![]() 09/06/2016 at 06:56 • Filed to: None | ![]() | ![]() |
...a Facebook acquaintance buys a new 4 cylinder Camry as a “sporty” car. It’s gotta be because the Camry is so grounded to the ground.
![]() 09/06/2016 at 07:11 |
|
You could’ve suggested something actually “sporty” at least the V6 Camry is “sporty"
![]() 09/06/2016 at 07:11 |
|
I shall activate the Top Gear laugh for, um, as long as these.
There. Now I’m weeping for him. He knows nothing. And it’s saddening.
![]() 09/06/2016 at 07:29 |
|
A new Camry will be pretty boring regardless of the cylinder amount.
But here’s a sporty Camry with a four cylinder engine. It competed in certain super touring races in ~1998.
![]() 09/06/2016 at 07:57 |
|
Jack Baruth actually really liked running a 4-cylinder SE on the track: http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2013/05/review…
And based on a review of a V6 SE that he referenced, the 4-cylinder may actually have far better handling...
![]() 09/06/2016 at 08:00 |
|
Needs more coupe.
Or wagon.
Dream Camry: 3s-GTE and AWD from the All-Trac.
![]() 09/06/2016 at 08:01 |
|
Of course better handling. But a 4 cylinder pulling a big sedan by the front wheels...that’s the problem
![]() 09/06/2016 at 08:16 |
|
Yeah, 178 HP pulling 3300+ lbs through a slushbox isn’t exactly sporty for someone who cares about straight line performance. (Dang, the Camry could use a new platform to reduce weight.) Looks like the V6 adds about 130 lbs to the nose, which could explain a lot about handling impact (including steering feel differences), though.
![]() 09/06/2016 at 09:30 |
|
To be fair, “sporty” is a kinda bullshit term anyway.
Sounds like your friend lives in econobox hell. This probably is about as “sporty” as he/she knows.
![]() 09/06/2016 at 18:46 |
|
My ex girlfriend’s Lancer is in a similar boat. Handles well because it’s so light, but the lack of power kills any sporting pretensions. It can’t pull itself out of a corner :(