When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
who knows when the next gs will be out, let alone a next gen gs-f which could be what, 2023 or beyond?
Well let's see, based on the 7 year cycles for the GS models (1998-2005, 2006-2013) I'm going to say 2020, but with the extra calculus of how long it took Lexus to work on the flagship (10 years)... based on the next lunar eclipse and whether there will be a new Italian parliament every 9 months - sure 2023 and more likely 2024. But they will grab the TTV6 and park that in the GS in the interim.
The GS is such a superior handling / feeling car over the Camry, a driving enthusiast wouldn’t bat an eye in choosing the GS over the Camry. In fact, a driving enthusiast would never even consider a Camry. I would think most people on car forums would fall into the enthusiast camp.
I was actually going to replace my original 4GS with a 2016 6.5ES Refresh for its latest up to date styling with a lot of chrome at the front, extra interior space, more practical bottom end torque [though at the expense of top end maximum torque], and its softer ride.
However, the rear 3/4 styling, the cheap flattish door trims, the cheap thin looking front seat backrests with 2nd rate stitching, the small sat nav LCD screen, the cheap looking confused twin separate cup holders on the front center console, plus the understeery handling killed it for me...
Going through the literature, I notice that Accord is much more spacious than Camry as usual, because Honda only has the one Accord model, whereas Toyota has both midsize Accord & full size Avalon.
I also notice new Accord is sharper handling, at the expense to ride - as usual.
However, I'm still confused as to how Honda's new 2.0T performs against 3.5 V6 Toyota?
^^^ Yeah unfortunately the ES you drove rides on the Avalon platform from the previous generation Camry/ES. These don't have the benefit of the new architecture so that means a FWD ES customer who wants a little bit of extra luxe and badge prestige gets to wait for the next ES in 2019. But nothing wrong with the 2018 Camry in XSE trim with the V6/8 speed.
Going through the literature, I notice that Accord is much more spacious than Camry as usual, because Honda only has the one Accord model, whereas Toyota has both midsize Accord & full size Avalon.
I also notice new Accord is sharper handling, at the expense to ride - as usual.
However, I'm still confused as to how Honda's new 2.0T performs against 3.5 V6 Toyota?
One of the Accord tests did a drag race between a '17 Accord V-6 and an '18 2.0T. The '18 won every test by a small margin. Since the V-6 Camry and V-6 Accord were close in performance, I would expect similar results. If anything, the margin for the 2.0T Accord should be slightly larger vs the Camry. More torque, lighter weight, and 10 speed auto all add up to give the new Accord the advantage.
Steve
Going through the literature, I notice that Accord is much more spacious than Camry as usual, because Honda only has the one Accord model, whereas Toyota has both midsize Accord & full size Avalon.
I also notice new Accord is sharper handling, at the expense to ride - as usual.
However, I'm still confused as to how Honda's new 2.0T performs against 3.5 V6 Toyota?
Latest test I read had the 2.0T Accord beating the Camry 6 cylinder in 0-60 and quarter mile which is shocking.
One of the Accord tests did a drag race between a '17 Accord V-6 and an '18 2.0T. The '18 won every test by a small margin. Since the V-6 Camry and V-6 Accord were close in performance, I would expect similar results. If anything, the margin for the 2.0T Accord should be slightly larger vs the Camry. More torque, lighter weight, and 10 speed auto all add up to give the new Accord the advantage.
Steve
Originally Posted by UDel
Latest test I read had the 2.0T Accord beating the Camry 6 cylinder in 0-60 and quarter mile which is shocking.
I wonder how Honda's 2.0T compares with Toyota 3.5 V6 for NVH?
Because Civic 1.5T still has a four cylinder-ness about it, esp at idle and low rpms, while full throttle still can't match a six for NVH.
The larger the engine capacity, the greater the reciprocating mass, and therefore worse NVH.
However, the being an Accord, Honda may deliberately refine the 2.0T and subframe and engine mounts more.
I wonder if Toyota will replace the 3.5 V6 with a 2.0T like the Europeans, or a 2.5T like Mazda?
I'm not convinced that, driven and/or engineered property, a normally-aspirated V6 necessarily even uses more gas than a turbo four. My Lacrosse's GM 3.6L, for instance, with a couple of engineering tricks like the idle start/stop, cylinder-shutdown at cruise, and the advanced 9-speed automatic, averages low-mid 20s in town/suburban driving and well over 30 MPG on the road (these are real-world figures, not just EPA).
With any turbocharged car it completely depends on how you drive it. I once took a 2013 Chevrolet Cruze 1.4L turbocharged w/automatic (138hp at the crank) onto some mountain roads and kept the car in its manual shift mode to hold revs and keep the little turbo on boil. Whereas usually it achieved very good city fuel economy I was surprised to see the fuel gauge to have dropped quite a bit faster after the entire run was finished. Throughout I saw the little fuel economy estimator on the dash drop to as little as 14mpg when I was driving it hard. I was very surprised that even a 1.4L turbo engine could drink THAT much premium fuel. That's on par with my SC300 on the same road ;D
Although the difference is that once you stop trying to use the turbo constantly and start driving normally you once again have the high fuel economy from that 1.4L turbo.
There certainly are a lot of tricks to make a much bigger NA engine achieve decent fuel economy on average. And then there is the example of the non-ZR1 Corvette with the 7 speed manual. It's not a heavyweight car but it has a huge V8 engine. When you drive it in 6th or 7th gear without goosing the throttle it actually returns fairly decent fuel economy. As soon as you throw into a low gear and start driving it aggressively that's when it burns far more fuel.
...
As for the Camry XSE V6... pretty good from what I hear but... it needs a factory-order option (which Toyota does not and will not do unfortunately) for a manual transmission with the V6. And since Toyota owns the company that makes Torsen limited slip differentials that should also be a factory order option. Of course Toyota will offer neither of those.
Toyota also hasn't offered an AWD (4cyl or V6 equipped) Camry since the discontinuation of the Camry All-Trac in 1991. Decades later and still no AWD available.
With any turbocharged car it completely depends on how you drive it. I once took a 2013 Chevrolet Cruze 1.4L turbocharged w/automatic (138hp at the crank) onto some mountain roads and kept the car in its manual shift mode to hold revs and keep the little turbo on boil. Whereas usually it achieved very good city fuel economy I was surprised to see the fuel gauge to have dropped quite a bit faster after the entire run was finished. Throughout I saw the little fuel economy estimator on the dash drop to as little as 14mpg when I was driving it hard. I was very surprised that even a 1.4L turbo engine could drink THAT much premium fuel. That's on par with my SC300 on the same road ;D
Although the difference is that once you stop trying to use the turbo constantly and start driving normally you once again have the high fuel economy from that 1.4L turbo.
Years ago, almost all turbos came wth a boost-gauge, so you could see how hard (or how little) you were stressing the engine/turbo and components. Today, those boost-gauges are either not there any more, or, if so, buried down deep within the programmable-electronics somewhere. Also, today, the boost is much more tightly-regulated by the engine-computer.
There certainly are a lot of tricks to make a much bigger NA engine achieve decent fuel economy on average. And then there is the example of the non-ZR1 Corvette with the 7 speed manual. It's not a heavyweight car but it has a huge V8 engine. When you drive it in 6th or 7th gear without goosing the throttle it actually returns fairly decent fuel economy. As soon as you throw into a low gear and start driving it aggressively that's when it burns far more fuel.
And, don't forget the old 1-4 skip-shift feature on V8 Mustangs and Camaros that forced the lever away from 2nd or 3rd gear unless you really hammered the throttle. That drove a lot of owners nuts (some aftermarket features were available to disconnect it)...I didn't like the feature myself when I sampled those cars.
...
As for the Camry XSE V6... pretty good from what I hear but... it needs a factory-order option (which Toyota does not and will not do unfortunately) for a manual transmission with the V6. And since Toyota owns the company that makes Torsen limited slip differentials that should also be a factory order option. Of course Toyota will offer neither of those.
I honestly don't think there would be a significant market for a traditional 3-pedal manual Camry XSE. You'd get a few buyers, but the term "Camry" and "Sport-Sedan" generally don't mix.
Toyota also hasn't offered an AWD (4cyl or V6 equipped) Camry since the discontinuation of the Camry All-Trac in 1991. Decades later and still no AWD available.
Yes.....I've mentioned that myself, several times. The usual answer (and it appears to be true) is that most of that potential market, long ago, gravitated to the RAV-4 and Highlander...and those with a little more money to spend to the Lexus RX.
I wonder if Toyota will replace the 3.5 V6 with a 2.0T like the Europeans, or a 2.5T like Mazda?
Originally Posted by mmarshall
I'm not convinced that, driven and/or engineered property, a normally-aspirated V6 necessarily even uses more gas than a turbo four. My Lacrosse's GM 3.6L, for instance, with a couple of engineering tricks like the idle start/stop, cylinder-shutdown at cruise, and the advanced 9-speed automatic, averages low-mid 20s in own/suburban driving and well over 30 MPG on the road (these are real-world figures, not just EPA).
Toyota and its dealers do quite well selling the V6 Camry even if that's not the bulk of sales of the model. The V6 Camry has a higher sticker because it's often packaged with a lot more options and allows for a better margin. Toyota's marketers believe that Americans prefer V6 power from the Camry when they opt for the higher trims. The smooth linear power delivery and fuss free driving keeps the V6 around.
They do have the 2.0 liter turbo from the NX200t, GS200t sedans if they want to do it. It provides plenty of torque for the Camry at its curb weight, but not sure they think they have to.
11-25-17, 04:36 PM
