sorptd

I actually like new SE/XSE design & glad they still offer a v6. I used to own a 2014 Camry SE v6 & that engine still outperforms pretty much all 2.0T engines i have sampled.

Striker223

Fun thread to read this morning as I wait for an alignment, got some whiplash from the sudden housing discussion though lol!

I would be shocked if they actually offer the ES with the 4 at all without a hybrid system, the AWD will drag it down so badly it will feel broken. If the ES had a rear drive option it would perhaps be on the radar for many more people than it currently is IMO, some people simply hate how FWD feels with any sort of power or aggressive driving. I would never, ever, consider spending loaded ES money when I could instead get a far superior drivetrain for comparable money. I would go so far as to say I would never pick an ES since I can buy many V8 rear drive cars for the same price and the performance and feel gap is simply so immense

mmarshall

That doesn't mean it wouldn't sell. The former IS250AWD, for example, had a 2.5L V6 that produced only 184 ft-lbs. of torque (roughly equivalent to many non-turbo-fours), but, in my area at least, sold like hotcakes.

tex2670

Yes but the IS 250 replaced the IS 300 which only had 215 HP.

Striker223

Bingo, so it was a performance increase due to weight and trans. The situation with the ES would be a loss

Toys4RJill

You make a great point there. The Lexus IS250 awd would very likely have the identical power/tq ratings of the new Camry awd. I would think the Camry would be lighter than the IS250awd

tex2670

I owned an 07 IS250. You have to look at the competitive cars at the time. BMW had 2 engine options in the 3-Series xDrive; the smaller engine had HP in the 220 range. Same with the Audi A4 Quattro. Infiniti had the G35 (later 37) which had significantly more HP for around the same price.

Who are the ES competitors that offer AWD and HP in the low 200s?

AJT123

The Honda is faster, though. I swear I saw a 0-60 time of 5.4 recently for a 2.0T. That's pretty insane for a regular family sedan for the masses.

It would probably be a tossup between those two for me.

I really like the Camry but also I'm a huge Honda fan. I think the Accord looks better. But the Camry has a NA V6.

mmarshall

I'm not sure if you would consider this the "low 200s", but both the Cadillac CT4 and CT5 AWD sedans come with a turbo-4 and 237 HP. The AWD Jaguar XE's turbo-4 puts out 247 HP. And, though it probably won't be around much longer, the Lincoln MKZ AWD turbo-4 puts out 245 HP.

tex2670

I wouldn't consider the CT4 or Jag competitors to the ES.

And I wouldn't consider the Lincoln's 245 HP low 200s. That's more than 20% difference. And it won't be relevant because it won't exist anyway.

sensai

i'm with you although our camry is a 2011 v6 se so not the latest but 268hp and is extremely smooth and reliable. just keeping that long term; not feeling the 4cyl ~200hp...

Lexuss07

Ok the horsepower I said was 205hp and it is only 203hp....

sdls

get out and push to make up the difference

SW17LS

WRONG lol.

coolsaber

Wonder how it drives before I`d write it off if its suppose to compete with the base V6 on price alone