 2010 Toyota Camry LE. Click image to enlarge |
|
Manufacturer’s web site
|
Join CanadianDriver’s Facebook group
Follow CanadianDriver on TwitterBy Chris Chase; photos by Bill Petro
Find this vehicle in CanadianDriver’s Classified Ads
Kingston, Ontario – It seems to be a given that any new car will be larger and more powerful than the one it replaces; after all, this is what the market demands. The real challenge for any automaker, though, is combining more space, safety and performance with continuing improvements in fuel efficiency.
And this was the purpose behind Toyota’s “More power, less fuel” event, held in Kingston in mid-June. Journalists were invited to drive Toyota and Lexus’ newest, most fuel-efficient models in a variety of conditions, including rush hour traffic and relaxed rural routes.
The event included the Corolla and Matrix compacts, with their 1.8-litre engines; the RAV4 crossover with the 2.5-litre engine that was new in 2009; the Venza, with its 2.7-litre four-cylinder; and we got to sample the 2010 Prius in a Hybrid Challenge event (covered in a separate article by Grant Yoxon). The 2010 Camry line includes a new four-cylinder engine plus new automatic and manual transmissions to go with it; the Highlander crossover also adds a four-cylinder to its powertrain choices, and the Tundra pickup gets a brand-new 4.6-litre V8 as its entry-level engine.
On the Lexus side, the company brought along its 2010 RX 350/450h (hybrid); the 2009 GS 450h hybrid; the IS 250/350, ISF and the brand-new IS C convertible; and the LS 600hL luxury sedan.
 2010 Toyota Camry LE. Click image to enlarge |
CanadianDriver has covered most of the cars and trucks listed above in some way. Read on for impressions of the new four-cylinder-powered Camry and Highlander. The IS convertible and 4.6-litre Tundra will be covered in the near future.
The 2010 Camry gets a new, 2.5-litre four-cylinder engine to replace 2009’s 2.4-litre. One notable addition to the line is a four-cylinder XLE model, marking the first time since the Camry’s 2007 redesign that the top-line trim could be had with four-cylinder power.
All four-cylinder Camrys get new transmissions, too. In LE and XLE models, a new six-speed automatic is standard, replacing last year’s five-speed. The SE gets a six-speed manual, which also replaces 2009’s five-speed; the new automatic is optional with SE trim.
| next >> View full article on one page
|
at 10:17 am
Wow very drastic fuel saving numbers, compared to the out going 4 cylinder powertrain.
the 2.5-litre Camry is rated at 9.0/6.1 L/100 km (city/highway), down from 9.5/6.2. With the SE’s manual transmission, ratings are 9.5/6.1, compared to 9.6/6.4 in the 2009 SE model
I guess a 0.1 savings is a savings.
Should have just reported a combined rating like you did with the 6 cylinder, looks more impressive.
Interior in pictures appear very low rent looking.
at 11:19 am
Any time you get more power AND better fuel economy you certainly can’t complain!
The RAV with that new 4cyl makes as much power as my 2.7L v6 Tucson – and adds two more gears as well. Wish they would have come out with it 2 years ago.
at 12:24 pm
Sounds like an ad for Toyota…oH I forgot, this whole site is an ad for Toyota.
at 1:52 pm
That’s funny, and I thought it was an add for Honda – I can’t browse to the main page without hearing a blatant advertisement for Honda’s new low interest rates on Civic, Rav and I think I’m missing one more… See advertising does work!
at 11:30 pm
Agree that interior looks plain-jane vanilla but i’m sure its functional. Still not sure what to think of that frosty/clear head unit. Any problems with legibility in Sun? Legibility issues at night? I’m sure it works fine but just wondering..
at 11:33 pm
Also, I like the LED lights, was just a matter of time – one step forward. However, I am absolutely not a fan of how they reworked the front end – 2 steps back. The current gen Camry looks better from the front imo..
at 6:54 am
easyrider,
You are the first person that is honest.
What is wrong with these people?
The camry is one ugly looking car, overpriced, horrible driving dynamics, the quality has dropped. Let’s compare them with the new taurus, miles ahead of this POS.
People will ask a friend, what is a good car to buy and because that’s the only car they know they might say camry. I can’t believe this.
at 7:37 am
Hey, where is easyrider’s post?
Censuring canadiandriver, censuring?
at 9:31 am
Not allowed to bash Toyotas or Hondas on this site. Notice that the reviewer did not say “the fuel economy of the Camry is not up to the standard set by Hyundai (Sonata) or Chevrolet(Malibu) in this segment”. Had it been the other way around, that would surely be stated.
at 10:18 am
I’ve noticed that big time. We should be fair with all the comments, good or bad, not to choose whatever the sponsor likes the crowd to read. IMO the new north american products are the best bang for the buck and the imports are scared of that. North American manufacturers are paying big time for their past mistakes but things are changing and I like the change. Domestic affordable cars which are improving in performance and reliability.
JMHO
at 11:17 am
Pick up a CR magazine guys – domestics are getting better but still no where near Toyota or Honda.
Although I do agree that the interiors and styling of the new Malibu and Taurus are much more to my liking than the Accord. I like the exterior styling of the Camry myself (Sport models anyway), but the interiors are painfully boring and a little more sound deadening in the floors and A-pillars wouldn’t hurt either.
That said, lots of people want the reliability and resale value of the Japanese stuff – and the truth is the domestics aren’t there yet. Although Ford is getting very close!
at 1:51 pm
@joe: the Sonata’s ratings with the four-cylinder/automatic are 9.5/6.2. The 2009 Sonata’s ratings were marginally better than the 2009 Camry’s, but the new Toyota is more efficient.
And the only comments that are censored (notice how the word is actually spelled, please) are the offensive ones easyrider likes to post, telling others to eat sh*t and die, and the like. Otherwise, we’re perfectly happy to let you look like a fool if that’s what you want.
at 2:01 pm
If censored is censored and not like I spelled then fix your spell checker on the forum. Nobody is perfect at spelling, some are better than others.
at 8:41 pm
Chris, in real world tests the Camry was well behind the SOnata and Malibu. It is on par with the 4 cyl Mazda 6. Check with Consumer reports for those values, or, if you like, I will provide them.
The Malibu beats it in the government ratings also. With respect to Government ratings, I would do like your own Chris Wilson does…use the US ratings converted to l/100 km. The city ratings are much more reliable than the Canadian equivalent. Nothing like the real world tests, though.
at 10:02 pm
Here are the real world tests:
Malibu
CR’s overall mileage, mpg 25
CR’s city/highway, mpg 16 / 38
CR’s 150-mile trip, mpg 32
Sonata
CR’s overall mileage, mpg 26
CR’s city/highway, mpg 17 / 40
CR’s 150-mile trip, mpg 33
Camry
CR’s overall mileage, mpg 24
CR’s city/highway, mpg 16 / 36
CR’s 150-mile trip, mpg 29
Looking forward to the full test drive.
at 7:36 am
I don’t have the most recent J.D. Powers Dependability Study but 2007 is available.
Chevolet: 226
Hyundai: 228
Toyota: 178
Honda: 169 (Problems per 100 vehicles)
They are in different classes. These also reflect on the resale values.
Just don’t like the exterior of Malibu, looks like a car in early 80’s. Sonata? You have to pay $29,999 or more for traction & stability control on a GLS v6!!!
at 10:37 pm
Bandai, the point is that this website rarely points out the advantages of other brands over Honda and Toyota but is quick to point out H and T strengths over other brands.
Which JD Power survey are you talking about? Don’t they have a survey to please everyone? Besides, quality is often model specific. I believe the Camry had some teething issues. Still good quality, though.
I have driven both the 4 cylinder Camry and Malibu as rentals. I found the handling and interior of the Malibu to be far superior to the Camry. The SE Camry might be better.
at 4:05 am
After reading this article, we are feeling good because today, we really need those veichle which have power but take less fuel.
at 8:37 am
We owned a 95 camry and tried to drive it to the ground, sold it w/ 195K miles. We never advertised the sale, literally, people were fighting to buy it from us. The drive train was still going strong. I’ve owned Fords, Dodge and Chevys and did not have the same reliability as Toyotas. Sure the Camry is a sedate sedan, but it did it’s job day in day out. That my friends is the Camry reliability experience.
at 1:12 am
The Ford Taurus may have improved along with other domestics but the real challenge is how a car will hold up over the long run. I would rather have a car with a plain and boring interior that was dependable than a car that looked better to the human eye but was unreliable. The new Camry models including the SE look more stylish from generations past. People may criticize the Camry looks but its reliability and engineering quality is what Toyota is really about – not styling