USB ports on Corolla

[FiestaRed]

Really interested in the Corolla Sports Touring but struggling to find any infotainment specs. Can I ask if the car has USB points please?

Coming from an Astra Sports Tourer that lost its CD player in the last round of "upgrades" and was replace with a single USB port that is tucked away in the box under the armrest. Any help or advice would be greatly appreciated.

[Swanthecat]

It has a single ‘data transferable’ USB located on the lower part of the centre console. A second USB is found under the centre armrest in the storage area but this is only for charging devices. Pretty poor for a so called modern car to be honest and if you use Apple CarPlay or Android Auto, having the phone permanently plugged into the only usable USB limits a lot of options.

[Ian.S]

MPG is close to 50 on the 2.0, you'll never get 60-70.“

This is a bit harsh, I average high 50s and single trips in high 60s are not unusual especially if I’m in urban traffic. 

[Jon Ben]

My 2021 2.0 GR has only done 98 miles so far. Mixed driving, and showing 50.1 mpg on the display.  I will wait until I have to fill up to the neck again before I calculate the real MPG.   As for the USB and power sockets. Pathetic.   My 2018 Tucson had several of both and a far better multimedia display.  But the car drives very well as cars go.  Would be a lot better on 17 inch wheels though.  18 inch are purely posers rims and do nothing for the ride or handling

[FiestaRed]

Thanks everyone for all the help, really appreciated. Got a test drive booked in the Corolla for Sunday morning and it will be my first time in an automatic so it should prove interesting.

[Luke717]

4 hours ago, ExcelHyb said:

MPG is close to 50 on the 2.0, you'll never get 60-70.

You're probably right re the 2.0 (although some reviews say to expect mid-50s depending on all the variables in play), one reason I didn't go for that engine when I bought my Corolla new last year, but the 1.8. My Excel 1.8 HB returned over 60mpg average as shown on the dash within 2 months of buying the car in June 2020. During those 2 months it steadily climbed up as I drove more reaching 64.3mpg in late summer. Currently the meter shows 61.5mpg average. I'm expecting it to get to 64-65 during this summer.

As for USB ports, well, this sure isn't a strong selling point for this car! Liveable with for me although I recognize for some it might be a deal breaker.

[StreetHawk]

Mid 60’s is easily doable on the 2.0, my commute regular gives me that with very little effort. 
 

 

[AndrueC]

I think the infotainment unit is fine as such things go. The graphics aren't that bad (although the map looks a little bit cartoonish it can be forgiven on the grounds of readability). My only gripes really are that it doesn't switch to DST automatically and we can't specify the default screen for when the car is started. It's certainly better than the one Honda foisted on its drivers. But the lack of USB ports is rubbish. My Jazz had three - one in a similar position under the infotainment unit (along with an HDMI socket for streaming video to the amazingly low-resolution screen) and two in the arm rest. All sockets were USB 2.0 and capable of high-power charging.

I particularly don't understand why Toyota left us with a charge-only USB port. As far as I know making it data compatible wouldn't affect its charging functionality. I stand to be corrected but I believe that the only reason for charge-only ports is to prevent unauthorised access to the data bus. But I struggle to see how that could be an issue in this situation. It's not like there's anything useful a miscreant could access over USB and anyway if they got into the vehicle they have the keys to the kingdom anyway. It annoys me because it means I have to keep my iPod more-or-less insight whereas the Jazz allowed me to hide the iPod in the armrest.

[Beta]

39 minutes ago, AndrueC said:

I think the infotainment unit is fine as such things go. The graphics aren't that bad (although the map looks a little bit cartoonish it can be forgiven on the grounds of readability). My only gripes really are that it doesn't switch to DST automatically and we can't specify the default screen for when the car is started. It's certainly better than the one Honda foisted on its drivers. But the lack of USB ports is rubbish. My Jazz had three - one in a similar position under the infotainment unit (along with an HDMI socket for streaming video to the amazingly low-resolution screen) and two in the arm rest. All sockets were USB 2.0 and capable of high-power charging.

I particularly don't understand why Toyota left us with a charge-only USB port. As far as I know making it data compatible wouldn't affect its charging functionality. I stand to be corrected but I believe that the only reason for charge-only ports is to prevent unauthorised access to the data bus. But I struggle to see how that could be an issue in this situation. It's not like there's anything useful a miscreant could access over USB and anyway if they got into the vehicle they have the keys to the kingdom anyway. It annoys me because it means I have to keep my iPod more-or-less insight whereas the Jazz allowed me to hide the iPod in the armrest.

I use my iPod via bluetooth to listen to music and podcasts, is there any advantage to plugging it in via data usb?

[Gray86]

I would have liked a pair of USB sockets below the rear air vents (in addition to the two present), but it’s far from a deal breaker. Not had a scenario where I NEEDED them, and if I do I’ll buy a cheap adapter on eBay to convert one to two. 
 

Also - 2.0 TS owner here - just averaged 58.4mpg across my last tank 🙂 some journeys into the 70+mpg, lots over 60mpg. Shorter journeys in the 50s. Not bad at all for a family estate with a 2.0 engine 

[AndrueC]

2 hours ago, Beta said:

is there any advantage to plugging it in via data usb?

It gets charged while the car is running 😉

I don't use the iPod anywhere else (don't actually like Apple products) so I leave it in the car, permanently plugged in. With luck I can almost forget it's even there.

[AndrueC]

46 minutes ago, Gray86 said:

Also - 2.0 TS owner here - just averaged 58.4mpg across my last tank 🙂 some journeys into the 70+mpg, lots over 60mpg. Shorter journeys in the 50s. Not bad at all for a family estate with a 2.0 engine 

I suppose so. On the other hand my 1.8 hasn't dropped below 70 mpg on the dash (around 65mpg measured pump to pump) since the weather turned 😉

[Luke717]

1 hour ago, Gray86 said:

I would have liked a pair of USB sockets below the rear air vents (in addition to the two present), but it’s far from a deal breaker. Not had a scenario where I NEEDED them, and if I do I’ll buy a cheap adapter on eBay to convert one to two. 

It's a good point and I agree with your view that the current poor USB port setup in the Corolla isn't a deal breaker. The only device I ever connect to the primary port halfway down the dashboard is my phone. Now that I use a third-party device to enable wireless connectivity to Android Auto in the car (I've written about this elsewhere in this forum), I don't really have a need to plug the phone in to a USB port at all except for charging. If the Corolla had wireless charging, I wouldn't even need to do that.

It might be a different picture if, say, I frequently had passengers in the back seats - there are no USB data or charging ports in the back of a Corolla hatchback. That might be a deal breaker.

But all of this is transition. As technology - in-car and in devices - evolves and further develops, we won't be too concerned about cable connections to USB ports. Already we're hearing how new Toyota models in the next few years will enable wireless connectivity instead of using cables. More devices will support that.

[frizzbee30]

On 6/10/2021 at 12:29 PM, StreetHawk said:

Mid 60’s is easily doable on the 2.0, my commute regular gives me that with very little effort. 
 

 

Absolutely!

 

I drive my 2.0 excel for business,  I have all the extras (and weight), even in winter I get the high 50's, currently I very very easily get 60, usually 64, and I've hit 70 on decent runs, and thats with aircon running full belt!

[TonyHSD]

27 minutes ago, frizzbee30 said:

Absolutely!

 

I drive my 2.0 excel for business,  I have all the extras (and weight), even in winter I get the high 50's, currently I very very easily get 60, usually 64, and I've hit 70 on decent runs, and thats with aircon running full belt!

Can then 1.8 and 2.0 deliver same or similar fuel consumption on motorway journeys since the ice will play bigger role in propelling the car most of the time? Can also the 2.0 be slightly more efficient even if both equally driven within the speed limits? What is your view on this matter? 
Thanks 

[Roy124]

On 6/14/2021 at 12:56 PM, TonyHSD said:

Can then 1.8 and 2.0 deliver same or similar fuel consumption on motorway journeys since the ice will play bigger role in propelling the car most of the time? Can also the 2.0 be slightly more efficient even if both equally driven within the speed limits? What is your view on this matter? 
Thanks 

Where does the power difference apply?  If the gear trains are identical the engine RPM when the ICE is delivering the power at a steady speed would be the same and either engine doing the same work.  I imagine a difference will apply when the work required changes, for instance as the gradient increases the 2.0 will apply more power to maintain the steady speed state more quickly.  Where there are more changes the consumption difference will be more marked.  My tuppence.