Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





The New Scion 2008 xD

2456712

Comments

  • ohplezzohplezz Posts: 74
    I use to sell cars. I know the game. The scion dealers were making about 700 gross on the 1st gen cars. Now adding 900 to the 700 gross on a 14k car is wrong. 1600 gross on a car the starts off less than 14k is greedy and if you are in the car bizz, or ever were, you know it. In the long run those dealers will get burned. Thats all I'm saying. I'd walk if some jack off tried that crap with me. The one that wants the deal the worst gets the worst deal. Go on the last day of the month (hopefully the weather is bad and has been for a week) and watch those doc fees disappear. ;)
  • mcmanusmcmanus Posts: 121
    Choice is a good thing for consumers and that is finally what Scion offers between their boxes. I'm surprised that Toyota didn't come up with a 2.0L or 2.1L for the xB. I had a 89 Camry with 2.0L DOHC and loved it (averaged a very smooth 35 mpg). But I'm glad to see the Corolla's 1.8L offered in the xD (good economy, proven, but a bit rough at high rpm).

    As said by many before, why isn't cruise offered? :mad:

    I'm old, but why are the Scion boxes still so ugly? :confuse:

    And while I'm at it, why hasn't Toyota ever fixed the long reach to the Corolla steering wheel? :mad:

    I don't need cargo capacity, so I'll wait to see what the new Corolla looks like. But I like the price (and no haggle pricing of the xD).
  • alpha01alpha01 Posts: 4,747
    The 1.8L in the xD is not the same as the 1.8L in the Corolla. Check out the edmunds.com Inside Line article.

    ~alpha
  • ohplezzohplezz Posts: 74
    Choice is a good thing for consumers and that is finally what Scion offers between their boxes. I'm surprised that Toyota didn't come up with a 2.0L or 2.1L for the xB. I had a 89 Camry with 2.0L DOHC and loved it (averaged a very smooth 35 mpg). But I'm glad to see the Corolla's 1.8L offered in the xD (good economy, proven, but a bit rough at high rpm).

    **The prior poster was correct. This is a new engine unlike the one in the old corollas and should be much smoother.
    **They probably used the 2.4 because it is a proven engine and using it saves them money.

    As said by many before, why isn't cruise offered?

    ** That definitely is a good question and one I do not have a good answer for. It is total stupidity on the part of scion for not having cruise control on the xD. It really makes me mad. It should come standard. The retards at scion have really screwed up big in my opinion. Their is a after-market one and if you look back a ways in this thread you will see the name of the company that makes it but after market cruise controls brake down a lot of the time. Pure stupid on scions part. Every other car in its class at least offers it as a option and on some of them its standard but nothing from scion. Idiots. :mad:

    I'm old, but why are the Scion boxes still so ugly?

    **LOL the youngsters that scion is trying to attract tend to like the boxy cars and the older folks tend not to. That was scions goal. They effectively ran you off.

    And while I'm at it, why hasn't Toyota ever fixed the long reach to the Corolla steering wheel?

    ** I don't know that one but my guess is in the event of a crash where the airbag deploys, people who are sitting farther back don't get their neck broke. But that is just my guess. What scion really needs is a air bag for the drivers knees. At least as a factory option. Toyota does for their sub compacts in europe. Thanks scion again for a exposing drivers to crushing injuries. I'd pay more to have a air bag for my knees. I need them and like them working after a bad crash. The tC has them :sick:

    I don't need cargo capacity, so I'll wait to see what the new Corolla looks like. But I like the price (and no haggle pricing of the xD).

    ** No haggle except the rip off Doc Fees that dealers charge. Thanks scion for allowing scum bag dealers to rip off and piss off your customers. :mad:
    ** Toyota has sent the redesigned corolla back ( it was ugly) to the drawing board. It didn't look nearly as good as the mazda 3 or civic which toyota is trying to compete with. Toyota is definitely not known for their hip car designs so you are going to have to wait and see what it looks like whenever it comes out but you will be paying much, much more money for the corolla. Scion gives you more bang for the buck if you can look past its looks and lack of cruise control :mad:
  • mcmanusmcmanus Posts: 121
    Don't know why Toyota can get so much right, but screw up on the obvious little things that can drive customers crazy. Are they so big that they're competing with themselves? Wonder how many have bought a Corolla just to get cruise or moved up to a Camry just to avoid the long reach to the Corolla sterring wheel?

    On a related issue, a friend works fairly high up in the automobile wheel industry. So I asked why car companies don't sell new s with better tires. He agreed that their cost difference would be minimal, but tire companies want to tease you aftermarket. Some car companies do offer good tires. Everyone probably has a different idea of what makes a tire "good". But 20K mile wear ratings (like on the tC) ain't good. Likewise tires that make a car look poor in braking or curves in published test reports can't be good either. Yes, it would create a race to pay tire manufacturers more to put good tire on all new s as you wouldn't want to have a Yaris out perform a Camry, but come on!

    It seems that the Solara is the only current good looking Toyota. Why can't they come up with more attractive cars? Even boxy cars can look better. Both the new Scion boxes have taken a step backwards from previous s. As you say, I'm probably too old to grasp this one. OTOH it wouldn't stop me from buying one. Maybe they're just trying harder than I imagine to keep us old farts away from the kids stuff.

    I'll be avoiding any 1st year engine, even a Toyota (blew the tranny in my 1997 Camry, a 1st year ). Still can't understand why, as long as they were doing a new engine, that they didn't roll out a 2.0L or 2.1L to "one-up" or keep up with the competition and fill the gap they currently have. I know keeping the same block is cheaper, but we're talking out the biggest car maker in the world and the largest selling nameplate in history. If not in this case, when would you ever develop a new engine?

    I prefer avoidance features to injury minimization technology. But I've yet to drive a car with ABS that doesn't lock up waaaaay to soon on ice or slush. Frankly I doubt that many drivers, when faced with a "head on" in dry conditions, would have the presence of mind to steer around the obstacle.
  • alpha01alpha01 Posts: 4,747
    The transmission in the 1997 Camry - whether 4 or V6 - was NOT a new trasmission. It was just a new body, and the mechanicals were almost exactly carried over from the Gen 3 version from 92-96. Modest modifications were made to the 2.2L and 3.0L engines, but no changes to the transmissions, from everything I've read.

    If you blew the tranny in one of those vehicles, it was because it was a bad tranny, and not because it was new.

    ~alpha
  • alpha01alpha01 Posts: 4,747
    From a business perspective, the following is not an issue for Toyota. In fact, its desired.

    "Wonder how many have bought a Corolla just to get cruise or moved up to a Camry just to avoid the long reach to the Corolla sterring wheel?"

    Now, of course, the problem arises when people move from the Corolla to the Civic, Elantra, et al. But moving to a Camry is perfect in the eyes of the bean-counters!

    ~alpha
  • eldainoeldaino Posts: 1,618
    as far as developing brand new engines for the scions goes, do you really think that out of all the cars toyota offers in the world, do you think that the scion xd or xb would be the prime candidate for a new engine? :blush:

    I can wait to see these in person. The only thing i wish they had was at least a 5 speed auto.

    Happy to see people finally realized that its not the same engine as in the corolla~!
  • nippononlynippononly SF Bay AreaPosts: 12,687
    OK, well the Fit Sport offers standard cruise. I guess they could switch there. The Versa has some really sweeeet features for a subcompact (including cruise), and under $16K sticker no less. So they could switch there as well. It really is a great shame how hard Toyota strips its global models when it brings them to the U.S.

    I wanna see a Scion Aygo, if not the Charade. That would be cool! :-)

    But hey, make factory cruise optional, Toyota!

    2013 Civic SI, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (stick)

  • bamacarbamacar Posts: 749
    The rating for the manual transmission is 27/33. Unlike the new xB, the xD numbers holds up pretty well. That translates to 31-32 city and 36 highway. Not a bad drop for the additional size and power of the xD over the xA.
  • coupedncalcoupedncal Posts: 252
    I am surprised the mileage is not closer (or greater than) 40 mpg highway. For a small car, it should be higher. Even the bigger civic offers better mpg.
  • alpha01alpha01 Posts: 4,747
    Again, please consider that the numbers are changing for ALL cars for 2008. The Civic will no longer post those near 40 MPG figures. Expect about a 4 MPG drop in highway, in the Civics case. When that is considered, and keeping in mind the new xD's ratings ARE the new 2008 numbers, the xD is comparable to the Civic.

    ~alpha
  • bamacarbamacar Posts: 749
    As alpha stated the 2008 Civic with manual transmission will drop from 38/30 to 34/26 which is almost identical to the 33/27 of the xD.
  • 719b719b Posts: 216
    will you let us know the source of the mileage information for the 2008 scion xd?
  • bamacarbamacar Posts: 749
    I got it from Ward's Auto World, but it only listed the manual transmission version.
  • ohplezzohplezz Posts: 74
    Even with the new gov numbers imho with a driver who is trying to get good mileage, and knows how to drive for that purpose, I see the xD coming in around 29/32 for city and 34/37 for Hway. The engines design should post excellent numbers. The only thing working against that is the short gearing on the xD and the wind drag of its little boxy body. The base car its self is a decent start but with some nice wheels/tires and good springs/shocks it should be a nice little sporty ride. I saw it in person at the auto show in early april and it has got a lot of potential.
  • crabbymancrabbyman Posts: 9
    Here is the information given to dealers:
    Optional: VSC with TRAC
    xD only vehicle without Cruise in '08 MY...however also saw pictures and other dealer info with cruise...

    As far as MPG...dealer info again..
    Manual: 32/37
    Auto: 30/34
    Unknown if based on '08 MY requirements or prior EPA requirements. :shades:

    image
  • herrkaleuherrkaleu Posts: 62
    These numbers are similar to the 2007 Fit numbers. As the engine is considerably larger it would surprise me if those would be 2008 EPA numbers. But getting the same EPA mileage with 25% more power is a good thing.

    After all, gasoline is dirt cheap in this country, 1 or 2 mpg might not be as important as usable size, safety, comfort..
    If I really love my car and can do all the things I need to do and maintenance and repairs don't kill me I'm more likely to keep the car for more years which saves me more money.
    whoever drives 20,000 miles a year in the city can always buy a hybrid.

    more important is the price and availability. I hope they bring over enough not to have waiting time. I don't want to make a deposit and wait 3 months as with the Fit, or not have ABS as with the Versa.....
  • ohplezzohplezz Posts: 74
    Those are the new model year 08 numbers according to scion. I spoke with a factory rep on media day at the auto show here in nyc and it was confirmed through a dealer I know on the west coast. The roller rockers and oil jet give it superior numbers even in its less than aerodynamic shape. You can look at other toyotas with this technology and see the the same impressive #s in mpg. And don't get me wrong, I'm not a toyota/scion nut job. I'm a honda man. I'm coming from a 96 prelude si that has over 250k and still going strong but the premium gas is killing me. I wish that honda would have got its act together and released the new design of the fit here in the U.S instead the current model at the end of its cycle. The fit/jazz is a quality car no doubt but its styling is a sore spot for me. It looks like their mini van:( But I don't even drive it any more. I ride the subway every where for the past year and a half. And you are right about cruise in some areas of the country. Scion has always offered cruise as a dealer option in the southeast and maybe even some other parts of the U.S but not nation wide. But I have heard some rumblings in the past week at www.scionlife.com that cruise is going to be offered up nation wide due to potential buyers anger over no cruise. Lets hope so! A car without cruise is a :lemon: in my book And although I disagree with the prior posters comment about gas being dirt cheap in this country. I do think that they should hold out on buying the new scion if they like the fit. If it works for you don't waste the money on a new ride unless you have to. I'm probably leaving the city later this year and moving out west so I'm going to have to buy this year. I wish I could wait to see what the new fit is going to offer but that is not in the cards for me. The compact market is heating up in this country. Hell even GM is getting into the mix with the sub compacts that they had at the auto show. Hopefully honda will keep its promise and give us the diesel engine that has been out in europe now for a while as well. The less money we spend on gas the better off our environment and safety will be.
  • roxy84roxy84 Posts: 8

    my brother in law works in marketing for toyota. fwiw, he says the asterisk next to those mileage figures denotes 2007 testing procedures, and that they will post those as long as legally possible. heck 32/37 for the manual would be higher than the new test numbers for a manual corolla, which i think are 28/37. being that the xd (my opinion here) may well come in heavier than a corolla and be far less aerodynamic, i'd highly doubt 32/37 is via the 2008 testing. the corolla loses about 4 mpg both city/highway, so if the xd does also, that would put it at 28/33. however that would put the auto at 26/30.

    hopefully those really are new method test numbers. if they are, a manual xd at 32/37 beats both the corolla and yaris.
  • eldainoeldaino Posts: 1,618
    hmm...you can really automatically assume that the milage drop would be so drastic or the same amount of mpg for each car, just becasue one drops four does not mean the xd will.

    28/33? the city sounds ok, but i def think it would at least get 35 to 36 on the highway.
  • eldainoeldaino Posts: 1,618
    what a good post! i too wish that honda would release the newer version of the fit, i'm a honda man too! But i really do like the xd, and i may end up seeing myself in one depending on when the new fit arrives!
  • roxy84roxy84 Posts: 8
    hmm...you can really automatically assume that the milage drop would be so drastic or the same amount of mpg for each car, just becasue one drops four does not mean the xd will.

    28/33? the city sounds ok, but i def think it would at least get 35 to 36 on the highway.


    well, that was a rough estimate on how much of a drop the xd will have. if you look at this site:
    http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/calculatorSelectYear.jsp

    it tells you the old numbers for any car vs the new 2008 numbers using new test methods. i mentioned 4 mpg because that is very close to what many economy cars are experiencing under the new test procedures.

    my brother in law was not 100% sure the numbers on that sheet were via old test methods. i, for one, would gladly trade my corolla for an xd if mileage was equal to or greater than the corolla. i had almost traded for a yaris, but i concluded id be giving up some comfort, quietness, power, and a little handling (overall, just more car) without gaining anything in mileage. why bother. the xd, with power locks/windows, 60/40 fold flat rear seats, side air bags, a stronger engine, gauges where they belong, a tachometer...would be so many things the yaris is not. hopefully,it will come in around $14000-$14500.
  • ohplezzohplezz Posts: 74
    With the new Dual VVT-i engine in the xD, when just considering the engine, you'll get better economy than the old 1.8 engine in the corolla. But having said that, their is more to mileage than just the engine. The body shape of the xD and the short gear ratios, scion has implemented to provide quick response, will have an overall effect on mpg. But this car is not just about good gas mileage for scion. Scions purpose is to introduce the toyota brand to people who would not other wise have purchased a toyota. They have been effective with this approach. But I feel the xD will provide very good mileage with this new engine despite its shape. This engine technology has been proven effective in other toyotas. Look at the toyota tundra. The 4.7 with Intake only VVT-i gets 15/18. The 5.7 with intake and exhaust VVT-i (like the xD motor) provides 100+ horses and gets 15/20. So there you have a motor giving more power and better mileage at the same time just like the xD compared to the xA will hopefully show. Only time will tell the true story but pound for pound, even with its draw backs, the scion xD is going to be a great little car that gives very good mileage. The honda fit second generation is not expected until some time in 2008 calendar year. I wish it would come sooner but its not going to happen. I'm going to be buying a xD this fall. Maybe in 5 years honda will have a couple of diesels for me to trade my little xD in for. :confuse:
  • roxy84roxy84 Posts: 8
    The body shape of the xD and the short gear ratios, scion has implemented to provide quick response, will have an overall effect on mpg

    this is what concerns me. the scion xa was slow anyway, so i felt it was overkill to have the engine revving so high at highway speeds (5 speed xa was booming so loudly on the highway that it became tedious on just a 10 minute test drive) were talkin 3600+ rpms at what should be a relaxing cruising speed of 70 mph. the corolla 5 speed is about 2850 at 70 mph. heck, even the yaris is relaxed at highway speed (about 3100 rpm)compared to the xa. 128 hp cars arent fast anyway, so i hope scion makes the xd a better highway cruiser(keeping the rpms around 3000 at 70 mph.this was the primary deal killer with the xa for me.
  • jbrahmsjbrahms Posts: 24
    I have an 2006 xA automatic, and I don't agree with the numbers you quote about rpms vs speed. Here are the figures I have measured in fourth gear: 1750 rpm @ 40 mph, 2100 rpm @ 50 mph, 2500 rpm @ 60 mph, and 2900 rpm @ 70 mph. I don't find it too noisy at 70 mph, but the ride can be uncomfortably choppy at that speed on concrete highways with their expansion joints. On smooth asphalt it rides very nicely at that speed.

    I also have a 2006 RAV4 V6 automatic that rides quietly and comfortably on the highway at 70 mph, so that's what I use on trips. However if the xD proves to be a good highway car, I plan to sell both of my cars and "step up" to the xD. I love the xA around LA where I do most of my driving, but I don't really want to own two cars.
  • roxy84roxy84 Posts: 8
    I have an 2006 xA automatic

    yes, but i was referring to the 5 speed xa. id have given up some speed in the xa just to cruise at a resonable rpm at 70 mph. my 126 hp corolla is plenty fast( for my needs) with a manual transmission, and is decent with highway cruising. the honda fit manual has this problem as well at about 3400 rpm at 70 mph.

    im just begging scion not to have such vastly different final gear ratios in the auto vs manual.
  • jbrahmsjbrahms Posts: 24
    I would have thought the fifth gear in the manual transmission would run at a lower rpm than the fourth gear in the automatic at the same road speed. Isn't that the whole point of the fifth gear?
  • roxy84roxy84 Posts: 8
    every econo car ive test driven in the past 5 years is the same in this regard. the auto tranny cruises at lower rpms on the highway than the 5 speed counterpart.

    on cars like the xa, xb and fit, and many other econo cars, the difference is quite drastic. i disliked the manual fit's gearing at highway speeds so much that i crossed it off my list. the auto tranny was much more pleasant.i guess automakers think it gives more power under foot at that speed or the lower gearing makes it "sporty".xa, xb, yaris matrix, corolla, civic (non si), etc....all these econoboxes are slow and they should never be confused with sporty.

    but i am a diehard stick driver, and will remain so until they quick making sticks or my left leg and/or right arm fall off.

    i really hope the xd manual tranny is not so punishing to the driver at 70+ mph as the manaul xa/xb. its quite a bit larget engine, so im hoping they wont feel the need to gear it so short.
This discussion has been closed.