Hi. My first post here is a few years. Not sure if this should be a new topic or not.
I finally decided to sell my 90 Civic SI and get something newer. I've always been interested in a used (around 2000) Accord or Camry but I really like the exterior looks of the Matrix so I went to check it out. I took a 2003 XR out for a long test drive and I must say I was a bit disappointed. Is it just me or does it seem like the engine struggles? This car I test drove was an automatic and I had the A/C on but going up hills the Matrix seemed to struggle and it seemed noisy to me.
Other impressions ... although stylish, roomy and functional (60/40 rear seats) there is something about the dash which bothers me. That red backlight and strange speedometer with 60 mph around 9 o'clock. It seems like they went out of their way to make it trendy ... maybe a little too trendy in my opinion.
I then took a 98 Camry with 65k miles and wow what a difference. It felt smooth as silk. It accelerated smoothly and quietly. The ride was much better as well. I found this strange since despite having a bigger 2.2L engine the horse power is very similar to the Matrix's 1.8L and the Camry is even heavier!
I'm going to drive a loaded 2000 Camry CE with 43k miles on it today. Dealer want $13k for it. In the end it would be about $3000 less than the Matrix equipped similarly. Mileage isn't a huge concern for me because I only drive about 4-5k miles a year.
So I was wondering if anyone had an opinion on this? Did anyone else feel somehow disappointed after driving the Matrix for the first time?
I agree about the XR auto being a tad weak. I drove the XR auto and 5 speed (fwd only) and found the 5 speed easier to manage without feeling sluggish. I ended up buying the XRS 6 speed. The dash is trendy, the chrome rings add pizazz which Gen X and Y are looking for (includes me age 26 male). You might look at an 04 Matrix which has different gauges. Also a 2000 CE with 43K seems high, I assume you meant LE. Check out the real world trade in values for a better number.
says it all: "maybe a little too trendy in my opinion". Matrix is designed to look edgy and different, but that will turn as many people off as it turns on, and I would say it turns you off.
Matrix handling is in a different league from Camry, but if what you want is a smooth boulevard cruiser and interstate-tripper, Camry is the one for you.
If you want any sense of sport, Matrix is the choice, or maybe you need to look beyond these two. The Camry will wind up feeling a little "boaty" to you after too long if you are coming out of a Civic SI.
Acceleration-wise, Matrix and Camry are about the same, because the Matrix engine is smaller and has 15% less torque than the '00 Camry 4-cyl, but is also 15% lighter. You would be surprised what Matrix can do if you really step on it, but it will make a lot more noise doing so than Camry ever will. In the final analysis, both the previous Camry 4-cyl and the current Matrix are a tad weak in the power department, but the upside is fuel economy: mid to high 20s for that Camry, low 30s for the Matrix.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Automatic, A/C, Cruise control, power locks, windows & mirrors. Toyota Certified Used Vehicle. When I get the Edmunds TMV the price is $12814 and $13664 if Toyota Certified.
Even as one who loves his Vibe, don't pass up the opportunity to own a bullet proof car at a great price. The 98 Camry is excellent, and will save you in insurance costs as well (and maybe even in monthly payments) if you are paying cash for it. I wish I was smart enough to know that 98 was to be the last year for that car; I'd have bought one, and I'm sure it would still be in my driveway for many years to come. Forget the mileage on it; it is a proven 200k engine. Go for it.
in 2000 they went to a slightly restyled front and rear light scheme, and made the 15" rims standard across the line. There were no other changes I can recall (barring color choices, of course) - certainly the powertrain choices were unchanged.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I thought you were talking about getting a Camry Wagon. My mistake. i must have wagons on the brain (thus my pen name). If it is a sedan you desire, then sure, go for the newer version. If you want versatility, go for the Vibe/Matrix. Sedans are good for one thing, driving. I want my autos to do a bit more than that. Good luck. Either way, you'll be a toyota owner. Hard to go wrong there.
As someone who owns a Lexus LS and a Matrix, I can tell you that the Matrix is a far more FUN car to drive than the LS or in your case, the Camry. Sure these latter two are smoother, silkier to drive, but for sheer fun, NONE can even come close to the Trix. Like nippononly pointed out, the Trix may be too trendy for you, but for me at age 40, male, I now gladly give up driving my LS for the Trix always.
The Camry seemed a tad on the high side, price-wise. But, it's your choice. Before you buy it why not post this price request at the "Real World Trade-Ins" in the Smart Shoppers forum. Terry and others are very helpful and can help you sort through this.
I own Camry 97 (Gen4) with 3.0 V6 and manual transmission. It is not a rocket, but gives nice pull right from 2.5K and kicks like a turbo at about 4K up to 6K redline. I always know that I have enough power to do fast but safe lane changes or onramps.
Stock shocks are good only for bad californian highways and this is exactly where they shine: the car goes like on silk road. But fast acceleration, braking and lane change can be frightening, body roll is excessive but the car still pretty controllable and can be easily put into the slide, and it turns in if you take foot from accelerator. It takes about a second for it to decide that it wants to turn in, though, so the turns better be thought through.
I replaced stock shocks with Tokico Premium Perfomance, keeping stock springs, and now it is better for fast driving, but highway ride is much worse, I can feel every pothole on uneven Golden State highways. It is better on 80mph, and very bumpy on 40mph.
Steering is kinda numb and vague and you have to always control the car and to look on the road, because the slightest move of the hand and the car jumps from the lane. Oldsmobile Intrigue which I had for about two months, was much much much better with its Magnasteer system.
Camry is a big sedan with lot of space for passengers and rather big trunk, but it does not have hatchback versatility and even while the rear seat backs can be folded down, it does not help much, because I cannot fit even the wheel of my bike in the small opening, so I cannot fit my bike IN the car. This sucks.
So, I was (and still am) looking for a smaller more versatile car, with better mileage, fun to drive. Matrix was (again, still is) in the list on par with Focus ZX5 (maybe SVT), Jetta Wagon, Protege5 and WRX Wagon.
Matrix is rather heavy for its size, and base engine is too weak for it even with manual gearbox. It just does not go, period. Yamaha powerplant is a little better, once you rev it past 6K, but it is so loud and the sound is not as pleasing as 2.2 engine of Prelude.
Matrix handles better mostly because of stiffer shocks, the steering itself is even more numb in the neutral position than on Camry. Shifter is too far, faux aluminum is faux, faux crome is faux too, weird red backlight tells about Pontiac "cooperation". I hate automatic headlights and rice ground effects, which are obligatory for the only decent Matrix -- the XRS. But the overall proportions, the rear seating space, the trunk, the great flat plastic floor are just great. Fuel economy is OK for base, and poor for XRS, considering that it is smaller than Camry and has an engine almost twice smaller in displacement.
So, I am still waiting for a bigger engine (say, 2 liters and about 140hp will be OK), nicer and more contemporary dashboard, no faux anything, no side skirts.
Camry is OK car and can even be fun on twisty roads, you just have to catch it really quick when it rebounds on its soft shocks. But while you might have some fun, your passengers would beg for a paper bag. But... it is bulletproof indeed. My car is 97, I bought it in 2000, and no any major problem (clutch was replaced on 80K, but I drive like crazy). Engine is silent until 2K, and with rpms build up the sound is louder but not very harsh or hollow, just shows that engine has something for you on every occasion on the road.
Base Matrix is waaaaaaaay too weak. It should be pushed and while it can go along, it shows that it is almost near the limit.
Hi Folks - Here's a new discussion that some of you may find interesting: Matrix/Vibe vs. RAV4, CRV. Perhaps you can help scottdude make up his mind. Thanks for your participation.
mikus, thanks for your feedback. Honestly, I'm not much interested in performance driving. I got that out of my system in the early 90's when my 90 Civic SI was new Anyway, I'm just looking for a car to drive back and forth to work a few miles and drive the family around town sometimes and enough room to hold a few extra adults should the need arise. I also have a 2000 Honda Odyssey so it handles all the major family outings.
I don't like being bounced around in a car everytime I drive on a slightly imperfect road. Quietness is also important to me. I want to be able to speak to my kids in the back seat without shouting while driving down the highway at 65-70.
I saw the new 2004 instrument panel on the Vibe/Matrix and like it a lot better. Instead of all orange/red, the numbers are a light blue. Much nicer, at least to my eyes.
Now if only they'd do something about a bigger engine...
IMO, the original target market for The Trix/Vibe is the Gen-X Gen-Y crowd. But many young-at-heart 30+ and 40+ and a few blue-haired oldies are known to own this vehicle. So what is the appeal to the non-intended target ? Ahhh... you guessed it... It makes you feel young again... It is tuned for performance with its low ground clearance, and high revving engine that needs you to go high up in the rpm curve to really feel the car giddy-up. It is certainly not for everyone. Granted its passing power could do with a little more umph at low rpm, but once up in the 2-3K rpm range, the car really moves. Get into the 4K+ rpm and the car is flying....
For those who desire more low-end power, TRD will release their SC sometime in this millenium . If you cannot wait then go with the turbo kit currently available for the 1ZZ engine. That may get you close to 200whp. Read of a couple guys running this on the MO site.
Personally, I have no problems with the engine performance of the Trix. Maybe 'cos I have two other V8 powered vehicles, which makes the 4-banger engine of the Trix a refreshing difference. But I must say, once you own and drive V8-powered cars, it is very difficult to ever be satisfied with a 4-banger. I may just be one of those exceptions to the norm ....
Regardless of how you feel about this vehicle, once you own it and get to drive it daily, you will love it, quirks and all...
I love high revving engines. Here is analogy: I am not fond of scooters with 50cc motors, they make more noise than power and do no go faster than 40mph. Decent scooter starts from 250cc.
Side skirts is either a decorative element or they help to increase downforce. If the latter is true show me the numbers Toyota, and I will be convinced. No blind faith. Visually they do not look good to me (granted, Protege5 looks even worse and shows how easy 323F can be spoiled). Somehow Vibe GT manages without spoilers (it has totally defunct plastic wheel-well flares instead).
I do not want someone to confuse being young-at-heart and having lack-of-taste-at-all. This is a car, not a Christmas tree. What's more, not a faux Cristmas tree. If those who makes faux aluminum were young themselves, they would know how easily metallic paint comes off your walkman or cd-player or cool new cell phone. I want them to get the message: no faux! What would you think about a woman wearing faux pearl neckace or a guy with taiwanese $10 Breitlings? Yuck!
sorry, you missed the reasons why I bought the car, so I'll throw them in: at 41, I am at the age where I can remember working on my own slant 6 engine; I am also at the age where I am sick and tired of shoe horning my body down into stupidly designed low profile sedans. Furthermore, I am also now wise enough to want more from a car than simply turning the key and driving. The Vibe is NOT low to the ground. It is well off the ground which provides for excellent driver visibility and the ability for me to crawl underneath it to perform maintenance. It also sits high, allowing me to plop myself into the passenger compartment without the use of a shoe horn (very important as one's body ages). The Vibe also does a whole lot more than drive me from one place to another and hold my umbrella in the trunk; it is very versatile, allowing me to haul items back from the hardware store. As for 8 cylinder cars, I think power and acceleration are ridiculous factors when driving anywhere but the racetrack. Why pay for power when you don't/can't use it? I love my Corolla engine. It doesn't take a genious to figure out how to modify one's driving habits to conform to its modest horsepower output, and it will last forever.
this is a car you can have a lot of fun in for cheap. The handling is good, the engine is peppy in town, the gas mileage is excellent, and I would not have bought my Trix without the side skirts and front and rear air dams - I have seen the base Trix, and they look incomplete to me.
I think the biggest difference between Vibe and Matrix (there are few) is the look - I believe the Pontiac people were going for more of a mini-SUV look. It is appropriate, given the amount of space this car has inside.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
You stated: "I do not want someone to confuse being young-at-heart and having lack-of-taste-at-all"
Hmmmm....So, if I heard you correctly, some of us 40-something who own one of these twins has a "lack-of-taste-at-all" ! You do not own this car so you can be forgiven for your poor choice of words. The Camry - modded and all - remains a Camry. If you are so into "taste" you'd be driving much better-looking and more tasteful cars than a Camry. Need I say more ??? Maybe the side skirts on the Trix don't do it for you, but it does for some of us. It gives the Trix a low ground clearance look. I know that I have had a few scrapes on the front air dam and have to watch those curbs, speed bumps and dips in the roads carefully lest I continue to scrape around there.
maxx4me:
Like nippononly pointed out (which I agree with 100%), the Vibe's look differs greatly from the Trix's look. To me the Trix's look is more aggressive while the Vibe has a more truck-ish look (a nicer-looking Aztek, IMO), w/out side skirts or air dams in front, and it has a roof rack. Is it a mini-sUV or is it a car ?? And therein lies one of the greatest contrast in the twin "cars". The Vibe is truly a nice car, although I'll take the Trix over the Vibe any day. Just never been a fan of Pontiac's, and anything remotely close to the Aztec look turns me off. Even Bob Lutz cannot stand the Aztec/Avalunch looks and they may be canned shortly.
Ok, if someone took me for Matrix hater, he is wrong, because I like this car very much. Overall design is brilliant, the proportions, the inside space, the versatility, the drivability are great. It is some details which annoy me, and which has nothing to do with the engineering: it is pure styling or lack thereof. I believe in two basic things: (1) functionality defines form, and (2) fake is bad. Maybe someone likes to live in a sheetrock house which looks like a brick one, or to drink instant coffee from plastic glasses, or to use a rubber woman. At least rubber woman might make some practical sense to someone.
The side skirts. Down: they decrease the angle of approach; they are bolt-on, so more parts - more money; they can scratch the body if moved; front spoiler can be easily cracked while parking; they make car look as if it has lower and longer hood. Up: some people think that they look cool; they increase downforce (any numbers? what about front/rear downforce distribution?).
Now, why longer hood is bad? Because the car has pronounced side flares over the rear wheel wells looking like "S" put horisontally. This element is now common for most Toyota cars and they think it looks cool. Some cars look better with it (Celica), some just ok (Gen5 Camry), some just plain ugly (second-generation Previa). It makes this heavy-butt effect, not is what exactly needed for a front wheel drive car. Add spoiler and skirts to this flying "S", and car looks awfully disproportioned from the front quarter. Again, how big can be downforce on 80mph (normal speed for California highways) or even 60mph (East Coast)? So, this element is purely styling. At least this plastic stuff can be taken off.
The "crome" dashboard accents. What are they for? Down: they glare, they contrast with instruments and dashboard (high contrast is bad for eyes), and they fake. Up: they look cool. Shiny thingy, 2yr olds like this stuff.
The fake aluminum. Down: high-contrast; it gives firm look to the dashboard instead of soft look (it is another question, that looking soft but really firm plastics is another kind of fake) and the biggest one: it scratches. I have not seen one plastic item with metallic paint, which could not be scratched. And it scratches easily, so it will not look like real aluminum pretty fast, especially on the door handles (it does not look real even now). Up: looks cool. Another shiny thingy for small boys and girls.
The optitron instruments. Down: sometimes illegible; high-contrast; extra complexity and price; Up: looks cool.
I think, too much artificial coolness for one car. Don't take me wrong, restyled Passat is no better. No, actually it is: it has good and nice to touch interior materials.
Speaking about Gen4 Camry. Stylistically it is Alfa-164 rip off with Japanese quality. I can live with that. And it does not have even one exterior or interior element which looks like non-functional baby toy. Camry is a family workhorse and cannot be beaten. You may call Gen4 bland, I call it clean. It will look nice in 10 years, as well as VW Golf.
Matrix is very well engineered, cudos to its creators. But when the marketing department got involved in R&D, it spoils the things.
Behind the front seats is where the Matrix really shines.
There do seem to be fixes to two of the above points concerning the dashboard:
1) The chrome gauge rings, as discussed earlier, can be painted a flat gray or black. They can be easily pried off to be painted.
2) The faux aluminum can be replaced by faux carbon fiber, which probably scratches less and reduces the contrast.
Also, aren't the opitron gauges less pricey? Those lights never burn out, do they?
One other thing, concerning the lower spoilers and side skirts: I did some research, and there are many 3M-authorized places that can install the anti-chipping tape, reducing any scratches...
Today I visited local dealership and took a look on a new dasboard. New instruments with white digits and gray trip computer panel look really nice and legible. Way to go. Fake aluminum front panel can be swapped, so now just waiting for 2-liter engine on base Matrix.
Mikus: if you wait any longer, you may be swayed by the 2004 Chevy Malibu Maxx in January. It seems to "fix" a lot of the quirks I have with my current Vibe. Check it out.
I bought the 2000 silver Camry on Friday. Got the price down from $13k to $12,200. I'm very pleased with the car. It's super clean. In fact I find I'm liking it more than when I first test drove it.
...when you say that the fake aluminum front panel can be swapped, do you mean it can be swapped for the carbon fiber, as I had mentioned above, or can it be swapped for something else? I checked with someone on the carbon fiber, and he said it was incredibly easy to install--I think you just pop out the panels and put the new ones in...
I am looking to buy a used Matrix XRS. The car comes with sunroof and with 51,145 miles. After negotiating alittle the dealer quoted me $15,500. I left and told him I would research this. Then he said he could go down a few hundred dollars. Is this worth it? What do you guys think? Thanks for any input!
$15,5 for an '03 XRS (6-speed, I suppose) with 51,000 MILES !!!!!
First off, that's a LOTTA miles for an '03. Second, this car should NOT be worth anything over $14K, imo. But, I am not the expert. You may want to ask a couple dealers in the "Real World Trade-In" forum on the Smart Buyers site here at Edmunds. They can tell you categorically what to expect to pay.
BTW, NADA pegged this XRS (assuming w/out sunroof ) at $15K retail. But I'd not believe that. As a point of reference: I got my
XR (auto) loaded 9900 miles Sport package, sport plus, Premium 3-in-1 w/6-spkrs, etc.. Price = $14,9.
Not sure where you are from and what equipment you are looking for. But there is a feeling that the Vibe GT hasn't been the fastest mover. May what to check in your area and see what you can buy a new one for. That will help you know if that is a fair price for the used XRS. With rebates could get a reasonable Vibe GT into the $17s, perhaps lower if the dealer is motivated.
YGTBKM - w/51K you're looking a three years+ wear and tear. Look at your first year maintenance cost...are they offering a warranty?I got my XRS with sunroof for 18,600...keep shopping, the dealer is looking for anyone to get it off their lot. With that many miles, it's a huge paperweight I'll bet they didn't give 10K for it.
Hurler, yes, what I meant was fake carbon, it is easier to get, because of the demand. Some think it looks cooler than fake aluminum and it should be definitely more scratch-resistant. But I do not see why someone would not make more traditionally looking panels. The only question is, does demand for such a panel would justify the production? Do not think so
Now, anyone in the mood for the bets? Edmunds discussions live pretty long life, I often read old ones and it is interesting to see how things really happened. So, I just want to throw in couple of ideas which I think are most likely to be introduced on next year Matrix. Maybe someone wants to argue or to add something?
First, the engine. Focus has 2.0 (and it is probably the biggest point in favor of Focus instead of Matrix). Protege5 has 2.0 and upcoming Mazda3 will have 2.3 as an option (the same as the base engine on Mazda6). Golf/Jetta has 2.0 as a base and has 1.8T with good low-end grunt and high power on the top. Elantra, Neon, Lancer, Sentra, RSX and Si all have 2.0 engine. Even this funny Suzuki box has it. Neon even has 2.4 as an option. Base Impreza comes with 2.5. So, the point is: Toyota just have to put bigger engine into Matrix just to play along. This is why I am betting that for 2005 Toyota will add 2.0 (at least, but I think it will be enough) as an option, or will use it instead of base 130-hp 1.8. I was hoping they would do it for 2004, but... did not work out. I will wait It took about what? 3 years for Mazda to get from 1.6 to 1.8 and to 2.0 engine on Protege. TRD done some job creating supercharger for a base engine, but TRD is not part of Toyota Co., so I don't think that R&D and production done by TRD will affect Toyota plans.
Another thing is AWD. Currently Matrix is the only Toyota car which has AWD (new Sienna? whatever, not interested), so it is reasonable to suppose that if Toyota will decide to ante up the stakes, it will be Matrix AWD with manual gearbox and bigger engine. I think that Toyota can live pretty good without better AWD car, but if they put engine and transmission from good old Celica All-Track into the Matrix, it would be really swell, and we would receive a decent WRX rival (STi is in a totally different league).
Independent rear suspension. New Golf will have one, and afaik Protege5 already has one (not sure). Matrix has one on AWD version. So, Toyota will need to spice things up, and I am pretty sure that for the next model year we well see independent suspension on FWD Matrix as well, maybe not on the base one, but definetely on XRS.
So, my bet for 2005: bigger engine, independent rear suspension on fwd, awd with bigger engine and the stick. Hope they get rid of fake aluminum as well
1) AWD comes with bigger motor and manual tranny as standard equipment by 2005 2) Base Matrix remains with the 1.8L Corolla engine, but upped in hp a tad (maybe 10% more hp and torque) 3) XR gets the bigger motor on the AWD trim as an option. Base 1.8L engine remains standard. 4) XRS trim gets upped low-end torque with a bigger motor, maybe the AWD engine or a different one, as standard equipment, with manual tranny. XRS w/auto tranny is dropped. 5) Faux aluminum gets turned down a notch, but still present. 6) Optitron gauge gets a white backdrop like the one on the Corolla LE.
These are my predictions. Most to start showing up by MY '05 (mid '04 timeframe), that will be in line with the 3-yr turn around tweaks that Toyota does.
For me tho', I don't much care what Toyota does with the Trix. I am content enough with my '03. Same situation with my purchase of the then new release '01 Sequoia in Dec/2000. I like it for whatit is TODAY, not what it could be tomorrow.
BUT, my money is on the '06 LS. Now, that is one re-design I cannot wait to see and drive off the lot ....
with most of that. First of all, Toyota most likely won't change anything until MY '06 - it lets all the models run three years before offering the mid-cycle revisions.
The history of celica will tell the whole story of what Toyota thinks of large-engine power: early 80s celicas had 2.4s, late 80s had 2.0s. In the 90s they had a 1.8 and a 2.2, now with the current gen they have only the 1.8. They are getting smaller, not bigger, and that is in their sport coupe!
So, forget engine size. They are very into fuel economy on the smaller cars. The only part of the above I think they may change is they could probably shoehorn in the RAV engine under the hood for the AWD Matrix, since it has been universally criticized by the press as being slow. That would be a 2.0 with 148 hp. In RAV it comes with both auto and manual (although just TRY to find a manual in AWD!), so I suppose they could do the same in the Matrix without a LOT of trouble.
The indy rear suspension on the AWD is necessitated by the AWD hardware taking up extra space. I don't think they will offer it on the FWD models because it costs more and this is at its heart an economy car.
As to interior trim, yes, that could change easily - they will probably "freshen" lots of visuals inside and out with the '06 update.
As to the XRS powertrain, I don't know why they don't just drop the auto on that right now - torque and power below the 6000 rpm crossover is just too low. In fact, rumors always seem to circulate that they are doing just that. But if they were to put in a new high-power engine, where would it come from? I doubt it would be a 6-cyl, which would make it nose-heavy anyway, and would require engineering mods to fit under the hood, I will bet. If they use a 4-cyl, well, what do they have? Their highest power 4-cyl is the Camry engine at 157 hp, and that is a 2.4 that may be hard to fit under Matrix's hood also. Even if they could, that is still a power drop from the current one, even with its limitations. I guess it might be OK if they could tweak the intake and exhaust to get another 15 hp or so from it, and you would then have the torque of the 2.4 as well.
I don't know what they are planning for the next celica GTS (due out '05) but I would like to see them tweak the engine to cross over a little lower (5000 rpm maybe?) and have 20 more hp - that would be cool to have in the Matrix for the XRS.
And BTW, the XRS above for $15,5? How do you do 51K miles in one year? That seems way overpriced. If it has the sunroof, that means it only has the 16" rims too.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Does anyone have any pictures of the carbon fiber trim? I might get the carbon fiber, and paint the chrome rings to match the charcoal interior of my Matrix when it comes in...
> They are getting smaller, not bigger, and that is in their sport coupe!
They _were_ getting smaller. Now big is back.
> So, forget engine size. They are very into fuel economy on the smaller cars.
This is laughable. My 3.0 Camry is 22/27, and 1.8 XRS is only 22/29? You call this a fuel economy? How about 30/35 for the ZX3/ZX5, or 31/36 for Protege5? They both have 2 liter engines. I don't even speak about Honda. The point is, that bigger engine will _not_ be a perfomance engine, it will be _economy_ engine. The Matrix would have 2.0 in a base version, and 1.8 high-rev Yamaha engine for XRS. Look at VW to see what I am talking about. 2.0 will have more torque, but less fun on the top, and 1.8 will deliver that screaming fun which young crowd likes. Adding 2-liter engine for a base model will add needed torque, while keeping Matrix in 3x-mpg zone. Ford and Honda did wise: Ford has three engines for the Escort/Focus family: 2.0/110hp (8 valves but enough power for small family car), 2.0/130hp (ZX3/ZX5), and 2.0/170hp (SVT). This covers pretty much everything, and keeps spending low. Honda did even better with its 2.0 engine (160, 200 and 225 hp). Imho 2-liter is the optimum size.
> The indy rear suspension on the AWD is necessitated by the AWD hardware taking up extra space. I don't think they will offer it on the FWD models because it costs more and this is at its heart an economy car.
Independent suspension is better for handling, but again who needs that, the plastic skirts are so much cooler. And XRS is not an economy car (if you mean price). Almost 20K for a shoebox? My Camry is cheaper, and it has V6 and independent rear suspension. Anyway, even semi-independent setup may be good, no wonder that Golf used torsion beam up to Golf4.
> But if they were to put in a new high-power engine, where would it come from? I doubt it would be a 6-cyl, which would make it nose-heavy anyway, and would require engineering mods to fit under the hood, I will bet. If they use a 4-cyl, well, what do they have? Their highest power 4-cyl is the Camry engine at 157 hp, and that is a 2.4 that may be hard to fit under Matrix's hood also.
Hope no one will decide to squeeze fat V6 into Matrix. Damn VW with its "lets put V8 into A4" ideas. Big engine does not mean performance. XRS engine will remain small-displacement, high rev screamer, may be with turbo or supercharger. Bigger engine should go on base version.
> I don't know what they are planning for the next celica GTS (due out '05) but I would like to see them tweak the engine to cross over a little lower (5000 rpm maybe?) and have 20 more hp - that would be cool to have in the Matrix for the XRS.
It is very hard to get more than 100hp from one liter, look at Honda. So I doubt that Yamaha engine will get more power unless they increase the displacement. And this will be pretty hard too, because Yamaha engine is actually built using base 1.8 engine block, but with bigger bore. I do not think there is a lot of block to increase the bore. They can try to increase the stroke, though. Can run into the problems with this as well with the compression ratio this high.
ended up lost a little, maybe due to poor writing...in general Toyota likes smaller engines, one of the reasons for which is fuel economy - I was thinking of the 29/36 rating on the manual base/XR (28/33 in the auto) - both of which have 30% or more better fuel economy than your Camry and better fuel economy than either ZX5 of Pro5 (the numbers you quoted were both for smaller versions of the car, not the EPA numbers for the five-door hatch versions).
As to it being an economy car, you have to remember that the basic structure of the car (things like, hmmm, SUSPENSION, for instance) is scaled to the base price of the base model, which is going out the door right now for less than $15K...if that is not an economy car, then I guess Hyundais are pretty expensive.
As for the driving experience of that "semi-independent" rear, drive one before you slap it in the face...you may find that the ride is similar to your much-vaunted fully independent rear in the Camry - this is not a car with a lot of axle hop like live axle rears of old.
Of all the things Toyota is probably planning for the corolla/matrix/celica family, I would say it is most likely that they will offer the new S/C package TRD has come up with as a factory option, and as the "energy boost" for future XRS models.
But who knows? By this timne next year we should probably know what powertrains they plan to put in the next-gen celica, and that will probably be mimicked by the next matrix XRS, since it is cheaper for Toyota than having separate powertrains for each model.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Thanks alot for replying to post #2128. Well I am in NH. I went to the Pontiac dealer looking for any GT Vibes and I was able to find two. I have never bought a Pontiac before, so I am still considering this. But for the XRS w/ 51K miles, it is obviously highway miles, and after negotiating with the dealer, he quoted me $14,000. And there is a 3yo, 36mo warranty. The car is in perfect condition, and is clean. Thanks you guys!
If you get the high mileage Matrix make sure that the warranty is from Toyota ( as opposed to a 3rd party ) and that BOTH the mileage and time run from date of your purchase, not it's 'in service' date.
If I remember right, new Toyota's come with a 3 year/36K new car warranty and 5 year/60K power train warranty. Since the warranties expire on which ever comes first, you'll shortly be out of warranty all round.
Toyota extended warranties typically have to be put in place before the 3/36K runs out. So this might be hard.
3rd party warranties are often a hassle for both the consumer and the service shop.
Hey, Thanks for the info. I checked and the warranty IS from a third party. Is this bad? Its a reputable company offering it, and it starts from the date of purchase. Is this bad?
I can get a new 2003 XRS/Vibe GT with these Edmunds numbers - MSRP $21,145 Invoice $19,755 TMV $19,904.
After $2000 GM rebate - you're at $18,000 MAX. If you're still thinking $14000 is still $4000 less. Read on...
A 2003 XRS Trix has this pricing: MSRP $20,280 Invoice $18,262 TMV $18,037
A car lease is usually base on 15,000 miles per yr, so low ball place hides the 12k/yr in the find print (pun intended) I think Toyota is advertising lease rates specials now at $159 per month + $1800 down = $7524. So Toyota is valuing their 3 yr old car with 45,000 miles at about $12,500.
Other facts: Cars depreciate real fast the closer they are to 100k miles. The XRS is not a fast mover - about 10% of anticipated sales.
Questions to ask: Are the tires new? Are the brakes new? A good way to confirm highways miles or not - the brakes will have a little wear if they are original... What other items need to be considered at 60,000 miles?
Good Luck in your decision.
Kinda funny how the Vibe $ after rebate is similar to the Trix TMV...
Hi Matrix fans! I am considering getting a Matrix XRS and want to know what kind of mileage people are actually getting in real world driving. Two people have written that it is very good and better than they expected. With an rpm range so big, I'm sure it depends on driving style, but I am interested in how good it can get if I nurse the gas on a long trip. Day to day I am a conservative driver, but every now and then I like to play with the g forces in the California mountains. So you Matrix XRS fans, please tell me your mileage!
Owned an XRS for six months, just a bit over 4700 miles, getting ~29 MPG in the city; running a mid grade gas (can't tell difference with prem) occasionally get to let her loose but not often due to traffic congestion. When I get to travel on the highways, it is a bit over 32. Due to my traveling (air) have not had many long Hwy miles. Good luck
Comments
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I finally decided to sell my 90 Civic SI and get something newer. I've always been interested in a used (around 2000) Accord or Camry but I really like the exterior looks of the Matrix so I went to check it out. I took a 2003 XR out for a long test drive and I must say I was a bit disappointed. Is it just me or does it seem like the engine struggles? This car I test drove was an automatic and I had the A/C on but going up hills the Matrix seemed to struggle and it seemed noisy to me.
Other impressions ... although stylish, roomy and functional (60/40 rear seats) there is something about the dash which bothers me. That red backlight and strange speedometer with 60 mph around 9 o'clock. It seems like they went out of their way to make it trendy ... maybe a little too trendy in my opinion.
I then took a 98 Camry with 65k miles and wow what a difference. It felt smooth as silk. It accelerated smoothly and quietly. The ride was much better as well. I found this strange since despite having a bigger 2.2L engine the horse power is very similar to the Matrix's 1.8L and the Camry is even heavier!
I'm going to drive a loaded 2000 Camry CE with 43k miles on it today. Dealer want $13k for it. In the end it would be about $3000 less than the Matrix equipped similarly. Mileage isn't a huge concern for me because I only drive about 4-5k miles a year.
So I was wondering if anyone had an opinion on this? Did anyone else feel somehow disappointed after driving the Matrix for the first time?
Matrix handling is in a different league from Camry, but if what you want is a smooth boulevard cruiser and interstate-tripper, Camry is the one for you.
If you want any sense of sport, Matrix is the choice, or maybe you need to look beyond these two. The Camry will wind up feeling a little "boaty" to you after too long if you are coming out of a Civic SI.
Acceleration-wise, Matrix and Camry are about the same, because the Matrix engine is smaller and has 15% less torque than the '00 Camry 4-cyl, but is also 15% lighter. You would be surprised what Matrix can do if you really step on it, but it will make a lot more noise doing so than Camry ever will. In the final analysis, both the previous Camry 4-cyl and the current Matrix are a tad weak in the power department, but the upside is fuel economy: mid to high 20s for that Camry, low 30s for the Matrix.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Asking price was $12,995. I'll offer less.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
> that 98 was to be the last year for that car
What did you mean by this? Was the Camry redesigned in 1999?
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
The Camry seemed a tad on the high side, price-wise. But, it's your choice. Before you buy it why not post this price request at the "Real World Trade-Ins" in the Smart Shoppers forum. Terry and others are very helpful and can help you sort through this.
Good luck.
Thanks for the tip about the Smart Shoppers forum. I'll hunt around for it.
Stock shocks are good only for bad californian highways and this is exactly where they shine: the car goes like on silk road. But fast acceleration, braking and lane change can be frightening, body roll is excessive but the car still pretty controllable and can be easily put into the slide, and it turns in if you take foot from accelerator. It takes about a second for it to decide that it wants to turn in, though, so the turns better be thought through.
I replaced stock shocks with Tokico Premium Perfomance, keeping stock springs, and now it is better for fast driving, but highway ride is much worse, I can feel every pothole on uneven Golden State highways. It is better on 80mph, and very bumpy on 40mph.
Steering is kinda numb and vague and you have to always control the car and to look on the road, because the slightest move of the hand and the car jumps from the lane. Oldsmobile Intrigue which I had for about two months, was much much much better with its Magnasteer system.
Camry is a big sedan with lot of space for passengers and rather big trunk, but it does not have hatchback versatility and even while the rear seat backs can be folded down, it does not help much, because I cannot fit even the wheel of my bike in the small opening, so I cannot fit my bike IN the car. This sucks.
So, I was (and still am) looking for a smaller more versatile car, with better mileage, fun to drive. Matrix was (again, still is) in the list on par with Focus ZX5 (maybe SVT), Jetta Wagon, Protege5 and WRX Wagon.
Matrix is rather heavy for its size, and base engine is too weak for it even with manual gearbox. It just does not go, period. Yamaha powerplant is a little better, once you rev it past 6K, but it is so loud and the sound is not as pleasing as 2.2 engine of Prelude.
Matrix handles better mostly because of stiffer shocks, the steering itself is even more numb in the neutral position than on Camry. Shifter is too far, faux aluminum is faux, faux crome is faux too, weird red backlight tells about Pontiac "cooperation". I hate automatic headlights and rice ground effects, which are obligatory for the only decent Matrix -- the XRS. But the overall proportions, the rear seating space, the trunk, the great flat plastic floor are just great. Fuel economy is OK for base, and poor for XRS, considering that it is smaller than Camry and has an engine almost twice smaller in displacement.
So, I am still waiting for a bigger engine (say, 2 liters and about 140hp will be OK), nicer and more contemporary dashboard, no faux anything, no side skirts.
Camry is OK car and can even be fun on twisty roads, you just have to catch it really quick when it rebounds on its soft shocks. But while you might have some fun, your passengers would beg for a paper bag. But... it is bulletproof indeed. My car is 97, I bought it in 2000, and no any major problem (clutch was replaced on 80K, but I drive like crazy). Engine is silent until 2K, and with rpms build up the sound is louder but not very harsh or hollow, just shows that engine has something for you on every occasion on the road.
Base Matrix is waaaaaaaay too weak. It should be pushed and while it can go along, it shows that it is almost near the limit.
Revka
Host
Hatchbacks & Wagons Boards
I don't like being bounced around in a car everytime I drive on a slightly imperfect road. Quietness is also important to me. I want to be able to speak to my kids in the back seat without shouting while driving down the highway at 65-70.
Now if only they'd do something about a bigger engine...
For those who desire more low-end power, TRD will release their SC sometime in this millenium
Personally, I have no problems with the engine performance of the Trix. Maybe 'cos I have two other V8 powered vehicles, which makes the 4-banger engine of the Trix a refreshing difference. But I must say, once you own and drive V8-powered cars, it is very difficult to ever be satisfied with a 4-banger. I may just be one of those exceptions to the norm ....
Regardless of how you feel about this vehicle, once you own it and get to drive it daily, you will love it, quirks and all...
Side skirts is either a decorative element or they help to increase downforce. If the latter is true show me the numbers Toyota, and I will be convinced. No blind faith. Visually they do not look good to me (granted, Protege5 looks even worse and shows how easy 323F can be spoiled). Somehow Vibe GT manages without spoilers (it has totally defunct plastic wheel-well flares instead).
I do not want someone to confuse being young-at-heart and having lack-of-taste-at-all. This is a car, not a Christmas tree. What's more, not a faux Cristmas tree. If those who makes faux aluminum were young themselves, they would know how easily metallic paint comes off your walkman or cd-player or cool new cell phone. I want them to get the message: no faux! What would you think about a woman wearing faux pearl neckace or a guy with taiwanese $10 Breitlings? Yuck!
I think the biggest difference between Vibe and Matrix (there are few) is the look - I believe the Pontiac people were going for more of a mini-SUV look. It is appropriate, given the amount of space this car has inside.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
You stated: "I do not want someone to confuse being young-at-heart and having lack-of-taste-at-all"
Hmmmm....So, if I heard you correctly, some of us 40-something who own one of these twins has a "lack-of-taste-at-all" ! You do not own this car so you can be forgiven for your poor choice of words. The Camry - modded and all - remains a Camry. If you are so into "taste" you'd be driving much better-looking and more tasteful cars than a Camry. Need I say more ??? Maybe the side skirts on the Trix don't do it for you, but it does for some of us. It gives the Trix a low ground clearance look. I know that I have had a few scrapes on the front air dam and have to watch those curbs, speed bumps and dips in the roads carefully lest I continue to scrape around there.
maxx4me:
Like nippononly pointed out (which I agree with 100%), the Vibe's look differs greatly from the Trix's look. To me the Trix's look is more aggressive while the Vibe has a more truck-ish look (a nicer-looking Aztek, IMO), w/out side skirts or air dams in front, and it has a roof rack. Is it a mini-sUV or is it a car ?? And therein lies one of the greatest contrast in the twin "cars". The Vibe is truly a nice car, although I'll take the Trix over the Vibe any day. Just never been a fan of Pontiac's, and anything remotely close to the Aztec look turns me off. Even Bob Lutz cannot stand the Aztec/Avalunch looks and they may be canned shortly.
Even the Edsel is nicer looking than the Aztek...
The side skirts. Down: they decrease the angle of approach; they are bolt-on, so more parts - more money; they can scratch the body if moved; front spoiler can be easily cracked while parking; they make car look as if it has lower and longer hood. Up: some people think that they look cool; they increase downforce (any numbers? what about front/rear downforce distribution?).
Now, why longer hood is bad? Because the car has pronounced side flares over the rear wheel wells looking like "S" put horisontally. This element is now common for most Toyota cars and they think it looks cool. Some cars look better with it (Celica), some just ok (Gen5 Camry), some just plain ugly (second-generation Previa). It makes this heavy-butt effect, not is what exactly needed for a front wheel drive car. Add spoiler and skirts to this flying "S", and car looks awfully disproportioned from the front quarter. Again, how big can be downforce on 80mph (normal speed for California highways) or even 60mph (East Coast)? So, this element is purely styling. At least this plastic stuff can be taken off.
The "crome" dashboard accents. What are they for? Down: they glare, they contrast with instruments and dashboard (high contrast is bad for eyes), and they fake. Up: they look cool. Shiny thingy, 2yr olds like this stuff.
The fake aluminum. Down: high-contrast; it gives firm look to the dashboard instead of soft look (it is another question, that looking soft but really firm plastics is another kind of fake) and the biggest one: it scratches. I have not seen one plastic item with metallic paint, which could not be scratched. And it scratches easily, so it will not look like real aluminum pretty fast, especially on the door handles (it does not look real even now). Up: looks cool. Another shiny thingy for small boys and girls.
The optitron instruments. Down: sometimes illegible; high-contrast; extra complexity and price; Up: looks cool.
I think, too much artificial coolness for one car. Don't take me wrong, restyled Passat is no better. No, actually it is: it has good and nice to touch interior materials.
Speaking about Gen4 Camry. Stylistically it is Alfa-164 rip off with Japanese quality. I can live with that. And it does not have even one exterior or interior element which looks like non-functional baby toy. Camry is a family workhorse and cannot be beaten. You may call Gen4 bland, I call it clean. It will look nice in 10 years, as well as VW Golf.
Matrix is very well engineered, cudos to its creators. But when the marketing department got involved in R&D, it spoils the things.
Behind the front seats is where the Matrix really shines.
1) The chrome gauge rings, as discussed earlier, can be painted a flat gray or black. They can be easily pried off to be painted.
2) The faux aluminum can be replaced by faux carbon fiber, which probably scratches less and reduces the contrast.
Also, aren't the opitron gauges less pricey? Those lights never burn out, do they?
One other thing, concerning the lower spoilers and side skirts: I did some research, and there are many 3M-authorized places that can install the anti-chipping tape, reducing any scratches...
First off, that's a LOTTA miles for an '03. Second, this car should NOT be worth anything over $14K, imo. But, I am not the expert. You may want to ask a couple dealers in the "Real World Trade-In" forum on the Smart Buyers site here at Edmunds. They can tell you categorically what to expect to pay.
BTW, NADA pegged this XRS (assuming w/out sunroof ) at $15K retail. But I'd not believe that. As a point of reference: I got my
XR (auto) loaded
9900 miles
Sport package, sport plus, Premium 3-in-1 w/6-spkrs, etc..
Price = $14,9.
Good luck.
Now, anyone in the mood for the bets? Edmunds discussions live pretty long life, I often read old ones and it is interesting to see how things really happened. So, I just want to throw in couple of ideas which I think are most likely to be introduced on next year Matrix. Maybe someone wants to argue or to add something?
First, the engine. Focus has 2.0 (and it is probably the biggest point in favor of Focus instead of Matrix). Protege5 has 2.0 and upcoming Mazda3 will have 2.3 as an option (the same as the base engine on Mazda6). Golf/Jetta has 2.0 as a base and has 1.8T with good low-end grunt and high power on the top. Elantra, Neon, Lancer, Sentra, RSX and Si all have 2.0 engine. Even this funny Suzuki box has it. Neon even has 2.4 as an option. Base Impreza comes with 2.5. So, the point is: Toyota just have to put bigger engine into Matrix just to play along. This is why I am betting that for 2005 Toyota will add 2.0 (at least, but I think it will be enough) as an option, or will use it instead of base 130-hp 1.8. I was hoping they would do it for 2004, but... did not work out. I will wait
Another thing is AWD. Currently Matrix is the only Toyota car which has AWD (new Sienna? whatever, not interested), so it is reasonable to suppose that if Toyota will decide to ante up the stakes, it will be Matrix AWD with manual gearbox and bigger engine. I think that Toyota can live pretty good without better AWD car, but if they put engine and transmission from good old Celica All-Track into the Matrix, it would be really swell, and we would receive a decent WRX rival (STi is in a totally different league).
Independent rear suspension. New Golf will have one, and afaik Protege5 already has one (not sure). Matrix has one on AWD version. So, Toyota will need to spice things up, and I am pretty sure that for the next model year we well see independent suspension on FWD Matrix as well, maybe not on the base one, but definetely on XRS.
So, my bet for 2005: bigger engine, independent rear suspension on fwd, awd with bigger engine and the stick. Hope they get rid of fake aluminum as well
1) AWD comes with bigger motor and manual tranny as standard equipment by 2005
2) Base Matrix remains with the 1.8L Corolla engine, but upped in hp a tad (maybe 10% more hp and torque)
3) XR gets the bigger motor on the AWD trim as an option. Base 1.8L engine remains standard.
4) XRS trim gets upped low-end torque with a bigger motor, maybe the AWD engine or a different one, as standard equipment, with manual tranny. XRS w/auto tranny is dropped.
5) Faux aluminum gets turned down a notch, but still present.
6) Optitron gauge gets a white backdrop like the one on the Corolla LE.
These are my predictions. Most to start showing up by MY '05 (mid '04 timeframe), that will be in line with the 3-yr turn around tweaks that Toyota does.
For me tho', I don't much care what Toyota does with the Trix. I am content enough with my '03. Same situation with my purchase of the then new release '01 Sequoia in Dec/2000. I like it for whatit is TODAY, not what it could be tomorrow.
BUT, my money is on the '06 LS. Now, that is one re-design I cannot wait to see and drive off the lot ....
The history of celica will tell the whole story of what Toyota thinks of large-engine power: early 80s celicas had 2.4s, late 80s had 2.0s. In the 90s they had a 1.8 and a 2.2, now with the current gen they have only the 1.8. They are getting smaller, not bigger, and that is in their sport coupe!
So, forget engine size. They are very into fuel economy on the smaller cars. The only part of the above I think they may change is they could probably shoehorn in the RAV engine under the hood for the AWD Matrix, since it has been universally criticized by the press as being slow. That would be a 2.0 with 148 hp. In RAV it comes with both auto and manual (although just TRY to find a manual in AWD!), so I suppose they could do the same in the Matrix without a LOT of trouble.
The indy rear suspension on the AWD is necessitated by the AWD hardware taking up extra space. I don't think they will offer it on the FWD models because it costs more and this is at its heart an economy car.
As to interior trim, yes, that could change easily - they will probably "freshen" lots of visuals inside and out with the '06 update.
As to the XRS powertrain, I don't know why they don't just drop the auto on that right now - torque and power below the 6000 rpm crossover is just too low. In fact, rumors always seem to circulate that they are doing just that. But if they were to put in a new high-power engine, where would it come from? I doubt it would be a 6-cyl, which would make it nose-heavy anyway, and would require engineering mods to fit under the hood, I will bet. If they use a 4-cyl, well, what do they have? Their highest power 4-cyl is the Camry engine at 157 hp, and that is a 2.4 that may be hard to fit under Matrix's hood also. Even if they could, that is still a power drop from the current one, even with its limitations. I guess it might be OK if they could tweak the intake and exhaust to get another 15 hp or so from it, and you would then have the torque of the 2.4 as well.
I don't know what they are planning for the next celica GTS (due out '05) but I would like to see them tweak the engine to cross over a little lower (5000 rpm maybe?) and have 20 more hp - that would be cool to have in the Matrix for the XRS.
And BTW, the XRS above for $15,5? How do you do 51K miles in one year? That seems way overpriced. If it has the sunroof, that means it only has the 16" rims too.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
They _were_ getting smaller. Now big is back.
> So, forget engine size. They are very into fuel economy on the smaller cars.
This is laughable. My 3.0 Camry is 22/27, and 1.8 XRS is only 22/29? You call this a fuel economy? How about 30/35 for the ZX3/ZX5, or 31/36 for Protege5? They both have 2 liter engines. I don't even speak about Honda. The point is, that bigger engine will _not_ be a perfomance engine, it will be _economy_ engine. The Matrix would have 2.0 in a base version, and 1.8 high-rev Yamaha engine for XRS. Look at VW to see what I am talking about. 2.0 will have more torque, but less fun on the top, and 1.8 will deliver that screaming fun which young crowd likes. Adding 2-liter engine for a base model will add needed torque, while keeping Matrix in 3x-mpg zone. Ford and Honda did wise: Ford has three engines for the Escort/Focus family: 2.0/110hp (8 valves but enough power for small family car), 2.0/130hp (ZX3/ZX5), and 2.0/170hp (SVT). This covers pretty much everything, and keeps spending low. Honda did even better with its 2.0 engine (160, 200 and 225 hp). Imho 2-liter is the optimum size.
> The indy rear suspension on the AWD is necessitated by the AWD hardware taking up extra space. I don't think they will offer it on the FWD models because it costs more and this is at its heart an economy car.
Independent suspension is better for handling, but again who needs that, the plastic skirts are so much cooler. And XRS is not an economy car (if you mean price). Almost 20K for a shoebox? My Camry is cheaper, and it has V6 and independent rear suspension. Anyway, even semi-independent setup may be good, no wonder that Golf used torsion beam up to Golf4.
> But if they were to put in a new high-power engine, where would it come from? I doubt it would be a 6-cyl, which would make it nose-heavy anyway, and would require engineering mods to fit under the hood, I will bet. If they use a 4-cyl, well, what do they have? Their highest power 4-cyl is the Camry engine at 157 hp, and that is a 2.4 that may be hard to fit under Matrix's hood also.
Hope no one will decide to squeeze fat V6 into Matrix. Damn VW with its "lets put V8 into A4" ideas. Big engine does not mean performance. XRS engine will remain small-displacement, high rev screamer, may be with turbo or supercharger. Bigger engine should go on base version.
> I don't know what they are planning for the next celica GTS (due out '05) but I would like to see them tweak the engine to cross over a little lower (5000 rpm maybe?) and have 20 more hp - that would be cool to have in the Matrix for the XRS.
It is very hard to get more than 100hp from one liter, look at Honda. So I doubt that Yamaha engine will get more power unless they increase the displacement. And this will be pretty hard too, because Yamaha engine is actually built using base 1.8 engine block, but with bigger bore. I do not think there is a lot of block to increase the bore. They can try to increase the stroke, though. Can run into the problems with this as well with the compression ratio this high.
As to it being an economy car, you have to remember that the basic structure of the car (things like, hmmm, SUSPENSION, for instance) is scaled to the base price of the base model, which is going out the door right now for less than $15K...if that is not an economy car, then I guess Hyundais are pretty expensive.
As for the driving experience of that "semi-independent" rear, drive one before you slap it in the face...you may find that the ride is similar to your much-vaunted fully independent rear in the Camry - this is not a car with a lot of axle hop like live axle rears of old.
Of all the things Toyota is probably planning for the corolla/matrix/celica family, I would say it is most likely that they will offer the new S/C package TRD has come up with as a factory option, and as the "energy boost" for future XRS models.
But who knows? By this timne next year we should probably know what powertrains they plan to put in the next-gen celica, and that will probably be mimicked by the next matrix XRS, since it is cheaper for Toyota than having separate powertrains for each model.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
If I remember right, new Toyota's come with a 3 year/36K new car warranty and 5 year/60K power train warranty. Since the warranties expire on which ever comes first, you'll shortly be out of warranty all round.
Toyota extended warranties typically have to be put in place before the 3/36K runs out. So this might be hard.
3rd party warranties are often a hassle for both the consumer and the service shop.
Thanks for the info. I checked and the warranty IS from a third party. Is this bad?
Its a reputable company offering it, and it starts from the date of purchase. Is this bad?
I can get a new 2003 XRS/Vibe GT with these Edmunds numbers -
MSRP $21,145
Invoice $19,755
TMV $19,904.
After $2000 GM rebate - you're at $18,000 MAX.
If you're still thinking $14000 is still $4000 less. Read on...
A 2003 XRS Trix has this pricing:
MSRP $20,280
Invoice $18,262
TMV $18,037
A car lease is usually base on 15,000 miles per yr, so low ball place hides the 12k/yr in the find print (pun intended)
I think Toyota is advertising lease rates specials now at $159 per month + $1800 down = $7524.
So Toyota is valuing their 3 yr old car with 45,000 miles at about $12,500.
Other facts:
Cars depreciate real fast the closer they are to 100k miles.
The XRS is not a fast mover - about 10% of anticipated sales.
Questions to ask:
Are the tires new?
Are the brakes new? A good way to confirm highways miles or not - the brakes will have a little wear if they are original...
What other items need to be considered at 60,000 miles?
Good Luck in your decision.
Kinda funny how the Vibe $ after rebate is similar to the Trix TMV...