Audi 100 vs Toyota Camry – Double Test – Old Box

With the last generation of the Audi 100 (which was eventually also sold as the A6 after the facelift), Audi created a car that again marked a clear step forward compared to its predecessor. Competitor Mercedes-Benz still had to make do with the strong but also somewhat outdated W124 and the BMW 5-series E34 was already a bit older than the 100. Yet the 100 was not suddenly unthreatened on the throne and suddenly there was competition from an angle from which there was not much to fear until then. In 1991 Toyota presented the brand new Camry of the XV10 generation. A car that came out much better on many fronts than the Camry that we knew in the Netherlands until then.

To start with, the Camry had a very sleek and modern appearance for its time. When you see them side by side 30 years later, the Audi 100 looks in a way more like an 80s legacy than the Camry, while there was only such a short period of time between the introduction of the two. But hey, looks can be deceiving. To really get a good picture of this new Japanese, we had to go out with both the Audi 100 and the Toyota Camry.

Once we took a seat in the Camry, we noticed that the whole thing made a very neat and ergonomic impression, but just lacked that edge of class that the Audi 100 radiated. “It’s like the difference in style between Doris Day and Grace Kelly: both excellent actresses, yet Grace Kelly already had something royal before she became Princess of Monaco,” we compared. Interiors have often been a weaker point of Japanese cars compared to German competitors and to some extent that was the case here.

So it largely came down to the often impressive technique from the land of the rising sun. That was also good in the Camry. The handling met European standards and although the Audi 100 smoothed out imperfections a bit better, the Camry was certainly not disappointing. The Toyota scored a big plus with its 2.2-liter four-cylinder, which did its job just a little more smoothly than the five-cylinder engine in the Audi. The fuel consumption was also slightly lower with the Camry and, moreover, it was a fraction faster than the 100. Another plus for the Camry: with 517 liters of luggage space, it was a fraction more spacious in the back than the 100 (510 liters). In the back seat you had a little more space in the Audi, but that was also quite good in the Camry.

Still, how good the overall picture of the Audi 100 was if you took it on the road and the German still had an edge over the Camry. It all felt like just a little ‘more car’. The finish, road holding, the sound when you close the doors, the overall picture in the interior. In the end, however, you were seriously doubted when you put the price tags of the two cars side by side. The base price of the Camry was fl. 48,850 no less than fl. 13,500 below that of the Audi. If you also wanted to equalize them on equipment level, the price difference even rose to 18 grand. A hole that we couldn’t really explain. Yes, the Audi had an overall advantage, but not such an expensive dash. Toyota hit the mark with this generation of the Camry. In the sales figures, however, the Camry only managed to equal 100 for one year, but the XV10 generation took the highest number ever for the Camry in 1992 with more than 2,000 copies sold.