CaptainFrank

Now don't laugh!

I currently own a 1994 Toyota Camry wagon, V6, specs are:
Max HP 188 @ 5200 rpm,
Max torque 203 ft-lbs. @ 4400 rpm,
weight is 3175 lbs.

This car is FAST. I'm not talking 325i or G35 or anything like that, but stepping on the gas on the line pins you back in your seat. Zero to 60 is quick (again, not comparing it to a "sports" sedan). Passing on the highway is a BREEZE with lots of spare power. I LOVE using the power in this car.

My question is this: I am considering the TSX but I am curious as to how it would compare performance-wise with the Camry V6. The engine specs are obviously higher on the Camry, but this often does not tell the whole story.

I am most interested in how they might compare both in acceleration off the line, and in passing power on the highway (30-70mph).

Remember, I said not to laugh. This is a real comparison that would tell me if the TSX would have enough power for me, or if I would be better off shopping for a 6-cyl.

Thanks, Captain Frank

PS: The Camry is an automatic, but I would mostly likely get the TSX in 6MT.

ClutchPerformer

The TSX has less torque and (surprisingly) more weight. So you might be a little disappointed in the "oomph" department. Still, the TSX isn't slow, and passing on the highway is plenty easy as long as you're not trying to do it in 6th gear (try 4th). 30-70 is also great in this car (again, not in 6th).

I recommend a test drive. That should tell you everything you need to know (unless the salesperson you ride with is a tight-ass and won't let you hit it at least once). Good luck, though, and welcome to the forum.

fdl

The only thing higher in the camry is the torque. So you will have more "push to the back of the seat" feeling from the camry..and have more power in the lower rpms...but the TSX should be faster and will have more pull in the higher rpms (which is where you will be when you are really gunning it).

The biggest thing you will need to get used to is not having as much torque down low.

Buff-Daddy

Just the fact that you will be out of a WAGON should seal the deal. I am a 50/50 guy. I need 50% performance and 50% appearance. Even if you are getting 100% performance satisfaction out of your wagon, I bet you are close to 0 in the appearance category. The pride you feel alone in the seat of the TSX should outweigh any performance concerns...

CaptainFrank

I am actually not selling the Camry wagon.
I like wagons and need one - I've had 5 of them. My wife and I always seem to be hauling sh*t everywhere and the wagon configuration is very practical. This particular wagon is very cool looking (IMHO) - it is white, rounded, with a bunch of black pinstripes on the lower sides. I also have a Suburban for hauling even bigger sh*t (plus a boat), but I "steer" away from it for everyday driving because of the fuel costs.

If I get the TSX, no doubt the coolness factor goes up a whole bunch, and it will be MINE , while the wife :-* gets to drive the Camry.

And thanks for the responses so far - they are helpful.

TinkySD

comparisons like these aren't that out of the ordinary. A guy on the rx8 forums was complaining about how he couldn't pass a new solara driven by some kid and his mom

darth62

Yeah, but I think the comparison might be more meaningful if you were looking at the more recent iterations of the Toyota V6. The V6 in the above posters Camry was like a lot of OHC V6 of the era, relatively limited power available off the line. You also have an aerodynamics issue. There is much more wind resistance, and that will make the car slower.

At the end of the day, I would bet similar 0-60 times, but the Camry should "feel" quicker around town.

Count Blah

I traded in a 1994 Camry V6 XLE (4AT) for my TSX (6MT). It was a decent enough car and served me well for 5 years, but I don't miss it at all. The TSX is roughly 1 second faster in 0-60 times. I love my TSX.

gilboman

aerodynamics wont play much of a factor in performance if any at all between these two cars... atleast you wont be able to feel it..the only difference the low cd in the TSX will make is less wind noise on the highway and nothing more...these two cars dont have the power in the top end to have aerodynamics make much of a differnce in performance...

darth62

I'll have to respectfully disagree. Aerodynamics will play a role (although maybe not a major role, because the CDs are not hugely different), on the highway. This is part of the reason even smallish cross-overs SUVs (like the CRV) which aren't all that heavy are so darn slow. However, around town, wind resistance is pretty much meaningless.

gilboman

aerodynamics will play a small role..but i think not one that can be felt performance wise. and for suv's, its not their cd that makes them slow...it's the huge frontal area that they have... the TSX and the old camry have similar frontal area.... on the highway its all about hp/weight when the cars have similar frontal area....cd can really only tell the story of which will have less wind noise....the CRV is underpowered in terms of hp/weight anyways so it should be real slow and with its frontal area a dog on the highway... but of course this is just what i feel...i'm not trying to start anything

darth62

Gibloman, I don't personally see you as a troll-like guy who tries to start something. You are always polite and nonconfrontive, even if we practically never agree.

I think the frontal area is an aspect of wind resistance. I think you'll get SOME similar issues with a wagon, like the Camry wagon. I think it wouldn't me much of an issue with a comparison between two sedans. Let's face it, the TSX may have a low CD but it is not THAT much lower than a Camry. So, ultimately, it is not a major issue.

sauceman

I can see Gilboman's point where acceleration numbers will not change a 0-60 dash by more than 2 or 3 tenths, but it does affect performance up to a certain point, especially from 45mph+, where wind resistance numbers start taking a sharper curve.

I do agree though, that the frontal part of the vehicle plays a critical role in establishing the cd, as well as the undercarriage.

Spud

The cd starts with the front of the car. Regardless of the aerodynamic design of the rest of the car, if you strap a sheet of plywood to your front bumper you will have a higher cd and you will accelerate less quickly. A CR-V with the same engine would be slower over all because airflow is less efficient. Same, on a lesser scale, for the Camry.

A car's performance is about the whole package. Where the TSX is a little weaker (and not by much) in outright power and power transfer, it makes up for it, somewhat, with one of the lowest production cds.

Count Blah

Since we're talking about cd, how exactly is the ratio derived? Is there a simple thing that it measures?

darth62

I don't think it is a simply mathematical formula. I think you have to actually have access to a wind tunnel to derive it.

rb1

c/d is (in sort of layman's terms) the ratio of the actual drag of an object (e.g. your car) to the drag created by flat surface that matches the projection of the object on the axis along which drag is being measured.

Translation: Take an "actual size" picture of your TSX directly from the front, cut it out, and use it to create an equivalent piece of plywood.

Your c/d is the ratio of how much drag your TSX has compares to how much drag the piece of plywood has.

If I recall correctly, a perfectly square sheet effectively has a c/d of about 1.98 (force of wind on the front, almost the same amount of "suction" on the back).

darth62

Thanks for the info, RB1.

This forum rocks. I learn something new each time I come here!

Count Blah

Thanks, rb1 (and darth62), that's a good explanation.

tsx-mdxman

Captain,
I think a TSX would be just the ticket to round out your, umm, fleet, heh heh. That Camry is a torquey beast! I had no idea. If I'd bought such a useful car 10 years ago I would probably still own it today too.
________________________________
04 TSX CG AT/NAV
03 MDX TOURING/NAV/RES

algorithm

Since I have a 99 Camry V6 Sedan and a 5AT TSX, my opinion might count for something.

Yes, the Camry feels a little faster around town especially when you are driving uphills. On the highway, the Camry still feels faster but I believe that's the illusion of having a very soft gas pedal. My way to make up for the less torque (under the 5AT constraint) is to use sports shift.

One thing I came to appreciate TSX in highway driving is the precision it delievers when you change lanes. In that regard, Camry is a sloppy and dangerous car because of its slippery handling. The tires (205/65) on the Camry are also unstable when driving in high speed. On the other hand, the torguier Camry saved me a couple of times in near collision situations when driving in town.

As for wind noise, my feeling is that Camry is a little noisier.

Since our TSX is the first car we got from the Honda family, we finally realized why Accords and Civics are selling well despite the firmer ride.

My wife and I have decided that "no more Toyota for us" after driving the TSX for just a month.

kenbiddulph

Hey now, don't forget that in the case of the Honda Accord, the wagon (94-97) was sportier than both the sedan and coupe. The wagon to get was the EX with a 5 speed, since it had VTEC and anti-roll bars front and back. Those cars cornered incredibly flat and were VERY fun to drive. They also were geared for acceleration, even in the automatic models.

CaptainFrank

I suppose then that getting a TSX with the manual shift would also somewhat make up for the less torque.

I agree that the 1994 Camry is not a good handling car. I had a 1990 Camry Wagon before the 1994, and even though it was a 4 banger, it was far superior in handling than the 1994. But the power of the V6 in the 1994 makes up for it , almost. (Tradeoffs, tradeoffs).

Frank

TSX Hokie

As an aerodynamics researcher, just thought I'd throw my two cents into the Cd discussion. The actual equation for Cd is:

Cd=Fd/(.5*rho*V^2*A)

Where Fd is the drag force (newtons, pounds-force, whatever), rho is the density of the fluid medium (1.2ish kg/m^3 for air), V is the fluid velocity (car velocity in this case), and A is the FRONTAL area (just like Rb1 described). Cd is a nondimensional parameter, so theoretically only dependent on the object's geometry; although in actuality, boundary layer transition effects, air temperature, etc will cause it to vary slightly over the velocity range of interest.

Those of you geekier than me can now estimate the drag force on a TSX as a function of vehicle speed.....

bob shiftright

I fished through my magazine files and found some old Camry road tests all from Car and Driver:

'97 Camry V6 CE 5-speed MANUAL, 194hp 209lb-ft.:
0-60 7.0, 5-60 7.3, 0-100 20.3, ss 1/4 15.5 @ 90mph.

(I'd add about a second or so to everything for the power lost in the torque converter and the extra 200 pounds weight of the wagon.)

'01 Camry V6 SE 4-speed AT, 192 hp, 209 lb-ft.:
0-60 8.4, 5-60 8.4, 0-100 23.7, ss 1/4 16.5 @ 85mph.

That's vs. the '04 TSX iVTEC 6-speed 200hp, 166lb-ft.:
0-60 7.2, 5-60 7.7, 0-100 19.0 ss 1/4 15.6@91mph.

So if you had a (rare) Camry V6 5-speed stick, the car would at least give the 6-speed TSX a run. The Camry V6 automatic vs. the 6-speed TSX looks like it would be a non-contest, however. I'd have to guess that much if not all of the extra torque of the V6 Camry gets lost in the torque converter of the AT.

I haven't seen any published figures on the TSX automatic, but the V6 Accord is CLEARLY quicker than even the 6-speed TSX, at least until you get to the first corner.

'03 Accord EX VTEC V6 5-speed AT, 240hp, 212 lb-ft.:
0-60 7.0, 5-60 7.2, 0-100 18.1 ss 1/4 15.5@92mph.

(BTW, I feel your pain, since I'm a long-time fan of the 5-door hatch/wagon configuration, and my "old' car is a Volvo T5 wagon (236hp, 243 lb-ft of torque, 5-speed manual). Odd that the other Japanese manufacturers have mostly abandoned that market segment in the US to Subaru.)

Lung Fu Mo Shi

Well, it's already been proven that other cars are faster, including the Camry, Accord, etc. But, once you turn the wheel, it's a different story.

rick955i

the dirtiest areas on a car, from an aerodymic point of view are the wheels and wheel well area and the manner in which the air rolls off the vehicle. Two things to keep in mind, ever notice how your rear bumper gets more dirty than the front on dusty roads and the rear taper of an aircraft fuselage is one of the most critical areas for drag and thus drag reduction. How you put the air back from where you got it has a huge amount to do with drag coefficients.

1SICKLEX

Drag does not affect the car until over 100+ mph. Drag does make the car noiser under 100mph. It also makes it less fuel efficient. But most cars have enough power to not have a drag issue.

U have to really start worrying about drag about 140mph plus, when most cars run out of power and u NEED aerodynamics to help u slip through the wind.

While we are at it, rear spoilers are all for show basically. And some INCREASE drag at high speeds.

I got 2 friends that got the TRD supercharger in their Camry, one auto, one manual, pushing about 270hp. They are SWIFT. But they needed shocks/springs and Sway bars bad. It handled like crap until those parts were added.

End results, a stock TSX and a stock V-6 Camry is even speed wise.

MSB128

Naptown reporting...

We have a '94 Camry V6 XLE. Held onto it for the odds and ends jobs that we don't really need a truck for, but to keep the mess from the other cars.

The car definetely pushes you into the seat slightly more than the TSX.

Like someone said, though, changing lanes on the highway in the TSX in SS is far more precise. Downshifting and changing lanes gives you far more control (throttle-wise) in the TSX.

Something I noticed, though. The Camry is by far the oldest car of the bunch. The next oldest is a '99 Cherokee and the rest are '00s or newer.

The steering is so loose. I could steer this thing with one finger. I don't know why...I've driven other cars older and similar to the Camry, but it's just loose. It doesn't give me an unsafe feeling driving, but it's just weird.

Naptown out.

freakofgibralter

In some sense we're talking apples and oranges. Comparing the camary to an accord may be easier to visualize. The tsx is a refined accord. It has a luxury element, handling boosts, safety features up the wazoo. The tsx is loaded with everything, save the navi, as standard equipment. You certainly would not want to use it for hauling things around. This car you take your woman out to dinner in.

CaptainFrank

Well, the consensus here, most interestingly from those who have had a 94 Camry V6 for direct comparison, seems to be that it wouldn't be THAT different from the TSX (esp. in manual) in terms of acceleration.

Perhaps the Camry V6 would be somewhat faster around town, such as taking off from a stop, but the TSX might do better in highway passing situations especially with the 6MT.

Certainly, in handling, there is no comparison between the 2 cars. As I said, I had a 1990 Camry wagon and it handled way better than the 1994.

And I know about the other differences in the vehicles. The TSX would not be my hauler - I've got my hauler in my Black Bohemoth (97 Suburban) and my wife will continue to drive the 94 Camry wagon as her everyday car.

It's just that as I've moved to 6 and 8 cylinder vehicles, I've gotten smitten with the available power when needed, and I didn't want to feel "underpowered" when driving a TSX as my everyday car.

Thanks,
Captain Frank

1SICKLEX

Nope apples to apples. The TSX is a Euro Accord. Same everything, just different badges. They compare the Toyota Avensis (their version of the Camry) to the Accord there.

20-30k cars are blending many features of more expensive cars, making it harder to differenciate a good reason to pay more $$$$$ for a nameplate.

And I don't think the V-6 Camry or the TSX is slow. It's just that nowadays, marketing and EVERYONE is concerned about 0-60 times. And most people in marketing and most people that buy cars don't know jack about cars.

Spud

Not sure it's quite so simple as that. TSX has suspension upgrades, more standard features, completely different dash and, I'm led to believe, quality upgrades over the JDM Accord/Euro. To say it's just a rebadged EuroAccord is not quite accurate, although I'll admit that the differences are subtle.

gilboman

with the execption of minor suspension tweakings..the rest are just very minor cosmetic updates to reflect north american tastes......it is pretty much a carbon copy of the euro accord, which is not a bad thign at all.

freakofgibralter

So is the Euro Accord comparable to the American Accord? My original thought was that no accord or camary has their suspensions screwed as tightly as the tsx's. I'm no mechanic but the tsx has a serious sport suspension. Accords and Camarys generally are softer ride with significantly more body-roll. Perhaps Edmunds got it wrong by comparing the TSX to 300 series BMW's and the A4.

97AcuraCL

/yourself

i hate camry's with a passion

darth62

How do you know this? Have you spent much time in the Euro Accord?

1SICKLEX

I subscribe to EVO and CAR, European based magazines. The only differences are the badges. Everything is identical. That is not a bad thing, it's a great car no matter what badge is on it.

It's called the Accord-Type-S in our spec. A smaller 4-cylinder is available AS a Diesal! And they love the car overseas. They love how it drives, they love the interior and Honda quality of expected ownership. They dislike the bland styling and no "prestige" of owning a Honda.

It has won every comparison it has been in EVO. But it DOES not battle the BMWs, Benzs over there in the comparisons but Toyotas, Peugots, MGs etc.

dom

Your wrong. The entirely interior is different. The Euro Accords have an interior that is almost identical to the North American Accord. The TSX interor will be shared with the new Japan only Inspire.

And again the suspension is slightly different. Everything else should be the same.

1SICKLEX

So domn, the 2 Accords swapped interiors in different markets?