Plenty of CC posts have been dedicated to the second-generation Celica – even the rather less common notchback has had its moment in the sun. It figures, as this generation was both the one that heralded the Supra, and one that was a pretty big hit in North America, which remains the CCentre of our audience here. Oh, and it was designed in California, too. But how was is perceived in its country of origin?
Toyota took their time with this Celica. The first gen model was a global hit, going well beyond its maker’s expectations. As a result, Toyota made it last for extra innings: the usual four-/five-year production run was stretched to almost seven years, milking the 1970 design for all its worth. The second generation, designated as A40, was unveiled in August 1977.
The design was the very first production car undertaken by Calty, an offshoot of Toyota of America that had been established in 1973 to help Toyota cater to the American market. The A40 Celica was a great success in this regard, as it sold very well in the US, but it also had to fit into the strict Japanese regulatory system. And not be so foreign that it ended up being a dud on the JDM.
It was a challenging brief. Contrary to prevailing mid-‘70s wedgy / origami trends, Calty went for a more rounded and aerodynamic approach. The Celica was not going to pretend to be a Lamborghini. Nor would it be a chrome-laden mock-Eldorado like a Crown coupé, which might have worked in Japan, but would have been a disaster everywhere else.
The Liftback was the star model, though both it and the notchback were there from the get-go. In Japan, the notchback was somewhat favoured – the Liftback was nicknamed “hunchback” and “Celica van” by some, which is harsh but understandable, given the first generation Liftback’s sportier look. But this did not hamper the Celica’s success at home, in the end.
Our feature car’s ST trim makes it a couple levels above the lowest rung of the range. The ST could be had with a 1.6 or a 1.8, the latter being a 105hp EFI engine from late 1978 onward, which is probably what’s under the hood here, mated to a 5-speed manual.
As per usual in those days, JDM Celicas could be ordered in a wide variety of trims (ET, LT, ST, SE, XT, GT, and GTV) and several engine options, ranging from a 75hp 1.6 litre to a 105hp 2-litre – some carburated, some with EFI – multiplied by two body styles and two types of transmission. Lower-end JDM models and many of those sold outside North America even sported slimmer chrome bumpers, but STs and above received the black polyurethane treatment.
All in all, in 1979, Japanese customers could pick one of 49 variants of Celica, and that’s before the options list. One option that was a new feature on a Japanese car was the sunroof, which our feature car has. It’s pretty amazing that such a mundane automotive accessory had never been adapted to anything made in Japan prior to 1978.
Unlike its predecessor, this generation Celica died young. By the time the traditional mid-production facelift came in August 1979, with those squared-off quads, sales were waning slightly. The Carina underpinnings were a tad crude perhaps, and Toyota had begun launching a bunch of spin-offs (Celica XX — a.k.a Supra – and the four-door Celica Camry) that diluted the nameplate’s image somewhat. Plus competition got stiffer in the shape of the new Nissan Silvia / Gazelle S110.
The last major milestone in the model’s life was the generalization of the XX / Supra’s semi-trailing arm IRS to the upper end of the range in mid-1980, but the lure of the new generation’s trendy pop-up headlights was irresistible. The A60 took over in July 1981, after the JDM had absorbed just over 137,000 of the A40/A50 Celicas.
Both the 1st gen A30 and the 3rd gen A60 turned out to be a bigger hit (the latter by a small margin) on the home market than the A40/A50 we have examined here. So in a way, it is very much the middle child of the RWD Celicas, the one that was outshined. This is all quite relative though, as all three of the RWD Celicas handily outsold every one of their later FWD incarnations – on the JDM at least. It goes to show that Japan did take to the odd American design, provided it was built by Toyota.
Related posts:
Curbside Classic: 1980 Toyota Celica GT – From Zero To America’s Favorite In Under Ten Years, by Eric703
Curbside Classic: 1979-81 Celica Sunchaser- The First Celica Convertible?, by David Skinner
CC Capsule: 1980 Toyota Celica GT – Dusty, But Not Rusty, by Tom Klockau
CC Capsule: 1979 Toyota Celica GT Notchback – Obscurity Makes The Heart Grow Fonder, by Perry Shoar
eBay Find: 1981 Toyota Celica Sunchaser – Spring and Summer., by Geraldo Solis
Cohort Pic(k) of the Day: 1978 Toyota Celica GT Liftback, by Don Andreina
My Curbside Classic: 1981 Toyota Celica GT Liftback – Who Says You Can’t Go Back?, by Bryan McCarthy
COAL: 1979 Toyota Celica GT Liftback- Oh What A (Sinking) Feeling!, by Ponderosamatt
COAL – 1978 Toyota Celica GT Liftback. Who Could ask for Anything More?, by Chas Glynn
Vintage Review: Toyota Celica GT Liftback Extended-Use Report, by Yohai71
The Oz 2nd gen had round lights, but with neato Daytona-style glass covers, and skinny chrome bumpers. (Later, it got the quad square-starers and huge US boat-buffer bumpers and looked like the same car hungover as shit, but I digress).
The hatch – when chromed and glassed as mentioned – is a tidy thing. But the notch is a bit off, and both versions have the upturning beltline to the front screen – perhaps to accommodate a sedan-y Carina firewall height? – which bugged me from the day I first saw one as a 10 y.o. Looked then like someone who’d who’d hoiked up their pants to try and meet a too-short top, and still does now.
As for Transpacific and all, these mechanically and dynamically dowdy old things sold like very fresh cakes, proving yet again, as if needed, the extent to which I know nothing.
The skinny chrome bumpers definitely made the whole design more appealing. Never saw the glass-covered headlights, but that would have worked too. Can’t say I agree with the hatch being better-looking than the notch though. The “hunchback” moniker is a pretty apt one in this case…
We had the same car, same year, same trim level, but in the beige color circa 1985. My boys are the same age currently that my brother and I were then (16/14) and I can’t imagine buying a two door coupe as my primary transportation today. We did have a VW van too I guess but that was more for weekends and camping trips and only after my brother and I were both gone did my dad step up to a station wagon. What can I say.
Anyway, that Celica wasn’t my favorite, you sit really low in these and the dashboard does the ’70s American car thing of kind of looming ahead of you. The beige didn’t help, and it was an automatic which also didn’t help. The 20R engine was torquey though, I’ll give it that, and it was dead reliable. It doesn’t make the top three on my favorite Celica styling versions either though.
It met its end when my parents went on a trip, my brother drove it to school one day, it was stolen from there and recovered two weeks later at the bottom of a cliff near Palm Springs, burned out.
Still, that’s a nice find. I still don’t love it, but I’m slightly warming up to it after all these years.
the 3rd gen A60 turned out to be a bigger hit
Are six-cylinder XX (Supra) sales part of your calculations? Understandable if so, seeing as they were marketed as part of the Celica series, and although I don’t have production figures for those, I do know the XX was a bigger success for Toyota than they anticipated that continued to gain popularity into the 1980’s. If not, that very much isn’t the case.
Sales of the short nose four-cylinder cars fell off a cliff in Japan with the arrival of the second generation squared headlamp refresh, and never recovered thereafter. Increased competition that didn’t exist before is likely part of it (Prelude, Savanna RX-7, said XX), but Japanese buyers clearly were not keen, and Celica primarily became an export driven product; 1979’s sales of 48,047 (down from 60,956 the year prior) dropped to 22,083 for 1980. 1981 fractionally increased to 23,916. Only three model years went above 1981’s level ever again for the remainder of the Celica’s production run; 1982 (24,535), 1990 (29,245), and 1994 (30,520).
The numbers I found for the A40/A50 was 137 000 units made, versus 151 000 of the A60. I guess those include the 6cyl. XX/Supra for both generations (as well as the Celica Camry for the A50), as it’s for the general Celica family, and the Supra wasn’t really branched out into its own thing until the generation after that. FWIW, my empirical field observations do bear out that the A60 Supra was a very good seller, there are still quite a few about.
This was an overcautious design. Calty obviously didn’t want to make a mistake, and instead, came up with a nice gelded coupe. Unlike the previous generation, or the next one that replaced this – there isn’t a single shred of muscle or power in this design. Soft instead of firm, passive instead of aggressive, stationary instead of forward. Celica really becomes a secretary’s car during this time. If I had a lady in my life back in 1979, I would have wanted her to be in this dependable, milquetoast Toyota, instead of a Plymouth Volare/Road Runner – for sure.
Compared to the new Fox Mustang, or the old Camaro/TransAm, in my opinion, this generation Celica needed to grow a pair and have headed to the metal gym. Not certain what Calty was thinking with this design, but it was a mistake Toyota did not repeat.
My first reaction when seeing this Celica was “Oh no!!”. Like most people, I’d really loved the first Celica. Anything which followed it was going to have a hard row to hoe. This was a clean, mostly inoffensive, coupe, but was, as VanillaDude says, overcautious – except perhaps for that downswept beltline which made for a very strange appearance from some angles. There was nothing really distinctive about it, aside from that beltline, the headlight treatment looked awkward, and the taillights were over-fussy.
Unlike my countryman in first place above, I have trouble remembering what these looked like on the road. I suspect I just ignored them. After I’d built one, of course.
Not really seeing the fussiness of the taillights, but otherwise, I can only agree with what you wrote. The gen 1 Celica, especially in liftback garb, is nothing short of glorious. Best mini-Mustang ever.
This was a great car for me when I was 25 and in my first job. Bought a white with blue interior 1979 GT, similar to the one shown, as a year-old used car. Loved the five-speed, and it had enough pep and style to make me feel superior to any Corolla driver. Never any engine woes, but the alternator failed one night and I barely made it home. I also remember some expensive AC repairs — Florida is hot, and the air was always running — and I needed a new clutch before I traded it for the first Accord coupe after about 88,000 miles. None of this soured me on the car, though. Had a lot of fun with it. Used to see a lot of them in Florida when they were new.
I concur that the notchback looks better on both the 1st and 2nd gen Celica’s. The 3rd gen notchback looked like the box the hatchback came in, and was not desirable at all. In fact I’m struggling to think of any other cars where one version looked so superior. Maybe the 68-73 A bodies.
I had a ’78 GT in the late 80s as my college car. I always thought the hatchback looked awful. It was a fun car to drive and never let me down. Easy to work on and relatively inexpensive.
First Gen hatch backs were way better looking.
Looking back on the 2nd generation, the notch still looks good and the hatch looks just awful. Still.
Always quite liked these, especially the Liftback. Seemed like a better Capri to me, and visually very neat. Joanna Lumley in one in the The New Avengers might have helped…
I’ll be the contrarian (surprise!) and say that this is probably my favorite generation of Celica notchback, ever. It’s both curvy and linear, as well as looking more substantial than the first trunked Celica, and less strictly angular like the third.
It doesn’t need to look more aggressive. It has an attractive, understated, sporty elegance that doesn’t announce itself out loud. Effortlessly cool. The 3rd Gen hatchback / Liftback is probably my favorite three-door Celica, but this ST notchback represents the pinnacle of two-door Celica style for me.