[bimmer456]

Not sure why performance models only come with front wheel drive.

What do you think?

[M3_WC]

Originally Posted by bimmer456

What do you think?.

I don't ever think about a Camry.

[rlmesq]

I think people who drive a Camry really don't care much about that stuff.

[xQx]

Originally Posted by rlmesq

I think people who drive a Camry really don't care much about that stuff.

BMW thinks people who drive 1ers also don't care about that sort of thing.

I expect they'll test the waters with their I4 models, then roll it out into all models later. It's probably just that they sell a lot more 4 cyl camrys than they do performance models.

[Efthreeoh]

Camry + performance model; does not compute...

[Germanauto]

I'm sure they figured since the I4 makes up the bulk of their sales it should get their AWD. I know a manager at a Toyota dealer who says the V6 can't put down the power thanks to being FWD only.

[bimmer456]

The new Camrys aren't as bad as the older ones. The exhaust note on the XSE with quad exhaust is pretty good as it is a naturally aspirated 3.5 V6 with over 300 horsepower. Somehow the Honda Accord with a 4 cylinder and less horsepower (and just slightly more torque as to be negligible) manages to be faster from 0-60, however.

[MJBO]

Originally Posted by xQx

BMW thinks people who drive 1ers also don't care about that sort of thing.

I think for the vast majority they’re right.

[RM7]

Originally Posted by bimmer456

The new Camrys aren't as bad as the older ones. The exhaust note on the XSE with quad exhaust is pretty good as it is a naturally aspirated 3.5 V6 with over 300 horsepower. Somehow the Honda Accord with a 4 cylinder and less horsepower (and just slightly more torque as to be negligible) manages to be faster from 0-60, however.

It's called torque under the curve, and it wins every time. Modern turbos make full torque around 1500-1700 with a flat "curve" across the RPM range and making maximum torque at that RPM means in practical driving it'll be much "faster" than a 330hp V6 that has to rev out to 6K to be making full torque.

I remember the world of low-compression V6s when getting 150hp was a big deal, then came the high compression stuff with advanced valve timing and all of a sudden we jumped up to 270hp and beyond, but those days were pretty short lived, as everyone started to go to turbos instead and cars still got faster due to the torque. Even without the modern twin scroll short-header turbos, you'll get a massive rush of torque coming on at a lower RPM with a turbo engine (and it'll fall off significantly near the rev limit). Being able to get that flat curve from the modern stuff, the old limitations are gone and the only issues are not a result of the turbo, things like throttle mapping and automatic transmission gear choices, being mistakenly called "turbo lag".

[GenXer]

I think about a Camry as much as my washing machine. Both are equally important appliances but I wouldn't brag about either one of them. However, I think my washing machine has a better looking grille.

[bimmer456]

Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes

It's called torque under the curve, and it wins every time. Modern turbos make full torque around 1500-1700 with a flat "curve" across the RPM range and making maximum torque at that RPM means in practical driving it'll be much "faster" than a 330hp V6 that has to rev out to 6K to be making full torque.

I remember the world of low-compression V6s when getting 150hp was a big deal, then came the high compression stuff with advanced valve timing and all of a sudden we jumped up to 270hp and beyond, but those days were pretty short lived, as everyone started to go to turbos instead and cars still got faster due to the torque. Even without the modern twin scroll short-header turbos, you'll get a massive rush of torque coming on at a lower RPM with a turbo engine (and it'll fall off significantly near the rev limit). Being able to get that flat curve from the modern stuff, the old limitations are gone and the only issues are not a result of the turbo, things like throttle mapping and automatic transmission gear choices, being mistakenly called "turbo lag".

Would be interesting to see if after quarter or half mile the Camry starts to gain. But for all practical purposes except the open highway the Honda is faster and handles better.

[bimmer456]

Originally Posted by GenXer

I think about a Camry as much as my washing machine. Both are equally important appliances but I wouldn't brag about either one of them. However, I think my washing machine has a better looking grille.

The grill isn't terrible on the Camry. Didn't know washing machines had grills.


https://images.app.goo.gl/cUAwaaMkzNYWs27n6

[GenXer]

Originally Posted by bimmer456

The grill isn't terrible on the Camry. Didn't know washing machines had grills.


https://images.app.goo.gl/cUAwaaMkzNYWs27n6

[GenXer]

And another one with a grille

[RMachuca3d]

I'm sure its also a packaging issue, and a flimsy\light awd system that on the long run wont fair well with 300+hp

[bimmer456]

Originally Posted by RMachuca3d

I'm sure its also a packaging issue, and a flimsy\light awd system that on the long run wont fair well with 300+hp

They can use the AWD system from the Venza

[bimmer456]

Originally Posted by GenXer

And another one with a grille

This looks better

Also check out the new TRD

[The Outrage]

Originally Posted by bimmer456

Not sure why performance models only come with front wheel drive.

What do you think?

The answer is Lexus. The Lexus ES 350, IS 350, GS 350, RC 350, and RX 350 all use the exact same engine as the V6 Avalon and Camry. Adding AWD to the V6 Avalon and Camry would create all sorts of problems for Lexus in their positioning "above" Toyota.

[grocerylist]

Not really sure who Toyota's Camry or Avalon TRD target audience is, maybe boy racers that have a family and need 4 doors? No amount of body cladding, spoilers and painted calipers is going to fool the majority of buyers that these Toyota's are "performance" vehicles. These TRD cars remind me of the new Civic Type R but the Civic, despite it's ricer looks, actually performs.

[bimmer456]

Originally Posted by grocerylist

Not really sure who Toyota's Camry or Avalon TRD target audience is, maybe boy racers that have a family and need 4 doors? No amount of body cladding, spoilers and painted calipers is going to fool the majority of buyers that these Toyota's are "performance" vehicles. These TRD cars remind me of the new Civic Type R but the Civic, despite it's ricer looks, actually performs.

It needs a turbo so it can be faster than a run of the mill accord or one of those TRD superchargers you can bolt on as a kit.

[bimmer456]

Originally Posted by The Outrage

The answer is Lexus. The Lexus ES 350, IS 350, GS 350, RC 350, and RX 350 all use the exact same engine as the V6 Avalon and Camry. Adding AWD to the V6 Avalon and Camry would create all sorts of problems for Lexus in their positioning "above" Toyota.

Lexus doesn't know how to make AWD. The AWD cars are actually slower than the 2WD cars.

[heavyD^2]

Originally Posted by GenXer

I think about a Camry as much as my washing machine. Both are equally important appliances but I wouldn't brag about either one of them. However, I think my washing machine has a better looking grille.

When I had an MR2 project car I was frequently at the dealership ordering little parts here and there. One thing I noticed is that being at a Toyota dealership is a little like being at a senior citizen center and everywhere you looked was bland car after bland car. It's probably no coincidence Toyota has made the styling a little edgier on the current Camry and Corolla as you need vehicles that appeal to younger buyers.