Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
The Camry LE/XLE V6 is rated at 210hp at 5800 RPM and 220 foot-pounds at 4400 RPM.
Otherwise- I agree with snarks. Its hard to go wrong with either of these two, unless youre looking for "something different". Its a matter of preference.
That said, I dont want to get a slap on the wrist... this is after all, an Accord v. Camry thread.
~alpha
My Accord needed brakes and tires for around $1500, and still had value in trade, so I figured now was a good time to look. I ended up buying the Camry, and I've had it one day.
First impressions...much more stylish than the 2001 Accord. The one available was silver with dark charcoal cloth interior...not as luxurious as Honda's leather. But I like the metal trim on the panel and doors on the SE.
Camry steering is looser, more Saab-like. I am suspending judgment to see if it grows on me, but for now, a negative point. In the Accord, I couldn't hear the stereo well due to acoustics and road noise, so the Camry sounds like a concert hall, another thing that is important to me. The Camry gives you more feel of the outside world than the new Accord, although a bit less than the old Accord. In the Camry the driver seems to be sitting a bit higher.
Acceleration is great in the new Camry. I detect a bit of hesitation between my first push on the pedal and the response. I think I will learn to work with this, but it remains to be seen. The best integration between driver impulse and response I ever had was, believe it or not, on a 96 T-bird with the 4.6 v8. Neither the Accord nor the Camry matches that (FWD may have something to do with it as well), and the Camry seems a hair less responsive than the Accord, but I suspend judgement for the moment. I'll report back in a few, after the new car smell wears off.
The "hesitation" you are experiencing isnt really hesitation- its the fact that the throttle you depress with your foot is not mechanically linked to anything, as it was in your Thunderbird. Its all electronic, "drive by wire" technology.
Keep us posted!
i thought that was one of the weak points of the camry - too much isolation.
Dynamically, theres no doubt that the Accord achieves a better sense of driver involvement (at the expense of ride tranquility, which is the Camrys strong suit, even in SE guise).
~alpha
New problem emerged. After driving a few miles on the Mass Pike, I felt shaken, not stirred. The sport suspension sends you for a ride over every bump. Something I didn't notice in the test drive, even though I was on a back road and then a medium speed highway. While I was back at the dealer to get my inspection sticker, I compared it to the LE, which felt similar, but absorbed a bit more of the rough stuff. The SE is still much more stylish and I don't want an LE. I wonder if there's anything you can do to reduce the bouncing (something I didn't experience in the Accord). The ride on the highway reminds me more of a 1950's pickup truck than a sports car. As always, all opinions are subject to revision after I drive it some more.
This weekend I drove to Connecticut...the Pike to 84, to 91 to the Wilbur Cross to the Merritt. The car rode much better. The road is better than what I drove on the first day, but the car seems to be breaking in as well. I'm thinking that whatever formaldahyde they dip new car tires into makes the ride rougher. I did notice that my new Camry handled the grooved pavement on the Pike construction better than my Accord did, presumably because of the Michelin touring tires.
On the plus side, or pulse side which I started to write, the nimble handling in traffic and exceptionally smooth and worthwhile acceleration in the 40-80 range, not that I admit to exceeding the speed limit, mind you, did at least remind me of the grin I get driving an Audi 2.7.
Also on the plus side the Camry SE sits in a slight prowling posture, and is definitely a looker. I did see old reliable Nellie, my 2001 Accord EX v6, on the dealer's lot, and almost felt a tear at having dumped her for a hot babe, but then, nah.
Incidentally my 1994 Camry, 4 cyl. has 270,000kms (165,000 miles) and still runs great (touch wood).
We have had to replace the water pump in the 94 XLE and the hood gas cylinders have gone bad. Other than that, we haven't had much problems with any of these models. (We have experienced the previously noted aliignment problems on the Solara.)
I don't think the sludge issue is an issue if you change oil regularly.
If fact, we just bought an 04 XLE V6 last month based upon our prior experience with Toyota and the Camry model.
A 2003 Sienna owner recently reported a sludge problem in the Sienna Problems and Solutions discussion here at Edmunds. This particular owner followed the oil change recommendations in their manual. The repair was covered under the warranty. There are still plenty of reports on the internet about sludge. People usually don't complain if they don't have to pay for the repair, so the ones I have read are usually from people who have been denied coverage under the sludge policy or who are worried about it happening again. I can only assume that there are even more who are getting their engines fixed for free who are not complaining.
Camry has the following items ( Accord doesnt):
-power driver seat
-cassette player
-split folding rear seat
-full size spare
and a few minor items:
-outside temp gauge
-larger trunk
-gas strut to hold hood
Accord has the following (Camry doesn't):
-5 speed auto transmission
-slightly better fuel mileage
Also noticed the following on demographics:
- Accord drivers seem to be a bit younger.
I have a 99 camry with 155k on it and am now looking for something new. Stuck between going with the same car even though I am happy with it, or just a change to the Accord. I like the extra equipment on the camry, but then the Accord did make Car&Drivers top ten, and there is a slight concern about the seats in the camry for long trips. Both are nice cars, tough decision. BTW, it amazes me that Honda doesnt even offer power seats on the EX, and you cant get a cassette player,and an outside temp display is only available on the EX with leather, weird. And dont even get me started on Toyota or Honda when it comes to side airbags. Oh you dont want to get me started.
All 05 Accords will have side curtain and side airbags srandard.
I've already stopped noticing the looser feel to the steering wheel in the Camry. The bumps are noticable from time to time, but no biggie. Came home with a trunk full of books, which stopped her from wiggling her rear end on the bad bumps.
Very nice handling, even grins at times. On Judy Collins' My Father, I heard the triangle for the first time in years. Jose Carreras sent chills in La Boheme, and the bass line in Gangsta Paradise sent the chills lower. I passed an Audi 4.2. Smooth, very smooth. Sped up to avoid problems, shifted lanes (with signal, thank you) and slowed seamlessly. At 60-80 it's all quick and easy.
This could be love.
the accord may be less punchy in certain driving conditions than the altima but its drives more smoothly without the dreaded torque steer.
Motown, if this 3.5L engine is real, its a good bet it will make it into Camry. Toyota is not one to use several different engines. Up until now they've been using their 3.0L (and the 3.3L stop gap engine) in pretty much everything they make, except for the IS\GS which have been using their old Inline which is being retired this year. I would expect that the 3.5L will take over all of Toyota's V6 needs, much like the VQ 3.5L does for Nissan.
Lexus ES330: 3.3 Liter, upgrade
RX330: 3.3, new
Current & 2006 GS: 3.0, since intro
IS300: 3.0, since intro
Toyota Camry: 3.0, since intro
Solara: 3.3, new
Highlander: 3.3, upgrade
This says absolutely nothing about the validity of recommended oil change intervals for engines without such defects. If you wish to second-guess the designers regarding recommended maintenance, or implement a maintenance schedule that assumes that the engine has a defective design, that's your call, but this whole scenario revolving around significant engine design defects is not validation for these actions.
After all, even the ultra-conservative, "err on the side of caution" people at Consumer Reports call the 3000 mile oil change a myth that's propagated by oil companies and quick lube shops. Their advice is that you follow the recommended schedule from the owners manual.
Right back at you... QUESTION: Why did some owners who changed their oil more frequently than recommended still fall victim to the sludge issue caused by defective engine design? If your position about the absolute benefits of excessively frequent oil changes was valid, NONE of these frequent changers would have experienced the problem. Yet they did. Case closed.
"Extended oil and filter changes are a Joke! Toyota initially blamed this condition on owner neglect,(lack of frequent oil and filter changes). They new right from the start, that extended oil and filter changes were not the way to maintain an engine, and they tried to put the blame on the vehicle owner, but they got caught by their recommendations in the "Book of Toyota".
That's merely your cynical and baseless interpretation of events that tries (and fails) to spin an exceptional, out of the ordinary situation into proof about normal conditions. And it's total nonsense. Toyota's definition of "lack of frequent oil and filter changes" was that they weren't done as frequently as described in the manual, not that people were negligent because they followed the manual's recommendation. Spin it all you want, but those are the real facts.
And regardless of their initial response, they have since admitted a design defect, and are covering any vehicle that followed recommended oil change intervals. They absolutely do not require that anyone exceed the recommendated oil change intervals in order to get warranty coverage for this defect. So your point is invalid.
QUESTION... Why didn't every owner with a V6 experience a sludge problem? Clearly not all of them changed their oil as frequently as you promote. Anyone who didn't, INCLUDING THOSE WHO USED OBSESSIVELY EXCESSIVE OIL CHANGE INTERVALS, were lucky, pure and simple.
Why you insist on jumping on this bandwagon at every opportunity is a mystery. But this forum is NOT about oil changes, so please move on.
No, I don't believe everything I see in print. But given that I don't share with you the extreme cynicism that you express in many of your posts, I will believe a credible source, and Consumer Reports is one such source.
If they were the only ones to make those recommendations, you might have a point. But CR, auto makers and many automotive technical experts say the same thing. Yes, I HAVE done my research and I make my own decisions. And I find those resources to be far more credible than you. And I have every right to do so, and I don't appreciate your insinuation that such decisions make me a fool. Nothing personal, just the way I feel.
1. We don't know if it is an issue with the 2004 models or not. Toyota never did admit to what caused the problem. They did some modifications to the engines in late 2002, but who knows if that totally fixed the problem? Toyota even said that the modifications would not prevent sludge, just buy some time. And it is time that will tell if the problem has been remedied.
2. The sludge policy is for 1997 - 2002 models (not through 2001 as you state), but I have seen reports of problems in models pre-1997 and post-2002. Go to the Edmunds Sienna Problems and Solutions message board and there is a recent 2003 Sienna owner who followed the manual on oil changes and had sludge. Their engine was fixed under warranty, which is fortunate because the policy does not cover 2003's.
3. There was never a sludge failure rate published. When Toyota first announced the policy in spring 2002, they told the media that they had received around 3,000 - 4,000 "complaints" of sludge -- this is most definitely not a failure rate and should not be interpreted as such. In addition, the number of complaints has never been revised by Toyota since the first announcents. I continue to read about new sludge problems on the internet, so I can say most definitely that the number has grown since 2002. But no one (except Toyota) can even hazard a guess as to how prevalent the problem is. The http://autos.msn site lists the Toyota engines covered by the sludge policy as having significant problems. This rating comes from a group of independent mechanics (i.e., not affiliated with a dealership), so they would only be seeing the repairs not covered by Toyota.
I agree that it is still important in the used car market. There are a lot of these cars still on the road.
This is not a sludge discussion - there have been plenty of those in dedicated Toyota discussions; we do not need to rehash all of that here.
It's also not a place for two people who will never convince the other that he is wrong to get into it yet again. You two need to learn to ignore each other.
Back to comparing the Accord to the Camry, please. If you must continue on with the sludge issues and whether or not they still matter, do it in a more appropriate venue.
Thank you.