Corolla Hybrid: 1.8 vs 2.0?

[TonyHSD]

Yes,  new Corolla is kind of smaller car compared to previous Auris especially the first gen despite both have very similar looks, first gen Auris are cars that have sitting position high, high roof and easy access plus wide opening doors, all of that had been changed with the new Corolla and not for good. Only positive side of the new lower and smaller car is the road handling and maybe nicer looks but for the price of the comfort. For the fuel economy, for the hybrid to get to the closer claimed figures you need to drive exclusively in town and you also need to give the car a drive of around 10k miles before you can get best out of it, plus there are some techniques how to drive a hybrid that helps achieve that plus enhance the whole Toyota hybrid drive experience. 

[FROSTYBALLS]

32 minutes ago, TonyHSD said:

Yes,  new Corolla is kind of smaller car compared to previous Auris especially the first gen despite both have very similar looks, first gen Auris are cars that have sitting position high, high roof and easy access plus wide opening doors, all of that had been changed with the new Corolla and not for good.

Dimension wise, the Corolla is only lacking in height compared to the second generation Auris.

Wheelbase: Corolla hatch 2640mm; Auris hatch and estate 2600mm.

Length: Corolla hatch 4370mm; Auris hatch 4275-4330mm.

Height: Corolla: hatch 1435mm; Auris hatch 1460 -1475mm

The second generation Auris (2012-2019) was a re-work of the first generation (2007-2012), and carried forward the Type Approval from 2007. The second generation was also lower than the first (1515mm first generation).

The Corolla Touring Sports and saloon have a longer wheelbase (2700mm - same as the Prius and Avensis - than the Corolla hatchback and Auris.

Having said that, Toyota have said the Corolla hatchback targets couples, the Touring Sport families, and the saloon 'professionals' - which is a different stance than they took for the Auris.

[Heidfirst]

Most modern cars (as opposed to SUVs) are getting lower - it helps the aerodynamics so helps fuel economy/emissions.

[PeteB]

18 minutes ago, Heidfirst said:

Most modern cars (as opposed to SUVs) are getting lower - it helps the aerodynamics so helps fuel economy/emissions.

But they need to be bought with care - I've had problems with my hips since less than a year after I got my Gen 4 Prius, to the extent that getting in and out is now very painful.  For this reason it's going as soon as my RAV4 Hybrid arrives, hopefully next month.

Each Generation of Prius has got lower, the original saloon had quite high seat cushions and somewhere in the Toyota blurb at the time was a diagram demonstrating how it made entry and exit easier.

Last year a neighbour wanted to replace his 2012 Auris with a new one, but when he planned to go for a test drive found it too low, and cancelled the drive.  He bought a C-HR instead.

It's a shame about my Prius, I didn't foresee that problem, but my Physiotherapy team concur with my suspicions it may have worsened my problems or even caused them.  It's annoying, because changing to the Excel spec RAV is costing me almost £20k to swap for my 3 year old Excel Prius, and in many respects it's a backward step, though the RAV does have a few things in it's favour, not least the increased floor height!  The Prius in almost every other respect is the best car I've ever had or even driven, and when I bought it I planned to keep in until my health forces me to stop driving altogether.  In fact, my 2012 Gen 3 Prius was going to be my last car, but the Gen 4 had so many things I really liked (like adaptive cruise control, AEB and the other safety features I couldn't resist.  The 4 month wait for the Gen 4 was agony, as it the wait for the RAV but for different reasons.

[HSDish]

On 5/6/2019 at 4:14 PM, FROSTYBALLS said:

Dimension wise, the Corolla is only lacking in height compared to the second generation Auris.

Wheelbase: Corolla hatch 2640mm; Auris hatch and estate 2600mm.

Length: Corolla hatch 4370mm; Auris hatch 4275-4330mm.

Height: Corolla: hatch 1435mm; Auris hatch 1460 -1475mm

The second generation Auris (2012-2019) was a re-work of the first generation (2007-2012), and carried forward the Type Approval from 2007. The second generation was also lower than the first (1515mm first generation).

The Corolla Touring Sports and saloon have a longer wheelbase (2700mm - same as the Prius and Avensis - than the Corolla hatchback and Auris.

Having said that, Toyota have said the Corolla hatchback targets couples, the Touring Sport families, and the saloon 'professionals' - which is a different stance than they took for the Auris.

Very informative

[HSDish]

On 5/6/2019 at 5:30 PM, Heidfirst said:

Most modern cars (as opposed to SUVs) are getting lower - it helps the aerodynamics so helps fuel economy/emissions.

Guess Youre right (even if i personaly dont like neither SUVs nor low cars that much, MPV ish cars suits my/our needs the best)

[HSDish]

On 5/6/2019 at 5:59 PM, PeteB said:

But they need to be bought with care - I've had problems with my hips since less than a year after I got my Gen 4 Prius, to the extent that getting in and out is now very painful.  For this reason it's going as soon as my RAV4 Hybrid arrives, hopefully next month.

Each Generation of Prius has got lower, the original saloon had quite high seat cushions and somewhere in the Toyota blurb at the time was a diagram demonstrating how it made entry and exit easier.

Last year a neighbour wanted to replace his 2012 Auris with a new one, but when he planned to go for a test drive found it too low, and cancelled the drive.  He bought a C-HR instead.

It's a shame about my Prius, I didn't foresee that problem, but my Physiotherapy team concur with my suspicions it may have worsened my problems or even caused them.  It's annoying, because changing to the Excel spec RAV is costing me almost £20k to swap for my 3 year old Excel Prius, and in many respects it's a backward step, though the RAV does have a few things in it's favour, not least the increased floor height!  The Prius in almost every other respect is the best car I've ever had or even driven, and when I bought it I planned to keep in until my health forces me to stop driving altogether.  In fact, my 2012 Gen 3 Prius was going to be my last car, but the Gen 4 had so many things I really liked (like adaptive cruise control, AEB and the other safety features I couldn't resist.  The 4 month wait for the Gen 4 was agony, as it the wait for the RAV but for different reasons.

Do You know how your neighbour thinks about his C - HR in terms of comfort and quality ?

[HSDish]

On 4/29/2019 at 1:58 PM, Nicolai said:

Does anybody have an idea as to a realistic combined MPG for 2.0 vs 1.8?

I dont think theres any new Corollas delivered to customer in Sweden yet. Think the first will be here in June. Possibly the same in Denmark.

Think you/we have to wait a little more (even if it feels very frustrating) for real world MPGs

[PeteB]

2 hours ago, HSDish said:

Do You know how your neighbour thinks about his C - HR in terms of comfort and quality ?

He's only said he's very pleased with it.

I had a Hybrid version for a few hours a couple of years ago, and felt it drove just like the Gen 4 Prius (since it's on the same running gear).  My neighbour, however, chose the 1.2 litre turbo petrol automatic.

My only dislikes were the limited rear legroom and the seats were very slightly less comfortable than the Gen 4 Prius, but not enough to be a problem.  It had old fashioned dials rather than the bright, clear digital dash of the Prius and Prius Plus, and no HUD.  It also had the electronic parking brake with hold feature that the RAV4 has, which I liked a lot.

[HSDish]

Heard that some people in my area got their Corolla TS 1.8 last week (19). No ones that I know and I havent heard about their opinions , though.  but... their out there by now

[AndrueC]

Meh. Still not impressed with the dashboard MPG display. This time it was claiming 60mpg (woo hoo!) but after filling up it calculates to 55mpg (meh). Still far less accurate than any other car I've owned.

[JoaoM]

I've tested the Touring Sports on both engines. The 1.8 is a quite good car, I'd buy it as it is the most proved hybrid powertrain on the market, has been continuously improved over the years, and is very frugal. But... I wanted to try the new 2.0...

I had to feel the new generation of engines that will fit all new Toyota and Lexus models. For the ones that don't know, the M20A-FXS Dynamic Force engine is the second of a family of engines regarded by Toyota as the new and best ever generation of ICE for both conventional and hybrid powertrains. The 2.0 powers the Corolla HB and Touring Sports and the Lexus UX 250. It's older 2.5l brother, the M25A-FXS, powers the Camry, RAV 4, IS 300h, ES 300h, NX 300h and RC 300h. They're high output and high efficiency engines, with on the 2.0, 54kW/l and thermal efficiency of 41% (for HV, 63kW/l and 40% for conventional powertrains) and on the 2.5, 52kW/l and thermal efficiency of 41% (for HV, 61kW/l and 40% for conventional powertrains). It's quite remarkable, technically, at least on paper, that both high efficiency and high output can be labelled on the same engine, as we're used to get either one or the other.

On top of the new engine, the 2.0 version get's the new Direct-shift CVT with the launch gear that promises shorter shift speed and higher fuel efficiency. And I'll start from here: it's great! The car answered any stronger move of my right foot with a immediate rev increase (from about 2.000 to 3.000) and delivering the torque and power needed to perform an effortless acceleration, with a reaction that it's at least equivalent of my Corolla Verso's 136hp and 310Nm 2.2 D-4D. Not bad at all for a fuel efficient hybrid! On a slight up hill wet street, starting from full stop with a stronger push of the accelerator, taught me that if I didn't want the VSC/ASR to come into action, I should have been more gentle... The test drive was... too short! The car feels smoother and more quite with this engine, reacting very well for a long station wagon with chassis handling well the increased torque and power. I tend to drive more on the highway than on city so I've decided to pay the engine premium and ordered the 2.0 version. For anyone that calls hybrids dull, test this new Corolla and change your perspective...

[AndrueC]

One thing I've found with the 1.8 is that when leaving an urban area where you've been driving in EV mode if you want to maximise your get away you first need to have woken the ICE up. A little nudge with the accelerator pedal is enough, just so that the ICE is running when you want to go. If you just push the pedal down when in EV mode it takes a while to react and doesn't seem to react in the same way. I think that if the ICE is already running and you push the accelerator quite hard the Battery is used to provide most of the initial torque the result is quite impressive acceleration.

It's not something I do very often but just occasionally I like to make a point to an idiot tailgater who's been on my **** driving through a 30mph zone or at one roundabout I want to be sure I can get into the right hand lane on the exit.

[Nicolai]

On 5/20/2019 at 8:58 AM, AndrueC said:

One thing I've found with the 1.8 is that when leaving an urban area where you've been driving in EV mode if you want to maximise your get away you first need to have woken the ICE up. A little nudge with the accelerator pedal is enough, just so that the ICE is running when you want to go. If you just push the pedal down when in EV mode it takes a while to react and doesn't seem to react in the same way. I think that if the ICE is already running and you push the accelerator quite hard the battery is used to provide most of the initial torque the result is quite impressive acceleration.

It's not something I do very often but just occasionally I like to make a point to an idiot tailgater who's been on my **** driving through a 30mph zone or at one roundabout I want to be sure I can get into the right hand lane on the exit.

By "EV Mode", do you mean EV button pressed or just normal,"gliding" EV mode?   I don't remember having noticed wha you descripe and if I did, it didn't bother me. the 2.0 i, obviously, faster but the Danish £5,000 premium is too much. For my style of driving (very cautious and not agressive) I guess the 1.8 will do just fine. I actually found the new 122 BHP quicker and more responsive than my own 2013 136 BHP.

[AndrueC]

5 hours ago, Nicolai said:

By "EV Mode", do you mean EV button pressed or just normal,"gliding" EV mode?   I don't remember having noticed wha you descripe and if I did, it didn't bother me. the 2.0 i, obviously, faster but the Danish £5,000 premium is too much. For my style of driving (very cautious and not agressive) I guess the 1.8 will do just fine. I actually found the new 122 BHP quicker and more responsive than my own 2013 136 BHP.

I mean just normal EV operation. It doesn't bother me normally because it accelerates plenty fast enough anyway but if you first give the ICE a chance to wake up the acceleration is actually quite startling.

[JoaoM]

Received the car last friday. Took the wife and younger daughter to the beach on saturday morning... the car is amazing! The engine runs smooth and reacts fast to any demand. And it's very quite inside the car. Noise is (much) more aerodynamic and tyre related than mechanical. With the adaptative cruise control and line assist engaged it's an almost autonomous driving experience with the car always helping our movements (I must confess that I found it very stange in the beginning and I'm still getting used to it). It's funny that it starts to accelerate immediately when we turn on the left indicator to overtake the car that is slower than our set up speed.

Switching to "power" mode makes it a real fast car, reving quickly and going from 120km/h to 160km/h (on the highway) effortlessly and very fast, maybe even faster than the 2.2D-4D (2AD-FTV engine) on my former Corolla Verso that had 50% more torque. Very happy with the powertrain response, no cvt lag on this baby. On "Normal" mode the response is probably very similar, but I'll have to test a lot more to achieve any conclusion. The only thing that I've noticed that is very different from the D-4D is that uphill, the engine revs up to keep the speed steady (cruise control) and I wasn't used to that anymore after 11 years driving the "endless" torque verso.

[Zurbaran]

2 hours ago, JoaoM said:

Received the car last friday. Took the wife and younger daughter to the beach on saturday morning... the car is amazing! The engine runs smooth and reacts fast to any demand. And it's very quite inside the car. Noise is (much) more aerodynamic and tyre related than mechanical. With the adaptative cruise control and line assist engaged it's an almost autonomous driving experience with the car always helping our movements (I must confess that I found it very stange in the beginning and I'm still getting used to it). It's funny that it starts to accelerate immediately when we turn on the left indicator to overtake the car that is slower than our set up speed.

Switching to "power" mode makes it a real fast car, reving quickly and going from 120km/h to 160km/h (on the highway) effortlessly and very fast, maybe even faster than the 2.2D-4D (2AD-FTV engine) on my former Corolla Verso that had 50% more torque. Very happy with the powertrain response, no cvt lag on this baby. On "Normal" mode the response is probably very similar, but I'll have to test a lot more to achieve any conclusion. The only thing that I've noticed that is very different from the D-4D is that uphill, the engine revs up to keep the speed steady (cruise control) and I wasn't used to that anymore after 11 years driving the "endless" torque verso.

Hi Joao,

what size wheels does yours have? Here they would be 18’s and I’m wondering how compliant it is compared to the 17’s

[JoaoM]

Mine has 17". I know that in some markets they come with 18" on almost all trim levels. Here in Portugal we have them only on the top "luxury" trim level. The 2.0 that I test drove was that version and honestly, I prefer the 17" in all aspects: looks (that's highly subjective), ride comfort and tyre cost. Handling differences are very small, if any, at least with most of people driving style (Ott Tanak may disagree 😁).

And makes the car 14mm lower 😎

[Auris2010]

On 4/29/2019 at 12:58 PM, Nicolai said:

Does anybody have an idea as to a realistic combined MPG for 2.0 vs 1.8?

On my 2.0 design HB. I recently had 56.5mpg on a full load,plus 2 passengers, A/C on and with a slight heavy right foot. Its a 270 miles jreturn journey. 

[chicken_george]

6 hours ago, JoaoM said:

Mine has 17". I know that in some markets they come with 18" on almost all trim levels. Here in Portugal we have them only on the top "luxury" trim level. The 2.0 that I test drove was that version and honestly, I prefer the 17" in all aspects: looks (that's highly subjective), ride comfort and tyre cost. Handling differences are very small, if any, at least with most of people driving style (Ott Tanak may disagree 😁).

And makes the car 14mm lower 😎

It's not 14mm lower (satire? 🤔). There is just more rubber. Outside wheel dimension stays the same.

[JoaoM]

2 hours ago, chicken_george said:

It's not 14mm lower (satire? 🤔). There is just more rubber. Outside wheel dimension stays the same.

No, measuring from the centre of the wheel, the rim has 25.4mm (1") less and the tyre more 11,25mm (225x0.45=101.25 vs. 225x0.4=90) resulting on that approx less 14mm.

And that extra rubber makes a difference on ride comfort.

[alan333]

1 hour ago, JoaoM said:

No, measuring from the centre of the wheel, the rim has 25.4mm (1") less and the tyre more 11,25mm (225x0.45=101.25 vs. 225x0.4=90) resulting on that approx less 14mm.

And that extra rubber makes a difference on ride comfort.

No, measuring from the centre point of the wheel to the outer edge, the rim has ½ inch less and the tyre 11.25mm more.  That ½ inch of rubber instead of steel still makes a difference tho.

If you were to measure the diameter of the complete wheel/rim set up it would be:

On a 225/40/18 setup - tyre sidewall height 90, plus wheel diameter 18", plus tyre sidewall height at the other side 90.  Total 25.1 inches.  804 revs/mile.

On a 225/45/17 setup - tyre sidewall height 101.25, plus wheel diameter 17", plus tyre sidewall height at the other side 101.25.  Total 25 inches.  808 revs/mile.

[JoaoM]

On 8/14/2019 at 9:17 AM, alan333 said:

No, measuring from the centre point of the wheel to the outer edge, the rim has ½ inch less and the tyre 11.25mm more.  That ½ inch of rubber instead of steel still makes a difference tho.

If you were to measure the diameter of the complete wheel/rim set up it would be:

On a 225/40/18 setup - tyre sidewall height 90, plus wheel diameter 18", plus tyre sidewall height at the other side 90.  Total 25.1 inches.  804 revs/mile.

On a 225/45/17 setup - tyre sidewall height 101.25, plus wheel diameter 17", plus tyre sidewall height at the other side 101.25.  Total 25 inches.  808 revs/mile.

🤭 I used rim size as a radius instead of a diameter... A little lost in unit conversion...

[kp1]

What's the 1.8 like with 5 people in it? I've just ordered my 1.8 sports touring, it's going to be a taxi. 

[JoaoM]

For a taxi service I'd definitely go with the 1.8. It's more economical and has enough power. In the city consumptions must be very good.

I went with 2.0 because I do a lot of highway and I'm a little engine geek. The M20A-FXS is a state of the art engine. Kind of a self present...