Jump to content
Do Not Sell My Personal Information


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • First Name
  • Toyota Model
    Mazda 323F
  • Toyota Year
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

MikiMaz's Achievements


Rookie (2/14)

  • First Post
  • Conversation Starter

Recent Badges



  1. This is exactly what my impression was at the dealers. I had no way to "measure" the light brightness and distribution, but I found the parabola LED beam visibly weaker and the high beam surprisingly narrow. Absolutely agree. It is really difficult to find detailed information on the lighting characteristics of a car although it is a very important point for potential owners.
  2. Hi, thank you for your replies. I did not have a good opportunity to compare the two versions, neither have I found any comparisons by others. I tried to compare the two headlights at the dealers and it seemed to me that the Bi-LED was way brighter. I know this was not a reliable 'measurement', I might have been wrong. Just for the look I probably would not have chosen the Bi-LED, but brightness is a very important point for me because I am suffering with my old halogens now a lot. In Hungary, the Style trim option includes the Bi-LED headlights too. It's interesting how different these trims are in the various countries, even in the same region (or the name 'Style' has a different meaning). Thanks
  3. Hi, it's me again hesitating between different trims of the Corolla TS. Now I wonder whether the Bi-LED headlights are brighter and have a better light beam than the parabola LEDs? The dealer says that the difference is only aesthetic but my impression is that the Bi-LED is brighter. Is it possible to find some comparison? Thanks
  4. Yes, that's correct. I'll check that, thanks.
  5. Many thanks for the replies. I also think that the bigger alloys contribute to the different drive characteristics. My favorite version would be a Trek with 16" wheels but my dealer is unwilling to offer such a combination. In fact I do not understand why Toyota offer the Trek version with bigger alloys; probably this trim is meant as an off road version from the visual point of view only. Peter, special thanks for your detailed answer, personal experience is the most useful information. In fact I would not like to use the car off road other than a few meters to drive into the garden of my mother-in-law's house. I am driving a Mazda 323F now with a pretty small ground clearance (140 mm I think) and I have already scratched the underbody a number of times on a slightly downward sloping driveway. My driving style is not particularly sporty so I do not need a very tight suspension, however, me and my wife hate the wobbliness of cars which we have experienced a few times (driving e.g. Citroen C3 or Kia Venga). And my other worry is about the potentially increased stiffness of the springs which is often applied in cars with elevated center of mass to compensate for the proneness to wobbling. The city road surfaces here where I live are generally very bumpy, so I am looking for a good trade-off between drive comfort and usability under poor road conditions. Maybe a Trek with 16" alloys would be solution if my dealer was a bit more flexible. As for the new Trek trim, my dealer told me that the new cars would have a new infotainment system (at a higher price of course), which is a most welcome improvement I think. But he did not mention any other modifications. I think I would not need a leather upholstery or 18" alloys, so I hope the rest will still be the same as before. But I have to hurry to make up my mind before the prices are raised again...
  6. Welcome to Toyota Owners Club - Toyota Forum. Please feel free to browse around and get to know the others. Why not introduce yourself in the New Members section.

  7. Hi Everyone, I am seriously considering ordering a Corolla TS 2.0 and would like to ask for your advice. I cannot decide whether I should go for the normal or the TREK version. I am quite worried about the small ground clearance of the normal one (135 mm as far as I know) so I would prefer the TREK version just for the increased ride height (even for normal use). But I would not like a potentially wobblier ride due to the elevated chassis (which I have read about in some reviews). I only had a few short test drives so far but it was not enough to check the cars' behavior on different road surfaces. My impression was that the normal version ran smoother, and the TREK was more prone to undulate (mainly longitudinally rather than wobbling side to side), and maybe hitting a pothole gave a harder response to the car body. I am not sure whether my impressions are correct, but I suspect that the normal version runs smoother and may be more enjoyable to drive than the TREK. Can anybody help me and give a comparison between the suspension systems of the two models? Thanks, Miki
  • Create New...