The Toyota Celica GT-S can run 6 to 7 second zone 0-60 times. It is LIGHTER than the RX-8 by almost 500 pounds, high rev engine, has futuristic design, gets BETTER gas mileage, is CHEAPER, and has been around so the powerplant has proven itself.

What’s your opinion?

If you like the Celica, get one.

I liked the old Celica design. My housemate has a white one in my garage. It's so low!!! Cool! Makes the RX-8 looks like a big monster car.

The new Celicas are ugly, IMO.

its a chick car, thats all, nothin to special, its a 4cylinder POS

I agree with the others on the new Celicas being ugly (with a capital ug). If you drive an auto, why do you care so much about the performance? (j/k :) ) Compare the room in the back seat as well as the handling. If all you want is straight line perf there are much cheaper alternatives than the 8, even with an auto trans.

If you're really curious, just go for a test drive to find out for yourself, because you're probably not going to find an unbiased opinion here, or even in any of the celica forums.

Yea the celica may be cheaper but your not gonna get the drive/handling or quality that you do w/the rx8...or the recognition.... before i had a 2003 tiburon and no one even cared but now people stare at me in my rx8, but i still think celica is a good car....def a chick car tho

Originally posted by DragonRX8
The Toyota Celica GT-S can run 6 to 7 second zone 0-60 times. It is LIGHTER than the RX-8 by almost 500 pounds, high rev engine, has futuristic design, gets BETTER gas mileage, is CHEAPER, and has been around so the powerplant has proven itself.

What’s your opinion?

The Toyota Celica GT-S can run 6 to 7 second zone 0-60 times. It is LIGHTER than the RX-8 by almost 500 pounds, high rev engine, has futuristic design, gets BETTER gas mileage, is CHEAPER, and has been around so the powerplant has proven itself.

What's your point? It's still a Celica. Go away, troll.

I traded a 2000 GT-S(with 68k miles) in on my RX-8. It is a nice car and I averaged 27 mpg (93 octane) driving the same roads (and same speeds) as I do now in the '8' getting 18 mpg. I never had to add oil bewtenn 3k mile changes It handles and stops almost as good as the RX-8. There was very little brake dust and the stereo was very nice for a stock unit. A chick car? What facts support that statement? A stock 6 speed GT-S (2000-2001, or 2003) driven properly will give the 6 speed RX-8 a good run, but the '8' should take it. The GT-S has only 133 ft lbs torque, but it weighs 2500 lbs. It has 180 hp, BUT only a 13% driveline loss, so the front wheels put down close to 160 hp. The problem is it does not have a LSD, so it all goes through 1 wheel.

The automatic GT-S is not as fast as the 6 speed and will take close to 8 seconds 0-60

As for the legendary Toyota quality, well it did have problems:
The idler pulley for engine accessory belt (serpentine) had to be replaced (twice), The CD player started skipping and was replaced, the Throttle body had to be replaced - it was sticking at 3000 rpms and the transmission was replaced at 49k miles due to grinding going into 2nd and 4th. The moonroof was acrylic and the tint (on the outside of it) started peeling at 60k miles.

all repairs were covered under warranty except the moonroof.

The car was very noisy inside and the engine was fairly smooth up to the cutoff around 8300 rpms, with a tremendous burst of power at 6000 rpms. But nowhere as smooth as a rotary engine.

As for looks, well that's subjective, I think it was and is a unique style, with several cars copying the headlight style (including the new 350Z).

The problem was Toyota only made slight cosmetic changes and a lot of people have trouble with the shift gates on downshifts landing in second instead of fourth resulting in blown engine.

THe RX-8 is much more refined car (it also costs more) and has a usable back seat, but give the Celica GT-S some respect, they are
nice cars , but not as nice as the RX-8 - IMO.

no facts support my statement of it being a chick car...its just that the majorty of people i see driving it are chicks...

Dang, you guys were drawn to it like moths to the flame. I like the new Celica. The design philosophy is almost the same as RX-8. Emphasis is put on handling and having a good power to weight ratio by reducing the weight instead of increasing the power. However, the Celica GTS auto does not run between 6 - 7 on the 0-60. Only the 6sp stick shift does. People who go for the 8 instead of Celica are looking for RWD, better safety features (curtain airbags, larger cabin), newer design features, and a coupe with room for actual people. People who consider the Celica may also be detracted by the fact that the car will be redesigned in 2005.

Originally posted by 6speed8
I traded a 2000 GT-S(with 68k miles) in on my RX-8. It is a nice car and I averaged 27 mpg (93 octane) driving the same roads (and same speeds) as I do now in the '8' getting 18 mpg. I never had to add oil bewtenn 3k mile changes It handles and stops almost as good as the RX-8. There was very little brake dust and the stereo was very nice for a stock unit. A chick car? What facts support that statement? A stock 6 speed GT-S (2000-2001, or 2003) driven properly will give the 6 speed RX-8 a good run, but the '8' should take it. The GT-S has only 133 ft lbs torque, but it weighs 2500 lbs. It has 180 hp, BUT only a 13% driveline loss, so the front wheels put down close to 160 hp. The problem is it does not have a LSD, so it all goes through 1 wheel.

The automatic GT-S is not as fast as the 6 speed and will take close to 8 seconds 0-60

As for the legendary Toyota quality, well it did have problems:
The idler pulley for engine accessory belt (serpentine) had to be replaced (twice), The CD player started skipping and was replaced, the Throttle body had to be replaced - it was sticking at 3000 rpms and the transmission was replaced at 49k miles due to grinding going into 2nd and 4th. The moonroof was acrylic and the tint (on the outside of it) started peeling at 60k miles.

all repairs were covered under warranty except the moonroof.

The car was very noisy inside and the engine was fairly smooth up to the cutoff around 8300 rpms, with a tremendous burst of power at 6000 rpms. But nowhere as smooth as a rotary engine.

As for looks, well that's subjective, I think it was and is a unique style, with several cars copying the headlight style (including the new 350Z).

The problem was Toyota only made slight cosmetic changes and a lot of people have trouble with the shift gates on downshifts landing in second instead of fourth resulting in blown engine.

THe RX-8 is much more refined car (it also costs more) and has a usable back seat, but give the Celica GT-S some respect, they are
nice cars , but not as nice as the RX-8 - IMO.

I aslo traded in my 2000 Gt-s on my new Rx-8. Both cars are very nice, the 8 is just that much better. Its a smother ride, and you will get alot of looks. The bad thing about the celica is you had to keep it above 6000 RPMs to feel the power. It felt like you were going to blow the engin evertime you do it. With the GTS i also blew my engin on a miss shift, thank god they covered it under waranty. They said the engin blew at 9200 RPMS. The 8 can eat that for breakfast. The best thing about the 8 is the RWD. I will never go back to a FWD sports car ever again. Cutting donuts in wet parking lots is just to fun.

I don't think anyone has ever been "bowled over" by the Celica. It's another Toyota with "sporting pretensions".

Most who are really into sports cars (not the fast and furious set) don't take it very seriously.

That said, I've used '80s corolla GTS as an autox machine, and with some major mods, did quite well with it.

But it runs 2 days at dealer for flooded engine lol what a pos

Dude seriously, you want to compare a Celica with an RX8?

LOL...not even worth the time to type it out. Nevermind.

Three words: Front. Wheel. Drive.

The fastest things about celicas are the girls that drive them.

(An old club RSX quote that always amused me)

I really have no qualms about the celica but its not for me.

DragonRX8,
Having owned a 2001 Celica GT-S 6-speed I can say that it feels faster than my RX-8 but that is just an illusion. ;) The Celica has a nice rush of power at 6k RPMs that pulls very strongly until it hits the rev limiter. Which makes the car feel faster than what it really is and that is one of the things that I both loved & hated about the car. If you were able to keep the car in its sweet spot (6,000-8,200 RPMs) the car felt like a go-cart on steroids but if you let the RPMs dip below 6k the car becomes a complete dog.

If you check out some of the Celica forums you will notice that the auto feels under powered because it has a very hard time staying in the sweet spot. I don't think that you would be happy with its performance and I'd suggest that you look at other cars before you spend any money.

I agree with Hard 8, not diggin' the whole front wheel drive thing at all, maybe if they brought back the GT-four the Celica might be of worthy contention, (if they did already, my bad) but until then there's no comparison. The technology used in the 8 alone is way cooler than any Celica could ever wish for.

Originally posted by DragonRX8
The Toyota Celica GT-S can run 6 to 7 second zone 0-60 times. It is LIGHTER than the RX-8 by almost 500 pounds, high rev engine, has futuristic design, gets BETTER gas mileage, is CHEAPER, and has been around so the powerplant has proven itself.

What’s your opinion?


the 13B has been around for more than 10 years, since the 3rd gen RX7.....the celica is a cool car though....not as cool as the RX8. IMHO;)

If cheaper and better mileage were my criteria, I'd be driving a Civic.

The celicas engine is used in the new lotus so that should say something positive about the celica.

Or something negative about Lotus :)

lol

Originally posted by zerohour
The celicas engine is used in the new lotus so that should say something positive about the celica.

are you sure? In what country? I heard they are using the Integra Type-R motor aka the B18C in the Lotus Elise... and in other countries it differs.

I have a 2001 Celica GT also with my 2004 RX-8 and its a cool car and all, but performance is extremely limited in the factor that the engine is pretty much maxed out as it is, the fwd factor, and that aftermarket support sucks. Its the truth, but that why I moved on to bigger and badder things, like the 8.

Dude, I can not believe we are discussing the Celicas here. I traded my 2002 330i for the RX-8, and the beemer was a RWD. I will have to agree with most of you, for the Celica (or is it CILICA) being a chick car.

Originally posted by Efini 8
are you sure? In what country? I heard they are using the Integra Type-R motor aka the B18C in the Lotus Elise... and in other countries it differs.

I have a 2001 Celica GT also with my 2004 RX-8 and its a cool car and all, but performance is extremely limited in the factor that the engine is pretty much maxed out as it is, the fwd factor, and that aftermarket support sucks. Its the truth, but that why I moved on to bigger and badder things, like the 8.

The USDM Elise will have a 190hp 2ZZ-GE, it has been confirmed by many sources. Sun International is the company that currently brings Elises into the country with the B18C5, however when lotus introduces their own version I don't see Sun's Elise business doing so well. Rumor had it that Lotus was considering a Nissan and a Mazda powerplant as well but found the 2ZZ-GE to be the ideal application for the Elise.

Here's a link to a shootout between the CobraR and the Sun Elise.

Early reports claim the USDM Elise to be capable of low 12s in the 1/4 and low 4s 0-60 and it's just about the best handling car on the planet, well, street legal car at least :p

Geez people, we are talking about AUTOMATIC RX-8 vs Celica here, I don't think performance is a big issue. btw: If you want a better comparison, try RX-8 vs MR-S, both RWD. The MR-S is ugly as sin, but it has a huge aftermarket overseas and here. It's definitely not a chicks car because it's so damn ugly, like a dragon fly. Still....

Get what ever you want... and like.

I used to admire the Celica when I was younger and didn't really know anything about performance. It was elegant and beautiful. Then that horrible body redesign... I just don't understand how anyone, especially a professional designer, could look at this:

http://www.celica.net/Gallery/6th_generation_Celica's/Exterior/black_celica.JPG

and this:

http://www.celica.net/Gallery/7th_generation_Celica's/Exterior/draggin'.jpg

and consider it an improvement. The person at Toyota who made that decision should be found and publically eviscerated.

Originally posted by bluesnowmonkey
The person at Toyota who made that decision should be found and publically eviscerated. Geez bluesnowmonkey, don't hold back, tell us what you really think... ouch.

Originally posted by bluesnowmonkey
The person at Toyota who made that decision should be found and publically eviscerated.


I feel the same way about the person that put chrome wheels on the first celica... Honestly the celica has always been an also ran in my book, at least the new one handles better and accelerates better than previous models.

I don't know what you guys are talking about. The latest gen Celica looks good to me, especially with the Action Package. I think it carries the large wing more elegantly than the Evo's and STi's.

The latest generation of the Celica was lauded by the Auto Magazines when it came out as a much more sporty version of the previous generations march toward obesity. With the exception of the ITR and possibly the Eclipse GST/GSX, it was the top-performing sport compact at the time it came out. The amazing thing is that the GTS is only 2,500 lbs. in a mass-produced car!!

That being said, Toyota screwed up a few key areas: engine powerband (needs another 500-1000 revs in the powerband), strange gearing and the gearbox itself. Still, I think it will give the RX8 a hell of a fight on a road course.

The US version of the Lotus Elise gives mad performance with the Toyota Celica engine because the Elise weighs in around 1800 pounds.