2018 Toyota Camry - Redesigned

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: AZjeff
Originally Posted By: Nick1994
Honestly, I have never liked the looks of any of the Camrys from 1982-2017. But the new 2018 is quite a bit better looking IMO. It's definitely not drop dead gorgeous but I think it's now reasonable enough looking to buy.


Nick, would you be buying a new 2018 or wait til it gets 16 years old and 200K?
crazy.gif


Lexus or bumper car grill, Impala rear wheel well treatment, and those weird Prius taillight things...but the fastback look is nice.


As a 22 year old college student, I do not want a new car. That would be the stupidest thing financially.
 
Originally Posted By: Nick1994
Originally Posted By: AZjeff
Originally Posted By: Nick1994
Honestly, I have never liked the looks of any of the Camrys from 1982-2017. But the new 2018 is quite a bit better looking IMO. It's definitely not drop dead gorgeous but I think it's now reasonable enough looking to buy.


Nick, would you be buying a new 2018 or wait til it gets 16 years old and 200K?
crazy.gif


Lexus or bumper car grill, Impala rear wheel well treatment, and those weird Prius taillight things...but the fastback look is nice.


As a 22 year old college student, I do not want a new car. That would be the stupidest thing financially.


Yanking your chain. New cars aren't the smartest financial move at any age but we buy them anyhow. The cost of Az yearly registration is one reason.
 
I suppose it's better than what is currently be sold; but that's not saying much.

Too aggressive looking for a Camry. It's trying to be something it's not.

I'm sure it will sell well, but can't say I'm interested.

Originally Posted By: B320i
Have driven a couple of 2003 Toyotas of late (Corolla and LandCruiser-Prado). I find them "hard" to drive because of how easy they are to drive, if that makes sense. Still, the litte 'rolla is quicker than my old battleship.


Yes, I think I know what you mean. I call it brain dead steering; someplace else (TTAC?) I think put their finger on it better: there is no on-center dead spot in the steering. Any pressure on the wheel will move it. It's not "set and forget" steering (see Mirage) but close enough: steering is too light. All three of my non-electric PS Toyota's have dead steering. Which is fine, in a parking lot, horrible once moving though.
 
I found an article where it states that the 2.5 is all new. Specs are posted as well, saying that it will produce 202 HP and 184 Ft.Lbs. The CR is listed at 13:1.

If this combo of the 2.5 and the 8-speed does not impress, I'm not sure what will.
 
Originally Posted By: SumpChump
Look Mom! Toyota make a Maxima now! Gee whiz!

Gag a maggot. I wonder if it will offer the same great U760E tranny with the poorly design torque converter that shudders like rumble strips when combine with the low gear seeking firmware. And gotta love that ATF fluid level check procedure requiring a vacuum holding device with a special temp adjustable probe.



keep beating that drum.

(nobody cares)
 
Ward's Link

Both the 2.5L and 3.5L will have direct injection.

Huh, it appears they have taken a page from their competitors, and might be using a lockup convertor in the automatic. Changes indeed. One of my major gripes about my Toyota automatics is the convertor programming; it seems to be rarely used, and grudgingly at that--it is quick to unlock and slow to lock.

Quote:
Hallmarks of the new 8AT include direct lockup from second through eighth gears, “eliminating power loss from the torque converter (and) executing shifts like a high-performance automated manual gearbox.”
 
Originally Posted By: supton

Huh, it appears they have taken a page from their competitors, and might be using a lockup convertor in the automatic. Changes indeed. One of my major gripes about my Toyota automatics is the convertor programming; it seems to be rarely used, and grudgingly at that--it is quick to unlock and slow to lock.

Quote:
Hallmarks of the new 8AT include direct lockup from second through eighth gears, “eliminating power loss from the torque converter (and) executing shifts like a high-performance automated manual gearbox.”


I can assure you that more aggressive lockup operation was in place in the 2011 Camry with the AT option. This is one of the reasons that driving that car was aggravating to me. The converter was very quick to lock, slow to unlock, and the general driving experience was generally not smooth. You had to be extremely intentional to drive it smooth. I find most automatics programmed in the last 6-8 years to be like this.

This is one of the things I really like about our older model vehicles that we currently have. They're not quick to lock the converter, and they're quick to unlock it. They were programmed before the days of "uber efficiency", and I far prefer this style of programming. It sacrifices fuel economy, but I think the driving experience is much better. You CAN tell a difference between our 2005 and our 2009. Our '05 is programmed "looser" than our '09. Our '09 isn't as aggressive as our Camry was, but you can tell the converter is trying to harness the engine more than our '05 is. I could attribute that to a number of things, but I think it's simply the era in which they were designed. Our '05 is near the end of that generation and I think much of the engineering and fuel economy strategy were developed at a time when all-out economy wasn't as much of a priority. Our '09, in contrast, is the first year of a revised engine in the Ridgeline (and new transmission gearing as well), and I think Honda was beginning to try to tighten it up in terms of fuel economy. I haven't driven a 2006-2008 Ridgeline, but I bet it drives more like our MDX than it does our '09 Ridgeline.

Very interesting to follow this stuff as time goes on. Transmission programming has crept into the top 2 or 3 things I look for in a vehicle, and we're staying put with what we have for as long as we reasonably can.
 
Interesting. Twenty-some-odd years of manuals has me thinking sudden rpm changes means slipping clutch. Very used to a 1:1 linkage from motor to wheels. It's "unnatural" to have anything else to me.

I dislike the notion of wear and tear on the lockup clutch, but also dislike the waste of a slipping coupling. Aye, next vehicle, maybe I'll get a manual.
 
Originally Posted By: supton
I dislike the notion of wear and tear on the lockup clutch, but also dislike the waste of a slipping coupling. Aye, next vehicle, maybe I'll get a manual.


I don't think a lockup torque converter clutch is like a slipping clutch disc/plate, though. I think it's more of a fluid coupling, and engagement is via fluid pressure than with a physical friction disc. I don't think converter clutches "wear" in the sense that a conventional clutch disc wears, but you certainly are right that slippage is wasteful. Transitional activities (switching from one mode to another) are almost inherently wasteful -- the smoother those transitions are, the less efficient they often are. As you tighten those transitions up, you gain efficiency, but usually lose comfort.

It's a balancing act for sure.
 
Originally Posted By: gregk24
Hopefully the 8 speed proves to be reliable, I know everyone hates CVT's but Honda seems to have nailed down reliability in that department, so they can be reliable if engineered properly.


Toyota's foreseeing a lot of these are going to rental fleets and as Uber/Lyft cars - and seeing how renters and Uber drivers thrash their cars, a conventional automatic might be more durable than a CVT and easier for fleets to maintain - no special fluids or procedures to check the fluid level(although Toyota is one to speak, their 6-speed transaxle is picky about fluid level).
 
Why does everyone seem to hate CVT's? I've only driven one, a 2009-era Nissan Altima 2.5L. I loved it, and it brought high-RPM power to nearly all driving conditions, as opposed to some vehicles where transmission gearing gave you the big middle finger for power, when you needed it at certain speeds. The CVT experience wasn't normal (sustained engine RPM) but wasn't bothersome either. Is there a durability issue with these? I've ridden in a newer Accord w/ 4 cyl. and CVT, but it seemed that car had pre-determined shift points instead of fixed RPM. As I look for a newer vehicle, I wonder about those with CVTs...
 
Originally Posted By: 92saturnsl2
Why does everyone seem to hate CVT's? I've only driven one, a 2009-era Nissan Altima 2.5L. I loved it, and it brought high-RPM power to nearly all driving conditions, as opposed to some vehicles where transmission gearing gave you the big middle finger for power, when you needed it at certain speeds. The CVT experience wasn't normal (sustained engine RPM) but wasn't bothersome either. Is there a durability issue with these? I've ridden in a newer Accord w/ 4 cyl. and CVT, but it seemed that car had pre-determined shift points instead of fixed RPM. As I look for a newer vehicle, I wonder about those with CVTs...
Reliability is my issue. My mom has a 2012 Jeep Patriot with a CVT. Same Jatco CVT Nissan uses. It drives fine, but it was making loud whining noises, and I mean loud. Took it to the dealer and they diagnosed as transmission. They changed the fluid and the noise has so far gone away. But I'm not satisfied, something is wrong. Luckily it has an extended warranty.

Until they have proven reliable, I won't have one. Honda has their stuff together better than Nissan though.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top