Evo Mag

[T Sport 1978]

Hi guys,

Just read the EVO mag and this edition has a top 10 best/worst cars they have tested... Sorry to say, the Corolla T Sport comes 2nd worst! hahah

CHEERS

[tsportkid]

Hi guys,

Just read the EVO mag and this edition has a top 10 best/worst cars they have tested... Sorry to say, the Corolla T Sport comes 2nd worst! hahah

CHEERS

Most journalists are proper idiots. They dont realise what they have missed

140 mph top speed, bet it might go a little higher

0 to 60 8.4 seconds yeah right I can do it in that time by taking off in second gear!

Soft chassis, yes it has but I can take corners with a lot more confidence in mine than I could in the wifes old focus 2.0 ghia (more grip)

Looks boring, not with some tte stuff on it particularly springs which make mine look a lot sportier.

Just to add also group 14 insurance very low Mines well under £500 fully comp

38 mpg without trying too hard.

Shall I go on

[PaulT]

Yeah I wrote to Evo a little while back to try and put them right about the CTS. Fair play they printed the letter, but still wouldn't give it any more stars.

My problem is that they clearly haven't bothered to test it properly. It is as fast as a Celica T Sport in a straight line almost, as they have the same engine, ECU and gearbox. The Celica is very slightly lighter so has 155bhp/tonne compared to the Corolla's 152bhp/tonne.

I think they just looked at the Toyota figure of 8.4sec 0-60 and wrote conclusions based on that. They really like the Celica, but it then doesn't make sense that they think the Corolla has the wrong engine for it's size. Muppets!

Paul.

[tsportkid]

Yeah I wrote to Evo a little while back to try and put them right about the CTS. Fair play they printed the letter, but still wouldn't give it any more stars.

My problem is that they clearly haven't bothered to test it properly. It is as fast as a Celica T Sport in a straight line almost, as they have the same engine, ECU and gearbox. The Celica is very slightly lighter so has 155bhp/tonne compared to the Corolla's 152bhp/tonne.

I think they just looked at the Toyota figure of 8.4sec 0-60 and wrote conclusions based on that. They really like the Celica, but it then doesn't make sense that they think the Corolla has the wrong engine for it's size. Muppets!

Paul.

Do you notice that comment about the engine having no torque. Did they not bother to work out with their calculator that the tsport has more torque per liter than a civic type r. The cts will pull from 1000 rpm in sixth no fuss, alright its not going to be the fastest but there must be enough at 1000rpm or it would'nt do it

[dawesy]

its fair to say though that the 2zz dosnt have a lot in the torque dept. my 1.4 d4d has more torque but due to the fact the revs are limited being a diesel,it is about 100bhp down

[PaulT]

Power makes the car fast, torque is for people who have trouble with the gear lever :P

Paul.

[dee-SR]

Power makes the car fast, torque is for people who have trouble with the gear lever :P

Paul.

It never did get many good ratings!I dont understand why! i work for toyota and my dad has one and i think they are a fantastic car! and as for no torque i think it pulls exceptionally well through every gear no matter what rev range she sits at.....And as for looks the face lifted cts looks just as good as a type r, the only let down is the 16" wheels

[chrisio]

The problem is that they get test driven by people who do not understand the best way to drive a T-Sport

[L4AGZE]

I can understand people not being happy with EVO's rating but its not all about pure statistics a car with a lot less power can be more fun to drive than a more powerful car. EVO rating it as they do is purely their opinion and EVO is a magazine which concentrates on driving appeal than other aspects. Having said that i dont think the T sport is a bad car at all.

Anyway as for it accelerating to 60 in around 8 seconds i dont think that can be questioned its their test figures. Besides I was more than a match in first and second gear in my GTi!!

[T Sport 1978]

I can understand people not being happy with EVO's rating but its not all about pure statistics a car with a lot less power can be more fun to drive than a more powerful car. EVO rating it as they do is purely their opinion and EVO is a magazine which concentrates on driving appeal than other aspects. Having said that i dont think the T sport is a bad car at all.

Anyway as for it accelerating to 60 in around 8 seconds i dont think that can be questioned its their test figures. Besides I was more than a match in first and second gear in my GTi!!

Point taken about Evo, a mag that concentrates on pure driving appeal of cars, but mags like top gear where they should be looking at the bigger picture for any car i really dont understand the thinking. Here we have a car that has all the gears of a luxury car as standard (i.e climate cocntrol), but yet it could give almost any car on the road (even the newer super hatches) a run for their money.

They always talk about the lack of torque for this engine, but yet for the displacement it has one of the highest torque for an N/A engine. The fact that the 2zzge have a flat torque curve doesnt mean it cant pull, if anything it is much more useable in the real world. I have never had any problems with torque in this car, and whats wrong with dropping a notch or two to get to the torque? Whatever happened to the joy of driving?

As some of you said here that people who test drives the T Sport probably dont know how to drive it properly, they probably are used to instant power or another word, easy cars. I get such a laugh and so much joy driving the T Sport, working the gears and staying in the power using skill and having to think about what i am doing, thats what i call 'Driving'.

*PAULT*

Do you still have the letter you wrote to Evo?

[The Gooner]

I cant understand why they dont slate the Type R same as Tsport, it is similar engine only 2.0 litre, all power is at top end same as Tsport and has low torque suposedly, same as tsport.

For me the TS is a superb car, you hve a bit of luxury a few toys and there isnt many NA 1.8 cars out there that can be beat it, the face lift model handles alot better and is fun to drive.

Personnely I dont think some of these so called reports are done on a test drive but on figures issued by manufacturer.

[PaulT]

*PAULT*

Do you still have the letter you wrote to Evo?

I'm sorry, I can't find either my e-mail or the actual mag at the moment. I think it was November 2005. Probably if I'd just written, "Oh god you're rubbish sometimes." that would have been better :D

Paul.

[T Sport 1978]

I cant understand why they dont slate the Type R same as Tsport, it is similar engine only 2.0 litre, all power is at top end same as Tsport and has low torque suposedly, same as tsport.

For me the TS is a superb car, you hve a bit of luxury a few toys and there isnt many NA 1.8 cars out there that can be beat it, the face lift model handles alot better and is fun to drive.

Personnely I dont think some of these so called reports are done on a test drive but on figures issued by manufacturer.

OK, the Type R cannot be faulted for a driver's car, it never was meant to be a family car like the T Sport is, so the comparison is unfortunately wrong. People compare the 2 because they are both Japanese and Corolla was conceived to be against the civic in general. But the 2 cars CTR/CTS are of 2 different ideas.

But if a comparison must be made, then the CTS performs very closely to the CTR in straight line speed despite the BHP and displacement difference, but the CTR will out manuvoer the CTS in stock setup.

As an everyday car, the T Sport is by far the better car, with the benefit of hi performance and comfort... in my opinion nothing comes close for spec and reliability.

*PAULT*

Do you still have the letter you wrote to Evo?

I'm sorry, I can't find either my e-mail or the actual mag at the moment. I think it was November 2005. Probably if I'd just written, "Oh god you're rubbish sometimes." that would have been better :D

Paul.

Thats a shame, wanted to know what their response were if any. :)

[The Gooner]

OK, the Type R cannot be faulted for a driver's car, it never was meant to be a family car like the T Sport is, so the comparison is unfortunately wrong.

I know what you are saying and I am certainly not looking for CTS V CTR post, but what I was pointing out is that every review points out that the CTS needs to be revved high to get to the power & torque, what im saying is this is always picked up to be a bad thing yet on the CTR reviews this is pointed out to be exciting.

Now I know in stock the CTR is a better drivers car but the reviewers take the same fact and call it different things hence my statment that the publishers of these reviews look at figure and dont go and drve the cars before writting them. which is the point I was trying to make although badly

[hedzx]

Hi guys,

Just read the EVO mag and this edition has a top 10 best/worst cars they have tested... Sorry to say, the Corolla T Sport comes 2nd worst! hahah

CHEERS

at least they test it(or maybe not) as a sport car to a sports cars magazine