View Full Version : So, how does it handle???


yellow_aspen
04-16-2007, 01:08 AM
For the lucky few who've driven the new xB, how does it handle? I've seem some posts describing it as smooth, well put together, less buzzy but how does it feel on the road? Is it pretty similar to a tC in terms of body roll, road feel, corners, and overall tightness? Is it softer or harder?

Thanks,

xCube
04-16-2007, 01:27 AM
From my experience at Mercedes, I take it no one has taken the car out on main roads. It is always a closed enviroment. I can;'t wait to feel the ride, just think, if that same motor can move a bigger body like the camry(that is where the tC's motor originated- don't let anyone fool ya), nice fast and quiet, think about what it can do for the smaller body.

It has done wonders for the tC, as you can see alot of tC owners have captured tickets, and there seems to be alot of tC's in salvage yards. So we soon will find out.

YELOSUB
04-16-2007, 02:15 PM
Just drove it last week at the Scion Backstage...I was impressed...The build quality seems better with a much better quality feel...They handle EXCELLENT, better than the tC...Plenty quick enough I might add...I had the tires screeching around the course...If anyone has the chance to go to the Scion Backstage event I highly suggest that you go...

Rayman
04-16-2007, 03:34 PM
Just drove it last week at the Scion Backstage...I was impressed...The build quality seems better with a much better quality feel...They handle EXCELLENT, better than the tC...Plenty quick enough I might add...I had the tires screeching around the course...If anyone has the chance to go to the Scion Backstage event I highly suggest that you go...

Was it stock?

YELOSUB
04-16-2007, 10:54 PM
Yep, bone stock...I drove both the Manual trans and the Auto trans!

xCube
04-16-2007, 11:44 PM
Yep, bone stock...I drove both the Manual trans and the Auto trans!

I am stumped, after driving them which woud you prrefer auto or man, I can't decide.

YELOSUB
04-17-2007, 12:33 AM
My old car, a Ford Focus, was a manual...I drive 62 miles round trip every day for work, mostly stuck in rush hour traffic...So, when I got my xB I chose an Auto...Although I like the auto, I miss the extra power of the manual...Now for the new xB models that I recently drove, it is a tough choice...The automatic features a feature where you can shift it manually or just throw it in drive...I did like the way the manual model (5-speed) shifted and it did seem quicker...It comes down to a matter of choice...Either way, I don't think you can pick a loser...Good luck...

xCube
04-17-2007, 12:45 AM
I too got an automatic after I started delivering mail. On my feet for 12 hours a day plus to press the clutch for a 25 mile hike home was no joke. I am used to it all and plus my toy(another car) is manual. But since you say it is a smooth shift and I think someone said it is a short throw, i say what the heck, save a grand, I too enjoy upshift and downshift, all in the name of fun.

yellow_aspen
04-17-2007, 02:09 AM
I have this fantasy that it will be tight, zippy and fun like a Mini but I'm guessing it will feel more substantial and soft like the tC.

Bigfieroman
04-17-2007, 02:51 AM
I have this fantasy that it will be tight, zippy and fun like a Mini but I'm guessing it will feel more substantial and soft like the tC.

That is a fairly unrealistic dream. IMHO, the Mini is probably the best handling front-drive car currently sold. The man said it was better than the tC, so I would expect it to be a bit better than the tC, which is at least decent. You can't expect a 3000 lb box on wheels to be an autox machine on the stock wheels/tires/suspension and still have a tolerable ride.

YELOSUB
04-19-2007, 04:13 AM
Ok, click this thread and watch the video...It will answer all of your questions! http://www.scionlife.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=2499729#2499729

Rayman
04-19-2007, 09:54 PM
Oh my. I'm really tempted now. Where is the Release Series announcement?!?!?!?

Rich_Manas
04-19-2007, 10:34 PM
handling: compared to the 1st gen is morning and afternoon. it feels more secure less prone to roll during hard cornering and that has most to do with the wider track and longer wheelbase. also, you can definitely feel the extra 500lbs leaning into corners.

steering: was a little slow and could be understandble because its not a sports-coupe or car. and it has nothing to do with the eps because there are plenty of cars with eps that are quicker than non eps equipped cars.

ride: its night and day compared to the 1st gen. with the wider track and longer wheelbase it transmits less road imperfections because occupants are not sitting close to or on top off the suspension mounts. the B2 will be a great touring car because of the new chassis and the location of the suspension. and with more than enough power if loaded with friends, the xB2 will steal a lot of civic, corolla and mazda3 sales with a better price to feature ratio.

wishlist: i think a must have is the trd springs and slightly wider wheels and tires. the trd springs will give it a better look without looking slammed and it will handle better. 215/45-17 or 225/40-17 wheels and tires 18's are too big and heavy where it will suffers from rolling inertia and sacrifice performance.

Bigfieroman
04-20-2007, 12:06 AM
wishlist: i think a must have is the trd springs and slightly wider wheels and tires. the trd springs will give it a better look without looking slammed and it will handle better. 215/45-17 or 225/40-17 wheels and tires 18's are too big and heavy where it will suffers from rolling inertia and sacrifice performance.

You can always toss 225/50-16s on the stock wheels. Same height/sidewall as stock, wider tread.

Rich_Manas
04-20-2007, 12:39 AM
wishlist: i think a must have is the trd springs and slightly wider wheels and tires. the trd springs will give it a better look without looking slammed and it will handle better. 215/45-17 or 225/40-17 wheels and tires 18's are too big and heavy where it will suffers from rolling inertia and sacrifice performance.

You can always toss 225/50-16s on the stock wheels. Same height/sidewall as stock, wider tread.

205/55-16 on 6.5" wheels with 225/50-16 would give the tire love handles on the sidewall. a plus zero treatment would be 215/45-16. plus one 215/45-17 and plus two 225/35-18.

Bigfieroman
04-20-2007, 01:30 AM
wishlist: i think a must have is the trd springs and slightly wider wheels and tires. the trd springs will give it a better look without looking slammed and it will handle better. 215/45-17 or 225/40-17 wheels and tires 18's are too big and heavy where it will suffers from rolling inertia and sacrifice performance.

You can always toss 225/50-16s on the stock wheels. Same height/sidewall as stock, wider tread.

205/55-16 on 6.5" wheels with 225/50-16 would give the tire love handles on the sidewall. a plus zero treatment would be 215/45-16. plus one 215/45-17 and plus two 225/35-18.

225/50-16 fits fine on a 6.5" wide rim. I checked a few tires on tirerack.com and all of them had the same recommended rim width range; 6"-8" wide. I have had 225/50-16s on a 6.5" wide rim before, it worked great. As long as you are within the manufacturer's recommended range, you will suffer no ill handling effects. That said, I would rather have a 7" wide rim under the tire, but 6.5" is still perfectly acceptable and well within manufacturer recommendations.

215/45-16 is actually a much worse choice. It is smaller in diameter(changing gearing and speedo) and a much, MUCH less common size, tirerack only shows about 5 tires in that size, all very very expensive. Besides that, a 215/45-16 requires a 7"-8" wide rim. Why would a narrower tire require a wider rim? Because the shorter sidewalls do not allow as much variation in the rim width. They need a width close to their natural width or they will perform very poorly.

Rich_Manas
04-20-2007, 02:33 AM
wishlist: i think a must have is the trd springs and slightly wider wheels and tires. the trd springs will give it a better look without looking slammed and it will handle better. 215/45-17 or 225/40-17 wheels and tires 18's are too big and heavy where it will suffers from rolling inertia and sacrifice performance.

You can always toss 225/50-16s on the stock wheels. Same height/sidewall as stock, wider tread.

205/55-16 on 6.5" wheels with 225/50-16 would give the tire love handles on the sidewall. a plus zero treatment would be 215/45-16. plus one 215/45-17 and plus two 225/35-18.

225/50-16 fits fine on a 6.5" wide rim. I checked a few tires on tirerack.com and all of them had the same recommended rim width range; 6"-8" wide. I have had 225/50-16s on a 6.5" wide rim before, it worked great. As long as you are within the manufacturer's recommended range, you will suffer no ill handling effects. That said, I would rather have a 7" wide rim under the tire, but 6.5" is still perfectly acceptable and well within manufacturer recommendations.

215/45-16 is actually a much worse choice. It is smaller in diameter(changing gearing and speedo) and a much, MUCH less common size, tirerack only shows about 5 tires in that size, all very very expensive. Besides that, a 215/45-16 requires a 7"-8" wide rim. Why would a narrower tire require a wider rim? Because the shorter sidewalls do not allow as much variation in the rim width. They need a width close to their natural width or they will perform very poorly.

i don't have tire calculator handy so i'm going to assume the difference in speed and overall circumference between 205/55-16 vs 225/50-16 is minimal.

roXor_boXor
04-20-2007, 02:44 AM
I have to agree with Rich on this Fiero.

The set up he described will drive circles around your choice as it wallows around on the wide tire on the narrow rim.

Yours will be cheap and comfortable. His will cost more and perform very well.
What works best for you just depends on your budget and desired end results.

While I like the idea of the nice ride your setup would have I would have to spend the money and go for a little less ride comfort and lots better handling.

I have driven my Mazda 3 on the stock 205/50-17's on 6.5x17 wheels and on 205/55-16's on 7x16 wheels. The overall circumference is within a 1/4 inch. The handling is night and day. With the 16's it corners like a Buick Lesabre. With the 17's it feels like a go-cart on rails. :)

Bigfieroman
04-20-2007, 03:04 AM
Rich, the 205/55-16 and 225/50-16 are basically identical in diameter, less than a tenth of an inch according to my tire calc.

Roxor, I don't think you read what I wrote.


A 215/45-16 is too wide for a 6.5" rim. The manufacturers recommend a 7"-8" rim. The recommendations are there for a reason, that tire on a 6.5" rim will suffer in the handling department. It is also significantly smaller, and will result in a 5% speedo calibration error/change in gear ratio.


A 225/50-16, while actually being a bit wider, is not too wide for a 6.5" rim. The manufacturers recommend a 6" to 8" wide rim. It is pretty much IDENTICAL in height to a 205/55-16, the difference is about 0.1% in speedo and gearing. Treadwear actually makes a much bigger difference in size than 0.1%.


If you want more responsive handling and don't care about the effect on gear ratio and speedo, go with a 205/45-16, as it fits on a 6.5" and has a WAY shorter sidewall. Wheel gap will also be enormous. This is sometimes what hardcore autocrossers do. They find the smallest sidewall tire that will fit on their rims to give them great agility and short gearing.

Trust me on this one, handling is what my Fiero is all about. I have $2000 in the suspension and another $2k in the brakes/wheels/tires. I have left my 140hp engine alone for years just so I can cut a corner a little faster. I have done so much research that I actually knew the specs above off the top of my head, I only checked to make sure I wasn't mistaken. It's just my thing. Maybe I need a girlfriend...

toyotatodd
04-20-2007, 03:28 AM
Hey Fiero,

Heeeeeeerre ya go

http://www.russianbrides.com/

Bigfieroman
04-20-2007, 04:05 AM
Hey Fiero,

Heeeeeeerre ya go

http://www.russianbrides.com/

Sweet, THANKS!!

Ohh no, there goes my xB money!

yellow_aspen
04-20-2007, 05:29 AM
Thanks for the video link Yelosub...that definitely answered all my handling questions. I'm shocked that it did so well against the Mazda 3 and Civic (though I wonder if there wasn't some bias in the testing). Even if there was some bias, if it handles anywhere near the ballpark of the 3 or Civic, I'm getting one!

roXor_boXor
04-20-2007, 06:16 AM
Roxor, I don't think you read what I wrote.
Now that I looked more specifically at the size details, you are right, I did not read it deep enough.

I still think a 17 would be better, but on a properly sized wheel. I definitely agree on the diameter importance. That is why I pointed out mine are very close in circumference and/ or diameter.

I think from the xB's stock 205/55-16 I would prefer a 205/50-17 on a 6.5" wheel.

If you add the TRD springs for a better wheel well fit, as Rich mentioned, I think it would cover all your concerns as well as look and handle better.

j-pol
04-20-2007, 12:26 PM
the validation video was great. but i don't think that the xb can outperform the civic or the mazda 3 on handling. the validation may be biased.

Bigfieroman
04-20-2007, 12:59 PM
Roxor, I don't think you read what I wrote.
Now that I looked more specifically at the size details, you are right, I did not read it deep enough.

I still think a 17 would be better, but on a properly sized wheel. I definitely agree on the diameter importance. That is why I pointed out mine are very close in circumference and/ or diameter.

I think from the xB's stock 205/55-16 I would prefer a 205/50-17 on a 6.5" wheel.

If you add the TRD springs for a better wheel well fit, as Rich mentioned, I think it would cover all your concerns as well as look and handle better.

Roxor, I do not contend that a 225/50-16 would be better than any of the 17" or 18" sizes. You could get a similar treadwidth with a much shorter sidewall in those sizes, that was never my contention. I was wondering why you brought up the Mazda with the different wheel diameters.

All I was saying is that there is a very cheap +0 upgrade availible...I am considering selling the stock tires while they are brand new and buying a nice set of 225/50-16 all-seasons with better wear and better handling than the stockers.

I have a set of 16X7 5X100 rims left over from my Fiero (soon to be too small to fit the brakes...hehehe), so hopefully they are close enough in offset to fit, and hopefully have the same centerbore (57.1mm). I am just wondering how gloss black rims will look against the almost-black Scion.

Rich_Manas
04-20-2007, 03:45 PM
the validation video was great. but i don't think that the xb can outperform the civic or the mazda 3 on handling. the validation may be biased.

the testers at these events are always independent (ie:amci) and are not affiliated with Scion or Toyota.

Bigfieroman
04-20-2007, 03:55 PM
the validation video was great. but i don't think that the xb can outperform the civic or the mazda 3 on handling. the validation may be biased.

the testers at these events are always independent (ie:amci) and are not affiliated with Scion or Toyota.

That surprises me considering the way the video was put together. Obviously, I would expect it to have more footage of the xB, but what about the shots that were purposely set up to fail the hondas, like the tire-innertube braking thing? I don't doubt that the drivers were independent, but it is surprising they would allow something like that which seems to favor the Scion.

rishio
04-20-2007, 04:15 PM
It's good to know the testing wasn't biased.. but you can tell the video was definately put together by Scion. I wonder what tests they excluded from the video where the XB didn't do so well.

the validation video was great. but i don't think that the xb can outperform the civic or the mazda 3 on handling. the validation may be biased.

the testers at these events are always independent (ie:amci) and are not affiliated with Scion or Toyota.

That surprises me considering the way the video was put together. Obviously, I would expect it to have more footage of the xB, but what about the shots that were purposely set up to fail the hondas, like the tire-innertube braking thing? I don't doubt that the drivers were independent, but it is surprising they would allow something like that which seems to favor the Scion.

Rich_Manas
04-20-2007, 04:17 PM
the validation video was great. but i don't think that the xb can outperform the civic or the mazda 3 on handling. the validation may be biased.

the testers at these events are always independent (ie:amci) and are not affiliated with Scion or Toyota.

That surprises me considering the way the video was put together. Obviously, I would expect it to have more footage of the xB, but what about the shots that were purposely set up to fail the hondas, like the tire-innertube braking thing? I don't doubt that the drivers were independent, but it is surprising they would allow something like that which seems to favor the Scion.

how would the braking test purposely set up for the hondas to fail?

1: it's a 60mph to 0 test for all the cars. its not like the 3 or B2 was from 40 to 0 and the rest were 60

2: the civic in question is an LX civic because of price with drum brakes in the back not disc all around like the mazda or the B2.

3: the element has disc all around but it also weighs 400lbs more.

4: they do this test not just once but multiple times. so, if the civic hit the tires in the 1st run it did on the last one as well.

5: if you look at the 3 vs B2 difference in the video the 9' difference shows the mazda stopping a lot further from the tires.

Rich_Manas
04-20-2007, 04:41 PM
It's good to know the testing wasn't biased.. but you can tell the video was definately put together by Scion. I wonder what tests they excluded from the video where the XB didn't do so well.

the validation video was great. but i don't think that the xb can outperform the civic or the mazda 3 on handling. the validation may be biased.

the testers at these events are always independent (ie:amci) and are not affiliated with Scion or Toyota.

That surprises me considering the way the video was put together. Obviously, I would expect it to have more footage of the xB, but what about the shots that were purposely set up to fail the hondas, like the tire-innertube braking thing? I don't doubt that the drivers were independent, but it is surprising they would allow something like that which seems to favor the Scion.

rishio: the test was perfomance evaluation and judging by the video it was pretty standard. any car magazine will conduct the same exact performance test for a new vehicle or comparison test with the competition.

the only thing i wish they had was 30-50mph and 50-70mph passing numbers and 1/4 mile times. looking at the video 1/4 mile would've been difficult based on where they were doing the test. the mid range passing i think would have still gone to either the 3 or B2 taking 1st or 2nd.

Bigfieroman
04-20-2007, 05:07 PM
I was referring to the PLACEMENT of the tires. They obviously can measure the stopping distance with great accuracy, and I feel the numbers are about right for the situation, but those innertubes have no purpose other than dramatic effect. In the mazda stop, the tires are not visible, it could have been done somewhere else, or the tires may not have been in place. Or, they might have been. The cones shown in the mazda stop are in a configuration unlike the cones visible during the Scion stops. All the cones in the Scion stops are by themselves and upright, in the mazda stop, there is one lying on it's side next to 1 or 2 upright cones, all in a group.Or, they might have been.

All I am saying is that it seems convienient that the tires were placed such that the Scion stopped ~6" from them, since the innertubes have no significance in the test other than to look hilarious as the Hondas go bashing through them.

It is probably just a coincidence, the innertubes were probably placed at 150' to signify an obstacle, and the Scion just happened to stop at 149.5', but it still seems wierd.

Rich_Manas
04-20-2007, 05:38 PM
I was referring to the PLACEMENT of the tires. They obviously can measure the stopping distance with great accuracy, and I feel the numbers are about right for the situation, but those innertubes have no purpose other than dramatic effect. In the mazda stop, the tires are not visible, it could have been done somewhere else, or the tires may not have been in place. Or, they might have been. The cones shown in the mazda stop are in a configuration unlike the cones visible during the Scion stops. All the cones in the Scion stops are by themselves and upright, in the mazda stop, there is one lying on it's side next to 1 or 2 upright cones, all in a group.Or, they might have been.

All I am saying is that it seems convienient that the tires were placed such that the Scion stopped ~6" from them, since the innertubes have no significance in the test other than to look hilarious as the Hondas go bashing through them.

It is probably just a coincidence, the innertubes were probably placed at 150' to signify an obstacle, and the Scion just happened to stop at 149.4', but it still seems wierd.

its called editing. they probably didn't have the camera ready when the mazda did its run. we don't know, all we know is that the mazda stopped shorter than the other cars.

the whole idea behind the tires is for the "dramtic effect" as you put it but it also shows consumers what an extra 26" can do in an emergency situation. it goes from not hitting to possibily love tapping the car in front of you, to $4000+ in individual car damages. not counting any medical or litigation fees that could incur with the car in front.

roXor_boXor
04-21-2007, 05:40 AM
Roxor, I do not contend that a 225/50-16 would be better than any of the 17" or 18" sizes. You could get a similar treadwidth with a much shorter sidewall in those sizes, that was never my contention. I was wondering why you brought up the Mazda with the different wheel diameters.

All I was saying is that there is a very cheap +0 upgrade availible...I am considering selling the stock tires while they are brand new and buying a nice set of 225/50-16 all-seasons with better wear and better handling than the stockers.
:D
See and I was mostly saying that while yours was fine if you were looking for low cost with decent performance, I personally would prefer something like I posted the second time.

The only real confusion and disagreement was when I failed to realize the diameter discrepancy in the sizes Rich brought up. That was somewhat ironic since I too find keeping the speedometer and gearing working as designed important. :doh:

TrafficinLA
04-24-2007, 06:53 PM
Speaking of wheels and tires, does anyone know if Scion will provide the dealers with alignment specs at the release of the new xB?