Find Reviews by Make:
By the time you’ve read this, I’ll have seen the new Corolla in the flesh. We’ll have more details shortly, but because you were dying to know, yes, the 4-speed automatic is back. But only on the very base model. Otherwise, there’s a CVT (which Toyota is calling a “7-Speed”) or a 6-speed manual. There will be an Eco model, targeting over 40 mpg, as well as an “S” model, seen here. The engine is a 1.8L with 132 horsepower and 128 lb-ft of torque, while Eco models get a revised valve timing system that puts out 140 hp and 126 lb-ft.
108 Comments on “2014 Toyota Corolla Revealed...”
Read all comments
Latest Car Reviews view all
Latest Product Reviews view all
Recent Comments
- Oberkanone: I’d pay $10,000 for the little trucklet.
- Oberkanone: Fiber Reinforced Panels?
- Mike A: Do you know anything about demand and supply and the supply chain issues. The price increases are in part due...
- Imagefont: I rented a Wrangler Unlimited for a week, my wife and I (plus the dog) went to Santa Fe and put just shy...
- ajla: They delivered it? Congratulations.
Car Reviews By Make view all
New Car Research
Who We Are
- Tim Healey
Managing Editor - Matt Posky
News and Social Media Contributor - Timothy Cain
Sales Analyst - Murilee Martin
Junkyard Finds Author - Matthew Guy
Contributor - Chris Tonn
Contributor
- Adam Tonge
- Bozi Tatarevic
- Corey Lewis
- Jo Borras
- Mark Baruth
- Ronnie Schreiber
I think it looks great and the interior is a huge improvement. Hopefully the materials inside are best in class and the MPG as well. Toyota execs saw how Honda was dragged through the mud and said they won’t repeat their mistake so hopefully they stay true to their word. I definitely am anxious to drive one and compare it to the current car.
They need to be dragged through the mud for their powertrain choices. Wouldn’t hold your breath on the interior materials either.
Surprised the sport model has less torque than the base model.
Me too! The slight difference in HP isn’t going to make up for the deficiency – it seems the one step up from base model will feel like it has more “grumpf” than the sport.
Wow. Would three be enough for one of you to notice that the second engine spec is for the Eco model?
Thanks CJ for pointing out that the situation is even worse.
The line up except for Eco gets the exact same 132 HP 1.8L 4-banger that has been around with 132 HP since…forever. Same torsion beam rear suspension. 15″ steel wheels, or 16 or 17 inch alloy.
The only car that gets any HP boost is the “eco” (wonderful work on branding, did they come up with that all by themselves) and suffers a torque penalty.
Poverty spec models, by Toyota’s own PR machine is destined for rental lots and sales fleets, soldier on with the ancient 4-speed automatic.
It would be like GM was still trying to sell the W-Body Grand Prix with the NA 3.8 and the 4-speed auto wrapped in a new, longer package.
So – thanks – Toyota really did phone it in when it comes to mechanical upgrades.
Dude, i understand car guys wanting the latest and greatest stuff but if this car is for someone like my mom what the hell does she care if there are 4 gears or 14. Fact of the matter is our family has had more than 10 Toyotas over the years, at least 7 or 8 with a 4 speed auto, and not once have we had a transmission problems. Oddly enough out newer Toyotas, with 5sp, have given us more issues than the older ones ever did.
Why mess with a good thing if they can still eek out good MPG with it? There is a reason why we stick with 4 wheels for a car for more than a 100 years. If it works so why mess with it.
Again, every application has different needs but no need to hate for the sake of “progress”
Well said!
Agreed. I’ve owned several Toyotas over the years since the late 80s. My wife is the primary driver of our ’06 Corolla and she knows nothing about cars, nor does she care. She just starts it, puts the lever into “D” and goes. Whether it has 4 speeds or 13 she could care less. The Corolla is the safe, responsible, reliable, and economical small car for non-car people – and non-car people like it that way. Just gas and go. And for some reason, these qualities incite hostility and contempt from gear heads and TTAC.
You’ve basically told me that Toyota is incapable of engineering reliable modern powertrains and therefore has to rely on old tech to keep their reliability ratings up for the automotons who will buy their products regardless of what the competition is doing. That’s a cynical argument, and given the new 6 speed trannies they put in the very important Camry and RAV4, I don’t really buy it.
Oddly, the choice to put a CVT in this thing blows your entire argument out of the water. It’s the perfect example of unproven “latest and greatest”. All I want is an engine that isn’t 15 years old and 2 more gears in the auto-swapper.
Cynical it maybe but realistic it is…Perhaps we are talking past ourselves here instead of to ourselves here…
Regarding the CVT, I happen to think the CVT is stupid. To me it is a gimmick like Start-Stop. Company X says this transmission is 4.5% more fuel effiecient that that trans mission. Like we are some 500k a year truck drivers or something.
I would have no problem with toyota giving honda and nissan a big FU with their CVT and keep on rolling with the 4 sp. As I said, if the 4sp does what it needs to in terms of reliability and mpg what do i care? I don’t get the 6sp automatic transmission love for the sake of 6,7,8…20 speed automatic love. For what for whom? In particular with this application. And anyway the “enthusiasts” have the 6sp manual which is good for them. again, once the 4sp can’t keep up we move on but until then what is the rush?
And by the way my uncle does have the 6sp Rav 4 in the garage. I asked him what he thought about it and he dead pans to me: “6sp? Oh…it’s good.” So do you really think a buyer like him would not buy it because of the transmission? and let’s face it, we car guys are not the target audience here, he is.
anyway, we’ll agree to disagree, probably.
The 2ZR engine debuted with the 2009 Corolla. 2009 wasn’t 15 years ago.
“The 2ZR engine debuted with the 2009 Corolla.”
IIRC, it was in the ’07 xD. But, you’re correct- it isn’t that old.
Now you know how I felt trying to tell people that the GM 3900 wasn’t the same as the engine they had in their ’81 Citation.
Why? The only numbers its buyers will look at are mileage and longevity. It’ll probably do very well with both.
I’m not sure why Toyota would dare bring back the four-speed automatic. And the car seems too overstyled for my taste, but it’s far better than the outgoing Corolla. It even looks like it could overshadow the bland Camry. Let’s give the Corolla a chance to get rid of its reputation as The Second-Most Hated Car on TTAC.
My guess is that the base L model, with the 4-speed and the only model with it thankfully, is just there so Toyota can advertise having a lower base price than brand xxx for the new car’s first year then is quietly dropped the next year, much like the I4 Sienna and 4Runner. The most common Corollas today are the LE and S, so likely that trend will continue, making the L redundant.
Yeah, probably. It might also be fodder to get customers into the dealership, where the low-spec, low-price car in question will be “unavailable”, but a “slightly more-expensive” one will be just a signature away….which highlights all that is wrong with the way people buy cars.
And for cheap fleet sales / rentals.
Stripped down rental cars are becoming less common. I see a lot of Altima 2.5S-es in rental car fleets as opposed to the base 2.5 model (which I think lacks cruise control, a radio, and the full keyless ignition system). Those features certainly make it an easier sell on the used market. I would bet the Corolla LE is the most common trim for fleets/rentals.
Can’t knock the sales king off it’s thrown. The lackluster Corolla with “ledgenary 35 mpg” has been surpressed long enough to pad Camry sales.
So ghetto… :/
the front angle shot it looks a bit like the last iteration of the previous gen US Focus
Not really seeing it. That version of the Focus had much better styling than whatever this thing is trying to look like.
I can’t put my finger on it, but I do see something Focusy in there. It looks more Kia to me though. Anyway, the front end is a hot mess to my eyes. The back end is much better.
I agree, the rear 3/4 view is not bad, even attractive, but the front end rivals Hyundai’s front end look for sheer busyness.
No one respects 日本の工学 more than I, but their styling….
Always, always, always it’s the Veneration of the Carp.
Or worse, bugs.
I don’t know if I should laugh or cry about the fact that one of the bigger automotive giants is stealing styling cues from Korea.
They’re pretty much the same; superlative tech, hideous aesthetics.
I second this. 10 years ago, I’d of never believed it would happen.
It’s not straight Korean. More like a mishmash of all the trending design cues on the market. The combination of the blade styling element up front with the… errh… Soul Patch?… is something that a lot of makers are doing. That’s more Ford or Honda than Hyundai/Kia. Toyota’s interpretation eschews Ford’s downward pout for a truncated version of Hyundai’s Goatee, however. The bracketed side lamps are similar to Subaru’s or Audi’s. The rear tails are Audi channeled via Kia.
I see they’re still too chicken to use the broken shoulder line with a hard crease (though it’s there), but they’re finally using a Hofmeister kink to give definition to the rear quarter.
Not bad. Overwrought, definitely, but they’ve got to show their conservative customer base that they’re trying to be “hip”. About as hip as a hipster, but hey, it’ll sell.
The styling is dominantly Korean, it just looks cheap all around though, like the regular rental car.
I see a bit of Cruze in the front wheel arch and hood, the Dart in the greenhouse, and Hyundai in the nose, with a bit if old Focus in the headlights (as has been mentioned). The rear quarter panel looks a bit first-gen Lexus IS (Altezza) – not a bad thing. Attractive, in a “one of the club” sort of way; which is to be expected.
I find it interesting that they’re targeting the Cruze Eco with their own version. That car more than met it’s target, at least the 6M version. I own one, and I routinely exceed the EPA numbers without being an annoying hypermiler. The Corolla Eco CVT with some smart programming could very well beat my mileage, nevermind the Eco 6A. It could even get close to Prius mileage, at least on the highway.
I was getting ready to roast you for your comparison of the Cruze and Corolla, since the Cruze is an elegant and restrained compact sedan, and this new Corolla is somewhat over-the-top. However, I agree with you. Most of it has to do with the drastically-accentuated wheel flares of both cars, and how they geometrically compliment the areas around them.
Well, Kia uses wide radius fender flares, too.
Agreed, IMO the Cruze, Elantra and Focus in completely different ways have a depth in design that is not added on styling. This Toy looks like a cross between a Dart (dull) and Subaru weirdness.
*sigh* It’s a Toyota Auris sedan:
http://www.netcarshow.com/toyota/2013-auris/
The interior is essentially identical, and the front end theme is the same. Toyota don’t just make cars for the US, remember? We need to look further afield to understand what’s going on.
Looks like Toyota has abandoned luxury in favor of sporty. It might work in the US where the Corolla is more of a bare bones transportation for lower income (thus often younger) folks. But in developing countries Corollas are almost a luxury car, thus the new style (especially the interior) might not work as well. Though the picture was of the sporty S model. I suppose in Beige and with some extra chrome and fake wood it might look luxurious enough. The exterior might need more work to make it look luxurious and elegant though. Mostly it looks sporty and econocar-like.
If other countries took the old model as luxurious, then they’ll buy anything and it doesn’t matter!
What an embarrassment. The only actual transmission will be the CVT, because few people buy a base model or a manual.
They’re about 2-3 years behind Hyundai, Ford, and Chevy’s competing vehicles. And the 2014 Forte has it all over this Corolla in looks. The tail has some Sentra lines, which isn’t bad.
I see the floor mat cuts a wide berth around the accelerator.
The front end looks over-engineered and overly aggressive for such a humble car. Sides and rear end look fine. The interior does look good for an econobox. I bet what we see on the pictures is some kind of higher end trim. The base version will look a lot more pedestrian. I am surprised they still use 4-speed automatics. I bet the base model with the 4-speed auto was designed primarily to have the lowest MSRP in class.
Big yawn.
3-Speed autoboxes in Corollas occurred as recently as 2002…
Oh, that 3-speed was horrible; I had to drive one of those things recently. There’s hardly any usable engine-rangeb because of it…
Also, Toyota’s late obsession with gaping maws has reached its peak here. This needs to stop. I can’t reiterate how terribly unimaginative it is to just use a giant chrome-bordered void in lieu of actual styling. Everyone, please Google Image a 2002 Corolla S to see a competent, unpretentious, and earnest compact car – and quite possibly one of Toyota’s last attractive designs period.
yeah its grossly overdone
dont mind the interior too much except for the 2002 (or earlier!) clock
let it go
i’m not that desperate to tell the time
I’m confused because the E120 Corolla that I think you’re talking about was available in Japan since 2000, and while it did have its North-American debut in 2002, it was for MY2003. I think the Corolla’s peak was the 2002-2008 generation, but who knows what might happen with this new version. It looks like it has plenty of the things that buyers look for. But it will have to compete with cars that have far-better styling, which include Civic, Cruze, Dart, Elantra, Focus, Forte, Imprezza, Jetta, Mazda3, Sentra…and basically anything else I missed that’s in the mainstream-compact segment.
Sorry. I’m definitely referring to the preceding 8th-generation Corolla. The 2003MY+ You’re talking about looks terrible in comparison, IMO, with its bulbous lighting and too-tall/too-narrow stance. Plus, the off-center interior is hillarious.
I love that term “gaping maw”.
They are all the rage these days, one of those styling paradigms that scream 21st century ‘teens styling / sheet metal fashion.
I blame Audi and pick up trucks for this.
Showed the picture to my friend without uttering a word, her exact respond, “Ford needs to cut it out.”
So she saw Focus also. I see Forte – but I also see from the rear three panel shot a whisper of Scion tC and I can see the Toyota DNA.
As far as technical specs.
So Avis, Hertz, et al will get the ancient 4-cylinder with the ancient 4-speed automatic. Way to create a favorable impression to the rental crowd.
The tech specs seem to be table stakes to the Chevy Cruze. Two more HP, less torque and “over 40 MPG” puts in Cruze Eco territory (and remember, the Cruze may not hit EPA numbers but reviewer after reviewer exceeded EPA numbers in the Eco version). Oh, and the “eco” version from Toyota? Well – called Eco.
I see the stand alone digital clock from 1985 soldiers on smack dab in the middle of the center stack.
Oh I get it – Toyota will sell a billion of them. Certainly won’t deny that. And the 2/24 free service sure will help those good service advisors find “something” wrong when they are brought in.
I’ll give credit to Toyota for making significant style changes – the Corolla needed it – and when you have the number one seller in the segment even when you phoned in the last update – most companies wouldn’t be that bold with the design language change.
But the drive line? Whatever. CVT makes sense in this car, and Corolla buyers aren’t remotely enthusiasts. It will sell well regardless. Hell Toyota could power 40 ounce Foster beer cans and they would sell still.
I just don’t see this as resetting the bar in the class – all I see here is a big ball of “me too.”
It is a bit of a surprise from the company that basically introduced the c segment to the United States.
“I see the stand alone digital clock from 1985 soldiers on smack dab in the middle of the center stack.”
False, back in the 80’s the elements were green or ambar. Not blue.
Our 1991 Tercel had the green clock. I can’t believe they’re still putting a standalone digital clock in a 2014 model. They could at least be retro and put a useless analog clock in, like VW did with the Passat!
I’ve driven quite a few rentals from Enterprize and Hertz over the last two years. None of them was a base model. Quite a few, including a 2012 Acadia, 2013 Town & Country and a 2013 Cruze, were fully-loaded.
I don’t think Toyota will be too keen on selling base-models for rental-fleet use because it doesn’t want consumers leaving with a poor impression of Toyota vehicles…especially with the competition stronger than ever. Besides, a significant number of base-model Corollas being cast into the pre-owned market after a year or two would probably bring down the model’s overall resale-values.
Never had a base model Corolla as a rental, nor have I seen any and I work at one of the rental companies. It’s always been LE or S models, none of which in the new model have the 4-speed.
I hope Toyota never ditches the clock. I hate clocks lost in seas of different screens and menus. Nothing wrong or dated with digital clocks. Several things today still use them, and so do many other cars.
The grille itself is fairly modest Jetta-like, but the rest of the front end is far more aggressive. A bit much for me, but at least Toyota dared to make real changes this time around. Normally I have a pretty hard time telling apart the Toyota generations.
A shrunkin Camry. Though a bit overstyled for my taste. I know it’s unpopular to say but the current Corolla especially in S or XRS trim is a nicely styled compact. Far better looking than a Sentra or Lancer.
I like the current Corolla’s styling too, it looked similar to the 9th Gen but is a completely different car and while the styling was somewhat evolutionary, it is a much better style than the predecessor car. My friend bought a ’13 S in January and loves it, 4-speed auto and all.
I really like the styling of the new Sentra and Altima (The Versa is a huge turd, however). Never saw the hype of the Mazda 3 which I think looks like a clown car and I think the Cruze, while a nice car, looks weird from the side profile. The Focus still has the confusing center stack and the crappy DCT transmission, though handles nice and is peppy. Curiously, Ford has removed a lot of the soft touch plastics they bragged about when it came out in the ’13 models. Civic is a solid choice as always and the ’13 model is a big improvement.
Yeah, Nissan’s got some great styling as of late (Cube and Juke notwithstanding), but they’re falling into the same-design-in-different-lengths trap. That’s fine for a luxury automaker like Audi or BMW…but not so much for the more-plebeian ones.
The problem I have is that they look like too much like Infinitis. That’s not a bad thing if you want to look good while spending less money, but it’s bad for the perception detractors will no doubt have saying “Infinitis are just tarted up Nissans” or Infiniti buyers who see a $18K Sentra that looks like their $ 50K M56 (not using their stupid new names).
They definitely have some great styling going on, and I was never a fan of the styling for most old Nissans except for very few exceptions, but they need to work on separating the two brands.
I noticed this myself. It doesn’t help that the Infiniti M is the least-distinctive sedan in its class, either. It’s part of what makes Infiniti so forgettable…
Nobody is seeing the dodge dart resemblance with the headlights? Leftlane news has a few more pictures on their site.
Looks like the temp gauge is gone and integrated into the small odo display. Atleast, it is better than the idiot light for temp in the Subaru Impreza.
Looks pretty good, especially the interior, but with that carryover engine, they’d have to cut a lot of weight to get me the slightest bit interested. Last time I drove a Corolla in 2008, I tested it back-to-back with the Yaris and found the Yaris to be the better drivers car, and would have have chosen the Yaris between the two, no question.
Truth be told, I had actually forgotten what the Dart looked like and had to Google it to see what you were talking about. Since the Dart has been in production, I have seen exactly five examples on the road. Chrysler Group probably would have done better to keep the Caliber around.
It’s sad, because you can tell the designers and engineers really tried, but after driving one, I found that they missed the fine-points, like ergonomics and livability.
This looks like a shrunken Avalon, as though Toyota is going for a one sausage, different lengths design. The problem with this is when proportions of a good looking, larger car are significantly changed for the smaller car. The Avalon is a pretty good looking car, but the Corolla’s large wheel gaps look ungainly. The Corolla would probably be a much better looking car if the wheel gaps are proportionately closer to the Avalon’s.
I’m still not totally convinced that the wheel gaps will be this dramatic when production rolls around. I am never in favor of lowering a vehicle and hate modifications like that, but if I bought a new Corolla (possible in a few years), I might be tempted to lower it, but only so that it looks “normal”.
While it looks good, the real question is rear seat room. From the pictures, it appears Toyota avoided the current styling gimmick, the low roof line, so it is possible it will have best in class rear seat room. But, you never know. Rear seat room is very important in this class, and this is where all Detroit products get an F. Some manufacturers go out of their way to exaggerate dimension to hide this deficiency. Have you ever tried to get into the rear seat of a Focus? I think that rear seat is for marketing purposes only.
Doesn’t the Dart have reasonable legroom? It has 97 cu ft of interior space, the most of any compact.
I agree about the Focus, that is small inside with 90 cuft.
I can sit in the back seat of a Focus quite comfortably, if the driver or front passenger is under six feet tall. The seat is actually very comfortable and I am 6’4″. I’ve done 4 hour trips back there. The C-Max puts it to shame though.
The biggest issue with the Focus backseat is not a backseat issue. It is that the dashboard is the size of the moon. If Ford could have pushed the dash six inches forward, there would be more legroom for everyone.
This design does not even look fresh, Toyota did not even try, the front is a mess and so is the instrument panel.
depending on how the CVT behaves, the 4 speed may still be the transmission of choice here, lucky those who live out in un-congested areas that can have the 6 manual.
Oh Toyota. You clearly tried so very hard. But that nose… sigh.
Still, it’s fine. It’s bigger, the interior looks from here like a big improvement, most owners will have no trouble getting close to its EPA-rated numbers, and Consumer Reports will adore it. They’ll sell plenty of them.
Anybody else that would put out something like this would be crucified, oh well we have great choices out there, Sentra, Elantra, Focus to name a few.
Well, Toyota has an exceptional brand and a very loyal following, as we all know so well. As long as they hit their marks and deliver on those core brand values blah blah blah, they’ll always do fine — and this new Corolla looks to be enough.
But it could have been so much better. This isn’t going to change the mind of anyone who tried a Focus or Elantra and liked it. It’s just another Toyota, only with a funny nose. Can’t wait to see one in beige (oh, excuse me, Sandy Beach Metallic).
I’m not ‘getting’ the ‘jowl’ thing lately.
Anyway, homeruns on both this and the RAV-4’s dashboards. Ok maybe a triple for the RAV-4 because of that huge ass 1964 Chevy gas gauge.
If you could just mash up this dashboard into the Civics styling….
How many Corolla haters have actually driven one? I ask this because I too am one and I confess that I haven’t driven one. But my coworker just got one for a $99 dollar lease to commute with and I went out to lunch with him in it. I liked it, granted I didn’t drive it, but as a passenger it was better than my other coworkers E92. Sucked up bumps well, quiet, more room in the back, didn’t have any problem going 80. I get it why people buy them now. Still won’t be me but I no longer have contempt for people when they talk about getting one.
I’ve driven multiple late-model Corollas within the past few months – a ’10 LE, ’12 S, and ’11 XLE. All extraordinarily mediocre cars. Lots of wind/road noise, jouncy suspension, and overall ‘chintzy’ feeling. Not that its a “bad” car, per se, but the last-generation Focus delivered the same qualities with a touch more refinement, more attractive styling, more usable tech, more friendly ergonomics, and a cheaper price.
I never found the last generation Focus to be attractive. Horribly mis-shapen and hideous perhaps, but that’s just me.
Oh, it was terrible. Easily one of the ugliest cars out there at the time. And the interior was trash too. Maybe this guy is talking about the European model.
The extended family has had a 1994 and a 2005 Corolla, both of which I have driven extensively. The 1994 had that indestructible quality/feeling, and while the 2005 felt noticeably cheaper in materials/feel, you didn’t feel that the car would fall apart any time this decade. We also had 2002 Rav4 (based on the Corolla platform) and it was just too much weight for that little power plant.
Then we took a look at the 2009 at the dealer while getting a comp oil change. Just a few years after the 05, the decontenting and cheapening intensified. I believed the 2009 and 2010 were the low points for the Corolla in terms of price/quality ratio.
2 weeks ago, I rented a 2013 Corolla S. The quality issues have been addressed some, though the car only had 7000 miles on it so it’s hard to tell how well it will hold up over time. I’ve driven the “S” before in previous generations, but this one felt like it didn’t really make any performance difference. But for $18k in 2013 dollars for the “S”, it’s about what you would expect in that class.
“…the last-generation Focus delivered the same qualities with a touch more refinement, more attractive styling, more usable tech, more friendly ergonomics, and a cheaper price.”
The ’08 thru ’11 Focus also offered more hp and torque from its 2.0L engine, better handling with its fully independent rear suspension, better hydraulic steering, a more solid chassis, better crash ratings, more trunk space, and much higher content for the money (not to mention, based on my personal experience, much less douchey salespeople).
Not a bad update from the current car. I agree with a lot of other folks here that there’s a lot of Focus and Forte (or previous gen Civic, which the Forte rips off gratuitously) here. Although, my very first impression was “is this a new Subaru?” Still not digging the spindle grille, though…
Not my cup of tea, but good to see that the car has been updated.
I agree with others. Looks like they cribbed the ’07-’11 Focus to me. And that ain’t flattering.
I’m fine with the exterior and dashboard. The former is a bit derivative, but the latter looks like nothing else in the segment, for better or worse. I’m not OK with the drivetrains. 140hp and a CVT. Since when did Toyota decide the Sentra was their benchmark for powertrains? With 126 lb-ft, this thing had better be a featherweight…
That massive black bar in the grille makes me glad for the first time that New York is a front plate state.
I find the comments stating they see so many styling cues from the competition to be a little silly, since the front grille and lights are basically coming directly from the European Toyota Auris. The interior is the exact same as well. I think people need to look wider afield than the US domestic market…
Also, reading the press release, it’s interesting that they bluntly note the complaints people have with the feel of CVTs, and state that they focused on making sure the rubber-band feeling was minimized. An odd thing to put in a press release for a compact car not aimed at the enthusiast market.
I have to agree, if you take the stupid cheap black paint off the front end the new Corolla looks identical to the Auris, really the car wouldn’t look that bad if it didn’t have a huge smudge up front.
Well, maybe they cribbed styling cues from the competition for the European Auris…
I personally don’t think it’s a bad looking car, just that one can recognize certain elements used by other makes. This happens all of the time, particularly with mainstream cars.
I know that they do. My point is that it is a trifle ridiculous to claim that the car is a rip-off of so and so, while completing failing to note that Toyota actually makes a car which looks remarkably similar, shares the same interior and probably most of the same chassis. Yes, everyone in the segment looks similar and cribs from each other, but the majority of this car comes from another Toyota. That needs to be remembered…
I think its ridiculous that theres even an argument over the styling of a Corolla.
Did Toyota give up? Everyone has been correct in saying it looks like a Kia and the powertrain options are a complete joke.
At least stick to your successful formula.
This is mind boggling. The world leader in auto manufacturing essentially insulted its target customer base with garbage transmissions and copy cat styling.
Boomers can’t be insulted by Toyota or Honda anymore than you could be by your mother.
We make due allowances when diabesity and dementia appear, but we never forget those decades of nurturing support when all others offered only trash.
Sedans are dead to me, but not Toyota. If I wanted one of these obese, decapitated excrescences, I’d trust Toyota to deliver a supremely safe and reliable excrescence.
You have a point. It will be as reliable as a hammer. And suck at everything except getting you from point A to point B.
There is also the 86. So my diatribe can get crammed back down my throat.
“getting you from point A to point B”
I guess only we elders see that as an achievement in itself and laud it accordingly.
Looking at the high-res of the interior, there’s a “Sport” button (below the shifter, next to the stability control button).
Also wonder if that textured material on the “spokes” of the steering wheel is soft touch or hard plastic…
Maybe people can stop complaining about Mazda’s interiors in the cx5 and 6 cause the inside of this car looks terrible IMO. Also, as mentioend by some, my initial impression was this looks very “Korean” which I don’t think is a good comparison. Maybe Toyota is starting to get concerned about Hyundai/Kia?
Corolla can finally meet it’s twin Elantra.
Make no mistake – this will be a success for Toyota for 4 reasons:
1. The combination of older engine and transmission will allow them to continue to be price competitive in the very cost sensitive entry level market.
2. While styling is subjective, an aggressive change is usually a good idea – just ask Hyundai (and what it did to Elantra and Sonata sales).
3. The CVT and new engine will most likely make them competitive with the MPG leaders in this segment.
4. It still wears a Toyota badge.
Yes, enthusiasts will hate it but nobody else will care.
The car doesn’t look bad but do they really have to show it in the most hideous color purple. I’m all for thinking out side the box but you shouldn’t use a crayola crayon for color inspiration.
Without the badging, I would have thought this was a Civic. Less extreme hood/windshield angle, but the rear looks like a Civic.
I guess Toyota’s platforming must be like VWs these days. This MC platform underpins everything from the Corolla to the Lexus ES/RX and the Toyota Sienna and Highlander.
Good job updating the car without alienating traditional Corolla buyers by also keeping the 4 speed, most Corolla buyers don’t care about how many gears, just that it’s dependable and gets decent mileage and performance.
I guess that depends on how you define “performance”.
132 horsepower…I think even a Malaisemobile could dust this Corolla.
Sure the 1979 Mustang GT had 140 hp, but it had more torque, so even that could dust this Corolla.
By today’s standards no one would consider this Corolla fast, but I think the vast majority of its target market will consider it perfectly acceptable. Not everyone has to join the horsepower wars – especially for an econobox commuter car.
I think the fact that it could more or less hang with a V8 Mustang from ’79 is indication that it should be able to muddle along in a modern rush hour, which is all it really needs to do.
I don’t really see why huddling at the bottom is a good thing, but it must work because Toyota sells a ton of Corollas.
Oh well.
I guess you weren’t around when this class of car had way less than 100 hp? My 86 Camry had less than 90 besides turbos and DGI and all these things are prone to break down as the miles and years pile on, NOT what Corolla buyers expect
Times change. With current engine technology, 132 horsepower from a modern 4 cylinder that isn’t tiny is a joke. Even the 1.8 Cruze has 140.
There was a time when the Golf GTI only made 100 horsepower, but it’s not that time any more.
I wouldn’t put too much stock in power specs; they can be deceptive just like fuel economy figures (like Hyundai’s 1.6 that they claim 138hp on).
That said, the current Corolla doesn’t feel as fast as its numbers would suggest. It was a real dog when I tested it. The Corolla from 2 generations ago where they debuted the 1ZZFE was faster and more efficient than anything since.
Economy considerations make a mash of any “power” numbers for family cars, nowadays. Electronic throttles, lean-burn, ultra-lean burn, intelligent load detection… A car may well make the horsepower on the label, but you won’t be able to feel any of it unless you’ve got your foot flat to the floor.
And even then, transmission lag and tip-in delay will make it feel like forever before you get it.
The design looks like a cheap car made in China. And those wheels are hideous!
The interior design very much follows the new Lexus tiered theme. It’s a 100% improvement over the old outdated stack, even if it feels crap.
Also, I think I’d like the styling if it were in S trim level, and in yellow…