4 Cyl Camry vs. V6 Taurus

Can anyone give me some advice? I will soon buy a car and it's down to the 2003 4 cyl Camry and the 2003 V6 Taurus, and many friends recommend the
Camry but I'm worried about it's power going up hills.
Can you tell me how the 2003 Camry responds to steep inclines, hills and mountains? Memories of another, lesser, four-cylinder twenty years ago have me gunshy about the less than a V6.
Thanks for your advice to anyone who responds. Sorry if this is too stupid a question for this group.
Michael
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I think the question you need to ask is, why on earth would you EVER buy a Taurus over a Camry?
Either save up for the V6 Camry or just get the 4. You'll be glad later.
The 2002-2003 Camry has an improved 4-cyl engine with 150 or so horsepower and should be fast enough.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Last summer I took a business trip here in Colorado through the Rocky Mountains. Obviously there are several passes to go over. At the time, I was driving a 2000 Honda Accord EX-V6, with 200 hp. The rental car for my trip was a 2002 Toyota Camry LE 4-cyl. I was a little apprehensive at the thought of not having my V6 for the passes, but the Camry did great! I was rather impressed with the available power for such steep passes. Don't even consider the Taurus....it'll be in the shop all the time anyway. ;-) You could always save up for the 2003 Honda Accord V6...with an awesome 240 hp.
Jase 2003 Honda Accord EX-V6 2000 Honda Accord EX-V6 1994 Honda Accord EX 1991 Honda Accord EX
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Bought the wife a new V6 Camry wagon in 1993. Total repairs to date except for maintenance and wear out items is less than $5 for two radio knobs. Granted, it is low mileage, but we're still pleased. We debated getting a Taurus but believe we made the right choice. I know a lot of my neighbors have Camrys and not one has said they made a mistake. BTW, I've driven 4 cylinder Camrys and they really din't feel much less powerful than the V6.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

159 hp for the 4cyl Camry vs. 157 hp for the "standard" Taurus V6.
--
Philip

"If a long train of abuses, prevarications, and artifices, all tending
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Wouldn't torque be of more inportance in 'hill climbing' ??
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yes and No. It depends on where the torque comes from. When you have an engine capable of producing "work" (horsepower) at RPM higher than its maximum torque point, you get torque by working the gearbox aggressively to muliply modest crankshaft torque. Torque (twisting effort) at the crankshaft is touted when a minimum number of gearbox selections (our American 3 speed automatic tradition) are available to multiply crankshaft torque so.... the engine must be the torque producer.
In other words, use the tachometer. Find out were maximum torque output RPM is and don't be the least bit afraid of running the engine in that range (between max torque and a wee bit below max horsepower) whenever the most pulling power is needed for an indefinite period of time. SHIFT!
If a diesel engine is in question, limit your maximum continuous RPM to the maximum torque RPM as diesels amost never produce more horsepower beyond the maximum torque RPM.
(retired trucker)
--

Philip

"If a long train of abuses, prevarications, and artifices, all tending
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

What?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
When you have an engine capable of producing "work" (horsepower) at RPM higher than its maximum torque point, you get torque by working the gearbox aggressively to muliply modest crankshaft torque.

output RPM is and don't be the least bit afraid of running the engine in that range (between max torque and a wee bit below max horsepower) whenever the most pulling power is needed for an indefinite period of time.
Any concerns doing this when the prior owner (an older lady) probably never ran the engine over 3,000 RPM for the first 85,000 miles? You recently mentioned checking valve clearances with the bearing / journal under pressure to get a more accurate setting. Is there any legitimate concern that the top compression ring could be touching the wear ridge at the top of the cylinder at higher RPMs? On my tach, 4,000 is right at the 12:00 o'clock position, so it makes it easy to run the engine up to 4,000 or a bit more, and "using the gearbox" (automatic) by pressing the gas pedal further, definitely yields better acceleration on my 1994 4 cylinder. Just wondering if there could be anything harmful in the vibration that seems to increase approaching 5,000 RPM. I realize this is prbably an ignorant question, but hoping for an intelligent repsonse.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote in message news:

None that I can think of. Why? Are you expecting the engine to pop up an Evil Eye out of the ash tray and blink at you in astonishment?

And?
What ring ridge? You just got thru telling me the car was "granny'd" for 85k miles (hopefully with clean oil).

As a general, broad brush reply, once you pass 1600cc's in a four cylinder engine, vibrations at the higher RPM's increase to the levels of needing external spinning counter balancers. Even a V6 or two has resorted to this kind of "patch" for rocking vibration. It is also common practice to choose where the vibration point (found in all engines) will be by balancing the reciprocating parts to create vibration at a certain RPM. I suspect you'll find your maximum horsepower is about the same point you start cringing about the vibration. Old fashioned rev limiter.
--

Philip

"If a long train of abuses, prevarications, and artifices, all tending
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
But the Taurus was probably discounted thousands more than the Camry. Not recommending the Taurus but I think the depreciation difference is overstated on imports versus domestic when you consider the initial rebates and discounts.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Just got a 2003 Camry LE with a 4 cylinder to replace a '94 Taurus wagon with 157,000 miles. The Taurus wasn't too bad in terms of reliability (water pump problems mainly) but I think I was pretty lucky (and fortunate to have the "smaller" V6 offered that year; the "larger" V6 had major problems, especially with the head gasket).
What really swayed my decision was the '98 Sienna that my family owns. It's basically a Camry engine with a "big" body hooked on. So far the most prevalent problem has been squeaky doors when opening and closing. It has over 105,000 miles. It still drives like new.
The 4 cylinder in my LE seems to have roughly the same response characteristics as the V6 Taurus; but I haven't had the car very long and it really isn't fair to compare a 2003 to a 1994.
One item of note (and I'm not sure about this) is that the 4 cylinder Camry engine is considerred a Ultra Low Emissions engine..

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Having owning a 1999 V6 Taurus which was pretty useless on hills, I opted for a V6 Camry. I have gone on various inclines thru mountains and it works just fine. The 2003 Camry is a 210 hp and 5 speed auto but recommends premium fuel. The mpg that I get on my camry more then makes up for premium fuel.
Save your $$ and get the Camry V6

the
have
stupid
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
When we bought our 91 Taurus's, we were moving from 1983 4WD Tercel wagons. The Taurus's felt like race cars (when they weren't in the shop).

down
hills.
hills
too
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I was referring to the 2003 Camry Philip. My 2002 Camry V6 is a 4 speed auto. You are correct that the 2 valve V6 on the Taurus is better compared to the 4 cyl Camry. But in terms of engine reliability, the Camry is more reliable.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
2003 Camry is a four speed auto with t/q lockup. There is supposedly a genuine 5 ratio automatic plus t/q lockup for 2004 models.
--
Philip

"If a long train of abuses, prevarications, and artifices, all tending
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
writes:

Sorry... I HAVE a new 2003 in my driveway right now this evening with the V6. Drove it. It's a four speed with lockup. What you read on Toyota's website is not correct and... they know it. The wording is deceiving. The wording is for a 5 speed manual.
--
Philip

"If a long train of abuses, prevarications, and artifices, all tending
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Well then.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I had 2 91 Taurus's... a wagon and a sedan. Something broke on them every 3 months. The 6 back then was not very strong but that was a long time ago. I currently have a 2001 Avalon and I am not at all impressed with it compared to my Chysler 300M but I would still thing your obvious choice is the Camry.

to the

the
and
ago have

stupid
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.