NEW TOYOTA CAMRY 2005 has bad fuel economy

Do you have the sticker for the old car? I was wondering how EPA figures compared. That would be the first question.

----- Original Message ----- From: Newsgroups: alt.autos.toyota.camry Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 11:14 AM Subject: NEW TOYOTA CAMRY 2005 has bad fuel economy

Consumer Reports tested a 2005 4 cylinder and got the following fuel mileage:

CU's overall mileage, mpg - 24 CU's city/highway, mpg - 16/34 CU's 150-mile trip, mpg - 28

The EPA Estimates for the 2005 are 24 City / 34 Highway. For a 1999 the EPA Estimates were 23 City / 32 Highway (with the manual transmission)

It seems to me that your mileage for your 1999 was unrealistically high and that the mileage for your 2005 is about what it should be. How careful are you when you check your mileage? If you are basing this on single tankful calculation there is a very good chance your calculations are off my several miles per gallon. Single tankful calculations are notoriously inaccurate.

I would not panic about the 2005 until you have 5000 miles on the engine. You should also verify that your tires are properly inflated. If might be worth checking the accuracy of the odometer as well. Have you made any changes in where you buy your fuel? At least for the vehicles I have owned, the CR fuel economy is generally lower than what I achieve. CR said their city mileage for a 2005 4 cylinder Camry was 16 mpg, so 20 mpg is not unreasonable. I am guessing that you did not record your 1999 mileage religiously and that you are comparing a normal single tankful number for the 2005 with a best you can remember single tankful number for the 1999.

Ed

I do not understand what you mean by sticker. I no records of old car.

Ed,

I based my calculations on Imperial gallons for the 1999 camry and trip Odometer.

The fuel consumption on the 2005 Camry Pamphlet shows 28/44

I have no records of old car and do not understand what you mean by sticker.

Thanks for your interest.

I have a 2005 Camry 4 cylinder and the EPA mileage shown is 26/34. I have

Don in Tracy, Calif.

I did not realize you were using Imperial Gallons. My numbers were all in US gallons, so you have to up them by around 20% to match Imperial numbers. Which market are you in?

Ed

THe original price sticker that was on the old car when it was purchased new would have had the EPA mileage figures for the old car.

I am in Montreal, QC, the former home of the former under financed and supported Montreal Expos.

Roger

On a Canadian car?

Merritt

If you want better mileage, drive it on the highway.

"" wrote: > I have no records of old car and do not understand what you > mean by > sticker. > > Thanks for your interest.

I just bought a 2005 Camry 4 cyl with a 5 speed standard. I went 550 km and took 50 liters of gas. That was about a 50/50 split highway and city driving. Don?t know what that works out to though.

"Fourmiler" wrote: > I just bought a 2005 Camry 4 cyl with a 5 speed standard. I > went 550 km and took 50 liters of gas. That was about a 50/50 > split highway and city driving. Don't know what that works out > to though.

Ok I am got 32 mpg on the first tank, but I am going to give it a little while then try again.

Heard the same poor mileage problem from others. The new 2.4L 4 cyl with variable valve timing and five speed should have yielded better mileage.

I guess when the time comes to replacement I have to think twice about the new Camry.

My Camry is a 93 (4 cyl) with 285,000 kms. I recently went to Chicoutimi, QC (3 persons in the car + luggage) and when I returned home (Moncton NB), I filled up after 732 kms. It took 50 liters of regular gas. It means a consumption of 6.8L/100 kms, 34.6 US MPG or 41.5 Imp. MPG. I use synthetic oil. A brand new car's gas mileage is never good. After the normal break-in period, your numbers should improve considerably. Les Nationals (anciens Expos) risquent de jouer aux Québécois le même tour que l'Avalanche (anciens Nordiques). JP

As has been said you need several tank fills for comparsion. Also you need to do the first and final fill at the same pump. Also your vehicle should have about 3,000 KMs on it before you measure mileage. Also the EPA highway mileage is done in a very unrealistic manner. The CDN site gives how it is done. On a dynameter with calculations for wind, hills, etc. The speed is no where's near a typical highway speed of 100KMPH + (about 60MPH) but is from about 75KMPH to 95KMPH. Air conditioning and load will also negatively affect the mileage. By the way if you use L/100 no one will get confused by the 20% smaller USA gallon.

Also, the 2005 Avalon with the 3.5 liter engine has better fuel economy than the prior Avalon with the 3.0 liter engine. And that 3.0 is the same as the Camry engine, I believe. I was told that it has something to do with the valve timing tweaks (VVT-i).

Merritt

I will give the car more time. Should the car NOT eventually live up to the glossy Toyota Camry pamphlet re MPG specifications, I shall cease buying Toyota products and maybe switch to Mazda, depending on consumer reports, when I am ready to buy.