2006 Chevrolet Silverado 2500 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2019 Toyota Corolla vs. compact hatchbacks: How they compare

So you've read what we thought about the 2019 Toyota Corolla Hatchback. Oh, you didn't? Well, click to your left, we'll still be here. Just made some coffee, we're good for a while. Welcome back! Wasn't that riveting? The blue paint sure is bright, eh? Well, now you must be wondering how that new 2019 Corolla stacks up with all the other hatchbacks. And, despite long thinking that hatchbacks were doomed, there are actually quite a lot of them these days. So many, in fact, that we couldn't fit them all in our space-limited comparison chart. So, with apologies to the Hyundai Elantra GT, Kia Forte and the dead-man-walking Ford Focus, these were the cars we chose based on sales and competitiveness: the Honda Civic Hatchback, Mazda3 5-Door, Volkswagen Golf, Chevrolet Cruze and Subaru Impreza. We also included the outgoing Corolla iM for reference. If you think we've left something of interest out, you can always create your own comparison. Performance and fuel economy There is but one king here, and its name is Civic. While the sedan and coupe come with a naturally aspirated 2.0-liter 158-horsepower four-cylinder that's less potent than the Corolla's, the hatchback comes standard with the 1.5-liter turbo that aces the segment in terms of both acceleration and fuel economy. The Golf's acceleration should be comparable, but as you can see, it trails on fuel economy (still not bad, though). The new Corolla ends up being better than the rest with its new 168-hp four-cylinder paired to novel transmissions: a six-speed manual with rev-matched downshifting (!) and a CVT that mimics the actions of a 10-speed automatic. The Corolla does weigh more than everything else, though, so that could hamper its acceleration. Fuel economy data also wasn't announced, but Toyota indicated it would be a bit better than the old Corolla iM. Something akin to the 2.0-liter Mazda 3's numbers seems likely. As for the Mazda, its top two trim levels actually come standard with its bigger engine. In any event, despite its ample power, testing has often showed that the Civic is still the quicker car from 0 to 60 mph. And finally, let's not leave out the two on the end. The Subaru is the only car in the segment that offers all-wheel drive (the Focus RS and Golf R don't count), but is also the segment weakling now that the Corolla iM has been discontinued.

Consumer Reports criticizes small turbo engines for misleading performance, fuel economy claims [w/video]

Consumer Reports has taken aim at at small-displacement, forced-induction engines, saying the powerplants don't manage to deliver on automaker fuel economy claims. Manufacturers have long held that smaller, turbocharged engines pack all power of their larger displacement cousins with significantly better fuel economy, but the research organization says that despite scoring high EPA economy numbers, the engines are no better than conventional drivetrains in both categories. Jake Fisher, director of automotive testing for Consumer Reports, says the forced induction options "are often slower and less fuel efficient than larger four and six-cylinder engines."
Specifically, CR calls out the new Ford Fusion equipped with the automaker's Ecoboost 1.6-liter four-cylinder engine. The institute's researchers found the engine, which is a $795 option over the base 2.5-liter four-cylinder, fails to match competitors in acceleration and served up 25 miles per gallon in testing, putting the sedan dead last among other midsize options.
The Chevrolet Cruze, Hyundai Sonata Turbo and Ford Escape 2.0T all got dinged for the same troubles, though Consumer Reports has found the turbo 2.0-liter four-cylinder in the BMW 328i does deliver on its promises. You can check out the full press release below. You can also read the full study on the Consumer Reports site, or scroll down for a short video recap.

2015 Chevy Volt gets larger battery, though range remains the same

The Chevrolet Volt isn't changing much for the 2015 model year. According to specifications uncovered by Inside EVs, though, the new Volt's battery does have a slightly larger capacity. According to the spec sheet, this doesn't translate to increased range. Real world driving, though, might tell a different story. The 2015 Volt's battery storage is slightly higher than the outgoing model's, up from 16.5 kilowatt-hours to 17.1 kWh. According to GM's manager of electrification technology communications, Kevin Kelly, speaking to Green Car Reports, the increased capacity is "a late change done in the cell... just another continuous improvement to surprise and delight our customers." The stated electric range, however, stays at 38 miles. Inside EVs followed up on its original report, and found that drivers could see some advantage to the battery tweak. When they spoke to Kelly, he told them, "As a result of this change, we would expect that some customers may see a slight improvement in overall EV range." It's worth noting that when battery capacity increased from 16 kWh to 16.5 kWh for the 2013 Volt, electric range increased by three miles to the current 38, while MPGe went from 94 to 98. The price of the 2015 Chevrolet Volt remains steady, at $34,995. The actual cost to the customer is considerably less with the $7,500 federal tax credit, as well as any local incentives.