FINALLY!! Scion tC Preview(s)

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: RagingBITCH

Originally posted by: MAME

Originally posted by: andylawcc
MAME:

Civic EX 1.7L obviously would beat the tC's 2.4L handdowns in gas mileage. but I will see you on the tracks
you can't have 160hp AND 160 torque AND 30 above MPG all together. you would be asking for too much.

is 25 too unreasonable?

That was my point I made either in this or a different tC thread. It weighs almost 200lbs less than my 04 Accord, which is rated at 24/34, yet consistently gets anywhere from 25-27 in the city, and my accord has the same size engine and is rated the same power wise.

The same engine in the tC is in the Camry LE manual where it is rated at 24 mpg / 33 mpg, yet only 22/30 on the tC. Something fishy is going on.

 

[KokomoGST]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile

Originally posted by: Passions
NFS4, I'm debating between an IS300 and tC. I fear the tC will become this in a few years....one of the reasons I'm leaning towards IS300.


http://www.dtnrox.com/mainpage_images/tC_rice.jpg

Exactly. Given the target market, I think this is a given. The IS300...just not worth it IMO. The interior and exterior doesn't scream "young professional" to me like a BMW 3-series. The ride quality is harsh on highways, wind and tire noise is high, engine power and gas mileage are weak compared to BMW's I6, and the manual is arguably the worst I've driven.

Well, personally I've always leaned toward the IS over the 3 series. Yes, I have driven both at the limit and comparing a 330i with an IS, the Lexus does lose out in terms of power... but I was happy with the ride quality and road noise. Besides, the aftermarket on the Lexus is bigger by far... that Toyota I6 is easily turbocharged as it is very similar to the Supra MkIV's 2JZ-GTE.

I've always liked Toyota build quality... not to mention it'll be more reliable than the Bimmer. And yes, the BMW screams yuppie.

 

[KokomoGST]

Definitely have to agree that this is prolly going to do very well with the "rice" crowd just as the Honda Civic is still very strong.

Then again, it's also going to be a great "first car" for lots of young people. It's not going to be a performance platform of any sort though. Those wheels look TINY, and the wheel arches look way too small.

 

[NutBucket]

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: RagingBITCH

Originally posted by: MAME

Originally posted by: andylawcc
MAME:

Civic EX 1.7L obviously would beat the tC's 2.4L handdowns in gas mileage. but I will see you on the tracks
you can't have 160hp AND 160 torque AND 30 above MPG all together. you would be asking for too much.

is 25 too unreasonable?

That was my point I made either in this or a different tC thread. It weighs almost 200lbs less than my 04 Accord, which is rated at 24/34, yet consistently gets anywhere from 25-27 in the city, and my accord has the same size engine and is rated the same power wise.

The same engine in the tC is in the Camry LE manual where it is rated at 24 mpg / 33 mpg, yet only 22/30 on the tC. Something fishy is going on.

More like they re-geared the tranny for better accleration.

 

[Jzero]

Originally posted by: NFS4
The same engine in the tC is in the Camry LE manual where it is rated at 24 mpg / 33 mpg, yet only 22/30 on the tC. Something fishy is going on.

There are so many factors that affect fuel economy, though.
Gear ratios and aerodynamics to name 2...

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: NutBucket

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: RagingBITCH

Originally posted by: MAME

Originally posted by: andylawcc
MAME:

Civic EX 1.7L obviously would beat the tC's 2.4L handdowns in gas mileage. but I will see you on the tracks
you can't have 160hp AND 160 torque AND 30 above MPG all together. you would be asking for too much.

is 25 too unreasonable?

That was my point I made either in this or a different tC thread. It weighs almost 200lbs less than my 04 Accord, which is rated at 24/34, yet consistently gets anywhere from 25-27 in the city, and my accord has the same size engine and is rated the same power wise.

The same engine in the tC is in the Camry LE manual where it is rated at 24 mpg / 33 mpg, yet only 22/30 on the tC. Something fishy is going on.

More like they re-geared the tranny for better accleration.

The CC article mentioned that acceleration was rather soft, so I dunno.

 

[NutBucket]

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: NutBucket
More like they re-geared the tranny for better accleration.

The CC article mentioned that acceleration was rather soft, so I dunno.

I'm too lazy to look up specs but if the 2.4 is anything like the previous gen camry engines (tho it does say its all new in the '02 Camry) it just doesn't feel like its all that powerful.

 

[0roo0roo]

double wishbone suspension stupid honda had it in their last gen civic.. stupid honda ditched it

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: NutBucket

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: NutBucket
More like they re-geared the tranny for better accleration.

The CC article mentioned that acceleration was rather soft, so I dunno.

I'm too lazy to look up specs but if the 2.4 is anything like the previous gen camry engines (tho it does say its all new in the '02 Camry) it just doesn't feel like its all that powerful.

Toyota 2.4 (in the tC)
160 hp @ 6,000 RPM
163 lb-ft @ 4,200 RPM

Honda 2.4 (in the Accord)
160HP @ 5,500 RPM
161 lb-ft @ 4,500 RPM

Mazda 2.3 (in the 3s)
160 HP @ 6,500 RPM
150 lb-ft @ 4,500 RPM

 

[RagingBITCH]

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: NutBucket

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: NutBucket
More like they re-geared the tranny for better accleration.

The CC article mentioned that acceleration was rather soft, so I dunno.

I'm too lazy to look up specs but if the 2.4 is anything like the previous gen camry engines (tho it does say its all new in the '02 Camry) it just doesn't feel like its all that powerful.

Toyota 2.4 (in the tC)
160 hp @ 6,000 RPM
163 lb-ft @ 4,200 RPM

Honda 2.4 (in the Accord)
160HP @ 5,500 RPM
161 lb-ft @ 4,500 RPM

Mazda 2.3 (in the 3s)
160 HP @ 6,500 RPM
150 lb-ft @ 4,500 RPM

Just a quick note - when I test drove an 04 Camry - the 2.4 felt weak. It was noisy, felt really sluggish, and had no real pickup compared to the Accord. I had to mash it down to get decent acceleration out of it. (Then again I don't know if it has a 5 speed auto like it's competitors)

 

[GTaudiophile]

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: NutBucket

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: NutBucket
More like they re-geared the tranny for better accleration.

The CC article mentioned that acceleration was rather soft, so I dunno.

I'm too lazy to look up specs but if the 2.4 is anything like the previous gen camry engines (tho it does say its all new in the '02 Camry) it just doesn't feel like its all that powerful.

Toyota 2.4 (in the tC)
160 hp @ 6,000 RPM
163 lb-ft @ 4,200 RPM

Honda 2.4 (in the Accord)
160HP @ 5,500 RPM
161 lb-ft @ 4,500 RPM

Mazda 2.3 (in the 3s)
160 HP @ 6,500 RPM
150 lb-ft @ 4,500 RPM

Let's also compare curb weight:

Toyota Camry LE (AT): 3,142 lbs.
Scion tC (AT): 2,970 lbs.
Honda Accord LX (AT): 3,164 lbs.
Mazda3 4-Door S (AT): 2,807 lbs.

So, the Mazda is the lightest of them all, but I'd give the performance edge to the Scion.

 

[NutBucket]

Ionno about this car, but Toyota 4 bangers just seem soft. The only experience I've had that proved otherwise was riding with OS in his now defunct Prizm.

 

[andylawcc]

Originally posted by: Jzero

Originally posted by: NFS4
The same engine in the tC is in the Camry LE manual where it is rated at 24 mpg / 33 mpg, yet only 22/30 on the tC. Something fishy is going on.

There are so many factors that affect fuel economy, though.
Gear ratios and aerodynamics to name 2...

could the ECU be a factor? Toyota's engineers could have programmed the ECU to spit more fuel during hard acceleration, compare to the Camry's more subtle one.

 

[andylawcc]

Originally posted by: NutBucket
Ionno about this car, but Toyota 4 bangers just seem soft. The only experience I've had that proved otherwise was riding with OS in his now defunct Prizm.

what? his ex-Prizm has the weaker 1.8 1ZZFE? It didn't feel weak to you at all?

 

[NutBucket]

Originally posted by: andylawcc

Originally posted by: NutBucket
Ionno about this car, but Toyota 4 bangers just seem soft. The only experience I've had that proved otherwise was riding with OS in his now defunct Prizm.

what? his ex-Prizm has the weaker 1.8 1ZZFE? It didn't feel weak to you at all?

His Prism pulled a hell of a lot harder then my parents camry (and his was an auto whereas the camry is a stick).

 

[andylawcc]

Originally posted by: NutBucket

Originally posted by: andylawcc

Originally posted by: NutBucket
Ionno about this car, but Toyota 4 bangers just seem soft. The only experience I've had that proved otherwise was riding with OS in his now defunct Prizm.

what? his ex-Prizm has the weaker 1.8 1ZZFE? It didn't feel weak to you at all?

His Prism pulled a hell of a lot harder then my parents camry (and his was an auto whereas the camry is a stick).

really? whao. I test drove a stick celica GT, and it felt really really weak. My friend has a Matrix auto, and that also felt really really weak.

 

[miri]

Is that the base model with the 7 second 0-60 time? If so that is in the 1999-2000 Honda Civic Si territory. And the 1999-2000 Civic Si cost more than $15995 and even more when you factor in inflation.

 

[NutBucket]

Originally posted by: miri
Is that the base model with the 7 second 0-60 time? If so that is in the 1999-2000 Honda Civic Si territory. And the 1999-2000 Civic Si cost more than $15995 and even more when you factor in inflation.

IIRC that's an "estimated" time. I doubt it'll be that quick given its curb weight.

 

[Shortcut]

Any insights to noise level in the tC's cabin? For $17k, some corners must've been cut...

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: Shortcut
Any insights to noise level in the tC's cabin? For $17k, some corners must've been cut...

TCC

Indeed, one of the things Scion engineers borrowed from Lexus was the use of sound controlling foams, fabrics, and metals. The coupe is uncannily quiet when compared to anything else in its size and price segment.

 

[miri]

Any insights to noise level in the tC's cabin? For $17k, some corners must've been cut...

Just because the price is $16,465 including delivery, processing and handling fee does not mean they cut corners. Maybe they just want market share in this category.

Also the powertrain warranty is 5 years 60,000 miles.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: NutBucket


More like they re-geared the tranny for better accleration.

The CC article mentioned that acceleration was rather soft, so I dunno.

soft compared to a 4 banger camry? probably not.

on another note, the SE-R with the same engine as the altima also makes worse highway milage, but only by 1 mpg.

 

[CTrain]

There is no freakin, and I mean no freakin way that car can go 0-60 in 7secs given its HP/torque and weight.
Just for comparison, the Mazda 3 weight less, has about the same HP/torque and does 0-60 around 7.4-7.5.
If it actually does 0-60 in 7 secs, then Toyota have just conjured up some special voodoo sh!t that no one knows about.......and I'll be in line to buy one.

 

[oslama]

Originally posted by: isekii

Originally posted by: Fingolfin269

Originally posted by: isekii

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: isekii
where are the scion tc's built ?
i hope it's straight out of japan.

then you'll know the build quality is definitely there.

yup, Japan.

that's awesome
it should be built very solid.

Are you saying that foreign branded cars built domestically suck?

No i'm saying the cars built in japan are better.

True, my 97 geo prizm (toyota engine, us made) is falling apart while my dad's 95 corrolla (japan made) is going on strong.

The japanese just have better Quality Control.

 

[NutBucket]

Originally posted by: CTrain
There is no freakin, and I mean no freakin way that car can go 0-60 in 7secs given its HP/torque and weight.
Just for comparison, the Mazda 3 weight less, has about the same HP/torque and does 0-60 around 7.4-7.5.
If it actually does 0-60 in 7 secs, then Toyota have just conjured up some special voodoo sh!t that no one knows about.......and I'll be in line to buy one.

I agree with this man's statement completely. Either its voodoo or that tranny has some very closely spaced gears made to optimize 0-60 times and nothing else.