| Author | Topic |
|---|
Location:
south east - melbourne
Registered:
March 2004
|
|
98-99 camry differences pls help
|
Sun, 20 March 2005 07:53
|
 |
hey fellas getting a new car for my sis soon and we are after a camry 1998-1999,2000 model
what im interested in knowing is this
whats the difference between the 2.2 four cylinder and the 3.0 liter 6 cylinder models
whgich one is better and what the difference in fuel consumption between the 2
im leaning towards the 4 cylinder but would like to know the differnces as this will be used as a family car as well so will need to haul 5 people around
any help or link to some sort of web site with the differnces between the two will be very much appreciated
cheers
|
|
|
Location:
Campbelltown
Registered:
November 2003
|
|
Re: 98-99 camry differences pls help
|
Sun, 20 March 2005 11:06
|
|
2.2 4cyl = piece of poo, not really enough power to shift the weight of the car + its occupants, the V6 is a great enigne very smooth reliable doesn't mind a rev and is good on fuel and super quiet, the four cylinder will end up being not much more efficient because you will be accelerating harder and revving it more to get the same performance anyway, the V6's are cheap as chips anyway even a touring with better suspension and features are cheap as.
I tink in 2000 not exactly sure the modelk was updated it has different head and tail light designs the later tail lights are alot fatter and have circles the earlier ones 97-99 are thin. The later ones are a lot nicer to look at but not really a major concern.
We have a touring and in the time we have had it 2 years one front wheel bearing has gone but replaced under warranty much to the delight of the dealer who was looking to get some money out of us but then realised they'd have to do the work and we wouldn't pay a cent.
Other than that our aerial died it stopped coming up it would jam and make horrible noises once again fixed under warranty.
Nothing else has gone wrong or though the air con vents get pretty smelly.
ABS triggers fairly early in the camray's other than that the accelator is like a block of wood very stiff the cltuch on the other hand is very light and the brakes lack feel, the touring is very well insualted from noise although on the freeway their is a touch of windnoise that makes it way in.
It is a good honest car great family hack and a good ride, gearbox is a little notchy but the touring has quite short throws which is good, you can be tagging the limiter and barely hear the engine it's that quiet although it doesn't have too much down low, launch the car quick off the line will see it race to about 30 kmph then hit 4krpm and then the wheels will start to spin.
Just drive one for yourself
|
|
|
Location:
toowoomba qld
Registered:
March 2004
|
|
Re: 98-99 camry differences pls help
|
Sun, 20 March 2005 11:13
|
|
|
both seem pretty good on fuel. 4 cyls the cheaper to run. The V6 is a bloody great performer (espically in manual form) was quicker then the Holden Commodore N/A V6 and the Ford Falcon 6 at the Time. better on fuel then the both of them. I'd perfer the V6 myself, but It maybe cheaper to opt for the 4 cyl both are pretty realible. I don't know the exact fuel ecconomy figures but the four is the cheapest fuel wise.
|
|
|
Location:
toowoomba qld
Registered:
March 2004
|
|
Re: 98-99 camry differences pls help
|
Sun, 20 March 2005 11:16
|
|
| Corona RT142 wrote on Sun, 20 March 2005 22:06 |
2.2 4cyl = piece of poo, not really enough power to shift the weight of the car + its occupants, the V6 is a great enigne very smooth reliable doesn't mind a rev and is good on fuel and super quiet, the four cylinder will end up being not much more efficient because you will be accelerating harder and revving it more to get the same performance anyway, the V6's are cheap as chips anyway even a touring with better suspension and features are cheap as.
I tink in 2000 not exactly sure the modelk was updated it has different head and tail light designs the later tail lights are alot fatter and have circles the earlier ones 97-99 are thin. The later ones are a lot nicer to look at but not really a major concern.
We have a touring and in the time we have had it 2 years one front wheel bearing has gone but replaced under warranty much to the delight of the dealer who was looking to get some money out of us but then realised they'd have to do the work and we wouldn't pay a cent.
Other than that our aerial died it stopped coming up it would jam and make horrible noises once again fixed under warranty.
Nothing else has gone wrong or though the air con vents get pretty smelly.
ABS triggers fairly early in the camray's other than that the accelator is like a block of wood very stiff the cltuch on the other hand is very light and the brakes lack feel, the touring is very well insualted from noise although on the freeway their is a touch of windnoise that makes it way in.
It is a good honest car great family hack and a good ride, gearbox is a little notchy but the touring has quite short throws which is good, you can be tagging the limiter and barely hear the engine it's that quiet although it doesn't have too much down low, launch the car quick off the line will see it race to about 30 kmph then hit 4krpm and then the wheels will start to spin.
Just drive one for yourself
|
agreed the 1997-1999 taillight look so much nicer but still the same bassically
|
|
|
Location:
Campbelltown
Registered:
November 2003
|
|
Re: 98-99 camry differences pls help
|
Sun, 20 March 2005 11:16
|
|
|
no i reckon the newer tail lights are better
|
|
|
Location:
toowoomba qld
Registered:
March 2004
|
|
Re: 98-99 camry differences pls help
|
Sun, 20 March 2005 11:18
|
|
|
oh, sorry my mistake. I like the older ones myself
|
|
|
Location:
south east - melbourne
Registered:
March 2004
|
|
Re: 98-99 camry differences pls help
|
Mon, 21 March 2005 21:41
|
|
thanks guys for the input its been of much help
ive driven the 4 cylinder and it struggles a bit even with the foot to the floor , and yeah the wind noise is there on the freeway
a car dealer mentioned to me that there isnt much diffrnce btween the 4 and 6 in fuel consumption as it hauling the same sized body so the 4 will have to work a bit more harder than the 6 to get the car going
so im not very sure which one to go for as they both look good
i suppose iil wait and see what i get whichever one comes first and hasall the features wiil be bought lolllllllll
cheers for the input
|
|
|
