Ecotec or Alloytec V6? [Archive] - Australian LS1 and Holden Forums

Sonnymad

09-07-2006, 12:41 PM

Hi guys,
I'm thinking about trading in the ss soon & getting a V6, being either a ecotec or alloytec 175 engine.
The people who have driven both engines, what do you think is better in regards to fuel economy, smoothness, etc.
I've heard that the alloytec engines whin alot.

Justin

I have a series II vs calais and i have driven plenty of alloytechs at work,my vote goes to the ecotech,very smooth gets 12.5litres round town and 8litres on the freeway.though i,ve seen some really good figures on the alloytechs at work wen there in service,they are pretty economical as well.also smooth,though they are noisy on cold start up and there is also a wine during acceleration.

regards sonny

regards sonny

Invasionss

09-07-2006, 01:04 PM

Many thanks Sonny,

Justin

Danv8

09-07-2006, 01:08 PM

If you were going to get an alloytec powered commy then go for atleast the SV6. I have a Rodeo with the 157 kw alloytec engine and it does a great job although its like any petrol commercial vehicle it likes to drink. Although I find the alloytec to be a smooth going engine. With saying that the ecotec still has plenty of life left and has really good low down torque. I only notce them getting harsh when you really put them to the red line. But usually they are torquey enough not to thash the crap out of them to get good acceleration out of them.

I would say take a drive of either and see what you like the best.

Also the whine I kind of like the sound because it sounds like a little supercharger. And you don't hear anyone complain about the supercharger whine. :-)

Y2kGoofball

09-07-2006, 01:16 PM

yeah im still undecided

at home we've got the best of both worlds, 2x alloytecs 190kw (Adventra and SV6) and 2x ecotecs (VS and VX execs). So far the Alloytecs are at 22 000km and 36000 k's and the ecotecs at 210 000 and 100 700 k's.

Personally I'm undecided. I think the Alloytec at first seems like a better choice, its quieter, a hell of alot smoother and seems more refined, and yes you can feel more power.

We've only ever had the normal wear and tear issues with the VS (210 000Km). So far its had the water pump, harmonic balancer and alternator replaced. I havent had the VX long enough for anything to go wrong with it (got it at 92 000K's and it just had a 100 000K major service which nothing was reported wrong with it). As for the alloytec I suppose its still early days until some start to clock up a few K's and problems start to happen.

You need to adjust to the whining noise on the alloytec but thats common as mentioned.

As mentioned the Ecotec is very harsh when pushed to the upper limit of the tacho BUT so is the Alloytec. The Ecotec offers good powerful torque at low revs but absolutely screams its head off at higher RPMs, say if you put your foot down it doesnt sound good, I suppose any engine does though. But the Alloytec does almost the exact same thing just a bit quieter and less shaky.

Yes the alloytec does have a whine but you get used to it.

Best suggestion, drive a VY Ecotec and a VZ Alloytec and compare and see what you like!

Either way coming down from an SS your gonna notice alot of difference, especially if you go for an older Ecotec such as lag between pushing the pedal and getting some response from the engine / tranny even on S pac models. Keep that in mind too when making a decision because you will notice it.

Dacious

09-07-2006, 01:56 PM

No question, Alloytec. Quicker, faster, more economical and much better gears behind the 190, as well as better handling. Even the revised A4 in the VZ is supposed to be much better than VY. As there's minimal diff. between resale of VYII and VZ, get the better motor. A 190 manual, driven well will surprise a lot of people with supposed quicker cars.

Swordie

09-07-2006, 04:46 PM

I'm very happy with my 3.8 V6, I haven't driven a 3.6 175kw and can’t really see the point in upgrading. I have done 85,000Km and the car feels as good as new and it's been very reliable. The torque is good down low and economy is quite good. When I purchased my car I had a look at a VX Berlina Wagon and didn’t find the low down torque anything to write home about. I preferred the 5.0. On the highway it will easily get into the 8's and even 7's. Around town with a mixture of driving with a few squirts it’s around 12.5.

VXSS346

09-07-2006, 09:01 PM

I've driven the Alloytec 190 with the 5 speed auto.

To me it felt it had similar torque to the 3.8 ecotec, but much much more top end. Revs out to 6500rpm at WOT.

CLUB_819

09-07-2006, 09:18 PM

I'd have to go for alloytec, there both great engines but the transmissions are chalk and cheese. But as said before have scoot in both and see what suits you best.

Cheers
Scotty

Invasionss

10-07-2006, 02:25 PM

Many thanks guys for all your input...

I do understand that i'll need to drive both kinds of engines to finally make my mind on which to buy. And yes, going from an SS to an V6 will have it's disadvantages!
Then i would wanna look at power form the Alloy's 175 & 190.
The only advantage with the Ecotec cleaning wise would be, that you can clean the inlet manifold & throttle easily! I'm a little confused on why it gets so bloody dirty with so much built up carbon? The Ecotec manifold was mean't to improve the combustion. I never knew how dirty the inlet manifold was on the old 3.8 in my old VN berlina!

Justin

OzJavelin

12-07-2006, 02:20 PM

So .. which one would push a V6 Crewman around better? 175kw Alloytec or the VYII Ecotec? Without driving one, my GUESS would be the Ecotec 'cause of low down torque?

Rod.

Carby

12-07-2006, 02:33 PM

I have a 190KW SV6 and the specs for the car belie how agricultural it feels. It does not have a smooth idle, it's torque delivery is too high and it is bloody raucus at high revs. It does have very good fuel economy and gets up and boogies after about 4000 rpm. However the old Berlina I had with the 3.8 litre had great drive up to 100 kph , it was a motor well matched for 85% of the motoring it would do. It also had good fuel economy though not as good as the newer V6.

Just expected more from the Alloytech given it's specs.

Interestingly though the service manager at my local Holden dealer loves the engine - he reckons he has not had any oil leaks from the main seal on this engine yet - must be some sort of record for a Holden 6!!

tenfold

12-07-2006, 02:46 PM

personally i'd go the alloytec, will give u a bit more to play with if you want some extra grunt down the track

zorro

12-07-2006, 02:47 PM

Wasn't all too impressed with the new 190 alloytec, would much rather the Super 6. I believe all utes/crewmans get the 172kw version, dealer mentioned it to us when went to drive a thunder ute. Manual and was even more unimpressive although could have been the larger wheels.

Personal opinion I dare say is what it will come down to. Good luck

slickholden

12-07-2006, 04:25 PM

Have you considered a Supercharged V6??

Also on economy, My mate we once hired a VS, Done about 3 tanks got returns of about 500-550km have herd about people getting 700+ easy on highways trips. With the VY's in V6's they were maybe the best for economy with the older 3.8lt's.
On the Alloytechs side many have gotten 11-12 average driving. On the noise they make i think it sounds pretty good sucks hard when hard up it, 4 weeks ago i was parked next to a 06 SV6 with sports system was drooling:drool: He gave it some stick as he left and there was no wine whistle induction noise at all.

My VP V6 Auto gets 450-500km local driving.

steen

12-07-2006, 04:39 PM

Wasn't all too impressed with the new 190 alloytec, would much rather the Super 6.
I had a VY SC6 when the missus got her SV6. Stock SC6 was a dog by comparison.

I have a 190KW SV6 and the specs for the car belie how agricultural it feels.
I agree. My BF XR6 has better NVH characteristics - probably due to I6 vs V6. I still prefer the SV6 on the road, once you get used to it's power delivery. The whine on acceleration seems more like an electric motor than SC induction, to me.

I'm kinda surprised that Sonny feels an Ecotec 3800 is smooth...

Invasionss

12-07-2006, 05:14 PM

Invasionss

12-07-2006, 05:18 PM

Maybe i could pull more kms from the V6 over the Gen 3?

McobraR

12-07-2006, 05:35 PM

Swordie

12-07-2006, 05:36 PM

I haven't really thought about the super 6 as these use just around the same amount of fuel as the Gen 3's? To be honest with you, not really interested in the super 6... But i could change my mind?

I believe the 3.8 V6, 3.8 ecotec V6 & alloytecs should drive further on a tank of fuel than the Gen 3's. I get around 460-500 kms from my Gen 3 around town & on the highway:driving:, i can pull over 700kms & it's stock as a rock:banana:... Well except for the Vaporate collars & Fitch Fuel Catalyst & people say these don't work!

My change of thought to go from a Gen 3 V8 to the V6 isn't a fuel issue, but more of a cost issue being licence & third party, insurance, servicing & other bullshit costs with owning a car.

Justin

If fuel consumption was the decision maker for me between a V8 and 6 I my of purchased an 8. When I was looking for my wagon my car new cost $40K and V8 Berlina Wagon was $50 -55K. Plus insurance was a few hundred dollars more a year. I couldn't justify a nearly 15K more to go a couple of seconds quicker from 0-100 for the occasional squirt when the 6 has plenty of go. Plus the 3.8 is a proven reliable technology and needs to be services every 15K instead of 10K for the 8.

I noticed there have been comments in regards to the VZ having a better auto. The 5 speed auto with the 190KW I can understand. In regards to the 4-speed I personally can't see what all the fuss is about, I have never felt there is a problem with mine (a VY). If I plant it off the lights no problems at all.

Compared to my previous cars the Holden is years a head. If you are used to driving the latest thing I could probably understand there is some fussing.

Danv8

12-07-2006, 05:49 PM

In regards to the 4-speed I personally can't see what all the fuss is about, I have never felt there is a problem with mine (a VY). If I plant it off the lights no problems at all.

.

I agree I guess someone needs tells me I need something better even if I am currently happy with what I have got. :)

Danv8

12-07-2006, 05:55 PM

jeese! everyone here is saying how the ecotec has more low down torque than the alloytec... I own a 99 VT1 exec. and i can tell u that the ecotec has NO low down torque... my dads 4 cylinder camry has more oomph from the time u just tap the pedal (yeh it starts to run outta puff after 2500-3000rpm, but at least it throws u back from standstill). If the ecotec has more torque than the alloytec, then man.... the alloytec must be a POS!

Remember the camry is a smaller and lighter car to begin with and gearing plays a big role in it. When I had my VP wagon had the pre ecotec 3800 it had plenty of low down torque in it. 90% of the torque is from 1200 rpm. Its all to do with perception of course a smaller and lighter car will feel more lively but stick a decent rear axle ratio in the VT and you will notice some differences.

tigermica

12-07-2006, 09:46 PM

i have a ecotec v6 its done 200,000 k's and never misses a beat

McobraR

12-07-2006, 10:13 PM

Remember the camry is a smaller and lighter car to begin with and gearing plays a big role in it. When I had my VP wagon had the pre ecotec 3800 it had plenty of low down torque in it. 90% of the torque is from 1200 rpm. Its all to do with perception of course a smaller and lighter car will feel more lively but stick a decent rear axle ratio in the VT and you will notice some differences.

But camry is only 150kg lighter, and the commie beats it in power to weight ratio. Even the VSII that my mates sis has feels the same, and is about the same weight as the camry. Gearing definitely would have an influence but if uve driven both, its somethin else... the way i feel it, i think its due to the power delivery of both the cars. The camry is low down focused for quick stop and go's and the ecotec has a wider power/torque band.
As for that 90% of torque from 1200...all i can say is that the 147kw version of the ecotec doesnt push out that much from 1200. I'd say it'l be closer to 2500-3500 as i always keep it there to actually feel something.

OzJavelin

13-07-2006, 07:59 AM

But camry is only 150kg lighter, and the commie beats it in power to weight ratio. Even the VSII that my mates sis has feels the same, and is about the same weight as the camry. Gearing definitely would have an influence but if uve driven both, its somethin else... the way i feel it, i think its due to the power delivery of both the cars. The camry is low down focused for quick stop and go's and the ecotec has a wider power/torque band.
As for that 90% of torque from 1200...all i can say is that the 147kw version of the ecotec doesnt push out that much from 1200. I'd say it'l be closer to 2500-3500 as i always keep it there to actually feel something.
If you still have the same perceptions in the lighter VN-VS body, then I'd say you have driven in some pretty sick V6 Commodores. I'm not a fan of them by an means, but most early V6 Holdens will launch harder and faster than just about anything else out there .. that's why some many inexperienced drivers end up in trouble with them (especially in the wet).

Years ago, my wife, sister and mother all owned VS V6s. My wifes Acclaim went really well, my sisters Exec was a dog. My Mum's Exec (stipped down with only A/C as option) was a sleeper .. a really nice put together engine. I'd suggest you have been driving around in my sisters old car ...

Rod.

VXSS346

13-07-2006, 08:43 AM

camry has more oomph from the time u just tap the pedal

I think your a victim of holden's OEM 'progressive throttle'
After that though an ecotec will pull heaps harder.

Speedy Gonzales

13-07-2006, 06:42 PM

Pre VT Buick 3.8s are nice to drive, the throttle response is very punchy and economy as good if not better due to weight loss.

I find them to be very quiet and smooth, especially when higher octane fuel is used.

VE Turbo

13-07-2006, 10:27 PM

1MACGYVER

13-07-2006, 10:38 PM

ive got a 175alloytec with the 6spd man which im really happy with but a bit more power wood b nice

ive been told the 175 is exactly the same as the 190 except 4 the chip, is this right?

banarcus

13-07-2006, 10:39 PM

I drive the alloytech at work both Commodore and Rodeo and I believe that they both suffer from not enough low down torque when compared to the earlier motor however, the motor is pretty smooth and the uprated(improved) 4 speed is great. Dont be fooled by the BS holden sv6 ads though, the exhaust sounds really strange, the stangest V6 I've heard.

VE Turbo

13-07-2006, 10:41 PM

ive got a 175alloytec with the 6spd man which im really happy with but a bit more power wood b nice

ive been told the 175 is exactly the same as the 190 except 4 the chip, is this right?

No, it has and extra air opening in the trottle body me thinks.

1MACGYVER

13-07-2006, 10:45 PM

so by rites i can get a new chip and throttle body and i have a 190?

VE Turbo

13-07-2006, 10:55 PM

Yeah, you could.

V8BRUTE

13-07-2006, 10:57 PM

Doesn't matter which V6 you choose you will be disappointed, both are reliable and get decent economy but for noise and smoothness the V8 is in another league entirely ;)

Over the years we have had almost every Holden 6 engine and auto combo made and the Ecotec 3.8 V6 and auto marriage is the roughest pile of crud Holden has ever bolted together, there is absolutely no connection between your foot and the forward motion of the car and don't even bother trying to second guess an auto kickdown :rolleyes:

The VZ with the same 4L60 box seemed ok but compared to a VS feels fat and heavy, does sound strange but still nothing to get excited about, I hate to say it but the Ford inline 6 and BW auto works a lot better in harmony.

The SC V6 wasn't a bad engine just let down by a POS auto, one of the smoothest engines and best shifting auto in a Holden would have to be a VL in my opinion, not relevant for your car choice but thought I would throw it in :)

Good luck with your choice, I am currently torn for a car choice but couldn't live with any of the V6's after a Gen3, front wheel drive is another pet hate so my choices are very limited :sleep:

McobraR

13-07-2006, 11:05 PM

Mate, I think you need to get your injectors cleaned.
My VTII blasts off the line, just load up the torque converter.
I blew off a GEN 3 ute the other night, he had a manual.
But, the VSII is the pick of the bunch.
Exact same engine as the VT, it had the complete re build done on it.
In a lighter car.
I`ve driven an SV6 with paddle shift auto as well.
Fun car to drive, but it sounds like a sewing machine.
I've also driven 3.0 Camry as well, YAWN!

Exactly, u gotta rev the engine while in standstill to actually make it move (im assuming u have a V6). Like i said, my mates sis has a VSII and it just doesnt feel punchy enough as the 4cyl camry, (but i agree, it'd be the pick betwen VT and VS), its probably due to that progressive feel thing that VXSS346 stated, which i never heard of before.
Never driven the V6 camry, but it'd definitely beat the VT V6s. similar power, less weight, less power loss to wheels (due to fwd layout).

VE Turbo

13-07-2006, 11:26 PM

Exactly, u gotta rev the engine while in standstill to actually make it move (im assuming u have a V6). Like i said, my mates sis has a VSII and it just doesnt feel punchy enough as the 4cyl camry, (but i agree, it'd be the pick betwen VT and VS), its probably due to that progressive feel thing that VXSS346 stated, which i never heard of before.
Never driven the V6 camry, but it'd definitely beat the VT V6s. similar power, less weight, less power loss to wheels (due to fwd layout).

I have the V6, and really, you don't haavvee to rev it if you don't want to.
As for the V6 camry over a V6 Commodore, nah, tried em both.
The Commie has way quicker response. The Camry has to think long and hard 1st.
Seriously, get your sisters VSII injectors done. Once that is done, run it on 95 octane only.
As someone else here stated, runs a hell of a lot smoother with lots more oomph!

McobraR

13-07-2006, 11:54 PM

I have the V6, and really, you don't haavvee to rev it if you don't want to.
As for the V6 camry over a V6 Commodore, nah, tried em both.
The Commie has way quicker response. The Camry has to think long and hard 1st.
Seriously, get your sisters VSII injectors done. Once that is done, run it on 95 octane only.
As someone else here stated, runs a hell of a lot smoother with lots more oomph!

Have u driven the 4cylinder camry? i'd have to take ur word for the V6 camry cus i havent driven one, but the 4cyl camry takes off faster (2000 model, not latest model). Yes it runs out of puff right after about 2000-2500rpm, but i'd expect the commie to be as responsive. I use regular, but so does my dad for the camry. I probably should start using higher octane, but i doubt it'll make that much of a difference.
As for the VS, it was my mates sisters car. I havent driven it, but i have been in it, feels the same. My mates bro, whos driven it, says his old nissan bluebird paddybasher, 83 model manual, felt ALOT more responsive.
I'l tell em to clean the injectors, see what happens from there ;)

slickholden

14-07-2006, 02:07 AM

jeese! everyone here is saying how the ecotec has more low down torque than the alloytec... I own a 99 VT1 exec. and i can tell u that the ecotec has NO low down torque... my dads 4 cylinder camry has more oomph from the time u just tap the pedal (yeh it starts to run outta puff after 2500-3000rpm, but at least it throws u back from standstill). If the ecotec has more torque than the alloytec, then man.... the alloytec must be a POS!
I tell you what the VS or manly the ecotec's low down take off problems are, It's Transmission.
Simple as this why is a VR Executive 1 sec + slower to 100 then a VP executive with same engine?. Same engine same or about same weight, Different Transmissions. It's the electronic transmission that negates the VR onwards. But when moving the Ecotec is pretty quick with kicdown.
I have my mate who is next door with a VR, We won't even try to have a race:D Even when he had a sports system and my car was untouched.
So i plan to have a Ecotec fitted in the next 12 months or so to my VP and keep my transmission (Which is only months old) to see if this is 100% right.

an-D

14-07-2006, 02:58 AM

i must say that my wagon feels like a slug off the line even with a catback/cai, just seems to bog down and not want to move til around 3000rpm... my friends VR series 1 was a machine off the line! just punch the accelerator and it would chirp/spin and off she'd go, he'd also beat me everytime we raced from standing start... but rolling start it was bye bye :D

i heard that the 4L60E has Torque management so the car wont put down as much torque as the engine offers as the torque management cuts it off so that the car doesnt break traction!

i need to work out how to turn that off :D

The Alloytech is a totally different feeling to the Ecotec, i drove my cousins one and it feels quicker than a Ecotec but as stated it doesnt have as much downlow torque.

Swordie

14-07-2006, 09:11 AM

I have only tried Premium Unleaded a couple of times from Shell. I noticed no difference in power and economy on my 3.8. I wouldn’t waste my money on it.

VE Turbo

15-07-2006, 12:26 AM

I have only tried Premium Unleaded a couple of times from Shell. I noticed no difference in power and economy on my 3.8. I wouldn’t waste my money on it.

Mate,
Give it a bit more chance than a couple of fills.
It`s got to clean the gunk out 1st.
On 95 I can get 700ks easy out of a full tank with mainly city driving.
Smoothness and power are better as well.
Also, when was the last time you had your injectors cleaned?
Don't forget your fuel filters as well.

payaya

15-07-2006, 04:12 AM

the way i see it is, with all the hype and bragging of specs of the new engine why are they being compared anyway???

So much money was poured into this engine and now there is a post asking if the new engine is better than the old???? Why is this happening?? If you were involved in the design, testing and manufacturer of this new engine would you be proud???

The 3.8 should be slamed in this post!!

I dont know the specs of the engine but im guessing shorter strokes smaller bores and increased revs give it its peaky characteristics. I believe with the VE platform the engine should behave better. But with the extra weight who knows.

Rick76

15-07-2006, 01:29 PM

Having owned/driven various LS1 & 3.8 and now owning the 3.6 (172kw) my perceptions are....

Alloytech best fuel economy...... figures below obviously vary according to mix of stop/start and freeway driving... the LS1 benefiting from the tall 6th on the freeway but quickly shooting up when stuck in traffic. The V6's are more consistent whereas the V8 can quickly shoot up or down depending on where you are driving. They also go up quicker (relative to the 6's) if you start giving them a few stabs of the right pedal.
3.6 10.5-11
3.8 11.5-12.5
5.7 13.5-15.5

Alloytech is definitely more refined at idle (quieter and smoother) than the other 2.

3.8 punchier low down but 3.6 better mid-high in the rev range.

Overall there is not a huge difference but I would definitely go the Alloytech.

Dacious

15-07-2006, 01:50 PM

Most of the people here are comparing the performance of the base Alloytech with the 3.8.

Basically it's like this:

175/172 > n/a 3.8, VZ A4 >>> earlier A4.

190 M5 > any 3.8 except S/C on standing start because of 2.8 diff ratio - rolling, no contest, 190 is quicker

190 M6 > any 3.8 unless S/C and been breathed on.

Don't let people from publications like Drive kid you. Guys at work who've had both recently say the Alloytech is 10% better on fuel in the same conditions - cars handle better because it's lighter in the nose and revised steering, it has the same or similar low-end performance (if it feels slower it's just taller gearing) and past midrange where the 3.8 stops, the Alloytechs keep revving. Flatten a VY and VZ together and first gearchange it's all over for the VY. The Alloytech is also much smoother in virtually every circumstance. They report no harshness and don't understand what the journos are on.

No they won't compete for ultimate performance with a LS1, but do pretty damn well except the tall gearing issue. Someone in a 190 Calais got the jump on me the other day and beat me across the intersection until we both backed off.

For some reason the journos got it in their head that the Alloytech was meant to be superengine rather than just a more modern replacement. Remember, Holden had a long time to optimise that 3.8 engine - the fact that a smaller brand new engine is better straight off the bat should speak volumes.

I bet the old 3.8 could not be so easily modified to pass Euro III, anyhow - it would have lost more than 3Kw.

HSVMAN

15-07-2006, 02:35 PM

so by rites i can get a new chip and throttle body and i have a 190?
190 throttle body is variable
190 also has variable valve timing on both inlet and exhaust where 175 only on inlet :)

NICO

27-05-2007, 04:33 PM

I traded my 97 VS II v6 A4 in on a 05 VZ SV6, the 190kw Alloytech is a hell of a lot better both power wise and fuel wise than my old ecotec not to mention the 15000km service interval.

Crispy

27-05-2007, 08:03 PM

the alloytech hands down
but plz tell us why would u want to trade a v8 in vor v6 this is disturbing that u want to do this why would u drop the power???

OPTIMUS

27-05-2007, 09:18 PM

The problem with the Alloytecs is the Torque management and the crappy diff gears (2.87:1) in SV6, having it tuned and torque management removed at the same time with some 3.46:1 diff gears will make a world of difference

azzss

27-05-2007, 10:40 PM

I reckon a SV6 manual with a tune and shorter diff gearing 3.46 or 3.7s would be pretty sharp i'd imagine. Not much wrong with the ecotec/buick v6s though as far as being relible goes, work with a bloke who runs commodore utes ranging from vr to vz all done plenty of kms and had no probs. The vr has done 412000 kms engine and tranny still original has been on duel fuel from day 1 and still going strong.

SS Enforcer

27-05-2007, 11:21 PM

I owned a VY ecotec and a VZ sv6 190. It's a no brainer get a sv6 the thing was very sharp for what it was and great on fuel. The alloytech suffers from the same perception ls1's have and that is a lack of low down torque. This isn't true as we know a ls1 just pulls very hard from 3500 but still has good power lower than that . The same with the alloytech but the 190 will out rev a ls1 in stock form :). I took mine back to the dealer and complained that it reved to 6700 before it shifted when I held it flat !!! He smiled and said something like yea they really like to rev.

PS: I sold my VU and bought the VY 6 pot ..... then the sv6 it took my over 2years to realise what a fool I was and go and buy another V8 again.

cheers

Holden Man

28-05-2007, 10:32 AM

Go the VS II (you could have 3 of them for the price of an alloytec commy!!)
Road / Track / Strip versions !!!

Trust me they will beat any 4 cyl camry with ease (that's BS about the comments stated on camry). They still have the ability to bolt from the lights which can be handy. They are quite quick from 0 > 60-70kph for an old six. Yes they are rough at idle and do whine when pushed hard but SO WHAT !

The auto is a bit ancient but does the job. They will chew juice if you drive them hard (like any engine really)