 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Toyota / Toyota Cars / May 2006corolla highway rpm
Hello all, first time poster... I'm considering buying a 2006 Corolla 5-speed, and I'm wondering if anyone can tell me what kind of RPM's these cars turn on the highway? (I'm also looking at a civic, and it turns around 3000 rpm on the highway... way too many RPM's for my liking; I'm hoping the corolla has a better overdrive than the civic?) Thanks in advance! >Hello all, first time poster... I'm considering buying a 2006 Corolla >5-speed, and I'm wondering if anyone can tell me what kind of RPM's [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >Thanks in advance! My son bought a 2006 Corolla S with 5 speed. As I remember it on our trip from Philadelphia (where we bought his) back to Florida....it was around 2K at 65. A sweet ride....  SignatureScott in Florida That was because, if you look at a globe of the earth, it was ALL downhill from Pennsylvania to Florida ;) mike >>Hello all, first time poster... I'm considering buying a 2006 Corolla >>5-speed, and I'm wondering if anyone can tell me what kind of RPM's [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > A sweet ride.... > That was because, if you look at a globe of the earth, it was ALL downhill from Pennsylvania to Florida ;) > > mike LOL... hahaha >>>Hello all, first time poster... I'm considering buying a 2006 Corolla >>>5-speed, and I'm wondering if anyone can tell me what kind of RPM's [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >>> >>>Thanks in advance! I have to ask. Excluding the gas mileage, performance, dependability and comfort because you must already know what they are why does it even matter to you! If the answer was 2,900 or 3,100 for example what RPM is better! Dan > I have to ask. > > Excluding the gas mileage, performance, dependability and comfort > because you must already know what they are why does it even matter to you! > > If the answer was 2,900 or 3,100 for example what RPM is better! It doesn't matter at this point since I've already put a deposit down on a Civic, but... I was interested in the 5-speed Corolla's highway RPM's because if it were significantly lower than that of the Civic, then I would've seriously considered the Corolla over the Civic. I'd already explained my reasoning in an earlier post - that is, lower highway RPM translates roughly into less engine wear. I know it isn't quite as simple as that, but I still would prefer a highway cruise closer to 2000 rpm than 3000. Since this apparently cannot be achived with either vehicle's manual transmission, this factor did not play into my final decision. (although I'm still confused about one thing... if 3000 rpm is more ideal for the 1.8L, then why does the automatic's overdrive keep it down close to 2000? Is the automatic technically worse for the engine in this respect? Overdrive is meant for cruising, not as a passing gear... I'd still say the manual's overdrive should keep the rpm's down closer to that of the automatic) > I'd > already explained my reasoning in an earlier post - that is, lower > highway RPM translates roughly into less engine wear. I know it isn't > quite as simple as that, but I still would prefer a highway cruise > closer to 2000 rpm than 3000. Engine wear is rarely an issue with Toyota and Honda engines, provided regular maintenance is kept up. They are known for lasting much longer with much less problems than North American engines (4-cylinders in particular). You forgot to say in my opinion. I have seen many Toyota and Hondas in courier cars that were toast at less the 150K. I have an American car with a 2L 4, that has nearly 300K on the clock, that runs just fine. mike hunt >> I'd >> already explained my reasoning in an earlier post - that is, lower [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > much less problems than North American engines (4-cylinders in > particular). > I have seen many Toyota and Hondas in courier cars that were > toast at less the 150K. I have an American car with a 2L 4, that > has nearly 300K on the clock, that runs just fine. My neighbor has a Mazda Protege with 340,000 miles,. and it doesn't smoke or stink. It's also in better shape than my crappy 1.9L Escort of the same age but with 90% fewer miles. >> I have seen many Toyota and Hondas in courier cars that were >> toast at less the 150K. I have an American car with a 2L 4, that [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >smoke or stink. It's also in better shape than my crappy 1.9L Escort >of the same age but with 90% fewer miles. I got an Escort to almost 180,000 miles... There isn't enough time or space to tell all the failures in that POS... It caught on fire the day I donated it to the Salvation Army... Luckily I was able to put out the fire... SignatureScott in Florida > >My neighbor has a Mazda Protege with 340,000 miles,. and it doesn't > >smoke or stink. It's also in better shape than my crappy 1.9L Escort [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > There isn't enough time or space to tell all the failures in that > POS... I haven't had many mechanical breakdowns, mostly buzzes and rattles and lots of plastic parts breaking muchy sooner than they do on Chevys and Toyotas. > It caught on fire the day I donated it to the Salvation Army... > > Luckily I was able to put out the fire... When I was a kid, a neighbor's brand-new, just delivered Ford pickup had a big engine compartment fire that totaled the vehicle, and a few days later he received a recall notice telling him to get a plastic clip installed to hold a fuel hose away from the exhaust manifold. :( >> >My neighbor has a Mazda Protege with 340,000 miles,. and it doesn't >> >smoke or stink. It's also in better shape than my crappy 1.9L Escort [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >lots of plastic parts breaking muchy sooner than they do on Chevys and >Toyotas. The timing belt on mine broke at 55,000.....just inside the warranty with a hundred dollar deductible. It broke again just before 120,000 I learned and changed it 55 thousand later... Ford uses computers to design parts to last a certain length of time... In my experience, Toyota designs for long life. That is why I drive Toys now... >> It caught on fire the day I donated it to the Salvation Army... >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >days later he received a recall notice telling him to get a plastic >clip installed to hold a fuel hose away from the exhaust manifold. :( SignatureScott in Florida How did he like his free replacement truck? mike hunt >>> >My neighbor has a Mazda Protege with 340,000 miles,. and it doesn't >>> >smoke or stink. It's also in better shape than my crappy 1.9L Escort [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >>days later he received a recall notice telling him to get a plastic >>clip installed to hold a fuel hose away from the exhaust manifold. :( >>When I was a kid, a neighbor's brand-new, just delivered Ford pickup >>had a big engine compartment fire that totaled the vehicle, and a few >>days later he received a recall notice telling him to get a plastic >>clip installed to hold a fuel hose away from the exhaust manifold. :( > How did he like his free replacement truck? He didn't get one. His insurance paid for repairs, which he said cost almost as much. Guess that was a while ago, before all the shark lawyers. ;) mike hunt >>>When I was a kid, a neighbor's brand-new, just delivered Ford pickup >>>had a big engine compartment fire that totaled the vehicle, and a few [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > He didn't get one. His insurance paid for repairs, which he said cost > almost as much. We all know that not every owner provides the proper preventive maintenance required to keep their vehicles running for along time. ;) mike hunt >>> I have seen many Toyota and Hondas in courier cars that were >>> toast at less the 150K. I have an American car with a 2L 4, that [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Luckily I was able to put out the fire... > We all know that not every owner provides the proper preventive maintenance > required to keep their vehicles running for along time. ;) Defenders of losing auto makers always say that. You mean like Toyota still losing to GM and Ford in the annual sales figures? ;) mike hunt >> We all know that not every owner provides the proper preventive >> maintenance >> required to keep their vehicles running for along time. ;) > > Defenders of losing auto makers always say that. > We all know that not every owner provides the proper preventive > maintenance required to keep their vehicles running for along time. ;) [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > You mean like Toyota still losing to GM and Ford in the annual sales > figures? ;) No, I mean like losing to Toyota in the annual profit figures. When company that is in fourth place in sales in the US in 2005 is making huge profits on over priced vehicles, that are no better than others on the market, that says a lot about the customers being foolish enough to pay those high prices. ;) mike hunt >> We all know that not every owner provides the proper preventive >> maintenance required to keep their vehicles running for along time. ;) [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > No, I mean like losing to Toyota in the annual profit figures. > We all know that not every owner provides the proper preventive > maintenance required to keep their vehicles running for along time. ;) [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > huge profits on over priced vehicles, that are no better than others on the > market, You lose credibility when you claim that GMs and Fords are, overall, just as good as Toyotas (it's not 1968 any more) or that Toyota's profits are simply due to high prices. I haven't checked car prices recently, but if Toyotas actually do cost more, how can they be sold unless they're better? Because a long time ago, when they were worse, they could be sold only on low price. > that says a lot about the customers being foolish enough to pay > those high prices. ;) That was a weak retort, Mike, similar to the product lineups of GM and Ford. I doubt that those companies were given junk credit ratings for producing the best vehicles and being run the most efficiently. I realize that you have a lot of pride in the American auto industry, but unfortunately it lacks enough leadership. Except in the case of their leadership in the sales race. I'm not stating an opinion, as are you, I am simply looking at the sales figures of comparable vehicles available to the average American buyer, and what they actually chose to buy. The number sold by any manufacture, compared to what is sold by their competitors of the same size and equipment, is the ultimate test of what buyers believe is the best and the prudent place to spend their hard earned money. Apparently the only Toyota vehicle that most buyers believe is the best for their money is the Camry. In EVERY other segment of the market the vehicle offered by Toyota is outsold by a vehicle from some OTHER manufacture. In the majority of cases it is one built by GM or Ford. Toyota does indeed make good stuff, but so does every other manufacture today. You are free to spend your money wherever you wish but apparently most buyers do not agree with you personal opinion, since they continue to buy far more vehicles from GM and Ford. mike hunt >> When company that is in fourth place in sales in the US in 2005 is making >> huge profits on over priced vehicles, that are no better than others on [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > realize that you have a lot of pride in the American auto industry, but > unfortunately it lacks enough leadership. > Except in the case of their leadership in the sales race. I'm not stating > an opinion, as are you, I am simply looking at the sales figures of [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > most buyers do not agree with you personal opinion, since they continue to > buy far more vehicles from GM and Ford. Why did you bother replying, especially without actually saying anything, like an empty-headed sales person rather than an engineer? Sorry if you were confused, it was not my intent to confuse anybody with facts. ;) mike hunt >> Except in the case of their leadership in the sales race. I'm not >> stating [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > Why did you bother replying, especially without actually saying > anything, like an empty-headed sales person rather than an engineer? "larry moe 'n curly" <larrymoencurly@my-deja.com> wrote in message > news:1148767267.031625.301350@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com... > Except in the case of their leadership in the sales race. I'm not > stating an opinion, as are you, I am simply looking at the sales > figures of comparable vehicles available to the average American > buyer, and what they actually chose to buy. > Toyota does indeed make good stuff, but so does every other manufacture > today. You are free to spend your money wherever you wish but apparently [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Why did you bother replying, especially without actually saying > > anything, like an empty-headed sales person rather than an engineer? > Sorry if you were confused, it was not my intent to confuse anybody with > facts. ;) I guess the superiority of GM and Ford over Honda and Toyota are also reflected by their junk bond credit ratings, higher long term defect rates, and extra hours needed to build each vehicle. You must believe that if that is what you posted. Me thinks more buyers chose GM and Ford vehicles over those sold by Toyota and Honda because they do not believe what you believe. I'll bet they buy more of the vehicles sold by GM and Ford, over those sold by Toyota and Honda because they believe GM and Ford vehicles are the better vehicles on which to spend their hard earned money. Same reason more buyers buy the Camry than the Accord, or what ever vehicle they chose to buy as well. mike hunt > "larry moe 'n curly" <larrymoencurly@my-deja.com> wrote in message >> news:1148767267.031625.301350@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com... [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > reflected by their junk bond credit ratings, higher long term defect > rates, and extra hours needed to build each vehicle. > Except in the case of their leadership in the sales race. I'm not stating > an opinion, as are you, I am simply looking at the sales figures of [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > mike hunt Being #1 in sales, according to their profit picture, isn't worth much. Get your head out, willya? In 1970, GM, Ford and Chrysler OWNED the domestic US market. Since then, their share has dropped to about a combined 50 to 60% AND IT CONTINUES TO SLIDE. The Japanese went from 0 to 33% or so and the Koreans are now ramping up. About half the country is now buying cars no one had ever heard of in 1970. This is bad for the domestics. If the company I worked for lost that much market share to a new arrival, the exec floor would be littered with heads. The only reason GM and Ford still exist is that it takes a long time to piss away market dominance. How many people still drive GMs or Fords because their Dad drove GMs or Fords? That's what remains to GM and Ford. They only get a chance to lose a customer every few years, when that person buys a new car. Eventually, in every family, some renegade black sheep brother buys a Toyota or Honda and, son-of-a-gun, it turn out to be a great car. After a while, the rest of the family notices this and starts to look at other options and, within the next 10 years or so, a whole lot of potential GM and Ford sales have gone bye-bye. > >> When company that is in fourth place in sales in the US in 2005 is making > >> huge profits on over priced vehicles, that are no better than others on [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > realize that you have a lot of pride in the American auto industry, but > > unfortunately it lacks enough leadership. Really? There are those in this NG that will tell you the Protege and the Escort are the same car LOL mike hunt >> I have seen many Toyota and Hondas in courier cars that were >> toast at less the 150K. I have an American car with a 2L 4, that [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > smoke or stink. It's also in better shape than my crappy 1.9L Escort > of the same age but with 90% fewer miles. > > My neighbor has a Mazda Protege with 340,000 miles,. and it doesn't > > smoke or stink. It's also in better shape than my crappy 1.9L Escort > > of the same age but with 90% fewer miles. > > > Really? There are those in this NG that will tell you the Protege and the > Escort are the same car LOL Then there are those who received an admission of error about the matter, but because they lack class they still act like petty heels with no manhood. > > I have to ask. > > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > It doesn't matter at this point since I've already put a deposit down > on a Civic, but... Then you really don't need the answer. Civics are very nice cars. Make that great cars. Yep, I've got Toyotas but many of my friends have Honda Civics and Accords and they just love 'em. Enjoy your Civic. Breathe in that new-car smell and don't think about what might have been. There are other differences between the cars and, for you, they're all moot now. What was it that Sheryl Crow sang? Something like, happiness isn't having what you want, it's wanting what you have? Go with that. The sales number show which one buyer believe is the better of the two, for their money. The Civic outsells the Corolla and has for a number of years mike hunt >> > I have to ask. >> > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > *** Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com *** > The sales number show which one buyer believe is the better of the two, for > their money. The Civic outsells the Corolla and has for a number of years > > mike hunt And exactly where did I suggest that one was better than the other? Or that this guy should be less than happy with his choice? Or that he should fret for the rest of his life that the Corolla is somehow better? Answer, nowhere. Civics are very nice cars. He should enjoy it. > >> > I have to ask. > >> > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > > > *** Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com *** Who says all posts are directed to you? There is a name for people who believe things like that ;) mike hunt >> The sales number show which one buyer believe is the better of the two, > for [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] > > *** Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com *** > Who says all posts are directed to you? There is a name for people who > believe things like that ;) > > mike hunt All posts on usenet are directed at everyone, I, being part of everybody, am therefore directed towards thusly lol (getting coat already). > Who says all posts are directed to you? There is a name for people who > believe things like that ;) > mike hunt You attempted to twist my post into a straw man argument. I responded appropriately. > >> The sales number show which one buyer believe is the better of the two, > > for [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] > > > > *** Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com *** I guess now you will tell us how to build a man of straw LOL mike hunt >> Who says all posts are directed to you? There is a name for people who >> believe things like that ;) >> mike hunt > > You attempted to twist my post into a straw man argument. I responded > appropriately. > I guess now you will tell us how to build a man of straw LOL > > mike hunt Are you that ignorant or just continuing to be obnoxious? > >> Who says all posts are directed to you? There is a name for people who > >> believe things like that ;) > >> mike hunt > > > > You attempted to twist my post into a straw man argument. I responded > > appropriately. >> I guess now you will tell us how to build a man of straw LOL >> >> mike hunt > >Are you that ignorant or just continuing to be obnoxious? "Mike" is a troll. You didn't know that? I anybody knows about trolls it would be our friend dizzy AKA Stupid, Troll, Moron, Idiot, a.shole, Engineer and pathological liar, he is our resident troll. He often signs his post with his alias 'Troll" mike hunt >>> I guess now you will tell us how to build a man of straw LOL >>> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > "Mike" is a troll. You didn't know that? No really, you attempted to twist my post into a straw man argument. I simply responded appropriately ;) mike hunt >> I guess now you will tell us how to build a man of straw LOL >> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > *** Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com *** >that is, lower > highway RPM translates roughly into less engine wear. I know it isn't > quite as simple as that, Not even close to the truth, but .... > but I still would prefer a highway cruise > closer to 2000 rpm than 3000. Fair enough, your call. > (although I'm still confused about one thing... if 3000 rpm is more > ideal for the 1.8L, then why does the automatic's overdrive keep it > down close to 2000? Because auto boxes have fewer gears, than their manual counterparts, to attain the same speeds, meaning each one has to be 'longer', therefore to be a smooth progression of gears instead of 4 and a 'plodding along' gear a 5 speed car doesnt have 'overdrive' as such. Automatics usually have 3 and overdrive (modern ones are getting more and tend towards the same rev ranges). So yes, IMO, a longer-drive gearbox can add wear, but it will also reduce wear (averaging out somewhere in between) as the torque converter smooths the driveline shock that a manual car would get from poor clutch use. J > Hello all, first time poster... I'm considering buying a 2006 Corolla > 5-speed, and I'm wondering if anyone can tell me what kind of RPM's [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Thanks in advance! I drove my folks' '04 Corolla on the highway once. This was with a 4-speed automatic, and I think it was at 75mph where the RPMs were a steady 3000. Needless to say, one should achieve lower RPMs at that speed in 5th gear. wow... them are some low RPMs my celica turns at 3000 doing 55 > > Hello all, first time poster... I'm considering buying a 2006 Corolla > > 5-speed, and I'm wondering if anyone can tell me what kind of RPM's [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Needless to say, one should achieve lower RPMs at that speed in 5th gear. > I drove my folks' '04 Corolla on the highway once. This was with a 4-speed > automatic, and I think it was at 75mph where the RPMs were a steady 3000. > > Needless to say, one should achieve lower RPMs at that speed in 5th gear. You guys are far too used to high-torque, large capacity engines. My celica (2ltr turbo) runs 2800rpm at 75, in fact virtually every petrol car i have been in other than monster 3.5 to 4 litre ones have been around 3000rpm. Autos are different generally, my dads 3.5 auto sits at about 2200 at 70mph. 2800 rpm is the optimum fuel efficiency speed for a 2litre-ish 4 stroke internal combustion engine, hence why most manufacturers make highway speeds that level in 5th. This changes with engine size and the new VVTi setups but its still approximately correct as it is linked to the speed of combustion of the fuel in the cylinders. J > You guys are far too used to high-torque, large capacity engines. My > celica (2ltr turbo) runs 2800rpm at 75, in fact virtually every petrol [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > as it is linked to the speed of combustion of the fuel in the > cylinders. I've driven a 3.9L V6 pickup truck for 8 years and 170k miles, and I admit I've really enjoyed it's super low highway cruise rpm... it turns around 2000 rpm in 5th gear at 70mph! This is mainly thanks to the 3.21 axle ratio. But the reason I like this low highway rpm is plain and simple: less engine wear per unit of distance driven. I'm putting said truck into semi-retirement and getting either a Corolla or a Civic to start using as my daily driver, mainly highway... and I much prefer manuals to automatics, but if the automatics are keeping these little 4-bangers down closer to 2000rpm, then I might have to re-consider. 3000rpm vs 2000rpm is a 50% increase in crankshaft revolutions, which scares me a little. my daily driver celica has 235,000 miles on it on the original engine and tranny only on its second clutch. > > You guys are far too used to high-torque, large capacity engines. My > > celica (2ltr turbo) runs 2800rpm at 75, in fact virtually every petrol [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > have to re-consider. 3000rpm vs 2000rpm is a 50% increase in > crankshaft revolutions, which scares me a little. > have to re-consider. 3000rpm vs 2000rpm is a 50% increase in > crankshaft revolutions, which scares me a little. Dont be scared, wear rate is not only a function of number of revolutions - its FAR more complex than that. The engine and transmission has been *designed* to work at that rate, just as the lower rpm engine has - its not the same as taking the same engine and running it at different RPMs. In actual fact to run the same engine slower but output the same power (the power required to maintain highway speed) would require more torque to be passed through the engine and driveline which would increase wear somewhat. J > > have to re-consider. 3000rpm vs 2000rpm is a 50% increase in > > crankshaft revolutions, which scares me a little. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > J Just as a side note - fatigue failure and wear is a function of load and speed, but from what i remember its much more greatly related to load than speed of cycling - so ideally a well balanced high revving engine would last longer than a slow clunker with big torque. >> You guys are far too used to high-torque, large capacity engines. My >> celica (2ltr turbo) runs 2800rpm at 75, in fact virtually every petrol [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > 3.21 axle ratio. But the reason I like this low highway rpm is plain > and simple: less engine wear per unit of distance driven. But the same wear rate on drivetrain components from final drive to the road... > I'm putting said truck into semi-retirement and getting either a > Corolla or a Civic to start using as my daily driver, mainly highway... > and I much prefer manuals to automatics, but if the automatics are > keeping these little 4-bangers down closer to 2000rpm, then I might > have to re-consider. 3000rpm vs 2000rpm is a 50% increase in > crankshaft revolutions, which scares me a little. As Coyoteboy has pointed out, this is a simplistic perspective. If the oil is providing the necessary lubrication you've nothing to worry about. Most wear is caused when the engine (and associated funkiness) is cold, or when the oil is shot - reduce cold starts and ensure you change the oil as recommended and it'll be absolutely fine. Labouring the engine at lower speeds is bad news for longevity... SignatureThe DervMan www.dervman.com >> I drove my folks' '04 Corolla on the highway once. This was with a >> 4-speed [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > about 2200 at 70mph. 2800 rpm is the optimum fuel efficiency speed for > a 2litre-ish 4 stroke internal combustion engine Eh? How do you figure this? > , hence why most > manufacturers make highway speeds that level in 5th. This changes with > engine size and the new VVTi setups but its still approximately correct > as it is linked to the speed of combustion of the fuel in the > cylinders. Hmmm... SignatureThe DervMan www.dervman.com >> Hello all, first time poster... I'm considering buying a 2006 Corolla >> 5-speed, and I'm wondering if anyone can tell me what kind of RPM's [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Needless to say, one should achieve lower RPMs at that speed in 5th gear. Many automatics have taller gearing compared to their (more ratioed) manual counterparts. SignatureThe DervMan www.dervman.com 65 mph = 2,500. > Hello all, first time poster... I'm considering buying a 2006 Corolla > 5-speed, and I'm wondering if anyone can tell me what kind of RPM's [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Thanks in advance! |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.