By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
Referring to this C/D report, they have a rating of rear seat accommodations for the tested models. With 5 being best, here are the Galant's numbers:
With 2 passengers: comfort 3, space 2
With 3 passengers: comfort 2, space 1
By comparison, here's the Accord's numbers:
With 2 passengers: comfort 4, space 5
With 3 passengers: comfort 4, space 4
The Camry had similarly high numbers (4's across the board).
Also, one of the "Lows" listed for the Galant was "cramped rear seat". In the report, they commented "And this sedan's rear seat forces non-consenting adults to explore one another's body parts in a most ungallant fashion."
All of this tells us much more than total passenger volume... the Galant's rear seat space and comfort fall far short of the leaders in its class in that category. Sit in the back of a Camry or Accord, and then sit in the back of a Galant. There is a *major* difference...
Sorry about the off-topic stuff... I didn't think that a simple remark about the Galant would stir up this much debate.
Thats all.
~alpha
Any body else have these thoughts?
Randy
One additional item worth mentioning is the "summer tire's" standard on the SE are not good in the snow. This according to the Toyota factory rep who trained the sales people at this dealer. They were told that the tires are softer and wear more quickly than the all season tires found on the LE & XLE. However it being a performance tire handle better and stick to the ground when cornering. If you prefer the all season tires vs the summer tire, Toyota will do an even exchange.
Good luck!
So let's say they include the Passat and the Galant and the Stratus. Then someone else complains that they didn't include a Mazda 626. Someone else, a Subaru Legacy. Then a Kia Optima or a Hyundai Sonata or a Daewoo Leganza. And if Dodge can have two entrants, then why can't Chevy have a Malibu? And a Pontiac Grand Am? And if the Passat sets the stage for the more premium level mid-sizes, then how about an Avalon? And Nissan could bring the Maxima in. And so on, and so on.
To make the test manageable, they have to set some criteria to limit the pool of test cars. Otherwise they'd have such a huge stable of cars to test that they couldn't do a decent job of reporting on any of them. While I understand your point, we could second-guess their choices for eternity. And someone else would second guess them with different results. All they could do was come up with a set of cars that they thought would be representative of the kinds of cars purchased for families, and go with it. Bottom line is, they'll never make everybody happy.
The one change that I think would have made the most sense would be to include a Stratus in place of the Intrepid, since the Stratus is new and hasn't been in such a comparo yet, while the Intrepid has. But that's just me.
The car I'm replacing is a '93 Saturn, whose timing jumped. I found out after the fact that this is a notorious problem with Saturns of that era, and if I can help it, I'd like to know ahead of time if there are any notorious problems with Camrys.
Thanks for your help!
Laura
My wife *loves* this car and even though I bought her a '99 Sienna XLE, she still drives the Camry and refuses to let me sell it.
We haven't had any problems with ours since we've had it, and we're the original owners. I'd suggest you do these things:
1. Compression test to make sure that all 6 cylinders are within tolerance.
2. 4-wheel alignment and brake inspection (including the calipers and rotors.)
3. Change the plugs if you don't know when they were last changed. They are probably the platinums and they are good for 60K miles. At 120K you are due.
4. Have the struts and CV joints inspected. (I think they call them CV joints, but they are the boots at the end of the front wheel drives. If they are broken it could mean some expensive work needs to be done.)
I think that you will enjoy the way it handles. They practically drive themselves. :-)
Anyway, to do this in Ontario is completely illegal, and you should have that Accord towed by the local garage shop. This would probably be illegal where you live too, so be careful.
Thanks
Thx
As for the posters (postees) asking about the comfort of the seats my question is this: Why don't you go and try them out yourself? for all you know the poster answering your question might be of a different size and build than you are, so what good is their opinion going to be?
: )
Mackabee
About what you said about seat comfort, it's true that nothing beats trying it out yourself, yet if most people say that it's uncomfortable, then chances are I'd be uncomfortable as well.
~alpha
You can't necessarily say that a car is "uncomfortable" after only a 5-minute sitting at a dealership or auto show at a local venue.
-RAVvie4me
: )
mack
I was all ready to buy it until I saw that the LE came with rear drum brakes. I didn't want to order a car so I went over to the Nissan dealer and checked out the Altima 2.5S and 3.5SE.
I thought the 2.5S wasn't powerful enough and decided that if I was going to buy a 4-cylinder car, I'd get the Camry SE. But after driving the Altima 3.5 SE, I knew that this was the car that would keep me happy for at least 3-4 years. Sliver 3.5SE.
was told that XLE V4 is not available to SF
bay area. I think he was lying because another
dealer just emailed me saying that they will
sell their XLE V4 in stock for $300 over invoice.
Haven't seen any price this low so far. BTW
invoice is $22499 in SF bay area, with leather
+ CD changer + moon roof + wood trim except
nav..
Well for one thing it cost less than a comparably equipped Camry, much less when you compare the top of the line Accord EXV6 to the XLEV6 without the Navi.
It also has a lot of refinement, not to say that the Camry doesn't, because it does, but for the price, it clearly should be the winner.
It not stylistic are anything, neither is the Camry when you think about it. It also packs a lot of standard feature which are optional on the Camry and some items that aren't even available. For example steering wheel radio controls. I no, the Camry has the optional Navi, but look at how much it cost.
For the comment about performance, if that were Car and Driver's main reason for the comparison, the new Altima would have beaten them all, It was the fastest and probably handled better than any of them. Even though I want the new Altima, I can clearly see why the Accord beat it and the Camry. It's a comparison for people who need good dependable transportion for a set sum of money, the Accord was cheaper than the other two Japanese makes, while having compariable features and a lower price than both. For the sake of arguement, I believe that even if they had used the Accord EXV6(I think they should have) the Accord still would have came out on top.
This BTW is just my opinion.
Jhchang: Is it possible the dealer was answering you literally word for word? Because there is no such thing as a XLE V4. There is no V4. Ask him if there is a XLE 4 cylinder. But if the above was the case, then I wouldn'tnbuy from this guy because he's either a jerk or an idiot.