Huh? Toyota Says It Held Off On A Turbo 4 Camry Because Americans Demand The V6

This front end is the stuff nightmares are made of.

Very true. Although Toyota/Lexus designers seem to be imaginative, I am sure they all must be visually handicapped.

It's is true. Nothing compares to a smooth V6

I wonder how Porsche's new 718 will do. It only has a 4-cylinder engine, which replaces the outgoing Boxster's flat 6. If Americans do indeed "demand a 6", then sales will be dismal.

I recently drove a 718 Boxster S and came away really impressed (I drive a Cayman GTS). I personally liked the sound of the engine and the torque was great. The car pulls and sounds like a beast - should erase any vestige of the "hairdresser" car image. The handling and grip was absolutely fantastic too. But, I too wonder if it will sell given that the 4 cylinder Boxster S I drove stickered at nearly 90K.

I recently drove a 718 Boxster S and came away really impressed (I drive a Cayman GTS). I personally liked the sound of the engine and the torque was great. The car pulls and sounds like a beast - should erase any vestige of the "hairdresser" car image. The handling and grip was absolutely fantastic too. But, I too wonder if it will sell given that the 4 cylinder Boxster S I drove stickered at nearly 90K.

A V6 is smoother than an I4 Turbo in most applications. Most volume I4s sound like lawn tractors in comparison to a good V6. I wouldn't use Porsche as an example because first it is a flat engine which is inherently balanced and they spent a lot of time and money tuning the sound so it doesn't sound like a typical 4 cylinder. Also in the real world Turbos don't offer the fuel economy benefits they advertise. Toyota didnt go to Turbo because they didn't have to...they sell so many fuel efficient cars that they can stick with the V6.

re "...Also in the real world Turbos don't offer the fuel economy benefits they advertise..."

It all depends on what you expect. If you expect to take a 3.0 liter engine, bolt on a turbo, and get better fuel economy, that won't happen.

But if you understand that if you want to get better fuel economy from your 3.0L normally aspirated engine, you can downsize to a 2.0 Liter engine with a turbo, and that's how you get better fuel economy, then yes, you can and will get better fuel economy (without sacrificing power much or at all) by employing a turbocharger.

In such implementations, the 2.0 L engine consumes less fuel than the 3.0 in a steady state (at cruise). However, the 2.0 L naturally lacks the power of the 3.0, so the turbocharger kicks in on an "as required" basis (during acceleration, or possibly only during brisk acceleration), to provide more power and also consume more fuel while it's doing it.

No one knows more about engineering efficiency and reliability than Toyota. Interesting they are leading the reversal of downsizing in engine displacement. It is all about real world verses test cycle performance.

Agreed - WHile Turbo 4 cylinder engines manage to get SLIGHTLY better gas mileage than non-turbo 6 cylinders - ON THE LAB TEST - in the real world - Turbo engines rarely show an increase over the larger but non turbo engines and normally show POORER mileage. OF course - the problem is - there is no way to use real world for laws - since the real world is not reproducible - for testing.

WHen I bought my CT6 - I deliberately chose the 6 Clylinder - non-turbo - and and glad I did so. It has plenty of power for the car - in normal driving. ANd has less complications to go bad over time.

MrEE: I agree that Toyota is high on real-world, practical, for-the-masses engineering. I respect and value that! Having a turbo does not automatically mean a "better" product. If you can accomplish what you need without the added complexity and cost of a turbo, then that's great! So I'm not sneering at Toyota or Honda for being "late to the game" with respect to turbocharging. They're doing well in their arenas.

People are buying trubo 4 cylinders because that is what they are forced to buy by virtue of a V6 not being offered. I'd rather have a V6 than a turbo 4.

The turbo 4 cylinders do not deliver better real world MPG than naturally aspirated and sometimes less.

Funny, I don't seem to recall Toyota attempting to sell any Celica ST205 turbo's in the U.S.

The U.S. got completed shafted during the Golden Era of turbos in the 90s.