Best year for a used Camry?

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12 Jan 2009, 08:02 am   #1 (permalink)
Bob
Guest
  • Posts: n/a
  • User Status:


Default Best year for a used Camry?

I'm in the market to replace my 1998 Camry (bought new in '97) with
190K miles. According to my research, it seems the later models
starting with 2007 have some transmission problems, yes? So would
that make the 2005-2006 a good year to buy?
  Reply With Quote
Old 12 Jan 2009, 01:25 pm   #2 (permalink)
SMS
Guest
  • Posts: n/a
  • User Status:


Default Re: Best year for a used Camry?

Bob wrote:
> I'm in the market to replace my 1998 Camry (bought new in '97) with
> 190K miles. According to my research, it seems the later models
> starting with 2007 have some transmission problems, yes? So would
> that make the 2005-2006 a good year to buy?


Avoid the current U.S. generation Camry (2007-2011)). I'm not sure when
in that generation they switched to the problem transmission, but as you
stated it appears to be 2007 when the problems started.

Any word as to whether the 2009 fixed the problem. I can't believe how
cheap the Camry LE (2532) w/automatic is right now. Around $17K in L.A.,
around $18.5K up in northern California.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12 Jan 2009, 05:11 pm   #3 (permalink)
M.Balarama
Guest
  • Posts: n/a
  • User Status:


Default Re: Best year for a used Camry?


"Bob" <xxx@xxx.com> wrote in message
news:l6jmm45hopoto3aldkjfgejkt3c3375q4j@4ax.com...
> I'm in the market to replace my 1998 Camry (bought new in '97) with
> 190K miles. According to my research, it seems the later models
> starting with 2007 have some transmission problems, yes? So would
> that make the 2005-2006 a good year to buy?


on the vehicle indenifation number-buy amy year that starts with a J-means
made in Japan


  Reply With Quote
Old 13 Jan 2009, 03:42 am   #4 (permalink)
ransley
Guest
  • Posts: n/a
  • User Status:


Default Re: Best year for a used Camry?

On Jan 12, 8:02*am, Bob <x...@xxx.com> wrote:
> I'm in the market to replace my 1998 Camry (bought new in '97) with
> 190K miles. *According to my research, it seems the later models
> starting with 2007 have some transmission problems, yes? *So would
> that make the 2005-2006 a good year to buy?


90 might be best
  Reply With Quote
Old 13 Jan 2009, 08:12 am   #5 (permalink)
RD
Guest
  • Posts: n/a
  • User Status:


Default Re: Best year for a used Camry?

This ones easy for me. I had a choice to sell either my 95 (290K) or 98
(220K). I chose to keep my 95. We have 2 1992's and 1 94 and my 95 all over
250K. Just picked up an 04 and as it is said - time will tell. For me 1992 -
1996 have out shone all the rest.

RD

"Bob" <xxx@xxx.com> wrote in message
news:l6jmm45hopoto3aldkjfgejkt3c3375q4j@4ax.com...
> I'm in the market to replace my 1998 Camry (bought new in '97) with
> 190K miles. According to my research, it seems the later models
> starting with 2007 have some transmission problems, yes? So would
> that make the 2005-2006 a good year to buy?



  Reply With Quote
Old 13 Jan 2009, 09:56 am   #6 (permalink)
SMS
Guest
  • Posts: n/a
  • User Status:


Default Re: Best year for a used Camry?

RD wrote:
> This ones easy for me. I had a choice to sell either my 95 (290K) or 98
> (220K). I chose to keep my 95. We have 2 1992's and 1 94 and my 95 all over
> 250K. Just picked up an 04 and as it is said - time will tell. For me 1992 -
> 1996 have out shone all the rest.


1992-96 was the peak for the Camry. In 1997 they started decontenting. I
read that they got $2000 of cost out from the 1992-1996 generation to
the 1997-2001 generation. They worsened the engine, the
weather-stripping, and removed the hood springs in favor of a prop
stick, among less visible changes.
  Reply With Quote
Old 13 Jan 2009, 11:51 am   #7 (permalink)
Daniel
Guest
  • Posts: n/a
  • User Status:


Default Re: Best year for a used Camry?

Bob wrote:
2007 have some transmission problems, yes? So would
> that make the 2005-2006 a good year to buy?

=========
I've always had good results striking up a converstaion with the lead
mechanic - preferably at the Toyota dealer, or an independent shop.
They work with them on a daily basis and know the most current
information.
---
My '94 with 187K is just now the way I like it, but then I've replaced
the leather interior, control arms, ball joints, axles, springs,
struts, and keep the fluids and maintenance all like new.
BTW the exterior gets Zaino, many people have remarked on the high
gloss, one suspecting repainted.
  Reply With Quote
Old 13 Jan 2009, 12:52 pm   #8 (permalink)
Mark A
Guest
  • Posts: n/a
  • User Status:


Default Re: Best year for a used Camry?

"SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
news:SP2bl.17598$Ws1.7286@nlpi064.nbdc.sbc.com...
> 1992-96 was the peak for the Camry. In 1997 they started decontenting. I
> read that they got $2000 of cost out from the 1992-1996 generation to the
> 1997-2001 generation. They worsened the engine, the weather-stripping, and
> removed the hood springs in favor of a prop stick, among less visible
> changes.


Having owned both a 92 and 98 (both V6) I would not complain about the
1997-2001 generation. It is larger and quieter, and very reliable (assuming
you use Synthetic Oil to avoid any possibility of sludge). The stereo
speakers were crap, but I replaced them when I bought the car.

The "hood springs" (actually called Hood Support Prop Struts) went bad after
a few years on my 1992 Camry and I had to carry around a wooden stick to
prop up the hood (the struts cost a lot to replace). The "stick" on the
1997-2001 is much preferable.


  Reply With Quote
Old 13 Jan 2009, 01:58 pm   #9 (permalink)
Winston
Guest
  • Posts: n/a
  • User Status:


Default Re: Best year for a used Camry?

ransley wrote:
> On Jan 12, 8:02 am, Bob <x...@xxx.com> wrote:
>> I'm in the market to replace my 1998 Camry (bought new in '97) with
>> 190K miles. According to my research, it seems the later models
>> starting with 2007 have some transmission problems, yes? So would
>> that make the 2005-2006 a good year to buy?

>
> 90 might be best


I really like my 2000.
Don't tow utility trailers with it, though! AMHIKT.

I love and hate my 2007. It gets good gas mileage because it is a total
slug.

* Acceleration isn't just boring, it's unresponsive to the point of
being unsafe. The 2000 is a dragster by comparison.

* Even at it's lowest setting, the drivers seat is *way* off the ground.
This makes it easier to climb out of the car than with the 2000. The
relatively low door jambs mean that you will bash your head on them
a few times while learning the difference between the two cars, however.

* The suspension is so tight, speed bumps at 2 MPH cause your next door
neighbor to hit his head on *his* moonroof.
The 2000 is relatively cushy and shields you from such unpleasantness.

* The mandated TPMS (Tire Pressure Monitoring System) sucks bigtime
because it forces you to pay the dealer to "register" each new valve
stem when you swap summer / winter tires. If this is 'small government',
don't show me 'big government', OK?

* Don't be over 5' tall. With the seat adjusted to it's lowest, furthest
back setting, the top of your head will have marginal clearance to the
ceiling.
With the mirrors adjusted optimally for driving, the "high waist"
design of the car will prevent you from seeing parking lot stripes
when backing into a slot, over the side or via the mirrors.
With the 2000, everything is easily visible.

* The intermittent squeaks and groans from the right half of the dashboard
tend to disappear as the interior of the car warms up.

* The RF ignition key sometimes opens the trunk and sometimes sets off the
car horn when you squat down to check tire pressure, etc.

* The various plastic 'racer boi' 'ground effects' panels stuck to the car
sometimes come loose and have to be pushed back into place.

* The "maze" shifter is a nightmare. After a year, I still find that I've
been driving in 3rd instead of overdrive because I shifted without looking.
By comparison, the straight path of the shifter on the '00 (or practically
any other vehicle) is intuitive and trivial to use properly.

Hmm. Anybody want to buy a gently used '07?

--Winston
  Reply With Quote
Old 13 Jan 2009, 02:14 pm   #10 (permalink)
Bob
Guest
  • Posts: n/a
  • User Status:


Default Re: Best year for a used Camry?

I tried to sit in a new Camry and noticed the ceiling was lower too.
I'm 6' 4"



On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 11:58:23 -0800, Winston <Winston@bigbrother.net>
wrote:

>ransley wrote:
>> On Jan 12, 8:02 am, Bob <x...@xxx.com> wrote:
>>> I'm in the market to replace my 1998 Camry (bought new in '97) with
>>> 190K miles. According to my research, it seems the later models
>>> starting with 2007 have some transmission problems, yes? So would
>>> that make the 2005-2006 a good year to buy?

>>
>> 90 might be best

>
>I really like my 2000.
>Don't tow utility trailers with it, though! AMHIKT.
>
>I love and hate my 2007. It gets good gas mileage because it is a total
>slug.
>
> * Acceleration isn't just boring, it's unresponsive to the point of
> being unsafe. The 2000 is a dragster by comparison.
>
> * Even at it's lowest setting, the drivers seat is *way* off the ground.
> This makes it easier to climb out of the car than with the 2000. The
> relatively low door jambs mean that you will bash your head on them
> a few times while learning the difference between the two cars, however.
>
> * The suspension is so tight, speed bumps at 2 MPH cause your next door
> neighbor to hit his head on *his* moonroof.
> The 2000 is relatively cushy and shields you from such unpleasantness.
>
> * The mandated TPMS (Tire Pressure Monitoring System) sucks bigtime
> because it forces you to pay the dealer to "register" each new valve
> stem when you swap summer / winter tires. If this is 'small government',
> don't show me 'big government', OK?
>
> * Don't be over 5' tall. With the seat adjusted to it's lowest, furthest
> back setting, the top of your head will have marginal clearance to the
> ceiling.
> With the mirrors adjusted optimally for driving, the "high waist"
> design of the car will prevent you from seeing parking lot stripes
> when backing into a slot, over the side or via the mirrors.
> With the 2000, everything is easily visible.
>
> * The intermittent squeaks and groans from the right half of the dashboard
> tend to disappear as the interior of the car warms up.
>
> * The RF ignition key sometimes opens the trunk and sometimes sets off the
> car horn when you squat down to check tire pressure, etc.
>
> * The various plastic 'racer boi' 'ground effects' panels stuck to the car
> sometimes come loose and have to be pushed back into place.
>
> * The "maze" shifter is a nightmare. After a year, I still find that I've
> been driving in 3rd instead of overdrive because I shifted without looking.
> By comparison, the straight path of the shifter on the '00 (or practically
> any other vehicle) is intuitive and trivial to use properly.
>
>Hmm. Anybody want to buy a gently used '07?
>
>--Winston

  Reply With Quote

Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:41 am.

Attribution:
Autoblog
Powered by Yahoo Answers



ToyotaLexusForum.com is an unofficial community for car enthusiasts. ToyotaLexusForum.com is not affiliated with Toyota Motor Corporation in any way.
Toyota Motor Corporation does not sponsor, support, or endorse ToyotaLexusForum.com in any way.
Copyright/trademark/sales mark infringements are not intended or implied.