Gasoline engines are more efficient when under more of a load.
Camry 3.5L V6 Option worth $2500?
- Thread starter The Critic
- Start date
- Status
gm pushrod v6's seem to always out perform toyota's v6 for gas mileage.simple design. timing chains do break and are costly to repair.simple is always better and cheaper.
Up to about 85% throttle opening. Its primarily an issue with pumping losses due to an air throttled design.
I ask is the engine significantly better than the previous six cylinder, and is it significantly better than the four cylinder. On both accounts I would give a resounding..."yes.." The previous 3.3 six cylinder used timing belts, and used similar technology to the 3.0 cylinder Toyota used for years. This new six seems similar to the one used in rav 4, and coupled with the six speed transmission, which motor trend stated uses less moving parts than the 5 speed automatic. I see the exact specifications for the 4 cylinder as was used on the previous generation camry. I think this engine is worth the extra 2500 bucks.
Do you have any examples to cite?
Here are some, from EPA:
(Note, the Impala has enough interior space to be classed as a "large car" by EPA, while the Camry is merely "midsized")
Camry 3.5 V-6 22 city/31 highway
Impala 3.5 V-6 21 city/31 highway
Impala 3.9 V-6 20 city/29 highway
Impala 5.3 V-8(!)18 city/27 highway
Looking at a more comparable Toyota, in interior size, the Toyota Avalon:
Avalon 3.5 V-6 22 city/31 highway
Maybe GM really does know how to design efficient cars.
(Note, the Impala has enough interior space to be classed as a "large car" by EPA, while the Camry is merely "midsized")
Camry 3.5 V-6 22 city/31 highway
Impala 3.5 V-6 21 city/31 highway
Impala 3.9 V-6 20 city/29 highway
Impala 5.3 V-8(!)18 city/27 highway
Looking at a more comparable Toyota, in interior size, the Toyota Avalon:
Avalon 3.5 V-6 22 city/31 highway
Maybe GM really does know how to design efficient cars.
Last August borrowed my dads 2003 Buick Century 3.1 v6 to go to Disneyland. Cheapest thing about the whole trip was the gas.Did 5000km whole trip gas bill was under 300 dollars U.S.In Cal paid as high as 3.49 gallon.Best mpg was 39 mpg.By the way oil was Castrol GTX 5-30 never used any oil on the trip.
I rented a 4-cylinder Camry during my last trip to ATL and it seemed to have plenty of power around town - it actually surpised me with some pretty violent wheelspin as I was trying to make a quick left turn at a busy intersection. However, I would have liked more passing power on the highway. It seemed to run out of breath above 50mph.
On a side note, a Rav-4 is probably heavier than it looks, but I bet that V6 is a blast in such a tiny SUV. WoooooHooooooo!
On a side note, a Rav-4 is probably heavier than it looks, but I bet that V6 is a blast in such a tiny SUV. WoooooHooooooo!
The EPA's efficiency numbers for the Chevrolet Impala are worse than those it lists for the Toyota Avalon and the horse power of the Chevrolet Impala's 3.5 L V6 engine is 211 compared to 268 for the Toyota Avalon. If the Impala's V6's horsepower was better than the Avalon's V6's horsepower, I would agree, but since the horsepower of the Avalon is higher, the real world fuel economy of the Avalon will be better, as it will not have to consume gasoline as much as the Impala to maintain the same power output. Not to mention that Toyota's vehicles typically exceed their EPA rated fuel economy (according to owners of Toyota vehicles and from my own experience as a Toyota Avalon owner) while GM vehicles typically underperform their EPA rated fuel economy (according to owners of American vehicles in general).
I really want to see GM make fuel efficient vehicles, but so far, I have not seen it. If they would improve their fuel economy by at least 10% and their horse power by at least 30%, I would call their vehicles fuel efficient, but until then, their vehicles are fuel inefficient.
I dunno. I had a Ford Contour V6. EPA rated at 31MPG highway.
Now I have a Saab 93 2.0T. EPA rated at 31MPG highway.
Guess what? I'm getting the SAME fuel economy from the Saab that I was from the Contour.
I guess maybe these EPA ratings are based in science.
Whereas I have my doubts about the claims made above.
The fact that someone cannot beat the EPA fuel economy rating of their car tells me much more about their driving and maintenance habits than it does about the car itself...
I've suggested before (in jest) that the EPA ought to have a feature on their fueleconomy.gov website where you input your SSN, it analyzes your driving record, and comes up with a fuel economy figure tailored for your driving.
Now I have a Saab 93 2.0T. EPA rated at 31MPG highway.
Guess what? I'm getting the SAME fuel economy from the Saab that I was from the Contour.
I guess maybe these EPA ratings are based in science.
Whereas I have my doubts about the claims made above.
The fact that someone cannot beat the EPA fuel economy rating of their car tells me much more about their driving and maintenance habits than it does about the car itself...
I've suggested before (in jest) that the EPA ought to have a feature on their fueleconomy.gov website where you input your SSN, it analyzes your driving record, and comes up with a fuel economy figure tailored for your driving.
Last edited:
The answer depends entirely upon your priorities. If fuel efficiency is your primary concern and you regard your automobile as a "transportation appliance" then certainly the 4 cyl would be "adequate". But, if you're a "car guy" like many of us, that sweet new V-6 would be well worth the extra money as it pushes you back in the seat and sings it's song at wide open throttle as you enter the onramp and get up to speed in no time. Well worth the money knowing that power is there to feel and hear anytime you want.
That is a good idea, except it would have to use your driver's license number, as the social security number is not for identification purposes, as it says on the card.
The V6 will use more gasoline than the V4 and with the oil from which gasoline is refined being purchased from overseas, oil (and therefore gasoline) prices are quite volatile, so would that not be spending money, to ensure that one spends even more money? Would the extra money not be better spent on something less perishable like someone's (a child's or grandchild's) education, certificates of deposit or home improvements?
I really do not understand why people need so much horsepower. I have seen old men in vehicles with far less horse power passing me on the road and I do not care the slightly bit. Why do people need sensory input from their cars in the form of noise or increased acceleration? Do people here go to tracks to race their cars?
I apologize for all of the questions, but it really does not make sense to me why anyone would need so much horsepower for anything short of racing on a track, especially since American highways had higher speeds limits during the 1950s when cars had much lower horsepower and no one had a problem with it.
I doubt this though...
Camry 3.5 V-6 22 city/31 highway
I have a new highlander and it gives me 18/22 city/highway. The brouchure does say 20/24.!!! These MPG numbers are quite not right!!
Camry 3.5 V-6 22 city/31 highway
I have a new highlander and it gives me 18/22 city/highway. The brouchure does say 20/24.!!! These MPG numbers are quite not right!!
It eliminates the need to plan ahead when passing and merging. A lot of people aren't so good at planning.
dupe post
Last edited:
Depends on your priorities.
In my case, I would choose the I4. Here is why:
- easier to maintain (spark plugs, accessory belt, etc).
- probably cheaper to fix if you have to take to a mechanic (one cylinder head, for example)
- better fuel economy
- some 6-speed complaints.
But, it's your money. Probably can't go wrong with either engine.
In my case, I would choose the I4. Here is why:
- easier to maintain (spark plugs, accessory belt, etc).
- probably cheaper to fix if you have to take to a mechanic (one cylinder head, for example)
- better fuel economy
- some 6-speed complaints.
But, it's your money. Probably can't go wrong with either engine.
You have a gas guzzler 3.3 vs very fuel efficient brand new 3.5. I have it in my RAV4 and it's a rocket! 0-60 in 6 sec or so. This is exactly why I din't buy Highlander! But seriously, I get 18 city, 24 hwy driving fast.
- Status
