Anyone know the xD weight and mileage? I bought an xA because it was the only hatchback with 30+MPG in the city. The light weight and 1.5L engine made that possible.

The xD has a larger engine and probably weighs more. It does not sound good. I'd rather have a 1.3L or a turbo 1.0L that makes the same power as a 1.5L. That would be progress.

At least they kept the overall dimensions similar while extending the wheelbase. I have no doubt it's a better car in many ways.

The xB is a mess. Bigger, fatter, uglier, and far less of a style statement. What the hell were they thinking?

a presskit was given to us during the unveiling which included the volume 9 brochure. it did not include the weight of the vehicle but did show mileage. the weight for the auto xB was shown but not the manual.

30/34-auto
32/37-manual

whether or not these are the real figures remain until the cars official release.

Just remember that the Corolla gets >30, and I'm certain it's heavier than the 1.5L xA. I haven't exactly figured that out yet....

Manual is same as the xA but automatic (the most popular choice) is worse on the xD. Good job Toyota.

Weight, gearing, tires, engine efficiency, and aerodynamics are the main mechanical parts of EPA fuel economy. Sedans do a lot better, especially on the highway, because their aerodynamics are so much better.

The xD is probably geared differently from the xA allowing the manual to get similar mileage even though it weighs more and has a slightly bigger engine. That's why the Corolla gets good mileage. Hopefully it is still geared such that it feels sporty though (although I won't ever own one so it doesn't really matter to me).

Manual is same as the xA but automatic (the most popular choice) is worse on the xD. Good job Toyota.

Weight, gearing, tires, engine efficiency, and aerodynamics are the main mechanical parts of EPA fuel economy. Sedans do a lot better, especially on the highway, because their aerodynamics are so much better.

First of all, 2008 EPA MPG changes will lower MPG for all cars. If xD is doing better than smaller, lighter, unsafer xA while using 30hp more powerful engine, it means Toyota has done really good job at it.

It gets state of the art 1.8 VVTi engine of completly new construction with double VVT-i, first in its class. Engine alone will spend 5% less fuel than previous 1.8, despite having better power and torque.

None of us knows whether those mileage figures are based on the new EPA method of determining mpg or not. Given the car will go on sale by mid-2007, and any new rules wouldn't be in place yet, I seriously doubt they would announce lower EPA mileage than they would have to. Maybe these figures are based on the new rules, but I doubt it.

My guess is they got the manual mpg the same as the manual xA through gearing that doesn't require the engine run at such high rpms. Since the engine has more power, they might be able to do that w/o making the car seem unresponsive (assuming it doesn't weight alot more).

I'm sure the 1.8L engine is good and a step up from the 1.5L, but alot of people liked the fact that the xA is lighter and smaller. Making the engine more powerful and maintaining gas mileage is good. IMO, making the car bigger and heavier is bad.

I wish Toyota looked at the success of the xA, xB, and Mini, all with their small engines, and realized that there is a market for even smaller-engined ~100HP cars that get great mileage. A smaller VVTIVVTITTTVVILMNOP engine with 100HP would have made me think about replacing our Integra. They just think all Americans are energy pigs or want to pay through the nose for a hybrid.

Manual is same as the xA but automatic (the most popular choice) is worse on the xD. Good job Toyota.

Weight, gearing, tires, engine efficiency, and aerodynamics are the main mechanical parts of EPA fuel economy. Sedans do a lot better, especially on the highway, because their aerodynamics are so much better.

First of all, 2008 EPA MPG changes will lower MPG for all cars. If xD is doing better than smaller, lighter, unsafer xA while using 30hp more powerful engine, it means Toyota has done really good job at it.

It gets state of the art 1.8 VVTi engine of completly new construction with double VVT-i, first in its class. Engine alone will spend 5% less fuel than previous 1.8, despite having better power and torque.I want that for my egg.

The 2ZZ in the Corolla and the 1NZ in the Yaris get comparable mileage. Since the 2ZR is more efficient and powerful than the 2ZZ and the xD is basically a 5-door Yaris, I have reason to believe that the figures in that press kit are based on the new EPA system.

One of the reasons Scion most likely used the 1.8 liter engine instead of a smaller engine with the same horse is not because the general American population thinks bigger is better (although that may have influenced their choice) but more likely because there is an abundant supply of the 1.8 liter engines already being produced at Toyota manufacturing plants. It's a lot cheaper then developing a new engine and the American population is already familiar with the 1.8 from the Corolla, which is a very well selling car. The Corolla gets 32/41mpg with a manual and 30/38mpg with an automatic. My guess would be that the xd has about the same mpg rating.

The 1.8 in the xD is an all-new engine from the all-new Corolla that hasn't been unveiled in the U.S. yet, not the 1.8 from the Corolla that Americans are familiar with. I thought that was established already.

Toyota uses a 1.3L 86HP VVT-i engine in the European Yaris. I'm sure they could up the HP to 100 without too much of a stretch. They don't even offer the 1.5L there, only a 1.4 diesel.

None of us knows whether those mileage figures are based on the new EPA method of determining mpg or not. Given the car will go on sale by mid-2007, and any new rules wouldn't be in place yet, I seriously doubt they would announce lower EPA mileage than they would have to. Maybe these figures are based on the new rules, but I doubt it.

My guess is they got the manual mpg the same as the manual xA through gearing that doesn't require the engine run at such high rpms. Since the engine has more power, they might be able to do that w/o making the car seem unresponsive (assuming it doesn't weight alot more).

I'm sure the 1.8L engine is good and a step up from the 1.5L, but alot of people liked the fact that the xA is lighter and smaller. Making the engine more powerful and maintaining gas mileage is good. IMO, making the car bigger and heavier is bad.

Actually, xD is 2008 MY vehicle, so EPA numbers are 2008 EPA rules.
xD is not a lot heavier while being nicely bigger. Yaris 5 door (xD bro) is the lighest and smaller car in the class in Europe, while having biggest interior. It weights 20% less than European small cars....

So before complaining about things, lets get them into perspective.

2008 MY vehicles shipped September or later will use the new EPA estimates. Earlier 2008 models will use the old estimates. When will the xD ship?

August, supposedly. But considering how Toyota quickly adopted the new SAE horsepower ratings, they may have voluntarily used the new system even if they don't need to. After all, they constantly denounce the EPA mileage as being unrealistic for the Prius.

I don't know if they even could legally go by new numbers before September 1st. Either way, I doubt they're the new EPA numbers. Is the EPA even doing the new test yet?

While the 30/34 EPA (2008 rule rating) is not bad, I would LOVE to see Toyota offer something better than the 4AT transmission as an extra cost option. How about a 5AT automatic or a modified version of the i-CVT automatic found on the JDM Vitz and Auris models?

Curb weight on the 2007 Corolla with manual transmission is 2550 pounds and fuel economy is listed as 32 city and 41 highway. I could only find information on a 2004 xA, which weighs in at 2350 pounds in manual form - 200 pounds lighter than the Corolla - with fuel economy ratings of 32 city and 38 highway. All of these figures come from Car and Driver's website.

It has long bothered me that the heavier Corolla with more engine power could get better fuel economy than our lighter and less powerful xA. As I understand it, it's a matter of how the transmission is geared. Toyota wanted the xA to feel 'peppy,' and therefore geared the car shorter than the Echo on which it was based at the expense of a few miles per gallon. This measure kept costs down, another goal Toyota set, because re-gearing a transmission is far less costly than putting in a bigger, more powerful engine.

Incidentally, the 2005 Echo sedan with a manual transmission weighs only 2055 pounds and is rated at 35 city and 42 highway.

^^^Damn 2250lbs with a driver! ____e!

Here's a picture from the xD brochure:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v628/xbscion/DSC01896.jpg

"Magnetic Gray Metallic" oOoOoOoO I wanna see that.

The 1zz has both more power and more torque than the 1nz. Combined that with what will probably be taller gearing than what's in the current xA, and you have a drivetrain that just doesn't have to work as hard as the current 1nz setup. So, the net result will be comparable EPA numbers, if not slightly better in the real world, despite having the "bigger" 1zz engine.

hopefully slightly taller is the key word. With that little more hp, if you make the gearing too much taller you'll lose some "pep." And the pep is why I love my xA so much.

hopefully slightly taller is the key word. With that little more hp, if you make the gearing too much taller you'll lose some "pep." And the pep is why I love my xA so much.

x2

I doubt Toyota would do anything to hurt the "peppyness" of any of the Scions, as that seems to be a mojor selling point.

I am bummed that they are not offering a 6MT in any of the models. Especially in the xD as that would put it on (more) even footing with the Versa. Maybe in the '09 MY when I'll be shopping for one.

hopefully slightly taller is the key word. With that little more hp, if you make the gearing too much taller you'll lose some "pep." And the pep is why I love my xA so much.
Yep... I agree. But the current 1nz drivetrain for the xA/xB was orginally designed as a in-city driver for the tight streets of Japan...making the short gearing a big plus for that type of environment. But, for those of us who do a lot of highway commuting....not really what the xA/xB was designed for....taller gearing or an extra gear would be a welcome improvement. Toyota knows this. That's why the xD and 2nd gen Box will probably be better suited for our U.S. highways.

hopefully slightly taller is the key word. With that little more hp, if you make the gearing too much taller you'll lose some "pep." And the pep is why I love my xA so much.
Yep... I agree. But the current 1nz drivetrain for the xA/xB was orginally designed as a in-city driver for the tight streets of Japan...making the short gearing a big plus for that type of environment. But, for those of us who do a lot of highway commuting....not really what the xA/xB was designed for....taller gearing or an extra gear would be a welcome improvement. Toyota knows this. That's why the xD and 2nd gen Box will probably be better suited for our U.S. highways.I've been looking for a 6spd since about a month after I got my car. I'd prefer that personally, because I LOVE the pep of the car but i would prefer a true o/d gear, something that could get you up to about 140-150mph, not that I want to go that fast, I'd just like the milage at 80 (the min speed here in So Cali :silly: )

+1 to props for Max on that photo from the brochure! I never would have expected such a huge difference between the automatic and manual versions of the car; now i have convincing reason to make my girlfriend learn to use the third pedal on our next car!

The 1zz has both more power and more torque than the 1nz. Combined that with what will probably be taller gearing than what's in the current xA, and you have a drivetrain that just doesn't have to work as hard as the current 1nz setup. So, the net result will be comparable EPA numbers, if not slightly better in the real world, despite having the "bigger" 1zz engine.

ONCE AGAIN, two things.

First off, the Corolla used the 2ZZ.

Second of all, the xD uses the 2ZR, not the 2ZZ.

From the information on the EPS website, it says that all MY 2008 vehicles will have the new EPA ratings. Hopefully that's true and we can make a better comparison as more 2008 MY vehicles come out. If we guess a 10% loss from the new EPA numbers, the comparable numbers for the auto would be ~33/38, which would actually make sense. This is all speculation though. Here is a link to the EPA 2008 information:

EPA: http://www.mileagewillvary.com/docs/MileageFacts.pdf
Edmunds: [url]http://www.edmunds.com/advice/specialreports/articles/118986/article.html

The 1zz has both more power and more torque than the 1nz. Combined that with what will probably be taller gearing than what's in the current xA, and you have a drivetrain that just doesn't have to work as hard as the current 1nz setup. So, the net result will be comparable EPA numbers, if not slightly better in the real world, despite having the "bigger" 1zz engine.

ONCE AGAIN, two things.

First off, the Corolla used the 2ZZ.

Second of all, the xD uses the 2ZR, not the 2ZZ.
Only the XRS versions of the Corolla and Matrix used the 2zz engine, along with the Celica GT-S. All other Corollas use the 1zz. I don't know whether Toyota is calling the xD's engine a 1zz. But it will be virtually the same engine as the 1zz.

Looks to give good gas mileage considering its with the new regulations. I'm tired of spending $30 to fill up a 4cyl..

Can't wait to see how it effects other models..

http://www.epa.gov/fueleconomy/regulations.htm

"To more clearly convey fuel economy information to consumers, EPA has also revised the fuel economy window sticker that appears on new vehicles beginning with 2008 models manufactured after September 1, 2007."

Kachow!

OK, we don't know.

Anyway, anyone watch the new Top Gear? Nascar Sucks! Hillary For President!

The 1zz has both more power and more torque than the 1nz. Combined that with what will probably be taller gearing than what's in the current xA, and you have a drivetrain that just doesn't have to work as hard as the current 1nz setup. So, the net result will be comparable EPA numbers, if not slightly better in the real world, despite having the "bigger" 1zz engine.

ONCE AGAIN, two things.

First off, the Corolla used the 2ZZ.

Second of all, the xD uses the 2ZR, not the 2ZZ.
Only the XRS versions of the Corolla and Matrix used the 2zz engine, along with the Celica GT-S. All other Corollas use the 1zz. I don't know whether Toyota is calling the xD's engine a 1zz. But it will be virtually the same engine as the 1zz.

Ok, fine. But the xD uses the 2ZR. Dual VVT-i => ZR. I think it's actually an all-new engine. ZR is to GR as ZZ is to MZ.

Looks like we will jsut have to wait. Looks like the EPA just requires it after September 1, 2007, so the MY 2008 vehicles would be the first to have the new ratings. In any case, we will have to wait and see.

The new label features more prominent fuel cost information, a user-friendly graphic for comparing the fuel economy of different vehicles, clearer text, and a Web site address for more information. Since the new label design will be required on vehicles manufactured on September 1, 2007, or later, manufacturers will be phasing in the new design during the 2008 model year. For model years 2008 and 2009, the label will also state that estimates reflect new EPA test methods beginning with 2008 models.

http://www.epa.gov/fueleconomy/420f06069.htm

They're required on vehicles manufactured on or after that date, but why can't automakers use those numbers on early MY cars?

Why WOULD manufacturers use the new EPA figures which don't look as good before they have to?

Because it's better than changing the EPA figures half way through the model year.

^^And I think that buyers would respect them more for using (more) accurate MPG #'s instead of the Prius "claiming" 60MPG when the only time my moms has ever done it, was driver from Vegas to So Cali down the Cajon pass.

Well, Toyota has already said before that the EPA figures aren't realistic. By law, they have not choice but to use the EPA figures in advertising.

I said "claiming" (note the quotations) because Toyota has denied the EPA claim.

Well, the EPA released a comparison of the new EPA tests and wanted to see what the MPG difference would be on the 2006 xA.

xA auto:
2006 - 31/38
2008 - 27/35

Would this match the 30/34 the folks saw at Chicago? We will have to wait to see.

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/calculatorCompareSideBySide.jsp?column=1&id=21777

All cars classified by the manufacturer as a 2008 model will adhere to the 2008 EPA ratings, regardless of when they are released.

Scion could conceivably release the xB and the first xD models as a 2007.5 model, but they'd need to change the printouts to 2008 for any car built after September (when 99% of the 08s will be released anyway) so there's no real point.

There seems to be a lot of emphasis on combined mileage averages with the new test method. So, if the 08 xD gets 30/34 compared to the 27/35 of the xA, it will have a higher combined average which will make it look awfully good.

For comparison sake, the Matrix, with the same engine, gets 31/25 with the 2008 method. The Corolla gets 35/26. So, they've apparently geared the trans to get better city economy somehow. very nice.

No, you read it wrong. You reversed the numbers.

oops, yeah, I did reverse them. At any rate, what I meant (and very poorly wrote) was that if under the 2008 methods the xD gets 30 in the city compared to the Corolla's 26, then it must be geared toward city driving somehow.

This is, of course, assuming that the info that Toyota released in the info packet contained EPA numbers by the 2008 method and not the old way. If not, then once the xA reaches the showroom, the actual stickers will read about 10% less.

I'm hoping for the former.

Well, the GZ is more efficient than the ZZ at any rate and the xD is bound to be lighter than the Corolla, so it could be all factors combined: lighter car, more efficient engine, and city-biased gearing.

Smaller gas tank and worse gas milage.

Ummm, no thanks :rofl:

Here's a picture from the xD brochure:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v628/xbscion/DSC01896.jpg

Smaller gas tank and worse gas milage.

Ummm, no thanks :rofl:

xA MPG (from fueleconomy.gov)

Auto: 27/35
Man: 27/34

xD MPG (from Scion brochure)
Auto: 30/34
Man: 32/37

... looks to me that the xD gets better gas mileage. Also, the tank is only 0.8 gallons smaller, which shouldn't be a huge difference.

Just find ways to bump up a couple of horses in your XA and make up for the 20HP you got in the XD. IMO I really dislike the XD. They took out the rear window, redesigned the gauges, gave it but ugly seats, ran a body kit, and added the corolla drivetrain. Some may disagree with me...but I think my XA looks a lot more stylish and unique then the XD does. It looks like something Dodge would make.

Styling is a personal preference, obviously. I have nothing against xA styling, actually quite enjoy it, but the build quality was way below the level of tC, and I really hope xD will be more along the lines of the tC that I drove for 3 years than the xA. If it's not I just lost a $200 deposit.

Ok, just so everybody fully understands the difference between the 2007 and 2008 EPA figures, here is some evidence that it is going to shock loads of people when the 08's start rolling out:

2007 EPA figures for Corolla Auto: 30 city 38 hwy.

2008 EPA figures for Corolla Auto: 26 city 35 hwy.

The new figures are no joke. I think you're going to see 08 full size p/u's and SUV's delayed as long as possible. I'm extremely interested in what the Titan and Hemi's get under the new standards :ponder: