(first posted 6/12/2013) Today’s Curbside Classic is a cautionary tale; a lesson in how difficult it is to predict the future, and how humbling it can be to bet on the wrong pony (car).
In 1972, I worked briefly on a small construction crew in Iowa City. Two of the young guys had just bought brand new cars. They were both painted silver, and were sporty coupes, but couldn’t have been more different otherwise. One bought a base Mustang coupe, just like in this picture, right down to the wheel covers. The other one bought a Celica Coupe, pretty much like this one. And the two of them argued endlessly about which one had made the better choice.
Frankly, I thought they were both nuts to hock themselves at their tender age; I was driving a hand-me-down 1962 Corvair, and hit the road with it as soon as I had saved a few hundred bucks, leaving them to dig footings, keep their argument going, and make their payments for the next 36 months. But that’s beside the point, mostly. Of course I got caught up in the debate, and you probably won’t be surprised with which camp of the pony wars I had enlisted with.
You didn’t really need to be a very early Toyota fanboy for that. The 1971 – 1973 Mustang was not only the nadir of Mustangs, but pretty much of the the whole pony car segment. It had lost its direction, and was rather overwrought and excessive in just about every way possible. And though it reflected badly on Ford, all of the Big Three were similarly guilty at the time, with a few exceptions. As I looked at that bloated Mustang with its white wall tires and vinyl top, my personal Detroit DeathWatch ratcheted up a few notches. I just couldn’t see where they were going, other than off an inevitable cliff.
Yes, the Celica was a skinny little underfed Japanese kid (2200 lbs), and its approx. 90hp 2.0L four hardly set the world on fire. For the times, it was lively, and compared to the Mustang, it was actually fun to drive. The stick shift was slick, the engine was willing, and at least it sounded and felt like it was trying hard. The manual steering and handling were…well, not up to BMW 2002 standards, but you could toss it around on the back roads and have a ball. It was so slim, one wore it like a suit. In comparison, the Mustang might have been your grandmother’s Grand Torino or LTD coupe: dull, soft, and slow; its de-smogged 302 losing out to the battle of its bulge.
The original Mustang, especially a bare-bones six with a stick, was much closer akin to the Celica than its 1973 namesake. And Toyota’s timing with the Celica was perfect, even more so a year later when the energy crisis hit. The drastically-downsized Mustang II was Ford’s acknowledgment that the Celica had it right.
But by that time, the Celica had won over a lot of loyal fans, especially with its 1975 refresh and the very 1969-Mustang-esque Liftback.
And with the very handsome 1978 restyle, which was penned at Toyota’s brand-new Calty SoCal studio, it seemed that the Celica was well on its way to becoming America’s new pony sweetheart.
That was quite the trick too, considering that this first gen Celica is very Japanese in style and feel. Yes, inspiration and the popularization of the affordable sporty coupe segment may be largely attributed to the original Mustang, but the execution here, especially the details, are anything but Detroit. Actually, the gen1 Celica was progressively “Americanized” throughout its fairly long lifespan, losing the original up-curved face and its delicate little geisha-butt. By the mid-seventies, Toyota knew clearly where the greatest opportunity for growth lay, and opening up the styling studio in California made that official.
We’re not going to recap the whole pony car wars here, and we all know how the Celica story ended. Not like I predicted in 1972; that’s for sure. But in the mid eighties, two significant events turned the tide: the lightweight Fox-body Mustang GT reappeared with its lusty 302, and the Celica went to a FWD platform. Ford had rediscovered its roots and thrived; the Celica went a different direction, which ultimately petered out more or less, unless we consider the Scion Tc its spiritual successor. Or is it over-reaching to consider the Toyota 86 (Scion FR-S) as legitimate successors? Now that would change the otherwise bleak demise of the Celica considerably. That’s not to say it didn’t leave some highly memorable (All-trac turbo), fun and reliable cars along the way.
I’m a sucker for late-sixties to early-seventies Japanese design, even when it descends into kitsch, or worse. It was a time when the Japanese were finding a unique design language of their own, after they stopped blatantly imitating and before they either mastered a more universally acceptable look, or opened styling studios in California (and Europe). I don’t know where the Juke was designed, but Nissan is certainly more than willing to mainstream distinctly Japanese vehicles, like Cube. Meanwhile, Toyota’s Scions, some of them specifically designed for the NA market, are stylistic dullards. Toyota’s race to dominate the American market extracted a price.
The owner of this particular Celica is very representative of so many other Curbside Classics. She’s a young woman who works in the cafe at my neighborhood market, and it was her uncle’s car, who had bought it new. Family keepsakes, passed from generation to generation, like genes. It’s her daily driver, having learned what it takes to keep a vintage Toyota on the road. I smile every time I see it, even though it humbles me to remember how cock-sure I was about its future in 1972.
While the 71-73 Stangs were bloated, the F bodies of the time gradually took over the segment. Those were right for the times, not counted quality. But, then Toyotas rusted away then, too.
OTOH The M-II may be maligned, but if it had not sold well, there’d not have been a “Mustang III” aka Fox Stang.
The liftback you show should be a 76 model–no LB in the summer of ’75.
The 75 was similar to the 74, but with the addition of federal bumpers and the change from the 18RC engine to the 20R. They were fairly similar in looks, though I think the hood had some bulges to fit the 20R. The 76 redo got rid of some of the chrome and went to a sleeker look on the hood.
I had a 75 from new to 99,800 miles. Fun car and fairly reliable.
Man, that’s one very long shift lever on the Toyota. I wonder how the tranny shifts, was the throw as large as the long lever implied?
They shifted improbably well. They had a very light, mechanical and direct feel. I don’t recall the shift throws seeming long compared to other manuals of the ’70s, and you certainly didn’t need the leverage required by some cars and trucks at the time.
As CJinSD stated, they shifted improbably well. Almost no effort to shift, and rarely did you need to use the clutch. Probably the best feature of of an otherwise unlustworthy car.
These Celicas rusted away even in the south.
These Mustangs were the worst ever, but they WERE a PONY car. No Celica ever was… tho the last Supras could be.
My high school best friend had a ’65 Mustang notch. When he eventually sold it, the replacement was a Celica. Really enjoyed the car. I remember it being somewhat softly sprung, but otherwise tossable.
That orange Liftback is sweet. The ’69 Mustang Fastback inspired that design as Paul says.
You hear some folks, not many, saying the ’69 was a lesser year which I never got. It also inspired the ’05 retro Mustang.
I still maintain 69 is the best of the fastbacks and worst of the coupes and convertibles
The 05+ is way more 65-66 2+2 looking IMO, with a little 67-69 thrown in in the details
Beautiful survivor. Too bad about having the bumper blocks. They look better than the all black bumper on the ’78 though.
I always liked the original Celica, but by the early 80s they were all gone in the NorthEast. They were explosive rusters. Poof!! Gone….
Now, is it SELL-ick-ah or sell-EE-cah?
You dont see any American styling touches in the 1st gen Celica? Really? Because its covered in them from my eyes, there are GM and some Mopar cues all over it. Coke bottle curves and hips, exposed gas filler door decked out in chrome regalia, the inset tail lamps and sloping rear deck are very 1st gen Camaro, not to mention the 70’s “uni-bumpers”.
Elegant looking little car, I remember a 7ft tall guy from Chile that owned a tiny little green Celica like this one with a vinyl top, It was amazing to see that guy get out of that little thing,
Agree, not to mention the classic long-hood, short-deck pony car proportions. The dash is reminiscent of the ’67 T-bird, though on a smaller scale.
It also reminds me of the dash form the 71-73 Cougar XR-7
…and the two-door hardtop body style.
Of course I see them. My point was that there are also distinctive Japanese touches too. Around this time, they were starting to develop something of a more original design language, unlike the sixties when many Japanese cars were designed by Pininfarina, Bertone, and such, or pretty blatant rip-offs.
And that shift clearly became more US-centric. Which also made sense, as the US became their main export market.
One can find elements of American cars in the Celica coupe, but overall, it does have a rather distinctive shape. It’s not a rip-off, per se (the liftback’s Mustang tail obviously is).
I see a lot of 67 Cougar in the rear profile of the coupe as well
The Datsun 240-Z was lust inspiring; the Celica not so much so. I did test-drive one of near-end-of-line Celicas and it was a blast. Reminded me of the most positive aspects of my old Volvo 1800 but I knew I wasn’t serious about a sporty car.
This Celica was a milestone of my youth, as my older brother got a GT Liftback in 1976. It was the first Japanese car in my family, and we were impressed. My brother, solidly in the Baby Boom generation, has actually never owned a domestic product since.
In the Summer of ’76, my brother was heading off to college. He’d saved up money from jobs for the car, and my father helped significantly by trading in the 1972 Pontiac Grand Prix we had as a “kids car” (technically my father’s, but since he drove company cars it was an “extra” as my brother and sister were off to college–I couldn’t yet drive). So it was a big deal for my brother to get a new car. Ah, what would it be?
I was a 10-year-old car nut, so remember spending tons of time with my brother and father obsessing over the best choices. The Toyota had won Motor Trend Import Car of the Year and had gotten favorable reviews in the press. My brother loved the Mustang-inspired look of the fastback. Essentially, the Celica went to the top of the list.
But we did shop domestics. I remember looking at Mustang IIs (felt puffy and underpowered–he wasn’t looking for an 8 since he had to pay for gas), plus the ones we saw were strangely equipped–either very base (he wanted a stick) with nothing on them at all, or cheesy loaded Ghia notchbacks. On to Chevy, where we looked at the Monza. It was much better looking than the Ford–actually really liked the styling, but … it had the 4 cylinder from the Vega, which had by then developed a bad reputation. And both my brother and father thought the car felt slow and didn’t like the way it shifted. Believe it or not, we also looked at Oldsmobile (Mom had a Ninety Eight), and my brother was vaguely interested in seeing the Starfire with a 6 cylinder. It was rough! I remember being wedged in the back and feeling the way the car shook when idling–very bad. A funny aside: the salesperson was a woman (named Trudy, will never forget) who took a liking to my brother. She kept cooing about the reclining seats and wanting to “help” lean him back. Back to the cars … didn’t bother with the Skyhawk or the Sunbird, nor the captive Chrysler badged the Plymouth Arrow (remember those?).
On to the Imports. Though the Celica was already the lead horse, we did also look at Datsun and Honda. Spent time with 3 Datsuns: the B210 Hatchback (too cheap, not sporty), the 200SX (strange) and the F10 (even stranger). There was still lust for the 280Z but it was way too expensive. The newly introduced Honda Accord was tempting–I remember my brother really liked it. However, he wanted RWD (we were in the South) and the Accord, while nice, wasn’t as sporty as he wanted.
Then back to Toyota. My brother wanted a Celica in Silver or Blue. The dealer said he could have one in Green (the very bright Kelly green that was common on Toyotas of the era). And if he didn’t want green, well … too bad. Suffice to say that the Grand Prix (ironically also green, though a much darker shade) was turned over and the Toyota became my brother’s.
The Celica turned out to be a milestone car in our family. My brother kept it for 8 trouble free years and well over 100k miles. Really no major issues aside from normal wear and tear. It was light and fun-to-drive, and felt quick for what it was. I got to drive it a bit when I finally got my license, and though it was older and well used by then, it still felt tight. Even my Pop (who at 18 had been sent on his way in the Navy to the Pacific when the bomb was dropped) loved the car. He always said the Celica reminded him of one of his favorite cars, the yellow 1965 Mustang Coupe (he had it when I was born–wish I could remember it). Shame on Ford, and rest of the domestics, for just botching their attempts at making smaller, sportier cars.
What a costly mistake too. My brother, as I mentioned, has never bought a domestic product (even went with Mazda for his family’s first and only minivan). That ’76 Accord did make a huge impression, as his next car was a 1984 Accord (waited about 6 months and paid over sticker to get the dark grey color he wanted on that one), and he has owned mostly Hondas ever since. As for his impressionable younger brother (me), I was a convert as well, and definitely loved the Japanese products of the 1980s in particular. My first new car was a 1988 Prelude Si. Other than 2 Jeep products, I also have not owned a domestic. Even my parents eventually left the domestic fold. Pop got a 1991 Accord SE and my mother got a 1992 Prelude Si 4WS (with no kids at home, she went “wild”). And no domestics since then either.
So that little Celica cut a big swath!
Those V6 Starfires had the odd-firing Buick V6. I remember riding in one once as a kid and thinking what the heck. The Cadillac V864s had a similar sound.
By 71 the Mustangs ride at the top was over it turned into a fat tank of putresence. The Celica OTOH was a great car it looked good went ok considering if you bought the cheap one it was only a reskinned Corona but with the twincam engine these went ok cornering was marginal in true Japanese skinny tyre style but they lasted and were updated, The Mitsubishi GTO made a bigger splash when it landed with 5 speed etc but Toyota as usual got it mostly right.
I much prefer the Mustang to the Celica. Around here in that era Japanese cars didn’t have a good reputation of being durable. This didn’t really happen until the 1980’s since these cars would virtually disintegrate after a couple of winters. The only 1970’s Toyota I have seen in the past 10 years is one that the local Toyota dealer owns and has been stored inside for the past 40 years (less than 10K miles). Even the 1980’s models are pretty much all gone here. Regardless, nice to see that feature car on the road in your area, it looks to be a nice original car.
As for the 1971-73 Mustangs, they always get a bad rap, but they weren’t that bad. Sure they were big, but even compared to the original “small” Mustang, were only talking about 8″ in length difference. The way people talk it’s like the 1971-73 is the size of an LTD. Like many Fords of the era, base models had too soft suspension, but the upgraded suspension packages were decent for the times. The 1971 Mustang had some suspension improvements as well as a vastly improved power steering system over previous models. I liked the fastback styling, especially the 1971 Boss 351 which had acceleration comparable to previous Big block Mustangs with its little 351C. Sure that base 302 Mustang would have been no fun to drive, but that was a typical secretary’s car with soggy suspension and a weak 302. If it had the competition suspension, faster ratio steering and a 351-4V it would have been much more fun to drive.
As far as the worst Mustang, I think most would agree that the Mustang II meets that definition. Although it was a massive sales success, it was far from sporty.
The early 70’s Stangs are also collectable and have a following. Don’t see too many old [none] Celicas at Barrett-Jackson or Russo and Steele auctions.
Perhaps they didn’t have a “reputation” since the Beer Belly Brigade was spouting the “hammered flat beer can” nonsense of the day in regards to Japanese cars. My first car was a 1974 Corolla, sold new for $2500 that went 250,000 MILES before I killed it. It never had one major component replaced in all that time.
Yup, most 40 year old Toyotas are gone. There are still some 40 old American iron around but there were a lot more of them to begin with.
People actually did buy them and here in Ontario they didn’t last. My father was one who bought a 1971 Mazda, then switched back to the big three. He was a well educated professional at that time. In the west coast, you guys don’t have the same issues we do here with cars rusting apart. I have bought a few BC cars and they are MUCH cleaner than Ontario cars.
I grew up in Montreal and moved to Vancouver in 1976. It was not only Japanese cars that rusted. My dad’s 1970 Pontiac had huge holes in it by 1974.
Yes, but there was so much less car to spare in a Japanese car, those huge holes on the Pontiac would have been like 50% of the Corolla falling off!
No doubt that the American cars were very bad too for rusting during this time, but the Japanese cars were worse without a doubt. I just don’t agree with your comment that basically the only reason that these cars weren’t popular was that the people were too ignorant too try something else. We did, and so did our friends and the results were the same. They weren’t very good. None of the big three cars we had from the 1970’s or 80’s were bad vehicles, other than a 1979 Fairmont. And my father daily drove a 1976 Malibu until 2007. My entire family (including my father) now all drive Toyota’s and Honda’s (for the most part).
Ive just been to the store and my camera stayed hereuploading the cohort I walked out sans camera straight into the ONLY 72 Corona that survives locally, bugga yeah its full of bog/filler but it runs and drives and its very rare now durability wasnt their strong suit the mistake of using JDM grade painting saw to that.
There’s a lesson to be noted here.
When the Japanese brought over a car for Americans…mostly, it and they, thrived. People LIKED those light, tossable, nimble cars.
When the Japanese, buoyed with success, started designing TO the American market…the best that came out of it was bland. The worst was kludgy and garish. And somehow the feel, the nimbleness, got engineered out as well. It’s as if Toyota and Nissan/Datsun executives, trying to understand the American auto market, rented pre-Panther LTDs and Sedan de Villes for a week. They noted the wasted space; the numb steering, the weight, the inefficiency…the bland and contrived styling…and targeted for all of those.
I totally agree. I think the 1973 style Celica was really good looking, albeit a terribly small car. The redesign looked horrible imo.
Like what the Germans did to the Rabbit/Golf when they brought its US production to Pennsylvania.
One thing to point out, the Celica name is long gone from the market. It turned into a ‘teen girl’ car, even joked about on ‘Friends” by Jennifer Anniston/Rachel Green.
While the Mustang is still in production, with a new version coming.
The Scion tC may count, but it’s not a Celica.
In fairness, the Mustang has always been a teenage girls’ and baby-boomer men’s car. When the cars were new, the men and women that drove them were young. Since then, it has always been mostly the same generation of men and the youngest women that drive Mustangs. There was a brief time during the Fox-body years that they appealed to gen-X teenage boys too, but Mustang ownership didn’t take with my generation. The only non-baby-boomer male I’ve known that’s owned a Mustang in the past twenty years was a British guy that came here for a couple years and bought a used one.
These were really popular cars in their day and I remember them well. They were well designed, cheap and durable, as good or better than anything else available in their day.
What I found a real stand-of the Toyotas of the era was their impeccable fit and finish. These cars were really well designed and built. Just look at the dash of the first generation Celica here. Real quality. What is more, the cars had features that really added perceived value: every car had a tool kit, plug wrench and even a wheel chock for changing a tire. All the Canadian cars had a rear window defroster, for example.
Things change and the coupe market is largely gone; that’s because people have gotten older. When I was 25 I would love loved a Celica, but my age it’s not my cup of java. That’s why Toyota, and most other makers, have given up on dedicated coupe models.
Defroster was compulsory in our market along with fan forced vent/heat the days of heaters being an accessory was legislated out in Australia and we got a similar spec.
Such a graceful car, pity you guys didn’t get her without the overriders.
My older sister bought a ’72 Celica in 1981, and while I was a year from getting my driver’s license, I was hooked. It really looked and felt like a Japanese Mustang. My mother liked it as well and bought a ’73 Celica a few months later. Then, I bought a ’74 Celica in December, 1982.
I drove that Celica throughout the rest of high school, college and my first year out on my own. It had ~65,000 miles on it when I bought it and close to 130,000 when I replaced it in February 1989. As the car approached 100,000 miles during the summer of 1986, it seemed to have a nervous breakdown, with something breaking on a nearly weekly basis. By the time I got rid of it, it probably needed a valve job or a complete engine rebuild. It died on me once on one of the busiest streets in town, and I had to push it the last block to the Toyota dealer. The front window was rolled down, and when I finally pushed it to the service entrance, I slammed the door so hard the glass shattered inside the door. I called my Dad: “Go to the junkyard, get a driver’s door window, and don’t ask!”
Despite the mechanical issues I had with it in its last years, it was a fun little car to drive. I can confirm that the 4-speed shifter was marvelously slick, and while not exactly a powerhouse, the car was light enough that the little 18RC could move it along briskly. The seats were comfortable, and the dash — other than the embarrassingly bad fake wood — was one of the best of any car I’ve owned. Full instrumentation, including tach, temperature, oil pressure and ammeter. No, it wasn’t a 240Z, but it wasn’t priced like one, either. It felt plenty sporty to me.
I would love to find a first-generation Celica as a fun car, but the aforementioned rust issue (mine was a Texas car and there were small rust areas behind the rear wheels) has made them very hard to find. Plus, many of the survivors have been heavily modified with the twin-cam engines that were only available in Japan — making them pretty pricey.
This is one of the only pictures I have of it, taken outside my college dorm in the fall of 1984.
That picture of the 78 Cutlass brings back memories of my 79 Calais I would have had in 1984. With the t-tops, bucket seats 350 V8 and the F41 suspension it was popular for cruising.
The parking lot at my dorm was full of Cutlasses, Grand Prix, Monte Carlos and Regals. Among my friends, each of the GM A/G bodies was accounted for.
I do like these first generation Celicas a lot, in both coupe and later liftback form, although a little less so since the US models only came with those nasty 5mph bumpers. I can’t say I’d choose, or even crossshop a Celica over a 71-73 Mustang though, and even if I miraculously did I certainly wouldn’t choose it over a 70-73 F-body. Ironically the only way I would buy one over a Mustang is if the only choice was the Mustang II.
I think Im the only one that loves 71-73 Mustangs. Make mine a Metallic Lime 71 Mach 1 429 SCJ with a Top Loader 4 speed. They look tough. Gen 1 Mustangs are sooooo played out.
Not a whole lot of dudes lusting after Celicas of any year though. Classic Toyotas aren’t exactly setting the collector car market on fire.
A quick trip to Ebay showed a nice 71-73 Mach 1 could be bought in the high teens to low 20s. A same generation Celica could be bought for…NOTHING!!! Because there were none to be found, lol. The market has spoken.
Try looking a little harder – this 77 is already past $26k
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/GT-/181153630914?redirect=mobile&forcev4exp=true
This exact car sold for $19k just two years ago (no it’s not mine nor do I know the owner 😉 As hard as it is to believe, old Japanese cars have been appreciating in value in recent years.
I would call that 77 Celica on Ebay an anomaly. Its a nice car for sure but my guess is its either being bid on by someone that just has to have the car for personal reasons or its being shilled up to its BIN price.
So I went back to Ebay and OldCarTrader as well and this time included a search up to 1983 Celicas. I found a grand total of 7 cars available, all under $5K (most under $2K) including another rust-free ’77 in California.
So yeah I stand by my statement that there is not a broad market for classic Japanese cars. Now the Toyota Land Cruiser, that’s a different story and they are bringing serious $$$ these days along with other classic 4X4s. But cars…the Datsun 240Z has a following and to a lesser extent so does the 510 but not many more than that. 😉
And yes, I know a 1967 Toyota 2000GT just sold for big bucks ($1M?) but Im not including it or the Mazda Cosmo, or Japanese market Nissan Sylvias, Im only talking about mass produced cars that were sold in the US.
Also don’t agree with your view on Japanese collectible cars. The oldest Gen Xers are turning 50 and grew up on Toyotas, Hondas and Nissans just like the Boomers did with their muscle cars, Mustangs and Camaros. Hemi ‘Cudas haven’t always been $250K at auction, that’s a fairly recent thing.
Original low mileage cars of almost any make have gone nuts in value over the last couple of years. In addition to my point about the demos, I attribute that to how generic cars have become since about 1995. If you want a car with character these days you almost have to go old.
Another reason is that automotive technology has not been advancing at the pace it did in the 1980s (which is one reason it’s so ridiculous to compare a LS400 to a G1 Seville but I digress…).
It has plateaued and you give up very little in an early 90s Civic over a brand new one. In fact the early ones are better in nearly every way except passive safety.
The previous generation could not say that. The average new 1990 car was in a different galaxy than the average twenty year old 1970 model. To say it another way, with today’s collectibles you don’t have to give up driving enjoyment, reliability and safety to have your nostalgia.
In the case of Japanese collectibles, and this is off the top of my head, you have…
70s: 510, 240Z, Celica, RX-7
80s: RWD Corolla GTS, MR2 G1, Supra G1 and G2, 240SX G1, Maxima SE, Civic Si, CRX G1, Prelude Si, Integra G1, Legend
90s: Supra G3, LS400, SC300, SE-R, 240SX G2, 300ZX, G20, Civic last double-wishbone, CRX G2, Prelude SH, Integra G2, NSX, RX-7
Those are just the more performance oriented models. There were plenty of nice Accords, Cressidas and trucks to round out the mix and suit every taste.
If you were to pick the facing domestic model of almost any car in my list the price would be lower. Much of that has to do with the import tuner craze which took so many J cars out of circulation, and boosted their desirability.
I don’t agree with your statement about classic Celica’s not setting the market on fire, but I most certainly DO agree with you on the Mustang, that 71 shape especially is co cool. That shape is about the only Mustang I would own. I also really like it’s distand antipodean cousin the XA-XC Falcon.
XC was the better one Ford evicted the rust bugs mostly by then the XA was amazing in its ability to rust out and I did have a seethru XB in QLD but XCs last.
I always liked the ’73 Mustangs. I thought that long hood and short deck made a great look.
I love this model of Celica, I used to prefer the lift-back, but I think I prefer the notch now.
It’s a pity that you guys got those over-riders, as they ain’t pretty…..
One day I might purchase one, but these are starting to appreciate in value too.
Incidentally I have a few friends with ths model, one with two lift backs and a notch back, and another with one of each. His have had transplants, one with a 1JZ-GTE, the other with a 1UZ-FE (Lexus V8).
Oh and Paul “I don’t know where the Juke was designed,” – it was designed in Nissan Europe’s London design centre, which often surprises people.
Theres a Lexace around here V8 lexus in Toyota Hiace van its bloody quik and locally there are at least 3 lexus powered Hilux utes early models
There are factory 1UZ-FE powered Hiaces, they were used as ambulances in Japan. Would be quite the shaggin wagon.
Fun tidbit about the photo of the mustang/celica at the top of the page: The ’72 Mustang on the left is a pre-production prototype. Note the lack of chrome wheel-lip and rocker trim that became standard issue that year.
In Japan that early Celica was affectionately known as the ‘Daruma Celica’ (Daruma being a squat, round figurine with only one eye filled in; you fill in the other when you reach a goal that you’ve set for yourself). Speaks to the fact that at the time, its curvy Coke-bottle lines and wraparound fascia must have looked as striking to the Japanese as its compact size did to Americans.
I’ve got a thing for these micro-musclecars from early ’70s Japan. Only thing I don’t like is the dead-feeling recirculating-ball steering on most Japanese cars of this vintage. The TA22 Celica is no exception–you get an inch of play either side of straight-ahead, and complete numbness until you take up the slack.
The Celica was at that time, too small.
It was too narrow.
Shifting in a car with no elbow room sucked.
The reason it ended up being a girl’s car is because it was too damn small.
The Mustang also sucked.
It was what a Torino or Fairlane was in the previous generation.
The Mustang was bloated, poorly balanced, full of rattles, rusty and hard to see out of.
The Celica screwed up by becoming a girl’s front wheel drive car. The Supra was the man’s car. The Fox Mustang and Capri did this too. The Mustang was the man’s car and the Capri was the girl’s car. Mercury worked for the ladies market extensively throughout the 1970s with women spokes models and denim-butt covered trunk lids.
When the 1978 Celica redesign was revealed, I gave up. It was ugly and goofy looking. The headlight surrounds looked odd with the round headlamps, the beltline didn’t fit the front fender line. The huge metallic B pillar was obviously trying too hard. It fixed the small interior dimensions for men over six feet tall, but ended up being too expensive, and a poor shadow compared with the Fox Mustangs pointing the way for the testosterone crowd.
This guy-car, girl-car dichotomy strikes me as vastly overblown. It accepts pretty polarized gender stereotypes that I suspect can’t be supported by actual psychographic research.
Or facts.
In ’95 my new girlfriend, now my sweet wife, thought my ’87 Celica GT was attractive and smart, and she liked driving and riding in it. A nice part of her first impression of me. Fast, stylish and reliable she said. She drove an Alfa GTV6 coupe at the time.
…
So you were the actual owner of said Celica, but because your future Wife liked and appreciated it, it’s a “chick” car? With that logic, every Ferrari, Aston, Porsche, and Lamborghini owner must also be “chick” car enthusiasts… I’ve yet to meet any intelligent Lady who wouldn’t take instant ownership of a set of keys from any those thoroughly “masculine” brands.
That dichotomy also ignores the fact that ‘guy cars’ and ‘girl cars’ are often… the same car. Eg: Jeep Wrangler, Mustang, Camaro, virtually any BMW or Merc… they’re all ‘personal statement’ cars.
Ten years ago, my then-girlfriend, now-wife commented on the ’60s-British, minimalist dude appeal of the ’95 Miata I drove at the time. Bless her for that!
Some cars do skew more heavily female than others, and the automakers know it. As an example, VW’s most recent redesign of the Beetle was intended to increase the proportion of male buyers, as the rate of female buyers of the New Beetle had been as high as about 70%, which VW considered to be excessive. There can be some truth to it.
There is a lot to be said in demographics. Every major company that sells anything knows who their customers are.
Some cars DO have skewed demographics, some for practical reasons, others simply because of looks and driving personality.
The VW New Beetle (98-12?) was exceptionally popular with the ladies because it was fairly small, coupe, efficient, drove nicely, and looked cute. It would take me all day to count the number of those Beetles that I have seen with eye lashes on the front headlights, flower appliques in the rear, and of course the ubiquitous flower in the factory vase on the dash. Although I did know a guy once in the early 00s that worked at UPS, drove a Chevy C1500 with bed cap, was about 6’3, and worked in industrial engineering that showed up for work one day in a NB. Ostensible with some input from his wife I never did understand what he got out of the car…
Car buying tends to follow the demographic, but you will get some pretty wild exceptions on occasion. We once owned a 1994 Beretta Z34 purchased new by an elderly lady as her last car in her late 1970s because she couldn’t get in and out of a Camaro Z28.
From what I have seen, Camaro v. Mustang v. Challenger today the Challenger has the most male highest income demographic, the Camaro in the middle (but still leans male), while the Mustang has a lower average income and nearly twice the female % of the Challenger of buyers. Especially the base V6 model that is said to be 48% female. So much so that everyone is talking about the 2015 Mustang abandoning a lot of its retro theme and going to a more youth oriented European look.
http://hedgescompany.com/blog/
http://backfires.caranddriver.com/forums/53/posts/59236-demographics-stereotypes Have some fun!
OTOH The M-II may be maligned, but if it had not sold well, there’d not have been a “Mustang III” aka Fox Stang.
Glad I’m not the only M-II defender. While not what we look back and consider a ‘Mustang’, it saved the species and sold hundreds of thousands. Not bad. And it handled much better than the ’71-’73….
That’s funny, you see a Mustang that’s “was rather overwrought and excessive in just about every way possible.” In that copper example I see a very clean and purposeful design with a strong character line and forward thrusting hood that does a great job of conveying motion. Properly optioned it wouldn’t have been a bad driver, if a little too large.
The Celica on the other hand is stubby, laden with pointless bling and marker lights that look like they were snatched from the nearest parts bin with no regard to aesthetics.
I had the Celicas bigger brother the 73 MK2 corona coup’e and the styling is identical and that was designed as a US market car the Corona got the 2.2 6 soon to grace the Cressida the Celica got the 4banger corona powertrain so if it was too small look around the shop they did have others.
I always thought the 71-73 Mustang looked like you could take a can opener and remove some sheet metal and there would be the previous generation car underneath.
I’m of the opinion that the current Mustang is starting to look and feel a bit too much like the ’73 BloatStang. Obviously with vastly better performance, tech, safety, and reliability, but can we have a next-gen Mustang that’s a bit more lithe and easier to see out of?
Truth be told, the Mustang has seemed that way to me since 2005. The 05 has the retro styling of the Mustangs year’s everyone fondly remembers though, so it always got a bloat pass.
The current one lacks as many traditional Mustang styling elements the 71-73s did so it’s similarly a lot less forgivable.
The first generation Celica created quite a stir among young males in my city, much as the first 240Z did. It was hard not to love its stylish lines and interior layout. The price was right so its no wonder Celica’s were everywhere for a few years. After the liftback model appeared, it seemed to me the party was over.
I’d guess the closest domestic alternative to a first gen Mustang in 1971 was the Duster/Demon? Not quite the sporty stance, but definitely the compact base & build it as you want options.
I would have thought the popular alternative to the 71 Mustang would have been the Camaro/Firebird, Yes? Dusters were more positioned up against the Nova, me thinks.
He’s looking at the 1971 alternatives that would closest match first versions of the first gen Mustangs – 65-66 – The second gen F bodies were in essence as bloated and impractical as the 71 Mustangs were, they just had a better tailored suit, same with the Barracuda and Challenger. These did Sporty better arguably too, but there was a semi-practicality to the 65-66 that got lost in translation as more and more emphasis was made on big V8s and GT40 aping fastback styling and roof heights. The Mustang always managed to please huge swaths of buyer’s with the coupe/fastback bodystyle but by 71 even it had many of the fastback drawbacks.
The styled compact coupes (68+ Nova/Maverick/Duster) replaced the six cylinder Mustang etc in the market. The 1971 subcompacts also ate some of that youth market business for a distinctive and economical car, the same way someone might end up choosing between a Mustang six and a Beetle even tho they’re very different cars and prices.
I knew of at least two Celicas in my circle. One girl had the ’74, and it was her reliable, daily driver for years. I rode in the back as passenger a few times and it was pretty cramped as I recall, but not as lacking in space as the Mustang. Another chap I knew had the 1978 Celica, his daily driver, a 100 mile commute each way, and he got hundreds of thousands of miles from that car. It truly stood the test of time, and reliability after having received less than caring treatment.
The 73 Mustang I had for a weekend was great to me, it was new, and I was a new driver. Driving this was part of my driver training, outside of driving school. No room in the back at all as I mentioned, where my parents were stationed, my Uncle rode up front as he was licensed. Transporting family members to and from Niagara Falls was enjoyable, I always liked the style of that generation.
Never the Mustang. Once upon a time the Celica. But now, if you put me in a time machine and sent me back to ’73, I’d go full Rockford—even before The Rockford Files got on the air:
I would pass on the color and the back end needs that spoiler to look right, but I would and did, take an F-Body over a Mustang or Celica. My friend’s sister had a blue ’80(I think) Celica and like it’s mentioned in an above comment, the speed it rusted away at was amazing. It was like the steel used in it had some chemical no cars but other Japanese ones had, triggered by road salt. It was a great car for her, but in 4 years it was a mess. She got it through to about 100K at about the six year mark, and then it went to the scrapper when it cracked going over a rough railroad crossing, and couldn’t be driven and repairs were, well, crazy to even attempt. She got an ’86 Camry and had that about 10 years, then she bought a Chevy Silverado and has been pickup only since. She just got a new Ram last year.
The ironic thing about the A20/A30 Celica is that the export versions largely avoided the Mustang’s zillion-options, have-it-your-way marketing onslaught, which was a MAJOR part of the Celica’s raison d’être in the home market. Different markets got different versions, but it was much more of a one-size-fits-all arrangement. In the U.S., Toyota made hay of the fact that basically the only option on the initial Celica ST was a radio (and presumably the inevitable dealer-added floor mats) — very un-Mustang-like!
That definitely was not true in the home market, which was all about options. Some of the lower-spec JDM variants were less glitzy, which was kind of an improvement, although sadly Toyota didn’t emulate the Plymouth Road Runner by letting you specify the hottest engines on the cheapest grade and trim.
(If you’ve driven a U.S. Celica of this vintage, “hottest engine” may sound a little suspect, but the non-U.S. 1600GT and 2000GT with twin-cam engines and five-speeds — and no U.S.-spec bumpers to haul around — had very respectable performance for the time. They still couldn’t handle until the long-nose versions arrived in ’76, but they were decently quick.)
As alluded to above, the first generation of a sports car is usually the best.
On later editions, the Marketing Dept tries to water down the fun factor to appeal to broad audience.
When I was born in 1985, my mom had a 1977 Celica coupe ST 4-speed. She actually had to drive herself to the hospital while in labor with me because my grandmother doesn’t drive manual.
She loved that car and still talks about it. I vaguely remember it. It started her love affair with small manual transmission cars. I’d love to have one simply because she had one.
One of the American “founders” of CALTY was Mr. Strother MacMinn, long a top instructor at Art Center College of Design. He developed numerous Toyota contacts over the years; that combined with his professionalism as a Industrial Designer earned him the position at CALTY.
CALTY’s first Celica was developed under the auspices of a former GM designer (forgot the name!), and shows a very Opel like influence. DFO
You’re thinking of David Stollery. He’s an interesting person (and also a former child actor) — and while young at the time he came over to Toyota, he’d had a good amount of experience at GM. Stollery was the lead designer on the Calty Celica, and did a great job on that car.
My sister Pat passed away this week and while going through photos for the service I ran across one from 1979 or 1980 with her proudly standing in front of her new light blue Toyota Celica.
The photo is too small for the service, but this is a car site and we are talking about Celicas, albeit earlier models.
She had been in a financial bind after a nasty divorce and her early 70’s Buick Skylark was rusting out from under (and over) her. At that time I was financially able to help Pat by getting her this car as a gift and as a way to make her feel better. She drove this car for many years and loved it. I found it to be very comfortable, well designed, and it had great seat upholstery. The 22R engine provided all the needed power I ever asked of it.
When her Cadillac driving ex-husband came by to see the kids he looked long and hard at the Celica. I told him: “You wouldn’t like it; it’s good.”
That was a long time ago. Pat was only 83 when she died from complications of Alzheimer’s, just like our father, and just like our paternal grandmother.
Enjoy every day. Don’t waste a single one.
My condolences on the loss of your sister.
You (and the Celica) obviously played a significant role in her life. I loved the line you told her ex.
And I’m working on taking your advice to heart.