As our Tundra was coming up to the end of its lease, I had already been thinking about what was going to follow it on my side of the garage. We had the “practical hauler” side of the equation covered with the Sienna minivan, so I could go back to a sedan or something else that didn’t need to haul home remodeling supplies. It didn’t take me long to make my decision, even with the large number of possible Toyota models to choose from.
By the Tundra’s lease end in the summer of 2002, Toyota had already introduced a new version of the Camry to follow the 1997-2001 platform I had already owned. Released in late 2001, the new XV30 platform was larger and offered new and (to me) more interesting styling. I very quickly decided that the Camry was going to be the replacement for the Tundra, so I needed only to choose which model to lease. The new model came in base model LE, “sporty” SE, and “luxury” XLE versions, both with 4 cylinder or V-6 power. I certainly wasn’t interested in the base model car as it seemed like a rental car special, but the SE and XLE were better options with more equipment and a more upmarket look.
I considered the 4-cylinder automatic XLE because of its equipment (automatic climate control, power accessories galore, and multi-function trip computer, among other things). Amusingly, the XLE model came with some seriously fake-looking “wood” trim that was (to my eyes) pretty cheesy. The 6 cylinder XLE was a bit out of my price range, and I recalled being underwhelmed by the 4-cylinder performance of the ’97 Camry I had, so I was reluctant to commit to this powertrain. The SE “sporty” model had a cheaper base price (no trip computer and manual air conditioning) so a V6 automatic was in my price range. I briefly thought about the 4-cylinder 5-speed manual version but decided to go with the V-6 to get more power (192 hp versus 157 for the 4-cylinder). The SE offered “sport suspension” and a strut tower brace (JDM tight, yo!). The SE package also brought a sport steering wheel, blacked out grille and emblems, fog lights, and silver face gauges. All highly up to the moment in 2002, to be sure.
When I was ready to purchase, the big-box dealer who had sold me the last several Toyotas showed me the cars that were in transit. A well-equipped white V-6 automatic SE was on its way to the big-box dealer and seemed to be the right choice for me. My father planned to buy the Tundra when I turned it in, so I figured we could do the whole transaction at once at the dealership and made arrangements for my dad to show up in Maryland. I got an unpleasant surprise about a week before the intended transaction date when I found out that my dad couldn’t just buy the truck from Toyota Motor Credit – I had to buy the truck first and then immediately sell it to him, a hassle that I didn’t particularly want to deal with. However, my dad had the cash on hand to buy the truck, so he gave me the funds to buy the truck from Toyota Motor Credit and turn it over to him (we figured that he could drive the truck for a couple of weeks under my insurance and temp tag while we waited for the title). However, Toyota Motor Credit had lost the title to the truck so it took almost 60 days for me to get a title in hand to sign over to him.
The second surprise in this transaction was the lease payment. As with the Tundra, the leasing price structure Toyota was using at the time used high residual percentages on the base price of the car and fixed increments added to the residual for the options. Since the car I was purchasing had a lot of options (high-end stereo, the V-6 powertrain, sunroof, a sunshade for the rear window, and an alarm, but no leather interior), the lease payment ended up being relatively high (over $400 a month, as I recall), and I paid through the nose for that V-6 powertrain in particular. I had already more or less decided on this car by the time I got the actual lease payment. I probably should have shifted at that point to the cheaper 4-cylinder 5-speed car, or at least test-driven it, but I stayed with the V-6 model and accepted the relatively high payment. I wanted one of the new electrochromic auto-dimming inside mirrors but that would have jacked the payment even more, so I paid for that separately after I took delivery of the car (that mirror was about $400 installed, as I recall). As readers of my COAL series might expect, there was a front end mask purchased as well…
My ownership of this Camry began with a hassle in selling my truck and a hassle in getting the new car (surprise high lease payments), so we were not starting off on the right foot. Things got a bit worse during the first month of ownership, where the car demonstrated some uncharacteristic build quality issues. The biggest of these dealt with the ignition switch. At that time, Toyota had an ignition switch with an interlock that prevented the doors from being locked when the key was in the ignition. I believe the interlock was a simple finger that was pushed upward when the key was in the lock and dropped back down when the key was removed. The mechanism made an audible “clunk” when the key was removed, as I recall.
In my car, the interlock finger was sticky so it wouldn’t drop down when the key was removed, which meant that it was impossible to lock the car as the locks would automatically unlock every time you locked it. There were several instances when I had to leave my new car unlocked in a mall parking lot as I couldn’t get the doors locked. Inserting and reinserting the key shook the finger loose sometimes, but that was not a foolproof solution, nor did a squirt of lubricant on the key fix the problem. A new ignition switch was the ultimate solution, but I was quite annoyed with the car by then (I was overly sensitive to problems with brand-new cars at the time, too). There were some squeaks and rattles that were surprising to me given my past experience with Toyotas – perhaps buying the first year of a new design wasn’t the best idea.
On the plus side, the car was very enjoyable to drive. The V-6/4-speed automatic powertrain did a great job of moving the car at extra-legal speeds, and the “sport” suspension, while not Mustang-like, still provided better handling than the softly-sprung base models. I did drive the 4-cylinder automatic car as a rental on several occasions after buying this model, and learned to my chagrin that the 157-hp engine was a much better performer than the 130-hp model in my ’97 Camry, and I suspect with the 5-speed it would have been even better. I probably would have saved $40 a month on the lease payment, too.
So, I was somewhat dissatisfied with the quality of the car and suspected that I’d paid too much for the lease, leading me to start to dislike the car not long after I bought it. My dislike for the car intensified quite a bit when my parents leased a 2003 Acura 3.2 TL Type-S with navigation (which stickered at about $4k to $5k more than my Camry) and were able to lease that car for about $30 less per month than my Camry. The realization that I was paying a lot more per month for quite a bit less car really irritated me, and caused me to be a bit irrational in my actions.
I don’t have a lot more to say about the driving experience of this Camry SE, because it probably holds the record for the shortest ownership period of any daily driver in my fleet. I leased the car in July of 2002 (roughly) and traded it in in February 2003 and was glad to be rid of it eight months into a 36 month lease. As one might expect, I lost a considerable amount of money trading the car in that early – I don’t recall how much the loss was, and it is probably better that way. Its replacement was still sporty, but more practical and much less expensive (even with the money I lost on the Camry rolled into the payment), as I will describe in the coming weeks.
I’ve leased a car only once. In 2011 Toyota had a $199 down/$199 a month lease on their Camry LE for 4 years.
Loved the cheap lease payment, loved the car, bought it after the lease was up. I should had tuned it in and purchased a brand new one; given what all it cost me to buy the car.
I found the 4 cylinder/6 speed automatic more than adequate 99.5% of the time.
Surprised.disappointed to read of your quality control issues! I guess even Toyota can build an occasionally mediocre model.
I was never a Toyota fan growing up and I particularly loathed this generation of Camry. They always looked too tall and narrow to me… I read somewhere recently that Aussie-built models had a narrower track, but I haven’t been able to verify that.
I also loathed the interior. Over time, I’ve come to appreciate the interior design… It’s really very American-looking, when you think about it. And Toyota had figured out exactly what American consumers wanted: plenty of cabin space, soft suspension tuning (but with the option of a firmer tune), reliability, quality, etc.
I can understand why you’d want to ditch it so quickly though, especially considering how the lease was actually more (!!) than an Acura TL. To me, there’s just nothing exceptionally desirable about these, other than Toyota’s key tenets of quality, reliability and general competence. My Toyota hate has cooled over the years and I think when they try and build something interesting, it tends to be pretty compelling. When they don’t, it’s pretty forgettable.
One thing I don’t understand is your insistence on car bras. I know you want to keep the car in good condition for when the lease is up but it just reminds me of people that leave the plastic on their sofas…
Although the Aussie-built Camry of this generation had a substantial local content, I would find it extremely unlikely that the track would be narrower. If anything, the Aussie Camry was specifically enhanced to improve its dynamic qualities.
Yes, this Camry was quite tall, and the cabin was pushed forward over a relatively shorter engine compartment. The result was very impressive on the inside: the Camry had a superbly roomy interior for this class of car. That was obviously Toyota’s prime objective and the succeeded rather brilliantly. These Camrys made “larger” cars irrelevant, in terms of interior space.
And the Camry’s competition never could equal or better it in terms of packaging. Which explains why this platform/basic body stayed in production through 2017. It never became obsolete, in the qualities that were important for its target market.
Admittedly, this first variation was the least attractive; I found subsequent generational variants to get increasingly more attractive while still on the same platform and body, except for the final one with the fake window in the C-pillar. Yuck.
My brother had one of these, and I’ve rented later ones, and I’ve never failed to be impressed at the room in these, front and back. I’m quite tall, so that means a lot to me. Perhaps that’s why I’m fonder of Camrys than others.
And then of course there’s its reliability….which has of course been proven to be best in class,
The NZ delivered Aussie built Camrys dont have narrower track but do come with a stiffer grade shock package and quicker rack than the Australian version to suit our driving conditions, and they were very popular,
That is an interesting point – I hadn’t thought of the analogy of the plastic sofa covers! Luckily for me (as I will note in my COAL for Saturday) the invention of clear plastic paint protection film keeps the car from getting banged up but is nearly invisible. Not sure why, but paint chips always bugged me (somewhat unreasonably, to be sure).
I hope your next car is a nice one, and may you eventually understand the joys of German car ownership. At least when the car is nice, you can forgive quirks.
Forgive quiks, just because the car is nice. That is a horrible way to go about things. “Hey my car is in the shop monthly, but at least the leather feels good. LOL
No wonder why german manufacturers can charge incredible prices for options.
That’s absurd. My car is not in the shop monthly, it’s in the shop about once every six months, as it needs service every 15k miles. At 65k miles everything works just fine, it has never been in for unscheduled repairs, although it has needed a little extra work; covered by warranty.
It is silly to take the (true) statement that German cars are more maintenence intensive and more likely to need repairs than a Toyota under 250k miles or so, and suggest that this is like the vehicle being always in the garage.
I like German cars, but I am neither a fanboy nor an apologist. But I can’t stand that people think that German cars are junk or unreliable. Speaking strictly as an MB owner, they aren’t. They are less reliable at lower mileage’s than a Toyota, a heck of a lot more expensive to maintain in general, and can be safely roaded for a lot more miles than the average Toyota if you are willing to pay the cost of repairs. Tell it like it is.
and can be safely roaded for a lot more miles than the average Toyota if you are willing to pay the cost of repairs. Tell it like it is.
I generally agree with the first part of your comment, and obviously there’s a lot of stereotypes thrown around about German cars. But I don’t agree with this part of your comment. I’ve seen and heard about way too many Toyotas with 300k, 400k, 500k or more miles on them that are still perfectly safe.They don’t fall just fall apart after a certain number of miles. I’m telling that like it is.
NZ taxi operators here were offered 400,000km warranties on the hybrid Camrys to counteract the price offered on factory built Falcon taxi packs, Ford simply gave up on that market here, those Camrys will out live most things it seems.
In this area, they tend to rust to powder.
I agree with Paul on this one, as I have seen numerous Toyota’s with a ton of mileage. And as a person who lives in an area that probably has more rust problems than the majority here, I can say that Toyota’s are generally more rust resistant than average. Sure 35, 40 years ago they were terrible, but now they hold up very well, better than most “domestic” vehicles.
Interesting story on an age old question; lease or buy?
Despite my tendency to use Excel spread sheets to define the pros and cons of just about every financial decision, I have never been able to wrap my mind around the arcane details, rules, and subjective complexities of leasing a vehicle.
Years ago, leasing was supposed to be a way to drive a nicer car than one could afford to buy, and leasing may have offered benefits for companies depreciating assets (not sure – we had an accountant for that stuff and besides, we bought our company cars anyway).
In retrospect, I probably should have leased the 1990 Sable, 1995 Eagle Vision TSi, and the [shudder…] 2001 VW Passat simply because of what these owned cars cost me in post warranty repairs.
On the other hand, I am glad I bought my long term 1999 Miata, 2002 PT Cruiser, and 2013 Tacoma.
So, it appears that after all these years, I still don’t see a clear answer to the lease or buy question – except of course with 20/20 hindsight.
Unless I’m missing something.
Speaking from personal (and current) experience, you have to fit a pretty narrow demographic for leasing to work out well. You have to drive relatively few miles, and not make any meaningful modifications to the car (window tint is a noteable exception). There are very reasonable allowances for scratches and dings as well.
The beauty of it is you’re never totally “married” to the car, and there’s always a guaranteed way out of it. If you decide to buy the car at the end of the lease it generally costs a bit more that financing it would have. Otherwise, just turn it in or use it as you would any other trade-in.
Sometimes you love the car (my 2011 BMW 328i coupe) and hate to see it go. Others (my wife’s 2015 Acura TLX), you cant wait to give back. One suggestion: don’t lease it longer than the warranty period or, if the company provides it, the free scheduled maintenance. Otherwise, it’s just plug-and-play if you like new cars every few years. Just beware mileage overages!
Agreed – I am probably one of the better leasing customers as I don’t drive all that much (my current car is 7 months old and has 3500 miles on it) and I take pretty good care of cars. I also avoid putting any extra money down up front unless it’s a manufacturer cash incentive – keeps my initial outlays down.
Unfortunately, I live in one of the six states (last time I checked, it was Arkansas, Illinois, Maryland, Oklahoma, Texas and Virginia) that charge sales tax on the full price of the vehicle, and that cost is rolled into the lease payments (or due at signing).
In my opinion, it seems to work better in states that only charge sales tax on the lease payments (the “capitalized cost”).
I agree – it was a bit of a shock to me to move from Ohio to Maryland and have to add 6% sales tax on the full vehicle to the capitalized cost instead of just 6% tax to each monthly payment. One dealer brightly told me “but you don’t have to pay tax if you buy the car out at the end of the lease!” If I wanted to keep the car for longer than 3 years, I’d just buy it outright, dude.
It’s really about depreciation. With a lease, they try to predict how much the vehicle will be worth at the end of the lease, and you pay the difference between that and the new price (plus fees, etc.) Which is why you can get into a nice car sometimes if they predict it will have low depreciation. Of course, their prediction is really just a guess, so if you think they’ll overvalue the car (lower depreciation) it can be a good deal, but if they undervalue the car (higher depreciation) that means higher payments, though in theory if it’s bad enough you could buy out the lease at the lower price and try to resell the car.
If you can nail down a pretty good expected value at the end of the lease, you should be able to crunch the numbers pretty easily in Excel: For the lease, it’s the cost of the down payment and lease payments. For buying, it’s the cost of the down payment, the loan payments, and the residual value when you plan on selling it.
Of course, this all assumes you plan on having the car for 2-4 years, and use it in a way that’s consistent with the leasing terms like the number of miles, no modifications, no excessive wear and tear, etc. If not, or you’re not sure, it’s probably best to just buy the car.
Lease European, buy Japanese. At least that’s been my armchair takeaway.
“decided to go with the V-6 to get more power (192 hp versus 157 for the 4-cylinder)”
Just dropped in to say those numbers are now 301 hp vs 175 hp. Having been born in 1977 and having my first car be from 1982 – I’m just smiling at the ability of us plebes to purchase hp that once was the domain of sports cars and muscle cars.
Paul wrote an article about a contemporary Camry vs. an early Lamborghini Countach:
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/blog/comment-classic-which-is-faster-a-lamborghini-countach-lp400s-or-a-toyota-camry-se-v6/
It IS nice to find recent V-6 Mustangs and Camaros with a horsepower rating of over 300 (which is small block musclecar territory to me) and mileage that equals or beats 70s Beetles and Rabbits at the same time. If only they didn’t weigh as much as a 79 Crown Vic or Caprice 🙁
This goes for most aspects of a car. Compared to the old days there’s little to complain about these days. Virtually all cars are luxuriously equipped, excellent handling and pretty speedy compared to the average car from many years ago.
The exception is today’s greater complexity and cost of repairs. Older cars have a significant advantage, being relatively simple to repair, restore and maintain. Valued older cars will still be around when today’s latest tech wonder has been used-up and recycled.
Actually, the new generation Camry’s four is quite a bit higher than that; 203 HP (or 206 HP in the dual exhaust XSE model).
Yeah – it’s amazing to see that the “base” engine is almost as powerful as the 2002 optional engine, and the 300 hp V-6 option would have been Corvette territory.
My Mom had a 2004 4 cylinder Camry and it out dragged my 1991 305 V8 LO3 Caprice.
I remember following my Dad on the highway. He was in the Camry and I was in the Caprice. The big Chevy was able to keep up well but once we hit 80 or so, it ran out of breath and the Camry pulled ahead easily.
Yeah…the 305 B-bodies were kind of dogs above 70. I think the CAFE-friendly gearing did them no favors, either. (Though a TBI 350 would get up and move pretty well.)
My Caprices were much better…95 wagons, powered by the potent LT1. 80MPH? Not even breathing hard, even at 4000′.
You are correct there. I had a 95 9C1 LT1 Caprice as well. That car was scary fast! It pulled so hard, that I would be the one to lose my nerve and back off!
Mine wasn’t a 9C1…I think it topped out at 105. (governed)
The reason the Camry pulled away so easily at higher speeds has more to do with aerodynamics than horsepower. This generation Camry had a superb (for the times) drag coefficient (CD) of 0.28. The Chevy brick? Probably well into the 0.40s. That makes a huge difference as speed increases.
In terms of acceleration from rest, the Camry was of course also much lighter, and its 157hp were as much or more than the Chevy 305. There’s no question of it walking away from the Chevy, and then utterly spanking it at higher speeds.
Paul, the 91 Caprice was not a brick but a bubble or whale body. Also, the stock LO3 305 V8 was good for 170 HP. Drag coefficient was around 0.32.
My 88 Caprice wagon had a brick or boxy body and the Olds 307 V8 with 140 HP. That car was kinda slow.
Ah yes…but the same factors still apply, just not as much so, as the example you gave confirms. Or do you attribute it to something else, other than weight and aerodynamics?
I agree, the same factors still apply. Weight, aerodynamics, and horsepower (engine tuning etc.) As a previous poster mentioned, an LT1 car may have yielded a different story. Although a V6 Camry or Accord may have given even an LT1 car a challenge. As the data in your previous article confirms, a 2015 V6 Camry could out accelerate an early Lamborghini Countach.
Maybe; maybe not. A bit of Googling indicates that the LT-1 Caprice did 0-60 in 7.1, and the 1/4 mile in between 15.0 and 15.9 seconds.
A ’97 Camry V6 did the 0-60 in 6.9, and the 1/4 mile in 15.3.
The Caprice would most likely pull away from the Camry at the very higher speeds due to its 260hp, but The Camry would apparently beat it to 60, and beat or keep up to the 1/4 mile.
YMMV…
I’m thinking not…my actual 1/4 mile time (Heartland Park, Topeka, Kansas) was 14.9 seconds (uncorrected, on an 85-degree day). 1995 Caprice station wagon, all stock except for AR wheels, 235/70R15 tires, and a transmission cooler, and no spare tire. The car DID have a limited-slip axle.
Congratulations, John! You would have (just barely) beat a Camry with your Corvette-powered Caprice. But it better be an early Camry, because they soon got a lot quicker.
Motortrend claims the 97 Camry V-6 did 0-60 in 7.9 seconds and 1/4 mile in 16.0 seconds @ 86.8 miles. This quite a bit slower than the stats you found, but still respectable for a 90’s family sedan.
http://www.motortrend.com/cars/toyota/camry/1997/1997-toyota-camry-2-2/
The 91-96 Caprice’s were actually pretty slippery for their time. This alone accounted for a significant increase in top speed when you compare a 1990 Caprice 9C1 to a 1991 Caprice 9C1 (they essentially had the same engines). One of the biggest factors here is the L03 Caprice simply doesn’t have the power to weight ratio to keep up with the Camry. Car and Driver had a 0-60 time of 8.3 seconds for a 2003 Camry 4 cylinder. While a 1991 L03 Caprice would be in the 10 second range. These 1991 Caprices were heavy cars, well over 4000 lbs real world.
The other factor with the L03 engine is like all GM TBI small blocks they were tuned for very low RPM horsepower. The strong low end torque was great at moving these heavy but relatively low powered cars around effortlessly, but they ran out of breath at even moderate RPM. The LT1 and L99 fixed this since they actually could breathe at high RPM.
Having driven both LT1 Caprices and V6 Camrys, the LT1 was noticeably faster until the 2007 Camrys with the 2GR-FE V6. With 3.08 gears, C/D got 0-60 in 6.5 seconds and 1/4 mile in 15.0 seconds flat on a LT1 Impala SS. Based on how many LT1 B-bodies have run down the 1/4 mile since then, these times are not hard to obtain. In the mid 1990’s, the LT1 B-bodies Caprice/Impala SS had very good performance for that time regardless of vehicle class.
FWIW, there are some Camry V6 times:
MT test 1997 Camry V6:
0-60 MPH 7.9 secs
1/4 mile 16.0 seconds
2002 Camry V6 – C/D
0-60 8.2 seconds
1/4 mile 16.4 seconds aT 86 MPH
2007 Camry V6 – C/D
0-60 5.8 seconds
1/4 mile 14.3 seconds at 99 MPH
2012 Camry V6
0-60 5.8 seconds
1/4 mile 14.1 seconds
The TBI Caprice engines were, for all practical purposes, truck engines…and mostly done by 4000rpm.
The 7.9 0-60 is the automatic equipped Camry. The manual could do 7.0 seconds. However, the vast majority of cars sold were most likely automatic.
I have never leased a car but some of those advertised lease payments look tempting. We have tended to a system of one good car and one older but fully usable second car. For a long time we put too many miles on the good car to lease, but we may be to a place where that would work now.
All of my Camry miles have come from driving those of my step mom. They remind me of the GM cars of the 70s in that they are unremarkable for both enjoyment and for problems. Which is what most people seem to want.
PrincipalDan,
You need to realize that horsepower was somewhat abundant until…ironically, about the time you were born, or so those of us a bit older than you felt.
As far as the lease of this car being more expensive per month than an Acura TL, what isn’t mentioned is how much cash was required “up front” in each case. I’ve seen ads that tell you you can lease car X for $99 a month, but you need to put several thousand dollars down and/or can’t drive more that 750 miles a month on average.
While this car was probably a little more trouble prone because it was a 1st year of a new design, it is my opinion that Toyota reliability started to slip noticeably in 2000.
If I had to buy this car back in 2001 or so, I would have stretched to the V6 and manual transmission SE.
I leased a 2003 frontier crew cab because I really needed a pickup at the time and also needed to haul wife and 3 kids a lot as well. Great. Till the end. I ended up getting soaked pretty good on trade. Oh well…
We just leased a 2017 Tucson for my wife though. She gets the urge for a new car about every 3 years, we don’t drive all that much, and she is gentle with her cars. So we’ll see. I have a 2007 edge and the thought is, we may keep the Tucson for me at the end. And sell off the edge. Maybe. If I like the Tucson, which at this point is not likely. Only things I don’t like are the seats and the lag between mashing the gas and it actually going at full throttle. Pretty important. I’d just as soon have a 10-15 y/o American sedan myself.
So we’ll see how leasing round 2 works for me.
i live in Southwest Florida. In most of the SE United States, all Toyotas come through a distibutor. Thus all Toyotas have mandatory “Toyo Guard”.
AFAIK Toyota still does not include certain options in the capitalized cost. You pay up front. Not only is Toyo Guard etc mandatory, the local dealer makes nothing on it and looks for other profit builders such as mop and glow and VIN etching.
This makes Toyota leases uncompetitive which is too bad. The 2018’s have red leather as an option. I like red leather but most don’t. if I leased. I would have a guaranteed cost; no worry about trade in.
The one Toyota I leased here in CO was part of an advertised regional special deal (i.e. $199/month for base model yada yada yada.). The one i wanted had a couple of options on it. The dealer formula in that case was to adjust the lease cost proportionally which seemed more than fair enough to me (i.e. if the factory sticker due to the options was 10% more than the base price, then the lease payment increased by the same percentage). Tax was added per payment (based on payment), not on the whole car.
This generation Camry was/is probably my least favorite of all of them, I just found it fairly drab and unattractive, especially inside. However, the interior was very roomy, and they did seem to sell in huge numbers so my opinion clearly didn’t matter too much. And nobody asked me anyway…
We had a 2009 Highlander with the 2.7 liter four/6 speed auto combination and it was fine. Unless you consistently carried 4-5 people in the car or wanted to pull a trailer I can’t imagine opting for the V6. Toyota did an excellent job of matching the shift points of the transmission to the torque curve of the engine. Our first Camry (1993) was the V6 and it, at times, seemed to overpower the front end; since then we have had three other Camrys, counting the Highlander, and all with the perfectly adequate four.
We did lease some vehicles in the past, and if you want to always drive a newish car it might be the way to go. We finally reached the point where we didn’t want to have car payments and decided to keep our vehicles for a longer period of time. Now that we are retired we probably don’t put 1000 miles per month on the two cars combined, unless we take a long vacation trip. I doubt that I would lease another vehicle but always is a long time.
I loved my wife’s 2003 Highlander 4 cylinder – fine with power, perfectly sized package. If it had a power driver seat I would have jumped all over it when she upgraded after 6 years.
There still is a 4 cyl Highlander option, although it actually gets worse mpgs than the V-6 nowadays.
We just replaced the Highlander with a new RAV4. One of the deciding factors was that it is almost impossible to find a Highlander now that isn’t the V6. The RAV4 is AWD, which the Highlander was not, it was a pretty basic unit with the four cylinder/FWD combo, although it did have the power driver’s seat. There wasn’t anything wrong the Highlander, it only had 73K miles since we purchased it new in the spring of ’09. My wife just decided that she wanted a new car. We are in the midst of a 2500 mile driving vacation and I have to say that the RAV4 is quieter and more comfortable than was the Highlander; likely a function of being newer and nine more years of progress.
A family friend had the LE version of these that I would repair for them. It was mostly a trouble free car, but it did occasionally nickel and dime the owner towards the end.
When it was new the seat would slide forward under heavy braking. The dealer initially did not fix it, but there was a TSB out for it and it was eventually repaired under warranty.
As it got older, the steering rack bellows rotted away, the starter went out, it leaked oil from the VC and oil pan gaskets, needed a timing belt replacement, needed new shocks, brakes, etc. some plastic underbody parts fell off. The main bad thing about it was the way it drove. It felt like everything in the car was connected to marshmallows. The steering, brakes, suspension was very mushy even when new. It made old FWD Cadillacs and Buicks feel sporty.
On the plus side, the seat fabric was extremely durable and the only non maintenance thing that went out that would stop the car from running was the starter.
Lots of good info in the comments here .
-Nate
I’ve not owned one of these Camrys but have rented a few. They were unremarkably average cars for the most part but an alarming number of them had problems. One had an annoying habit of upshifting too soon and remaining in high gear too long when a downshift was needed. On another, equipped with a manual/automatic transaxle, the manual shifter would downshift but not upshift. On yet another, the dash lights would not dim, and remained full bright, too much so…distractingly when driving at night.
I had and drove a ’02 SE 4 banger 5 speed for 260k. Interesting thing about this car was it was a J vin car. (made in Japan) Most were Alabama? assembled cars. It was enjoyable enough to keep me interested during my ownership. Like they say, it’s more fun to drive a slow car fast than a fast car slow!