2009 corolla rear suspension

[mybuddytmil]

I wonder what other TN'ers thought about Toyotas decision to continue the use of the (cheaper to produce) torsion beam rear axle? If Toyota is going to charge this much for these new corollas and supposedly make a sport model ie XRS, they should have changed to a fully independant rear suspension. There is nothing you can do to a torsion axle to make it handle like an independant suspension. NO INDEPENDANT = NO SPORT. Period.

[Tideland Prius]

You can check the IRS vs. Torsion beam thread lol.

But it does save space cause it's more compact so you get more cargo space.

[vasia]

If you want double wishbone rear suspension, you can get a Matrix XRS or AWD. The reason the Corolla doesn't have it is for space-saving, as well as for lower repair costs.

Think about it in the long-term; a Corolla's torsion beam rear suspension will be cheaper and easier to fix or replace than a double wishbone or IRS suspension from a competitor. That and the space savings it allows for.

The Corolla has always been about reliability and low maintenance more than sport. What's the point of a low-priced compact car if repairs are going to cost a lot?

[cwayne]

I wonder what other TN'ers thought about Toyotas decision to continue the use of the (cheaper to produce) torsion beam rear axle? If Toyota is going to charge this much for these new corollas and supposedly make a sport model ie XRS, they should have changed to a fully independant rear suspension. There is nothing you can do to a torsion axle to make it handle like an independant suspension. NO INDEPENDANT = NO SPORT. Period.

I see exactly what you mean mybuddy. Toyota rips people off with an overpriced car with spoilers and bodykits and calls it a "sports" model Corolla. How the hell can it be "sports" when it has marshmallow and stick suspension and handles like crap?

Toyota is all about "profit" now. They want to give you the least amount of car, for the most amount of money.

I totally agree that they charge too much for the new Corollas that offer very little. Even some of the competition has a fully IRS on their cars that are CHEAPER than the Corolla.

The reason the Corolla doesn't have it is for space-saving, as well as for lower repair costs.

Your suspension system shouldn't break unless you try to drive your Corolla like the Dukes of Hazzard. Shocks and joints replacement is normal wear and tear for every car.

The Corolla has always been about reliability and low maintenance more than sport.

The Civic also achieves all that, including a TRUE sport.

What's the point of a low-priced compact car if repairs are going to cost a lot?

That's the problem with the new Corolla, it isn't "low-priced".

[vasia]

Originally Posted by cwayne

I totally agree that they charge too much for the new Corollas that offer very little. Even some of the competition has a fully IRS on their cars that are CHEAPER than the Corolla.

Your suspension system shouldn't break unless you try to drive your Corolla like the Dukes of Hazzard. Shocks and joints replacement is normal wear and tear for every car.

The Civic also achieves all that, including a TRUE sport.

That's the problem with the new Corolla, it isn't "low-priced".

Too much for new Corollas? If you compare equipment, the Corolla is cheaper than a Civic. It sounds like you're only concerned about sport and not much else. The Corolla then is not really for you. The Corolla is the most refined car in the segment, and if you want some sport *with* the refinement than that is what the XRS is for.

I never said anything about broken suspension. My point was that when it comes time to replace your suspension pieces (due to normal wear and tear) a Corolla WILL be cheaper than a Civic. The current Civic by the way has a double wishbone rear suspension. Over the long-term, with wear-and-tear replacements the Corolla will end up being cheaper with it's simple torsion beam setup compared to the Civic's more complex double wishbone setup.

Like I said earlier, the *top* priorities for the Corolla have always been reliability, low maintenance, and also comfort and refinement. These have NOT been top priorities for the Civic. The Civic is more sporty, but it will cost more over the long term for maintenance, and the Civic is also less refined than the Corolla. The Civic will also likely have higher insurance since Civics are high-theft cars and Corollas are not.

I don't see how we're getting "less" with the new Corolla. In the US, for the same cost as the old model, you're getting MORE standard equipment, better fit and finish, and a better base engine. In Canada, the new Corolla is cheaper than the old model.

[cwayne]

Originally Posted by vasia

Like I said earlier, the *top* priorities for the Corolla have always been reliability, low maintenance, and also comfort and refinement. These have NOT been top priorities for the Civic. The Civic is more sporty, but it will cost more over the long term for maintenance, and the Civic is also less refined than the Corolla. The Civic will also likely have higher insurance since Civics are high-theft cars and Corollas are not.

It seems like the cheaper Civic has the Corolla beat.

[long27]

amen brother. sounds like we got a honda man wanting to pretend he dont have buyers remorse....i.e ...i shoulda got a rolla!

[long27]

take note...six...toyota cars to three hondas!!!!!!!

[rolla-XRS]

also take note - outdated 2007 survey comparing new model Civic to 5 year old Corolla. I should certainly hope that Honda was chasing something ot make it better.

Let's put that 09 Civic up against an 09 Rolla to compare apples to apples. Let's see what JDP says then.

[cwayne]

sounds like we got a honda man wanting to pretend he dont have buyers remorse

I don't own a Honda. Although I wouldn't mind an SI. Too bad they were marked up when they first came out. Probably because people actually wanted to buy them.

....i.e ...i shoulda got a rolla!

Maybe when I'm 70 years old and viagra no longer works.

also take note - outdated 2007 survey comparing new model Civic to 5 year old Corolla.

Maybe because 2008 isn't over yet. After all, yearly surveys mean exactly that... "yearly". Looks like cars aren't the only thing slow here.

[vasia]

Originally Posted by cwayne

It seems like the cheaper Civic has the Corolla beat.

Initial quality? A survey that only looks at cars for 90 days? You're kidding right?

Regardless, what I stated earlier about the Corolla still rings true.

[Tideland Prius]

Originally Posted by cwayne

Maybe when I'm 70 years old and viagra no longer works.

Didn't know you need it so early.