain breaks, valves and pistons collide.
>>> But you'll will have some pretty high mileage by that time and LOTS
>>> of chatter warning sounds beforehand.
>>
>> Belts are a cost-saving measure that gives more money to the
>> mechanics
>> down the road - both bad things for the consumer. A chain? I've
>> never owned a car with a chain that even needed replacing. Maybe
>> check it every so often to make sure it isn't stretched. As in
>> every 3-4 years.
>
> Were those cars you've owned with chain driven cams DOHC? There's a
> big difference in the chains used for pushrod engines. People have
> reported as little as 150K miles before chain replacement on OHC
> engines.

Careful George.... Toyota is noted for making DOHC engines with a cam
belt driving ONLY one cam while the second cam is gear driven from the
first cam. ;^)

>> Interference designs with a belt are asking to implode if that
>> things breaks. Poor engineering as well.
>
> If properly maintained the belts don't break. I don't see the "poor
> engineering" here - belts are easy to replace compared with chains,
> where you have to go into the wet part of the engine, are quieter
> when new and do not get noisy with age.
>
> Rgds, George Macdonald

Agreed. One thing Honda engines are not known for is .... poor
engineering. But a causual look at Honda's motorcycle engines finds low
RPM (<8,000 redline) engines with belts, medium RPM (<12,000 redline)
engines get chains, high RPM (>12,000 redline) engines get gears. Of
course there are compromises and exceptions such as the Hornet 250 four
cylinder with chain driven cams and a 17,000 rpm redline.
--

Philip

"If a long train of abuses, prevarications, and artifices, all tending
the same way, make the design visible to the people . tis not to
be wondered that they should then rouse themselves."
- John Locke (1632-1704)

brianb wrote:
>
> They are similar but I would say that the Civic has more engine noise,
> is made to rev a little higher, and has a better clutch if you want a
> manual transmission. It's thought to have a better suspension, dual
> wishbone, etc.

I have an '03 Corolla. :^) The single piece trailing arm in the
Corolla *does* make for more roll stiffness than earlier generation
Corolla's. The Civic's rear suspension is more sophisticated and
probably works better thru bumpy corners.

> The Corolla is quieter, mine can't really be heard at 60-70 mph.
>
> I have an older Corolla though. The new ones have a high door, so you
> kind of feel like a little old lady behind the wheel. I like to have
> windows open and have my upper arm resting on the window well, with my
> forearm vertical and fingers on the upper part of the door. I
> couldn't do that in the new Corolla, so I didn't like it.

Gee.... I prop my arm up in the manner you describe quite often. Are you
of short stature?

> Plus the new Corolla looks ungainly and awkward.

There is more head room and a more chair-like seating position. Coming
from the line haul trucking profession, I prefer this to being slouched
back with arms and feet extended. "Ungainly?" If that's what keeps "the
kids" who buy Civics (and lower/chop/whatever) then I chose the right car
.... a Corolla.
--

Philip

"If a long train of abuses, prevarications, and artifices, all tending
the same way, make the design visible to the people . tis not to
be wondered that they should then rouse themselves."
- John Locke (1632-1704)

I was not aware that the Toyota is now chain driven, I guess it just
makes them that much better, although I'm surprised that they are now an
interference design. I agree chains last much longer but what about the
Honda. Are they still an interference design and using belts?

Philip® wrote:

> Ummmmm ... you better reconsider. The Corolla starting in 1998(?) has a
> cam CHAIN. If the chain breaks, valves and pistons collide. But you'll
> will have some pretty high mileage by that time and LOTS of chatter
> warning sounds beforehand.
> --
>
> Philip
>
> "If a long train of abuses, prevarications, and artifices, all tending
> the same way, make the design visible to the people . tis not to
> be wondered that they should then rouse themselves."
> - John Locke (1632-1704)
>
>
> tomcas wrote:
>
>>Given that both are great cars I'd lean towards the Toyota because its
>>engine won't crash like the Honda if the timing belt breaks.
>>
>>Robert wrote:
>>
>
>

In article <3F2089EB.3040400@mjwebsitedesign.com>,
tomcas <tomcas@mjwebsitedesign.com> wrote:

>I was not aware that the Toyota is now chain driven, I guess it just
>makes them that much better, although I'm surprised that they are now an
>interference design. I agree chains last much longer but what about the
>Honda. Are they still an interference design and using belts?

Toyota has been making interference engines for a while. I tested it on
my 88 Tercel when I changed its timing belt. The pistons did bump the
valves when I hand turned the crankshaft.

Hondas are interference engines with belts. The belt change intervals
are around 105K miles. The cost is about $600 USD at a dealership for
replacing the belt, oil seals, and water pump. That's nothing compared
to the cost of gasoline needed to drive $105K miles.


>Philip® wrote:
>
>> Ummmmm ... you better reconsider. The Corolla starting in 1998(?) has a
>> cam CHAIN. If the chain breaks, valves and pistons collide. But you'll
>> will have some pretty high mileage by that time and LOTS of chatter
>> warning sounds beforehand.
>> --
>>
>> Philip
>>
>> "If a long train of abuses, prevarications, and artifices, all tending
>> the same way, make the design visible to the people . tis not to
>> be wondered that they should then rouse themselves."
>> - John Locke (1632-1704)
>>
>>
>> tomcas wrote:
>>
>>>Given that both are great cars I'd lean towards the Toyota because its
>>>engine won't crash like the Honda if the timing belt breaks.
>>>
>>>Robert wrote:
>>>
>>
>>
>