During his first inaugural speech, given at the height of the Great Depression, President Franklin D. Roosevelt famously said, “Let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself – nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.” Once again, Americans find themselves living through days of economic infamy. Uncertain times and erratic energy costs have cured fearing suburbanites of their predilection for gargantuan SUVs. It’s time for practical pragmatism; inexpensive family haulers that dine lightly on 85 octane and stay firmly bolted together for years to come. To fully understand this segment, I tested and compared a quartet of economy sedans. First up: the Toyota Camry.
As fear-fearing Americans fretted over the possibility of $200 per barrel oil, the Camry surpassed the venerable Ford F150 as the national best seller. The Camry is synonymous with reliability: a veritable rolling appliance. The Camry is now the benchmark against which all others are measured. The mid-sized market is crowded with more models than is practical to test at one time. Of course the Honda Accord LX, also a sales leader with significant mindshare for affordable quality, had to be included. To round out the field I chose Toyota and Honda’s leading home country competition, Mazda Mazda6 Sport and Nissan Altima 2.5.
In keeping with the economy theme, I opted for entry level four-cylinder, front wheel-drive models with base option packages. The four cars are remarkably similar in size, capacities, fuel economy, power, options and price. Drawing distinctions between the sedans largely fell to subjective styling taste and driving impressions. Before I delve too deeply, I suppose it’s proper for me to disclaim that I’ve owned three Toyota Camrys and currently drive an aging Accord LX. As you will see, this didn’t necessarily help either of these cars in this comparison.
The success of the Camry franchise is indisputable. What’s even more remarkable: with the possible exception of the first generation, on the aesthetics scale Camry looks have ranged from dull to homely. I guess that shows what a reputation of practical reliability can do for you.
The current model, with us since March 2006, is the ugliest-ever iteration. What Adrian van Hooydonk did for trunk lids, Toyota’s designers have done to Camry’s front end (pray that the automobile industry doesn’t follow suit). The Camry’s hood and grille are formed into an unsightly bulge in the center, as if an Alien baby were about to emerge. Or, if you prefer, it’s straight from E!’s “Rhinoplasty gone wrong!” series.
The Camry’s countenance looks like it was inspired by a Sperm whale’s brow. It prompts the sardonic critic to ask, is that a 12-cylinder under your bonnet or are you just happy to see me? Camry’s Bangalized hind quarters are nearly as unsightly as the front. In profile the Camry looks like a cooked Ball Park Frank®.
What a relief to get behind the wheel, where occupants are greeted by purposeful class-compliant gauges and switches. HVAC knobs turn with all the firm assurance of dials on a safe. Otherwise, the components are largely made from weight (and money) saving hard plastics that are a qualitative step down from Camry’s of yore.
Let’s face it, none of these 3300 lbs cars with economical four cylinder power plants are gonna set your hair on fire when your inner hoon gets feeling a little randy. Among these weaklings, Camry is the wimpiest by 12 hp. Yet mom and dad will happily shuttle young’uns from home and school to football practice and dance lessons. Stoplight to stoplight dashes from zero to forty and back to zero are what this 158 hp 2.4-liter engine does best.
Just don’t count on getting out from behind a slow-moving semi on a two lane highway without your heart rate going anaerobic. The move from fifty to eighty mph is almost as slow as waiting for a Dancing with the Stars verdict.
Flop and wallow. The Camry’s handling dynamics in a nutshell. Driven hard, the Camry gets your blood pumping; again for all of the wrong reasons. Through twists and turns the Toyota pitches and rolls with a distinctly nautical flavor. In every respect, the Camry, which lacks so much as a hand brake, is the least driver’s-oriented car of the bunch. BUT this is a superb passenger’s car. Its refined, glossy-smooth ride outclasses its mid-sized competitors. Horrendous county roads are quietly dispatched with limousine luxury worthy of its Lexus-badged siblings.
Comfort-oriented buyers might find Camry’s ride sufficient cause to overlook its visual and performance shortcomings. For me, it’s not nearly enough.
69 Comments on “Comparison Test/Review: Fourth Place: 2009 Toyota Camry...”
Back to TopLeave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
You can also login using Facebook Connect.
I realize that you couldn’t do ‘all’ the cars in such a segment, but I’d have liked to see at least 2-3 more…
glaringly missing is the Hyundia Sonata,
would also be nice to have seen the fusion and perhaps a malibu – just for some general bashing…
Crystal ball says: Mazda, Nissan, Honda, Toyota.
I must agree with improvement-needed: the Sonata, Malibu, and Fusion would be good to see in this comparison. Maybe the VW Passat as well, except that its price is likely out of line.
My personal pet peeve with most Camry reviews, including this one, is that they test the LE or XLE then evaluate the car from an enthusiasts perspective. The SE would be much more appropriate.
Ugly is subjective. I personally found the previous generation car much uglier.
And, finally, reliability. A year ago TrueDelta was the first to warn of transmission problems in V6 Camrys. Later, we were the first to note that that problem had gone away, and the four-cylinder was never affected.
In other words, while the Camry sees a bit shoddy inside, they aren’t requiring many repairs, at least not yet.
TrueDelta will have updated results around November 12. The latest results are always displayed here:
http://www.truedelta.com/latest_results.php
I agree 100% with 90% of the stuff you said!
I’m one of those idiots who bot this car without test-driving it or looking at the really crappy interior quality. It was because it was a Toyota and you can usually depend on Toyota to produce a good car.
However, on the good side, it’s nearly 3k cheaper than the Accord, is smaller/easier to park, and I really like the side profile and the bangle butt… looks best when viewed during sunset. :)
On the power side, you really have to mash the pedal to the medal if you want any acceleration between 20-50mph and it’s really loud. Seats make my ass sore after 15 minutes, but it’s got like 50 airbags. :) The basic radio/stereo is pretty good. I wish the ASL factored in the windows being up or down…
If you’re considering this car, VSC is a must because the handling’s so mushy it’s unsafe at high speeds. :O I made my mom cry by taking a really curvy road at 40 mph.
I’m glad I got the LE and not an expensiver version… paying more than 20k OTD for this is crazy.
With the Camry, you have to own it to appreciate it. I was not a Camry fan at all. I thought all previous models were bland and boring. And they are. But, I really like the current design, actually. And after a year of trouble free ownership I really like and appreciate mine and have grown to like the previous generations, as well.
My personal preference based on brands would be
Honda-Mazda-Nissan-Toyota
But, as only the Mazda6 is offered in a similar form in Europe I can’t really tell what the outcome of this will/should be.
Honda should make great cars all the time but sometimes just seems to choose not to. Mazda is on and off, sometimes you think they finally reached the level you’d want them to and then they mess up again, plus many of their regular cars don’t age well (in terms of design). Most of the times I can’t be bothered by Nissan, they still make crappy plastic interiors that will be the worst out there if Chrysler folds, but that V6 is nice.
Toyota is just trying to make a world where car enthousiasm doesn’t exist anymore by forcing innocent car buyers to buy their cars for the sake of reliability and then subsequently, through continous subliminal messaging, replace all associations those people might have with the concept of “car” with the associations one has with the concept of “blender”. That way making sure that those people will have no option but to buy Toyotas for the rest of their sorry lives.
I am a huge fan of this car (really). I think it’s spot on for what the Camry buyers would want, especially in 4-cylinder LE trim. The other trim levels, in my opinion, are just more money and not worth it.
I rented a Camry from Enterprise for a drive from Los Angeles to Las Vegas last summer and found it a thoroughly pleasant machine.
Obviously it has no sporting character, but that was never the intention (I have no experience with the SE model) and I think it serves those intentions well. It’s appropriately bland (as opposed to the new Accord, which I find odd) and yes the interior is way below Audi levels.
But if you look at it as an appliance and nothing more, it very much does what Toyota set out for it to do.
For some reason I was expecting this senence “Horrendous county roads are quietly dispatched with…”
to end with something about the dispassionate casualness of a hardened hitman, but the sentence as it stands *does* tell us more about the Camry.
How about a recent test from Driving Television in Canada on four cyclinder base models:
1. Honda Accord – 99 points/115 points
2. Chevrolet Malibu – 98 points
3. Nissan Altima – 97 points
4. Hyundai Sonata – 93 points
Subaru Legacy – 93 points
Volkswagen Passat – 93 points
7. Toyota Camry – 90 points
8. Ford Fusion – 83 points
9. Kia Magentis – 74 points
10. Dodge Avenger – 63 points
Mazda 6 wasn’t included because ‘09 wasn’t available for their testing.
Overall price was not used in the rankings or final score.
The Camry will get you from point A to B in comfort for years to come. It’s just too bad that when you arrive at point B you remember nothing of the drive there. A family sedan doesn’t have to be this boring, does it?
At least they got the ride right, unlike most cars that go for cushy and end up feeling nautical.
My personal pet peeve with most Camry reviews, including this one, is that they test the LE or XLE then evaluate the car from an enthusiasts perspective. The SE would be much more appropriate.
Actually my test model was not the LE, XLE or SE. It was the unlettered “base model” formerly know as the CE. The premise of this test was to determine the best family car for budget minded buyers. Each is an entry level model. As my upcoming reviews show, other automakers found a way to infuse a little sporting verve into their sedans. Toyota chose not to.
However, on the good side, it’s nearly 3k cheaper than the Accord…
The pricing of the four tested sedans was tightly grouped. The Camry cost just $707 less than the Accord LX tested.
proboscis monkey car
oop! oop!
the Mazda6 in this test – the ‘09?
On looks, I’d say this generation is by far the best looking since the 1986 SV20 Camry. It’s okey, it’s not hideous as the last generation, the 2003 SV30 Camry.
the Mazda6 in this test – the ‘09?
All four cars tested (Accord, Altima, Camry, Mazda6) were ’09s.
It is NOT all about performance! Cars have REAL purposes in the REAL world outside of having fun.
Never, ever forget how important the ownership experience is. I do care how much HP a car has and how many Gs it can pull, if it is a hassle to own it is NOT a fun car.
Each and every 3/4/5 door sedan/hatch/wagon/CUV/ SUV on the market today is an APPLIANCE! Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know there are many deluded folks out there that somehow believe that their 328s or WRXs are NOT appliances but come on and get real, look around you are you commute to work this morning.
If you do not understand the Camry, count the number of 20 year old Camrys you will still see on the road today. It is important to remember the Camry was NOT the best seller in 1988, the Ford Taurus was and needless to say 1988 Taurus are non-existant today, along with VW Quantuams, Nissan Stanzas, Mazda 626s, Chevy Corsicas, Chysler Aclaims, Mitsu, Galants, etc. The only other 20 year old car in this class you still encounter with regularity is a Honda Accord and in all honesty they have not held up as well.
Outside of body rust on the rear quarter panel a Camry is all but indestructible. If a Camry spends its nights and winters in a garage it will last forever. Now mind you, I speak from a NYC perspective and this city is brutal on cars yet Camrys manage to handle this city with ease.
Over the long haul Mazdas and those other “low priced” performance cars are junk!, Yes they are fun to drive new but they quickly wear out like a cheap pair of sneakers. This is due to the fact that Mazda is trying to sell “zoom zoom” to overcome shortcoming in build quality. It is easy to put together a cheaper car and than install go fast bits and pieces that only shorten the life of the vehicle in the long run than to build a $20,000 car with a solid body structure that would make a $50,000 car proud.
I like Toyota’s approach. Toyota sells you a rock solid car and than will show you the TRD Catalog if you are so inclined to want to “abuse” your car. There is a trade off. The reason Toyotas have such longevity is due to the fact that they are set up to minimize stress on components, which does equate to a bit more “give” in the handling.
Performance tires, sturts, brakes, exhuast, etc are all expensive to replace. People with mortgages and tuition payments to make, THAT DO NOT LIKE DEBT will generally pass on this stuff for the better more reliable car.
It is important to remember that cars in general are a major hassle to own and operate. Toyota understands this fact and is actually listening to people and building the cars that they want to own; durable, reliable, comfortable, inexpensive to own and operate, great resale value.
While the Camry is not the best “drivers” car, its resale value certiainly proves out that is one of the best cars money can buy.
How is this only 2 stars? Sure, it may not be fun to drive in a sporty sense but come on, the cars are highly reliable, durable, and ride very well. Blah blah blah, it’s all been said in the comments already. 2 stars seems ridiculous for this car when it’s already proved itself a value purchase for the mainstream. I can’t see giving this a rating equivalent to something like an Aveo.
The Camry is definitely not by any means one of the worst-cars on the road, which the rating implies.
Because the Hyundai Sonata does the same thing vastly better for less, perhaps?
OK, here’s the deal…
Mr. Montgomery is reviewing this car with a slight enthusiast’s perspective in mind. That’s more than fine since all of us do have a bit of that focus within us.
As someone who owned a Camry for 12 years and 239k, you can definitely count me among those here who understand the importance of the ‘economic proposition’ when owning a car. But…. as it was pointed out in the review, you can’t rely on that alone. Especially in an automotive world where virtually everything can last 12 years and 200k with minimal issues. Our world isn’t based on reputations that were made in 1988 or 1998 and neither should this review.
One more aside, the longest lasting vehicle from the late 1980’s was the Volvo 240. Not even the Camry can come close to the powertrain durability of that vehicle and a lot of it has to do with the actual material quality of the powertrain. I love Camcords quite a bit but if you’re looking at the durability issue, RWD Volvo’s from late 80’s to mid-90’s (sans the nix 960) are the gold standard.
The hood bulge is something to get used to due to new European pedestrian safety regulations. The tacked-on trunk lid on this one should also cover you for that speedy reverse hit as well.
I think that the current “Family Camry” is actually better looking than the last gen by far, particularly in darker colors. The rear is tidy with a bit of Lexus curve. The front isn’t offensive. We wont’ talk much about that side view…
I can’t say anything positive about the last gen in any sense. It was just god-awful conservative and downright dowdy. A beige one would be your rolling badge of proof that you respect your choice in cars about as much as that of a washing machine. At least Honda has held on to some semblance of a soul – its willingness to play, it’s tactile goodness. Driving an Accord never made me feel like I’d given up any hope of style or automotive goodness and fun like the Camry makes me feel.
Talk all you want about the new Accord’s bloat. It still has that crisp feel to the steering and controls that tells you right away it’s a Honda. The Camry feels rubbery and institutional in comparison.
I second the questioning of the two star rating. Where did you pull that from? The Camry is a snooze-fest, but it is definitely not a two-star vehicle overall in any trim.
It is silly to talk about how a Altima or Sonota handled a highway on-ramp so much better than the Camry. If that mattered to the 98% of the buyers of $20,000 mid-sized sedans the sales leaders would be different.
What matters is when you go to the dealers and start slaming doors and the like the Camry undeniably feels like the superior choice. The doors on a Mazda6 feel like they are made out of tin foil compared to the Camry. Hyundai’s body panels dent if you simple blow on them. Nissan are full of style but on closer inspection the “cut-corners” are readily visible. The Camry on the otherhand has far less “flash” but far more substance to it.
While the interior is less than what I have come to expect from Toyota it does have that feel to it were it will last forever; the bin doors are solid, the fabric has a high quality feel to it, door handle and switches all feel durable and sturdy.
Notice both leaders in this class (Camry and Accord) do not put much emphasis on performnace. They do NOT have too! These cars are so good that they do not need an extre “edge” to generate interest and sales. Mazda has been trying to push the 6 as a “fun to drive” car and has meet with little success. There are not enough “kool-aide” drinkers to buy that arguement.
Can you folks honestly say that you’ll be having any more fun driving an Accord or a 6 in bumper-to-bumper traffic, or on long trips on the interstate? A family car is a family car: large, heavy, and designed to go from point A to point B. If you’ve bought one of these cars, it is because you intend to use it to go from point A to point B. Stop denying this fact.
I was seriously considering a 2009 Camry as a daily driver but the one thing that drove me nuts about it was the dashboard. It has a dip in the center where the clock is that casts a big, half-moon shaped reflection on the windshield. The only time it went away is when it was dark out, and its all I could focus on while driving. Every time I am next to one on the road I look at the windshield and see that reflection. Has anyone else noticed this?
What a relief to get behind the wheel, where occupants are greeted by purposeful class-compliant gauges and switches. HVAC knobs turn with all the firm assurance of dials on a safe. Otherwise, the components are largely made from weight (and money) saving hard plastics that are a qualitative step down from Camry’s of yore.
Two things:
One, Toyota nailed the ergonomics. Spend time in the Accord (button bonanza), Sonata (teeny knobs), Fusion (teeny knobs at level with your shins) or Malibu (not bad, but the control context sometimes odd) and the Camry’s interior stack looks like a work of genuis. You can operate the damn thing with mittens on. Easily.
Two, Hard plastics where you don’t rest your elbow don’t matter, as long as the fit is decent. The only reason dashboards are soft is because they’re aping leather dashes of yore. Since we’re not even aping the appearance of leather, let alone actually using it, who cares? My Fit’s dash is comprised of rock-hard plastics, they all fit together well (unlike the soft-but-misaligned panels in my Saab), and I never touch them. And that’s ok, as it would be in the Camry.
I think entirely too much is made out of the lack of soft-touch plastics where people rarely touch, especially in mainstream cars.
ctoan: Yes. Ask RF about the Accord’s steering wheel for one reason why.
RE: Mr. Montgomery
Oops, my bad. Somehow my calculations were off. Before the 1k rebate, they’re just a few hundred apart. I got the 3k from when we went car shopping a few months ago when the Honda dealer wanted 20.5k for the base LX, and the Camry was offered for 18.3. After TTL, it would’ve been nearly 3k difference.
One more aside, the longest lasting vehicle from the late 1980’s was the Volvo 240. Not even the Camry can come close to the powertrain durability of that vehicle and a lot of it has to do with the actual material quality of the powertrain. I love Camcords quite a bit but if you’re looking at the durability issue, RWD Volvo’s from late 80’s to mid-90’s (sans the nix 960) are the gold standard.
The point that people should not miss is that the crown once worn by the Volvo 240 past on to the Camry back in the 1990s. The Camry is the Volvo 240 of our current times.
There was once a time when the makers of the best cars in the world did not concern themselves with how “sporty” there cars were (looking at you Mercedes Benz). The goal was to build the best cars and the measurement for best was longevity.
Notice that Lexus captures the “best car” crown from MB and now MB thinks it is a sportscar company; body kits, big wheels, superchargers, all attached to poorly built unreliable cars.
Today any Toyota will run circles around any Volvo built today in terms of quality and reliabilty. That Volvo magic quickly disappeared with the change over the FWD. Remember Toyota made a big switch to FWD in the first half of the 1980s and did NOT see any decrease in it quality, if not an increase.
In all fairness if I were to only go back to 2000 I would say that Altimas, Sonotas, Mazda626, and Legacies have not shown the same level of durabilty as the Camry counterparts. Honestly what really matters, an extra hundreth of a G or headlights that do not cloud up due to improper seeling. Do you really care if you car makes it to 60 2 tenths quicker if the glovebox door is hanging off?
The real question here is, if you were given $7000 today and had to purchase a used one of these cars which one would you trust?
No Malibu? Why not, I would very much like to see a comparison – more so given GM’s problems.
Great review and good summary of what the modern day Camry is.
PS: “heart rate going anaerobic”?
Technically “anaerobic” refers to metabolic respiration and not the heart rate. It is when the lungs and blood stream can no longer keep up with the oxygen demand of the muscles and the body switches to an alternative (and much less efficient) method of synthesising ATP that does not require oxygen.
Technically “anaerobic” refers to metabolic respiration and not the heart rate. It is when the lungs and blood stream can no longer keep up with the oxygen demand of the muscles and the body switches to an alternative (and much less efficient) method of synthesising ATP that does not require oxygen.
In a cardiac stress test, anaerobic is defined as 80% to 90% of an individual’s Maximum Heart Rate (i.e. in terms of beats per minute that is higher than Aerobic and less than VO2 Max).
Thanks for the review. I have always thought the Camry got sort of a bad rap for its styling. I find it innoffensive, but far from stylish. I drove a 4 cyl model a while back. My impressions from its body roll and dive during braking are the main characteristics that have stayed with me to this day from the experience. I cannot help but wonder though if the drive would have been helped by better tires, it seemed like they gave up very quickly.
The current Camry grille harks back to the 1951 Studebaker.
See pic at: http://auto.howstuffworks.com/1950-1951-studebaker.htm
romanjetfighter “…and I really like the side profile and the bangle butt… looks best when viewed during sunset. :)”
I find the Camry looks best when viewed in total darkness.
The best Camry I’ve driven was a ‘94. Felt and drove much more like a more expensive car in that it had the level of driver isolation from the road the way that Lexus has.
My rental car experiences with 4 cyl Camrys have been dull and dangerous. Same level of isolation, poor 30-50 and 50-70 mph acceleration, iffy braking, iffy emergency handling.
I appreciate Camry’s dependability and economy of ownership, but I would not feel safe relying on that car’s ability to quickly respond to avoid an accident.
gamper : I cannot help but wonder though if the drive would have been helped by better tires, it seemed like they gave up very quickly.
The 2006 Camry I tested had V-rated tires, Michelin branded IIRC. The tires aren’t the problem: and once they get replaced with WalMart specials, there’ll be precious little grip for America’s top understeerer.
Toyota handling= Japanese Buick.
I can see why you wouldn’t be giving a CamCord 4 out of 5 stars on TTAC, a pistonhead based car site.
But 2 out of 5 stars makes a strong statement that there is something inherently wrong with the vehicle and that TTAC is recommending it’s readers steer clear of purchasing said vehicle. Same way if a vehicle is rated 4 out of 5 stars, TTAC is then recommends such a vehicle to their readers. This is inherently the point of such a “star” system.
That said, two stars is not within the realm of believability when it comes to the Camry. TTAC, not Toyota, loses credibility with such a claim. Especially when you clearly state:
Great site, nicely written review, but overall it seems clear that while a base four cylinder Camry may not stir the automotive passions of an A5, it shouldn’t be taken out back and shot because of it. The Camry ain’t no Aveo.
I can’t see giving this a rating equivalent to something like an Aveo… The Camry is definitely not by any means one of the worst-cars on the road, which the rating implies.
But 2 out of 5 stars makes a strong statement that there is something inherently wrong with the vehicle and that TTAC is recommending it’s readers steer clear of purchasing said vehicle… The Camry ain’t no Aveo.
The Aveo was not part of this test. Neither was a Mercedes S600. This is a comparison test among four economical entry-level sedans. Rating them all three stars wouldn’t communicate anything. Camry was the worst. The two was awarded to illustrate that distinction.
Did I just read that it doesn’t have a handbrake?
When I climbed into this car, I just couldn’t get over (or around) the terrible placement of the gigantic handlebar on the inside of the door. Aside from the ugliness, it blocks the controls. If I’m resting my arm on the idiotic sloped ledge on the door, shouldn’t I be able to move my arm forward to reach the window and door buttons? Terrible. Just like the interior in general.
In the end, it was easy to dismiss this Camry (for a number of reasons, most mentioned in this review) — especially when Sonatas were going for 14-16k and had a lot more standard features.
A family sedan doesn’t have to be this boring, does it?
It’s a family sedan. If you want excitement, buy a G8 GT.
now MB thinks it is a sportscar company; body kits, big wheels, superchargers, all attached to poorly built unreliable cars.
No disagreement about the marque – MBz is chasing after a “sporty” image, which IMO would be alright if they did not lose their reputation for engineering, taste and build quality. The problem is that the cheap, tacked on sportiness has killed their image for tasteful cars, particularly at the top-end; and the low-budget crap (M-class) has screwed up their quality average.
The only part of the MBz range that is still relatively good is their mid-size E-Class, although it doesn’t compare very well with the Lexus LS which overlaps some of the E-Class range.
Ah, the silly handbrake. Am I the only one who prefers the parking brake to be foot activated? I prefer a foot brake even on a stick-shift car , provided the release is hand operated.
Case in point: Girlfriend parked her car on a hill, put it in park, and set the handbrake by pulling it up 2 clicks. I told her to put the car back in neutral and see if we would roll. Sure enough, we went rolling backwards no problem. Try as hard as she could, she couldn’t pull the brake hard enough with her [awkwardly positioned] arm to stop the rolling. I then wrenched the break to the “proper” position… and she wasn’t able to release it!
The foot-activated parking brake has so many benefits: easier to engage, easier to disengage (with hand release), gives your foot something to do after releasing the clutch, doesn’t clutter up the central console. On the downside: the passenger can’t reach it in an emergency and you can’t modulate the release, which means you only get one try when starting the car going up a hill.
@Quasimondo
Or buy one of the other cars in this segment that don’t sacrifice driving dynamics.
What do you mean you don’t have time to test the other cars in this class? What else do you have to test? Another Lamborghini or Ferrari? Cause that’ll be some useful consumer information. See, I don’t need somebody to tell me how awesome some new exotic car that less than 1% of the population will ever hope to own is. If you are going to rip Consumer Reports and the big car rags for writing biased and shoddy reviews, that means you’ve got to back that up with some action and show’em how it should be done. Your review of similarly priced domestics is due no later than the end of the month.
ambulancechaser :
I’m not sure about the time line. But fair enough. You want this one Bill?
Giving all the midsize offering 3 stars actually would be more informative than giving the Camry two stars. They really are about the same to most people.
Have to agree with netrun and whatdoIknow1, the 2 star rating given to the Camry is the same recommendation given to the Aveo and as such it is disservice to anyone researching a plain jane midsize car. 2 stars for a sports sedan segment review is one thing but is the Camry really the Aveo in the middle of the road plain jane midsize market?
Maybe the rating sytem should be 100 points maximum instead of five?
William C Montgomery :
…
Rating them all three stars wouldn’t communicate anything. Camry was the worst. The two was awarded to illustrate that distinction.
But what if they WERE all three star vehicles? Seems to me that each vehicle should be rated without relation to where the others place. If I made a B and three other students also made Bs, then the act of simply comparing the four of us would not reduce my grade.
Perhaps dispensing with the star rating for a comparo would work best. The winner is going to be the one you subjectively award, regardless. A number system of 0-100, A-F, or stars is, in the end, still subjective – you’re just putting a number/letter/star on a specific qualitative measurement.
I can dig that a Camry and an Accord may both be 4 stars (for example), but I want to know which qualities place one above the other overall in your estimation to be the desired choice.
A star system is not granular enough to convey distinction here. As an example, our friends at C&D use a 0-100 system for different areas. These are added up to come up with the winner. They probably surprise themselves in some cases, given how closely the top 1-3 vehicles are during the evaluation. They may not know until the final tally which one comes out on top.
It would be fine to me if you had already evaluated the Accord, Camry, Altima, Malibu, 6, etc. individually and awarded them their respective stars. A comparo, to me, implies that the vehicles are compared directly, jumping between vehicles, caressing plastic and steering wheels while going over ride/handling and brake feel one more time. Some things won’t stand out until you go back and forth in the parking lot, for example. Things like the relative sound and feel of doors closing, trunk hinges intruding, etc. Their original stars never change. There just emerges a new winner now that you’ve had a chance to shine the light on them all at the same time.
That kind of testing, of course, implies that you have vehicles available together and, preferably, more than one person’s input. I’m sure that it could be accomplished by TTAC, but it would bring a host of logistical issues with it.
Final comments… I really hope that you can see fit to change the star rating to what the Camry really deserves. I think there is credibility to be lost here for TTAC if you stand by a 2-star rating for a solid vehicle like the Camry, boring as it may be.
Would wholeheartedly agree with the first point. My ‘93 Camry (same generation as ‘94) had fit and finish and ergonomics and styling superior to its competitors. Felt like the first true “modern” car. V6 DOHC engine was whisper smooth. From that point on seems like Toyota just rested on its laurels and didn’t make any substantial improvements to the Camry line.
However, the brakes of the ‘07 4 cylinder I rented for a week are super strong and predictable. Much better than the ones in all past Camrys I’ve owned. I would also say the handling and suspension was much more composed than my ‘01 V6 Camry. Not that the ‘07 is any driver’s car, but the ‘01 has got to be mushiest Camry ever. The ’07’s electric assisted steering does feel weird in comparison to the ’01’s hydraulic steering though.
Too bad about the European pedestrian safety requirements. Aerodynamic, oversized, upright grills just don’t look right to me.
Surprised there weren’t more complaints about the Indiglo radio panel and HVAC controls. For a car that’s supposed to be an inoffensive appliance, this little splash of spunk is most unwelcome. I want my black/gray plastic buttons with backlit green-white text.
I really like the new Camry. But then again, the model I rented was the SE.
What’s “inherently wrong” with the Camry is the Sonata isn’t ugly, isn’t cheap inside, is equally reliable, gets better performance, ride, handling, MPG, and is bigger inside – all for less money.