Toyota Camry 2006 and earlier

1138139141143144165

Comments

  • ian721ian721 Member Posts: 93
    "Yep some day you can tell your grandkids way back when you could buy gas for only $3 a gallom!"

    Why wait? I could go to Europe and brag about it right now. :)

    Hopefully my grandkids won't be buying gas....they'll have vehicles running on something cheaper and environmentally friendly.
  • alpha01alpha01 Member Posts: 4,747
    I dont buy the enviornmentally friendly argument so much anymore.

    Anyone see the recent PZEV Camry commercial?

    Drive a 2005 Camry PZEV 4 cylinder (5speed automatic, 151 hp and 161 lb. ft torque), and you'll emit fewer pollutants in 50,000 miles than if you were to paint a 100 square foot room. (may be wrong on the square footage, but its something very small)

    Incredible, and its all the INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE.

    ~alpha
  • quaffapintquaffapint Member Posts: 9
    I'm currently comparing an 05 Honda CRV EX vs an 05 Camry SE w/ VSC/TC. The main reason I'm looking at the CRV is for all-wheel drive. I drive an hour to-fro work on some rural roads, and when the snows come (I live in southeastern Penn.), I don't want to get stuck or slide down an embankment.

    My question is : For my needs will Camry's VSC+TractionControl cover most cases, or does the VSC+AllWheelDrive combination add a lot more to the plate?

    Thanks for any advice...
    Matt
  • alpha01alpha01 Member Posts: 4,747
    Why not compare the CRV to the RAV?
    Your driving conditions are the best determinant of your driving needs.

    But heres an article that might pull you toward the advantages of VSC:

    http://www.iihs.org/news_releases/2004/pr102804.htm

    But that doesnt really solve your problem since both the CRV and Camry you want will have stability control.

    ~alpha
  • solara00solara00 Member Posts: 81
    "Nobody has ever got 33 mpg on this car - even the 4 cylinder."

    I've heard some pretty stupid comments on this board, but that's right up there with the best of them.

    Unless you've driven every Camry how would you know? Cars are different, driving conditions are different, drivers are different. For you to make such a statement is beyond ridiculous.

    Since April I've driven my XLE V6 11,044 and I have purchased 395 gallons of gas (mid-grade, btw). That's a 7 month average of 27.95 mpg. City driving has resulted in some tanks only getting 21mpg (never lower than that) and some tanks have averaged 33mpg on strictly highway miles. I have filled up 32 times in this period, so you can see I usually don't let my tank get below one-quarter full.

    33mpg may be baloney on your car, but you should be careful when you try to make your experience the best achieved. Or get a better calculator. Your statements are simply inaccurate.
  • motownusamotownusa Member Posts: 836
    http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20041030/bs_afp/- japan_auto_toyota_gm_us_company_041030084924

    Looks like things are looking good for Toyota. They could surpass GM in 2006 for the number 1 spot.
  • kneisl1kneisl1 Member Posts: 1,694
    My wifes 2005 with the four cylinder engine is getting 21 mpg. Granted she drives it mostly short distances (and drives pretty fast) but we are fairly disappointed with the mileage. We noticed on a manual transmission cars sticker that it didnt get any better mileage than the automatic.
  • typesixtypesix Member Posts: 321
    You pretty much answered your own statement. Short trips do not allow for the engine to reach optimum temperatures. Being a fast and leadfoot driver will also drastically decrease mileage. Accelerating more gently will allow transmission to reach more economical gears sooner. Driving habits can vary gas mileage greatly.
  • kneisl1kneisl1 Member Posts: 1,694
    My ECHO on the other had always gets MORE mileage than the advertised figures. I dont think people expect a Camry to get 21 mpg in town. While not as good as me my wifes still a better than average driver.
  • wabashwabash Member Posts: 3
    LOOKING TO BUY SOME WHEELS FOR MY 94 CAMRY.
    FOUND SOME FROM A 97, BUT DO NOT KNOW FOR
    SURE IF THEY WILL FIT???? ANYBODY KNOW THE
    ANSWER???? BUYING ONLINE AND CANNOT TRY THEM
    ON FOR SIZE. HEARD THERE WAS SOME CHANGES AFTER
    96 ON THE CAMRY, BUT CAN'T VARIFY IT...
    THANKS FOR ANY HELP.......
  • phd86phd86 Member Posts: 110
    Yes, I'll shed light on this:

    My dealer did something similar. First, they told me that it needed a few thousand miles on it. Then, they said to bring it in for a test drive of 40-50 miles, and mileage check with precise refueling. But when I brought it in, they said the "computer says you are getting 33 mpg on the freeway".

    The 19 mpg is normal for mostly city driving in this car. Mid to low 20s for mixed. My other camry is a 92 manual shift. It gets high 26-27 mpg mixed, and 30-35 mpg freeway. I've put 270,000 miles on it, so far. Last tank it got 35 mpg, but the clutch is kinda worn.

    So to shed light on the mystery, the EPA estimates for automatics are certainly 20-25% lower than actual, the manuals 15% higher on the top end.

    I drove a couple 2004 and 2005 rentals 300-400 miles to check and see no significant difference in freeway mileage over my own 2004 4-speed auto, so don't bet on the 5-speed automatic either.
  • phd86phd86 Member Posts: 110
    don't believe it:

    drove my car and similar-equipped rentals, on table-top flat ground, no a/c, no wind, no weather, at constant 60 mph for 380-420 miles. Checked exact fuel consumption in the tank. there are no 30 mpgs in the automatics. maybe a few underfilled tanks, but not actual, and you'll see that on the long term average (one poster disputed me, but averaged 28 in what looks to majority freeway and midgrade gas).

    go ahead and post the citation for the consumer reports article; I'd be interested in reading it and perhaps contacting them.
  • ian721ian721 Member Posts: 93
    Can I ask where on earth you drove a constant 60 mph on table-top flat ground with no wind or weather for 400 miles? And what do you mean that you checked the exact fuel consumption in the tank? Most people just fill it up and then when they fill it up again check how many miles they've driven, how many gallons they've purchased, and divide.
  • dudleyrdudleyr Member Posts: 3,469
    I would post the CR link, but you need a subscription to read it. If you are interested any library has the info.
  • bd21bd21 Member Posts: 437
    You are sadly uninformed! There are several midsize cars with automatic transmissions that can achieve over 30 MPG highway or greater with the A/C on, cruising at 70 plus miles per hour. I have tracked every tank of gas put into my 2001 Accord since I bought it for over 48,000 miles. It has always achieved 28-29 miles per gallon driving 78-80 MPH on the interstate in Florida. My father in-law has a 2003 Camry and he regularly achieves 33 MPG or greater driving the speed limit in Alabama. My 1991 Mercury Sable with a six cylinder got 30 MPG under the same circumstances. I'm a very experienced mechanic and I know how to properly track gas mileage. I also know many people can own the same type car and achieve vastly different gas mileage. Your statements are your own experiences only and don't qualify as a realistic hypothesis to valid your assumptions.
  • phd86phd86 Member Posts: 110
    so you're saying, based on your 48,000 mile experience, that you did not get 30 mpg average for your accord on pure highway driving, you got 28-29, right? so the top end of automatic hondas is about the same as toyota. well, thanks for not making me feel so bad....but I do believe your post supports (rather than refutes) my contention.

    The camry is very comfortable, but it does underperform on gas mileage.
  • phd86phd86 Member Posts: 110
    kneisl1:

    that sticker mileage is pure crap. my other car, a 92 camry, with 270,000 miles and a pretty worn clutch, averages 27 in the city, and 30 in the freeway. BTW, I wouldn't be too disappointed with the 21 mpg, since the rating, I believe, is 23 mpg city for the 5-speed-auto. Although I'm suspicious that the manuals in the current camries also perform much better than their respective automatics relative to the EPA rating, I haven't tested it. The manuals are not available for rent, and don't know anyone who has one in the 04-05 model.

    very suspicious of toyota on this issue; especially when the dealer offered to verify the EPA figures (actually, it was toyota's own figures first) with a test drive and they didn't follow thru - gave me some mumbo-jumbo about "reading the computer" (see my earlier post on this).
  • bd21bd21 Member Posts: 437
    You totally missed my point! Try reading closer this time. My older Accord with a four speed automatic transmission got 28/29 MPG driving 78-80 with the A/C on. I can easily get over thirty driving at 60 MPH with the A/C off, but I like A/C and driving around 80 MPH, so I get less gas mileage. I got 30 MPG in my six cylinder 91 Mercury Sable with a four speed automatic. My dad just got an 05 Camry LE and he gets 35 MPG with the A/C on in Florida driving the speed limit. And as I stated before my father in-law gets 33 MPG plus in his 02 Camry LE. Both the Accord and Camry come with a five speed automatic and they can obtain over 33 MPG at the speed limit with A/C on the highway. Just because you don't get great gas mileage doesn't mean others don't. Some others have posted 38 MPG or higher and that is possible under some conditions.
  • patpat Member Posts: 10,421
    Phd86 can you tell us exactly how you figure your mileage? Maybe we aren't all on the same page in how we perform those calculations. I don't think we know what you mean by "checked exact fuel consumption in the tank".

    And folks, let's do be careful that we don't turn this conversation into personal attacks.
  • bd21bd21 Member Posts: 437
    One fairly accurate method to measure gas mileage is to fill the gas tank up at a specific gas station at the same pump with the car parked the same way until the pump clicks off. If possible return to the same gas station and repeat. I like to drive a few hundred miles, but 70 miles or so will work fine. Divide the exact miles driven (down to tenths) by the exact gallons (to hundreds) added back to the tank to fill it up (pump clicks off). This will give you about as accurate a measurement as you can get without using some very specialized equipment. Also, forget about using the on board computer gas mileage calculators. They are notoriously not that accurate.
  • solara00solara00 Member Posts: 81
    Instead of trying to figure out how much you've pumped at each fill up, wouldn't it be easier and more accurate to simply divide total miles driven by total gallons purchased over a longer period of time?

    As I stated, since April I've driven my XLE V6 11,044 miles and I have purchased 395 gallons of mid-grade gas. That's a 7 month average of 27.95 mpg. I'd say the highway vs. city driving percentages would be 60-40.

    As the host so correctly states, I don't want to turn this into a personal attack on anyone. But it is a little frustrating to see someone make a blanket statement about ALL Camrys based upon his/her one experience.

    My MPG is what it is. If it was 21mpg average, I'd certainly be disappointed, but I'd report that. For business reasons I keep and track all fuel purchase receipts. So to date, my 27.95 mpg average after the first 11,000 miles is not bad for the V6.
  • carzzzcarzzz Member Posts: 282
    Getting 21 MPG is acceptable, I get around 23 to 24 MPG( mix of city+hwy) with usually loaded with people, short-trip, stop-and-go traffic and not too heavy foot overall but sometime pressed all the way... but the fact is not easy to get the EPA MPG with bad habit, inproper maintainance, etc even with good habit, and proper maintainance, is hard to obtain a good "city MPG" because it is more depends on the traffic light!
  • slov98slov98 Member Posts: 112
    I get b/w 22-24 city/hwy driving, mostly highway then 27 mpg
  • alpha01alpha01 Member Posts: 4,747
    The Consumer Reports issue, Jan 2002, shows the test milage data for the now unavailable 2.4L 4 cylinder/4 speed auto combination.

    I do not remember the City/Highway loop splits that they got, but I will post them when I have a chance.

    In mixed overall, they achieved 24 MPG with that engine/transmission combination, which should be noted- that is exactly the same that was achieved by the Accord 4 cylinder 5M that they tested in 2003.

    But again, CR has tested neither the new 4 cylinder/5 speed setup OR either of the two newer V6s.

    I will reiterate that in mixed driving (really just about a 50/50 mix) we are averaging about 28 MPG with 54,000 miles on our 2002 LE 4/4A.

    ~alpha
  • bd21bd21 Member Posts: 437
    Actually your method is easier, but less accurate. My dad worked as a Florida State Gas inspector for years. His job was to test gas pumps for accuracy and the gas for contamination. Gas pumps all turn off slightly differently. Therefore, full is not always full. If you use the same pump and park the same way, your reading will be more consistent and accurate. Your method will only give you a ballpark figure, mine will give you the most accurate figure you can produce without special equipment.
  • phd86phd86 Member Posts: 110
    patHOST:

    I run the tank down at least as far as when the light comes on, fill it up, record the mileage difference, and divide that by the gallons of fuel purchased. this is done continuously for every tank full.

    On some tankfulls, I also have checked the level using such measures as propping the fill cap door open, and using a sort of cardboard "dipstick", to make sure I have actually filled it to the full level, and did not go way under (which would indicate I had used more gas than in the computation - and an overestimate of MPG on that tankful), or overtopped (which would result in an underestimate in the tankful). This is how I figured out that the light comes on at just about 16 gallons used. Anyhow, the exact gas use doesn't affect the long term average - just a slightly more accurate depiction of variation between tankfuls.

    My last tankful recorded 21 mpg on 40% highway and 60% city driving (I indicate percentages as the miles driven, if that is of interest).

    I'd be particularly interested mileage from anyone in California, as one other suspicion is that the PZEV equipment, and resultant reduction in torque and horsepower, may be a factor.
  • phd86phd86 Member Posts: 110
    bd21:

    To be honest, I've heard those occasional 30+ stories as well; but when I investigated further, I found the drivers didn't actually do the continuous recording of fuel purchase and odometer reading to get an accurate MPG. The conversation goes something like this:

    "yeah, I sometimes get 35 mpg on my camry"

    "really, so how far do you drive it between fillups?"

    "well, I don't record every one, but I've gotten over 400 miles before the light went on!"

    "and how much gas did you add?"

    "just about 14 gallons, that's about 30 mpg!"

    And the true mileage wasn't. They used 16 gallons to go their 400 miles, which gives 25 mpg. They would have discovered this upon several consecutive fillups, but most people don't keep such continuous records. The ones that do, that I've spoken to, get the 19-22 city, and 26-28 highway. And there's sufficient report of similar mileage in this website to give me pause of actual mileages in the 33+ range.
  • solara00solara00 Member Posts: 81
    Not to be disagreeable, but unless you are saying the pumps are displaying inaccurate amounts of gallons pumped, I would think my method is more accurate.

    It matters not when the pump shuts off. It only matters how many gallons are measured. I wouldn't even have to fill past half full as long as the pump tells me how many gallons have been purchased.

    Over time, if I drive 50,000 miles and buy 2000 gallons of gas, then I'm getting 25 miles per gallon.

    Unless the pumps are not accurate.
  • solara00solara00 Member Posts: 81
    Again, if I have 11,044 miles on my odometer and ALL my fuel receipts show I've purchased 395 gallons of fuel in that period, how many miles per gallon is that? If the average is 28, and I know I had some city driving at 20-22 mpg, wouldn't you have to assume that some tanks got more than 28 mpg.

    You can't net a 28mpg average without some tanks being significantly more than that.
  • bd21bd21 Member Posts: 437
    That is indeed was part of my point. Again, my dad had to pump 5 gallons of gas from every pump into an accurate measuring container at every station in his area. Surprise, that were not all accurate. Some gave more, some gave less, and some were right on. Again, the general method of tracking each tank for a while by dividing the miles driven with the gallons used is O.K. But if you are looking for extreme accuracy use the same pump and station. Also, do one city test with a tank and one highway test with a tank. That will give you a true picture. I only do this method every now and then, otherwise I use your method. Also, never fill up you car at a station that is in the process of being refueled by a tanker. All of the crap in their storage tank is being stirred up and it will end up in your tank.
  • fredvhfredvh Member Posts: 857
    I just wanted to thank you for your suggestions and information on fueling our vehicles.
  • carcrazy99carcrazy99 Member Posts: 4
    I bought my first car ever, a Camry, and it turned out to be a nightmare. I dont know what all the hype about the camry is about. It was a headache from day one. A weird, loud rattling noise from the dashboard, abnormally loud suspension noise, alarm light malfunctioning...just some of the problems I had with this car. I tried to get the defects resolved through the dealer and then through Toyota...no luck. My complaints fell on deaf ears. Toyota doesn't offer customer service, they offer Customer disservice. They make promises they can't keep. They leave customers in the dark. I had to keep calling the manager and he would not even return my calls. This was my first Toyota and it will be my last one...

    My advice to someone looking for a new car...DO NOT BUY A TOYOTA...especially NOT A CAMRY!
  • petlpetl Member Posts: 610
    What year of Camry did you buy? Was it new or used?
  • phd86phd86 Member Posts: 110
    Your original msg #7181 reported 27.2 mpg, but no matter, 27 is still a pretty good average. Both of us live in flatland (me in central valley of california). The motor is different - makes me wonder, with the other posts of substandard mileage (one poster reported only using premimum!) if the V6 is actually more efficient?

    Any confirmed thoughts on whether or not california emissions affects mileage (toyota says it shouldn't affect it "that much").
  • phd86phd86 Member Posts: 110
    "I dont know what all the hype about the camry is about"

    to sum up "they don't make em like they used to"

    In the past....they made these huge sedans with great mileage and ultra-low maintenance. My 1992 is an example. I had zero problems of any kind. Just oil and gas - right on the EPA estimate. 12 years of technology and they produce a car that yields 6-8 mpg less than the sticker. is your squeak....near the clock? Did the dealer even say "most people can't hear it " as if "it" was a characteristic of the car?

    Oh, and the rattling noise is likely an extra clip that fell behind the dash during assembly. What a pain in the behind to get out (requires removal of entire dash to start), but it can be done if the dealer wants to. Or maybe its the wire to your malfunctioning alarm light?
  • slimwolf77slimwolf77 Member Posts: 11
    Greetings all.

    Just purchased an 05 Camry Standard(5 spd auto). So far I really don't have an complaints. Wonderful vehicle. No it's not the 'funnest' car on the market, but when it comes to getting here and there comfortably and in style, the Camry is hard to beat.

    Based on post here in this forum and my own observations, the low fuel light comes on with approximately 2.5 gallons left in the tank. I felt reassured when pumping a full tank yielded about 15.9 gallons pumped. Again, due to pump variance, this is all approximate. The driving conditions were about 65% city and 35% highway. I'm usually light on the throttle, but certain situations did require some extra lead foot action. My highway driving was at above average speeds...I'd say in the 80-90 MPH range. City driving was purposeful. Always tried to time the lights to minimize stop and go situations. When waiting at long stop lights, I would often shift into neutral(Deep down I'm a manual kind of guy).

    I got around 26.5 MPG this session. Mind you, my car is BRAND NEW. I'm satisfied with this number. On a long highway trip, I'm certain this NEW car could get at least 30 MPG, if not better. However in real world driving situations (I live in a Los Angeles suburb), 25-29 MPG mix is pretty darn good.

    Let's not forget the Camry has one of the 'larger' four cylinders on the market. It's not a weak motor, by any means. I like the Toyota's compromise.
  • alpha01alpha01 Member Posts: 4,747
    Great perspective, excellent, well-written and informed post, what a breath of fresh air! Thank you so much for joining the forum. Even if you become dissatisfied (unlikely), please continue posting. I dont know if we have many other Standard model owners that are frequent posters.

    happy motoring,
    ~alpha
  • slimwolf77slimwolf77 Member Posts: 11
    Thanks for the welcome, alpha01. From what I've seen here, your knowledge of the Camry is second to none. Visiting this forum has been quite eye opening, mostly thanks to your post.

    As much as I'd like to add to the forum, it's gonna be hard to do so with this car. I just can't find anything to hate, and most of the folks here already know about the good stuff. The sound system took some getting used to. A bit boomy in the base department, and the tone controls seem to have minimal effect on sound. But even the sound system has 'grown' on me. I understand the speaker assortment was upgraded for 05, so I'm pleased I waited.

    Haven't noticed any rattles and creeks some others have mentioned. Nor have I had any transmission issues. This 5 spd is silky smooth, while being fairly quick to act when acceleration is needed. My car is new, so there's plenty of time for things to go wrong. I'm hoping for the best.

    This is my third Toyota. Every single Toyota I've owned has been top notch. I doubt this will be my last one.
  • ian721ian721 Member Posts: 93
    04 Standard here. :)

    It's probably not a good idea to drive a brand new car at 80-90 mph. Gotta break that baby in first.
  • slimwolf77slimwolf77 Member Posts: 11
    Dude...at 80MPH the car's engine is at 2700rpm. Hardly a stressing situation for even a new engine.

    Heavy foot, high revving styles of driving are what should be avoided on a new vehicle. Cruise speed has nothing to do with engine break in.
  • ian721ian721 Member Posts: 93
    If you say so....
  • alpha01alpha01 Member Posts: 4,747
    thing, in my understanding, for a new engine... is to be driven long distance at a constant RPM.

    ~alpha

    PS- thanks for the kind words slim. I was raised on Camrys, and really appreciate how well the vehicle serves the masses, despite how people knock it as unsporty. Its an incredibly smooth vehicle. My mom (who now drives an awesome 2005 Legacy recently commented on the Camry's smoothness of operation, not just ride) But if people were really interested in sports cars, the Prelude would still be around, the real MR2 and Celica wouldnt have died/be dying, etc. Just my .02. Im actually a big fan of the Accord as well, but I listen in that forum more often than post because the Accord folks are a bit much- I feel that they dont accept even a class leading car can have its issues/weaknesses.
  • hank2hank2 Member Posts: 76
    I have a 2004 4 Cyl Camry SE with ~ 6000 miles on it. I drive ~25 miles each way to work at 65 MPH by cruise control and about 50 miles city driving during the weekend. I get about 28 MPG.

    My 1989 4 Cyl Camry got 33 MPG under similar driving (and still does according to the current owner.)

    That said, the 2004 (and the 2005) is an amazingly better car... which is what I would expect after 15 years. It has nicer lines, better handling, I like this version of silver/gray, the ride is smoother (even the SE), and it is much, much quieter ... I don't have the reported rattles, yet, altho a noise crops up sometimes that later goes away.

    I continue to recommend the Camry.

    But if someone knows some non-mathemagical way to get 35 MPG, then I'm all ears.

    -hank2
  • autoguy1autoguy1 Member Posts: 87
    Toyota has always been very reliable to me.

    I'm on my 3rd Toyota with my 2nd still with me. I moved from a Corolla to a Camry and then bought a Sienna.

    Corolla was at about 250,000KM before I sold it. The 1995 Camry is at 71,429 miles and although I recently had some major things replaced (from wear & tear, mind you), it's still only oil & gas. I just came back from a trip from NY. Many times I had to jack rabbit accelerate (I was late too...). With a full load, the little 2.2L 125HP I4 got us there quickly but it did rise past 4000RPM (I think that's a bad thing).

    The Sienna is running nice and strong But it still has yet to past it's break-in period. I've owned it for 1.5 months now and it has 526 miles on it.

    Toyota has done a magnificant, IMO.

    Regarding gas milege. My Sienna gets rather horrible milege in the city. At about 15MPG, I get gas pains. Which is why I use it more for highway. Now mind you, the car is 4100+ lbs.

    The Camry, with it's fuel sipping engine is pretty good. For 95% city, I get 21MPG. Now that's good. With highway it can get higher. I do have to admit, maybe I got use to the feeling of the Sienna but now I feel the Camry is instable at high speeds. Many times today I felt unsafe. Maybe it's not good switching lanes so quickly at such high speeds.
  • 18fan18fan Member Posts: 129
    Hank, In my experience, my Camry's mileage improved considerably once I passed the 7500 mile mark. I believe your mileage will improve, too, as you put more miles on your car.
  • slimwolf77slimwolf77 Member Posts: 11
    " I do have to admit, maybe I got use to the feeling of the Sienna but now I feel the Camry is instable at high speeds. Many times today I felt unsafe. Maybe it's not good switching lanes so quickly at such high speeds."

    Very interesting. As posted earlier, I regularly drive my 05 Camry at 80-90mph. The car feels completely under control. I'm hardly a passive driver, as lane changes are the norm. Have never gotten the impression the car was going to 'get away' from me. In fact, I'm sure I could safely maintain a higher speed. At my mothers request, I won't be doing that ;)

    It's tough to believe a 4100lb van could feel more stable than a 3200lb Camry.
  • bearcrkrdbearcrkrd Member Posts: 167
    I have the last gen of Camry, 2001, but wanted to reply. My Camry's mileage started to go up after 10,000 miles. The sticker said 24/33. I got that right off, but it has now (at 48,000 miles) gone through the roof! On a road trip I get 36.9 and I use that because the math has worked out to that exact number a few times, after 2-3-400 miles. A year and a half ago I got 41 mpg for a 100 mile stretch, and have kept track since, because it seemed something was wrong. The speedo and odometer are right on. Normal driving, which for me is 70% hiway, is around 32!! I have a 2001, CE, with the 4cyl AND a manual tranny, which is what has to be the reason for the mileage??? I do drive carefully, try to slow on corners by easing off the gas instead of using the brake, No dirt roads (ever), no jack rabbit stops and starts, and broke it in real slow and carefully the first 1,500 miles. All maint has been done, except the 45,000 service. I finally climbed under it and changed the oil myself, and the air filter. Shifting in stop and go traffic has lost it's novelty, but this is car is a beaut!! No one I know seems to give a darn, so thanks for this forum.
  • autoguy1autoguy1 Member Posts: 87
    Well maybe since our cars are 10 model years apart. They have bound to change something. And the Sienna has yet to break-in. I've only accelerated to about 55mph and usually no longer than a minute. Does anybody know if I can go faster than that after going past 500 miles?

    Anyways, I felt the car bouncing around after I switched. Maybe the suspension is to blame but since I had to switch lanes all the time and the road was somewhat curvy, I bounced around a lot. But the guys at the dealer said the shocks were perfectly fine.
  • alpha01alpha01 Member Posts: 4,747
    So wait, you're comparing a Camry to a Sienna leading people to believe that you're talking about the current of each, but in actuality, you're comparing a 94 Camry to a 2004 Sienna? Thats a bit misleading.

    So yes, maybe the 10 model years apart thing does have something to do with it.

    Saying the current Camry suffers in highway stability based on your experience with a 10 year old Camry... is far from valid.

    ~alpha
  • hank2hank2 Member Posts: 76
    18fan - Thanx, I'll hit 7500 toward the end of December, so maybe higher mileage will be my Christmas present. I did notice that after ~3K my mileage went from about 24 MPG to 27 MPG. I guess it's an eelctronic learning thing.

    AutoGuy - I drove 60 MPH up to the first 1000 miles, but I accelerated gently and used the brakes gently becuase I wanted to do a breakin period. Also, everything I read says to drive at various speeds, so that the fule injection computer can learn to adjust to your driving style.

    On the other hand, my 2004 Camry 4 Cyl glides smoothly up to 90 MPH, just as easily as 50 MPH. I rarely go over 65 MPH, so I was surprised at the stability and power ... and pleased that I was not observed by radar.

    - Hank2
Sign In or Register to comment.

Your Privacy

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.