2014 Corolla vs 2014 Civic

[lukejo]

Which one will have the least repairs before 300,000 miles?
So, I normally drive Toyota cars and usually take them from 275,000 to 350,000 without any major (and very few minor) issues.
Going to be picking up one of the above. Liking the style of the Civic. For the sake of this question, assume both are 2014 (because that is within the generation I'll be getting in each model), both have 75k miles, auto transmissions, and have been well maintained.
I haven't kept up on these generations, but I know CVT transmissions are in the mix...and newer/tweaked engines.
Are there any longevity/reliability issues for one of these two over the other?

 

[Revving2Redline]

So far so good for me. Pick either or and run 0w20 or 0w30 full synthetic oil. Change tranny fluid every 30k. Coolant every 80-100k and adjust valves and plugs at #4MM. Mine goes off at 90k mile intervals religiously. Use a premium pea based cleaner a couple times a year.

 

[PeterPolyol]

The Corolla will probably be less trouble, it should be considering it's very old equipment... pretty sure a 4 speed auto was available till 2017ish... meanwhile the Honda might have a CVT (gross), but you're asking about reliability only. The Honda will be far less punitive to operate save for a potential CVT

 

[CharBaby]

Yes, the Toyota, key words, "COULD BE" the least trouble between the two. However, the Civic is simply a nicer car to drive everyday in a slightly tidier package AND is a quieter car as well. The Corolla isn't that quiet anymore. I have driven both and ended up with the Civic LX. The Civic is simply a nice car to drive everyday.

Power delivery in the Civic is a bit better(more power/better throttle response & better EPA fuel economy), steering, braking and overall ride & handling seem a bit more to my liking in the Civic but, you'd have to judge for yourself. DRIVE'EM BOTH but keep in mind that neither are a Mazda3...just throwing that out there!

The Civic is a roomy car however if interior space is a priority to you, then the Corolla will be the more accomodating car for passengers in the back seats as it's just a roomier car overall. The Corolla's interior controls are Toyota simple to use, as where the Civic(EX & above) infotainment system can be frustrating.

I have owned both Hon-Yotas over the years and both were equally reliable over the 15-18 yrs of ownership with each having their own idiosyncrasies & problem spots while also having their own driving character.

Civic's(HONDA's overall) used to be among the the louder cars in class out on the hiwy but in this case, the Corolla is now the louder car. And in this particular generation of Corolla('14-present sedan), may be among the loudest in class...not LOUD, just louder! HONDA seems to have done a nice job of quieting down many of their vehicles. And in this case, the Civic is quite good.

The '14-'15 Civic is the compact sedan that I could drive everyday.

 

[spk2000]

I personally have always thought hondas drive better meaning more sporty and stiffer ride. This is especially good when you are talking 200k plus miles. Toyota used to be slightly more reliable but not sure that is still true. Both are great cars with many on the road having over 300k on the odometer. If you take care of them and maintain them they are both capable. I had a 92 civic with 290k miles that was beginning to nickel and dime me all the timeso eventually I sold it to a modder.

 

[diyjake]

I personally think the 2012-2015 civic is ugly! Just for the looks alone I would go with the 2014 Corolla. They are both CVT's which is a big long term reliability question.

If you could get a 2016 civic I would go that route.

 

[joekingcorvette]

I would buy the Honda. I have a 2012 Civic with the regular 5 speed automatic transmission and it's a great car to drive. I have owned several Civics and had zero problems. I did have a 2003 Toyota Corolla that was a medical delivery car and only about 5 years old that had 215,000 miles on it when I bought it and something like 242,000 when sold and it didn't use a drop of oil. I think the CVT transmissions are very good if you change the fluid according to the owners manual intervals. One thing about either Honda or Toyota for the most part they do it right the first time and don't use you for a guinea pig. You are making a smart move buying either of these reliable cars and should be able to find one for about $11 to $12,000 if you do a lot of searching.

 

[JeffKeryk]

Flip a coin. Both long runners. Good luck.

 

[philipp10]

You can get a Corolla with either a manual, 4 speed auto or a CVT. The Honda only offers a CVT Automatic and a manual. Personally I wouldn't shy away from the CVT as they do achieve better mileage. The jury is still out on their longevity.

I used to be a Toyota guy but for me, the Corolla is just too boring. Look at a Mazda 3 too....I have a 2007 and I love it.

 

[Andrew1972]

Equal chances both will do it. Coin toss. After 200k no matter who makes the car the repairs wildly vary amongst the same make/model/year.

My niece is driving a free Audi A4 handed to her at graduation of college 205k with now 290k. It has required no repairs over 2.5 years just some exhaust parts replacement

No idea what happened before and the first repair she will trash it.

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

Originally Posted by lukejo
Which one will have the least repairs before 300,000 miles?
So, I normally drive Toyota cars and usually take them from 275,000 to 350,000 without any major (and very few minor) issues.
Going to be picking up one of the above. Liking the style of the Civic. For the sake of this question, assume both are 2014 (because that is within the generation I'll be getting in each model), both have 75k miles, auto transmissions, and have been well maintained.
I haven't kept up on these generations, but I know CVT transmissions are in the mix...and newer/tweaked engines.
Are there any longevity/reliability issues for one of these two over the other?


This is an impossible question to answer due to the infinite number of variables.

Your own individual driving style has the largest impact on the number of repairs.

Personally I would look at the cost of parts and ease of maintenance/repairs. Scotty Kilmer would give the edge to Toyota because he doesn't think Honda AT's can go that distance trouble free.

 

[zzyzzx]

Doesn't the Civic have a timing belt with an interference engine? If so that is reason enough to get the Toyota

 

[KalapanaBlack]

The CVTs are a long-term unknown, since they aren't much older than 2014 or so in both cars. Toyota's HSD quasi-CVT has been the most reliable of its kind, Honda has had longstanding troubles with 4-, 5-, and 9-speed automatics and newer CVTs. You decide.

Judging from the very closely-related previous generation of each car ('06-11 Civic and '09-13 Corolla), you WILL have expensive HVAC repairs with the Civic. It is almost inevitable. The rear shocks need to be done every 60k or you will ruin tires (they are cheap regular gas shocks, not struts). And Honda starters have been relatively short-lived for a couple of decades now. The Corolla may need an alternator at some point, possibly a starter, and due to its solid rear axle, chops tires if not rotated regularly. And '14 was the first year for that generation, with one big highlight being the LED headlamps, which do fail occasionally and require replacing the entire unit. I suggest buying a Corolla without that option and enjoying life without constant vehicular repairs.

Edit: Long-term body integrity classically has been a Toyota strong suit, if salt is a factor. Honda went from terrible to better than average about 10-12 years ago. I wouldn't expect a '14 Civic to be very bad, but the edge probably goes to the Corolla.

 

[KalapanaBlack]

Originally Posted by zzyzzx
Doesn't the Civic have a timing belt with an interference engine? If so that is reason enough to get the Toyota


The Civic has had a chain since the 2006MY, when the R18 replaced the D17.

The Corolla has been chain since 1998 when the ZZ engines replaced the A engines.

 

[Mr Nice]

Originally Posted by PeterPolyol
The Corolla will probably be less trouble, it should be considering it's very old equipment... pretty sure a 4 speed auto was available till 2017ish... meanwhile the Honda might have a CVT (gross), but you're asking about reliability only. The Honda will be far less punitive to operate save for a potential CVT

I agree that Honda CVT should be avoided.

2013 Civic still had the 5 speed automatic (non CVT).

 

[DGXR]

Personally I would get the Toyota. Just a slightly better reputation for reliability and longevity, and ease of service. Although the Honda might provide slightly better fuel economy, which between these two models, the fuel economy really depends how you drive more than anything. If the Toyota has a timing chain and the Honda a timing belt, definitely get the Toyota chain. Also Toyotas feel a bit more "American" than Hondas, for ergonomics and the physical size of humans they are meant to hold.
For the time being, avoid getting a CVT -- generally they are more trouble than they are worth.

 

[joekingcorvette]

As others have stated the Honda has a timing chain since 2006 on the Civic.

 

[aquariuscsm]

I would choose the Civic. Feels more solid and refined.

 

[CharBaby]

If the Civic's CVT is a concern to you, look into buying a 2013 with the trouble free 5 spd auto. The MPG isn't much less than the Civic w/CVT and strangely close to the Corolla w/CVT.

 

[fdcg27]

How will you use the car?
I'm asking since if you'll regularly need to use the back seat or carry much in the trunk or you do a lot of highway driving you'd find a Gen 8 Accord a far more satisfactory vehicle. A couple of years older for about the same coin and with little penalty in fuel economy. I've seen nearly 35 mpg out of our Gen 8 on long interstate trips at moderate temperatures with the cruise set around 75 mph.
Hondas are usually sportier to drive than competing Toyota models and typically have more power and are more willing to rev.
Reliability and durability in any used car is mainly a matter of how the car was driven and maintained over its earlier life and this isn't really knowable.