@Icehart: At the same time VSC was removed when the 2.4 turned into a 2.5.

We have highly tuned 140+ hp 1.4 liter engines from VW over here, and I haven't heard anything about them failing. Our petrol should be fine I guess. Diesel is a different story of course.

I believe most of the advancements in terms of safety and fuel economy was driven by consumer demand rather than policy. Although there are some policies _nudging_ people into the right direction. You can drive an old stinking Proton Saga in Germany. But you'll pay a lot, really a lot on road tax. And some areas you are not allowed to enter with a heavily polluting car. And fuel is simply so expensive (very high taxes on fuel) that good fuel economy is very important. They even go so far as to put in special additives into heating oil (really it's just diesel that isn't heavily taxed) so that it produces some very obvious smoke when burned in a car engine. So that people don't use that to evade taxes.

Safety standards... I'm not sure there are even any rules. The Lada Niva, which is on sale in Germany, has ABS. That is _all_ in terms of safety. No ESP, no airbag, nothing. Lada Kalina, Dacia Logan etc. only have 2 airbags and ABS, and they are also perfectly legal. It's just that customers are not willing to accept this, unless there is a very, VERY good reason for that. The Kalina sells very bad, the Dacias are doing fine but are also offered with more airbags, and they are very cheap and spacious, running on reliable old Renault tech. The Niva is a cult classic, and a dirt cheap proper offroader. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mAjOKVd6Dws&feature=related lol)

AFAIK the 6 speed DSG is fine, 7 speed has problems when used inappropriately (main tip was I think to not shift from N to D while rolling). The 170 hp tune of the 1.4 TSI was AFAIK very problematic, so much so that VW pulled them from the market for a while. The others should be fine, but of course not many have done really a lot of miles yet. But I doubt these engines will fail before the 200k km mark, and for most of us that is more than enough.

I'm not sure why people don't bother about safety here. Some do, obviously, but many don't. I mean I can understand that when you spend 40k on a new car you can't expect much and you don't have much choice. But the Camry is at a price range where the owner can clearly afford something better. And someone who can afford a car that expensive is probably also not suicidal or thinks his life is worthless and wants to die.

Maybe people here can enlighten me. What is the thinking of buying a Camry today? Why don't you care about your life?

Keep in mind that a full set of passive safety features is considered the bare minimum elsewhere, and it is the bare minimum offered elsewhere. Even the A (!!!) segment VW up! has a radar system to stop the car when necessary (it is a rather limited system, but IIRC it comes as standard even in the lowest spec). And the Camry is D segment. It is not like the technology doesn't exist.

Who in the world wouldn't care about safety? Well, duh, Toyota owners of course. Either they are ill informed (then a hint for the next time: Inform yourself, do some research! Cars are expensive, do research before you buy!) or they don't care. At least not enough to base the car buying decision on that. I watched the Kangoo crash tests many times, read the EuroNCAP review, and looked at competitors and how they'd do. Of course Renaults good image in terms of safety helped in the decision (the alternative would have mostly been the Citroen Berlingo, but IIRC that one didn't do as good in the tests. The Avanza was out pretty fast). I did also read up on spare parts, reliability etc..

You can't argue that Proton and the high taxes are the reason why our Camry is so bad. The Camry is a competitively priced car in the US, that has all the safety features you'd expect. Other cars offer similar things, sometimes at higher prices. Yet over here those cars do have the safety features, while the Camry has not. At again similar prices. Even better example: Vios vs. Fiesta. Both non local cars, taxes should probably be quite similar. Yet the Fiesta is much, much better. Overseas again they do sell the Vios in hatchback form (as they do with the Fiesta), and again, competitively priced products, with a similarly high safety standard.
It is entirely UMWs fault. But is it, really? UMW does what UMW should do. It is a company, not the Salvation Army. I would do exactly the same thing, if I ran UMW. Make money. Lots of money. Ultimately it is the customer who is at fault that UMW is ripping Malaysians off. Stop buying their cars, tell them why, and next year the Vios has 6 or 7 airbags and VSC. For the same price as today. I promise.

Toyota SHOULD be scared that they have overdone their greed. They get a lot of hate these days for reducing safety rather than improving. Why not give the 2.0 and 2.5 VSC, and the 2.5 4 airbags? It may lag behind the competitor, but at least people could say "at least they are improving". Do you think those who drive a Camry now and who are asked why they bought a Camry, do you think they will blindly buy one next time again? They may have bought the Camry because it's a Toyota, no one will question you why you buy it over another brand, everyone will say good choice. This could be the last generation of Camrys that sells well.

That Volvo is so much safer than the rest is a myth. Yes, they are usually on top, but so (was) Renault. Renault was the first company to embrace safety, it was their sales pitch. Affordable cars that are as safe as it gets in that class. To me if you want to get a safe car, get one with JDM (not sure...), US or EU specs (especially the latter). One that is sold over there, with the same safety features as here. The brand hardly matters, they are all on a relatively high level nowadays. But obviously that message hasn't arrived here yet.

What I don't understand is why marketing material, ads etc. don't put more focus on safety. That Toyota and Honda aren't doing it is obvious, but Ford? VW? Advertise with the fact that the specs are the same. That exactly this particular car has 5 stars in EuroNCAP. Show crash tests. Hell, Citroen put Claudia Schiffer into a Xsara and did a crash test, after which she, as perfect looking as always, got out and walked away. Renault has a very funny baguette ad (they crash test sushi, german sausage, ... into a wall, and then a baguette. Cause the safest cars come from France...). Or they had an ad where very artfully the whole product range was crashed into each other. In the end they announced that all their cars have 5 stars in EuroNCAP. There is tons of potential.

About Paultan comments/votings: Keep in mind that whoever reads Paultan is interested in cars. He or she will probably have a decent grasp of the market, knows what other brands offer (probably also overseas). Same goes to some of the forumers who are in F&F. However there are many others out there who aren't as informed. They may trust the brand (Toyota is the best, they make great cars, very reliable and safe). They may not look at other brands or even be aware of them (Skoda? Never heard of them. New brand from China?).

Btw., keep in mind how many do not wear seatbelts in Malaysia. Especially in the rear, where it is the most important (I consider those who do not wear their seatbelts in the back as murderers, or rather people who are about to commit murder, willfully. I don't like murderers). Is safety really so important when people don't wear seatbelts or let their kids run around in the car? I find it hard to believe that people do it not knowing what the consequences are.

@Madgeiser: You got your terms wrong Active safety is features that prevent accidents, such as collision prevention systems, ESP/VSC, lane keeping systems. Passive safety is when it helps you survive in the case of an accident.

I do believe that nowadays it is fair to blame those who keep buying the Camry. Want a refined, comfortable car with an old but comfortable gearbox? Get the last gen Camry. Or the one before that. Or the one before that. Nothing wrong with those cars, right? If you buy a new car there are many other options to consider. You can have absolutely superior comfort (even over the Camry), decent handling and good safety. Get a Citroen C5. Many options out there. A Passat is probably not uncomfortable either (though obviously not as good as Citroen). And those who do buy a Toyota these days are supporting Toyota in selling sub-par vehicles. If it weren't for them we'd be getting decent cars from T&H.

---

Added on October 15, 2012, 11:01 pmWe are the future car buyers/many of us do buy cars. We are the ones who are asked for advise. We are the vocal ones. We are the influential ones. Toyota should care. As I mentioned above people also buy a Toyota because that decision won't be questioned. You buy a conti and everyone will give you trouble. Now it is the other way round, in certain segments and areas. I believe that does make a difference to these customers.

Toyota released so-so cars for quite a while in Europe. And while their reputation used to be great, they are merely a shadow of themselves. All they sell is small and cheap city cars, despite offering specially developed European standard cars, that are vastly better than what they sell here.

This post has been edited by kadajawi: Oct 15 2012, 11:01 PM

Hm. But quality and reliability the Camry is very bad? Running costs too? I thought that's what the car is good for? In any case just a bit more comfort... if comfort is so important, there is only one choice. Citroen C5.

Well, I can basically just walk into my Renault SC. Though I do call my service advisor first to make sure they have time for me. But usually they do. And I do think it is relatively easy to maintain. VW is also willing to pick up your car if there is anything, you don't even have to send it to the SC. So really, is it that bad?!

Spare parts can be easily acquired from Singapore. It is that way with Renault, so surely it will also be like that with VW.

@zweimmk: Adaptive xenon lights that have high beam on most of the time and block out the area where other cars are? That's quite nice. RNS 510 is also not bad, though a bit on the slow side. Auto braking, park assist, lane assist, adaptive suspension, the DYNAUDIO sound system. There's quite a bit that the Malaysian Passat is missing out on

This post has been edited by kadajawi: Dec 6 2012, 10:31 PM

The Citroen C4 had this feature for a long time. So yes, Passat should also have.

The sound system can be done aftermarket. Depending on where you go and how much you invest you can also get something better. A friend is getting the B&O system in the S5, but he wants to upgrade. Not good enough.

---

Added on December 7, 2012, 3:03 pm@stix: what car and brand? Sounds more like a Citroen, those are rather different from normal adaptive suspension systems.

This post has been edited by kadajawi: Dec 7 2012, 03:03 PM

Then you have an air suspension. They are also quite good.

Old Koreans were not very good. Newer ones aren't too bad. Also in the past contis were very expensive, now they are reasonably priced. Even better than Japs. Times they are a changing.

And VSC is not a gadget to play with, it is a life saver. The Japs pack gadgets that are not important, like auto folding mirrors.

I've driven the first gen Kia cee'd sports wagon (or whatever ridiculous name they gave it), and it was actually rather decent. I'd say on par with the Golf IV, and not so far behind more recent Golfs and Focuses. Felt like a 5 year old Golf or Focus (at the time it was launched), which is actually rather good. And the particular car I drove had spikes. Now I don't expect a Forte of the same generation to be as good as the cee'd, but it shouldn't be that bad. Reliability... they offer 7 years warranty overseas. Shouldn't be too awful then.

AFAIK Toyota made surveys and found out that their customers do not care about VSC. So they removed the feature (as it costs a few dollars to produce, and if it's not driving sales why keep it?).

No. But the Forte is. Is the Forte as good as the new cee'd? Probably not. Is it far behind? I don't think so.

Instead of the Camry I'd probably get that small Lexus hybrid or a Prius. Good safety, and not too bad cars.

Yes, and the rear doors shut pathetically too in the small Lexus... like a Myvi. Ok if it's a cheap Myvi, not ok if it's an expensive Lexus. But still, it's not that bad. Though I'd expect more from Lexus.

A Ranger... not exactly the most refined car in the world, is it? Not sure if it qualifies as an alternative to a D segment car, more of a workhorse that will go anywhere.

Maybe in the Camry they leave out crumple zones etc.?

If you want the ultimate in space, there is only one choice in this price range: Skoda Superb. Also it is only slightly behind a Merc E class in terms of refinement and ride quality.
http://www.dailycarsnews.com/newsgallery-s...7356-pic25.html


Btw. why exit from the boot? Alphard got sliding doors, right? There is no better type of doors for tight parking.

It just shows that there is no bump in the center. Which is a good thing of course, but not much of an issue to me.

@Iluvproton: you have to loose weight then

You can't fold the rear seats in the Camry? Really? The last time I have seen a car that can't do it was... Hm... I think never. All my cars had it, all the rental ones I drove too. Some you can also remove the rear bench or individual seats.

This post has been edited by kadajawi: Dec 13 2012, 01:57 PM

I thought Camry so reliable and flawless?

Anyway, can't the SC help?

I have XM2 on my car, and yes, comfort is there, fuel saving too (but hard to notice, I wouldn't pick a tyre to save fuel because at most a few % savings), but the grip is a bit lacking, especially in the beginning.

Send there again.

But you don't need to warm up your car, in Malaysia the engine is warm before you even start it. I never warmed up my Citroen in Germany, even though temperatures would often be below 0, sometimes down to -15. That is so cold that at idle the engine would die. To even reach the temperatures the engine has when starting in Malaysia takes like 10 minutes. Just don't rev it hard, then it is not an issue. Seriously, Malaysia is the last place on earth that needs the engine to be warmed up.

The Citroen is now 10 years old and has done around 150k. No problem with the engine whatsoever. And I usually drive it quite hard, revving to 4000 rpm frequently and driving at 4000-5000 rpm on the highway for hundreds of km.

Only exception may be carburetor engines. But as outdated as the Camry is, I don't think it is THIS outdated.

This post has been edited by kadajawi: Jan 20 2013, 02:33 PM

http://rt.com/news/winter-snow-russia-weather-275/
If you need to warm up your car, what do these people have to do? -50°C... omg.

Malaysians are slowly waking up, they can't be taken for a ride so easily anymore (see upcoming elections). So it is no surprise that when the 2.5 was a downgrade from the 2.4 people are not so willing to take it anymore. Also more competition, that too does not help.

Yeah, at 80-100k the Camry can be considered. Otherwise I think it is overpriced.

Citroen sold the C5 for 150-160k rather than 190k when they were transitioning from one distributor to the next. That is a massive discount.

Are there any numbers? I don't see that many new Camrys on the road, but if that means slow sales I don't know. Maybe they can't produce them fast enough...

If comfort is the number one priority then I'd go for the Citroen C5.

Isn't Honda much more expensive to maintain than Toyota? Volvo the schedule looked pretty expensive. For my Renault I think it is rather affordable. VW also not that expensive? Not sure. At least their longer servicing interval helps offset some of the cost, and you loose less time. Also don't forget that some car makers offer free servicing for a while or longer warranties.