I rented a car for our trip to Maine from Va. We ended up with a 2014 Toyota Camry. The car was equipped with the 4 banger which was an amazing engine. Overall we achieved about 30 MPG's loaded with four adults and our gear travelling between 75-80 all the time.

As for the rest of the car: The car wasn't all that well equipped so I'm sure that had something to do with the lack of comfort.
The seats front and back were hard as rocks. Adjusting driver seat position didn't help much. The steering wheel had no movement at all.
Visibility was ok but not great.
The stereo sucked.
The a/c was great.
Road feel and drivability was great.
Trunk space was great.
Ingress and egress front and rear from both sides sucked.

With Toyota's reputation of quality and reliability, I'm confident that this car would outlast any competitor, however, it's not worth it if you hate driving it.

 

Camry...........WTH is a "camry"?........Japanese for "boring"?

 

But in today's world 30 mpg isn't much.

Our 99 Crown Vic P71 get up to 23 mpg on the road.

I rented a Hyundai Elantra it got 40 mpg @ same speed's with only two & my service dog but a trunk full of baggage. We left at 500 ft of elev. & climbed up to as high as 7000 ft. So a bunch of uphill & driving @ 5500-7000 ft.
It sat comfortable, handled & rode great, great A/C, Stereo, & great performance. The only down side I saw was a little more road noise than I expected.
I'm sure the Elantra is thousands less than a Camary. Not to mention 10 year/100,000 mile warranty .

 

In the rental world, the Camry, Fusion and Altima are considered as full size cars. I wholeheartedly disagree. My sister has a 2014 Elantra and is getting 40 all day but it's significantly smaller and should get that MPG.

If buying, I would pass on the Camry and go for the Hyundai in a a minute.

 

Toyota's legendary quality is nothing but legend anymore. On more than one occasion I have looked around to find the source of a blue cloud ahead, and seen a very new looking Toyota.

 

My wifes 96 3.8 T-bird logged 32 mpg on one extended highway trip, 30 mpg from a NEW Camry seems pretty un-remarkable.

Hell, even my 84 5.0 Mustang GT broke 30mpg on one LONG highway trip.

 

I guess I didn't realize they were considered Full Size. Thanks for clearing that point.
But still 30 mpg isn't that good, when in 1975 my dads Cadillac Couple with a 500 CI V8 got 18 mpg @ 80 mph.
These new cars & Truck should be getting 50-70 mpg all day long. Considering they are so advanced over 1960s-1970s.
I had a 62 Chevy Biscayne 4dr 283 cast iron powerglide that got 16-18 mpg

 

The manufacturer considers it as mid size while the rental world classifies is full size.

 

So, the seats suck, driving positions suck, wheel position sucks, stereo sucks, getting in and out sucks but the A/C was good, there was trunk space and you could feel the road.

Sounds like a typical unimpressive rental car.

 

I've rented many mid and full size cars with favorable experiences. This is more of a bash on Toyota's flagship car.

I'm a firm believer in renting a car for a long term test drive before making a purchase. i I were int he market for a Camry, I'd look at another brand after this week.

 

I have a rental of an Excursion on a trip to visit my uncle in Fairbanks to thank for my Excursion obsession!

 

We rented a '14 Charger last Saturday morning in Seattle. We drove it back to Pasadena starting on Monday morning. Seattle to Crescent City was the first day. I made the first leg of Seattle to Eugene. On the second leg, the MPG average on the display crept up as high as 31 or so. Overall, I think we ended with about a 29 showing on that.

This was an SE with cloth seats, no lumbar, 4 way power (they say 5 way on the web site, but all I could get was fore and aft, up and down) for the driver, tilt, cruise, PW, PDL, auto lights and a few other bells and whistles.

It was also the V6 with the 5 speed auto. Plenty of power, smooth shifting, decent steering, decent handling and driving. Smooth enough. A bit of road noise on rough roads. Rear comfort was OK, I spent a few hundred miles back there. But, the visibility in the back is poor, due to the huge headrests and the slope of the roof cutting off the rear windows. Kids didn't complain about it.

I'd look at one if we were to buy that size car, but I'd try to get the better seats at least. That six has plenty of beans but it sounds like crap at WOT, even at 6500 rpms it never gives you a decent roar.

It had 18000 on it, solid, no squeaks or rattles or panel shakes etc. Had it up to 90 for a few seconds, felt fine.

FWIW, ymmv.