thanx for the info chaps. :D

 

is anyone going to the tc test drive at full sail university in florida? im going tomorrow morning around 11 or so. hopefully ill see some of you guys there. and finally the wait is over, i can actually see one in person.

 

No but i am going to school there next year i live in AL

 

^^ cool

 

test drove an a/t today.

exterior: very nice, clean. the grill does not look as generic in person. shorter length than i expected (anyone else get that?) but that is not necesarily a bad thing i.e. parking.

interior: very impressive for the price, cept what folks have said about the headroom. i am 6' and the roof was pretty damn close to my head even though the dealer tried to assure me i had "plenty" of room. sound system was better than average but it could use some bass/mid/high separation as all speakers seemed to produce a bit too much bass when turned up. someone said the cargo area was roomy, it's not. maybe with the seat folded down, otherwise good for grocery shopping and not too much else.

performance: acceleration was very smooth and pretty responsive on the streets. however once on the freeway, the response left alot to be desired. i am thinking that a m/t might fix some of that but this was one of my biggest dissapointments.

overall impression: a sports car its not. with mods such as the s/c et al, it has alot of potential. but here is my beef. sure it is a great car for the money. but with the s/c, exaust, and what not you are looking at another $3-4k at least. and guess what, your affordable car is now at or over $20k. certainly still not bad but an 04 subaru wrx comes to mind at that price.

 

I thought about a subaru also but the turbo version, the WRX, is $24,000+ with generally fewer features. It is also ugly IMO. They are great driver's cars though and have AWD if you want that.

Roy

 

about some of the comments:

I HAVE NOT DRIVEN A tC YET!!!!

headroom: although i have yet to drive one, many people believe that the RSX does not have sufficient hearoom. also, many dont know that the seat is height adjustable, so that could be the solution. im about 6'1" and have plenty of headroom in my RSX. i do not "lean" at all, as i prefer to have a good driving position. **EDIT** after some more research, it seems that the tC and my RSX have nearly identical headroom. must be driver position that's making people think there isnt enough.

pedal placement: i knwo the xB has near perfect pedal placement to me. the RSX does need some improvement compared to it, and unless the optional pedals for the tC are merely clip on's i doubt there would be any improvement.

steering: i drive many different cars daily since i work at a dealership with many varietys. this seems to be the downfall in many. the steering on my RSX is awsome, has great feedback, and the steering wheel may seem small to others that drive my car, but i love it. how's the lock to lock ratio on the tC's?

tires: another downfall because of ride quietness. the stock tires on my RSX went out around 65K, so i replaced them with some $60 kelley chargers. worst decision ever. i drove my friend's non-S RSX with falken azenis sport tires and it felt MUCH better than my S.

styling: the rear end to me is a little frumpy, and the wheelbase looks too extended, but other than that i love it all. ditch the 6 spokes for some nice thick 5-spokes, IMO.

quality: i've never owned a toyota, so this area's kinda iffy to me. honda quality has dropped off significantly lately, as i've had some problems with my RSX. being that it has some of the highest miles in the country(78K) it has had too many problems for me to classify it as "honda quality". build is nice, but some things let me down(mechanically). i rented a solora back in 2001 when i made a trip to california, and at the time i had a 1998 accord v6 coupe. the toyota felt much better, have large aspirations for the tC.

engine: toyota claims a 12chp gain for the axle back exhaust. doubt that. maybe 3chp, max. its already a very straight system, the only constraint being the muffler. the TRD system looks better, but there;s really not much improvement. i've driven a camry with a 2.4 equipped with an automatic transmission that felt like it had plenty of power. im sure with less weight, and a manual transmission, performance can easily be improved. possibly a reason why others felt like it was slow could be because of the torque/hp curve of the engine. in honda's its all about peak power, never mind anything else. the RSX isnt bad at this, as it has a nice flat curve, but has little torque for that matter(140+- lbs ft, crank). an accord with the K24 feels much quicker at higher speeds than my RSX does, and certainly feels quicker than my old accord. about the high-rpm noise increase: if it is anything like my RSX, with an intake, it will REALLY get loud. at low RPM's my RSX is has a nice deep bass tone, but as soon as VTEC hits, watch out! it gets loud, and ALOT faster. hopefully, with its larger displacement, an intake and header will greatly benefit this vehicle. a centrifugal supercharger such as the vortech unit employed on the tC delivers power at higher rpms than a normal supercharger does. something to note.

wow, ive said alot, i need to go and drive it now


also, it seems through some research that the most direct competitor to it would be the honda accord coupe. they;re much more similar than other cars in its(tC's) class. go to edmunds and try the comparison for yourself.

 

I test drove an auto tC today.

I went to the dealer just with the intention of looking at the car (I went there 3 days in a row, just to look at the car). I also wanted to get some price quotes. This guy there helped me out (Poway Toyota). There wasn't any additional dealer markup charges so I was happy about that. The guy that helped me out was cool. I told him what I wanted and after I come back from my vacation, I'm going to put a $500 deposit. I'm thinking it will take like 2-3 months for my tC to come.

He asked me if I wanted to drive it, and I was like "Really? I'm only 16." So they took it off the platform and drove it around for me. It was an automatic, the same exact car from my other thread, "Pictures of a blue tC from Poway Toyota, San Diego CA" (
https://www.scionlife.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=17540)

It was an automatic. I wasn't expecting anything spectactular. The car drove smooth, handling wasn't bad, acceleration wasnt bad. I don't think I put my seat to the lowest setting, I just went in and sat down, so I felt a little high. It was really cool because peopl were looking at me. I drove the car around Poway, took it on the free way, and to my house. (Yes, to my house). On the way I called up my friend to tell him to come over to check it out. I got to my house and got my parents out, they like it. My neighbors down the street (Members of Team Hybrid) thought it was pretty tyte. I drove the car back to the dealer and picked up my car. Overall, I was satisfied with the auto. I'm hoping that the 5-spd will have a little bit more kick.

EDIT: It was an 18 mile test drive :D

 

ha 18 mile test drive. i am going to test drive one on the 3rd

 

just got back from the tc test drive at full sail. even though i didnt get to actually drive the car. my cousin did though. the ride was pretty smooth(i was riding in the back) im 6'0, i reclined the seats all the way back. it wasn't as comfortable as i would thought it would be. i dont really care about the back, considering i will only be in the driver seat :D the moonroof covers were flimsy, they seem rather cheap. they should of went with a solid cover instead of the paper thin ones. sitting in the driver seat, it didnt seem all that bad, pretty comfy(only sat in it for like 2 mins). the steering wheel is smaller than what i am used to. IMO, its better for me. so that is a plus. what really surprised me was the trunk space. in the pictures with the seats up. it looks much larger. in person it is rather small, this isnt that much of a problem anyways i almost never put anything in trunk, besides groceries. the wheels looks better than i thought. i might keep them(for a little while) until i get some aftermarket ones. i can't really give my opinion on the handling or performance because i didnt drive it.

all and all, its a great car and i am getting one as soon as it hits here in orlando. my color of choice was indigo ink pearl. the flint mica looked really good in person. much better than the pictures. the azure pearl was really nice as well(a little bit too girlie for me). right now, im probably going to go with the IIP.

 

well, i finally drove a tC today. it impressed me. i'll be going out to try the other dealerships that sell them in the area later today to see if i cant get a 5-speed.

the car i tested was a non-optioned(at all) tC Automatic. the color was flit mica and it looked very nice. im about 6'1" and weigh in the neighborhood of 150lbs.

Exterior: this was the first thing that i looked at. it was a very nice black color, much like the brilliant black on the new jeep grand cherokees(lots of specks of colors). the paint seemed pretty durable, but only time will tell. the wheel/tire combination looked a little inward, could use some help there from some differently offset/width wheels to help with the look. i looked at the hood gap, and it only looks funny at an angle where you're looking down at it, but in reality, its the same space as the rest of the hood gaps were. all the other panel gaps fit perfectly and had little space inbetween. good quality control at the factory. with the sunroof open, i thought maybe the glass deflector would take a severe beating from stones bouncing off of it, could be a problem. the rear end is alot nicer in person, but more rounded compared with the rest of the vehicle. kinda weird there. overall, i was impressed with the looks of the tC and everything seemed to work well for it. the aftermarket should jump on this thing, its very agressive from the factory.

Interior: i havent had a chance to play with the switchgear, but the sunroof and window operations felt very nice. i didnt like how the sunroof stopped in a few places when going back, or wasnt automatic foward. the one touch front windows were great though. i noticed no wind buffeting on the example i drove. everything operated great.

Seating: i did not like the seats. the front seats were over lumbar supported, and made the side bolsters feel too small. the material looked nice, but it was a bit squishy, which is fine for long trips, but im not exactly into that anymore. the rear seat entry was a bit tricky, felt crammed getting in and out. headroom was good, but only had a few inches to spare, which is fine. the rear seat was great, except when reclined to a far back position. my head felt like it was going to scrub the ceiling a couple of times, but adjusting the rear seat helped. legroom was great! i cant tell you how much the long wheelbase of this vehicle helps it in the back. with the front seats at full back positions, it was very nice, and lots of legroom was available, way more than my RSX. big plus on the interior. i'll get a better feel for the rest of the switchgear when i test another one.

now the fun part :twisted: the test drive

Engine: being a 2.4L with 160hp/tq, it felt very strong. it hauled it's mass very well, and was plently powerful. things could only get better with a 5-speed manual. i would say its every bit as quick as a new accord coupe 4-cylinder, its most direct competitor(except in price). taking a look under the car before the drive showed me that the biggest improvement in the exhaust system is aft of the rear "axle". the muffler looks very restrictive, probably a good 5-6hp to be gained there with a straighter muffler. i doubt the TRD muffler makes anything but sound. in the engine compartment, it seemed very well thought out. the intake is about as good as its going to get, as there's no room for a "true" cold air induction system. might as well just throw a fancy tube and filter on there and call it a day. a heat shield would help alot. the exhaust manifold looks to be the largest restriction of the engine. flat, twisted, close coupled catalytic converter, and looking very cramped, it seems nice equal length tuned runners with a relocated cat would do wonders in this department. gains would be comparable to a Spec-V's gains with a header. bottom end torque was plentlyful, and it was easy to spin or chirp the tires in first gear from a stop. high end seemed lacking, but different camshafts would REALLY help that. my heart dropped when i heard the motor mounts were fluid filled though i'd have to fabricate some polyurethane ones just to get that awsome feedback like my RSX.

Transmission: seeing as it was an automatic i didnt pay much attention. shifts were a little to harsh, and downshifts really hurt. i dont like the automatic one bit. seemed very strained. driving very easy on the car would greatly help, and would disguise this problem. i wouldnt try driving it spiritedly though with the automatic.

Suspension: my favorite part of any car. taking a look at it in the lot made it seem like there was a bit of improvement to be had in the stiffness of the springs and size of the antiroll bars. a strut tower bar at each end of the vehicle would help, but the front looked to be a bit tricker than the rear for placement. feel and feedback were great, but there wasnt as much as in my RSX. probably because of the all-season Bridgestone Potenza RE-92's soft sidewall. grip was plentyful and the turning circle was great. dampening was great and it rode over harsh bumps, potholes, and even a dirt backroad like a champ. good tuning here. it was very responsive and fun to drive. i'd definately ditch the stock wheel and tire package, upgrade the springs/dampers, and the antiroll bars. this has tons of potential.

i'll be sure to try to get into a 5-speed ASAP and update this when i do. then its time to hit my favorite curvy road and let you know how it really performs.

 

Hey folks,
Just came back from the tC Unleashed test drive event here in Orlando. It's being held at Full Sail. I filled out a form, they slapped a wrist band on me and I was taken for a test ride (I'm 20...no driving for me ). Something about the tC just screams boring and plain...compared to the xA and xB. It felt like the tC was the luxury flagship of Scion (it probably is..heh). Mostly everything felt solid...but just felt plain. Like Erica said, the moonroof's cover is cheap. It's like the cargo cover for the xA, maybe thinner. The clock looked cheap, also.

The test drive was barely around the block. It was just a drive around the outside of the Full Sail campus. The ride was smooth...but it was a short ride. It was a fun experience, but I'm not gonna beg my mom to let me trade my xA for the tC... Oh, but I did get some goodies. I got a Scion t-shirt (wooo), a mix cd, the Winter '04 brochuromag©, and a $15 (!!!) gift certificate to my favorite record store, Park Ave CDs.

 

hey, did i see you there??? i was with my two cousins. yeah, the ride was short. i didnt get to drive either. all autos. except for the azure pearl(couldn't drive, display) i got the scion cap. the moonroof covers looked very cheap too me. i sure do hope a aftermarket company comes out with some better ones. stayed there for like a total of 20 mins. they didn't have the black sand pearl, super white or the black cherry. for display.

 

ahh something else i noticed but forgot to mention. i didnt like the cover's at all, and although the rear glass roof was cool looking, i'd rather have a real roof and hard cover for the sunroof.

 

I didn't see anyone there... I was in jeans and a black Mercury Program shirt... I was there around 12. I forgot to mention the interior... I was talking to Kaeon and I told him it looked like ashy skin... Maybe the car was just real dirty?

 

I found this review on a Mazda forum. It's written by a person, like me, who is considering the Mazda3 and the tC. Anyway...

I test-drove, back-to-back, the brand-new Scion (Toyota) tC 2-door hatchback and a Mazda3s hatch. Had driven the various Mazda3 configurations many times before, but wanted to re-inforce what I knew. NOTE -- this test for both cars was with an automatic, which is all either dealer had. My understanding is that Scion makes their dealers purchase a dedicated tester, which is always an automatic. (Maybe this is standard practice with others too?)

Since you already know the Mazda, I'll focus more on the Scion's traits. I know these aren't equal vehicles but I figure lots of folks will cross-shop the two, given the price/performance similarities.

PERFORMANCE

- Base Scion feels to be about the same accelleration as Mz3. With optional supercharger (bolt-on, and coming in October) the Scion will be much quicker, but price of supercharger will be $2900 - $3300! (Price depends on who does the install, $3300 quote is from the dealer, note that both are factory-warranted but dealer adds his own install warranty on top). That's a lot to pay for an extra 40 hp; no doubt there will be those who will, but couldn't we turbo/super up the Mz3 for less?

- Steering is MUCH heavier than Mz3. Mazda3 steering is a true delight.

- Front of Scion feels nose-heavy in turns, but straight ahead at freeway speed seems a little less "darty" than Mazda. To me, it's the typical Toyota "safe" understeer. I personally would rather get used to the Mazda way.

- Scion's ride is firmer in city driving. Seems much rougher over railroad tracks than Mazda. For some reason seems to smooth out on the freeway, taking expansion joints and lane markers well. But overall I would rate the Mazda a much better engineered ride/handling compromise.

- Scion rattles and flexes a bit more. If you test it, take it over railroad tracks. I blame the sunroof, which is very cool but has such a wide opening, it might be impacting body stiffness.

- Scion braking is excellent, but then so is Mazda's. I would rate the Scion slightly better in pedal feel.

- ABS is standard, as I feel it should be on the Mazda.

- Some of "drumming" sound at freeway speeds that you get with the Mazda hatch. Both cars IMO could use a little more soundproofing.

EXTERIOR

- Scion looks as lumpy from the side as their website pictures make it appear. That high beltline and two-door configuration gives it a little bit of an upside-down bathtub look.

- Nose of Scion looks much better in person than in photos on Web. Nicely done.

- Sides are very bare, tall and slab-like. No moldings or sculpting or anything. You'll either like it or you won't.

- After you're used to the four doors on the Mazda, a 2-door Scion seems awkward.

- Hatch area is large but shallow. Rear seats fold nicely flat. To accomodate the reclining rear seats, there's a tricky adjustment portion to the hatch area cover that you'll either think is very clever, or kludgy.

- Glass of roof is nicely done as one big "sweep" over the car. (Too bad they didn't style the rest of the car....sorry, I just had to say that!!)

- Have you seen the Scion paint selections? To my eye they're bizarre. Their version of every color is many shades darker than the equivalent Mazda color, and there's less of them (7 colors). Their "Flint Mica" is like a blacker Titanium, the "Dark Cherry" is a very dark-blackened Velocity Red and their "Indigo Ink" is a very somber version of Winning Blue. The only light color is "Azure", a kind of goofy talcum-powder blue, and of course there's black and white (a very plain white it is too; looks like a refrigerator). It seems Scion is trying to start some trend of dark, depressing colors just to be different. I would say they look elegant if they did, but they don't, just weird. (Or maybe I just don't "get it"...)

INTERIOR

- Headroom in Scion is VERY tight. I'm only 5'6" and with the seat in an average-comfortable position, I had literally just an inch of room above my head. Makes it cool with the sunroof because it's like, right there, but I think you tall guys are going to have a problem.

- Learned why the Scion boasts reclining seats in the rear -- because there's NO headroom. At 5'6", my head was pushing exactly where the headliner seam touches the hatch glass --- not a very comfortable ride, especially over the aforementioned railroad tracks. You HAVE to recline them to sit up. But to me, reclining the seats in back looks really stupid. Your friends are going to feel wierd.

- Scion dash/door interior materials look higher in quality than the Mazda. The design is much "cleaner", rather than having as many seams/color/texture changes as Mazda. However, the Scion is very stark. No color at all. Even the black-on-silver instruments seem to reject color. It's a deliberate attempt to marry high-quality materials in a very simplistic design. I personally don't favor it. The highly-touted "rice paper" texture of the dash especially seems bland after just a while looking at it. Your eye sort of gets lost in it looking for some evidence of pleasure, kinding of like looking through fog. Surprisingly for a black dash, it's also much more glaring/reflective on the windshield than it should be, due in part to the "waterfall" slope they gave it. Really stupid IMO. I hate glare.

- Scion's silver trim on middle-dash area is excellent quality, better than it looks on the website. Can't tell whether I'd get sick of the little door over the radio or come to love it, but it fits with the very "clean" image. Hate to say it but Mazda dash.interior looks a little junkier after you see the two.

- Middle console doesn't stick into your knee area like the Mazda does. Feels better. I know some of you like the knee rest aspect but I keep wanting to push it out the way.

- No lumbar support adjustment on seat, and they really need it (Scion). Seats are weak in that area. Mazda's feel much better in lower back but Scion's feel OK higher up. (Subaru WRX's feel best of all to me...)

- No interior release for hatch (just in case you thought it might).

- Controls very nicely done.

- Instrument display very nicely done. Looks like a miniature Lexus, if you don't mind no color during the day (it's amber at night).

- No Manu-matic mode on the automatic. The way it's gated makes it not easy to pop it into next gear down for engine braking down a hill. Still like that feature on the Mazda a lot.

- Seat cloth on Scion seems excellent quality. Oddly enough it has a very slight touch of blue to it, which might look funky on a red car


AUDIO

Unable to judge. Scion was so new it didn't have a radio installed. Probably awesome if you customize it enough.

Well, there you have my many opinions. Obviously tons of people at Toyota worked hard to make the Scion look and feel unique on the inside, and of very high quality, but it's almost like they tried too hard. Outside they didn't even try. Steering/powertrain/chassis feels classically Toyota, safe but a little numb. Overall it's a car that to me says "Oh, yeah, they obviously tried to do something different here" in a kind of an "oh, whatever" way (especially with that very stark interior), but in the end, to me it just doesn't have that whimsical fun component that makes it sing, that makes you say "I really want this car".

 

hmm.. i left before 12... the cars were dirty on the outside. didnt notice it on the inside. ashy skin??? lol

 

Finally got to drive one today.. white auto at Keith PiersonToyota/Scion in Jacksonville.

This car is friggin sweet. I ordered a manual and didn't expect much from the auto, but that damn engine is peppy and the throttle response is nice. The options are excellent. This is one clean design...

Handling is excellent and is not in need of immediate spring upgrades. The steering is immediately responsive. The brakes are very solid feeling and quick.

My favorit part.. the sound the door makes when you close it... a nice short "woosh" sound.. no rattling... now that's good quality.

Also..I'm a big guy.. 5'10.. and a stocky 255lbs... but it was still comfortable...nice fit. If you're 5'10' and up you will need to adjust the seat, but no biggie.

btw.. the hood gap is NOT that noticible.. lighten up guys.

My only concerns were the flip cover on the CD player and the sunroof covers.. the cd cover is a bit flimsy and had some functioning issues at first (bastard wouldn't open until I pushed three times), however, a very minor issue and I'm sure you can live with it. As for the sunroof covers, the only type of cover thay could possibly use were the soft vinyl type. This isn't a big issue but I wish it was maybe motorized or had a better latching system.

DON'T let these two minor personal prefernces effect your opinon... this car is worth every penny (just not a $700 doc fee ).

Overall this car is everything I hoped it would be.

My Black with manual transmission should be here this week sometime.. fingers are crossed. :D

 

anybody else wishing there were a 6th gear? This isn't exactly a 'test drive' thing, but starting a new thread for it would have been tedious. I'm not too sure if you'd be able to accurately judge w/only a test drive, but after two days of owning the tC, I'm really starting to wish there were a 6th gear for highway cruising. Just to get up to 65mph, you're already pushin 3500rpms (for a 6k redline, that seems a bit high). Just my .02. anyone?

 

CervezA, I agree with you about your 6th gear idea. I test drove a manual tC yesterday on the freeway and the RPMs are certainly high at 65+ mph. However, I think this is fairly common for cars in this class, even compared to 6-speed manual's. I've always been a fan of the Acura RSX (and still debating to get an RSX over a tC), but I recently read that even the RSX Type-S RPM's will spin up to 3500+ at freeway speeds in 6th gear. The same was true for a Hyundai Tiburon V6 GT when I had it out on the highway in the top gear. I wish I was able to drive the tC more on city streets, but I definitely wasn't very impressed with the performance in the lower gears, although it seems to rebound in the middle to upper RPM's. 3rd gear seemed especially sluggish. The car as a whole, though, was impressive. One test drive didn't cause me to break out my checkbook, but I plan on going back to give it another spin around the block to try to seal the deal for me.