Strangely, my 2000 Intrepid is the simplest of all my cars when it comes to changing the oil. The filter's up front and easy to get to. I don't even have to jack up the car!
All the other cars have the old-style suspensions with the grease gun fittings, that need to be lubed regularly. I always hated doing that, so simply because of that, I usually take the old cars in to get an oil change.
A few weeks ago, one of the taillight bulbs on my buddy's 2006 Xterra needed to be replaced. It's actually not TOO hard...just take out two long screws and then pop the assembly out at just the right angle. However, it does look like it would be very easy to break it, if you tried to pull it out the wrong way.
I think my uncle changes his own oil on his 2003 Corolla, so I guess it can't be that hard.
Were I still young and/or spry I could see doing my daughter's Camry. They couldn't make the filter easier to get at. Just not worth the time at this point.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
How often are you supposed to do transmission servicings these days? Back when I bought my 2000 Intrepid, they called for every 100K miles on the "regular" schedule and 50K on the "severe". And I always thought that was one reason those Mopar trannies were infamous for early failure, so I went the paranoid route and had mine done every 30K!
Even back in the late 1970's, it seemed manufacturers were pushing for longer service intervals. I have a sales brochure for a 1979 Malibu and a 1979 Nova, and one of the selling points on the Malibu was a 100K mile interval on the transmission! The Nova called for 60K...the difference being that the Nova used the older THM350 transmission while the Malibu used the lightweight THM200 that was famous for early failure...and again, I wonder if it's partly because of those longer service intervals they were pushing?
What about the serpentine belts these days? My Intrepid calls for every 60,000 miles. I overlooked that part though, and it was more like 86,000 miles when I had them replaced. Have the intervals on those gone even longer in more recent years?
I guess the rubber they use in the hoses is better too, these days. I almost had to twist the mechanic's arm to get him to change my radiator hoses back around the 7.5 year mark. He kept insisting that they didn't need it, but I figured I'd rather pay a little extra for a bit of prevention, than have to foot the bill for a melted down 2.7.
Anyway, sure beats the hell out of the old days when they'd call for changing the belts/hoses/coolant every 3 years/36K miles...not to mention those tuneups every 12,000 miles. Although I did discover that a 1968 Dart actually can go about 40K miles on a set of points, and 50K or more on the same spark plugs.
Got a 2004 here at work with about 155k on it. She says it has been trouble free and still runs like brand new.
We also have 3 others here who are planning to buy the new generation model, one is considering the HS250 if the availability and ADM don't deep six that one. :shades:
Nearly all the new Toyotas have sealed trannies that have no way to be 'checked'. There no longer is a transmission fluid dipstick. As part of the normal 30K-60K-90K etc major inspections the fluid should be checked by the service department to see if anything unusual is going on. But it's rare that anything needs to be done.
Serpentine belts should last well above 100K plus if not 200K. The new 2010 Prius has no belts at all. Electric motors replace the belt functions. The e-motors should last for the entire life of the vehicle.
In my case as a retired auto tech for European cars, I do all of the service work on my cars, including the warranty work (unless it requires the latest and greatest in diagnostic test equipment). I wouldn't let most dealers, and quick lubes, touch my cars for an oil change, as they always overfill the sump. Recently I asked the dealer to change the ATF in our car still under warranty because of time constraints, and they wanted to use ATF not approved by the manufacturer. So, I ended up changing the ATF - same old story. I find it amazing that the owner's manual specifies the exact ATF to be used, and yet the dealer doesn't follow the manufacturers recommendations. With this manufacturer, doing so voids the warranty.
Although sometimes it's a real pain to do-it-yourself, at least I know the job is done right.
What about the water pump? I know for awhile, it used to be standard operating procedure to change the pump at the same time you changed the timing belt, since you were in there already and much of the labor had already been done. Or has the water pump gone back to one of those wait-till-it breaks type of things?
My uncle's '03 Corolla lost its water pump back in the summer of 2007. I forget now how many miles it had on it, but I want to say around 150-155K. It cost $436.74 to have replaced. Not too hideous, in this day and age. Heck, my Intrepid cost more than that just to have a couple of buried sensors replaced, which caused the car to stall out at random, and occasionally refuse to start.
My rule of thumb (for Toyotas) used to be change the water pump, whether it needed it or not, with every second timing belt change. That way you get good life out of it, but it never lets you down.
That's the same rule my mechanic uses. Sometime next year we may hit the second timing belt on the 00 Accord. A timing belt and water pump would probably be more than the retail value of the car but a car like that - just rock solid reliable - is something I'd hesitate to give up.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
The Service Manuals only go out to 120,000 miles so there's nothing in the Schedule that directly addresses water pump replacements. 150K-ish sounds about right though.
What's up with Solara? Is that the end altogether or is there a replacement down the road? For the most part it doesn't matter to me but there are only so many convertibles that size and I do like convertibles.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
No the Avalon is still in the product lineup. It serves as the 'bridge' vehicle between the Toyota and Lexus lineups. That's all. It serves to support the price of the ES350, nothing more.
So is the Avalon going to get an update, or just keep on in its current iteration until interest fades and then get dropped? I never really cared for the styling of the Avalon, but thought it had a nice looking, comfy interior. I'd always thought that if they could combine the exterior of a Buick Lucerne and the interior of an Avalon, that'd be a helluva car.
At one time, Toyota did have a bit of a "bridge" car in the Cressida, although it does pre-date Lexus. The Cressida did make sense back in the pre-Lexus days, but once Lexus came out, and the Camry grew and got more luxurious, the Cressida sort of got squeezed out. Kind of a shame, as it was RWD, which probably gave it some decent handling.
And the Cressida had the engine straight out of the Supra. People would lower Cressidas and turn them into 4-door Supras! Those were the good old days of Toyota; that Toyota is dead and buried under a mountain of marketing-speak. :sick:
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
My 80 year old aunt still drives her Cressida every day. My cousin tried to get her into a new Camry and she did not like it. Great cars from the once great Toyota. :P
The Avalon is only a place holder. Its primary benefit is to bridge the pricing gap betweent the Toyota Camry and the Lexus Camry. The Toyota Camry tops out at ~$33000 Max while the Lexus Camry begins at ~$38000 and goes up. By having the Avalon in that slot it allows buyers that want something arguably different to spend $35000-$38000 without having to step up into the $40000-$45000 range. It also 'protects the rear flank' of the ES350 pricewise. If a buyer doesn't want to spend $42000 on a vehicle - but will spend $36000 on a vehicle - but also does want something more than a Camry in terms of ride and comfort then the Avalon fits this niche. It avoids the situation where Lexus has to discount the ES350 down to the $35000 range where it would becomes blurred with the Toyota model.
The Corolla serves the same purpose for the Camry on its rear flank.
The Cressida was the first Lexus, even though it was called a Toyota. It was the demand for this vehicle and others of its type that encouraged Toyota to develop the entire Lexus lineup. My opinion of course.
from 1985, and I believe the Cressida was the highest-rated car they tested in that issue. CG back then had 20 different categories rated 1-5, and I think it scored around 78. That might not sound good at first, but as varying as these categories are, it would be almost impossible for one car to score 100. For example, some of the categories were interior room, trunk volume, ease of entry/exit, serviceability, driveability, handling, paint quality, exterior fit and finish, fuel economy, interior quality, dash display, acceleration, overall value, etc. No one car could excel in all those categories, especially in 1985!
My 1981 CG doesn't have a Cressida, unfortunately. I should see what the highest rated car is in that book. I know both MB in it (a W126 and a C123) both scored 103, even with their high prices. They must have used a different scale then.
There are several Previas and AWD Corollas still kicking around here.
It's funny how things change...at one time, Toyota made interesting cars that could even be fun, and Honda was all about logic and sensibility. Now Honda appears more fun, and Toyota is for the most part painfully dull.
That seems to be intentional and it annoys auto enthusiasts. "Why should this dull appliance be so successful in sales? I don't get it.' That's part of the D3 syndrome.
I do have a Previa All Trac S/C (supercharged). Not the fastest or best mileage, but handles great (mid-engine is the way to go) comparing to any current SUV's and minivans. At 150K miles it is still young compare to most Previa's I see in SoCal, but the fading/peeling maroon paint makes it look much older than it is.
Great car, lousy paint job.
Been hoping to go hybrid route (got a Prius) but darn Toyota just doesn't want to bring a hybrid van into the US.
I just checked my 1981 CG - the highest scoring cars were those MBs. Several cars scored in the 90s, including big GM cars, big Fomocos, and the R-body NYer even scored 90. Toyota products scored in the 80s and 90s...strangely, no Hondas tested.
Worst scoring car was the Corvette, at 63...even the TR8 managed 66. Some scores are now questionable as the cars tested became known as problem children...Audi 4000 at 95 and Saab Turbo at 89 seem funny now.
I have a feeling that next year when they redo the Sienna that we'll see a hybrid version, I'm hoping. If they do add a hybrid option then I hope it's the 2.5L+HSD instead of the 3.3L+HSD that's in the THH.
Nah, even enthusiasts know that most consumers just want dull reliable appliances to drive around in. But I WAS reflecting the other day that it's a real joke that Toyota still has any presence in racing.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Yes. The money that the vanilla ice cream eaters have is just as useful as the money from the enthusiast crowd.
The key difference is that there is much much more money to be made from the vanilla ice cream buyers. In the end this is the only metric that counts. It's the only metric because business is only about cold, heartless profits and cash.
As you say it's good that this is such a diverse market with diverse tastes and diverse options where there's room for all kinds of enthusiasts and huge numbers of appliance buyers.
Just like vanilla is the most popular flavor...but that doesn't mean everyone has to prefer it.
Just make sure it's Breyer's or similar quality, with the little vanilla bean specs in it...and not that nasty vanilla "Ice milk" by Lucerne that my Grandmother used to buy in the 70's!
That's probably why Toyota does so well...they know how to do "vanilla". The domestics aren't so hot at it.
I guess if forced to choose between the three, my first choice would be a tossup between an Accord and Altima, with the Camry being a distant third. Not that I think the Camry is a bad car...it just does nothing for me. Whereas I guess the other two are more like "Cherry vanilla" versus "Plain vanillla" :P
Vanilla ice milk - that's the current model Impala.
My mother recently bought a nice used Camry, and it is as vanilla as can be - it is even white. The most exciting part about the car is the moonroof. But, it's a good Breyers vanilla I suppose. An Altima or Accord would be a nice vanilla bean flavor :P
Diverse enough that those who offer other flavors can still make a profit too - like the Germans and others. Although the market seems a lot less diverse than in the past, maybe it isnt so bad. It could be a lot worse.
The one current Camry model I drove was a V-6 model. XLE, I think? I didn't really care for it. It was like putting low-profile tires on my grandmother's '85 LeSabre, but making no other handling mods whatsoever. This was around a closed test course, where they encouraged you to get a little spirited with the car. The steering felt vague and disconnected. It did what you wanted it to, but just didn't communicate back to you that it was doing it...if that makes sense. :P Then there were just other ergonomic issues, like poorly-placed grab handles on the arm rest, a center console that made me feel closed in, etc.
They also had a Fusion AWD model and a V-6 Accord to compare. I liked the Fusion, but when I drove the Accord I was like DAMN...this is an ACCORD?! I know it's not a real performance car like a BMW or anything, but I was impressed!
This comparison test was sponsored by Ford, but I'm sad to note that of the three, I preferred the Accord, by a long shot. But, I did like the Fusion better than the Camry.
Don't they make a V-6 Sport model for the Camry? If so, maybe that would've been a better comparison?
I actually prefer the 2002-2006 style Camry to the current one. The current one looks slightly better from some angles, IMO, but the previous style makes much better use of interior space. The tapered, sculpted-off rump of the new Camry cost it about two cubic feet of trunk space.
I have noticed Toyota is aiming for a weird console/center stack styling theme that juts out from the dashboard area and kind of wraps around the driver. I can't say it is the best piece of design I have ever seen.
A friend of mine's mother has a loaded 08 Accord that has everything but nav. It seems like a pretty posh car - my only complaint is that it seems just a little too big. But, it's a relatively sharp car for a mass market offering.
I think there might have been a Camry "SE" that was claimed to be a sportier model? I don't know if it still exists.
My mother bought an almost unmarked 40K mile 2003 LE - it is a 4cyl, but it is relatively well optioned, with CD changer and moonroof. I visited her a couple weeks ago and drove it...it is very solid, and quite smooth for a 4-banger...but there doesn't seem to be much room for fun. But, it has a huge trunk, gets good mileage, and is easy to live with - for a driver in her 60s who doesn't want to spend new car money or spend a fortune in repairs, it's a good choice.
Alternate view: IMO the current Camry IMO has the best styling of all the models. I owned 4 Camry's prior to the Prius. The one style that I didn't like was the 02-06 although it did have more room in the trunk. Now that was a very vanilla iteration IMO.
The Gen6 model is more striking, both positively and negatively.
The Gen6 model is more striking, both positively and negatively.
I'll admit, there are some things I like about it. For instance, the headlights are smaller and give the car a slightly more aggressive look, compared to that bug-eyed/deer-in-the-headlights/Japanese-anime look that's been all the rage with oversized headlights. And the SE model isn't too bad looking. I like the chicken-wire grille better than the horizontal slats of the other models.
My favorite Camry, for some reason, has always been the 1987-91 style. Probably about as mundane and white-bread as it gets, but I always thought it had a pleasant, well-proportioned look about it. I remember one rag at the time called it a Rambler for the 1980's, but I liked it.
Comments
All the other cars have the old-style suspensions with the grease gun fittings, that need to be lubed regularly. I always hated doing that, so simply because of that, I usually take the old cars in to get an oil change.
A few weeks ago, one of the taillight bulbs on my buddy's 2006 Xterra needed to be replaced. It's actually not TOO hard...just take out two long screws and then pop the assembly out at just the right angle. However, it does look like it would be very easy to break it, if you tried to pull it out the wrong way.
I think my uncle changes his own oil on his 2003 Corolla, so I guess it can't be that hard.
Dealers do not work for Toyota.
oil/filters every 5000 mi
air filter ( cabin air filter? ) every 30,000 mi
plugs at 100,000 to 120,000 miles
alignments, rotations, brakes and tires as needed.
On my 2005 Prius with 120,000 miles as of today the total expense outside of 'rubber-related' service is $600.
Even back in the late 1970's, it seemed manufacturers were pushing for longer service intervals. I have a sales brochure for a 1979 Malibu and a 1979 Nova, and one of the selling points on the Malibu was a 100K mile interval on the transmission! The Nova called for 60K...the difference being that the Nova used the older THM350 transmission while the Malibu used the lightweight THM200 that was famous for early failure...and again, I wonder if it's partly because of those longer service intervals they were pushing?
What about the serpentine belts these days? My Intrepid calls for every 60,000 miles. I overlooked that part though, and it was more like 86,000 miles when I had them replaced. Have the intervals on those gone even longer in more recent years?
I guess the rubber they use in the hoses is better too, these days. I almost had to twist the mechanic's arm to get him to change my radiator hoses back around the 7.5 year mark. He kept insisting that they didn't need it, but I figured I'd rather pay a little extra for a bit of prevention, than have to foot the bill for a melted down 2.7.
Anyway, sure beats the hell out of the old days when they'd call for changing the belts/hoses/coolant every 3 years/36K miles...not to mention those tuneups every 12,000 miles. Although I did discover that a 1968 Dart actually can go about 40K miles on a set of points, and 50K or more on the same spark plugs.
We also have 3 others here who are planning to buy the new generation model, one is considering the HS250 if the availability and ADM don't deep six that one. :shades:
Serpentine belts should last well above 100K plus if not 200K. The new 2010 Prius has no belts at all. Electric motors replace the belt functions. The e-motors should last for the entire life of the vehicle.
All current vehicles have timing chains.
Although sometimes it's a real pain to do-it-yourself, at least I know the job is done right.
Except the last of the current 4Runners with the 4.7 V-8 and the Solara convertibles with the 3.3 V-6. ;-)
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Timing belt replacement? Pfffft.
My uncle's '03 Corolla lost its water pump back in the summer of 2007. I forget now how many miles it had on it, but I want to say around 150-155K. It cost $436.74 to have replaced. Not too hideous, in this day and age. Heck, my Intrepid cost more than that just to have a couple of buried sensors replaced, which caused the car to stall out at random, and occasionally refuse to start.
And the 4Runner V-8 is current until, what, October? It would be nice if Toyota would announce something official about it.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
At one time, Toyota did have a bit of a "bridge" car in the Cressida, although it does pre-date Lexus. The Cressida did make sense back in the pre-Lexus days, but once Lexus came out, and the Camry grew and got more luxurious, the Cressida sort of got squeezed out. Kind of a shame, as it was RWD, which probably gave it some decent handling.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
The Corolla serves the same purpose for the Camry on its rear flank.
The Cressida was the first Lexus, even though it was called a Toyota. It was the demand for this vehicle and others of its type that encouraged Toyota to develop the entire Lexus lineup. My opinion of course.
It's funny how things change...at one time, Toyota made interesting cars that could even be fun, and Honda was all about logic and sensibility. Now Honda appears more fun, and Toyota is for the most part painfully dull.
Great car, lousy paint job.
Been hoping to go hybrid route (got a Prius) but darn Toyota just doesn't want to bring a hybrid van into the US.
Worst scoring car was the Corvette, at 63...even the TR8 managed 66. Some scores are now questionable as the cars tested became known as problem children...Audi 4000 at 95 and Saab Turbo at 89 seem funny now.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Luckily, the economy as of yet gives us some choices.
The key difference is that there is much much more money to be made from the vanilla ice cream buyers. In the end this is the only metric that counts. It's the only metric because business is only about cold, heartless profits and cash.
As you say it's good that this is such a diverse market with diverse tastes and diverse options where there's room for all kinds of enthusiasts and huge numbers of appliance buyers.
Just make sure it's Breyer's or similar quality, with the little vanilla bean specs in it...and not that nasty vanilla "Ice milk" by Lucerne that my Grandmother used to buy in the 70's!
That's probably why Toyota does so well...they know how to do "vanilla". The domestics aren't so hot at it.
I guess if forced to choose between the three, my first choice would be a tossup between an Accord and Altima, with the Camry being a distant third. Not that I think the Camry is a bad car...it just does nothing for me. Whereas I guess the other two are more like "Cherry vanilla" versus "Plain vanillla" :P
My mother recently bought a nice used Camry, and it is as vanilla as can be - it is even white. The most exciting part about the car is the moonroof. But, it's a good Breyers vanilla I suppose. An Altima or Accord would be a nice vanilla bean flavor :P
They also had a Fusion AWD model and a V-6 Accord to compare. I liked the Fusion, but when I drove the Accord I was like DAMN...this is an ACCORD?! I know it's not a real performance car like a BMW or anything, but I was impressed!
This comparison test was sponsored by Ford, but I'm sad to note that of the three, I preferred the Accord, by a long shot. But, I did like the Fusion better than the Camry.
Don't they make a V-6 Sport model for the Camry? If so, maybe that would've been a better comparison?
I actually prefer the 2002-2006 style Camry to the current one. The current one looks slightly better from some angles, IMO, but the previous style makes much better use of interior space. The tapered, sculpted-off rump of the new Camry cost it about two cubic feet of trunk space.
A friend of mine's mother has a loaded 08 Accord that has everything but nav. It seems like a pretty posh car - my only complaint is that it seems just a little too big. But, it's a relatively sharp car for a mass market offering.
I think there might have been a Camry "SE" that was claimed to be a sportier model? I don't know if it still exists.
My mother bought an almost unmarked 40K mile 2003 LE - it is a 4cyl, but it is relatively well optioned, with CD changer and moonroof. I visited her a couple weeks ago and drove it...it is very solid, and quite smooth for a 4-banger...but there doesn't seem to be much room for fun. But, it has a huge trunk, gets good mileage, and is easy to live with - for a driver in her 60s who doesn't want to spend new car money or spend a fortune in repairs, it's a good choice.
IMO the current Camry IMO has the best styling of all the models. I owned 4 Camry's prior to the Prius. The one style that I didn't like was the 02-06 although it did have more room in the trunk. Now that was a very vanilla iteration IMO.
The Gen6 model is more striking, both positively and negatively.
I'll admit, there are some things I like about it. For instance, the headlights are smaller and give the car a slightly more aggressive look, compared to that bug-eyed/deer-in-the-headlights/Japanese-anime look that's been all the rage with oversized headlights. And the SE model isn't too bad looking. I like the chicken-wire grille better than the horizontal slats of the other models.
My favorite Camry, for some reason, has always been the 1987-91 style. Probably about as mundane and white-bread as it gets, but I always thought it had a pleasant, well-proportioned look about it. I remember one rag at the time called it a Rambler for the 1980's, but I liked it.