1.6 Colour Collection vs TR?

[American Friend]

Anyone know the key differences between the 2012 1.6 petrol manual Colour Collection and the TR? There seems to have been a £3k difference in the price when new. Why's that I wonder? Cheers again.

[FROSTYBALLS]

Colour Collection trim tended to offer a high level of trim at a cost saving. For example the 2006 Corolla Colour Collection offered the same level of equipment as the T3, but with different seat fabric and alloys, but at a cost saving.

With the Auris, think it was also used as a run out trim level, and in fact was exactly the same as the TR. I've gone through the 2012 brochure, and the only differences between the Colour Collection and the TR was that the TR had the options of VSC (vehicle stability control) and black leather seats.

[American Friend]

Right, thanks very much for that. Strange there was such a big difference in the price. A link for the 2012 brochure, if it's available online, would be very useful. Cheers.

[FROSTYBALLS]

Unfortunately it was the hard copy of the 2012 brochure I had when I bought my last Auris, that I used to compare the trim levels. Toyota do have a limited selection of previous model brochures available on their website to download, but the 2012 Auris isn't included.

[American Friend]

No worries, thanks anyway for checking your copy of the brochure. BTW, I see you have an i20. How do you rate that compared with your old Auris?

[FROSTYBALLS]

We had a 2012 first generation i20 (used as a second car) before the current one. The 2015 i20 is quite different - better quality, bigger, better equipment, and seems more solidly built. 

Compared to my 1.33 Auris, the i20 is a bit smaller, but still OK for us for holidays (eg. the two of us go to Skye every May with full load of luggage). Easier to get into the garage, being a bit narrower. Performance wise - quicker, faster and more economical (we have the 1.4 with six speed manual gearbox). Cruises as easily at motorway speeds. Seems just as well built. Suppose the one thing I miss is the higher driving poisition of the Auris.

We did notice with the previous i20 that the paint seems less prone to chipping - didn't have one obvious stone chip when we part exchanged it.

The i20 has now become our main car as we didn't need two cars the size of the Auris and i20 - hence the 2016 Aygo.

[American Friend]

How do you find the seats on the i20 on long drives? I looked at the same car, a 2015 1.4l petrol manual, and thought the seats were markedly worse than the seats in the Auris and even worse than the seats in my 2006 Corolla. The car otherwise looked like the perfect replacement for my Corolla. The technical specs and dimensions are very similar, and I much prefer the conservative European styling of the dash in the i20 than the dashboards Toyota sticks in their cars. Why can't Japanese car manufacturers do decent dashboards?

[FROSTYBALLS]

Seats can be very much a personal thing. What one person finds comfortable, another may not.

Luckily I've never had any problem with car seats - that is across 19 new cars since 1987, ranging from the Aygo up to Nissan Primeras and a Mazda Premacy MPV.

The seats in my 2006 Corolla and both my 2009 and 2012 Auris were good. I find the current i20 seats to be firmer but no less comfortable. 

As regards journeys, our annual trip to the Isle of Skye is 520 miles each way, which we do in two stages - first stage virtually all motorway, overnight stop at Stirling, and then the remaining 220 miles through the Highlands on mainly A roads. No problem with comfort in either the Auris or the i20. I do the driving.