Love my Yaris...

[09TRD]

I suppose anyone can claim anything on these forums, but the following it true.

I own/have owned several "nice cars," including the 2009 Corvette I bought two months ago (see below). Before that I owned a 2007 Acura TL Type S. I've also owned three Accords, a Taurus SHO and two 5.0 Mustangs - all purchased new.

This is the fourth "low buck" Toyota vehicles I've owned and it ranks near the very top of my "favorites" list.

I got the base 2 door hatch 5 speed manual with the convenience package and all weather guard package ("Option Group D" in this area).

I had the dealer install the TRD springs, shocks and bars and the four mudguards.

Summarily, the car is very well balanced, rides surprisingly well, is quiet, very smooth in operation, well made, utilitarian (holds lots of stuff with the rear seats folded) and downright FUN TO DRIVE. It is MUCH more fun to drive than my '07 Acura.

The Yaris's stereo is the car's single weakest point and that's going tomorrow (a Kenwood KDC-MP735U in dash receiver and 4 Infinity Kappas are going in it's place).

I averaged an even 35 MPG on my first tank on a still green engine with some of "enthusiasm" in my driving style...

The little car just hums along...This car's brakes feel better in every way than the "Brembos" in my '07 Acura TL. The Yaris's brakes are much quieter, far more progressive, firmer and simply feel stronger. (The car's light weight is a factor, but the bottom line is all I really care about.)

What an HONEST car this is; it's refreshing that cars like this still exist.

For those who "wish" they had "nicer cars, listen to me: They are "nice" in some respects, but they are also very over-rated and introduce as many hassles as they do rewards.

[Bob_VT]

Hey I owned a SHO and I loved it. Nice Vette but where's the Yaris!!

[09TRD]

Originally Posted by Bob_VT

Hey I owned a SHO and I loved it. Nice Vette but where's the Yaris!!

I'll snap and post a pic of the Yaris if you need to see it...

It's just a 1421 (Toyota model #) that's blue and sits 1.2" lower than most others due to the TRD springs...It has the stock wheels and tires, which I plan on running year 'round.

Not a whole lot to see, really.

The SHO was the absolute worst car I've ever owned. It did nothing but break and all four doors visibly moved when I went over certain sections of rough roads here.

Water leaked past the window seals on two doors in car washes...

Junk...

The Yaris is MUCH better built than that SHO.

[Sodium Duck]

I'll take that big hassle off your hands then, trade for my '08? =]

[Chupacabra]

I have a 1963 fuelie split window with 22K original miles. They certainly don't make like that anymore. I love my Yaris too....great little car for what it is!

[Sodium Duck]

...can I come over and ride in it? lol

[Chupacabra]

The fuelie is a beast....sounds better than a Ferrari and is just loving to be revved around 7500 RPM

[09TRD]

Originally Posted by Chupacabra

I have a 1963 fuelie split window with 22K original miles. They certainly don't make like that anymore.

Thankfully, they don't.

The "375 HP" (Gross) rating of that engine equates to something on the order of 275 Net, as illustrated by the ~ 101 MPH Trap Speeds (and curb weight combinations) of the day.

Go drive a new LS3 and you'll be blown away....until something "small" (e.g. any of the power accessories) breaks and you have t return to the dealership - AGAIN!

[09TRD]

Originally Posted by Chupacabra

The fuelie is a beast....sounds better than a Ferrari and is just loving to be revved around 7500 RPM

Redline was 6,500 RPM. The motor would have blown apart at anything close to "7,500 RPM."

They produced something on the order of 275 NET HP (the way modern engines are rated). The old "gross" ratings were essentially meaningless.

Here's an original road test of a 1962 327 "fuelie" Corvette. The car ran the quarter mile in 15.0 seconds @ 95 MPH. The 60 to 100 MPH segment required nearly 10 full seconds, which is pretty lame by today's standards. I like 60 to 100 MPH comparisons, since they eliminate the "but it had skinny tires" excuse that often used for the older cars.

http://www.caranddriver.com/content/...t+Corvette.pdf

A new, bone stock V6/automatic Camry is a faster car.

This 1965 327 fuelie was a little quicker than the other one (14.4. @ 99 MPH). http://www.roadandtrack.com/article....article_id=957

That's nothing that a new, bone stock, V6/6 speed Accord coupe couldn't handle. http://www.roadandtrack.com/assets/d...ccordCoupe.pdf

[Bob_VT]

The SHO was a fun car to blow off 5.0 mustangs..... I used to enjoy the looks on the face of people when they thought it was a family car. I kept up with the maintenance (and alot of it) but I just got tired of it. Never had a leak..... mine was a 1993.

[09TRD]

Originally Posted by Bob_VT

The SHO was a fun car to blow off 5.0 mustangs..... I used to enjoy the looks on the face of people when they thought it was a family car. I kept up with the maintenance (and alot of it) but I just got tired of it. Never had a leak..... mine was a 1993.

Either you're dreaming or you ran up against a lot of 5.0/automatic cars and/or people who couldn't drive.

Here's an original road test of a bone stock, '88 5.0 Mustang notch; it ran a 14.17 @ 99 MPH straight out of the box:

http://www.derekspratt.com/PDFs/Auto...May%201987.pdf


As you can see, the SHO (15.2 @ 93 MPH) wasn't in the same league:

[Latka]

Yeah, but the SHO Taurus was from the what...late 80s? I would hope a car with 20+ years more development could kick it's butt. :) It had a great (Yamaha?) V-6 in it from what I recall.

I can't wait to get my Yaris. Still trying to get things lined up out here...and then it looks like I'm going to have to wait to get mine after that - base model yellow 5MT 2 door hatchback.

[500snakz]

The vette gets excellent gas milage for a v8.

[Chupacabra]

Originally Posted by 09TRD

Redline was 6,500 RPM. The motor would have blown apart at anything close to "7,500 RPM."

They produced something on the order of 275 NET HP (the way modern engines are rated). The old "gross" ratings were essentially meaningless.

Here's an original road test of a 1962 327 "fuelie" Corvette. The car ran the quarter mile in 15.0 seconds @ 95 MPH. The 60 to 100 MPH segment required nearly 10 full seconds, which is pretty lame by today's standards. I like 60 to 100 MPH comparisons, since they eliminate the "but it had skinny tires" excuse that often used for the older cars.

http://www.caranddriver.com/content/...t+Corvette.pdf

A new, bone stock V6/automatic Camry is a faster car.

This 1965 327 fuelie was a little quicker than the other one (14.4. @ 99 MPH). http://www.roadandtrack.com/article....article_id=957

That's nothing that a new, bone stock, V6/6 speed Accord coupe couldn't handle. http://www.roadandtrack.com/assets/d...ccordCoupe.pdf

I have driven and been in the LS3 (on the racetrack). It is a performer...more car than I can handle on the track though...I much prefer my e30 M3 which was where I got the 7500 RPM's from.

I sometimes confuse that with the vette which also loves to be revved to the 6500 RPM that you mentioned...and it will stay there. I don't get on the fuelie often as it's a concours car. I am going to pick it up today AAMOF as I recently had the bearings in the steering replaced.

[09TRD]

Originally Posted by Latka

Yeah, but the SHO Taurus was from the what...late 80s? I would hope a car with 20+ years more development could kick it's butt. :) It had a great (Yamaha?) V-6 in it from what I recall.

I can't wait to get my Yaris. Still trying to get things lined up out here...and then it looks like I'm going to have to wait to get mine after that - base model yellow 5MT 2 door hatchback.

Try READING before you respond.

Here is the comment I was addressing:

Originally Posted by Bob_VT

The SHO was a fun car to blow off 5.0 mustangs..... I used to enjoy the looks on the face of people when they thought it was a family car.

I compared a "5.0 Mustang" to a later model year Taurus SHO.

The Mustang smokes the SHO, which is contrary to what was claimed.

[voodoo22]

Originally Posted by 09TRD

For those who "wish" they had "nicer cars, listen to me: They are "nice" in some respects, but they are also very over-rated and introduce as many hassles as they do rewards.

Like paying $900 to replace one rear tire, vs the Yaris where I bought top of the line winter tires and steel rims for $650. I don't miss the cost of nicer that's for sure.

[09TRD]

Originally Posted by Chupacabra

...I much prefer my e30 M3 which was where I got the 7500 RPM's from.

That statement is ridiculous; your original claim was clearly referring to 327 "fuelie" Corvettes, which have nothing whatsoever to do with an E30 M3.

[Chupacabra]

Originally Posted by 09TRD

That statement is ridiculous; your original claim was clearly referring to 327 "fuelie" Corvettes, which have nothing whatsoever to do with an E30 M3.

What?....I stated that I sometimes get the two confused. It is not feasible that I make a typo in regards to missing the RPM points by 1000 points? If you think that you are Mr. Joe f'ing cool....well you are waaaay off. I own the 327 "fuelie" and happen to know just a few things about it. I also happened to pay $150K cash for it. In other words...I own it. Get off your high horse.