Supra and MR2 to make return, says Toyota

[84Cressida]

I always get very mad when someone tries to tell me that the tC is the Celica. Sorry, but a fat, bloated, ugly monstrosity that is the tC is NOT the Toyota Celica I knew and loved. Not even close. I find it frustrating that Toyota said the sport coupe market was dying in their press release announcing they would discontinue the Celica, only to launch the tC at the EXACT same time. I've never forgiven Toyota for it and have had a bad taste in my mouth about Scion and the tC especially ever since. I absolutely LOATHE the fact that the FT86 was saddled with the ridiculous waste that is Scion. The day Scion dies and the Celica returns is the day I will shut up about the subject, but until then....DEATH TO SCION!!!

[84Cressida]

Originally Posted by Xenos

I would never try to make the case that the tC is on par with the FR-S from a sports car point of view in stock configuration. It was never intended to be. Quite frankly that last version of the Celica was never a great sports car either. As I understand it, with the lowering springs the skidpad numbers on the tC are bumped up to somewhere around .86 or .87 (stock is .82g). There's nothing wrong with that for a daily driver car. Autocross cars are great for autocross but they suck as a daily driver. I didn't buy a race car, nor do I want one. If I added the larger TRD sway bars and strut braces it would easily be over the .90g mark on the skidpad. All of that can be done for less than $500 and its pretty easy to install. I don't have any plans to do it though because the tC is the best of both worlds, offering plenty of fun to drive factor along with practicality and respectable mpg's. Yes I do enjoy my car and yes your point of view is skewed by your preference for an all out race car. All out race cars are a lot of fun to drive on a race track, but driving one to work and back everyday is a sucky miserable driving experience.

Stock for stock, the Celica mopped the floor with the tC all day long. The Celica GTS and the 22Z-GE were also a lot more potent and much more fun to drive than a tC with the 2AZ-FE. The only time a tC compares favorably to a Celica is when you compare one to a 20 year old Celica ST. Toyota went backwards with the tC. The 2G tC is a better looker and performer than the first one, but has a shittier interior and still isn't anywhere close to the 7th Generation Celica.

[Xenos]

Originally Posted by 84Cressida

I always get very mad when someone tries to tell me that the tC is the Celica. Sorry, but a fat, bloated, ugly monstrosity that is the tC is NOT the Toyota Celica I knew and loved. Not even close. I find it frustrating that Toyota said the sport coupe market was dying in their press release announcing they would discontinue the Celica, only to launch the tC at the EXACT same time. I've never forgiven Toyota for it and have had a bad taste in my mouth about Scion and the tC especially ever since. I absolutely LOATHE the fact that the FT86 was saddled with the ridiculous waste that is Scion. The day Scion dies and the Celica returns is the day I will shut up about the subject, but until then....DEATH TO SCION!!!

Wow, you really are upset about that aren't you? Anyway, just for the sake of being fair and objective. The last generation GTS Celica did 0 to 60 in 7.2 and had a 1/4 mile time of 15.4 seconds with a skid pad rating of .86g. Now by comparison, the current generation stock tC does 0 to 60 in 7.3 seconds, has a 1/4 mile time of 15.5 and a skid pad rating of .82g. So essentially if you add the TRD lowering springs to the current tC you have a car that performs exactly the same as the last generation GTS. So you know, I'm sorry to tell you but the GTS isn't mopping anything. Now when I said that the current tC is the Celica I didn't mean that literally. I meant that it is the current equivalent of the Celica from a performance standpoint and its place in the Toyota lineup. I get that you hate Scion for whatever reason and that's your choice. But I don't think Scion is going anywhere anytime soon so just get ready to gut it out I guess.


PS, the tC is 500 pounds heavier than the Celica so I can see complaints about it being bloated. Seems fine to me but there you have it.

[silver04rollas]

I would rather not get into this comparison debate.

But, Celica GTS in most of the tests did not get great magazine times. Sport compact magazine got 15.2 seconds for it, which is the best magazine number I have seen.

Forr the most part while RSX Type S was getting 14.8 seconds in the 1/4 mile stock when in
reality it was a driver's race in a straight line between RSX Type S and Celica GTS.

You can go and check newcelica website and you will see many of them bone stock ran 14.8 seconds.

Again, around a race track is where Celica GTS did really exceptionally well. It could turn in lap times comparable with the Integra Type R because of its cornering speeds.

Only stating some facts I know here.

Originally Posted by Xenos

Wow, you really are upset about that aren't you? Anyway, just for the sake of being fair and objective. The last generation GTS Celica did 0 to 60 in 7.2 and had a 1/4 mile time of 15.4 seconds with a skid pad rating of .86g. Now by comparison, the current generation stock tC does 0 to 60 in 7.3 seconds, has a 1/4 mile time of 15.5 and a skid pad rating of .82g. So essentially if you add the TRD lowering springs to the current tC you have a car that performs exactly the same as the last generation GTS. So you know, I'm sorry to tell you but the GTS isn't mopping anything. Now when I said that the current tC is the Celica I didn't mean that literally. I meant that it is the current equivalent of the Celica from a performance standpoint and its place in the Toyota lineup. I get that you hate Scion for whatever reason and that's your choice. But I don't think Scion is going anywhere anytime soon so just get ready to gut it out I guess.


PS, the tC is 500 pounds heavier than the Celica so I can see complaints about it being bloated. Seems fine to me but there you have it.

[Xenos]

Originally Posted by silver04rollas

I would rather not get into this comparison debate.

But, Celica GTS in most of the tests did not get great magazine times. Sport compact magazine got 15.2 seconds for it, which is the best magazine number I have seen.

Forr the most part while RSX Type S was getting 14.8 seconds in the 1/4 mile stock when in
reality it was a driver's race in a straight line between RSX Type S and Celica GTS.

You can go and check newcelica website and you will see many of them bone stock ran 14.8 seconds.

Again, around a race track is where Celica GTS did really exceptionally well. It could turn in lap times comparable with the Integra Type R because of its cornering speeds.

Only stating some facts I know here.

I would never doubt the performance of the GTS cars. I very nearly purchased one back in about 2002. They were great cars. They just weren't as great as some people remember them being.

[silver04rollas]

Originally Posted by Xenos

I would never doubt the performance of the GTS cars. I very nearly purchased one back in about 2002. They were great cars. They just weren't as great as some people remember them being.

Good thing you dodged a bullet and did not buy the model year 2002.

It was the slowest of all years (including the 2005) since the rev limiter was dropped from 8400 rpm to 7600 rpm (because people were misshifting and blowing the engines up ) so it could not stay in the powerband and it resulted in a much slower car than the other model years.

[Xenos]

Originally Posted by silver04rollas

Good thing you dodged a bullet and did not buy the model year 2002.

It was the slowest of all years (including the 2005) since the rev limiter was dropped from 8400 rpm to 7600 rpm (because people were misshifting and blowing the engines up ) so it could not stay in the powerband and it resulted in a much slower car than the 2000, 2001, 2003 and 2004 model year.

LOL Figures.

I don't expect everyone to be madly in love with the tC. I had reservations about it myself until I drove it. The bad press that it gets is entirely unwarranted regardless of who is dishing it out, as far as I'm concerned. I have found it to be a well built car that performs very well for a daily driver. I couldn't be happier with the car. If I had to pick between it and the GTS I'd pick the tC. I remember sitting in the GTS and frankly it was almost as bad as trying to cram myself into a first gen Miata. Not a comfortable car at all. I think a lot of the haters with respect to the tC are all upset because they want the car to be something that it never was intended to be.

[got-rice]

Originally Posted by Xenos

I think a lot of the haters with respect to the tC are all upset because they want the car to be something that it never was intended to be.

Some of it was Toyota's doing. When the 2005 tC came out in 2004, it became popular because of it's G35 like styling, good entry pricing with loads of nice features. However, once the market changed with the GTI and Civic Si pushing 200hp, and MS3s, EVOs and STis becoming the favorites for tuners, the tC fell out of favor. The car had the same horsepower (give or take) and looked quite the same until the new one came out in 2010.

For many Toyota loyalists, the tC was the sportiest compact that was offered, but it paled in comparison to the competition as far as overall performance (much like the 7G Celica). Scionlife had a lot of tC topics back then, but the focus is now on the FR-S obviously. The tCs are still popular youth vehicles, and have some modibility, but more serious tuners have focused on the turbo and RWD vehicles. If it makes you happier, the tC is as popular as the current day Civic in the aftermarket sense.

[Xenos]

Originally Posted by got-rice

Some of it was Toyota's doing. When the 2005 tC came out in 2004, it became popular because of it's G35 like styling, good entry pricing with loads of nice features. However, once the market changed with the GTI and Civic Si pushing 200hp, and MS3s, EVOs and STis becoming the favorites for tuners, the tC fell out of favor. The car had the same horsepower (give or take) and looked quite the same until the new one came out in 2010.

For many Toyota loyalists, the tC was the sportiest compact that was offered, but it paled in comparison to the competition as far as overall performance (much like the 7G Celica). Scionlife had a lot of tC topics back then, but the focus is now on the FR-S obviously. The tCs are still popular youth vehicles, and have some modibility, but more serious tuners have focused on the turbo and RWD vehicles. If it makes you happier, the tC is as popular as the current day Civic in the aftermarket sense.

I'm perfectly happy with the car as it is to be honest about it. It's comfortable, has a good ride even with the lowering springs on it, and it has enough hp to be fun without having so much hp that the gas mileage suffers. Even the base model stereo is better than most other cars with upgraded stereos. I love the dual sunroof and if I need to carry larger items I can still fold the back seats down and put it under the hatch. The other day I brought home an entertainment center in a six foot long box. No problem. The back seat has as much leg room as my Corolla did and the seats are actually quite comfortable. If I wanted to upgrade the car to a serious performer it can be done relatively easily. Stiffer shocks, bigger sway bars, big brake kits and turbo kits are all readily available. I don't plan on doing that because I love the car as is. It has the 2.5 engine out of the Camry so I know its good to go for a looooong time. lol In fact I rather enjoy the fact that the tC is not wildly popular because you don't see the car all over the place. It's amazing how many heads my car turns and how many compliments I've already had from people who had no idea what it was. It's a great car. I think people don't really give it a chance and that's their loss. My gain though. lol

[got-rice]

Originally Posted by Xenos

I'm perfectly happy with the car as it is to be honest about it. It's comfortable, has a good ride even with the lowering springs on it, and it has enough hp to be fun without having so much hp that the gas mileage suffers. Even the base model stereo is better than most other cars with upgraded stereos. I love the dual sunroof and if I need to carry larger items I can still fold the back seats down and put it under the hatch. The other day I brought home an entertainment center in a six foot long box. No problem. The back seat has as much leg room as my Corolla did and the seats are actually quite comfortable. If I wanted to upgrade the car to a serious performer it can be done relatively easily. Stiffer shocks, bigger sway bars, big brake kits and turbo kits are all readily available. I don't plan on doing that because I love the car as is. It has the 2.5 engine out of the Camry so I know its good to go for a looooong time. lol In fact I rather enjoy the fact that the tC is not wildly popular because you don't see the car all over the place. It's amazing how many heads my car turns and how many compliments I've already had from people who had no idea what it was. It's a great car. I think people don't really give it a chance and that's their loss. My gain though. lol

That's perfectly fine...I think you bought the car exactly for the reason why it is being produced, and it can be thrown around a corner better than my XRS, despite it being labeled a 4 door tC. Like we said before, the tC is a good upgrade from the Corolla. And yes, you should feel unique because you have the more rare RS8.0. I see a few in my neighborhood with the 5 Axis kit with some nice wheels, and they actually look sharp.

One statistic that I'm curious about, is what percentage of the buyers are men vs women. The first gen skewed heavily toward women as the car got older, with many of the women being younger, and somewhat jailbait

[silver04rollas]

Toyota softened up the XRS in the 10th gen greatly for much greater mass appeal and to go after the Lancer, Mazda 3 buyers.

Interestingly, Honda did exactly the same to the Civic SI as well.

The 9th gen 2ZZ-GE XRS did not sell well because it came only with a 6 speed manual, it was too stiff, it had a temperamental high-revving engine with revs either skyrocketing or plummeting that most typical Corolla buyers would not care for so Toyota did all the opposite in the 10th gen in order to appeal to mass buyers.

I still get the reaction from first-time passengers while driving somewhere "how the hell did Toyota come up with the idea to build a Corolla like this???"

Originally Posted by got-rice

That's perfectly fine...I think you bought the car exactly for the reason why it is being produced, and it can be thrown around a corner better than my XRS, despite it being labeled a 4 door tC. Like we said before, the tC is a good upgrade from the Corolla.

[Camread]

Originally Posted by silver04rollas

Toyota softened up the XRS in the 10th gen greatly for much greater mass appeal and to go after the Lancer, Mazda 3 buyers.

The 9th gen 2ZZ-GE XRS did not sell well because it came only with a 6 speed manual, it was too stiff, it had a temperamental high-revving engine with revs either skyrocketing or plummeting that most typical Corolla buyers would not care for so Toyota did all the opposite in the 10th gen in order to appeal to mass buyers.

Yeah that worked out great.