|
|
|
|
|
I have been put onto Celicas, I did not really know much about them but they hit the spot as a nice motorway cruiser that still is not too bad in the bends, relatively cheap (35mpg+) and reliable too. They have occasional back seats, that fold down with hatch so practical too. I am looking at the 6th Generation models, not massively retro but I think they are just about acceptable here. I am currently deciding between the basic 1.8 ST (facelift/anniversary model) or a 2.0 GT. Any top tips and inspiration of clean/OEM style like this one, which looks spot on:  Toyota Celica ST202_2 by Chromeddd, on Flickr  Toyota Celica ST202_1 by Chromeddd, on Flickr  Toyota Celica ST202_3 by Chromeddd, on Flickr  2 small by Chromeddd, on Flickr  3 small by Chromeddd, on Flickr  1 small by Chromeddd, on Flickr  1_3small by Chromeddd, on Flickr |
| |
|
|
|
|
goldnrust
West Midlands
Minimalist
Posts: 1,889
|
|
|
|
No real tips.. sorry. But I had one for a few months as a daily  I had a 2.0GT, bought blind for £510 from eBay with 12 months MOT. Was a very good car for the money. The driving position was nice, nice and low slung and I liked the general look of the car (always have done, I blame Sega Rally). The 2.0 engine went well, it always felt a little flat in the mid range to me, but I think that was probably just because it pulled so well at the top! Fuel economy wise I didn't think it was great, I got about 30mpg, maybe 32 on a long run if I was nice to it, but mine probably wasn't especially well looked after and needed a service. I used mine daily for 3-4 months, then sold it to a friend who did the same for a similar length of time and it was flawlessly reliable. It is after all a 90s Toyota… The only thing that let it down for me, was a lack of excitement when driving it. It kinda just did everything I asked, when I asked it too, and without making a fuss. It went fast, and cornered well, but it kinda didn't make me want to drive it hard, or reward me for thrashing it. Maybe I'm being harsh on it, but basically I had mine not long after selling my Alfa GTV 2.0 twinspark, which is a similarly cheap 2+2 coupe (admittedly without the rear hatch practicality) and IMO the Alfa was just a fraction better in pretty much every way (except reliability…). My £500 hack…  What I was driving in my head…  |
| |
|
|
adam73bgt
Club Retro Rides Member
Posts: 5,003
Club RR Member Number: 58
|
Gen 6 Celicasadam73bgt
@adam73bgt
Club Retro Rides Member 58
|
|
|
I'm weighing up my options for FWD coupes at the moment and these are so reasonably priced so they sound like good value, I did a thread on Gen 4 Celicas on here not long ago but sadly they're tricky to find and prices are going up I would be quite partial to a convertible Gen 6, I think it would look good lowered on some nice wheels but as I can't find a pic of one, have a pic of the Celica that was fastest at the Goodwood Festival of Speed a couple of years ago  |
| |
|
|
ryanc
Part of things
Posts: 31 
|
|
|
|
|
I had a 1.8 st in a burnt orange/gold colour looked the part but was very sluggish. Have driven a few of my mate 2.0 gt's and think they are great. Would definitely recommend the 2.0 gt but stay clear of the 1.8
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I know the 1.8 is not quick (0-60 in 10 Sec) but apparently its a nice drive while giving extra MPG.
|
| |
|
|
phil73
Part of things
Posts: 122
|
|
|
|
|
I like em. Forget the 1.8, though, as 2.0s are much more powerful and not much dearer. My wife is onto her second gen 6. The first had terminal rust underneath the sill covers, so I would advise trying to check that if you can (usual story of sunroof draining into rear of the sill, sill covers got blocked up, sills rotted.) her second one is immaculate and no sunroof. Fairly easy to work on, loads of parts available. Check the doors for rot, too. Paint is soft and lacquer goes. Her new one had some respraying by previous fastidious owner due to this. Toyota alloys are made of cheese.
The pre facelift was slightly higher in power, about 173 versus 168 due to no EGR and a few changes to the ECU mapping for emissions, I think. But I think the facelift styling is nicer. Convertibles are lower powered than the GT.
Good support on celica club. Nice drive, nothing too exhilarating but for a combination of decent power for the period, safe handling, thrashability and practicality it can't be beat. And better built than the gen 7.
|
| |
|
|
goldnrust
West Midlands
Minimalist
Posts: 1,889
|
|
|
|
|
The 2.0gt is a much better engine than the 1.8. You gotta think, how much does that extra MPG really count? It's easy to get hung up on MPG figures, but over a week/month of driving how much money is 5mpg less really going to cost you?
The 2.0 is still a modern twin cam fuel injected engine, it's not like it's a rotary engine or 4l Jag engine. What kind of idoits would daily drive those with their sub 20 mpg figures...
|
| |
|
|
phil73
Part of things
Posts: 122
|
|
|
|
|
Something that may or may not appeal is the fairly broad ratios so you can tootle in third etc. really nice shift if the box has been looked after.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The 2.0gt is a much better engine than the 1.8. You gotta think, how much does that extra MPG really count? It's easy to get hung up on MPG figures, but over a week/month of driving how much money is 5mpg less really going to cost you? The 2.0 is still a modern twin cam fuel injected engine, it's not like it's a rotary engine or 4l Jag engine. What kind of idoits would daily drive those with their sub 20 mpg figures... Interesting thought, I do around 250 miles a week on average (35 mile round commute every day) with usually a trip on the weekend. With the Metro, @45mpg that's about £31, for 35mpg its £40 and 30mpg its £46. So around £6 a week difference between the two Celicas and around £15 a week extra over the metro. Not a massive amount in the grand scale of things! Insurance quotes came out £15/year cheaper for the 2.0 GT as well! Trouble being is most of the GT model I have seen are high mileage or modified, I would like a nice original, facelift model with a budget of around £2k up to £3k (if I wait a bit longer). |
| |
|
|
adam73bgt
Club Retro Rides Member
Posts: 5,003
Club RR Member Number: 58
|
Gen 6 Celicasadam73bgt
@adam73bgt
Club Retro Rides Member 58
|
|
|
The 2.0 is still a modern twin cam fuel injected engine, it's not like it's a rotary engine or 4l Jag engine. What kind of idoits would daily drive those with their sub 20 mpg figures... *clears throat awkwardly* |
| |
|
|
|
|
goldnrust
West Midlands
Minimalist
Posts: 1,889
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Last Edit: Nov 6, 2014 13:01:23 GMT by goldnrust
|
|
phil73
Part of things
Posts: 122
|
|
|
|
|
Def no more than 1200 or so should get an excellent one, and prob with air con which was not all that common. But no matter how often those factory alloys are refurbished they will go within a few months. Utter junk, like the gen 7 alloys, too.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Def no more than 1200 or so should get an excellent one, and prob with air con which was not all that common. But no matter how often those factory alloys are refurbished they will go within a few months. Utter junk, like the gen 7 alloys, too. I was hoping to find one with maybe 50k-60k miles, so would not mind paying a bit more for a nice clean example, without silly MaxPower alloys and aftermarket gear knobs.  That '95 pre-facelift model looks OK though! |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
aren't the 1.8 engines plagued with issues, or is that the later celicas?
|
| |
|
|
phil73
Part of things
Posts: 122
|
|
|
|
|
The gen 6 1.8s were ok AFAIK.
Don't worry about the miles too much. They will do high miles if maintained; the one I scrapped had 180k miles with just rust and a slightly slipping original clutch to complain about. Front suspension lasts a while; checked my lower arms at 100k and no slack, bushes and ball joints fine, ARBs links fine. But lots of idiots modify the intake to make lower power. For some reason lots of them have dings all over. Hairdressers can't park, perhaps?
|
| |
|
|
awoo
Posted a lot
Posts: 1,507
|
|
|
|
|
as everyone else has said - get the 2ltr gt. not a bad car - few of my mates had them, seemed pretty bullet proof. i wouldnt be put off one with say, 150k+ miles, so long as it wasnt rusting out
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The 2.0 is still a modern twin cam fuel injected engine, it's not like it's a rotary engine or 4l Jag engine. What kind of idoits would daily drive those with their sub 20 mpg figures... *clears throat awkwardly* 
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Excellent, GT it is!  |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nice! Looks great on those rims - although personally think it would look better with + 1" on the wheels & - 1 or 2 inches off the ride height lol |
| |
|
|
|
|
I had a 2.0GT, bought blind for £510 from eBay with 12 months MOT. Was a very good car for the money. The driving position was nice, nice and low slung and I liked the general look of the car (always have done, I blame Sega Rally). The 2.0 engine went well, it always felt a little flat in the mid range to me, but I think that was probably just because it pulled so well at the top! Fuel economy wise I didn't think it was great, I got about 30mpg, maybe 32 on a long run if I was nice to it, but mine probably wasn't especially well looked after and needed a service. I used mine daily for 3-4 months, then sold it to a friend who did the same for a similar length of time and it was flawlessly reliable. It is after all a 90s Toyota… 
And myself as I'll shortly be daily driving my rotary again… 
