Hmmm, this is rather interesting.

http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/complaints/re...htype=DrillDown

There's are 3 complaints about the airbags not deploying when its supposed to.

Truth is, both the Toyota Camry and Hyundai Sonata feels undesirable once you read the reports. The Sonata in particular is worrisome - a lot of the cars suffers steering issues. Manufacturer is classified under KIA Motor corporation, which makes me wonder about the KIA Optima itself.

http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/complaints/re...htype=DrillDown

There's also a bunch of complaints against the Optima if I do a manual vehicle search.

I think better to not read too much or end up no confidence in any car, LOL!

Ya, I'm financially able to do that. Why you planning to be my financial adviser is it? LOL!

I'm more like reach a certain milestone to reward myself yet I also want the car to retain a certain value when its time to sell if off kind of guy.

Can't I have both the cake and the pie at the same time?

I think you need to examine the figures yourself more closely

For a 10 year old engine (not tranny) - the torque and power figures are still nearly on par with what the Koreans are offering right now. Despite it being an old engine, it's still more powerful than the latest dual VVT-i 2.0L engine found in the Corolla Altis.

KIA K5 vs Camry 2.0G vs Teana 2.0L vs Honda Accord 2.0 VTi

121.4kW @ 6200RPM & 198Nm @ 4600RPM
109kW @ 6000RPM & 190Nm @ 4000RPM
100kW @5600RPM & 190Nm @ 4400RPM (MR20DE introduced 2005)
115kW @ 6300RPM & 189Nm @ 4300RPM (R20A3 introduced 2007)

Look at the figures and break it down yourself! Aside from the power ratings, the torque figures are more or less the same across the board. And the Camry gets its full torque at a lower RPM compared to its rivals as well, and good torque figures is what you want in bumper to bumper traffic or city driving.

I think the engine is good enough even with today's standards and despite it being first introduced 12 years ago, it still remains competitive against its rivals.

So if you want to complain about the engine being old tech, it's not so valid since it still stands toe to toe with all its rivals. You have a better case complaining about its really lame 4 speed auto instead.

No, but to still give a 4AT in this day and age, it's really quite bad.

The 2.0L Camry engine probably isn't as fuel efficient on its own against its competitors, I mean after all, it has been 12 years but on paper, both power and torque looks alright. The 2.0L offering wouldn't have looked so horrendously outdated had Toyota offered a CVT tranny or 5/6 automatic transmission in place of the 4speed AT.

The general public, including myself, would not have seen the dyno graphs and the info was never shown on the Malaysian Toyota website so I can only conclude base on the figures given on their website. Maybe it's in the brochure, but I didn't bother to check.

Altis 2.0 (3ZR-FE, 2007)
107kW@6200RPM & 187Nm @ 3600RPM

Camry 2.0 (1AZ-FE)
109kW @ 6000RPM & 190Nm @ 4000RPM

You are right about the Altis torque, it gathers its torque much faster than any of the 2.0L engines out there, and basically you want torque to kick in as soon as possible for better acceleration and better overtaking power. But if you look at the figures alone, the difference is really quite small between an engine developed 12 years ago and an engine developed 5 years ago, in fact, based on those figures alone, the Camry 1AZ-FE engine still looks more powerful on the whole.

No arguments regarding the transmission though.

I dunno, I disagree with the refinement bit. Because when it comes to refinement, I think they are nowhere near as refined as the continentals. Whether if it's VW, Peugeot, Citroen, Fiat? or even Ford, I don't think the Camry comes close. Even if you compare it with the K5, I think the K5 interior comes close in imitating that continental look and feel of a typical continental car.

Maybe it's preference, but continental interior just look a class above compared to the new Camry, which is really cheesy with its decked out faux wood.

Comfort and space wise. Yes - the Camry is top notch, I can't argue with that. And they are selling based on their history and pedigree in Malaysia. But the competition themselves will one day catch up to their level as well and as people become more educated and affluent, they will want to demand for better specs and quality. Can they still continue to do this when that day comes? Look at Honda, they're taking appropriate steps in countering the competition. Is the giant contented to continue sleeping while the competition slowly but surely chip away their market share?

I've been in the E and I've been in the Camry. Comfort wise, I'd have to say even the Camry just feels better compared to the E class. Even if you take about space, the overall feel of the Camry is just large and spacious.

But if you talk about choice materials and quality, there is just no way the Camry is near the levels of refinement of an E class. No way, no how. Perhaps what they mean is the level of quietness and how the ride handles. I dunno, I've extensively driven the last gen Camry 2.4V and while it is very quiet and comfortable. The feel is quite good, the leather, the solid steering wheel, leather covered center console and.... that's it. There's no feeling of having reached a particular milestone in my life. Perhaps it's because the car was never mine to begin with.

Now fast foward to the Passat that I'm driving now. The feeling is good, the drive is good, the interior is comfortable as well. There's some hard plastics but the overall feeling I get from all the soft touch plastics is good. The steering is nicely weighted, the door shut sound is nice and meaty... But I still don't feel that having reached that certain milestone feeling.

Perhaps it is like you said, it's only something to understand when you've reached your late 40s or 50s

This post has been edited by zweimmk: Aug 8 2012, 08:09 PM

I get what you're saying. The rev counter for daily driving usually would not exceed 3.5k RPM, in fact gearing most likely switch once our cars hit slightly above 2k RPM between the 1st to 3rd gears which is usually where you would feel the rush of torque.

But without figures to look at, then all we have is driving "feel" and we all know how accurate that is. So it still comes back to figures at the end of the day and I can only assume they are accurate according to the manufacturer.

All I know is, there's no going back for me to Japanese cars unless they incorporate turbo or unless their hybrid can give the same kind of performance like those Continental turbo engines found in the PUGs, VWs, Mercs, BMW etc.

I went to test drive the 2.0G again earlier today and man, it feels so underwhelming sluggish compared to my car.

This post has been edited by zweimmk: Aug 9 2012, 04:19 PM

No la, what I meant was it's pretty difficult to drive back an NA engine after switching to a turbocharged engine.
Unless it's an NA engine that does 0-100 under 8s or less, LOL.

This post has been edited by zweimmk: Aug 9 2012, 06:53 PM

Modern car engines are now geared towards fuel efficiency rather than performance. So really aside from car features, NA engine from brand A is unlikely to differ too much from brand B or brand C. Whatever difference is going to lie in the way difference manufacturers tune their engines and their cars.

Those days of a high revving VTEC engine in a non performance based saloon? Long gone~~~

The results are for you to see actually

Europeans - smaller engines with turbochargers
Japanese - hybrid and electric engines
Americans - hybrid and electric engines
Koreans - Mix but no clear direction

Petrol prices will only continue to increase in the years to come, so it's just a matter of time before the fuel subsidy here is completely removed. Once that happens, I'm fairly certain we'll see a boom in hybrid sales. We're moving towards the day where petrol version will move down the rung in mainstream cars alongside with hybrid versions. They will also find life in high performance spec vehicles as well.

Current gen Camry have all the best features fitted into the hybrid versions whereas the non hybrid versions are actually more stripped down in comparison. It's a sign of things to come.

No it boils down to what you are after.

The Camry does 2 things very well:

1. A very comfortable drive
2. Spacious interior

For a lot of people, this really is good enough for them. It's hard to pinpoint why but prior to becoming a family man, safety was never really my no.1 concern. As long as the car got 2 airbags, got ebd, bsc, DVD, tc, TRC etc then it's good enough already, the idea was even if crash, if meant to die then sure die. But the car must have good resale value and easy to service or else got so many features also no use. That used to be my train of thought towards buying a car, I believe lots of people share the same view as well.

But these days, I wish my car is packed with as much safety features as possible. I look at how some idiots drive their [insert car] and I'm really scared they will at some point either lose control or never pay attention and knock into me.

It's fine if they want to rush to an early grave but please don't drag me or my family along. In this sense, the lack of safety features in the Camry and its obscene asking price is totally unacceptable. The lack of VSC is not so big deal to me as compared to the lack of airbags. After all, I can still more or less drive slower to compensate towards the lack of VSC but I can't compensate against an airbag not deploying or not enough airbags to protect me and my family, and right now, I'm extremely concerned how Toyota isn't addressing these 2 issues here with more urgency

So yes, there's no perfect car, but I would ideally want a car with as little things to complain about or worry about as possible.

For NKVE, I would be damn happy if my car has adaptive cruise control. Something that's only found in the cars in the higher tier pricing group. Even better now coz continental cars next year which want 5 star EURONCAP ratings must now include the autonomous braking system. So adaptive cruise control + autonomous braking system = easier driving experience.



This post has been edited by zweimmk: Aug 14 2012, 08:34 AM

CKD, because basically it's a CBU with a CKD sticker slapped on it. I would have bought the CC if the pricing was better, it makes no sense to buy it now since it cost as much as the Audi A4.

But I wouldn't have minded another 2k discount on the Passat at all, DAMN!

No idea about the SC coz I haven't gone in yet, but since my uncle works in one of the service center as a mechanic there, I should have no problem.

There's a new crash test (small overlap front test) in town and surprise surprise, most luxury vehicles barely passed it.

Now, I'm really curious how the new Camry or the KIA Optima would perform in this new test.

http://www.thedetroitbureau.com/2012/08/mo...new-crash-test/

http://www.iihs.org/ratings/frontal_test_info.html

Most interestingly in the latter article:

"Given equivalent frontal ratings, the heavier of two vehicles usually offers better protection in real-world crashes. In 2009, the Institute demonstrated this principle with a series of tests in which small cars were crashed into larger cars, all of which had good frontal ratings in the moderate overlap test."

This post has been edited by zweimmk: Aug 15 2012, 11:16 AM

I actually have no doubt even the Passat will fail this new test, let alone Camry or K5. Very likely the new Mazda 6 was designed not taking this test into consideration at all as well, so I also expect that car to fail this test.

Fastest I go also about 140 so far, no chance to go faster because some jackass is always in the way and I happen to drive in City more than I drive highway

Instant reading: 7.8L/100km @ 90km/hr, 8.9L/100km @ 120km/hr?

FC is most efficient in the 80 to 90km/hr range

But I'm constantly stuck for the most part between 40 to 80km/hr hence my fuelly score ain't that good

This post has been edited by zweimmk: Aug 15 2012, 12:48 PM