Older Camrys faster than newer ones?

[Nick1994]

So I've test driven 3 Camrys today, a 93 Camry Wagon automatic, a 95 sedan stick shift, and a 2000 Automatic.

I'll be going to pick up the 2000 tomorrow, but the 1993 and 1995 were peppier than the newer one.

I used to have a 97 Camry, and it and the 2000 are pretty similar in performance, pretty slow, but not slow like there's something majorly wrong with them.

The 93 wagon surprisingly moved nice for an old Camry.

I know there was some kind of engine difference that happened in 97, but does anybody know why they're more sluggish?

All of these were the 2.2L 5SFE.

Just out of curiosity.

 

[slacktide_bitog]

Even more interesting since the 4th gen is lighter than the 3rd gen.

Don't the later ones make a bit less power due to emissions standards? Maybe the transmission is geared differently for better mpg.

 

[expat]

Weight?

 

[Merkava_4]

There was one year I drove that was lightning fast. It had a V6 with an automatic. Not sure exactly which year it was, but it was part of the 1990 generation. It was way faster than the new 99s at the time.

 

[camrydriver111]

It could be a result of previous maintenance?

The stick shift might feel peppier because of the stick shift.

However, the wagon should be slower than the 2000.

 

[Nick1994]

Originally Posted By: camrydriver111
It could be a result of previous maintenance?

The stick shift might feel peppier because of the stick shift.

However, the wagon should be slower than the 2000.
Actually the wagon was the fastest. I can't get my head around that one.

 

[NHGUY]

Converters plugging? How many miles on these? Should be approaching 200K by now,even Toyotas get tired with miles like that.

 

[Andrew1972]

Gearing and weight was up in 2000's.

Lastly some Camry's lead very hard lives and the 2000 may be more worn then the older ones that lead harder lives.

 

[cptbarkey]

if your curious about the performance of a camry, your buying the wrong car.

 

[eljefino]

Race 'em head to head? The old ones might have less sound deadening and just seem faster b/c they're louder.

 

[CharBaby]

The best time(0-60) on some older Camry's(from the late 80s/mid/late 90's) that I can remember from the motoring PRESS was about 8-8.5 sec from 0-60 in the original 3.0 V6's. Maybe into the high 7 sec.

Most of the newer 4 cyl Camry's are faster(even if only slightly) than that today(below 8 sec). Today's V6 Camrys are nearing the low 6 sec/high 5 sec as are the V6 versions of Altima & Accord(mid 5's).

 

[Nick1994]

Originally Posted By: cptbarkey
if your curious about the performance of a camry, your buying the wrong car.
I know they're gutless, but it was totally noticeable the acceleration difference with the older one.

 

[babyivan]

Ive owned 4 stick ('90, '88, & two 95's) Camrys (4 cyl) and a '99 Solara SE stick (V6).
The Solara of course was CONSIDERABLY faster (200hp 3 liter V6). Putting that aside, I felt the older Camrys were faster even though they had the 2.0 vs. the later 2.2. The weight more than made up for it.

The Camrys in general are (barely)acceptable with the manual transmission... as most cars are better in "throw your own".

Ive never owned an automatic version but I had a friend with a '97 4 banger W/slush box and that thing was a SLUG... I don't care how good the gas mileage was, NO THANX!

Ive driven a V6 auto ('95?) and it was pretty peppy.

I drive Crown Vics part-time (yellow cab), and I can tell you that some are faster than others and MPG can vary greatly among the same year/mileage cars, it's very weird.

 

[TFB1]

Originally Posted By: babyivan

I drive Crown Vics part-time (yellow cab), and I can tell you that some are faster than others and MPG can vary greatly among the same year/mileage cars, it's very weird.


Dependent on the original intended usage of vehicle, a CV can have anywhere from 2.73 to 3.55 axle ratios, makes a noticeable difference... The '04-newer police versions had 250Hp vs the 200Hp or less of the earlier civvy models...

 

[babyivan]

Originally Posted By: TFB1

Dependent on the original intended usage of vehicle, a CV can have anywhere from 2.73 to 3.55 axle ratios, makes a noticeable difference... The '04-newer police versions had 250Hp vs the 200Hp or less of the earlier civvy models...


These are taxi specific (P72) fleet Vics all bought by the same taxi leasing garage at the same time from the same dealer with regular maintenance performed identically.

When newer, they were more similar stat-wise, but of course as time goes on, they tend variate much more.

 

[KitaCam]

The Kitacam always seems fast to passengers...likely the way I drive more than what I'm driving...

 

[Clevy]

Originally Posted By: KitaCam
The Kitacam always seems fast to passengers...likely the way I drive more than what I'm driving...


Hilarious.

A family utility vehicle.

That's like comparing a k car vs a chevette.


The kita-k seems fast,the the bicycle flew by

 

[Clevy]

Originally Posted By: TFB1
Originally Posted By: babyivan

I drive Crown Vics part-time (yellow cab), and I can tell you that some are faster than others and MPG can vary greatly among the same year/mileage cars, it's very weird.


Dependent on the original intended usage of vehicle, a CV can have anywhere from 2.73 to 3.55 axle ratios, makes a noticeable difference... The '04-newer police versions had 250Hp vs the 200Hp or less of the earlier civvy models...


In 99 the Pi head was introduced bumping hp from 200 to 260-270.

 

[901Memphis]

Did you get the camry?

 

[SwampSurvivor]

I'm confused. Didn't you get rid of the last Camry because it was too slow?