Toyota Auris Hybrid vs rivals

23 Jan, 2013 10:30am

The new Toyota Auris Hybrid takes on two efficient diesel rivals, in the form of the Mk7 Volkswagen Golf and Hyundai i30

Is it time for the Toyota Auris to shine? The brand says the latest model adds “emotional appeal” to the car’s traditional strengths of quality and reliability.

But the company hasn’t abandoned its commitment to hybrid technology, either: the 1.8-litre petrol-electric model is set to be the biggest seller. With CO2 emissions of just 91g/km and claimed fuel economy of more than 70mpg, it promises to be as cheap to run as a diesel.

Toyota can’t afford to celebrate yet, though, as the Auris hits showrooms in the UK at the same time as the new VW Golf – a car that has long set the standards for desirability, image and dynamic polish.

We test the 1.6-litre TDI version of the Golf, which offers road tax-exempt CO2 emissions of only 99g/km.

As well as taking on the Volkswagen, the new Auris needs to win back some of Toyota’s traditional customers from the ever-improving Korean brands. So it also faces the well built and great-value Hyundai i30 1.6 CRDi Active BlueDrive. Can the Toyota finally appeal to the heart as well as the head?

Verdict

Just like the last model, the new Auris is a solid, dependable and sensible family hatchback. But Toyota has failed to achieve its goal of making this car more entertaining and desirable.

VW’s new Golf is better to drive, better inside and better to look at. And while choosing the Auris Hybrid is a sensible way of lowering your company car tax bills, the CVT gearbox seriously compromises refinement and driver enjoyment.

The 1.6-litre diesel Golf also emits less than 100g/km of CO2 and averaged 50mpg on our test, so it offers efficiency without similar sacrifices. Plus, the VW has better residual value predictions and a bigger boot – but most importantly of all, it sets new class standards for cabin quality, refinement and driver appeal.

The Hyundai isn’t as good to drive as the Golf and its cabin lacks the VW’s upmarket feel, but it’s roomy and well built, and quite cheap to buy. Add in another sub-100g/km CO2 emissions figure, and it just edges the new Auris for second place in this test.

Disqus - noscript

All subjective criteria, made up the way it suits the most

Read the individual reviews and you'll know why the Auris is so poor. It's also the ugliest. Especially the rear is hideous.

Better to look at??????????? Never seen such a dull car, the previous Golf VI looked much better.
Again this 'test'is a shamefull plug for the new Golf.

Whatever they write to promote and plug the Golf in the Netherlands, the new Golf sells slowly.

Judge yourself and test drive the Auris and the Golf. You will notice how wrong AE is. Compare the specs, interior quality and the prices, and above all test drive both cars!

you must know auto express is a German owned paper wich are doing promoting german cars.

In this test Toyota Auris is the only petrol (hybrid) automatic. Hyundai I30 and VW Golf both are manual diesels. That's two cost advantages with Auris that reviewers keep ignoring.
On a separate note I would like to see what's the real / true mpg figures for this new Auris. I have driven Prius as a company car. And although I'm not the most light-footed among drivers I got 56mpg on a mix of urban and motorway driving. This Auris costs a shade under Prius given its smaller dimensions it better deliver over 60mpg.

I agree. I am rather confused that AE claim the Golf is better looking than the Auris. To my eyes the Auris is a sharper looking car than the Golf which just looks bland from any angle.

Biased review. I would have to strike down some sense into the reviewer's head. Let me state way.

a) Looks are subjective except for the golf which is boring, b-each.

b) The golf especially with the torsion beam rear axle comes continueously last on dynamic tests.

c) You don't need a c. You need other cars in this test. Citroen C4, renault megane, focus, astra giuletta of similar price (which means better spec or engine) or similar spec (which means better price after discount).

I'll save you the trouble. You can place any VAG product on the top three or four spots. You are biased.

Where can I strike thee?

Damn keyboard for my spelling mistakes. "Why" instead of way and continuously. Take that shi3##y e out.

41.8 mpg for the Auris hybrid? Seriously? I don’t know what the hell you’re doing with your Auris hybrid, because I’m averaging very nearly 60 mpg with mine in mixed driving. That beats the 50 mpg you get with the Golf, and that’s before bearing in mind that petrol costs less and emits less CO2 per gallon. And unrefined? Seriously? I don’t know what the hell you’re doing with your Auris hybrid, because mine is very refined in almost all circumstances. In short: I think you’re being seriously misleading.

As soon as I saw the headline, "Toyota Hybrid vs Rivals", I just KNEW the Toyota would be number three. As if Toyota could build a hybrid!

What a bunch of bollocks... the golf looks really boring and no different to say the 2008 golf. Also, if you have ever tried to sell a used Hyundai, you'd know it is a waste of money in terms of residual value.

This is the sort of review that has killed the auto industry in the UK. While the world has moved on, we keep admiring qualities of cars that appeal to 20% of us, the rest 80% goes and buys sensible cars.

The new Auris is a fantastic design, and there really is no contest in terms of mileage - the auris hsd comes on top and no diesel can come close especially in town driving. OK so if you drive at 90 on motorways every day, diesels will be competitive.

Wait another 10 years and see who come up on top.

I agree. That seems like an odd comment. The new Golf is so conservative inside and out. A very minor update on the previous generation. At least Toyota tried to do something a bit different.

Peejay wonders what the AE testers did to get such low (presumably compared to official) fuel consumption for the Auris. If he looks, he will find that regardless of the car, AE always get much poorer results, but never suggest why that may be. The main reason is probably driving style. Someone who does not have to pay for the fuel is less likely to drive in an economy style. Also, the economy figures from AE probably include test track time where fuel consuming activities like acceleration and top speed are measured.

Although AE has not reported economy figures for the 3 cars in the group, they can be calculated from the CO2 emissions which are reported. They are 42.3 mpg (Auris), 49 mpg (Golf) and 39 mpg (i30).

Here's a link to our mpg and mpl (miles per litre) figures for the three cars tested: http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/t...

And yes, our figures include some time spent on track, as well as commuting into central London. It's also worth remembering that mpg drops significantly when it's very cold and that the cars we test are very low mileage. But as all cars are tested equally, the figures are comparative and an owner should be able to improve on them quite easily.

Hope this helps,
Auto Express

This test is biased against the Auris because the others were manuals and Auris was auto.people who buy economy focused cars want reliable,cheap to own and cheap to run.I doubt the Golf DSG would last the distance.Also desiel costs more than petrol and are more expensive to repair.Please do this test again but with all auto's.How do they compare when the MPG is converted to pence per mile ?Do seperate MPG tests in the city and motorway.Hybrids excell in heavy traffic where the electric motor works best.Don't need to worry about battery life,here in Australia Prius taxis are doing 800,000km and more,then they buy another car,not batteries because they're so reliable.Same engine and batteries in the Auris.

Again a buch of worthless words and incorrect data stated as facts. I would bet on anything you'd never see such low figures for a hybrid driving in normal traffic in London. On the other hand you'd never see such good figures for a diesel driving in london traffic.
The answer is simple really... you have driven the hybrid hard and the diesels as light as you could to come up with a bunch of figures that reflect what you want to promote.

Did you really think people are so ignorant as to believe everything thats said. The funny thing is really that at the end of the day, this kind of harsh critical review of hybirds only help the hybrid manufacturers.

My toyota auris is as refined as my trusty old Lexus IS 200 who says so? One of my regular blind passengers he judges a car by how it feels not on its looks, plus a regular high 50s, low 60s miles to the gallon, and zero road tax, what more can you ask for.

I think it's nonsense that your figures for MPG are comparative on this test, based on information on other websites looking at the relative performance of hybrids and diesels. You do your readers a disservice. And by the way, in case anyone's interested, yesterday I drove across London for an hour in my Auris hybrid and got 77.8 mpg.

Just chiming in. I've had an Auris HSD for 4 months now, just short of 5,000 miles, with a mix of town and motoroway driving.

My actual measured average is 62 MPG.

AEX 1334
For more breaking car news and reviews, subscribe to Auto Express - available as a weekly magazine and on your iPad. We'll give you 6 issues for £1 and a free gift!

Sponsored Links