2007 Corolla LE

kyoo · Sep 8, 2013

Hey all

Was recently given a 2007 Toyota Corolla LE in automatic with roughly 160k miles on it. Parents basically gave this car to me to use as a beater when they bought their new Camry. Other cars in my stable include an 06 Evo IX with various mods, and an 08 Mini Cooper base that I run in HS for SCCA Solo. If the Rolla were manual rather than auto I definitely would have tried running it as well, but sadly it will just be relegated to DD duties, and the Mini moved to a more dedicated role for HS. I'll post pics of all cars soon.

One thing I'll definitely be doing is keeping track of the MPG via fuelly.com. First tank of my own was ~36mpg, which is about what I expected. The Mini will do 38-42 easily depending on highway miles, but it also takes premium fuel. The actual cost per mile for the Rolla is lower due to only requiring regular.

Otherwise, I don't have too many plans for the car as far as mods go; I'll keep it for at least a year since it was a gift from my parents, but may eventually trade it in for something else.

Upcoming mods/maintenance:
- Stock headlights seem quite dim - will probably look into putting HIDs in, which seems to require disabling the DRLs/cutting wires etc. More input on that would be very appreciated

**update - after looking a little more into it (retrofitting projectors, etc.) i've decided it's a bit more than i wanted to go through with for the beater. I found these on Amazon - [ame]http://www.amazon.com/Philips-CrystalVision-Ultra-Headlight-Low-Beam/dp/B00480FIEG/[/ame] and seems to work well enough, and probably the best option for someone like me.

- Need new wipers, basic stuff. Bosch Clear Advantage seems to get decent ratings on Amazon, and cheap enough. 24" drivers, 18" pass side looks to be right.

- Change engine oil to Amsoil SSO 0w30 for improved cold-start wear and efficiency (have a dealer acct if anyone else is interested)
- Maybe change the auto trans fluid, and bump up the tire pressures for more efficiency.

Planning to keep things pretty minimal, but still enjoy making logs for this sort of thing. Thanks for the read!

Pic:

Scott O'Kashan · Sep 8, 2013

Welcome aboard! :thumbsup:

kyoo · Sep 8, 2013

Thanks!

Went ahead and got the headlight bulbs and wipers (minor I know) and oil change and filter on the way. Hopefully car runs a little smoother after!

kyoo · Sep 9, 2013

hangfire said:

I totally agree with you there - I try to run as close to 4300k as possible with my cars, definitely not a fan of blue lights anything like that. The package said it'd be 4000k, so I'm hoping it'll run close to just pure white light and have good output. Thanks for the tire pressure recs, I'll be sure to try that out.

Just swapped oil to Amsoil 0w30 (with 1 qt of 5w30 Amsoil I had leftover), hoping to note any slight improvements in fuel consumption.

Has anyone changed the auto trans fluid? I checked on the Amsoil site, it wasn't too clear whether it needed 3.2qts or 7.7..

kyoo · Sep 10, 2013

update on this:

I'm considering just going with the WS for the trans fluid, a lot of conflicting info out there about what can and can't be used. I don't have the manual, but from what I can tell through bitog etc is that the WS atf seems to have a cst of around 7.2 - right in the middle of the two that Amsoil offers. I'm curious to see if the fuel efficient ATF will work in the car (cst 6.9). Obviously operating temp is the only factor that goes into play for fluid selection, but I can't imagine Toyota's WS has some secret sauce that the trans can only take that fluid..

Scott O'Kashan · Sep 10, 2013

Per the online AMSOIL Product Application Guide, the recommended automatic transmission fluid performance standard for a 2007 Toyota Corolla is Type-III and T-IV, not WS. AMSOIL Signature Series Multi-Vehicle Synthetic Automatic Transmission, (ATF), Fluid is rated Toyota Type-III and T-IV, the Signature Series Fuel-Efficient Synthetic Automatic Transmission Fluid, (ATL), is only rated Toyota WS and is not for a Type-III or T-IV application.

Modern transmission fluids are very complex and indeed do have different, "secret sauces", as you put it. Using the incorrect transmission fluid can cause transmission failure.

kyoo · Sep 10, 2013

Scott O'Kashan said:

Good call, thanks for that - I think I will go ahead and ask the dealer to change it with whatever they normally change it with, since they include changing the trans filter etc as well.

Scott O'Kashan · Sep 10, 2013

If you want the transmission to last longer, run quieter and cooler, improve fuel economy, etc., then you'll want the AMSOIL Synthetic Automatic Transmission fluid and not the stock stuff from Toyota.

By the way, always follow the online AMSOIL Product Application Guide and the products it recommends, because if you don't and use a non-recommended product that causes a problem, there is no warranty on that and you are left holding the bag for potentially thousands of dollars in repairs to someones car. Pays to be careful. :thumbsup:

kyoo · Sep 10, 2013

i totally agree (have 10yr amsoil dealership lol) and for the evo and the mini the only stuff that goes in amsoil, but for this car, at this point for the trans, just gonna let the Toyota dealer do its thing.

Still not sure though - for the flush, does it take 7.7qts or 3.2?

Scott O'Kashan · Sep 10, 2013

Why pay more for a transmission fluid that doesn't perform and protect as well?

Automatic transmission rebuilds are $2,000 + these days. Might save you a lot of money to avoid that.

kyoo · Sep 11, 2013

^ i've decided to go with the amsoil trans fluid - but I'm still not sure if it needs 7.7 for the flush or 3.2?

reason to go with OE fluid is that this car is gonna be with me for another 1-2 years tops, meh. regardless, going with Amsoil but not sure how much Corollas take for a full flush

kyoo · Sep 11, 2013

on a side note, this forums not emailing me instant notifications for subscribed threads like i requested.. need to look into that

actually while we're at it - recommendations for spark plugs? looks like denso iridium 3324 is the OEM part? Hopefully it comes pre-gapped.

I talked to the dealer and another shop, and their estimate of mid $200 doesn't even include swapping the filter... so literally just drain and fill, which is ridiculous. Looks like WIX has an auto trans filter for (58040) for 20 bucks on Amazon, so I might as well just get under the car and do it myself. I'll drain, drop the pan, clean, swap filters, pan back and refill and that'll be that

Scott O'Kashan · Sep 11, 2013

The much better performing AMSOIL Signature Series Synthetic Automatic Transmission Fluid, (ATF), is only a couple of dollars more than the lower performing/protecting AMSOIL OE Multi-Vehicle Synthetic Automatic Transmission Fluid, (OTF). If you're going to keep the car a year or more then you don't want that transmission needing a rebuild before then, so spending a couple of dollars more on the better performing/protecting AMSOIL ATF transmission fluid could save you thousands of dollars in unneeded transmission rebuild costs.

According to the AMSOIL Product Recommendation Guide, removing the pan, replacing the transmission filter and then refilling the fluid to top it off requires 3.2 quarts. Doing the job right and changing all the transmission fluid requires 7.7 quarts.

By the way, AMSOIL is spelled with all capital letters as it is an abbreviation for Al-Amatuzio-Oil. No one refers to GM as Gm, or IBM as Ibm, or UPS as Ups, etc. :thumbsup:

kyoo · Sep 11, 2013

lol jeez i thought i was the biggest amsoil fanboy i knew of.. i did get ATF, but no one, even some of the more extreme amsoil dealers i know, will tell you that using OE fluid will ruin your transmission..

Scott O'Kashan · Sep 11, 2013

I never said it would ruin your transmission. I just said the better fluid for a couple of dollars more is a better choice. I have a strong suspicion the OTF is merely a Group III based fluid. :thumbsup:

kyoo · Sep 12, 2013

gotcha - I did order the atf, hoping to tackle it this weekend, have a trip coming up next week and would like to get a read on how it feels and if there's an improvement in shifting and efficiency. also need to change the plugs which I suspect will have a big impact on efficiency.. I think they're right around the 100k mark as well

Scott O'Kashan · Sep 12, 2013

Try and do a before and after fuel economy test run on the highway seperately both for the spark plugs and the AMSOIL synthetic transmission fluid. Do at least two identical test runs over at least 30 miles of open highway to get a decent average. The results will be very interesting. I do this with my own vehicle to document the fuel economy improvements AMSOIL products provide. :thumbsup:

kyoo · Sep 12, 2013

Scott O'Kashan said:

not a bad idea - i try to do the same but i haven't had this car for very long. it may end up being that way just because i dont think the transmission filter i ordered is going to arrive on time. the effects of going to sso 0w30 are obvious though, even my girlfriend can tell lol

kyoo · Sep 12, 2013

Before and After: Crystal Vision Ultra - 09/12/2013

Just a quick before after snap of the crystal vision ultra:

not at the exact same spot but definitely a marginal improvement, which is exactly what I was expecting. A lot of the "bad" reviews about this bulb were from people expecting this to basically be an HID light - but that's not its purpose at all. I just wanted a slightly whiter, slightly brighter light that made it easier to see at night. I think this bulb accomplished that, and a reasonable and cheap alternative as opposed to HIDs. It's nowhere near HID level (both my other cars have HIDs) but it is reasonable output for a halogen bulb.

Before:

After:

kyoo · Sep 13, 2013

after driving it around a little i can definitely say the light is a little bluer than i'd like - i doubt this will go away, at least with most HIDs the light gets bluer as time goes on, but overall it is a huge improvement to the old lights - at least 30% great light output

again, it passes the girlfriend test - as in the does the girlfriend notice it when she's in the car - and she immediately did

kyoo · Sep 17, 2013

update-ish:

- after a few more days, i am definitely enjoying the increased and whiter output of these headlight bulbs. i will probably continue to use and use on any car i get in the future that may not come with halogens

- i've taken a few highway trips now, and oddly enough, my best tank was while the tires were still underinflated, old spark plugs, and on dino oil. I switched to Amsoil 0w30, brand new spark plugs, and tires inflated up to ~38psi (from ~29) and I still haven't been able to match my very first tank. I think I did have a bit of headwind on the way up though, so I'm expecting better numbers on the way back down. If not, very perplexing indeed.

Only thing left for me to do that would potentially have any impact is to change the auto trans fluid - wasn't able to get to it this weekend due to the filter not arriving on time from Amazon. I checked the air filter and it looked clean, so nothing else immediately comes to mind as far as improving my mpgs - or why I wouldn't be able to match what I had done previously with less going for me. Kinda disappointing, since the Mini will do 42 on the highway without breaking a sweat

Scott O'Kashan · Sep 17, 2013

If you'd purchased the transmission filter from a local store, you'd of had it in your hands right away. :thumbsup:

How exactly are you conducting the fuel economy tests?

Scott O'Kashan · Sep 17, 2013

Brighter burning headlight bulbs also burn out faster/don't last as long as the stock bulbs.

Scott O'Kashan · Sep 17, 2013

hangfire said:

You misunderstood my post.

The comparison is between AMSOIL Signature Series synthetic automatic transmission fluid and AMSOIL OE synthetic transmission fluid. The Signature Series line is AMSOIL's best, whereas the OE line is entry level and so for only a little bit more money the original poster can enjoy the performance, protection and peace of mind of the Signature Series line.

AMSOIL doesn't have any reps. AMSOIL is the finest product of its kind in the world and there's no, "bad name", involved with AMSOIL quality at all.

AMSOIL typically costs less to use than competing brands, especially original equipment oils, transmission fluids, etc. So there's no, "scare tactics", involved at all.

I just wanted to correct that. :thumbsup:

Below is a video from my YouTube channel that provides much more information on AMSOIL synthetic motor oils and synthetic motor oils in general. Enjoy.

Synthetic Oil Basics from http://www.HiTechOil.com

hangfire · Sep 17, 2013

kyoo said:

Yes, I'm impressed by your picture, that's a lot of increase for just a bulb swap. As Scott pointed out, they typically don't last as long, but Amazon recently had a sale where they blew out of bunch of high performance $50 lamps for 9.99 and 12.99 a pair. I stocked up and even resold one pair on eBay for a profit. :laughing:

kyoo said:

I think the answer is obvious, if you switched from OEM 0w-20 oil to 0w-30. You went up in oil weight, heavier viscosity oil takes more HP to pump through the engine and decreases fuel economy. There's a reason Mobil 1 labels their 0w-20 "Advanced Fuel Economy".

There may be other factors involved. I think it's a bit early for you to blame it on Winter formulation gas, that usually comes out around the first week of October, but you never know.

http://zhome.com/ZCMnL/PICS/winterGas/winterGas.html

HF

Scott O'Kashan · Sep 17, 2013

Certainly, as the AMSOIL Signature Series transmission fluid performs better than the AMSOIL OE transmission fluid, extending the life of the transmission.

kyoo · Sep 17, 2013

i did NOT know the oe oil that was used was 0w20, that will probably solve it.

i know the bulbs will probably burn out faster - replacing them more often is not a problem with me in exchange for the increase in output - and they definitely don't burn out as quickly as the other "white" halogen commonly used.

i'm just making general observations as far as mpg goes. if there was 0w20 in the car before this, definitely explains it. like i said the car was a gift so i don't know how it was maintained before i had it, except that the things that I did hadn't been done in a while. i'm not running any scientific tests. things will normalize after a while, i just was hoping for a bump after all the changes i made, but if the car ran 0w20 before it makes sense. they always took their car to a local non-dealer shop so i'm not sure what exactly they did

hangfire · Sep 19, 2013

OK I have to admit I was wrong... 0w20 is what is used in 10th Gen Corolla's. For your 2007 it was 5w-30, with 0w-30 being an acceptable substitute.

Nonetheless, oil MAY still explain your fuel economy issue. Lots of quick lube places and even dealers use whatever they have on hand for customer oil changes. Lately that is typically 5w-20, since that is the most common oil spec'ed for new cars for the past several years. A switch from 5w-20 to 0w-30 would still explain a fuel economy drop.

There is lots of debate concerning using 5w-20 or 0w-20 in older cars that spec'ed 5w-30. Hypermilers did not hesitate and have had good luck with it. People with warranties still in force often stick to the original spec weight. Some auto companies switched to recommending the lighter weight oil in the same engines that used to run 5w-30. Some manufacturers still recommend 30's outside the US. You have to make up your own mind if the switch is worthwhile. If going down in weight grade, I suggest going up in quality, that is, move up to a synthetic (which you already have).

kyoo · Sep 22, 2013

hangfire said:

Thanks. I did look into it and the w20 oil is backdated for at least the 03-08 corolla, and most likely that's what it's been fed. I have no hesitation with running 0w20 since the car is just daily driven to and from work for a relatively short trip (10-15m) so a lighter weight oil will probably be even better for the car, since it almost never reaches operating temp. There is 1qt of 5w30 in the car, but it really doesnt explain much since the factory estimate for all highway drives is like 38mpg

Scott O'Kashan · Sep 22, 2013

Kyoo - A 2007 Toyota Corolla is supposed to use the 5W-30 viscosity -

http://www.amsoil.com/mygarage/vehiclelookup.aspx?url2=2007+TOYOTA+COROLLA+3

With the 0W-30 you are using being the upgrade.

With fuel economy results, I have many years of experience with this area as I've completed many fuel economy test runs for my AMSOIL business and have first hand experience as to what can affect the results. I'm not criticizing mind you so please don't misunderstand, but filling up the gas tank and then driving to the next fill up and then calculating the mpg's, (as you had mentioned), is not an accurate way to compare fuel economy results. There are a plethora of uncontrolled variables that can have a huge impact on fuel economy results.

For one example, gas station fuel pumps have a pressure activated fuel cut-off that will stop pumping fuel when it senses the gas tank is, "full and this can vary widely from gas station to gas station and even from pump to pump. This by itself can have a huge impact on fuel economy results and skew any comparative fuel economy numbers, making them virtually useless.

Let's say for example that you fill up the fuel tank at gas station A and the fuel tank capacity is 13 gallons. The fuel pressure cut-off switch engages telling you your fuel tank is full. Right. With many different cars I've noted I can slowly add an additional 1.5 to 2.0 gallons of fuel after the fuel pump pressure cut-off switch engages and stops the gas pump from pumping more fuel.

Continuing, let's say we drive 300 miles on that fill up and then refill at gas station B, adding 10 gallons of fuel, (or so we think), to the fuel tank -

300 miles divided by 10 gallons = 30 mpg.

But what if the fuel pressure cut-off switch at gas station B is set differently from gas station A and senses that the fuel tank is, "full" after only 9 gallons have been pumped?

300 miles divided by 9 gallons = 33.33 mpg. Over a 3 mpg increase just by using a different fuel pump!

This is just the one uncontrolled variable of the fuel pressure-cut off switches from gas station to gas station that can totally skew comparative fuel economy results. When we add in different roads traveled at different speeds, varying tire inflation pressures, different temperatures, different wind conditions, different traffic conditions, (sitting at a stop light is delivering exactly zero miles to the gallon).

A plethora of uncontrolled variables that makes comparing fuel economy results totally invalid. It's just simply not accurate at all and can lead to incorrect conclusions, as I think you are experiencing.

With my fuel economy test runs I use a section of highway that is exactly 36.2 miles long from the fuel pump and back to the same fuel pump. The gas station I use is about 100 yards away from the highway test track I use so it's 99.99% highway mileage. Before I start out on the fuel economy run, I make sure that all four tires are inflated per factory recommendations and then I fill the fuel tank up all the way to the rim of the fuel tanks filler neck. Then I shake the car a bit and the fuel will settle, (maybe allowing air pressure to disperse), and I add more fuel, etc., until that fuel tank is completely filled. I then pull out of the gas station and immediately get on the highway gently accelerating to highway speed and set the cruise control. I travel to the predetermined exit 18.2 miles away and return to the gas station and to the exact same fuel pump I used to fill up with, (so the fuel is exactly the same), and then calculate the numbers. I do this three times to get a good average and even though the test runs are all exactly the same, the fuel economy can vary 2-3 mpg due to headwinds that kick up, vehicles passing me, etc.

On one windy day I ran a fuel economy test run to compare how much affect winds have on fuel economy and the results were eye-opening; the headwinds reduced the fuel economy by almost 7 mpg over the previous test run with no headwinds! :thumbdown: Another time, in the midst of my three run average, on run two there was heavy traffic from 18-wheelers passing me and just that buffeting from those huge trucks passing my car knocked the fuel economy down almost 4 mpg! :blink:

So with AMSOIL synthetics typically delivering a conservative 3-5% fuel economy improvement, using the tank to tank method of comparing mpg's, that fuel economy increase will not be detectable at all and lead people to falsely conclude there has been no improvement in fuel economy, or even a loss in mpg's. That's really unfortunate because most motorist spend about $1,500 - $2,000 per year in fuel costs and saving 3-5% represents a savings of $45-$100 in lower fuel costs. With my own vehicles, using AMSOIL synthetic motor oils and other products we offer, (like the P.i. fuel additive), saves me over $300 a year in fuel costs alone! So even if someone provided me another brand oil for free, it would still cost me more to use than AMSOIL. :thumbsup:

Another factor in the picture is when motorists replace their spark plugs, or use a better oil that provides more power, (just as you've experienced), the engine will have more power and better throttle response. Naturally, human nature with most people is to use that increase in power and drive in a more spirited fashion, accelerating harder, etc., which uses more fuel, reducing fuel economy.

Lastly, EPA fuel economy ratings for vehicles are notoriously inaccurate, so the real-world fuel economy your vehicle experiences vs what the EPA rates it at can vary widely.

I hope this has helped to have a more complete understanding on this issue. :thumbsup:

hangfire · Sep 22, 2013

Scott is right about how difficult it is to measure fuel economy in one tank. EPA uses 100% octane (the chemical, not the rating) fuel for tests, while the fuels we use change from station to station, season to season, and often have different Ethanol amounts that only average 10%.

But physics is physics, no matter now slippery your oil is, it takes more horsepower to pump 30w around then 20w, and that's the weight the oil is at operating temperature, no matter who makes it. No matter what brand or type involved, switching from 20w to 30w is a net negative to fuel economy. That's a fact and it's not worth arguing about it.

Scott O'Kashan · Sep 22, 2013

Correct, except the car came factory equipped with 5W-30 and Kyoo upgraded to the AMSOIL Signature Series 0W-30 synthetic, which will help fuel economy.

kyoo · Oct 14, 2013

way late response. sorry guys.

i realize there are differences with pumps etc yada yada - this should average out over time and fillups. just as easily as the clicker stops early it'll stop late etc etc. over a hundred fill ups, the average should be the appropriate mpg.

I think in my case, my drives right now just aren't getting the car to operating temps, and thus not getting to operating oil temp/viscosity. I'll be switching to amsoil 0w20 by the end of the month. the decrease in viscosity should be good for the motor

Scott O'Kashan · Oct 14, 2013

The 0W-20 viscosity is not recommended for that engine.

kyoo · Oct 22, 2013

Scott O'Kashan said:

i believe these cars were back-spec'ed to run 0w20 by Toyota. regardless, i doubt it'll make a difference in the winter.

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2430478

here's the actual TSB:
http://www.matrixowners.com/tsb/TS-EG018-06.pdf
http://www.positivespin.us/ToyotaOilChart.htm

kyoo · Oct 27, 2013

car running well with SSO 0w20 in it now! Unfortunately, keeping track of any mpg is about moot, since we just switched to winter gas here.

kyoo · Feb 6, 2014

long time bump.

is there any way to play media from phone/ipod through the car's speakers?

rc0372 · Feb 8, 2014

kyoo said:

i just use a fm transmitter.. easiest way =P

kyoo · Feb 25, 2014

has anyone noticed an increase in mpg in the automatic corolla going around 75mph? this may be questionable to some, but engine are more efficient the hotter they get - i think cruising close to 3k rpm at 75mph is definitely getting higher mileage than puttering around 2500rpm at 65mph

kyoo · Apr 28, 2014

0.2 tenths off my best mpg ever this past drive. all highway, on 0w20 amsoil, at speeds averaging around 72mph.

Scott O'Kashan · Apr 28, 2014

There are three different AMSOIL synthetic motor oils in the 0W-20 viscosity with three different performance results that can be expected; the OE, XL and Signature Series. Which did you use?

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/driveHabits.jsp

Observe the Speed Limit

While each vehicle reaches its optimal fuel economy at a different speed (or range of speeds), gas mileage usually decreases rapidly at speeds above 50 mph.
You can assume that each 5 mph you drive over 50 mph is like paying an additional $0.24 per gallon for gas.3
Observing the speed limit is also safer.

kyoo · Apr 28, 2014

Scott O'Kashan said:

It's odd, and I noted earlier/and in a different thread, somehow, 75mph has weirdly been a "sweet spot" where I get better gas mileage going 75 than I have at 65 and 70. Obviously there are a lot of factors involved, but it's very strange. My hypothesis is that 75mph (~2700-2900rpm or so?) happens to be a high efficiency spot for the engine, where perhaps a slight increase in efficiency outweighs the increase in wind resistance? I'm not sure, but I've noticed it on more than one occasion to say the least.

Also, FYI - the speed limit through IL interstates is now 70mph

Scott O'Kashan · Apr 28, 2014

For accurate fuel economy comparisons we need to have an average of at least three runs done as identically as possible to eliminate variables as much as possible -

Remove all extra weight from the car that is in the back seat or the trunk etc., (not including the spare tire). Make sure the wind is not gusting and if it is, wait until another day when the wind is calm. Select a gas station that is very near the onramp of a highway. Check the air pressures in all tires and inflate them to the pressures recommended for your car, (not what is on the sidewall of the tire). Fill up the gas tank to the brim of the filler neck and record the odometer reading including tenths of a mile. Then immediately get on the highway, very gently accelerate to 75 mph and set your cruise control and leave it on. Drive to an exit that is about 15 miles away where you can immediately turn around and get back on the highway, gently re-accelerate to 75 mph and set the cruise control again. Keep all windows up and the air conditioning off to eliminate drag variables. Return to the same gas station and ideally to the exact same fuel pump. Refill the gas tank to the brim, just like you did previously. Record exactly how many gallons of fuel it took to refill the car, right down to the hundredths of a gallon. Record the odometer reading including the tenths of a mile. Subtract the second odometer reading from the first and record that number. Of course, that is the miles that have been traveled since the previous fill up. Divide the miles traveled by the gallons of fuel consumed, for example 30 miles divided by .905 gallons of fuel = 33.149 mpg.

Repeat this test, exactly mimicking the first test. Let's say the second test resulted in 33.900 mpg.

Repeat the test once more to get a good average and lets say the result was 32.850 mpg.

If during any of these fuel economy runs you get caught in traffic that slows you down for more than a couple of seconds where you have to disengage the cruise control, or wind gusts kick up, etc., the results are going to be altered and the fuel economy results invalid and skewed. Cancel that run and re-run it.

Take all three mpg results and add them together -

33.149 mpg
33.900 mpg
+ 32.850 mpg
-------------
99.899 divided by three test runs = a 33.299 mpg average.

Preferably on the same day, with the same weather conditions, humidity, temperature, wind, etc., do the three fuel economy runs again except this time set the cruise control for 60 mph. Compare the results and it will be very interesting if you could post them here. :thumbup1:

kyoo · Apr 30, 2014

Right, but with short trips I think there is enough fluctuation in the gas fillup alone that would skew the results. it's not a bad suggestion, but frankly not worth the time. The highway speeds here are 70mph, so I won't be going 50 or 60. I honestly think certain cars just have sweet spots. My evo gets great MPG at 75mph+, the MINI prefers 50-60mph. Corolla seems to lean towards the higher speed.

kyoo · Apr 30, 2014

Air Filter Change

Thought I'd throw in a how-to for the air filter change. Probably the simplest thing ever to do for the Corolla, doesn't even need a how-to, but here it is anyway.

No tools required. I chose a Mann MA1026 Air filter - 9 bucks on [ame="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001DRP9K0/ref=oh_details_o00_s00_i00?ie=UTF8&psc=1"]Amazon[/ame]. Not the best option in the world, but this is my beater so I don't really care lol.

1. Open the hood

2. There are two clips holding the air box shut - pop them off.

3. Pry open the box. Don't need to open it all the way, just pull the filter out.

4. Swap filters, close the box - may take a little finagling to line it up, and reclip it. Done!

Scott O'Kashan · May 1, 2014

kyoo said:

There is no fluctuation in filling up the gas tank if it is filled to the brim of the filler neck, as I listed.

This method provides an excellent way to determine accurate highway fuel economy. "About", and, "Pretty much", etc., just doesn't cut it and is very inaccurate. There is no other way to accurately determine fuel economy. This is exactly what I do when evaluating fuel economy improvements after a given change has been made to my car.

Run these fuel economy tests and you may be very surprised with the actual results not being what you had thought.

kyoo · May 1, 2014

there IS fluctuation, perhaps you'd be the one surprised. It doesn't stop at the same spot every time. It would be "about" or "pretty much" the same spot, but as you said, that doesn't cut it.

just to settle this though, i think i will go ahead and do this on my next free weekend. get the car warmed up all the way, fill up at the station right by the exit, cruise 75 back and forth, refill, and repeat 3x. i'll do the same for 70, 65, 60.

Scott O'Kashan · May 1, 2014

kyoo said:

If you fill up the gas tank per the fuel pumps automatic pressure cut off, yes then there is a variable introduced that skews the fuel economy test results. This is why I suggested to fill the tank to the brim, the top of the filler neck, so you can actually see the fuel level and fill it to the exact same level every time. Shake the car and the fuel level will drop as air bubbles disperse. Refill and repeat until the fuel level isn't dropping any longer. This eliminates that variable.

I'm glad you will complete the fuel runs. The results are very eye-opening. I learned that windy, gusty days can have a huge negative impact on fuel economy, as can 18-wheelers passing us. On one of my fuel economy runs, I had quite a few 18-wheelers pass me and that run showed a 2 mpg loss, so I had to re-run it. On your runs eliminate every possible potential variable you can. Make them as exactly the same as possible.

Good luck and have fun. :thumbsup:

kyoo · May 5, 2014

haven't gotten to any testing yet, but i finally broke the 40mpg barrier yesterday! no big changes, so i probably had a tail wind or something. tires set to 40 psi all around, and new air filter, but i did that before the last tank. at last! on my 41st fill up.

http://www.fuelly.com/driver/kyoo/corolla

kyoo · May 5, 2014

Headlight Restore

Part of my ongoing efforts to get better light output from the Corolla (http://www.corollaforum.com/showthread.php?t=2341)

Trying to do everything I can before determining whether it would be worth the cost of properly retrofitting HIDs in. First step in doing this is making sure the headlights are clear and unfogged - which mine were not.

I used this: [ame]http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001TI5IIQ/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1[/ame]

Just a cheap-o lens restore kit from a well known brand on Amazon. The kit came with a spray, 2 double-sided sand paper pieces, a wax-like substance, a base coat wipe and a clear coat wipe. Instructions were very simple and pics below as follows. I don't think a "kit" is necessary per se - you can just grab a bunch of different grit sandpaper, go from rough to superfine, wet sanding everything and eventually throwing on some kind of wax protectant, such as [ame="http://www.amazon.com/Meguiars-PlastX-Plastic-Cleaner-Polish/dp/B0000AY3SR/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1399350006&sr=8-1&keywords=plast-x"]plast-x[/ame].

Anyway, my results weren't amazing, I think simply for the fact that they were a little far gone for the fine grit provided by the Turtle Wax kit. Results weren't bad though - and I do believe the light output has improved marginally. I've got one 9012 bulb to modify and see how it is, which will be what I try next. Anyway, results below:

Instructions:

Before:

Part of the kit - roughest sandpaper:

Midway through:

Wax on:

Final Results:

2007 Corolla LE

New Member

Super Moderator

New Member

New Member

New Member

Super Moderator

New Member

Super Moderator

New Member

Super Moderator

New Member

New Member

Super Moderator

New Member

Super Moderator

New Member

Super Moderator

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

Super Moderator

Super Moderator

Super Moderator

New Member

Super Moderator

New Member

New Member

New Member

Super Moderator

New Member

Super Moderator

New Member

Super Moderator

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

Super Moderator

New Member

Super Moderator

New Member

New Member

Super Moderator

New Member

Super Moderator

New Member

New Member