www.youtube.com

 

what the F is a clamry?

 

idk, it's eather a typo or a biproduct of a CL and a Camry

 

Yeah my wife has a heavy foot. That little Subbie is kind of cool. I drove it through snow up to the doors. Of course I got stuck once I stopped. ha ha But that all wheel drive will soldier through about anything. It has a nice ride height, has a much better turning circle than my TL (or my old 03 Maxima), it's considered one of the safer cars on the highway - according to crash tests, and you can carry a lot of junk in it. BUT...you still have to look at it!!!

She doesn't mess with me much, because I can beat her a*s with my BMW 1200GS and it will go offroad even better than her Subbie. (I suppose it doesn't like the snow all that much)

Regarding the Camry...like I said I haven't seen the new numbers for the 07's, but the 06's could only do 60 in 7.6 seconds (according to C & D) and the road handling was pitiful. It is also my understanding that the 07 has some reliability issues. Guess Toyota is trying to "really fit in" with the Nascar crowd by making a faster (now more unreliable) sedan/stock car. Well hopefully they are still better in quality/reliability than the Dodge Charger or the Chevy Monte Carlo.

 

I actually researched the wagon and found out that it's kinda weak to be beating cars you are listing, such as 04-06TL, 07 V6 Camry, and Mustang GTs.....it wighs a hefty 3320 lbs, and it only has 224hp, that gives a power to weight ratio of 14.82lb/hp, which is almost a pound and a half worse than a 6MT 06 TL....explain how that works??? I don't get it, I know it can launch nicely cuz it's AWD, but still that much weight with that funny amount of horsepower doesn't seem to make sence, even though it's still a sleeper because it looks really slow and funny...now if you say take one of those volvo wagons with the R badge, those make 300hp from a turbocharged I5 engine, and those are real rockets...

 

I figured the spelling was purposeful and meant to slam it. Like "CLAMMERING"

 

yea, but from the 06 camry to the 07, there is miles between them, they don't look like anything in common...and yea the only problems i have heard for the 07 camrys is the tranny (which is a rather huge 1)

 

what's a BMW 1200GS?? don't tell me it's a motorcyle lol. then it's not even fair man it's obviously gonna whip her..

 

All I can tell you is that it is Turbocharged and built by the same folks that took a 4 cylinder Impreza and can make it run like it does. You are correct that it lauches very well because of the all-wheel drive. And I can't really offer you anything other than Car and Drivers own test results of her car. If it hits 60 in 5.2 seconds and the quarter mile in 13.8 at 97 mph...it seems to be the real deal.

I had a growling 255hp 2003 Nissan Maxima SE which I think has loads of torque that could only do sixty in either 6.0 or 6.1. I couldn't beat her in the Subaru, all I can tell you. In fact, I sort of new to the TL and the TL doesn't "feel" as powerful as the Maxima even though the numbers say different. And I have been with her on at least two Mustang "stop light" races.

But I can't answer for what Car and Driver tested and experienced.

 

I know...didn't say I fought fair. ha ha

 

Here is the link for you on the C&D test. Titled: With a new turbocharged engine, a real hood scoop, and a slick new interior, this is the SUV version of the WRX STi. Almost.



http://www.caranddriver.com/roadtest...ster-25xt.html

One cool quote from the article "The force-fed flat-four's combination of torque, gearing, and weight will get you a blazing 0-to-60 time of 5.3 seconds and a quarter-mile of 13.8 seconds at 97 mph, just 0.3 second slower than an $89,665 Porsche Cayenne Turbo (see page 62)."

 

yea man. must be the gearing, and is it stick? if it is than your wife can really handle the stick (not in that way), you know what i mean. lol

 

yea wow, idk what they did with that thing but the numbers are unbeleivable....considering it has the power of a regular wrx and the performance of the sti.....something don't seem to add up but i guess it's true....cuz regular wrxs are rather slow....but i guess that's why there is a wrx wagon and a forester

 

i guess it pays the price with gas milege, 18 city 23 highway on that little thing

 

Another cool list from C&D

Ten stoplight assassins on a moderate budget.
Introduction
Tenth Place: Subaru Forester 2.5XT
Ninth Place: Pontiac Grand Prix GXP
Eighth Place: Pontiac Solstice GXP/Saturn Sky Red Line (manual)
Seventh Place: Chevrolet Impala SS
Sixth Place: Nissan 350Z
Fifth Place: Mazdaspeed 6
Fourth Place: Subaru Legacy 2.5GT
Third Place: Pontiac Solstice GXP/Saturn Sky Red Line (automatic)
Second Place: Ford Mustang GT
First Place: Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution RS

Pretty cool to have a station wagon make the top ten in Stoplight Assassins.

 

You are correct on that one...think she averages around 21 (when she's not racing the thing). Funny thing the new XT's are actually about a half second slower to 60 and in the quarter mile...they have made the gearing taller (even though I think the hp is up). Her's we bought new in 2004...the first year...the one in the C&D test.

 

yea, looking and comparing the two (TL and Forester) you would have her after 100mph...and the TL's top speed is 152, while the forester is 129..and you'd be more stable in the TL at high speed.

http://www.caranddriver.com/roadtest...-tl-page3.html

http://www.caranddriver.com/roadtest...5xt-page4.html

 

It was a CAMry when I first got it... Then it developed unrepairable transmission problems and and horrible creak/pop/grind that may or may not be the result of the engine pulling the right front strut tower and a poor/missing weld...

The car then became a bottom feeder with no suspension.

In other words, A CLAM! add the 'ry' and you now have a CLAMry.

So, I traded it and got me a TL - - - I like the TL and all, it is a different "luxury class' of cars, but my SE V6 CLAMry would still spank it, bad transmission and all!

 

lol, you keep saying how much slower your TL is than your Clamry, and there are a lot of debates here about how it is and it's not...personally i think it is a little faster than the 5AT TL, but why didn't you get the TL-S and forgot the whole "Camry spanking TL" debate...

 

To make it viable to trade a 3.5 month old car and still feel good about myself... (Still woulda had more fun lighting $20 bills in my living room fireplace) I needed to settle for a year end close out deal on a lowly 2006 ASM/Nav. I actually did very well considering I did in fact "use" the Clamry.

Plus, I didn't want to dig too deep, considering this is my first Honda and all.

 

I agree, its Camry this and that, and once again I'd like to add the G35 is not even in the same class as the TL they are not the same size car. they had their car at one time in that class it was called the I35

 

I'd rather have the ES if I were going to go that route, its much better looking then the Camry, My Lease ran out in Nov on my TL but they let me keep it a few more months. I'm about to turn it in for a TL Type S, I drove the Camry and the ES, they are quick, but the ride was too floppy for me on both....plus I already own a 2002 Camry which I never drive that often, and I think that one is way better looking then the current one. there is more to a car then just the 0-60 time, the TL is fun inside and out to me, anyone can have a camry.

 

Just for my own reading purposes where is the motor test that shows a fast Camry??? I have read just about every Car and Driver test (that I can recall) and I have never seen a Camry reported that can hit 60 in less that 7.6 seconds...that is including their former V6's. In their defense I have not seen performance tests of the 07 model...but the old Camrys are pokey. My wife had a V6 Solara and I could give her a head start with my 255hp 2003 Maxima. And from what I read on Car and Driver (in three years of test), they have the TL hitting 60 in 5.7, 5.8, and 5.9 with a 152 top speed ( I believe). I have to see this Camry that can smoke those numbers.

Also, I would like to see the cornering ability of the Camry. The tests I metioned above usually score a Camry around .77 (which is about what my wifes Subaru wagon will do). The TL hits somewhere in the .86 range. So if the Camry exists that can edge it out in the corners it is toast in the corners.

 

He's talking the 2007 Camry, with it's new 268 HP engine...

 

yea, and Lexus ES should be compared to the TL, not IS.....is is rwd, and way more expencive, the ES is based off a Camry, the TL is based off an Accord, and they are priced more closely, so there.....but why does it compare to IS and G35???? because it's that good beleive it or not......it's one of the whipper snappers haha

 

Still I would like to read the performance numbers and the road holding capability. As I said, I have to see this Camry that can WHIP a TL that hits 60 in 5.8 (avg of three C&D tests) and hits top speeds of 152mph and holds .86 on the skid.

Seems everytime Car and Driver compares the TL they put it up against the likes of the IS350, G35, BMW 3 series and always comes out respectable. Their saying in each testing is that the ONLY thing wrong with the TL is it needs to be rear wheel drive. Funny they never compared the Camry in that one, but the Camry is always included in the Nissan Altima comparison.

 

Yup, and rightly so... It's a "price point" that determines classification as well as the size of the vehicle, or maybe because they offer the car in silver.

A comparison is just that, a comparison, end of story... While a advertising sales-rag may select cars that share common qualities, they could choose them for any reason.

I happened to personally compare my new TL to my 07 CLAMry speed-wise and it appears some cannot handle the fact the 6-speed AT Clamry will WALK a TL 5AT all the way up to 162 MPH.... That's right 1-6-2 = 10 MPH faster than 1-5-2. But then again having ownned BOTH vehicles (and actually being pissed at Toyota) I suppose since I'm not a Advertising Revenue Rag... I have no authority or knowledge?

Anyway... Read up a link is below. The recent "Honda & Driver" aka Car & Driver didn't rate the CLAMry so well, but then again they tested the 4-bangers.

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...dan_comparison

 

I appreciate the link....funny they were comparing the Camry to the Altima again...glad it was able to hold it's own against the Altima, Galant, and a Chevy Malibu.

I noticed the Altima also cost $31,200. Funny, because people are paying that much or less for the TL without Nav. Not there is any difference between the quality, workmanship, looks, resale value, and size of the two.

Toyota Camry 0-60 (6.2) versus TL at 5.8 (as mentioned before, three year tests at C&D show 60 in 5.7, 5.8, and 5.9 in the TL).
Lateral G's (roadholding) = Camry at .80 versus TL at .86 (that's not even close)
Quarter Mile Camry 97mph at 14.6 seconds vs. TL at 97 mph at 14.7
Top Speed (can't find it on the report you provided).

So what I am reading is that the Camry cannot beat the TL to 60, can't come even close to it in the corners...but if you don't mind racing the two side by side for over a quarter mile in a straight line the Camry just might overtake the thing. And if you are able to race long enough (again in a straight line) the Camry so we are being told here will eventually pull away enough from the TL to say "It smokes the TL???????"

Somebody please pass me some of that Toyota Koolaid!

In all seriousness, it is nice that Toyota FINALLY learned that there is a market for one of their vehicles to actually have a little horsepower. And it even appears they are at least trying to make the car not look boring.

However, I doubt the Camry could come close in a vote over preferred styling when looking at a TL and Camry side to side.

 

Styling and luxo-items aside the 6AT Clamry does spank the 5AT TL...

The operative words above are highlighted. You're posting times for the manual TL.

The 5AT TL is 0-60 in 7.0 seconds

The 6AT Clamry is 0-60 (in this test others have 1/10th faster) in 6.2

7.0 - 6.2 = .8 = Ass Whoopin!

No?

 

are you saying that the auto is slower than the manual because the settings of the ecu? I know that obviously there is way more differences, I am just asking about the ecu controll.

 

The funny thing is, that we wouldnt even need to know your age, to know how your acting. But yes your are acting like your 6. Stop saying clamry(nobody fucking cares), and stop talking about how fast they are. Once again no one cares

 

How is backing up a fact "acting?"

Geez, you Acura dudes are a little touchy about your and mine TLs.

I've been bigtime into snowmobiles over the years and this appears to be like the folk over at Totalyamaha.com... Dare anyone say anything about their precious Yamaclams?

I guess I can understand your "Age 21" response that includes swearing and other kevetching, things I don't do because I'm 38... Your response woulda been more appropriate had I said, "All you TL faggots will get you lily-white asses handed to you if you race the new Camry."

But...

That's nothing I ever said... So that angers you (cause you know I right) to the point you have to swear and call names.

Brilliant, just brilliant... I need to take more advice from pimply-headed 21 year olds?

 

The Camry I have is an 2002 XLE V6 it was left to me by someone that had passed. the XLE has the 3.0 egn in it, that model style carried a 3.3 in the SE Model, same egn used in the ES 330. hit 0-60 in 7.0sec on the Camry SE and the ES about 7.2 The 3.0egn was about 7.7sec. I was talking about the way the car handles not about how quick it was, I think the Camry style before this one was a tighter feel and not so floppy. Comparing any Camry old style or the current one, I don't think it can match the TL in handling.

 

Thats because they think if the prices are close the cars must be as well. The TL is in the same size class as the BMW5, MB E class, Lexus ES, Audi A6. what Acura should do is drop the FWD TSX and make it a RWD sedan, the TSX is in the same size class as BMW3, MB C class, Lexis IS, G35, Audi A4. what would be cool is for them to take their 3.0 V6 used in the accord and drop it in a TSX and make it RWD then maybe use the 3.2 as a higher end performance model with RWD. when it gets down to it the TSX is a waste of a car, I think it was just put out there by acura because they thought people would buy one cuz of the name. When you look at the honda accord it has way better interior and looks out of the two for about the same price.

 

Where did you find the Acura test showing 0-60 in 7 seconds for the automatic? Did they mention whether traction control was off or on? I know it makes a difference. I'm not sure how much difference though. Anyhow, I would enjoy reading about it.

And why are you picking on only the automatic transmission when obviously the TL 5speed (from the supporting data I provided) and type S can beat or hang with the Camry in acceleration?

You also skip right over the fact that the Acura can handle the curves 7% better than the Camry. And by skipping over the styling and luxury items....well if that is how you are comparing them then may as well through in a WRX (also a 4-door) or the Altima in your talk.

There is a reason why the Altima and Camry are compared to the Galant and Malibu in your own posted article and why the TL consistently gets compared to the Lexus, BMW, and Infinity crowd. Even Consumer Reports magazine doesn't even put the Nissan Maxima in the same class as Camry. They consider it a higher scaled car.

And the Camry was just reviewed in Consumer Reports "Annual Auto Preview" December 06 for 2007 cars. Guess what the Camry V-6 finished 4th on the list behind the Accord (both 6 and 4 cylinder) and the Volkswagon Passat. The good news is that Camry beat out others in its class...Ford Fusion, Mercury Milan, Hyundai Sonata, Mitsubishi Galant, Chevy Malibu, and the Pontiac G6. (What a grand list of cars to "beat"...oh I mean to take 4th place in)

The TL took top honors in its class beating Lexus IS, BMW 3 series, Saab 9-5, Mercedes Benz C230, and Volvo S60. Competition here seems a little bit stiffer and the TL costs less that the cars it beat. In the comparison above the Camry actually costs more that almost everyone on the list. Kind of like a 18 year old picking a fight with a 12 year old.

 

Dude, the only reason I continue to reply is you keep getting it "so wrong."

I wasn't born yesterday, I know the 5speed is faster... I happen to have owned an 07 Clamry V6 and now own an 06 TL 5AT... Automatic to automatic, I know from "real world experience" the Clamry is faster and fair is fair comparing auto to auto.

I have said nothing to the effect the Camry is a better car, only that it is faster when you compare AT to AT... I've even gone so far as to say my TL with 500 miles may not even be broken in, maybe it gets faster, I dunno?

Go to google and type: Acura TL +0-60

I did and that's how I found out about 7 seconds, I did this because my ass kept telling me the Clamry was faster... So I looked it up, to see what others say... Don't blame me, I "searched!"

Finally... The "Honda & Driver" article you refer to (yes I believe C&D is favorable to Honda) compared 4 cylinder cars... Not the V6 to V6 and Auto to Auto comparison I am making.

Get it?

http://consumerguideauto.howstuffwor...acura-tl-1.htm

 

thats an interesting article...

 

Okay, now I get it. In a vacuum of only racing in a straight line and only an automatic versus an automatic a 2007 Camry V6 (ONLY) can SMOKE a TL...I get it. So I did the google you told me to so I could test this very NARROW claim you are making and came up with this.

http://www.modernracer.com/acuratl.html

It was very funny that the first article I hit (linked above) said that the TL in 5 speed does 60 in 5.9 and the automatic in 6.2. Apparently your "ass" that you referred to does in fact not know what it is talking about. Take your VSA off and kick the car in. That is the only way to explain such the difference in the numbers. So now I have quoted you 4 articles (3 from C&D...which are more reputable than that little message board link that you gave me, and this article I googled all report the TL in the 5.7 to 6.2 range). All still mention that the TL can outhandle the Camry by about .06 in lateral acceleration (or about 7%).

Also you misquoted me...it was Consumer Reports that rated the Honda and the TL over the Camry. And for your reference as I have about every annual auto review of their for the last 10 years. They always ranked the Camry the highest until the Passat knocked them off about 5 years ago and finally Honda just knocked them both off.

Regarding Car and Drivers love of the Honda Accord (not the TL), yes they rate the BMW 3 series and the Accord quite consistently in their annual top 10 pick. They say until someone else can clearly knock them off the top, they will stay.

As far as your real world experience and I am being very serious about this. My wife swore that my 2003 Maxima was faster than her 2004 Subaru Forester XT. She said this because the Maxima growled, ripped tires, and pinned you back as it jumped into action. I kept telling her that my car would only do 60 in 6.0 seconds (according to C&D once again). Her car also according to Car and Driver will do 60 in 5.3...the 2004 ONLY because of its gearing. I asked her to line them up with me and guess what I lost and she was finally convinced that her car (despite what her ass said) was the faster to 60.