Had a couple of weeks down under in Australia and had a Toyota Corolla (Auris) as a hire car for the second week in Cairns.
If the road tests are to be believed this car should have been characterless and unpleasant, I found it to be quite the opposite and a great conveyance.
It was Hobson's choice - a 1.8 manual, it managed 6.6l/100km in my possession - which is about 43mpg I think - albeit in out-of-town driving (there are no towns, Daintry rainforest etc). The ride was quite good on 15" wheels on some poorly surfaced roads (they suffer from flooding a lot). So, the torsion beam rear suspension wasn't the same problem as it is in a Civic FN3 then...
Handling was reasonable too - it goes where you point it, the 1.8 engine was torquey and refined although there seemed little point in revving it, the 6 speed box was delightful to use too.
Equipment was interesting, I notice that very few Australian cars have much in the way of bling - steel wheels, wheel trims, blanks in the fog lamp positions etc and this was no exception, it had good aircon, all the airbags and traction/stability/ABS plus electric windows all round (useful with kids as you can isolate the rear windows) - and a decent stereo too. But no bling.
It was relatively spacious too. In fact, when I'm in a market for a run-around I'd consider the Auris (badged Corolla in other markets), a car as a (good quality) appliance. there's a thought.
Last edited by: idle_chatterer on Thu 25 Aug 11 at 02:50
|
...electric windows all round (useful with kids as you can isolate the rear windows)...
Has Toyota improved the logic of these? One of the minor ergonomic irks that make our 2008 Verso hard to love is that the window override switch cuts out the motors in the other three doors, rather than just the switches in the rear ones. It means that the adult front passenger can't open the window, and nor can the driver without releasing the override.
|
The worse car I have ever driven.
It was an auto and that was the really bad bit
It was so bad I swopped it after 24 hours.
Handbrake / centre consol was orrible and the instruments were very poor.
|
>> The worse car I have ever driven.
>> It was an auto and that was the really bad bit
>> It was so bad I swopped it after 24 hours.
>> Handbrake / centre consol was orrible and the instruments were very poor.
>>
Interesting, I asked for an auto but none were available - peak season in Cairns it would seem and since Aussie children are at school it was generally an older demographic holidaying / renting so Hertz had no other options available. Seems I had a lucky escape ?
The rather pleasant manual gear-change was in fact one of the aspects I noticed most, I initially thought the high console and associated high-set stubby gear lever might have been an irritant but found the opposite to be true. The instruments were simple white on black (with only kmh markings) and were very clear and similar to a VAG offering from my experience.
|
>>The instruments were simple white on black (with only kmh markings) and were very clear
>>
Perhaps I had a higher spec as it was in a higher hire group. The IIRC instruments were electronic, poorly set out with a nasty orange glow.
>>.....renting so Hertz had no other options available. Seems I had a lucky escape ?
Avis South africa did not !! When I complained the desk guy admitted that there had been complaints and added that they had got 500 on their fleet. I replied that they should have 500 for sale :-(
|
|
Have driven an automatic Corolla (the booted version of the Auris in Canada (my daughter has one). Surprised that anyone would describe it as the worst car they have ever drive. Granted it is a little on the bland side but it is fact an exceptionally easy car to drive and ideally suited to the dense traffic conditions of Vancouver. It has a well built feel about it and it does its job as a small family car rather well. No problems at all with the automatic gearbox. Not normally a fan of automatics but driving in a city like Vancouver you see their advantages1
|
>>Surprised that anyone would describe it as the worst car they have ever driven.
>>
The one I had was not a conventional auto box.
Just to expand on my comments
The gear change in normal driving was so jerky I was starting to worry about neck injuries.
It would only get up the very steep road ( to the flat we were renting ) after several attempts.
The engine was well warmed up so perhaps I had a bad example but the car hire company comments seem to say otherwise.
We have stayed at flats / houses in the same street over a period of many years and not had problems before when climbimg the hill.
In addition, IMO it was a very bad car to offer as an auto due to the complex procedure when parking.
After the first time it rolled when parked I had to RTFM to find out what to do.
|
|
I've had an Auris II 1.6 TR from new since May 2010. While there's absolutely nothing exciting about it, it's a very likeable car due to the way it just 'gets on with the job' very efficiently. It's quiet, comfortable, economical, reasonably spacious but fairly compact. Nice quality inside now too.
Last edited by: Paul Robinson on Thu 25 Aug 11 at 09:23
|
My brother has a new Auris auto, and likes it for the same reasons as Paul (above).
Another selling point for him is the car is made in this country.
He works in commercial banking in the Midlands and likes to support local business.
A Derby-built Toyota is about as near as he can get to doing that when it comes to cars.
Someone will be along in a minute to say the auto Auris is made in Nagasaki. :)
Last edited by: Iffy on Thu 25 Aug 11 at 10:57
|
I bought a new Auris 1.33 back in October 2009. Interior quality is on a par with, if not better than, the last generation Focus and Mazda 3 - both of which I've driven.
The Auris replaced a 2006 Corolla 1.4 which I also had from new. Performance very slightly less than the Corolla. The stop start system and six speed gearbox makes the Auris more economical - can easily achieve 49mpg (fully laden with people and luggage).
The Multi Mode Transmission sold in the UK in lieu of a proper automatic or CVT, is an electronically operated manual gearbox/clutch.
Instruments - some have white analogue dials, some have the Opticron set up which places information from the trip computer into the instrument panel (rather than having a display centrally mounted), and this does work well (this is the set-up with orange lighting). Had a simpler Opticron set up in the Corolla.
For the UK/European markets, all five door Auris's are built at Derby, and all three door Auris's are built in Turkey. The five door Auris, the Astra and the Qashqai are the only UK assembled cars in the small family car sector.
|
. The five door Auris, the Astra and the Qashqai
>> are the only UK assembled cars in the small family car sector.
>>
Civic?
|
...Civic?...
OK, the Civic.
So apart from the Civic, the Auris, and the Qashqai, what have the Japanese ever done for us?
|
The leaf......
Followed one down the A3 from Wandsworth this evening. I zapped past it further along.
|
For "zapped" read "chugged"...
:-)
|
|
zapped..ZAPPED I tell you!
|
>> what have the Japanese ever
>> done for us?
Given us cars that don't break down?
|
I hired a 1.8 conventional auto in NZ.
Very easy, comfortable drive. Went Ok and pretty good handling.
The boot was too small for our second reasonable sized suitcase though.
|
>> >> what have the Japanese ever
>> >> done for us?
>>
>> Given us cars that don't break down?
>>
>>
That may be so but do they rattle and squeak and buzz like other cars and fall foul of our atrocious road surfaces which have seemed to shake the living daylights out of my once new and fresh VW Golf MK6?
If I could be assured of better quality coachwork and better quality 'out of sight' so to speak, then I be in a Japanese car showroom tomorrow or rather next year or so if I find myself looking for a replacement for my current car.
|
>> That may be so but do they rattle and squeak and buzz like other cars
>> and fall foul of our atrocious road surfaces which have seemed to shake the living
>> daylights out of my once new and fresh VW Golf MK6?
Hilux thrived on the roughest stuff you could throw at it without a rattle to be heard, could be a good bet..;)
Seriously though, much of the problem is down to low profile tyres which seem to be the only ones available except on base models, image and all that.
I'm guilty of going low profile by choice, changed the 15" 65 aspect tyres on the old Benz for 17" 45's, the handling and chuckability is superb now and the previous serious roll gone, however the ride quality has suffered a lot and good tyres nearly twice as expensive, luckily it was built well enough not to rattle, yet.
Would i do it again, no.
Hilux was on 65 aspect tyres too, maybe that should be a default setting.
|
There are zillions of 'em in car rental fleets throughout the world, says it all really. Small boot as commented above, not especially powerful or well-equipped compared to their competition (Civic, Focus, i30,...), all a bit dull.
And the frumpy exterior styling makes me think of a 21st Century Austin Allegro :-)
|
Being in car rental fleets, they are in the same company as even more products from Ford, General Motors, etc. Think that says more.
Power - in the UK (normally aspirated petrol engines) the 1.33 produces 100bhp, the 1.6 130bhp. The Hybrid at 134bhp hasn't got a direct competitor.
Focus - normally aspirated 1.6 105 and 125bhp.
Astra - normally aspirated 1.4 87 or 100bhp, 1.6 115bhp.
Kia Ce'ed - normally aspirated 1.4 101bhp, 1.6 124bhp.
Hyundai 130 - 1.4 108bhp, 1.6 124bhp.
Peugeot 308 - normally aspirated 1.4 98bhp, 1.6 120bhp.
Mazda 3 - 1.6 105bhp.
Boot sizes (rear seats upright): Auris 354 litres; Astra 351 litres; Focus 363 litres, Ce'ed 340 litres; i30 340 litres; 308 348 litres; Mazda 3 348 litres.
Equipment - my TR has nine airbags, dual zone climate control, electric windows all round, alloys, six speaker stereo, six speed gearbox, stop/start technology, speed sensitive power steering, etc - which is certainly on a par with cars of a similar size and price.
Styling isn't brilliant - but no worse than cars like, for example, the guppy-mouthed Mazda 3 and the 'basking shark' 308, etc.
Last edited by: Auristocrat on Sat 27 Aug 11 at 16:58
|
|
Yes, ban low profile tyres or resurface our roads properly throught the country and have fines for bodged repairs.
|
>> That may be so but do they rattle and squeak and buzz like other cars
>> and fall foul of our atrocious road surfaces which have seemed to shake the living
>> daylights out of my once new and fresh VW Golf MK6?
>> If I could be assured of better quality coachwork and better quality 'out of sight'
>> so to speak, then I be in a Japanese car showroom tomorrow or rather next
>> year or so if I find myself looking for a replacement for my current car.
My Avensis is very good quality, but maybe too big for you. The ride quality is superb - quite rare now amongst the general trend for hard riding cars with low profiles. I chose one with 16in wheels on purpose. Toyota improved the ride/handling post 2006, and it's much better than the earlier ones. The road testers will say that it's dull to drive, but they say that about any car that's built to cover long distances in a relaxing way. They trot out the same old lines for Volvo's and Saab's as well. I'd say that it handles around corners as well as my old BMW - the grip is immense and there's no roll. It just doesn't give the same sense of occasion, and doesn't encourage you to throw it around. But the chassis with it's rear double wishbone set up is very good - it's just been made soft for longevity. It's got 86000 miles and no rattles or squeaks. The only thing I wish it had and might push me to change it more quickly than my BMW is better seats - looks to me like they are designed for short people, although I'm only 5' 10". There isn't enough support underneath the back of the knees. And if you straighten your leg to get the support, your foot isn't in the right place for the accelerator. It forces you to drive with your legs bent and off the seat squabs, which means I end up with a numb bum after a few hours. Yes, you could argue that it's time to take a break about then, but I could drive for hours in the sports seats in my BMW with it's pull out front section.
This won't affect everyone of course.
I did the same as GB, and put a set of bigger alloys on the BMW - yes it handled better with less tyre squirm, but ride quality deteriorated and it tramlined. I wouldn't do it again either.
|
Auristocrat,
Just checked the boot capacites on Autotrader, as I could not believe the Auris is bigger than my Ceed.
The two suitcases fit easily into the Ceed. Spacesaver spare.
The second would not go into the Auris. I didn't check the spare but the boot floor was not very deep. Cannot remember if it was a height or interference from the back seat that was the problem.
I liked the Auris. So easy and relaxing to drive.
SWMBO does not like driving unknown cars. She drove it a lot in NZ and loved it. Especially the pop-out cup holders.
Last edited by: McP on Sun 28 Aug 11 at 01:34
|
We were able to fit 2 large suitcases, a laptop bag, camera bag and a small backpack in the boot of the Auris/Corolla with careful packing. IIRC the last Focus I rented (old model) wasn't as capacious due to an artificially high boot floor, can't remember what the boot in the I30 I rented last year was like but it certainly wasn't noticeably larger in any dimension.
So, as per my first post - well made, sensibly equipped and good at its job, an appliance but none the worse for that.
|
Think it depends on the size and shape of the boot, how the wheelarches intrude, shape and size of the suitcases, etc as to what individuals can fit in. The suitcases we use are quite deep, and square - as opposed to wide and narrow - and we can also stand them on their sides within the boot.
My partner often carries a therapy table in her car - an old model Mazda 2 which has a nice square, deep boot - which just fits in lying on its side or can fit in upright if the roller blind parcel shelf is retracted (although it comes above the lower edge of the rear window when upright).
Not many superminis would accomodate that.
|
The road testers will say that [the Avensis] is dull to drive ... They trot out the same old lines for Volvos and Saabs as well.
Indeed they do, Corax, but at least the Swedes give the impression of having been designed by a human being. In 2006 I briefly considered swapping my S60 for the extra space of an Avensis and tried a couple, including the supposedly sensational T180 diesel. All I can remember about either of them is the improbably long gearstick. Appliance is the word.
I share your low opinion of road testers, though. They get more interesting when they have to keep a car for months and live with it day to day. Since Avant here got me interested in the Skoda Superb I've read some glowing long-term test reports of it, stressing the very attributes that make it appeal to me.
|
Absolutely, WdB. The long-term tests are the most interesting part of any motoring magazine, not least because the testers manage to think beyond the car's ability on twisty B-roads, which is how the standard road tests seem to judge a car. That's why BMWs almost invariably win group tests over Audi and Mercedes, occasionally being beaten by the Jaguar XF.
Skodas serve well as excellent workhorses, but they also provide a bit more driving fun for those of us who want it. Toyotas often struggle to do that, certainly the almost inevitable 1.6 Corolla that we get when we visit South Africa. Adequate but boring, although holiday hire cars are the one time in the year that I prefer a saloon, and the Corolla does well for boot space.
Like Mc P, we were allocated a 1.8 Corolla (Auris) in NZ two years ago: why on earth Toyota UK don't bring this version here I have no idea. It's a good engine and far more lively than the 1.6, although as for McP the luggage space wasn't big enough. They should also have stuck with the Corolla name, as in Australia and NZ: a name meaning little crown is surely more evocative than one meaning ear.
|
>>I share your low opinion of road testers, though<<
I laughed out loud reading an answer HJ put about someone wanting a 4x4 supermini or somesuch thingy. He proceeded to describe the Suzuki SX4 as 'fun to drive' - now either he is on the take from Suzuki or he has the excitement threashold of blue rinse Maureen often seen at the post office in her ancient Micra because having had one on loan for some weeks, it is many good things but 'fun' it was not.
I sometimes read roadtests and wonder if they actually drove the car at all.
|
>> All I can remember about either of them is the improbably long gearstick. Appliance is
>> the word.
Funnily enough WDB, an S60 D5 is on the list when I've finally had enough of the seats and lack of character in my car. I've only heard good things about them in the main, and I know that DP had one and had nothing but praise for it. They look extremely good value too - maybe because of the lack of rear space, which doesn't worry me.
Since
>> Avant here got me interested in the Skoda Superb I've read some glowing long-term test
>> reports of it, stressing the very attributes that make it appeal to me.
Well, believe or not, I read a line from Top Gear magazine of all places that said this about the Skoda Superb "The Skoda Superb is a respectable and useful car. Think where Volvo was 15 years ago: producing simple and honest saloons. Other car makers may be vacating this area, but when an honest family saloon is done well, customers are satisfied. Skoda's are".
And thats probably why they appeal to you.
|
I haven't tried a Superb but my Octavia vRS is a lot better to drive than Top Gear implies. It's effectively a Golf GTI estate, and while it hasn't quite got the standard of handling that the GTI itself has, it's a lot nearer to it than it is to a 1990s Volvo.
I think TG is also a little unfair to Volvos: not only were they much better to drive in the 1990s than the 1970s Swedish tanks were, but they have got still better since then while not losing their reputation for safety and longevity.
They could make that comment quite reasonably about Toyotas and particularly the Avensis. And that's not to damn Toyota: what they provide is what a lot of people want from a car - which is, and should be, how they make money.
Last edited by: Avant on Sun 28 Aug 11 at 22:06
|
>> They could make that comment quite reasonably about Toyotas and particularly the Avensis. And that's
>> not to damn Toyota: what they provide is what a lot of people want from
>> a car - which is, and should be, how they make money.
>>
Which was kinda the point of my original post, I've always tended to select cars based on the opinions of road testers (1996 Vectra excepted) and (in truth) haven't gone far wrong, however I think that the all-round competence and unobtrusiveness of the Corolla/Auris impressed me, like a damn good electrical appliance it does it's job well and I felt it had a little bit of character too - which was the real surprise.
|
Toyota Auris - Not as bad as I imagined it would be.... - WillDeBeest
