Toyota C-HR Forum banner

1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
321 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I decided to create this thread due to a side bar discussion about getting rid of this car in another thread of mine.

So I'm seeing a few posts here where there have been some complaints about their C-HR enough to create buyer's remorse. It would be interesting to see what others think. I know there is a thread on the likes and dislikes about this car but I think this one adds to whether the likes are enough to warrant keeping the car or the dislikes are enough to make you want to get rid of it.

The latest feedback I have seen is the engine doesn't have enough power. I've been looking out there to see what power adders are available for this engine. So far I've seen a couple where there has been dyno charts proving the parts will add horsepower. The two I've been watching are the AEM CAI and the Quantum Solenoid. There's a Youtuber that has the Quantum Solenoid (Intake side) installed along with a CAI (don't remember if it was the AEM). He also has something else installed which I haven't researched but seems to be some sort of throttle sensitivity controller. His unscientific test showed he still has decent gas mileage and was able to shave 1 second off of a 0 to 60 sprint to get 9.5 seconds. This is pretty significant if true. But the money spent to get there to me is just unjustifiable. The Quantum Solenoid is to going to run you $200 per intake and exhaust side (with current sale). Quantum doesn't make it clear if you have to have both the intake and exhaust solenoids installed to achieve the dyno numbers they got. So you're looking at about 14 HP and 15 ftlbs increase for $530 assuming the exhaust solenoid isn't needed to achieve these total power increases. And assuming the mods are additive together.

For reference, my N55 powered BMW 135i has a Dinan Stage 2 tune. You can get the tune now for $450 which will add approximately 46 HP to the car.

I'm keeping my C-HR as I bought it as a daily driver and to be able to haul things around along with my daughter/car seat with some level of comfort. It's a shame this car could have been so much better and even if Toyota had to bump the price a little to fix the short comings, it would have been worth it. But Toyota keeps missing the mark.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
125 Posts
I was initially going to give this car to my wife and get something else for me but since we already have a 2019 Grand Caravan, I hardly believe another car will be needed and I most likely be trading it by next year

Here's what I don't like about the car;

*The engine..its too slow
*CVT.. God this CVT is horrible
*Too dark inside. I have blue color which comes with grey/dark greyish interior which makes it even more darker than it should be
*Tiny windows at the back
*Trunk space is too limited. Had a kid shortly after getting this car and trunk space is non-existent when I have stroller at the back. So i put a basket on roof to throw extra stuff on roof
*2018 legendary radio and the rear view camera in mirror


One would say I should have known all these things before getting the car... honestly I did and I thought it would perform better than the 125 hp Nissan kicks but so little I knew that they both would do 0 to 60 in same amount of time. I was sold on the looks and Toyota's reliability. Plus all the safety features it came with.

But I guess the good impressions didn't last long enough. I've had this car for over a year now and put on 40k km since I drive a lot.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
321 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
We can all agree the engine choice leaves us scratching our heads. The only saving grace for this engine is it should be extremely reliable since it's a very basic engine. Timing chain. Basic port fuel injection. I wonder if Toyota just wanted to get rid of the surplus inventory they had with this engine.

I agree with the CVT. I wonder if it's just a matter of how the transmission is calibrated. How the RPMs just hang without "shifting" into the next gear. The rubber banding effect. I think the engine performance issues would be mitigated some what if Toyota used an actual geared transmission.

The darkness of the interior doesn't bother me too much. The fact I have a little one...I'm glad I have a dark interior to mask all the kid mess that is going to happen. But then again, the interior of my BMW is all black....granted there's plenty of window real estate to not make me feel I'm in a cave.

I'm ok with the trunk space in general. But I wish I had the option to change the under trunk floor space to use the overseas set up that doesn't have a spare tire. From what I recall looking at the Euro site, you gain at least a couple of inches of trunk depth. What hurts the C-HR is the slope of the trunk lid. But I survived trucking my daughter around when I needed to have a stroller in my 135i. So the C-HR was cavernous in comparison. But the trunk space is much larger than the new Corolla hatchback. I don't care what Toyota says about the cubic ft of the Corolla HB. It's not 17 cubic feet. I've compared the two cars side by side and there's no way there's only a 2 cubic feet difference.

Yes, the Infotainment system. At least the 2018 has options for aftermarket head units. The 2019s may be better stock for stock, it's still bad.

I did go into this car knowing what I was getting myself in to. I guess I don't hate the car too much because I do have access to my other vehicles. But come on Toyota.....wake up. This car could have been so much better for what I feel not much more investment in improving the some of the components.
 
  • Like
Reactions: strikeblaze

·
Registered
Joined
·
41 Posts
how fast do you need to go? this car has little rolling resistance .once under way it rolls pretty well . might be a little slow out the gate but nothing i cant live with .
you all drove the car before purchase right?



to then complain its too slow is silly . have you tried sport mode?



if you wanted a faster car you should have bought a faster car . we bought this car based on its different look then everything else out there and it still retains some ground clearance for winter driving . and the wife instantly liked the look of the car . drawn to it she says . we keep cars about 5 years then trade em in .
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
321 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
how fast do you need to go? this car has little rolling resistance .once under way it rolls pretty well . might be a little slow out the gate but nothing i cant live with .
you all drove the car before purchase right?



to then complain its too slow is silly . have you tried sport mode?



if you wanted a faster car you should have bought a faster car . we bought this car based on its different look then everything else out there and it still retains some ground clearance for winter driving . and the wife instantly liked the look of the car . drawn to it she says . we keep cars about 5 years then trade em in .
With all due respects. You can't simulate a passing situation on a test drive. Yes, I test drove the car. And I know what I got myself in to. But Toyota could have made this car so much better with no effort at all had they not had their heads buried in their backsides and put the engine in the Corolla hatch back into this car from the beginning. The lack of power or proper transmission tuning is a major issue whether you want to admit it or not. It's the slowest car in it's segment. It's chief competitor the HR-V will do 0 to 60 in 8.6 seconds. That isn't lightning fast. The C-HR best 0 to 60 time is 10.5 seconds. That's almost a full 2 seconds slower which is an eternity. When you have to make a pass or quickly merge onto a highway in an area with a ton of congestion, that lack of power can mean the difference between making the move successfully or being in a wreck.

I never wanted this car to be fast. I have 3 other vehicles which will smoke most things on the road. My BMW is tuned out to 355HP and 401 ftlbs of torque. Will do 0 to 60 in about 4.8 seconds. My two sportbikes will do 0 to 60 in around 3 seconds or under. I bought this car because I needed reliable transportation with enough space to carry cargo and my daughter with a car seat in. The styling was lower on the list. Had the Corolla hatchback had the same trunk space as the C-HR, I would have the Corolla hatchback.

I wouldn't be complaining so much had there not been a readily available engine to put in the C-HR. There's absolutely no excuse Toyota or anyone can say as to why the Corolla HB engine is not in this car from the start. As I said the Lexus UX250 has the Corolla HB engine in it with zero modifications as the UX and the C-HR are the same chassis. Yet, we see with the 2020 model year that Toyota invested 50 million euros to refresh the over seas model and develop a whole new 2.0L hybrid power plant. Yet still leave this anemic powertrain combo for the North American market.

I see the appeal to the younger buyers with the polarizing styling. But the car is unfortunately all show and no go. That's unfortunate as the car alludes to some sort of performance type experience. The chassis and suspension tuning is very good. I've pushed this car in several twisty roads and remain impressed with the handling despite having the steel wheels and narrower 215 width tires. I base this on my years of track time with both cars and motorcycles. Had Toyota put in a proper powertrain package from the beginning, they would have something real special that no other competitor could touch.

Oh and that Sport mode you talked about. It's nothing special. All it does is make the throttle application more sensitive. It doesn't boost any held back power as you'll get the same 0 to 60 time with and without Sport mode engaged. The only thing I've been able to glean out of the information out there concerning the different modes besides the throttle sensitivity is the change in the steering feel.
 
  • Like
Reactions: strikeblaze

·
Registered
Joined
·
41 Posts
with all due respect i wasn't targeting you .just anyone who buys the car then comes complaining its too slow .
the time to make this decision is during the test drive .


we took our test drive on the highway .i agree its not a fast car but we weren't buying a go fast car .just a daily driver that's reliable and gets good gas mileage .


that said hows everyone's gas mileage??


we get about 27mpg with mixed city/highway driving . have seen 30 on occasion but mostly 27-28mpg. i would have thought mpg would improve as the engine breaks in .but so far not the case .coming up on 4 thousand miles very soon .
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
321 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
I can't really fault anyone that is now complaining about the car being too slow even after doing an extensive test drive. The test drive may not involve driving in the regular conditions this person typically sees. The whole newness of buying a new car with all the excitement which can cloud your judgement. I know I was when I was in my 20s which is where this care is supposed to be targeted. I know I made snap decisions due to the excitement of the moment which I wouldn't necessarily do now that I'm older. Fact remains, Toyota blew it with this car. It could have been so much more and would have dominated the market segment had they put in a competent powertrain to match the looks and handling of the car. Kia had the balls to put out a turbo version of their Soul which is appealing on paper. But it's one of the few times that yes, I wouldn't be caught dead in it because of its looks.

As to mileage, I have been averaging 30MPG lately with all the crazy traffic I have to endure with the DC metro area. I've gotten as good as about 33 MPG with mixed driving biased towards more highway. These numbers are after a full tank of gas has been run through the car. I also find it also depends on weather conditions. It's been windy lately, and this car being so under powered for the package immediately sees this affect in reduced fuel economy. This is also another reason why I keep beating on the current engine being inappropriate for this car. With a mediocre engine, this thing should be producing stellar fuel economy. It's ok/good for what it is but it should be phenomenal running a miserly engine. Heck going up a steep hill will tank the fuel economy big time with this car.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13 Posts
I have no intention of getting rid of my 2019 C-HR Limited anytime soon. Yeah, its acceleration isn't great, but I knew that when I bought it. I also knew that the back seat had an obstructed view, that the hatch area was smallish and the entertainment system isn't easily replaceable with better 3rd-party options.

But you know what? Those things don't matter that much to me. Here's what will have me keeping this car for a long time:

- It's unique. It turns heads more than any other vehicle I've owned (including a laser-red 2001 Mustang). I've got the Ruby Pearl paint with a black roof, and I maybe have ever seen one other on the road.
- It's comfortable. Compared to the 2014 Corolla I had before (and certainly to the Mustang), the ride is good and it's quiet on the highway once it's at cruising speed. It's also comfortable on city streets.
- I have an iPhone, so I use CarPlay, which is on the 2019 models, and for the most part ignore the Entune 3.0 features. I wish the integration between CarPlay and the radio was better, but I stay in CarPlay most of the time, so I'm good.
- The rear hatch is big enough for 99 percent of what I need to do. And if I need more, I can lower the rear seats.
- The mileage is decent, particularly on the road. In-town is about mid-20s at best, but I can come close to 40 on the highway if my lead foot doesn't take over.

I figure I'll have it for at least 5 years, and I bought it almost a year ago. I might even buy another one, if the quality holds up and if there's a hybrid or electric version then.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
I definitely had the buyer's remorse a week after I picked up my 2019 CHR. I came from a 2016 Scion tC Release Series 10.0 with enough goodies to make it pretty fun. So I was very used to the low and loud cars. I initially thought the CHR was a great looking car and it was somewhat of an impulse buy, Toyota offered me a great trade in deal for my tC. Unfortunately, like many of the other owners, the car is somewhat underwhelming power wise. The engine is lacking and it's only pulled down further with the sluggish CVT transmission. After a bit, I started to think, maybe if I did more research or have been more patient, I would have ended up with a faster or more fun car.

What I do like about it is all the tech and features it came. My tC was very bare bones when it came to features, your standard Scion/Toyota pioneer radio, no back up camera, decent speakers etc. But the CHR came with a ton of things that was so very nice to have. The logo projector on the side mirrors was definitely a selling point lol. Also, surprisingly, there is actually a fairly large aftermarket support for this car, mainly in Japan or Thailand, but support nonetheless. It definitely is a great daily driver, it's comfortable and unique.

What I REALLY hope comes for the 2019 CHR, which is something I was very disappointed in learning that it did not have, is Android Auto integration. Like most of us know, there are mixed talks about the possibility of this coming in a future update, however there is no official word of this just yet. I have an Android and I would have no issue paying for an update if one comes out. So let's keep our fingers crossed...

So my verdict is that I am definitely keeping the CHR, at least for a few years until another opportunity arises. I enjoy the blank canvas I have and it'll be interesting to see how far I take this car. I have plans for custom exhaust and placing the car on Airlift suspension. Who knows, maybe I'll pick up a project/fun car or a new bike.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
With all due respects. You can't simulate a passing situation on a test drive. Yes, I test drove the car. And I know what I got myself in to. But Toyota could have made this car so much better with no effort at all had they not had their heads buried in their backsides and put the engine in the Corolla hatch back into this car from the beginning. The lack of power or proper transmission tuning is a major issue whether you want to admit it or not. It's the slowest car in it's segment. It's chief competitor the HR-V will do 0 to 60 in 8.6 seconds. That isn't lightning fast. The C-HR best 0 to 60 time is 10.5 seconds. That's almost a full 2 seconds slower which is an eternity. When you have to make a pass or quickly merge onto a highway in an area with a ton of congestion, that lack of power can mean the difference between making the move successfully or being in a wreck.

I never wanted this car to be fast. I have 3 other vehicles which will smoke most things on the road. My BMW is tuned out to 355HP and 401 ftlbs of torque. Will do 0 to 60 in about 4.8 seconds. My two sportbikes will do 0 to 60 in around 3 seconds or under. I bought this car because I needed reliable transportation with enough space to carry cargo and my daughter with a car seat in. The styling was lower on the list. Had the Corolla hatchback had the same trunk space as the C-HR, I would have the Corolla hatchback.

I wouldn't be complaining so much had there not been a readily available engine to put in the C-HR. There's absolutely no excuse Toyota or anyone can say as to why the Corolla HB engine is not in this car from the start. As I said the Lexus UX250 has the Corolla HB engine in it with zero modifications as the UX and the C-HR are the same chassis. Yet, we see with the 2020 model year that Toyota invested 50 million euros to refresh the over seas model and develop a whole new 2.0L hybrid power plant. Yet still leave this anemic powertrain combo for the North American market.

I see the appeal to the younger buyers with the polarizing styling. But the car is unfortunately all show and no go. That's unfortunate as the car alludes to some sort of performance type experience. The chassis and suspension tuning is very good. I've pushed this car in several twisty roads and remain impressed with the handling despite having the steel wheels and narrower 215 width tires. I base this on my years of track time with both cars and motorcycles. Had Toyota put in a proper powertrain package from the beginning, they would have something real special that no other competitor could touch.

Oh and that Sport mode you talked about. It's nothing special. All it does is make the throttle application more sensitive. It doesn't boost any held back power as you'll get the same 0 to 60 time with and without Sport mode engaged. The only thing I've been able to glean out of the information out there concerning the different modes besides the throttle sensitivity is the change in the steering feel.
I cannot agree more with what you said about this car. One reason why this car is all show and no go can be explained by its original reason for production. The CHR was originally supposed to be released as a Scion branded car. Scion is infamous for its "all show no go" cars. The tC was a sporty car with fairly underwhelming engine power, but it at least had a transmission that had physical gears. My tC was decent, but was no where near as fast or had the capabilities of becoming fast as other cars out there. Scion was supposed to release cars that would attract more of the younger generation, which I guess is what engineers wanted the CHR to do. Once Scion went away, Toyota had to pick up the slack. This however does not give Toyota an excuse for the subpar performance of the car. They could have done so much more. As car people, we always want more out of our cars, and it seems like Toyota is really trying to snuff that excitement out. As normal consumers, I can see how this car can be attractive. CVTs are decent transmissions for the general public who can care less about power. It's smooth and creates a comfortable ride, but it sucks for anything other than that.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
321 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
I cannot agree more with what you said about this car. One reason why this car is all show and no go can be explained by its original reason for production. The CHR was originally supposed to be released as a Scion branded car. Scion is infamous for its "all show no go" cars. The tC was a sporty car with fairly underwhelming engine power, but it at least had a transmission that had physical gears. My tC was decent, but was no where near as fast or had the capabilities of becoming fast as other cars out there. Scion was supposed to release cars that would attract more of the younger generation, which I guess is what engineers wanted the CHR to do. Once Scion went away, Toyota had to pick up the slack. This however does not give Toyota an excuse for the subpar performance of the car. They could have done so much more. As car people, we always want more out of our cars, and it seems like Toyota is really trying to snuff that excitement out. As normal consumers, I can see how this car can be attractive. CVTs are decent transmissions for the general public who can care less about power. It's smooth and creates a comfortable ride, but it sucks for anything other than that.
That's why the Scion brand was shut down. Toyota feels having the look of being racy is good enough. It's not. I do get there is a fine balance between producing a car which can be categorized by insurance companies as a sports car would not be good for young drivers. But putting a stronger engine that is readily available into the C-HR wouldn't create this issue. It's just making the car on par with the other vehicles in its class. Also it would facilitate some of the fun/spirited driving image Toyota is trying to portray with this car. And finally, the stronger engine would provide the ability to actually officially support towing which would facilitate the active young demographic. 0 to 60 in the 8 seconds is not quick by today's standards. 0 to 60 in 10 seconds is just being a slug.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
I really enjoy owning and driving my C-HR. Im keeping it till it dies. I put an average of 350 miles on it a week. Some weeks more when going camping or hiking in San Diego. Gas mileage is good. I have a blue with white top color pattern I added a roof rack. When I feel the need for speed I drive my Challenger RT.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
350 Posts
I am enjoying my 2018. All the grievances has been aired out, although I wanted to throw a confused look at the people who complain about the small window haha.

- I love the small window because it works perfect for my dog.
- Trunk space is fine, that's why we have a roof rack that have similar capacity as a subaru wrx (ya me and my friend compared the weight limit)
- Infotainment is the worst, and I've had my 3rd party replacement unit sitting on the shelf waiting for firmware support, but that's my own beef.
- Speed and power, it's enough for all my needs. I was never under the impression that it's a sports car. Daily commuting and the occasional drive across North to South Cali. I test drove the CHR after the Prius and the prius was having a hard time going up the onramp to the freeway hahaha.
- I do wish the headlight is better!

If anything, it's a solid car for at least another 5-8 years for me. Hopefully at that time, they have a more affordable electric or hybrid.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
88 Posts
Oh, yes. Keeping them.

Totally keeping the C-HR.

Traded up my 2010 Rav4 for a newer 2018 Rav4 due to the dreaded "cold start of grinding noise of death" and valve leaking issue.
Would cost more to repair than the vehicle was worth. Went from a Base to an XLE.


https://www.rav4world.com/threads/traded-in-a-4-3-for-a-4-4-2010-to-a-2018.302365/#post-2741556


The Rav4 is the daily driver and the C-HR is my weekender. (Well, until I have the front end repaired on the C-HR)...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
I have had mine for one year now and 16000 miles. I love the car, yes the engine is slow but I was looking for gas mileage anyhow. I went from a 13 mazda 3 basic to the c-hr and have not regretted it. As for the trunk space, I do DJ work on the side and with the back seats down, I am able to get all my equipment into it with room to spare. I will hang on to it for the long haul.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
321 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
But just imagine the kind of car would should have had with the new 2.0L engine used in the Corolla hatchback? Comparing curb weight, the hatchback is 300 pounds lighter. Yet has MPG ratings of 31 city and 41 highway. Compare this to the C-HR at 27 city and 31 highway. Even accounting for the weight and aerodynamics, that's still a huge spread between 31 and 41 MPG on the highway. I've been able to get 33 MPG on one tank of gas before but that's with driving very gingerly (ie being really gentle on the gas pedal) and with very minimal stops/hills.

I recently got stopped by a couple asking me what I thought about the C-HR in a mall parking lot. They were considering purchasing the car. I talked them out of it. So because Toyota can't get the collective heads out of their rear ends to realize the car is half done, they lost a sale.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
For me personally, I've been wanting to trade in my car so bad for the past few months now. unfortunately my mother who I'm no longer in touch with or close to anymore is the co. owner on the title. so not much I can do its pretty much a keeper. I was young and didn't think much. I just wanted a car to start building some credit. I don't have much complaint on the car other than it being slow and having a crappy radio. other than that I has great mileage and is very reliable. I have a very successful job now and if could I always wanted to trade it in for a Toyota 86.
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Top