(first posted 5/18/2015) Toyota, among other automakers, tends to receive a great deal of criticism from enthusiasts and non-enthusiasts alike over the general lack of excitement across its lineup. This is largely due to the fact that Toyota does not sell anything remotely sporty beyond the minimally-promoted Scion-branded FR-S and tC in North America. That’s not to say that Toyotas are bad vehicles. They generally offer above average levels of safety, reliability, and affordability, which alone is enough to get many new-car shoppers excited. But in terms of generating an genuinely emotional response, Toyotas have largely come up short in recent years.
Although little more than distant memories now, Toyota was in fact, once a maker of some exciting and non-appliance-like cars that combined sporty looks with actual performance. A far cry from today’s sporty Corolla S and Camry XSE, there were cars like the 2000GT, Supra, MR2, AE86, Soarer, and, the longest-running of them all, the Celica.
The Celica’s long and storied history began with the 1971 model year, when it was introduced as a small and sporty personal coupe. Riding on a taut 95-inch wheelbase and weighting around only 2,000 lbs. for most versions, the Celica was powered by various sizes of Toyota’s long-running family of R-Series longitudinal straight-four. The performance-minded Celica GT also featured relatively uncommon dual overhead cam engines, although North American models would not be equipped as such. Available as both a 2-door pilarless notchback and a 3-door liftback, the Celica could be loaded with options such power windows, air conditioning, and a full-length floor console, features rarely seen on a car of its small size at this time.
Redesigns would come for 1978 and 1982; during this time the Celica would see increasing levels of power, as well as an aftermarket targa-top convertible and later a true folding soft top convertible. The Celica was also responsible for spawning the higher-performance six-cylinder Celica Supra, and the four-door Celica Camry, which would both soon become models of their own, dropping the Celica moniker.
The biggest changes in both engineering and styling came in 1986, when the Celica switched to front-wheel drive and in true dramatic Eighties fashion, now rocked “aero” styling. Despite its switch to front-wheel drive, beginning in 1986 the Celica would be available with an advanced full-time all-wheel drive system, marketed as the GT-Four in Japan and as All-Trac Turbo in the U.S.
Still available in coupe, convertible, and liftback form, the Celica would once again be significantly redesigned for 1990. While it retained the pop-up headlights, the Celica now wore very rounded sheet metal that would soon lend its way to other Toyotas, including the 1992 Camry and Corolla. The range-topping GT-S, with its turbocharged 2.0L I4 now made 200 horsepower, making it the most powerful Celica ever sold in the U.S. By now, the Celica could be equipped with lengthy list of premium features, such as leather seating, anti-lock brakes, premium audio system, and automatic tilt-away steering wheel for easy entry/egress.
This also brings us to our featured sixth-generation Celica, introduced in late-1993 as a 1994 model. Up a smidgen in length and width, the Celica was still relatively compact, with its wheelbase just under 100-inches. Gone were the pop-up headlights, a Celica hallmark since 1984. In their place were recessed quad round headlights, a thoughtfully retro element that hadn’t been featured on a Celica since 1979.
As a whole, styling was more aggressive, especially on the 3-door liftback, that borrowed many cues from the now almost supercar-like 1992 Supra, as well as the MR2. Coupe and convertibles were a bit tamer-looking with their more upright rooflines and attractive, but friendlier-looking taillights not shared with the liftback body style.
Yet, as much as its looks said sports car, in actuality it was quite the contrary as far as the North American Celica was concerned. While Japan, Europe, and Australia were treated to the 3S-GTE 2.0L turbo I4 that now made 239-251 horsepower (depending on region), for North America, all-wheel drive, turbo power, and the GT-S model all disappeared. Rather disappointingly, this left the Celica GT with its 135-horsepower 2.2L I4 as the most powerful Celica stateside.
This decision likely wasn’t because Toyota wanted to turn its back on performance, but primarily for budgetary reasons. Coupe sales in general were down, and high-performance compact coupes simply weren’t high-demand vehicles. Eliminating slow-selling models and focusing on the cheaper, better-selling, and broader-appealing ST and GT models just made more sense financially. Besides, Toyota still had the MR2 and Supra to its name, both of which had successively increased in size and performance over previous iterations.
Interior-wise, there was also clear influence from the Supra in the sixth generation Celica. The somewhat cluttered instrument panel of the fifth generation were replaced by a cleaner and more gracefully curved center stack, slightly angled toward the driver. Like most Toyotas of this vintage, fit-and-finish was generally good, although there were areas such as the all-plastic door panels, that at least to the eyes, came across as cheaper when compared to the previous Celica.
Commemorating the car’s 25th anniversary, in 1996, a special “25th Anniversary Limited Edition” decor package was available on U.S.-spec Celicas. Mainly just exterior and interior badging, plus embroidery on the front seat backs, the package continued on Celicas the following year as simply “Limited Edition”, minus the seat embroidery. This particular car is a 1997 GT convertible with the Limited Edition package. It also sports a wood-trimmed interior, which I believe was a dealer-installed accessory.
Beginning in 1997, Toyota would begin thinning the Celica line even further in the U.S. to cut down on overhead. The GT notchback was the first to go, followed by base ST models, and then all notchback coupes. I don’t even have rough numbers, but I’m willing to bet that Celica sales had been on a downward trend for some time anyway.
The year 2000 would see an all-new Celica for the final time. Now just a single liftback offering, styling was, for better or for worse, new, with lots of sharp angles as opposed to its predecessor’s rounder shape. Once again however, North American models would be deprived of the most powerful engines and performance upgrades offered elsewhere. Still, one could say that the 2000 Celica was an improvement, as power output was up and weight was down, making for more a spirited driving experience.
Predictably however, sales were disappointing. This is beginning to sound like a broken record by now, but by like so many cars of the 2-door variety from the late-1980s-onward, the Celica’s death was largely due to the fact that the demand for coupes simply wasn’t there when compared to sedans and SUVs. With little fanfare, Toyota stopped exports of the Celica to North America in mid-2005. The Celica would be discontinued for good the following year. By this time the Supra was long gone, and the MR2 was also in its swansong season, leaving Toyota without anything remotely sporty in its North American lineup (and no, the bloated Camry Solara wasn’t sporty by any means).
Serious power and handling may have already been a thing of the past, but the 1994-1999 Celica still possessed a decidedly sporty and fun persona, qualities that would all but disappear from Toyotas in the ensuing years. Collectively speaking however, mainstream automobile brands lack the amount of dedicated sports models they once used to. A sign of changing tastes, most brands do offer “sporty” trim lines of popular family vehicles, although they are usually much more for looks, with little to no performance upgrades. And while grandma’s 2015 V6 Camry will easily rocket past this Celica at the drag strip, it lacks the Celica’s fun-to-drive nature and overall sporty character.
The average driver may not care, but to enthusiasts of all levels, it’s a real shame that today’s Toyotas possess none of the qualities of its long-gone sports cars, which we once looked upon in excitement. It’s an even greater shame to think that younger drivers such as myself will likely never get to experience a truly fun-to-drive Toyota, and in general, have so few choices today when it comes to buying exciting, yet affordable new cars.
Related Reading:
1979-1981 Toyota Celica targa convertible
1982-1985 Toyota Celica notchback and liftback
I remember reading 3 or 4 years ago that Toyota was going to go back to having cars designed by a person (or small team) instead of the giant teams that make everything look the same. Does anyone know what happened to that plan?
The exchange rate issues and consequent high prices I think really hurt the Celica in the mid to late ’90s. The U.S.-market T200 Celica was a decent coupe (although I think the Prelude’s engines were sweeter than the 5S-FE), but it could get quite expensive for its performance and power. A GT with ABS, air, and fancy stereo was around $25K in the mid-90s, which was a lot of money even then.
It didn’t help that this generation of coupes showed up at an inopportune demographic moment (the Boomers were buying SUVs, as noted), but there was some market. I think the bigger issue was that Gen X buyers who were interested in this kind of thing (like me) looked at the sticker price and said, “Er, maybe not.”
The later FWD Celicas really became primarily U.S.-focused in terms of sales. Obviously, they were still sold at home and elsewhere (in the domestic market, there was also a short-lived Celica twin called Curren, sold through a different dealer network, although I don’t think it was very successful), but North America became the principal market after the first two RWD generations. One the U.S. market began to thin out, it was harder and harder to justify keeping the model in existence, even sharing its platform with bigger-volume models.
I think in a lot of respects the Scion tC really is the modern Celica. The tC is essentially a coupe version of the Avensis sedan, the successor to the Toyota Carina sedan with which the first six Celica generations shared their platforms and running gear. The tC’s salient advantage was that they managed to price it a lot more aggressively. A first-generation tC cost significantly less in actual (non-adjusted) dollars than a comparably equipped 1994–1999 Celica GT while boasting something like 30 more horsepower. It’s been a while since I saw tC sales figures, but judging by how many are around, I assume the first generation was a decent success.
Dealer gouging didn’t exactly help, either. Between that and the poor exchange rate, Toyota managed to price the Celica right out of the market. Too bad, because it was a competent sport coupe. It just got too expensive for anyone to buy, which I suppose could be said for just about anything with a Toyota nameplate on it. They better hope they never lose their reliability reputation. Once that’s gone, they’ve had it.
The 1st year for “halfway-pop up” headlights was in 1982, with the new Celica’s debut… It lasted till 1983.
It was a design emulated after the Porsche 928.
Then the Celica went “full pop up” in 1984.
I’ve owned an 82 Celica GT coupe, and an 85 Celica GTS coupe, and I’ve got to say I prefer the full pop ups of the 85 GTS, a lot better.
IMHO, I think the even numbered generations of Celica are the ones to own. I would like to own a 2nd or 6th generation notchback GT with a manual transmission. Sure, they aren’t hugely sporty cars to drive, but they are ….pleasant to drive.
A.U.W.M.
Several folks have compared the Scion tc to the Celica, unfortunately, the tc has a rep as a lackluster car….both in assembly quality, and in driving quality.
I have limited direct experience with the tC. (I actually considered buying one when they came out, but the dealers really put me off to the point that I decided not to even bother with a test drive.) I just meant that in terms of what it is and where it fits into the lineup, it has essentially replaced the Celica, at least in the States.
I always assumed that the tC name stood for Toyota Celica. Even if it doesn’t, it’s no stretch and easily could have been marketed as such if Scion didn’t exist.
I’ve always thought the Tc stood for Toyota Celica, too.
Funny, how the Celica exits in 2005, and the Scion Tc debuts in 2006.
The FR-S doesn’t count as a new Toyota, the body and engine are designed by Subaru. It has more in common, with a Subaru XT, than it does a Toyota Celica.
I considered the tC as well when we were in the market for a replacement car for my wife (late 2011), the looks are good if unremarkable, hatchback utility and that cool glass panoramic roof, but the somewhat lackluster fuel economy of the 2.5 put me off. I’m sure it has enough power to be somewhat entertaining but we were looking for a sensible commuter with a dash of style, not a would-be sports coupe. Basically, what used to be available as the base engine Celica.
In the nineties Toyota was a very successful WRC competitor. With the Celica and later on with the Corolla.
Below the Celica GT-Four ST205 WRC, prepared by TTE Cologne. Toyota was a naughty boy though, in 1995 they were caught using illegal turbo air restrictors (“the most sophisticated device I’ve ever seen in 30 years of motor sports”, according to FIA president Max Mosley). The whole WRC team was disqualified and stripped of all points plus a ban for the 1996 season.
The Celicas from the nineties were very popular among the “young enthusiasts”. Or boy-racers, if you wish. But the young enthusiasts have to look to other brands these days, since Toyota killed off anything with a sporty odor.
I worked for an advertising agency that had the Toyota account. The Creative Director had a VG Valiant choptop and, under a bit of pressure from management, changed to a Toyota. Celica GT4. Don’t know if he ever pushed it.
Trying to get enthusiasts to even think of Toyota these days must be a real uphill battle. Reliable, yeah, but they’re pure grandfathers’ cars. It’s not a brand I would want to be seen in – and I am a grandpa!
FT-86 is doing its part, but the Fast and Furious thing is generally on the wane.
Despite the uninspiring performance, I like the appearance of this generation of Celica, particularly the round headlights that (mounted somewhat on the car’s corner) resemble eyes that follow you as you walk around the car. In other respects, it’s a clean, good-looking design — I’ve always seen a resemblance to the Lexus SC400 coupes, which I also admire for their styling.
In 1999-2000, I was in the market for a new car, and looked at the Celica. But, as stated in a comment above, the cost was too high for me to justify. Still, I liked it. A few months later, I hadn’t bought a car yet, and went to a Toyota dealer to look at the new 2000 model… I found the design repulsive and left the dealership without even driving it.
The Celica’s demise is too bad, because for at least 20 years, they were great cars in terms of performance, durability and style. While the performance in the 1994-99 Celica may have been somewhat bland, I’d argue that this is the last of the good Celicas.
Completely agree with you, Eric, about the 7th-generation Celica being a step backwards. The first time I saw one, I was shocked by how much smaller and less substantial it looked – never mind there being only one body style offered. It looked more like a Paseo to me than a Celica, sharing no visual cues with any past Celicas.
While I understand that sometimes a company has to start with a clean slate (the Z32 Nissan 300ZX comes to mind), the 2000 Celica left me cold.
With the 7th-generation Celica, Toyota hoped to recapture younger buyers they lost as the Celica became more expensive. Because of this, they gave the 7th generation smaller dimensions, a single body style, and a cheaper interior with less available options, all in order lower costs.
But I agree with both of you, the 2000-2005 Celica didn’t do anything for me. It just came across as too small, cheap, and “tuner-ish”. Should have been a Scion, had Scion existed in 2000.
There are a fair number of T230 Celicas around L.A., so I see them pretty often. I remember disliking the style when it first came out, but it’s grown on me. At this point, I’d say the T230 has a pretty nice shape and good proportions, spoiled somewhat by the heavy-handed detailing. I would also have preferred to be able to combine the GT engine with the GT-S suspension and brakes — the 2ZZ-FE was peaky and needed premium gas, although I guess it was more appropriate in the Celica than in the Matrix and Vibe.
My cousin drove one of the early FWD models. I only drive it once, and I was prepared to be underwhelmed by a FWD, 4-cylinder Japanese car masquerading as a sports car.
It turned out to be a blast to drive. It had sharp handling, and the big 4-cylinder was tuned for torque and ran surprisingly smoothly.
That car, plus my father’s ’83 Cressida with the sweet I-6 borrowed from the previous-generation Supra, demonstrated to me that, at least in the 1980s, Toyota knew how to make cars for people who liked to drive.
Ah, I remember a few months ago I saw a woman with a 1996 Celica ST205 All-Trac (AKA the ‘Murican GT-FOUR) and I stopped her right after she got out of it to compliment her on keeping such a rare and underappreciated car in good condition. She looked at me, looked at the car, looked back and me, and then said “Is it really that special? I only bought it off this kid because I wanted a Toyota but didn’t want a Camry.” I’m pretty sure I scared her off with how deep my frown was after she admitted that fact.
You’re not in the US, are you? Because, I don’t , in fact I know the US, never got the 3rd gen Celica GT4. (1994+)
We only got the 1st gen All-Trac(1988-89), and the 2nd gen(1990-93).
If you are in the US, that must be a JDM import. Lucky lady.
I live in West Virginia. The car in question was probably originally Australian, judging from import feasibility. Don’t ask me how it got here. My best guest is that the guy who bought it before this lady was from Canada, or imported it to Canada, and got it here through illegal means. Had fishy written all over it, thought it did have the selection wheel on the dashboard, which was flipped for right-hand drive. My guess is the dude who imported it (or built it, more likely) used the All-trac badges to keep suspicion down. Thanks for letting me know it wasn’t real. Next time I see that lady I should tell her so she doesn’t get the Department of Homeland security on her.
What is a “selection wheel”?
Just like on older Subarus there’s a selection wheel in the ST205s that allows you to control the AWD settings. Turning it to the left makes it almost 10/90 front/rear power bias, while turning it to the right can make it as high as 50/50 front/rear. They did this as homologation for the WRC cars, as the AWD system was not sold on any other Celica model and was always reserved for the GT-FOUR levels.
Dude….I have an Alltrac and there is no “selection wheel” in it. Are you sure you’re not thinking of some other car?
I mean, first they didn’t even bring that generation of Alltrac to the US…second…I have no idea what you’re talking about as far as a “selection wheel” goes.
I really think you’re talking about some other car.
Jon “Vee” doesn’t know what he’s talking about; the only GT-Fours with a selectable differential, located in the center console between the seats, were the JDM October 1986 – August 1987 models. After that, it was viscous (or Torsen in rare instances) coupling over the years.
PS Jon, Austraila drives on the right-hand side of the road.
Re: above: My bad, I meant left hand. This is what I deserve for being blunt…
Yeah CJ I knew the early first gen had some kind of switch on them but I know the st185 doesn’t and as far as I know the st205 didn’t, although being in the US I’ve never actually seen one up close.
I kind of got the same impression of Hanson but I was trying to be diplomatic about it. You’d think if some random lady in the US bought a Celica ST205…”just because she wanted a Toyota” that she’d probably notice that it was right hand drive at the very least and realize it wasn’t just some standard run of the mill Celica.
And if someone went through all the trouble of importing one (if it’s even possible, I don’t know much about it but I know once a car reaches a certain age you can import them, I just saw an article about a guy bringing over an old Skyline from Japan like this) that when he sold it it would have commanded quite a bit over the market rate for an regular old Celica, and she probably would have noticed that as well.
His story just doesn’t make much sense IMO.
I would assume that the car was a standard ’96 Celica built to look like an All-Trac and badged as one. Maybe it even had the drivetrain parts retrofitted. But if it wasn’t RHD, then I think a custom build is much more likely than a gray import.
While it’s fairly common to see older Corollas and Camrys. I haven’t seen a Celica on the road for years. I don’t know if that is because there were comparatively few sold. Or did they all just wear out or rust away? I suspect like most affordable priced sports cars they led hard lives of neglect and abuse, which combined with few sold, led to their vanishing from the road.
The few Celicas I still see on the road have all been subjected to the “stickers = horsepower” treatment. Stanced, fart can mufflers, STi rear wings, and usually painted in varying shades of primer.
I have a friend with a ’97. I’m doing research for her as she contemplates selling her baby. So yes, there are a few still around and in good condition.
I may be a bit of an oddball but my favorite Celica generation is the angular 3rd-gen. So very 80’s styling but I still really like the look. I haven’t seen a notchback of that generation in ages but there are one or two hatches in the area, and I smile whenever I see one. They really were on a roll in the 80’s though. I came close to buying a 4th-gen (’87) in high school, influenced I’m sure by the fact that an acquaintance had a 5th-gen (’92 I think). I loved the look of those cars but I couldn’t afford one in ’97, hence trying out the ’87. It needed more work than I was ready to pay for so I passed, but it would have been fun despite not being turbo or AWD. And these sixth-gen cars, like the featured droptop? Beautiful styling, at least in my eyes. It shared more than a little with the 3rd-gen Integra which appeared around the same time, I think. But I was never aware that the top engine only put out 135 HP…disappointing. Still a fun drive, I’m certain. And then the final 2000+ generation may have been nice cars, but that styling…ugh. Didn’t like it when it was new, don’t like it now. It hasn’t aged well.
I agree with liking the 3rd-gen ones best, too. Maybe because I’m from the 80’s… I had freinds who’s parents had 2nd-gen ones, and they didn’t seem nice by the time I rode in them (in WI they rusted like mad) the one I rode in most you’d get wet from all the holes in the floor and around the windshield. When the angular 82-up ones came out, I immediately liked them. I actually tried to buy an 82 Supra as my first car (in 87), but nobody was stupid enough to loan the $ to an 18-year old. I still wish I had been able to get one…
I truly miss the Celica and, in general, the idea of a sporty Japanese coupe. Virtually every generation was a hit in terms of styling. Indeed, the change in buyers’ habits was the primary reason for the Celica’s demise, but I have to wonder if pricing was part of the reason as well. The 1994-1999 Celica was not cheap and, at that point, there were still plenty of competitors.
For what it’s worth, the 1990-1993 Celica is absolutely one of my favorite all-time designs of any car, and really epitomizes the 1990s for me. As a teenager in the 1990s, pretty much any Celica represented everything I wanted in a car, even if anything post mid-1980s would have been well outside of my price range.
My favorite Celica, seeing as I purchased a 1995 GT coupe for myself. As others have pointed out, these were not cheap cars. The only options mine had were air and alloy wheels, and it still had an msrp around $21,900 (things like full power, cruise, and a good stereo were standard, however).
“fit-and-finish was generally good, although there were areas such as the all-plastic door panels, that came across as cheap when compared to the previous Celica”
I have to strongly disagree with Brendan on this; I thought the sixth gen cars were a step up from the previous generation. The door panels were not all plastic, for one. Other than the map pocket and speaker enclosure, the doors were of a soft-touch material, just like the dash, and all cars either had cloth or leather door inserts. Fit and finish on mine was impeccable; I owned mine for 11 years and 219,000 miles and the cloth, carpets, etc all held up exceptionally well.
Yes, these cars only had 130-135 hp at most, but they also only weighed about 2500 pounds as well, so my manual equipped coupe was plenty quick. It also helped the car to be very nimble and tossable. Overall, I was completely satisfied with my ownership of the car, and I do regret letting it get away. The current Scion TC drives and feels nothing like that Celica…
I should say that I’ve been in a Celica of this generation in person, so I was merely going by what I noticed about this car and in other pictures I found. Having owned one, I value your more expert opinion and I’ve changed the wording a bit. I didn’t mean they were actually poor in quality or materials, I just meant that they didn’t look quite as premium as before.
Just my opinion, but I still feel like they were downgraded a bit compared to the previous generation. Notice how this pic of a 1990 had stitched leather (or nice vinyl) inserts and lower carpeting? The 1997’s did away with both, with cheaper-looking vinyl inserts.
1997:
Really, the beige-and-black interior on the featured car (presumably top-of-the-line being a convertible) is crying out for beige cloth inserts on the door panels.
It’s been some time sine you posted this, but I still want to throw my two cents in; pic one is a leather package 5th gen, and as such, makes no sense to compare to a standard 6th gen ST interior you present for photo two; How do I know? No tweeter enclosure. I would expect a big difference in materials when one spends between $26k and $19k in 1990’s dollars, full stop. No 6th gen. ST ever came close to the content of a GT between 1994-1996. As you know from BMW speak, SensaTec isn’t really Leather, and I’d think you could tell the difference before you proclaim vinyl to be déclassé.
In TV show ‘friends”, Rachel [J. Anniston] mentions that girls in her HS got Celicas as graduation presents. It was a trendy fashion item in the 90’s.
Another example is my cousin [female] had 2 Celicas in a row, during the 90’s, then switched to Highlanders. SUV’s took over for ‘statement cars’ by 2000’s up.
In my area (Illinois burbs of STL) the “daddy’s girl” new cars of choice in those days were Berettas and Grand Ams. Almost everyone knew someone who worked for or retired from Ford in Hazelwood, GM in Wentzville or Chrysler in Fenton so there was still a strong “Buy American” mentality. It wasn’t until the later ’90s that import sales really started taking off around here..
I can’t say I ever remember Celicas being “trendy fashion items”, my friend had a white notchback, plain Jane early 90’s Celica in HS and we all teased him about having a girl’s car. His dad bought it for him wrecked and had it rebuilt so he got a sweet deal. I thought it was ugly. I still think that generation of Celica is ugly unless it’s a hatchback, and even then they’re not great looking cars.
Another friend had an immaculate Sunchaser though, which looked like a time capsule at the time, I thought it was pretty cool but to be honest I’m not sure if I even knew it was a Celica as it was the only “convertible” Celica I’d ever seen like it.
But I don’t remember anyone thinking Celica’s were “trendy” back then.
Hey, at least it is the right color combo. Green and tan will make me look twice at any car regardless of make/model/year/options.
I like mostly American cars, but the Celica is one import that pretty consistently did it for me (save for the 5th and 7th generations). Too many favorites to list across so many great bodystyles. Always liked the first ones in notch or liftback form. The second-gen notchbacks still look good to me (would love a Sunchaser aftermarket targa-roof convertible). The angular third-gen liftbacks also still look good, but it’s the fourth-gen hatchback that’s probably my favorite as I type this. A nice, red All-Trac Turbo would have all the hallmarks of great 80’s design: pop-up headlights, a distinctive, aggressive front fascia, lots of tasteful blackout trim, a really smoothly flowing greenhouse, and a jellybean shape with just enough surface development to keep things interesting. The 5th-gen was just too blobular, like they left the clay for the 4th-gen / T160 in the sun and said, heck, let’s just use this. Still miss the Celica.
Regarding the pricing of these FWD sporty coupes, the last car I owned was a 1994 Ford Probe, which was on the low end of the totem pole (though I really liked that car). The Celica cost the most, and the then-hot Mitsubishi Eclipse wasn’t far behind.
The 7th gen Celica and its rival, the Eclipse, seemed to switch roles in about 2000 or so. The Toyota shedded weight and looked more like a successor to the 86-90 models, while the Mitsubishi became bloated and softer like the 6th gen Celica.
Whatever it eventually became, it’s a true shame that people just don’t find sporty little coupes ‘cool’ anymore. The dudebro crowd seems to be what manufacturers are pandering to these days with the ever bigger and more offensive diesel F-900s or whatever they’re called.
As we’ve talked about here before, I think the increasing stringency of child seat laws have had a lot to do with the decline of coupes. Obviously, you can still stuff a child seat in the back seat of a 2+2 (I saw a kid in a child seat in back of a new Camaro convertible yesterday), but it’s not very practical on a day-to-day basis. That tends to make coupes impractical for a lot of people unless they are definitely not having kids, empty-nesters, or affluent enough to have a second or third fun car. As a result, the coupes that survive (370Z, Camaro, Mustang) are increasingly pitched toward the midlife crisis set and are out of the price range of younger buyers.
That final generation did at least have the GT-S high revving 2ZZ motor good for 180hp or so. That engine was good enough for Lotus! [Exige & Elise]. If I recall, you could easily option up a GT-S to around $25-27K back in 2005 dollars. As nice as the car was, that just didn’t make any sense. It looks even worse when the Scion tC came out under $20K
Apart from Japan that was probably the same engine that was sold everywhere else. It was the only engine in Australia, I think with about 190hp, and made for decent competition against the Honda Integra (aka RSX).
On a side note it always confuses me a bit when criticisms are made between the price of an optioned-up car against the base price of another, not exactly a fair comparison and surely when the second car is optioned up the difference is not so great?
This is why I specified “comparably equipped.” Obviously, each market had its own model/content package, but in the U.S., the Celica tended to be fairly sparsely equipped for the money — if I recall correctly, it wasn’t until the late T230 Celica that air conditioning became standard here. Some rivals gave you a lot more equipment without dipping into the options list, or were so much cheaper to start that you could still get a decently equipped car for the price of a very basic Celica.
I think the TC is a Celica in all but name. A Corolla size car with a bigger Camry or then Corona sized engine. These were always aimed at younger buyers. Unfortunately, the ability of the young to buy and insure a car has dropped away and these models remained products of Japan with high production costs. Old people have not stepped in to buy them as happened with the Mustang and Camaro. I bet every year there is a fight within Toyota whether to keep alive the TC. Thanks for a good write up on the long fade.
In addition to the FR-S, Toyota currently sells some Lexus models that drive better than their competitors, particularly the IS350 F and the GS-F.
Reading through the comments I saw several people say they hardly ever see Celicas on the road anymore. Not sure where everyone is from but I still see them all the time. The past couple of years my DD has been an 1990 Celica Alltrac and maybe it’s because I own a Celica that I notice Celicas, but they’re still pretty common where I live (Indianapolis at the moment).
I also own a 2000 MR2 Spyder that is my summer car. I’m not really into Toyotas I just happened to get a great deal on the Celica and the Spyder was really low mileage when I bought it close to 2 years ago.
There have been a few pictures of cars “on end” lately, but that’s the first one I’ve seen completely upside down!
Yeah, that’s the way it was uploaded. What are you going to do?
Like every car, it all depends on location. Areas with long, harsh winters and major urban areas tend to see cars last less. At least where I live, in eastern Massachusetts, 9 out of 10 cars are newer than 2000 models.
I live in Indy, a fairly big city known for using copious amounts of salt on it’s roads in the winter.
I still see a ton of Celicas. They’re Toyotas, they run forever if you do even the most basic maintenance.
Like I said it might be because I own one and just pay more attention to Celicas than the average person.
I just got back from a midnight bike ride and at the little grocery store by my house was a red 6th Gen and a silver 7th gen parked right next to each other.
Like I said maybe I just notice them because I own one but they’re still common as hell in Indy.
Local assembly Toyotas here were fully galvanised against corrosion, they had the suspensions modified and wider wheels fitted to the best selling Corona and some Corollas Camrys came with stiffer shox and quicker steering racks to suit local conditions and Kiwis bough a lot of Toyotas and still do,
the Celica was always a Corona in a sports coat.
I’ve thought since day one that the Scion FR-S should have been branded a Toyota Celica. Probably would have boosted sales by a factor of five.
I don’t know why they weren’t. Maybe they felt that the Celica name was all used up and wanted a fresh start? Car companies do that all the time, even with hugely successful cars.
But yeah, the Scions seem to be filling the role Celicas did.
Celicas lost my interest when they went FWD. The all-trac is pretty cool but, eh..
I have to admit to liking the 7th generation, but if it came down to it I’d probably have bought a Matrix XRS with the same powertrain instead.
The Celica is one of those cars I prefer every other generation of. For me, the odds have it: Generations 1, 3, 5, and 7 were stylish, while 2, 4, and 6 (this car) were eyesores.
The fifth-generation Celica is one of my all-time favorite designs, and a bright red 92-93 GT-S liftback is my dream car. The proportions were perfect, and the curves were downright sensual. The sixth generation, by contrast, was a bad joke. It looked like a fifth-gen car puffed up with helium into a bloated caracture, decontented, shorn of interesting models, and given a hideous four-eyed face. And as if to add insult to injury, it outlived the perfect fifth-gen version by two years.
The seventh-generation 2000 version was a return to form (again, in my opinion)…but alas, the styling was a little TOO aggressive for popular appeal and just seemed to scream “HEY! LOOK AT ME! I HAVE HIGH INSURANCE RATES!” to anyone you passed on the road. I was probably in the target demographic for these cars and really wanted one at the time, but didn’t have the ability to buy one. Ten years later I could finally afford a new car, but the Celica was dead…so I bought a Hyundai Veloster. Toyota lost a sale they could have had at one time with their earlier lineup.
Too bad. It’s all about sedans and crossovers now. In the 70s and 80s the Japanese brought some interesting sport coupes into this country. Subaru XT, Prelude, 200SX, RX7, and the ubiquitous Celica. Oh and the ultra-rare Starion.
A lot of us criticize the Japanese for killing all their interesting cars but… did we buy them? It’s a shame, one country put out a lot of pretty affordable and fun cars for quite a while!
I’ve gotta admit though, I like coupes but I still prefer the practicality of a sedan. And then plenty of other people don’t even want sedans anymore, they prefer the practicality of a crossover!
The 200SX and particularly 240SX were certainly everywhere, and I still see the odd one here and there. Same with the Celicas. Later Preludes are still fairly common, though the early ones have pretty much disappeared. Haven’t seen an XT on the road in ages though.
Maybe the Starion was rarer than the XT when new, but I actually still see them every now and again. Higher survival rate, I’m sure. And one of my favorite 80’s cars, I’d love to own one someday!
You mentioned the GT-Four was still available in other markets, but in Australia at least it may as well not have been – list price was $80,000! The previous model was around $45k. Other than the changing exchange rate I’m not sure what else drove the price increase. Having said that, it was exacerbated by the luxury car tax that applied to the portion over $46k, but even without the LCT the price would have been over $70k. Consequently I’ve rarely ever seen one from this generation.
I distinctly recall Aussie journalists being pretty underwhelmed by the fifth gen Celica, and then the sixth gen was similarly received. And then, back in America, one of my favorite Motor Trend articles was their “Bang for Your Buck” article from 1990. They appreciated the 5G Celica All-Trac but they didn’t find it nearly as impressive as the Eclipse/Talon/etc. I can’t imagine how American journalists received the 6G: with so little excitement left, they may as well have called it Camry Coupe (oh wait, they had the even MORE boring Solara by this point…)
The final generation was praised as a return to form but the Aussie coupe market has never been as big as America’s and by the 2000s it had petered out further. And obviously, the coupe market was moribund in America too.
American critics’ reaction to the T200 Celica was pretty consistent with the comments here: good handling, looked okay, but too expensive and not enough power for the price. I don’t recall any really negative reviews, but any time there was a comparison test, the Celica would be overshadowed by cars like the Integra and the Ford Probe, which had more power and were better dollar values.
Also, American journalists had very mixed reactions to the styling of the T180 Celica — a few people really liked it, but it was definitely a controversial design. As I recall, some reviewers weren’t terribly keen on the T200’s headlight treatment, but thought the design was a step up from the previous generation. It was certainly more orthodox.
High insurance rates hurt coupe sales quite a bit. Parents now will buy HS grads a compact CUV/SUV for “safety”. But also, passenger and cargo room for ‘stuff’ is a priority over ‘sporty looks’, these days.
Some kids even call coupes ‘mid life crisis’ cars, showing how much times have changed.
Sad what has happened to the many different coupes we grew up with – Celicas, Supras, MR2’s, even some of the Corolla hatchbacks were cool. I lusted for a Supra back in the day. Toyota quality was top notch. Sadly, I think Toyota in general has taken a few steps backwards. I know a few people that currently own Toyotas and are very unhappy with them. The overall quality is surely not up to the standards it was back then IMHO.
Yes you are exactly right Brendan. After working their asses off in the 80s and earning their huge sales Toyota started phoning it in in the 90s. This gen Celica is the perfect example.
1997 Celica is a beautiful car. Toyota could never be at fault for style, engineering, design and style. They are greatest auto company in the world just behind Honda. A ’90s Celica looks way better and is better built and engineered than any of those stupid looking, current day, “retro” pony cars GM, Ford and Dodge builds. It would be my dream car to find a Celica convertible like the one pictured. Cars like the Celica is what is going to be the big ticket collectors cars in the future when the old fart baby boomers die off, and young people who love the Asian modern classics today will be at Barret Jackson bidding on those beauties. I’ll take mine in red or dark grey mica pearl coat:)
I just found a red ’97 GT, with a brand new soft top. Couldn’t get the money out of my pocket fast enough, even though it’s an automatic.
Although it has 120k, the two previous owners has obviously taken great care of it. Having spent its entire life in Texas, it doesn’t have a spot of rust.The handling is still crisp and responsive, the engine is peppy, and runs like a top, though I can’t imagine too many straghit line races it could win. Curving, twisty roads are another story, though. Tom handles like he’s on rails. (Yes, I named my car Tom Celica)
Everywhere I go, this car turns heads. And even though the interior is near perfect, I think I’m still going to head down to the upholstery shop, and upgrade the factory cloth seats, install my GPS-DVD, and add halo lights to the inner two headlights. Then I’ll be done, and have my dream car.
I plan on owning this car for a long, long time, and I’m very happy with my $3,000 purchase.
This one belongs to my friend – It’s in great shape! 1997 Toyota Celica – GT
Limited edition gold package with Black interior / red exterior