Talk:Toyota Camry/Archive 1

Archive 1

Milkmandan

Milkmandan: your changes to the Camry page are welcome but I wonder if it is worthwhile to note that the model names and release dates apply only to the United States. Stombs 12:26, Dec 20, 2004 (UTC)

I've made the change and have preserved your words as best as possible. Stombs 12:55, Dec 20, 2004 (UTC)

I very much appreciate the changes you've thrown at this--it's looking really good! I also realize anything I've got so far is pretty US-centric; I expect you guys can help me out with that. Don't worry about keeping what I've already got. I'm much less concerned about preserving my work than I am about preserving the correct work. --Milkmandan 17:40, 2004 Dec 20 (UTC)

Thank you, Milkmandan! Mind you, if you hadn't done the ground work with the generations, I'd have been well and truly stuffed. (No Red Meat jokes on that. :)) Stombs 21:53, Dec 20, 2004 (UTC)

Some more stuff

Given some references, and maybe getting more topics other than model lines, this could definitely be a featured article. →Iñgólemo← (talk) 22:53, 2004 Dec 30 (UTC)

Having spent a significant amount of time working on this page, I certainly would not mind that at all! Any suggestions (from anyone, really) for what to add? I know we could use a more thorough discussion of the available options and engines, but I'm having a hard time coming up with other topics. --Milkmandan 11:16, 2004 Dec 31 (UTC)

What about adding a list of exterior and interior colour codes and names for the various years/models? Heep (talk) 20:46, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

The name "Camry"

Where did the name Camry come from? How was it chosen? Can we answer that?

ProhibitOnions

I was thinking about that too, cause it's not covered in the article. Names like Accord or Maxima make sense at first glance, but Camry's not a word that's found in daily usage. --LeoTheLion 1 July 2005 17:23 (UTC)

It's a good question, and one that I can't answer fully. Most Toyota cars from the late 1970s and early 1980s were given names starting with the letter C—for example, Toyota Corona, Toyota Cressida, and Toyota Corolla. I suspect the Camry was named so because it was a C name that sounded good. --Milkmandan 19:15, August 4, 2005 (UTC)

The etymology of the word 'Camry' comes from the Japanese word 'kanmuri', 冠 (かんむり), which means 'crown' and when pronounced sounds very similar to 'Camry'. Toyota had several models at the time with names meaning crown: Corona, Camry and Crown. --Jsimpson 05:33, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

Extremely belated thanks for that. I'd been wondering about that off and on for years, but no Toyota people or Japanese-speakers I'd asked knew. Things like this make Wikipedia really useful! ProhibitOnions 00:35, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

The Australian should have stuff about the New Zealand Camry!!

They had the same design and features and sportivo model in new zealand to who ever the stupid twit is who changed it

Uh... sure. It's not that popular there, but, hey, I'll give it a shot. --Susanna Banana ^@ 19:53, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

2nd Gen Camry picture

I noticed that the 2nd generation Camry picture isn't a really good one. Can someone replace it with this?

http://photos.velocityjournal.com/images/stk/1988/ty1988camry01.jpg

Done! --ApolloBoy 04:55, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Good article nomination

Reorganizing infoboxes and using footnotes in this article will make it a good "good article" nominee. - Eagle^talk 22:51, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm sending this in for a peer review to see what else can be improved. This article seems informational enough to me. --Starcity ai 04:58, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Low build quality?

The article cites the Camry's "low build quality" in comparison with other models as a reason for its poor sales in Europe. Could we get a citation for this? Poor quality is not something Toyotas are usually known for. ProhibitOnions 15:09, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

I don't think that's the reason. At least in Germany the main problem is the lack in status compared to BMW, Mercedes and Audi. For the same reason Lexus is selling only very small numbers of vehicles here too. --84.142.138.98 13:17, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Strange, Misleading Sentence

In the Nascar section the following appears: "Although NASCAR rules state that the competing cars have to be built in the United States, the Camry slips through the cracks, as it is built in Kentucky."

Slips through the cracks? Did I miss something in US geography stating that Kentucky is a minor outlying territory instead of a commonwealth (re:state)? Saying slipping through cracks makes it sound like Toyota is sneakily sliding its way in to the competition. The Camry is fully assembled in Kentucky, a totally red blooded part of the US of A the last time I checked, making it fully eligible. The article should read as so. caz | speak 00:31, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Measurements

The newest generation quotes all of its measurements in millimeters, yet the old ones are all in inches. Is there some sort of rule that state it has to be in mm? Can we state it in inches and MM for the American readers? Smartmlp

Milimetres are an SI unit and are more used than inches. The conversions simple enough.(Morcus (talk) 23:40, 28 May 2008 (UTC))

Reliablity

I am so happy to hear that Consumer Reports no longer recommends the Camry!!!!!! TOTALLY HAD IT COMING!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.11.190.72 (talk) 00:35, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

CR Reliability Survey

As 24.11.190.72 is so intent on conveying the results of the CR 2007 Annual Car Reliability Survey, I’ve added a mention to the generation six section that does not mischaracterize CRs findings. Elcobbola 14:18, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Safety

Someone kept sticking a section about crash test ratings at the very end of the page, after the current generation Camry. However, the information was (supposedly) for the third generation vehicle. This is misleading as it appeared to be talking about the current car. I moved the section to the end of the third generation listing. Further, the citation for the information is out of date/cannot be located. Unless someone can back the information up, it will be removed. Avisron 22:05, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Camry V40

I have removed the Camry V40 from the sequential generation numbering system, as it is not considered the 4th generation Camry. It was a Japanese only model and is not considered a canon model. The 2007+ Camry is even referred to as the "6th generation Camry" in Toyota PR statements, not the seventh. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.117.30.178 (talk) 21:27, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Please see this similar discussion. OSX (talk • contributions) 05:44, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Weight and Power / Weight ratio

I'm doing a comparison of tanks with other vehicles in terms of power and power to weight ratios, so I was looking for weights and they were missing. The latest generation 2.4L manual, for example is 3,263 pounds (1,480 kg). Thought you might want to consider adding this to your (otherwise excellent) infoboxes. Dhatfield (talk) 09:25, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Toyota Camry (US Version)

There seems no need (and no valid Wikipedia precedent that's sufficiently similar or relevant) to have the US version of this car broken out into its own article (Toyota Camry (US Version)). Cars where this kind of thing happens to their article, like the Ford Escort for example, which has European and North American variants' articles, have very different international versions throughout their lives. This one has very similar international versions. To help readers the info should be in one place. Even if it stays, the capital "V" should be removed. 81.178.67.229 (talk) 01:11, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

The problem is that the old Toyota Camry article (now US Version) had information that is lost, and having to read through the Japanese Market information makes it difficult, especially on a website that is heavily read by Americans. It does not hurt to have two distinct articles, and i doubt anyone would go to the US Version article and think that it should take the place of the other, or vice versa. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.249.213.57 (talk) 04:34, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

After reading both the Toyota Camry article and the Toyota Camry US Version article, the information appears duplicated with some variations. I suggest the article be merged to both the Toyota Camry article and the Toyota Scepter article, which is the Toyota Camry in the US, with particular attention given to make sure that information isn't lost. For what it's worth. (Dddike (talk) 16:00, 4 June 2008 (UTC))

I support the merge because it's always dangerous to have article splits like this because information can get out of synch. It's not difficult to format an article with sections for specific countries, and I think it would be insulting the intelligence of the average US reader (or, indeed, any other American reader) to suggest that they couldn't follow a well-presented article just because it mentioned Japan. The problem is in the layout and writing, not the merge. – Kieran T ^(talk) 16:34, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I think that the Toyota Scepter article should be merged into the Toyota Camry (US Version) article, with a name change as well. Many people outside of Japan do not know what the Scepter is, and it might be easier to search for Toyota Camry. I dont think that it should be merged with the Toyota Camry article, however. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.249.213.57 (talk) 21:25, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

When the article "Toyota Camry" is searched, no one is going to remember to add "US Version", and the title Toyota Camry is already being used. An aslternative is to create a new article with the Japanese-spec Camry in its own site, as is currently being done for the Camry US version. Can the US version be renamed Japanese version and that the Japanese information relocated and replaced with the US version? (Dddike (talk) 21:52, 4 June 2008 (UTC))

It seems this is not as simple as a merge of articles. I agree the article Toyota Camry (US Version) Must go immediately, but I think in all honestly as others have said maybe make one for the JDM spec ones. I know that the JDM is it original market so it should go by that, but to people out site of Japan the numbering etc it up the creek. Maybe an article named Toyota Camry (outside JDM) would be more fitting if we must keep the Japanese numbering etc on the main article.

But having the current US Version one is creating just as many problems as it solves as the Camry sold in sold in Australasia is very popular and goes by the same numbering as the US.

I don't know what to do but something needs to change.Mbruce1 (talk) 13:10, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

The US Version article could have a name change, but as long as the Generation designations dont change, it should be okay. The purpose of the 2nd article (US Version) is because all the Names/Dates/etc. are different for the JDM model. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.59.8.10 (talk) 17:19, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

After printing the Camry, Camry US Version and the Scepter pages and physically examing each line of all three articles, no information will be lost if the Camry US version page is deleted. I also suggest that the heading "US version" be redirected to the Scepter page, just in case anyone searches for that heading. The Scepter page clearly states in the lead article that the Scepter name is used for Japan only and that the rest of the world calls this vehicle the Camry.(Regushee (talk) 17:32, 6 June 2008 (UTC))

Your printer must be highly selective. Look at the Generation Chassis Codes and Year designations, as well as the Engine # and Transmission # information on the far right column in the US Version article ... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.59.8.10 (talk) 19:31, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

At the very least this article should be retitled "Toyota Camry (JDM Version)" with the appropriate link the the US Version article at the top of the page. It is ridculous that an owner of a top-selling US car should have to look up an entirely different article about the unknown "Toyota Scepter" to find information about his/her car. 71.134.252.36 (talk) 07:02, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Where did the American 3rd generation Camry go?

I'm just wondering, where did the American 3rd generation Camry go? It's kind of annoying trying to find some info about and having to look back into the history. Could someone bring it back?69.228.199.250 (talk) 23:35, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Because the third generation Camry sold in the U.S. was badged Toyota Scepter in Japan, information regarding this car is found there. In Japan the third generation Camry was a related, but narrower and moderately differently styled vehicle. OSX (talk • contributions) 01:38, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Chassis codes

I am not sure if all the non-Carina based Camrys should have "S" at the beginning of the chassis code - is that not just specific to the Toyota S engine used in most '80s and '90s petrol models? Should they not be V10, V20... XV20, etc. like the Japanese article? --Zilog Jones (talk) 20:28, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

I've removed the "S" prefix from all models on both this Camry article and that for the Toyota Scepter. When the changes were made previously (I think I may have been partially responsible after noting another user doing so on the Scepter article), I did not really understand how the Toyota model codes worked. I have since noticed that many of the model codes for the Camry differ depending on the engine in use. OSX (talk • contributions) 02:55, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

The "V" alone is the chassis code, but adding the number is as misleading as it refers to fuel type (I believe). I'd suggest either including all the model variations, or excluding them from the headline and including them with descriptions in the body of the text. Expie (talk) 04:58, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

OK. I would include them all, but do you know them all? I can partially help in this regard for Australian-market vehicles only, which are important as Camrys have been produced there since 1987. OSX (talk • contributions) 07:27, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

The numbers don't refer to fuel types specifically as that would be defined by the engine e.g. S or C in most '80s/'90s Camrys. The numbers do seem to change along with engines, but they also seem to be specific to some drivetrains like 4WD versions of JDM models, however they are irrespective to transmission types and four-wheel steering seems to get its own number too. There are lists for JDM cars here but I'm not sure how accurate they are. Looking at V40 series for example, it seems:

• SV40 = 1.8 4S-FE FF
• CV40 = 2.2 3C-T (diesel) FF
• SV41 = 2.0 3S-FE FF
• SV42 = 2.0 3S-FE FF with 4WS
• SV43 = 2.0 3S-FE 4WD

The other Toyota pages use the chassis codes in the same way to refer to generations (e.g. E100, E110 Corolla etc.) so I think the current layout is acceptable. Including all variations if known would be good too but may get unwieldy considering all market variations. --Zilog Jones (talk) 22:41, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes, sorry, please pardon the brain fade, I was thinking of engine codes for some reason. I've found http://www.toyotareference.com/#CA83 (and above, pardon the bias, I own an '84 Camry...) seems accurate to the boundaries of my limited knowledge, and may be a good reference for colour codes, chassis and engine codes as well, at least for the US market. My main concern is that "*V40" refers to a specific generation(?), and that "*V40 series" might be a more accurate wording. Expie (talk) 13:42, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Generation Years

As far as I know, the first generation Camry was available 1983 - 1986, second generation from 1987 - 1990, etc. Are the dates of the various generations correct? Expie (talk) 05:09, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

They seem correct considering they were usually out in Japan before anywhere else, and model years are not widely accepted outside of North America.

So the dates are for availability for purchase in the Japanese market? Should that be specified in the article, and is it even particularly relevant considering the articles states it does not/ has not sell/sold well in Europe or Japan, but sells/sold well in the USA, Canada, Australia and certain Asian countries? Is the date of greatest relevance to Wikipedia users the date of manufacture, or the date of (supposed) market availability? Or some other date? Expie (talk) 13:09, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

cd stacker in the 1998 Viente wagon

hi Ive just purchased the wagon and alas no cd stacker. Does anyone know where it usually goes in the wagon? Thanks Rik —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.245.52.4 (talk • contribs) 03:23, February 21, 2009

Australian-specification 1997–2000 (MCV20R) Vienta (not Viente) VXi station wagons do in fact have a CD stacker. The centre console stereo system only houses the radio/casette player. The six-disc CD player is located in the boot. Usually, such players are located within a cavity to the side, but it may be (unlikely) under the floor (around spare wheel). By the way, for future reference, try Yahoo! Answers for questions like these, as this is more or less beyond the scope of Wikipedia. OSX (talk • contributions) 03:47, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

length

this article says the 1994-1998 camry was 182 inches, however, my 1995 camry is 187 inches and change. what's the deal? Ingridjames (talk) 04:34, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

You have the Toyota Scepter-based 1991–1996 Camry. OSX (talk • contributions) 04:57, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

5th Generation Camry (US) - 2004 model year - new engines

Hi all, I am wondering why the engines changes for the 2004 model year are mentioned in the 2005 model year changes. It was in the 2004 model year that the V6 engines were revised with the 3.0-liter 1MZ-FE equipped with VVT-i and the 3.3-liter 3MZ-FE V6 for SE models. See, for instance:

http://consumerguideauto.howstuffworks.com/2004-toyota-camry.htm

http://www.edmunds.com/apps/vdpcontainers/do/vdp/articleId=101056/pageNumber=16.

Thanks for the clarification,

Stairius (talk) 02:08, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Camry name

The cited source for "The name 'Camry' is an anagram of 'my car'" does not in any way assert that Camry was named because it's an anagram. So, I don't see how this is relevant to the article at all. The previous versions, about kanmuri and kemuri, at least attempted to explain the origins of the Camry name. Unfortunately, they lacked references, so they needed to go. The anagram thing seems to me completely irrelevant to the article, so I'm going to remove it. If someone can come up with a source showing that Camry was named because it's an anagram, feel free to revert my edit. Makeemlighter (talk) 05:50, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Camry was named after the Japanese name for Crown. The "my car" anagram is just a coincidence, albeit a good one. OSX (talk • contributions) 06:47, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

That was in the article a while ago, I think, but it lacked a reference. Can you provide one? Makeemlighter (talk) 07:39, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Done: [1].OSX (talk • contributions) 08:50, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Demerger?

Could there be a possibility of demerging the six Toyota Camry generations? -- Bull-Doser (talk) 15:10, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

I do hope not. I see it as a cause of confusion, not a solution. The best way to represent complicated multi-generation naming is in one well-written article. – Kieran T ^(talk) 15:22, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh Dear God No. Kieran T, you are absolutely correct. I can just see the edit wars starting over which Camry/Scepter model deserves prominence on the main Camry page. Demerging works when there is a ton of information on each particular generation. Ford Mustang for example. If enough verifiable information with genuine external references has been accumulated on each particular generation, to the point that the article is enormous, then demerging may be a possibility. However, this article is no where near that stage. There are other articles that need more attention from Toyota. Like maybe the Toyota Crown for instance. Or the newly discovered Toyota Tiara. (Regushee (talk) 15:50, 27 June 2008 (UTC))

Most recently, the Toyota Corolla and Volkswagen Golf pages have been demerged. -- Bull-Doser (talk) 23:42, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

I don’t think a de-merger would be a good idea, but perhaps something like what the corolla article has, a little about each, and a link to each specific model. It works for that so why not here? Mbruce (talk) 08:39, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Most articles for European vehicles has been split into multiple pages for a long time, and there aren't any problems over that. Even though equipment line ups for Toyota aren't exactly as consistent as the German vehicles, it can be addressed. - Jacob Poon (talk) 00:42, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

I support a demerger since the subsections are not getting many views making it less useful to wikipedia users. Some people might not notice the subsections or feel like clicking on additional links. For editors nobody really wants to edit pages with small viewership which might help explain why a number of the European split articles are of poor quality. Compared to articles like the Audi A4 and Audi A6 which are still pretty good. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.65.224.246 (talk) 21:15, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

And also the European marques have long lists of multiple engines sold in numerous markets 69.65.224.246 (talk) 01:03, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

reiterate low page views compared to main article, less useful to users. Tcamry (talk)

I demerged the current generation and split the previous generation into its own article. This is more useful to users as the page views for the current generation were unusually poor. Gmat33 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 10:12, 29 September 2009 (UTC).

Went ahead and split sixth gen. Gordido3 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 06:57, 20 October 2009 (UTC).

Language

I really resent being called an imperialist by Vossanova (talk · contribs). Personal attacks have no place on Wikipedia.

This article had different version of English in use e.g. "liter" and "litre" (the latter being the most predominant). I looked back at the first version of the article, which was written by someone from a UK IP address by an editor who has edited a number of Australia-related articles - probably explaining the interest in the Camry. Plus Stombs (talk · contribs) who did the first major expansion of the article is from New Zealand. The large occurence of "litre" and the British/Australian/New Zealand link is why I established a single version of English in the article. There's nothing imperialistic about that. An article that uses multiple version of a language is a bad one. It needs to be consistent and based on WP:ENGVAR and WP:RETAIN, I made a choice. Discuss rather than revert... --Biker Biker (talk) 15:12, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

OK, my edit comment was a bit hotheaded. There are editors out there who seem to spend most of their time changing the spelling of articles, even when it's not appropriate. I'm sure it goes both ways though, American to British or British to American. I will respect WP:RETAIN for consistency; however I was under the impression OSX's changes were across the whole article. Anyway, the spelling variety is not set in stone, so let's discuss if it's worth changing here - and I will start by reiterating my belief that most of this article does concern North American-market cars. --Vossanova ^o< 15:56, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

No problem. To be honest I have no preference either way, I just like consistency. --Biker Biker (talk) 15:58, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

There are at least guidelines for which units to use at Wikipedia:WikiProject Automobiles/Conventions#Localization. They don't specifically mention spelling, but it's safe to suggest it should follow terms and units, and go by major market. With Japanese/Korean-made cars, I tend to go by their largest export market. I'm guessing that's North America, although it does also sell in Australia and Asia, according to the article. --Vossanova ^o< 20:26, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

I'd use U.S. spelling because the Camry ultimately is designed for the U.S. market. Sure, it's made in Japan (in small numbers) and in Australia as well (about 150,000 cars per year), but the U.S. still is the largest market by far. Most Asian market Camrys from 2006 onwards are based on the Toyota Aurion, so that information is dealt with there. OSX (talk • contributions) 03:41, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Added space

Added space to the 4th generation to lessen confusion, otherwsie it appears infobox applies to both JDM and international models. Cassamanono (talk) 07:03, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for that Cassamanono. I have added a summarised SXV10 "international" infobox as well. OSX (talk • contributions) 03:15, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Dubious Statement

The line which reads "The car's popularity is further reinforced by its theft statistics: in 2009, it was listed as the car most often reported stolen in California" is of dubious merit. The author at the very least seems to be committing a 'base rate' fallacy. In addition, the popularity of a car is a small factor in thefts in comparison to the ease with which it is stolen as well as opportunities to steal it. In addition, the reference link leads to general insurance information for California, with nothing particularly relevant to the Camry. Mathiusdragoon (talk) 15:46, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

I've deleted it as I found it too region-specific for a global car. OSX (talk • contributions) 04:56, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Engine question

How about some info about the timing belt alternative in some camry's (a chain? whats it called, it has a funny name but i don't remember) and details about the engineering of the engine. (i came here looking for this)

Depending on the engine, Camrys have been sold with either timing belts or timing chains—neither configuration is unusual at all. The early models seem to have chains, whereas the later models have belts. The right place to find this information would be on the pages that describe the engines used in the Camry:

• Toyota T engine
• Toyota MZ engine
• Toyota S engine (presently not terribly helpful)

--Milkmandan 19:22, August 4, 2005 (UTC)

The timing chains began on the 2002 models. But as far as I know the 4 cylinder models (with engines 2AZ-FE) for sure received the timing chains, and not sure if the V6 models (with engines 1MZ-FE) still uses belts or not at that time period. Also, for the 2002 models, the 4 cylinder models all have engines with VVT-i, as the V6 model doesn't until it started to have it for 2003 and on. Wfrmsf (talk) 03:58, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Japanese only SV30/40

There is some confusion about how the Japanese Camry SV30 and SV40 fit alongside the international SXV10 and SXV20. The third generation had two subsections - one for the Japanese SV30 and one for the international SXV10. However the SV40 was counted as the fourth generation and the SXV20 was counted as the fifth. This seems inconsistent to me. A recent edit by 71.141.248.188 merged the SV40 and SXV20 as a single fourth generation and renumbered the following generations but was reverted. It seemed consistent to me to merge them into the same generation because they have the same styling, shared mechanicals, much shared sheet metal and considerable overlap in production years. There is also a bit of a coin toss about whether the SV10/20/30/40 should be treated as one series and the SXV10/20/40/50 should be treated as a different (but closely related) series that the 'Camry' name was transferred to for international markets. I'm inclined to treat them as two separate series. Thoughts?  Stepho  (talk) 10:20, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Stepho, I am kind of confused by what you have said.

The SV30 (narrow-body) and SXV10 (wide-body) share mechanicals, body panels (like the doors), and basic styling.

The SV40 (narrow-body) and SXV20 (wide-body) may share mechanicals, do not share body panels and in my opinion, don't really share basic styling cues. The SV40 and SXV20 appear to be completely different, contrary to what you have said.

Western markets did not receive the SV30 and SV40 models due to their narrow width. The SV30 was instead widened and became the Camry SXV10 for Western markets. Western markets simply skipped the SV40 generation.

Between 1996 and 1998, both the narrow SV40 and the wider SXV20 were sold alongside one another in Japan. After 1998, the narrow-body Camry was discontinued and replaced with the Toyota Vista.

To me, it makes perfect sense to separate the SV40 and SXV20 generations (but not the closely related SV30 and SXV10 models). OSX (talk • contributions) 10:40, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

I just reverted the article back to as of May 15th when user OSX made it into 7 generations again. The reason is that to many owners of Camrys claim their SXV20/MCV20 as generation 4, ACV30/MCV30 as generation 5 and the following numbers for the next newer models. Toyota themselves also claim these cars the exact same way so that the SXV20 and MCV20 models are for the fact the fourth generation Camry. So the facts that was declared by the makers and abundant owners cannot be changed and/or be distorted. I understand that the user OSX does not want the 2 not-known to many models to be side-lined or forgotten so the most can be done is either set the SV40 model as generation 3.5 or simply just split the narrow-bodied (SV30, SV40) and wide-bodied into 2 different categories. Wfrmsf (talk • contribs) 09:26, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Do you have any reliable sources?

Also removing content is also unhelpful[2]. Bidgee (talk) 10:06, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

The removal was unintended. I was trying to move the content into a correct spot by doing the cut and paste procedure. Wfrmsf (talk) 12:48, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

As for Toyota's claim, It was written on the Toyota website under the Camry's History section while the 1999 Camry was on the market. (Wfrmsf (talk) 10:09, 16 May 2010 (UTC))

Well it's not a verifiable source, not only does it need to be reliable but it also has to be verifiable so it can be checked. Also the large removal of content is extremely unhelpful and no reason into why it was removed. Bidgee (talk) 10:12, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Not trying to remove the international manufacturing topic but trying to to separate the content. Because I was in a sub-edit page, so I cut it from there and attempt to go into the general edit page and paste it there in separate category. Wfrmsf (talk) 10:19, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

I have no problem with the removal of content as it is repeated on the Toyota Camry (ACV40) page.

However, your endorsing of Toyota's claims are probably based on North American information. Wikipedia is supposed to represent a global perspective, so by sidelining the SV40 model, we are basically saying that Japanese models are not important because Japan is not an English-speaking country. Additionally, the "abundant [Camry] owners" are not reliable sources. The "facts" that they "declare" would be based on the information relevant to North America only.

Why is it such an issue for the generations not correlating directly with those relevant in North America? OSX (talk • contributions) 10:26, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

The fact is relevant to also outside of North America, Australian owners also claim that the SXV20/MCV20 Camry as the 4th generation By the way, Here is the reference of Toyota's claim. http://pressroom.toyota.com/pr/tms/toyota/toyota-passenger-car-chronology-90608.aspx scroll down to Camry and look at one of the 1997 chronologies. 1997 is the intro year of the SXV20/MCV20 Camry and the site claims it as 4th generation. As you can see Toyota themselves and the Camry owners that understands the generation layout are on my side of the argument, so please reconsider. Also, wikicars.org provides relevant information on each generations of the Camry and labeled SXV20 as generation 4 and the following numbers for the next generations. Distorting the fact by trying to make room for a not-that-well-known model I believe is a bad idea. At least label the SV40 as generation 3.5 or just separate the SV30 and SV40 into a separate narrow-bodied category. Thanks Wfrmsf (talk) 11:02, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Your right, Australians and North Americans would consider the SXV20/MCV20 as the fourth generation because that series was the fourth to be offered in those countries. However, in Japan, that is not the case. Considering the Camry is a Japanese car, one would have to consider the importance of its home market. OSX (talk • contributions) 12:56, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

In that case, the SXV20 and the SV40 should have no problem being merged into the same fourth generation, due to fact that first of all, the SV40 is just the narrow-bodied version of the SXV20 although with different panels, etc. In fact, the SXV20 and SV40's relation is the same as the SXV10 and SV30, and second of all SV40 and SXV20's production and MY had existed concurrently at one point in Japan so there is absolutely no problem of both of them being the 4th generation Camrys. Wfrmsf (talk) 13:06, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

I have no issue with the SV30 and SXV10 models both being grouped as "third generation" models. The SXV10 is essentially an SV30 with added width and lightly revised front- and rear-end styling. The interior and doors are even the same. The whole issue came about due to Japanese tax legislation penalising cars over 1.7 metres (5.6 ft) in width.

SV40 and SXV20 models do not share such a common level of engineering. All the body panels appear to be unique, and the interiors are completely different. The SV40 model may share some common engineering such as powertrains, chassis and suspensions, but this is no different to the Lexus ES, which is a re-bodied Toyota Camry with luxury fittings. OSX (talk • contributions) 13:21, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Well, as you can see that the SV40 and SXV20 are in the same era for the fact that they both existed as model years 1997-1998 to create another valid explanation to have them merged to the same generations, not to mention what I've talked about earlier. But in terms of their differences, if it's really such an issue, the solution is to separate them in different categories or label those models as generations 2.5 and 3.5. Also, the Lexus ES300 for third generation MY 1997-2001 is a designated MCV20 model. Wfrmsf (talk) 14:00, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

I checked the Toyota Camry article in Japanese language Wikipedia, they in fact have 8 generations of the car. Because they've counted the Celica Camry as part of generation 1 and did not include the Scepter. The Celica Camry is also a Japan-only model and not counted as a generation to the western perspective, which is another reason to make sense to leave the western Camrys the generations for the western perspective and the Japanese version the Japanese perspective. If you're still afraid of the Japanese market being sidelined, the Japanese Wikipedia has their own article for the car to include their markets so there is no need to worry. If you change this article into the version you want again, you are actually in fact sidelining the out-side of Japan perspective. Then you might as well have to label the A40 and the SV30 models as generations alone, to match up the compromised worldly point of view. Wfrmsf (talk) 23:06, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

The Celica Camry is not the first generation because it's a Celica, and not a Camry. "Camry" is just a designation used to differentiate it from the Celica coupe (think "Chevrolet Malibu Maxx" and "Honda Accord Crosstour"). OSX (talk • contributions) 13:12, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for the late reply - been busy over the weekend. OSX, I will take your word that the SV40 and SXV20 share little beside the engine. When I lay out a timeline I get the following:

0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9
SV30 Camry/Vista				SV40 Camry/Vista				SV50 Vista
	SXV10 Camry/Scepter					SXV20 Camry/Scepter					SXV30 Camry/Scepter					SXV40 Camry/Scepter

To me, that looks an awful lot like two separate models. The model codes can also be decoded as follows:

Name	Platform	engine	model	start	end
Camry/Vista	V30	S	SV30	July 1990	1994
	V40	S	SV40	July 1994	1998
	V50	S	SV50	1998	2003
Camry/Scepter	XV10	S	SXV10	1991	1996
	XV20	S	SXV20	Dec 1996	2001
	XV30	AZ	ACV30	Sep 2001	2006	Note Z+X codes combine to form C
	XV40	AZ	ACV40	Mar 2006	present

So the model codes also show two separate models - the V series and the XV series. I see no date gaps between successive V series model and no gaps between successive XV models. So it seems unlikely that we can consider the generations to alternate between the two V and XV series. This is part of the reason why I hate calling models by generations. Since the V30 wasn't sold outside of Japan, it's very natural for non Japanese markets to call the next Camry that they DID receive the next generation. So of course the Australian and US sites will say that the order is SV10, SV20, SXV10, SXV20, ACV30, ACV40 (with the SXV10 following straight on from the SV20). But in a global context this becomes unmanageable. In a global context we have the following choices:

1. find a place for the SV30/40 by pairing like SV30+SXV10 and SV40+SXV20,
2. find a place for the SV30/40 by adding extra generations: eg SV30, SXV10, SV40, SXV20, (SV50 ?), ACV30, ACV40,
3. or go really radical and just split them into two separate model series that Toyota has used the Camry name on differently according to the destination market: eg SV30, SV40 (called Camry in Japan) and SXV10, SXV20, ACV30, ACV40 (called Scepter in Japan and Camry elsewhere).

As OSX said, the SV40 and the SXV20 don't share enough to allow the first option. And the dates don't seem to allow them to be considered alternating generations, striking out the second option. Which leaves the third option.  Stepho  (talk) 05:32, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I think the third option may be the only solution. For option 1 as how the article is laid out as of now, and because of SV40 not being similar to the SXV20 is what taking the sense out of the generation 4 facts as what user OSX tries to claim, but there shouldn't be any major problems because of the MY overlap, so we can also say that the generation measurement counts within the era, not directly to the models. The same way Toyota Yaris is arraigned, 2 different types, - one hatchback (Vitz) and one sedan (Belta) both sold under the Yaris name, same generation Yaris. Wfrmsf (talk) 09:48, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Stepho, with that handy timeline I see exactly what you mean. I knew that the Vista and Camry shared the same model codes, but you kind of connected all the fragmented pieces for me with the timeline (i.e. the dates and the fact that there are two separate continuous Camry/Vista model lines). You're not suggesting we merge the Camry SV30 and SV40 information to the Toyota Vista page are you?

I like your idea of somehow splitting the Japanese-only and international models, but how do you propose we do so without causing confusion? I don't want separate Toyota Camry (Japan) and Toyota Camry (international) articles, as that would be too unmanageable with the earlier and later models correlating with each other.

Also just to clarify a couple of things. Firstly, there is no SV50 Camry as you suggested above ("SV50 ?") and the Scepter name was only applied to SXV10 models, not the SXV20 and succeeding models as well. OSX (talk • contributions) 13:12, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Good, we seem to agree on the general principle. In my mind, the Vista and early Camry in Japan are really the same car - just badged and optioned slightly different so that they can be sold through two sets of dealerships. Likewise for the Scepter and the later Camry. Toyota did this a number of times (eg Corolla+Sprinter, Mark II+Cressida, Corona+Carina). I would like to make the Toyota Vista article a link to here and then make this article cover the Camry, Vista and Scepter names. Making a comprehensible story won't be easy though. I'll make some suggestion and see how it goes.

First of all, lose 'generation' in section titles. The sections would be the following, in this order:

• SV10, CV10; 1983–1986
• SV20, VZV20; 1987–1991
• SV30; 1990–1994
• SXV10, VCV10, MCV10; 1992–1996
• SV40; 1994–1998
• SXV20, MCV20; 1997-2001
• SV50 ZCV50, ACV50; 1994–1998
• ACV30, MCV30; 2002–2006
• ACV40, GSV40; 2007–present

With text in the 1990+ sections saying which market and name applies. We might put 'Narrow body' or 'Wide body' in front of each section title. The main article intro would also have to say that the wide XV series was split off from the narrow body V series in 1991, that both wide and narrow body styles were produced in parallel for the Japanese market but only the wide body was sold on the non-Japanese market.

Or alternatively, arrange them as follows

• SV10, CV10; 1983–1986
• SV20, VZV20; 1987–1991
• Narrow body
  • SV30; 1990–1994
  • SV40; 1994–1998
  • SV50; 1994–1998
• Wide body
  • SXV10, VCV10, MCV10; 1992–1996
  • SXV20, MCV20; 1997-2001
  • ACV30, MCV30; 2002–2006
  • ACV40, GSV40; 2007–present

With text in the 1990+ sections saying which market and name applies. The narrow body section would have one or two intro paragraphs saying that the narrow body V series continued in Japan under the Vista name in parallel to the wide body. The wide body section would have one or two intro paragraphs saying that the wide body XV series was split off from the V series and that the Camry name was transferred to the new series for non Japanese markets.

Does that come across clear enough? I can construct some skeleton versions of these proposals under my user page if it helps (ie with section titles and some simple sentences but not covering other details of each model).  Stepho  (talk) 04:53, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

I have edited the article and made a variation to your above suggestion. I ended up making numerous changes so I have just gone ahead and saved the article. I trust that you will be satisfied with the changes.

I feel that merging the Camry and Vista pages is a bad idea since only the V10 Vista is really a rebadge. The V20 and V30 Vistas seem to be closely related, but different. The V40 model appears to be completely different (compare the doors of the two), and finally the V50 Vista is clearly a model line of its own without a corresponding Camry. For this reason, I cannot support that suggestion. However, I have split the article into "narrow-" and "wide-body" sections, added your above timeline, and included a general overview of the Camry's classification and market at the beginning on the article.

I also changed the model codes again (they have been changed a few times now), as I noticed that you stated above, "Z+X codes combine to form C". This simplified the headings, and takes up less space.

I have also reverted Wfrmsf's edit that changed the section titles from calendar years to model years, as the Camry is a Japanese car, and Japan does not use model years. OSX (talk • contributions) 15:21, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

The XV10 in the timeline is shown through 1995, shouldn't it be 1996? I've not read up on this discussion but I just thought I'd point it out (it says 1996 in the XV10 sub-section). Bdc101 (talk) 16:04, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

The XV10 goes up to the 1996 line, where the XV20 (introduced in 1996) then takes over. OSX (talk • contributions) 01:25, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

You should retain the "International Productions" on the main article, because the fact of Japanese manufactured models VIN starting with J and American manufactured models VIN starting with 4 applies to at least all wide-body Camrys, not only XV40. Also, where did the plants manufactured and engine types go? These facts were not wrong and researched. Wfrmsf (talk) 06:47, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

The international production information was too detailed for this general overview article. Sub-articles were created for the details. The manufacturing locations and engines were removed for the same reason—they belong in the sub-articles. A brief mention in the body of each section is sufficient enough. OSX (talk • contributions) 07:36, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

OSX, good job on the rewrite in such a short time and the excellently formatted timeline. And I will give in to you on merging the Vista article in. But of course I still have some nitpicking :)

1. I would like to remove the 'generation X' from the section titles and just leave them similar to 'V10; 1982–1986'.
2. Some sections spend more time talking about their wide/narrow body counterpart than talking about themselves. Eg, the V30 section says 'The XV10 incorporated unique front- and rear-end styling to the otherwise unchanged body'. It would be better rewritten so that the V30 is the subject, eg 'The V30 was identical to the XV10 except for the front- and rear-end styling to an otherwise unchanged body' (maybe soften 'identical' if you wish).
3. In the narrow body section you have 'Its replacement, the XV20 Camry'. It is not clear if 'it' refers to the XV10 or the V30.
4. Could we add the words 'narrow body' and 'wide body to the timeline? Perhaps just underneath 'Compact' and 'Mid-sized'.
5. A short reprise of the narrow body text would be welcome at the start of the wide body section.
6. I personally prefer the use of XV30 instead of ACV30 but then I always end up having to explain to people where the magically appearing X comes from. So I've always been in two minds of whether to use that style in articles. I guess time will tell.
7. I want to experiment with the timeline to show the models changing in mid-year. Maybe by doubling the number of columns, doubling the colspan numbers, add colspan=2 to the year titles and then shifting the models right by a single column (corresponding to a half column in the old system).

Overall, we're shaping up good.  Stepho  (talk) 10:59, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

1. Done.
2. I know, but because they are Japan-only models, English references are sparse (I do have a Wheels magazine from 1990 which has a fairly good article on the V30 though. From memory, it even discusses that Australia and North America will be getting a wider version.
3. Fixed your stated example.
4. Done.
5. Done.
6. Considering this is mentioned in the "overview" part of the "Narrow-body" section, the V30 section, and the XV10 section, I think mentioning it a fourth time would be overkill.
7. I'm with you on that one. I have changed from XV30 to SXV30 (completely incorrect) to ACV40 on several occasions now. Now that I realise that Z+X=C, I think it is the best solution. Should the sub-articles, like Toyota Camry (ACV30) be renamed to XV30, et cetera? Maybe you could use your knowledge of model codes to explain this in the article. Also, where did you get that equation?
8. Done, see this edit. While it is more precise with the model changeover years, it makes the coding even more confusing than it already is.

Finally, should we merge Toyota Camry Hybrid with Toyota Camry (ACV40) before its gets unmanageable when the next generation is introduced? OSX (talk • contributions) 03:56, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Wow, that timeline came out really good - I must do the same thing to some other timelines.

The Z+X=C equation walks the fine line between obvious synthesis (once the pattern is pointed out) and original research. The SV10 with the S series engine is well known to have the V10 platform (S+V10 = SV10). So its a simple jump for the SXV10 with the S series engine to be have the XV10 platform (S+XV10 = SXV10). Jump forward to the ACV30 which we can reasonably deduce to have the AZ engine on the XV30 platform. Ergo, AZ+XV30 = ACV30, therefore Z+X=C. Look at Talk:List of Toyota platforms for some more examples.

Since you've done such a good job and implemented so many of my recommendations, I'll agree to what you've said above (eg merging Vista, renaming to XV40, etc). As for merging the Camry Hybrid into the Camry ACV40 article , I'll need to think more. It would be unwieldy to have the multiple generations in the Hybrid article that duplicate the XV40/50/60 (future) articles but it would also be unwieldy to repeat the same stuff about engines, batteries, etc in each XV40/50/60 article. The hybrid article is big enough that I'm not keen to shift all of it into the XV40 article. My leaning is to keep a single hybrid article that mentions only hybrid specific stuff and defers the rest to the XV40/50/60 articles. But I need to think on it a bit more. Your thoughts?  Stepho  (talk) 11:21, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

The hybrid-specific information should be located at Hybrid Synergy Drive, just like engine-specific information belongs on the dedicated engine articles. Articles here tend to name the engine (for example, Toyota AZ engine), quote the power/torque figures and sometimes even the engine speeds that these figures are attainable at. Hybrid articles should do nothing differently. The visual differences from the "regular" versions tend to be limited to revised grilles, head- and tail-lamp lenses, interior gauges, badging, and other minor trimmings. Not enough to warrant a separate article; it is no different to the different trim levels in ICE-only vehicles.

I can assure you that the hybrid information can be integrated professionally with the regular Camry article. It will not be “unwieldy to repeat the same stuff about engines [and] batteries” because only a sentence or two would be need to be devoted to briefly describe what a hybrid is, and to appropriately link to the Hybrid Synergy Drive page. OSX (talk • contributions) 08:21, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough, if we treat the electrics+HSD as just another engine+trans option then it simplifies things. You can choose whether you want to put the HC-CV stuff in Toyota concept vehicles, 2000-2009 or not. Note, Toyota HC-CV currently points to the hybrid article but can easily be changed.  Stepho  (talk) 08:58, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Well I've done the merger of Toyota Camry Hybrid with Toyota Camry (XV40) and was reverted almost immediately (I wasn't at all surprised though, I knew someone would fall victim the Toyota's marketing department). Please see: Talk:Toyota Camry Hybrid. OSX (talk • contributions) 07:27, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Merging Vista with Camry

I will merge the Camry Hybrid page over later as it is a big job. Just today I decided to research the Toyota Vista a little further: we were both right. Stepho, you stated that the Vista page should be merged with the Camry article, as they are essentially the same car; I argued for the Vista page to be retained because the cars were different. It seems that you were referring to the Vista sedans (which are rebadged Camrys), while I was referring to the Vista hardtops (which are significantly different cars):

• V10: sedan (rebadged V10 Camry) [3]; hatchback (rebadged V10 Camry). Identical interiors for both the Vista sedan and hatchback.

• V20: sedan (rebadged V20 Camry) [4][5][6]; hardtop (independent model) [7][8][9]. The Vista hardtop was also lightly facelifted and sold as the Lexus ES 250). Identical interiors for both the Vista sedan and hardtop.

• V30: sedan (rebadged V30 Camry) [10][11][12]; hardtop (independent model) [13][14][15]. The Vista hardtop appears to be a narrower version of the Toyota Windom (also sold as the Lexus ES 300)—the side panels (doors and fenders, et cetera) appear to be common between both cars. The Vista hardtop interior is identical to the Vista sedan (which is the same as the Camry sedan), although the Windom has a unique interior design.

• V40: sedan (rebadged V40 Camry) [16][17]; hardtop (independent model) [18][19][20]. Identical interiors for both the Vista sedan and hardtop.

• V50: sedan (independent model); wagon (independent model).

Article-wise, now I am unsure what to do. On one hand, the Vista sedans are rebadged Camry sedans. On the other, the hardtops are significantly different, and then there’s the V50 (of which there is no Camry equivalent). Thoughts? OSX (talk • contributions) 08:28, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Always a tricky decision. In my mind the Vista sedan and hardtop or just variations of the same car (similar to back in the 1970's and 1980's when almost every Toyota came in sedan, wagon, hatchback, coupe and liftback forms). The hardtop seems to differ from the sedan mostly in the hanging panels (guards, doors, bonnet, boot, grill, lights) and allowing for the frameless windows. But explaining this to the casual reader becomes complicated. I suggest leaving the Vista in its own article but for every generation put in a comment that the sedan is based on the equivalent Camry. Likewise, the Camry article should continue to make some references to sharing the base structure with the Vista sedan. Here's a couple of references that you might find helpful:

• http://www.auto-japanese.com/catalog/index.php?action=3&company=TOYOTA&model=VISTA
• http://www.auto-japanese.com/catalog/index.php?action=3&company=TOYOTA&model=CAMRY

I can explain the codes but only the first 2 in the last group of letters is important. J/A/F means Japanese Camry and U/B means Vista. E means 4 door sedan and T means hardtop. P means 4 speed auto and M means 5 speed manual.

If I remember correctly, the Lexus ES (aka Windom) was really an excuse to sell an expensive Camry.  Stepho  (talk) 07:08, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

1987–1990 Toyota Camry Prominent (V20)

1989–1991 Lexus ES 250 (V20)

And it now appears that the Vista hardtop was sold as a Camry as well in the V20 and V30 iterations. See, cars-directory.net. I think it is best to merge as you first suggested. OSX (talk • contributions) 00:10, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Well, the work you have all been doing on trying to figure out and resolve the myriad different Camrys, Vistas, bodystyles and market differences is a really helpful template for some similar work that's one day going to happen to the Mitsubishi Mirage/Lancer and Suzuki Carry. Very useful, I will refer to many of y'alls layout decisions. I also wonder whether the Lexus ES250 was based on the Vista Hardtop or on the Camry Prominent? Can one even tell? Is it of any relevance?

As far as Vista/Camry being merged or separated, I think it's mainly up to how people view Wikipedia: Do we want brief, easily digestible articles, or do we not want to have to keep opening new windows and jump between articles? Either side has its merits, I could easily take either side in this case. Putting in the "See also" Vista subheading in the Camry article was my attempt at making the Vista visible (heh!) and at least that seems to have worked.

 ⊂ Mr.choppers ⊃  (talk) 09:30, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

The Vista is basically a more upmarket version of the Camry sold under a different name. This would suggest that ES 250 derives from Vista as it was positioned as a luxury car to slot under the LS 400 of 1989. The Camry Prominent/Vista relationship can be paralleled to Toyota Australia's 1997 through to 2000 policy of positioning the Camry as a fleet/budget model and rebranding the luxury-oriented models as "Toyota Vienta".

As for your contention concerning the "brief, easily digestible articles" versus "not [having] to keep opening new windows and jump[ing] between articles", I have exactly the same concerns. However, since automobile articles in general are shifting towards separation by generation, to me, it makes more sense to group essentially identical designs and explain these differences on one page. It is for this reason why I strongly oppose the existence of articles such as Toyota Camry Hybrid and Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution, et cetera. In reality, the 2007–present Lancer Evolution X has much in common with the 2007–present standard Lancer, but would share very few if any components with the 1992–1994 Lancer Evolution I. Lancer Evolution I and Evolution X are related in name and concept only. OSX (talk • contributions) 13:40, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Ah, so what's envisioned is one "umbrella" Camry page, one umbrella Vista page and then separate articles for each generation, incorporating both Vista and Camry? Seems like the best option to me, who also opposes the Toyota Camry Hybrid having it's own page. <facetious>The benefit of having the Lancer Evolution on its own page is that all the fanboiz have somewhere they can provide never-ending lists of special editions etcetera ad infinitum; a place where we don't have to see it.</facetious>  ⊂ Mr.choppers ⊃  (talk) 19:32, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

What I was proposing was a complete merger of the Camry and Vista pages. Basically, the complete lineup of Vista V10, V20, and V30 are rebadged Camrys or Camry Prominents (no unique body styles for Vista). The Vista V40 sedan is a rebadged Camry V40 sedan, but there was also a hardtop sedan sold only under the Vista name. Then there is the Vista V50 which is a model of its own.

However, the Vista V50 would fit nicely into this article after V40 in the "narrow body" section as it is a continuation of the Camry/Vista V40 line. OSX (talk • contributions) 00:38, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Also, if you have an opinion on the Camry Hybrid you should make it known at Talk:Toyota Camry Hybrid#Responses from uninvolved editors. I know you've already made a comment there, but your stance is not very clear and you replied in the wrong section. OSX (talk • contributions) 10:16, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Hatchback or Liftback?

Someone changed the caption on the 1st gen 5-dr Camry to read "Liftback" and it was immediately changed back. The references I can find (World Cars 1985, Auto Katalog 1984, Standard Catalog of Imported Cars, The Complete History of the Japanese Car by Marco Ruiz) all refer to it strictly as a liftback, which would match my private notion that anything with a rear sloping at more than 45° is indeed a LIFTback. Now I am fully aware that there is no strict dictionary definition of Hatch- vs liftback, but I was wondering why one was chosen over the other in this case? Both the German and Japanese Wiki entries also refer to the car as a liftback, as does Toyota's domestic Vista brochures (82.08 Vista catalog, with リフトバック clearly legible near the bottom)  ⊂| Mr.choppers |⊃  (talk) 14:21, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

The brochure linked is dead for me (it's a Geocities link, and Geocities no longer exists). Do you have another link? However, HowStuffWorks.com states, "the Camry model line consisted of a four-door sedan and a four-door hatchback, which Toyota called the Liftback." This is inline with the Wikipedia definition of a liftback: "a broad marketing term for a hatchback, which incorporates a shared passenger and cargo volume, with rearmost accessibility via a rear third or fifth door, typically a top-hinged liftgate — especially where the profile aspect of the rear cargo door is more horizontal than vertical, with a sharply raked or fastback profile." OSX (talk • contributions) 23:07, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Odd - the link doesn't work for me either, unless I go through the original page (also a geocities address...). In any case, I uploaded it here as well so that you can see. I guess I'll wait a week or so before I go changing everything, lest there be feathers ruffled somewhere.  ⊂| Mr.choppers |⊃  (talk) 03:12, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

2012 model

The 2012 model is NOT an XV50, it is a heavily modified version of the XV40 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.140.116.33 (talk) 02:00, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

I noticed that Toyota USA have announced it but are not yet selling it (http://pressroom.toyota.com/releases/toyota+introduces+seventh+generation+camry+for+2012.htm). The announcement said it is the seventh generation but different countries count generations slightly different (they only count models sold in their own country and some count facelifts). The annoucement also mentions that it is an "all-new" design but this might be marketing hyperbole. Toyota Japan are still selling the XV40 (http://toyota.jp/camry/spec/spec/index.html). There is no real evidence for whether it is a facelifted XV40 or actually a new XV50 generation.

Also beware that many countries call this a 2011 Camry because it was introduced in mid 2011. Wikipedia uses internationally understood calendar years for section titles (as opposed to US specific model years), so we would call this a 2011 facelift (assuming it is a facelift) because it happened in calendar year 2011.  Stepho  talk  03:00, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Confusion regarding development information based on sources

A number of years ago as an engineering student, I took greater interest in vehicle development. In being one of the highest selling vehicles stateside, I thoroughly researched the Camry history and Toyota development standards and patterns from past to present. I read that the chief engineer for the 1997 model year Camry was appointed in 1991, the same year the XV10 launched. I made the assumption he was referring to when the XV20 Camry program started. By assumption, I'd believed that since the V30 (& XV10 from 1988-89) went into development by the end of 1986 and was touted by Toyota in 1991, as being already development by 1987. By Toyota development standards that I already knew of, XV20 styling would've been completed in 1994. Turns out I was right and it's April 1994 to be exact.

Recently I read otherwise regarding XV20 development length, pointing to a 36 month timetable, with the design freeze occurring 28 months before start of production in 1996. However, Toyota emphasized in the '90s, that their designs never went from an approved design theme to final freeze less than 6 months. By comparison, the 1995 Avalon was designed up to late 1991, arriving in 1994. This has been true of most automakers to date, save for the 1994 Mustang (October 1990 to January 1991) and most Ford design development between 1989-1998 (1997 F-150 was frozen in early 1993). Nissan equally reported spending 29.5 months between design freeze and start of production until the late 1990s/early 2000s, plus an additional 12-15 months with an initial design theme/concept before a freeze.

The problem is, I have to wonder if Toyota is referring to when the XV20 design concept in full-scale was chosen at -36 months to SOP. Then design engineers and Masahiko Kawatsu spent 8 months engineering it for final production approval in April 1994 at -28 months to SOP, meaning the 1991 date of overall XV20 project start date might be correct. The problem is journalists or the individuals they interview, have a tendency to describe development commencement in different ways. Whether it's when planning a new model gets started, when a design theme/concept is chosen, or when a finalized body design is board approved, is what I'm trying to figure out. I am rather struggling with this in other articles. It helps give somewhat a timeline on various models, to give readers an idea of the complete age and background information on a vehicle.Carmaker1 (talk) 08:31, 2 May 2014 (UTC) — copied from Talk:Toyota Camry (XV20)

Camry XV20 and XV30 Development

It seems that it is not clear as what either Toyota or the journalists (writing Camry development history) are referring to at times, in regards start and completion of development. While I only do this as a hobby in my spare time and also work in the automotive industry, I believe from my own experience and research that it has been misconstrued by the journalists in these articles, what is actual vehicle development. Planning, visioning, and conceptualizing constitute the overall start of vehicle development program. That is usually about 48-72 months ahead of production, across different automakers.

For some reason the middle point of these programs, which is usually styling approval, design freeze, or start of production development/vehicle packaging is what will usually be either conservatively 18-24 months or 30-42 months, ahead of scheduled start of production. This stage of production development, seems to be mistaken by secondary or third parties as a vehicle's overall development program. The sources (i.e. Toyota personnel) explaining the development timeline to the journalist(s), may fail to rather clarify and differentiate between different stages and types of vehicle development. As a result, you have people believing that Camry XX began development 18-24 months before production start (October 1999 design approval, October 2001 start of prod.) instead the actual 3 1/2 to 5 years it took from start to finish.

I am bringing up this point, as I clearly stated earlier that the XV20 began development in late 1991, under the same engineer Kosaku Yamada. Due to poor wording in another source recently, I misread that development either started in 1993 or began 36 months before launch. Only reading a new useful contribution for the XV30 by User: OSX on June 17th, did I come to the conclusion that the design approval stage of the XV20 (which was in the summer of 1993 or circa August 1993), is what was being referred to as "start of development" or overall development from then until mid-1996. That is HIGHLY FALSE, as a development program does not just constitute the exterior design process, but also the planning, budgeting, and other initial stages known as "conceptual development". Not to mention the general testing phase, which is usually begins in the third quarter of a development program.

The half or mid-point is usually styling approval, so as to begin the packaging and testing of vehicle parts and components, which is referred to as production or series development. I am reverting my changes to these 2 sections+2 articles as a result and correcting everything to reflect that the XV20 program begin in late 1991, reached styling approved in August 1993, and final production design frozen in April 1994. The XV30 development information will be made to reflect that overall development did not start 26 months ahead of July 2001 production, which is May 1999. People cannot and should not be mistakenly assuming from loose journalism, that the word development always means from scratch, start-to-finish. Unfortunately some journalists to have lazily failed to clarify that from their sources and initially confused me as well.

I am trying to say, please bear with me if it seems I keep frequently undoing my contributions. Unfortunately some of our sources, even if verifiable, can make their own mistakes and contradict other verifiable sources.---Carmaker1 (talk) 04:54, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

More excellent analysis from you again Carmaker1. I'm always impressed by your great research. OSX (talk • contributions) 05:19, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

A quick question though, at XV10 you listed Japanese production started in June 1991. However, if you take a look at Toyota Camry (XV10)#Japan, Japanese sales did not occur until November 1992 for the Japanese made sedan. So can you please double check this one? I was under the impression the European XV10 models were exported from Kentucky. Exports to Southeast Asia and the Middle East from Australia started from 1993 (Middle East was 1996, very late in the XV10 cycle), [21].

You also wrote "The first production date listed for the 2002 model year Camry is July 2001, while the last date given January 2006. This makes sense as Japanese XV40 production began in January 2006. I am still verifying the latter". Where are these dates listed? I would be very keen to access them. OSX (talk • contributions) 05:30, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

I actually addressed this on your talk page talk, as I unfortunately made the late discovery that you responded to me here due to lack of notification. Thank you for tiding up my addition, as I forgot I had written above months ago. Japanese sales may have begun in November 1992, but this actually concerns US models. Sometimes production is supplemented for some reason. I'm personally not too familiar with this practice, as I work for JLR and we currently only have production domestically (outside of Pune, India). The Camry XV40 date has been verified already actually.Carmaker1 (talk) 10:01, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

XV70

Does anybody know if the "all-new" Camry due to be unveiled at the January 2017 North American International Auto Show is an "all-new" facelift or an "all-new" generation? Toyota has the habit of using "all-new" for just about any change - small or large. I will admit that they are due for a generational change on their standard 5-6 year cycle but it is not a given either way. Also, where did the XV70 model code come from? I would have expected XV60 but neither model code has a reference.  Stepho  talk  08:33, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

No response, so I've deleted the XV70 section in the article. We need references that actually support what we are saying.  Stepho  talk  05:07, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

It's a new generation. There seems to be an unofficial auto press release rule that "new" means refresh/facelift and "all-new" means a complete redesign/new generation. Now, if Toyota was calling the 2015 Camry "all-new" then they broke that rule, even if they did change more than the traditional mid-cycle refresh. As for the XV70 model code, if there's no reference for it yet, then we can take it out. For what it's worth, this page and this page call it "next-gen" and "eighth-generation", respectively. --Vossanova ^o< 15:08, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

XV10 in South Africa

The XV10 was sold until 2001 in South Africa when it was replaced by the Australian-built XV30 Camry, while I can find the picture of it on the Wayback Machine's archived copy of the Toyota South Africa website, the dynamic content of that website will not load and so I cannot find exact details. It's well known this was the case, but finding an exact reference for the model is proving difficult. What is the best way to go about this? If you do a search on used car websites in South Africa it's very clear to see, but I don't know how to reference that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.191.229.34 (talk) 18:07, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

XV60 vs XV70

There still seems to be some slow speed edit warring between the XV60 and XV70 code. Toyota Japan has references to the AXVH70 code for the Camry sold in Japan. However, it might also be that there are two concurrent versions of the Camry, similar to how there are two concurrent versions of the Toyota Corolla (E160) and Toyota Corolla (E170).  Stepho  talk  10:32, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

More images.

All the images we got of the 2018 Camry is the hybrid. We need some images of the regular 2018 car or else: 1. Our viewers will never know that the regular style looks like. 2. If they spot a regular 2018 Camry in real life, they will never know it's a Camry unless they read this article.

Also I am busy so I can't take any images right now. Prodigy55 (talk) 22:08, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

If history is a guide, the regular and hybrid Camry are externally identical apart from some badges. Also be aware that when you say 2018 Camry, people outside of America will think you mean a vehicle introduced in calendar year 2018.  Stepho  talk  23:38, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

Narrow/wide body

No one cares about the narrow and wide body differentiation. That was out decades ago. People looking at this article want to be able to search generation by generation. Narrow and wide body means absolutely nothing to the vast majority of people.

The Camry does appear to be notable for having a narrow body [22]p[23] as well for the wide body [24][25] so it does appear to be notable for these, I do agree it is pointless but if it was notable at the time then it should be done like this, FWIW I'd imagine there are offline sources way better than what I've found. –Davey2010^Talk 10:24, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

"That was out decades ago." WP reports on history, so being decades ago is no argument. The narrow-body and the wide-body are quite distinct from each other but were sold at the same time for about 12 years with the same nameplate. The overlapping time means we can not do a simple linear generation list. They are practically 2 distinct vehicles that just happen to share the same nameplate. We put the years in the section headings to help readers understand this separate but overlapping nature.  Stepho  talk  00:43, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

"No one cares", "People looking at this article". Have you noticed that every one of your edits has been reverted? Have you noticed that no-one is supporting your position? It's easy to treat your own opinion as gospel and dismiss other opinions as stupid.

We're a persistent lot that have been here for years. If you prefer trying to force your opinion on the article page then we're also prepared to keep reverting you to protect the page layout that has been hammered out over years. But if you have a suggestion that clarifies the overlap period then we would be happy to hear about it on this discussion page and you might be able to sway us.  Stepho  talk  10:38, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

I’m not sure why Stepho is acting like that, but I think “Narrow Body” should get a separate page because I would assume most people are trying to research the newer generations and have little interest in what happened in the 1980s because 99% of those cars are sitting in the junkyard somewhere. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.187.223.41 (talk) 00:27, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

We're an Encyclopedia .... We cater for Everyone, Some (like myself) prefer the older cars, Some on the other hand prefer new ... Point is people come here for all sorts of reasons so your statement (I would assume most people are trying to research the newer generations and have little interest in what happened in the 1980s because 99% of those cars are sitting in the junkyard somewhere.) is laughable at best. –Davey2010^Talk 01:12, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

I agree with Davey. Your (anon-IP) basic premise is that people only care about recent stuff and old stuff can be thrown away or hidden in a corner somewhere. If that is the case, then why bother showing anything more than the latest generation? WP shows the history of the car from day one to now, not just the latest model. And since the history has an overlap of two styles (narrow vs wide), we need to take that into consideration. We can not throw away history just because you are not interested in it. See WP:RECENTISM.  Stepho  talk  23:08, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

XV60 vs XV70

Looks like the confusion expressed at Talk:Toyota_Camry/Archive_1#XV60_vs_XV70 is still continuing. Toyota Japan lists it as XV70 http://toyota.jp/catalog/camry_main/book/#target/page_no=45 (see DAA-AXVH70-AEXDB code in top right corner). Can you show us this Wheels Magazine article (maybe a scan of a portion of a page) that calls it XV60? Did they actually know or did they just assume the next number after 5 is 6? The 60 or 70 code will be in the first section of the chassis/model/VIN numbers. Has anybody looked at these on the latest American version?  Stepho  talk  23:05, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

V20 in its own article

Is there a reason the V20 and the V10 don’t have their own separate articles like the later ones? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:200:4400:2290:E58A:18E6:10:D3A9 (talk) 05:20, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

No technical reason. They're just waiting for somebody to volunteer.  Stepho  talk  22:20, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

TMMK built ~460,000 SV21 Camrys from 1988-1991, and ~70,000 VZV21s. Some other production data I've found

I parse through insurance auctions online and a great thing they do is include a photo of the build sticker in the door jamb that includes the production month and year, and the VIN. Knowing that TMMK began producing the XV10 September 2, 1991, I've parsed through enough to see several 8/91 SV21s that have serial numbers in the range of ~460,000, such as this vehicle here 4T1SV24E9MU453779:

https://www.iaai.com/vehicledetails/35045160/2

Here is another 8/91 SV21, this one being 4T1SV21E9MU458338 https://www.iaai.com/vehicledetails/35064136/6

In addition, TMMK also built a few VZV21's. This one here is 8/91 build 4T1VV21E3MU069157. or the 69,157th VZV21 coming out of TMMK. VZV21's started off their own serial numbers and didn't use the same sequence as the SV21's.

https://www.iaai.com/vehicledetails/34648161/11

I've also found this TMMK built 1989 model year Camry from 10/1988 with the last 6 digits of the VIN being 006282. Whole VIN is 4T1SV22E1KU006282 https://www.iaai.com/vehicledetails/35064228/1 TMMK started production in May 1988, so by October they had built at least 6282 of them. Not very high in those early years. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84Cressida (talk • contribs) 23:32, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

And finally, it seems all Camry LE's are able to be deciphered from the VIN. All LE's I've seen have had either "SV22" or "VV22" (LE V6 models) after either the "4T1" or "JT2" portion of the VIN. This even includes LE All-trac Camrys, despite the fact the chassis code is SV25. DX models use "SV21"or "VV21" in their VINS and the unbadged base model car uses "SV24" (no V6 offered)

Examples here: Base model https://www.iaai.com/vehicledetails/35074603/7 4T1SV24E8MU350630

DX V6:https://www.iaai.com/vehicledetails/35062020/5 4T1VV21E8MU050006

LE All-Trac: https://www.iaai.com/vehicledetails/35028099/4 JT2SV22J6M0039122

Is there any way we can use this information in the article? I feel like it's definitely interesting and can provide a useful information for fans of the V20 like myself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84Cressida (talk • contribs) 23:30, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

XV70

Is it time to split the XV70 to its own article like the other generations?  Stepho  talk  11:05, 10 September 2020 (UTC)