This is small ‘90s pillared hardtop week, it seems. We had the dreary and quite superfluous Nissan Presea on Monday, so in the interest of fairness, we will presently take a mercifully brief look at the Toyota side of things. Don’t worry, I saved up some bile for this one.
The early ‘90s was the peak of the fake hardtop era in Japan. Everyone was at it and the fad started to spread downward. Big cars all had a hardtop version (a few were still pillarless, at that point), as did second-tier family saloons. Now the 1500cc class were going frameless. Nissan had led the way with their Sunny/Pulsar-based Presea, so they were naturally going to be followed down the rabbit hole by Toyota.
Thus the humble Corolla/Sprinter E100 begat the Ceres/Marino in the spring of 1992. Alongside the AE101 Levin/Trueno coupé, the new hardtops were supposed to bring extra pizzazz to Toyota’s popular family hauler. The Ceres/Marino inherited the coupé’s dash, but only received the more sedate versions of the platform’s 1.5 and 1.6 litre engines.
The main feature was the pseudo-hardtop’s extremely smooth and swoopy styling. The Nissan Presea is also a bit like this, but the Toyota design seemed to try to out-bathtub the Nash Airflyte. Compared to the original jelly bean, the Ceres is much closer to the actual confectionery’s shape than the Ford Taurus ever was.
Toyota Sprinter Marino, post 1994 facelift
Toyota’s new small hardtop saloon, tediously, was another one of those “I’ve-got-two-names” kind of deals, like the Nissan Cedric/Gloria or the Honda Vigor/Inspire. The sister model Sprinter Marino was identical save for minor details, such as the grille, headlamps and taillights. Some Toyota dealers carried one type, some carried the other.
For what it’s worth, I’m glad to have found an early model Corolla Ceres, as opposed to a later Marino, as these early Ceres’ elongated headlights and miniature plastic grille are just atrocious and fit the blob-like personality of the vehicle perfectly.
In actual fact, Toyota aimed to make these small faux hardtops something aspirational for the toiling masses who could never afford a Crown. The main problem was that said masses felt that unique styling and frameless windows were a hefty price to pay for cramped rear seats. The diminished headroom was less of an issue on larger cars, but on a Corolla, the idea just did not make much sense.
And so even as the Corolla/Sprinter platform evolved to the E110 in 1995, the hardtops got some updates (suspension and engine, mainly), but kept the older platform. Sales were modest to begin with, but as the economy continued to tank and the pointlessness of the model became evident to most observers, Toyota bit the bullet and cancelled the Ceres/Marino in July 1998. It took them until December 1999 to get rid of all the units they had in stock – pretty telling, especially for ultra-efficient, just-in-time Toyota.
Related post:
Automotive History: 1992-1998 Toyota Corolla Ceres/Sprinter Marino – The Sexiest And Most Limited-Availability Corolla, by Brendan Saur
This design style would be perfect for a jelly bean Taurus rather neutral than controversial. Although Taurus had the opposite proportion of the Ceres, with the rear end and nose too slow for its enormous green house and windows.
I see a lot of
Infiniti J30Nissan Leopard J Ferie in the Marino’s rear design. There’s another Japanese car strongly echoed in the Marino’s rear lights, but I can’t bring it to mind at the moment.Mazda Cosmo?
You might be thinking of the #X90 Chaser. Which I guess is exactly what they were aiming for.
Nope, found it: the ’95 Nissan 240sx.
It doesn’t look overly Toyota as others have commented and what bothers me about it mostly are the bumper cutlines. Nissan did this a lot in that era as well with the vertical joints rather than using the natural bodyline to wrap the bumpers all the way around to the wheelwells. I suppose it’s more obvious than usual on a white car but still…
As usual, these were once fairly common here in NZ as imports, and again, mostly all gone now. Just checked trademe (like NZ’s Ebay), none at all.
They also came with the 4A-GE 20-valve, but I’ve seen very few of those, the vast majority having the 1500 5A-FE. I suppose that most buyers were more motivated by style than performance…
Come on, now, what’s with all the hate for ’90s pillared hardtops? They’re a conceptual progenitor to the bevy of pointless stylistic bodystyles we have today, but (in my opinion) they embody that magical, effortless ’90s soap-bar style to the nth degree. I get the same mystique with these body shapes as I do the original Olds Aurora, and I think the sheer volume of Japanese car designs that came out of the ’90s really represents an amazing opportunity to understand the extent of ’90s auto design culture, such as these pillared hardtops or indeed the early CUV/MPV ‘lifestyle’ cars.
Beyond that, I love how they’re just another representation of Japan’s Galapagos Syndrome since the ubiquity of the Japanese marques and their societal integration of the tri-dealer systems at the time meant that all these obscure and pointless little models with nearly identical mechanicals all saw some degree of sales success. We act like modularity is new what with TNGA and MQB, but this was Toyota really getting going early with the idea of same car, new body as a mainstream manufacturer. Every week I still discover some new ’90s Japanese model that’s very similar, but a little different from the last. It’s such an endless trove of information.
Coming back to the hardtops of the ’90s, the Toyota and Nissan ones were always quite elegant, and I cannot deny the wacky 90s fantasy that is the ɛ̃fini MS-8, but the Mitsubishi Emeraude always struck me as an unexpected favorite. Extremely overshadowed, but nonetheless a ‘luxe’ hardtop from a smaller manufacturer with that zany 2.0 Mitsubishi V6, essentially making it a mini Diamante as it followed the same naming convention (Emeraude = Emerald, Diamante = Diamond).
The Ceres/Marino most definitely came with the option of the high output 4A-GE 20V from jump. 165ps @7,800RPM with a six speed manual at the end, just like the Lenin/Trueno’s.
Hehehe…
Comrade, the Lenin / Trueno was certainly revolutionary. And a leader in its class (struggle).
I guess some Ceres / Marinos could get the fancy engine, but realistically, you wanted that in the two-door. The overwhelming majority (bloshevik?) made do with far more sedate motors.
I was completely confused until I saw the auto-correct fail. Well played, sir, well played..
I have to say I prefer the looks of the Presea. This is just a bit too football-shaped for me.
For eyewash, I’ll just sneak in an AE101 Levin coupe. There, that’s better!
Yet another Corolla variant I hadn’t seen. The body shape somewhat favors the related Geo Prizm, but at the same time, they can’t share a single panel.
Which set of Toyota dealers had the Corolla that looked like a Prizm?
The Prizm used the Toyota Sprinter body, so you went to the Toyota Vista store to order one.
I wonder why this didn’t come to America? Surely there’s room in the American market for a more sophisticated looking Corolla at the same price point? Or probably not.
It looks like a mid 90s Mazda 626. I hate all those blobby organic melted shapes.
The list of premium-styled compacts that sold well in the US during the 1990s begins and ends with the Acura Integra.
I saw a lot of those Cereses in NZ when I was travelling there in 2014, and a few Preseas as well. At the same time I was driving a thrashy old 1991 Honda Integra 4-door, also frameless. The Integra somehow seemed to make sense, while the Ceres – as it seemed to me – somehow just didn’t. I remember I was looking at them and just didnt get the point why such thing should exist. The shape was just awful too, they looked like something that had melted in the sun. It had no balls, no personality, nothing. The Presea looked just kinda boring and dismissable; the Integra looked like a scaled down Legend – sleek but in a slightly thrashy way.
About a dozen years ago, in Europe, I had access to a late 90s Subaru Impreza, also frameless. Everybody felt it was supposed to be frameless because it was a Subaru, and when they released the new hatchback-shape generation of Imprezas then a lot of fans felt sad to find normal, framed doors on them – something that was seen as a defining Subaru feature had been lost.
Fully agree — the Integra pisses on the Ceres and the Presea both from a great height. The Subaru thing is something I remember too from my European youth (Ive been in Asia 10 years now): frameless was a Subaru thing. We really didn’t understand back then that it was a JDM thing, because we only got Subarus with those windows.
But coming back to the Ceres, when you see it IRL, it’s shockingly low and narrow, and the reduced headroom makes it seem beyond cramped. Japanese sources I’ve perused were adamant that the high price + tiny interior + blobby styling equation killed this car — sales dropped off a cliff after the ’94 facelift.
But then the R32 Skyline saloon is also cramped, and those sold well. But then it had real sporting cachet, RWD and a 6cyl. Hardtop saloons could never work on Corolla- or Sunny-based cars. Just not the right market.