TroysRollaSX

Niiiice! There's no skool like old skool cool!

*subs to thread*

Stupid question again from me: Ethanol blended fuel - best avoided, or ok?

Also, on the topic of fuel, is anything above a 95 octane fuel a waste in a 16v smallport 4AGE like in my 'rolla, or is it worth spending the extra to put in 98?

I'm not really a fan of the series 2 alloys, but quite like the look of the series 1 alloys if they're in decent condition and nice and clean.

Anyone got a set of them they don't mind parting with. Obviously it would be fantastic if they already had usable rubber on them, but doesn't matter if they don't.

Cheers.

Troy.

Dont worry about it!!!!!!!!!!!!! It should be fine, just dont drive into a lake.

Hahaha it's not a Bugatti Veyron driven by an absolute goose!

Also, I figure this is a good place to ask if anyone has the graphs for kw and torque for the 16v redtop 4AGEs? I'm curious to see what the torque curve looks like if at all possible...

A review is a review guys. Some people like to take things a little personally.

At the end of the day, a review is just how the reviewer sees it. There is no better review for yourself than a review done BY yourself.

That's not a bad idea, would be interesting for us to do a review of our own cars, sort of like a long term review. I'm sure I'm not the only one here who has experienced lots of other totally different vehicles...

I know my Corolla is a 1992 AE93 SX SECA, so it's not exactly new, but still, it's still a Corolla...

They felt spongy and weak and weren't progressive in their stopping power. In fact, we didn't get any real stopping power until almost halfway of brake pedal travel, especially at high speed.

I agree, but I am not sure whether corolla has a weak braking system, anyone comments?

My Corolla doesn't have a weak braking system at all, in fact it stops VERY well!

There is one area where we found the Corolla to be very uncomfortable to drive – it has such weak low beam headlights.

I agree, we find out this problem when we rent this car

We've easily bettered 7.2L/100klm in a Honda Accord Euro, which is a car with 40% more power than the Corolla.

I think the car must sit more than 1 person, this adds up 0.2L/100KM... I am able to do 6.9L/100KM this week because of school holiday in Sydney

Mine gets excellent fuel economy, I'll be doing a trip up the highway soon and will be filling up and resetting the trip meter, then driving up the highway, getting to my destination, filling up again and noting the trip meter reading.

I did a trip up to Echuca from Melbourne and back and went through about 30L of fuel a while ago, which I thought was decent for that trip, can't remember what that worked out to in L/100km

why are the old corollas called TWINKYS?

EDIT.

i just realised while typing this..... it was derived from the term "twin cam" right?

Spot on mate! Same reason the Ford Escort with the Lotus twin cam engine is also often referred to as a twink. http://www.uniquecarsandparts.com.au/car_info_ford_escort_twin_cam.htm

Gotta love twin cams!

Well I can put my hand on my heart and say that if I was to review my corolla, it would be NOTHING like that review. I think this part summed it up:

There are also well thought out double drink holders up front, right in front of the side air vents – no beer bottle … ummm … we mean “soft drink can” to get in the way when you’re shifting gears. Nice touch Toyota!

I know it was intended as a joke, but it shows the crowd they're writing for.

The passenger side front electric window has become very slow to go up and down, easily half the speed of the other windows. Anyone able to point me in the right direction of what might be the cause and how to fix it?

hey lol. whats TLC ?

Tender Loving Care = basically look after it well

Good to see so many level headed people, as well as those who are man enough to admit they are not always angels. Makes me even more keen to go on the next cruise, as I don't get the impression that people will pour scorn on me if I'm not driving on the limit the whole time.

Oh well, seems that my post was in the right thread, hahaha

Now, my stupid question. Does the 4AGEs cold start injector get activated at any other time other then when the engine is not up to temperature? It doesn't look it from the wiring diagram (looks to me like it only operates when the thermotime switch activates it, but thought it best to ask.

Reason being that I'm considering adding a relay and LED in the instrument cluster to show when the that system is active, to remind me to be gentle with it until that light goes out and stays out (and yes, I'm aware that it will probably flicker if I don't use a suitable capacitor as well), but if that injector gets activated at WOT then it wouldn' t be so much a 'still cold' light, more a 'back off' light, if you get what I mean?

Or is this idea too stupid for even this thread? lol

In the case of the C52 gearbox in my SX, for example, first gear is 3.166:1, and the final drive ratio is 4.310:1.

So for every revolution of the engine while it's in 1st gear, it's then multiplied by 3.166, and then multiplied again by 4.310 before being passed along to the drive wheels by the drive shaft. So at say 2000 engine rpm, after the gearbox it becomes 6332 gearbox rpm (2000 x 3.166), and then it's multiplied again by the diff (final ratio), so it becomes 27290.92 driveshaft rpm (6332 x 4.310). Now lets see the numbers at 4000 engine rpm, they would be 12664 gearbox rpm (4000 x 3.166) and 54581.84 driveshaft rpm (12664 x 4.310).

Now lets look at 5th gear (ratio of 0.815:1), same rpm. 2000 rpm gives us 1630 gearbox rpm (2000 x 0.815) and 7025.3 driveshaft rpm (1630 x 4.310). 4000rpm gives us 3260 gearbox, and 14050.6 driveshaft.

Compare the final resulting numbers (at 2000rpm 27290.92 in 1st, 7025.3 in 5th, 4000rpm 54581.84 in 1st, 14050.6 in 5th) and you can see that there is a MASSIVE difference in how much difference the gearbox is making to how much torque is being transferred to the wheels (remember, torque = turning force).

You got it the wrong way around dude. Both the gearbox and final drive are REDUCTION ratios, ie the first gear ratio of 3.166:1 is 3.166 turns of the engine gives 1 revolution of the gearbox output shaft. So to get one revolution of the driveshaft, you need to have 13.65 turns of the engine. So 2000rpm in first gear gives 146.6 turns of the driveshaft, and in 5th you have 569.4 turns of the driveshaft. (ie about 4 times faster than in first).

With gearbox ratios, torque and speed are inverse relationships. So if you have a 4.3:1 reduction (ie 4.3 turns of the input = 1 turn of the output) in speed you have a 4.3:1 multiplication of torque (output torque is 4.3 times greater than input torque).

Ahh, cheers, had been thinking about that since I posted it and thought I'd got it wrong there, but wasn't sure, thanks. Anyway, I was on the right track I think, just forgot that it's reduction instead of multiplication, but the torque multiplication part was the main bit and I was on the money there, even if I totally stuffed up the maths (guess who failed year 11 maths? lol)

The gearing analogy on a mountain bike and the force required to go forward in the different gears made sense tho to illustrate the torque multiplication I hope?

And also i feel that 1st n 2nd gears arent showing a bigger difference in torque aa 3rd. If this is true, y is that?

I believe (and I could be wrong here I'll admit), that it's a result of torque multiplication, which is what the gearbox does.

Think of riding say a mountain bike with 6 cogs on the rear wheel and 3 at the front. Remember how much easier it is to pedal with it set to the smallest cog at the crank and the largest cog at the wheel? Think of that as first gear. Why is it easier to pedal then? Because the torque (turning force) you apply to the pedals and thus crank is then multiplied by the gearing difference between the sizes of the 2 cogs. You don't need to apply as much force to get moving faster, but the ultimate top speed isn't particularly fast because very quickly your legs can't go any faster.

Now think of the same bike, but with it set to the biggest cog at the crank, but the smallest at the rear. Think of this as top gear. Close enough to impossible to start moving with, and you require a lot more force (torque) applied to the pedals and crank to speed up, however the top speed that can be achieved is much higher. This is because the torque multiplication is much lower.

In the case of the C52 gearbox in my SX, for example, first gear is 3.166:1, and the final drive ratio is 4.310:1.

So for every revolution of the engine while it's in 1st gear, it's then multiplied by 3.166, and then multiplied again by 4.310 before being passed along to the drive wheels by the drive shaft. So at say 2000 engine rpm, after the gearbox it becomes 6332 gearbox rpm (2000 x 3.166), and then it's multiplied again by the diff (final ratio), so it becomes 27290.92 driveshaft rpm (6332 x 4.310). Now lets see the numbers at 4000 engine rpm, they would be 12664 gearbox rpm (4000 x 3.166) and 54581.84 driveshaft rpm (12664 x 4.310).

Now lets look at 5th gear (ratio of 0.815:1), same rpm. 2000 rpm gives us 1630 gearbox rpm (2000 x 0.815) and 7025.3 driveshaft rpm (1630 x 4.310). 4000rpm gives us 3260 gearbox, and 14050.6 driveshaft.

Compare the final resulting numbers (at 2000rpm 27290.92 in 1st, 7025.3 in 5th, 4000rpm 54581.84 in 1st, 14050.6 in 5th) and you can see that there is a MASSIVE difference in how much difference the gearbox is making to how much torque is being transferred to the wheels (remember, torque = turning force).

Now think about how much you need to bury your right foot in 1st compared to 5th to accelerate. When you look at the numbers involved, you can see that the engine is needing to do a lot more work in 5th then it is in 1st, because there is a whole lot less torque multiplication being done.

I hope I've made sense, and I didn't take into account the tyres rotational speed, which then can show has fast the vehicle is travelling, and yes I've over simplified it a bit, but the very short version is this:

The lower the gear, the more torque multiplication the gearbox does and thus the easier it is for the engine to increase rpm.

hey thanks for the tip.

Instead of going to all that trouble, i tried resizing it with another program.

The first one i was using was paint!

but it looks better now. obviously not as good as yours but still alright

thanks for your help

Paint... there's your problem. A much better option is to use irfanview, it's free, fast and does a decent job: http://www.irfanview.com/

Once you've got it installed, load a picture into it, then click the image menu, then select the resize/resample menu option.

Or if you only want part of that picture, simply select what you want to keep with the mouse held down over the pic, draw a rectangle around what you want to keep, then click the edit menu and select the crop selection menu option. Then you can resize it if need be.

When saving, if you're saving as a jpeg, the save quality slider makes a BIG difference, and controls how much compression is applied to the image. The lower the quality, the worse it will look, but the smaller the resulting file will be. The higher the quality, the better it will look, but it will be bigger.

Usually between 80% and 93% is a fair compromise to use.

I hope that helps a bit.

Go-karts sounds good, I think I've got my helmet ready... :D

+1 Sure sounds like fun to me!

I forgot, I also plan on putting in a thicker rear swaybar (after reading this article), and a few driver information modifications, such as a light to tell me when the engine still thinks it's cold (so I'm reminded to not give it a hard time yet), and the fuelsmart and eLabtronics Timer (to allow the electric windows to work for another 60 seconds after the ignition is turned off) projects that are on Autospeed. If anyone has done any of these things, or anything like it, I would appreciate any input you might have. I'm also considering putting a PS2 in the glovebox, connected to the LCD screen, which would be easy seeing as it's a slim PS2, just need to get a suitable inverter.

nice car, takes me back to my youth

whitestivo

Thanks mate!

Hahahaha GOLD! Thanks for the laugh!

Almost a year ago I was after a new car to replace the poor old, worn out, 1979 Ford XD Falcon GL stationwagon, I was driving around with a very tired old 4.1 6 cylinder and auto.

I had a budget of no more then $5000 and one of my friends suggested I have a look at a Corolla SECA SX, and sent me links to a few of them on carsales. The first one I called up about had aftermarket wheels on it and less then 200,000kms, but was already sold by the time I called up. The second one had just clocked over 200,000kms, and was stock asides from tinted windows and a DVD player. I organised to go and take it for a test drive, and being used to an engine that ran out of go at 3,000 rpm, didn't take it above that, but I was still impressed - electric windows, electric mirrors, air-conditioning (didn't have any of these in the old Ford) comfortable seats, it drove, stopped and handled well, and I was sure it would be much better on fuel then my old Ford.

So I put a deposit on it there and then, and then a week or so later he'd organised the RWC, so I went and paid the outstanding amount and picked it up, and took it straight to a mates place, then we both went to the car wash to give it a good clean:

Then in summer, I decided the windows needed to be re-tinted, so I went for a darker tint then was already on there:

After that has just been maintenance, oil and oil filter changes every 5000kms, new brake pads all around, new rotors on the rear (no idea how the old ones passed RWC, the handbrake hardly held the car on a hill and there was a few mm lip on the rear rotors), new leads, put in a set of platinum plugs instead of the supercheap ones that were in.

It came with a pod filter that wasn't installed (obviously wouldn't have passed the RWC with that fitted), so I did fit it for a while, and I liked the sound, but put it back to standard to avoid possible problems with the boys (and gals) in blue.

This video was taken before I removed the pod and put it back to standard:

A few other videos:

I'm VERY happy with it still, great little car and I get a lot of comments on the colour. Also it has surprised many of my friends by being just as quick (and sometimes quicker!) in a straight line as their Falcons (I6s and V8s), and even has no trouble keeping up with a BA XR6 Turbo (4 speed auto) on a twisty road and on a rolling start pulls away until the turbo comes on boost. Not bad for a 1.6L 4 cylinder that still gets great fuel economy (that can't be said about the Falcons)!

I plan on adding a CAI, putting on a decent catback exhaust system, putting in a sub and amp, putting on better wheels and tyres (would love to put a set of simmons V4s on it) and getting a bit more power out of the 4AGE.

Anyway, as and when things get done, I'll update this thread.

Thanks for having a look!

Troy.

great meeting you the other morning.

Hope to see you on a few more meets.

Andy.

Cheers mate, you lot had an awesome day for it weather wise, and it was great to meet you too, as well as all the others. Great bunch of people who I'd be happy to catch up with again at another meet! And thanks for posting that link, otherwise I would never have found this place.

Wish I could have made it, but I'm glad I got to meet some of you and check out some cool cars up at Maccas before you all got to Ringwood lake.

I'll be coming along on the next one for sure!

Hi everyone!

I only just discovered this place, but met a few members on the 26th up at Nunawading Macdonalds yesterday (the 26th of September 2010)

I have a 1992 Corolla SECA SX (5 speed manual, 4AGE), stock asides from the dark tint and DVD head-unit and screen. But it's still my pride and joy.

I've attached a picture of it down in Lorne earlier this year.

Also, here's a video tour of it I took earlier this year, the pod filter has been removed and it's back to the stock air filter setup now:

It's not exactly my first car, but it's my first Toyota, first fuel injected engine, first FWD, first to have an engine rated above 100kw, and first to look so damn good!

I've got plans for it, including better wheels (and even more importantly, better tyres!), better exhaust, CAI, and warm up the 4AGE a bit.

Anyway, hi everybody!