Why is Scion (Toyota) doing it soooo worng??

[silentchaos]

Ok, so heres the story. Today I pulled into the Stealership to pick up my 104 dollar OEM shift knob. I parked to the right of a brand new 08 Tc. The First thing i noticed when i looked out my window at the window sticker on the Tc was the MGP ratings? 21 in the city and 28 or 29 on the Highway (i dont exactly remember). So on my way to the Parts dept im thinking about it. My 7 year old car that is essentially the predecessor to the Tc get way better gas milage than its replacement. I generally get about 32-33 on the highway and about 25-28 in the city. (and i don't drive like a old lady) so apon further inspection when i got done in the parts dept, i found that the Tc had a 2.4L instead of my 1.8L so i started to understand this until i saw that that big gas sucking 2.4L is only rated for 161bhp.

so inconclusion.

after 3-4 years of development toyota and scion have secsessfully built a car that is heavier, weaker(powerwise), slower, not as good looking and get not near as good gas milage.... than a 2000 celica GTS.

Discuss :popcorn:

[Littleguy]

People who buy automatic cars like bigger engines that have torque. It may not be as fast, but as long as it "feels" faster thats all that matters.

[Sty09]

People who buy automatic cars like bigger engines that have torque. It may not be as fast, but as long as it "feels" faster thats all that matters.

+1

[lVlemphizStylez]

after 3-4 years of development toyota and scion have secsessfully built a car that is heavier, weaker(powerwise), slower, not as good looking and get not near as good gas milage.... than a 2000 celica GTS.

Discuss :popcorn:

They've built a car that is selling more...end of story..

Toyota is there to make money...not appease the few thousand Celica owners that want to see their car for something far more than what it is. The facts are the TC is selling hotter than the Celica did...Toyota made the RIGHT move..

[Carbonized_GT]

Wouldn't you think that if they threw in a better chassis, and engine sales would go up even more? Especially when the tC came out when the RSX-S was still in production? But I guess its just like Toyota to use parts from the recycle bin and call its 'new'.

[lVlemphizStylez]

Wouldn't you think that if they threw in a better chassis, and engine sales would go up even more? Especially when the tC came out when the RSX-S was still in production? But I guess its just like Toyota to use parts from the recycle bin and call its 'new'.

Yea I think you answered your own question...The cheaper they can make the car, the more profit they are going to rake in..

[Littleguy]

And it was never made to compete with the RSX-S. The RSX is ahead in performance and luxury. It was meant to compete with Eclipse, Tiburon, Focus, Civic, etc...

[DragongurlTC]

why ? I have no idea why

[sky-on]

And it was never made to compete with the RSX-S. The RSX is ahead in performance and luxury. It was meant to compete with Eclipse, Tiburon, Focus, Civic, etc...

+1 When I bought my tC, it was between that and the Mazda 3. The tC is def. a bang for the buck. When i picked it up, there was nothing else on the market that was offering so many standard options for 17k. Plus, unlike silentchaos, I personally think the tC looks better than the Celica. :hitit:

Here's Mine if you don't agree:
http://media3.dropshots.com/photos/44963/20071110/215853.jpg
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1156/1462499272_7b409f1263_o.jpg

Discuss.

[GT-StreetCrime]

The only thing I like about the TC is the interior. The rest is so so. All around the GT-S is a better car, it should have never cost as much as it did though.

[sky-on]

^^ haha thats where we differ, i HATE the tC seats, they're made for the avg. overweight American, I can't take a hard turn without sliding around, those suckers don't hug for shiat!

[Carbonized_GT]

Looks like a Camry.

[Joey03_VVT-I]

+1 When I bought my tC, it was between that and the Mazda 3. The tC is def. a bang for the buck. When i picked it up, there was nothing else on the market that was offering so many standard options for 17k. Plus, unlike silentchaos, I personally think the tC looks better than the Celica. :hitit:

Here's Mine if you don't agree:
http://media3.dropshots.com/photos/44963/20071110/215853.jpg
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1156/1462499272_7b409f1263_o.jpg

Discuss.
You have clean looking SCION Tc. I only agree that the SCION Tc looks better stock over a stock looking CELICA. But when it comes down to bodykits and etc. Toyota CELICA fu@kn OWNS a SCION Tc any day of the week! I own a 2005 SCION Tc and I still plan on fixing it up someday with a Kaminari kit.
EXAMPLE:
http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g133/Joey03_VVT-I/Random%20Stuff%202/TRDWing011.jpg
http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g133/Joey03_VVT-I/kaminari_tc_front.jpg
http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g133/Joey03_VVT-I/kaminari_tc_rear.jpg

But no matter what. I will always love Toyota CELICA's!
http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g133/Joey03_VVT-I/CelicaNation4.jpg
http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g133/Joey03_VVT-I/143500979l2nn.gif
http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g133/Joey03_VVT-I/JoeysCELICAa-7.jpg
http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g133/Joey03_VVT-I/HIN006.jpg
http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g133/Joey03_VVT-I/Joey030-1.jpg
http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g133/Joey03_VVT-I/JoeysCELICAa-11.jpg
http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g133/Joey03_VVT-I/JoeysCELICAa-3.jpg
http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g133/Joey03_VVT-I/BarbeQandHOOTERSmeet024-1.jpg

[Booster1]

Bigger engine will suck more gas and remember the weight of the engine. It was a mistake for discontinuing the celica, I mean celica it's been around for so long and same as the supra.Please toyota, bring them back? They should make a better gt4 celica. And when I got my gts I test drive a tc when I made a sharp turn I felt like I was sliding off my seat.The interior is ok, but the celica overall, the looks is better, performance is better, the interior which I love most and even the seat just make my daily driving so much fun.....

[mindphunk]

It was a mistake for discontinuing the celica

Yes, Toyota is still reeling from that mistake. :rolleyes:

[GT-StreetCrime]

^^ haha thats where we differ, i HATE the tC seats, they're made for the avg. overweight American, I can't take a hard turn without sliding around, those suckers don't hug for shiat!

I just like the center console and dash. The seats can always be switched out.

It was a mistake for discontinuing the celica

Yes, Toyota is still reeling from that mistake. :rolleyes:


Nope. Toyota doesn't remember ever making the Celica...they're too busy making drivable toasters.

[Nineball]

For the money you could drop on a new tC, I'd be looking around at newer, slightly worn in used cars. You could get a nice IS with a few miles on it, an RSX, MR2, etc... Hell, you could grab a Celi and have enough left over for some nice mods. If you really wanted a new car, though, the Cobalt, though slow and awkward looking, has been referred to by many as "a lot of car for the money".

[Gt to GtS Swap]

welll... like it was said earlier on the people want more torque.. if you look at all the reviews on these websites about the celica.. a lot of people gave it a weak power rating because they don't like to rev high and think it lacks in torque... big time!.. So if its just a daily driver than a tc is better for the mass population.
++ the tc has a .6 liter advantage on the celica.. i believe they released a tc that was superchargered stock at one point.... when it comes to putting good power numbers ,via boost, to the wheels its almost always better to have larger displacement.

[Carbonized_GT]

For the money you could drop on a new tC, I'd be looking around at newer, slightly worn in used cars. You could get a nice IS with a few miles on it, an RSX, MR2, etc...


Hell yeah.

****, for the price, you can get a Z3 M-Roadster!

[xantonin]

To Toyota: http://www.gdargaud.net/Humor/Pics/DoingItWrong.jpg

[Zero]

Toyota became the number 1 automaker and did it with no performance oriented vehicles. Seems like they cut their losses (Supra, MR-2, and Celica) and are now at the top.

Toyota is not doing anything wrong and could give a rat's ass about their loyal [fanboy] enthusiasts.

[xantonin]

Toyota can't be the number one until they're number one in everything, including performance.

Unless you're going to raw sales figures...

[lVlemphizStylez]

Unless you're going to raw sales figures...

Yea I think he was talking about being number 1 in what mattered most...

You know, profit...for a company...

[Zero]

Toyota can't be the number one until they're number one in everything, including performance.

Unless you're going to raw sales figures...

Toyota has a rich history of performance oriented vehicles, there's no doubt, but you fail to see that their bread winner was not the Supra, was not the Celica, and was not the MR-2. Their bread winner is and always will be the Corolla and Camry. Scion is another marketing-genius that Toyota has incorporated - market to the youth with affordable, borderline ugly (in some cases) vehicles backed up with ricer factory parts. Since it's debut, the Scion brand has been selling like hotcakes, which would bring us to my point that Toyota is in fact doing things right - making a profit and becoming number 1, even though they currently have some boring cars.

Toyota has backed up their Scion line-up more than they ever had with the Celica. The Celica was an overpriced POS that Toyotas fvcked up on - this is something you should be making threads about.

Talk about how a fully loaded 2005 Tsunami-kitted Celica GT-S cost more than a 2005 Acura RSX Type-S. In 2002, when I was looking for a GT-S 6-speed with TRD kit, the price came out to under 30 grand! 30 grand for that POS! 4 years later we were searching for my brother's 06 Type-S and found a brand new, fully loaded, with about every option Type-S for less than 26 grand out the door, that was without haggling for a price drop. 26 grand for a "luxury-sporty" car was a much better deal than paying about 30grand for a "Toyota". (BTW, I know Honda=Acura, I'm making a point that their is a difference in status.) If the Celica was sold under the Lexus brand and sold for 30grand and came with more power and better options, it would be a justifiable purchase.

[Zero]

And it was never made to compete with the RSX-S. The RSX is ahead in performance and luxury. It was meant to compete with Eclipse, Tiburon, Focus, Civic, etc...

+1 When I bought my tC, it was between that and the Mazda 3. The tC is def. a bang for the buck. When i picked it up, there was nothing else on the market that was offering so many standard options for 17k. Plus, unlike silentchaos, I personally think the tC looks better than the Celica. :hitit:

Here's Mine if you don't agree:
http://media3.dropshots.com/photos/44963/20071110/215853.jpg
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1156/1462499272_7b409f1263_o.jpg

Discuss.

Clean tC.

Scion also offered to sell a base tC, meaning no options. Sell a tC with a cheap radio, cheap wheels, etc... because they had their customers in mind. This was a previously posted topic. Another genius idea. They actually thought of the customer interested in buying a tC with modifying it in mind. Why buy a tC with the Enkei rims when you'd eventually swap it for better rims? Why sell it with the Pioneer headunit when you could find something better, but cheaper than what they would charge for the upgraded factory headunit?

Do I think the tC is the replacement for the Celica? No, it's actually no where near it. The 7th gen GT-S, stock for stock, was an upgrade to the 6th gen's GT-4 - stock for stock. N/A, the GT-S will out run the GT-4, sure it's got a turbo'd motor and AWD system, but it weighed a lot more.

Toyota did show some real improvement over the past generations, although I think losing the RWD setup was a bad choice (but good for the overall consumer), for the Celica. A new innovative change that made it better than the last. The tC falls short of being the replacement of the Celica. It bumped up to a 2.4L motor that's shared with the Camry, so what? The 5s-fe was also used in the Camry and in the 5th and 6th gen Celicas and had bigger displacement than the 1zz/2zz. For all we know "TC" could stand for Toyota Corolla/Camry/Coupe. Coming from the 6th and 7th gen Celica, it's like Toyota went backward and is just above the 5th gen GT-S/6th gen GT. The tC is just another Toyota that Toyota sells to pick up where their marketing strategy with the Supra, Celica, and MR-2 failed at.

[silentchaos]

Toyota has backed up their Scion line-up more than they ever had with the Celica. The Celica was an overpriced POS that Toyotas fvcked up on - this is something you should be making threads about.
then why did you buy one?

Talk about how a fully loaded 2005 Tsunami-kitted Celica GT-S cost more than a 2005 Acura RSX Type-S. In 2002, when I was looking for a GT-S 6-speed with TRD kit, the price came out to under 30 grand! 30 grand for that POS! 4 years later we were searching for my brother's 06 Type-S and found a brand new, fully loaded, with about every option Type-S for less than 26 grand out the door, that was without haggling for a price drop.

Im 18 and even i know that if you buy new from a dealer you might as well bend over and hand the salesman a tub of vasoline.

for example. my best friends dad just recently bought an 06 VW Tuareg. 3500 miles and no i didnt forget "zero". fully loaded, leather, v8 air ride suspension, nav system. bluebook on it was 57,000. he picked it up for 35k

another example my mom bought a 03 mazda tribute in dec 2005 fully loaded, v6, leather, cd changer, heated seats sunroof. 24000 miles. picked it up for 15000.

and finally... me.
2000 gts bought this spring. 55kmiles sunroof, premium sound, not leather. 6spd. 10,000 you may say that is alot for a 7 year old car, but it has 55k miles and all the others i had looked at were selling for 2000 more and had double the miles

so my friend maybe toyota isnt the smart one by overpricing the celica but you are even less of a smart one for paying full price.

[Zero]

You, my friend, are an idiot. I was talking brand new prices, not used prices. Don't take my words and use them out of context.

And where did I say I bought a GT-S for that price? Another thing you are proving yourself to be. I bought a brand new GT for under 19grand with crappy options and an automatic tranny - the only thing I hate about it is that it's auto and that I should have looked for a 5-speed with no power windows, no sunroof, and no power doorlocks, a luxury I can live without.

You bought a used GT-S for 10k, but how much did it say it was on the original Toyota sticker?

I thought this was about the price of a brand new tC and how for that price you could be something else. I am comparing the price of a new Celica GT-S compared to the price of a brand new RSX Type-S. And none of that fvcking lame, "then if you wanted a Honduh, you should've gone with one," bullsh!t. Resorting to those tactics is about as lame as lambo doors, chrome rims, and altezza tail lights.

The info you're posting is of cars that are slightly used/used not brand new, as in buying in the year of said car.

Where else would I buy a brand-spanking new 2002 Celica at that time, other than a Toyota dealership? Most mom-and-pop dealerships sell cars that were once owned, making them used, not brand new.

[Zero]

You want to talk about stupid, you are one to talk. I didn't fork over 104 dollars for an overpriced OEM shift knob.
Toyota has backed up their Scion line-up more than they ever had with the Celica. The Celica was an overpriced POS that Toyotas fvcked up on - this is something you should be making threads about.
then why did you buy one?

Talk about how a fully loaded 2005 Tsunami-kitted Celica GT-S cost more than a 2005 Acura RSX Type-S. In 2002, when I was looking for a GT-S 6-speed with TRD kit, the price came out to under 30 grand! 30 grand for that POS! 4 years later we were searching for my brother's 06 Type-S and found a brand new, fully loaded, with about every option Type-S for less than 26 grand out the door, that was without haggling for a price drop.

Im 18 and even i know that if you buy new from a dealer you might as well bend over and hand the salesman a tub of vasoline.

for example. my best friends dad just recently bought an 06 VW Tuareg. 3500 miles and no i didnt forget "zero". fully loaded, leather, v8 air ride suspension, nav system. bluebook on it was 57,000. he picked it up for 35k

another example my mom bought a 03 mazda tribute in dec 2005 fully loaded, v6, leather, cd changer, heated seats sunroof. 24000 miles. picked it up for 15000.

and finally... me.
2000 gts bought this spring. 55kmiles sunroof, premium sound, not leather. 6spd. 10,000 you may say that is alot for a 7 year old car, but it has 55k miles and all the others i had looked at were selling for 2000 more and had double the miles

so my friend maybe toyota isnt the smart one by overpricing the celica but you are even less of a smart one for paying full price.

[silentchaos]

why do you think i waited over 6 months to get it? i looked high and low for a used one or a cheaper aftermarket one. the leather on mine came unstitched and i got it as a christmas present.

[Zero]

why do you think i waited over 6 months to get it? i looked high and low for a used one or a cheaper aftermarket one. the leather on mine came unstitched and i got it as a christmas present.

What are you talking about, the shift knob? There are quite a few being sold on here, FYI.

And I'm glad that you bought your 2000 GTS for that price, but don't try to mix in what I'm saying with that. I'm talking about the year of the car being sold in the same year that car was made, i.e. 2002 GT-S vs. 2002 Type-S, 2005 GT-S vs. 2005 Type-S. I'm not talking about the price of a car made in 2000 vs the price of a car made in 2007.

Some people were saying that for the price of a brand new tC being sold for, they could get slightly used cars or even better older cars. That is not a good/fair comparison. Comparing that price to cars in the same class as the tC would be a better comparison, unless you really don't know what you want and have a fixed spending budget. Brand new 2007 tC vs. brand new 2007 Civic is a good comparison. Brand new 2007 tC vs 2003 IS300 is not a good comparison, you're comparing two different classes and years.

[silentchaos]

what im saying is why buy new when you are probably paying 3-5 more than if you buy slightly used with say 10-20k miles on it.

[lVlemphizStylez]

because new car prices are what drive sales for a company...not used ones...And this thread is about toyota's move with Scion...not the used market for a celica...

[Zero]

what im saying is why buy new when you are probably paying 3-5 more than if you buy slightly used with say 10-20k miles on it.

Some people actually prefer being a car's (even with other things) first owner, first anything. One reason why I prefer a brand new vehicle is the fact that I'm not taking a gamble on if it will crap out on me down the road, the way some might feel if they go with a used vehicle. I want a worry free purchase, even though there are some incidents of problems occuring with a brand new car.

[xantonin]

Some people actually prefer being a car's (even with other things) first owner, first anything. One reason why I prefer a brand new vehicle is the fact that I'm not taking a gamble on if it will crap out on me down the road, the way some might feel if they go with a used vehicle. I want a worry free purchase, even though there are some incidents of problems occuring with a brand new car.
I agree.

I will keep getting used cars for a while. But when I can, I plan to buy a new car.

I like being able to customize the options right there on the spot, rather than looking at cars and being stuck with whatever options are already on the vehicle.

I like the peace of mind knowing that everything is covered in the vehicle. I like knowing everything that's happened to it, and knowing it's history, where it's been and everything.

New cars do actually somewhat have a trade-off point where they are cheaper than used cars. Mainly in repairs, since it's all under warranty. Especially with warranties getting better and better. You may pay $5,000 more, but 50,000 miles later, that will pay for itself.

One downside to buying a new car and with it's warranties, is your modding options are limited. Anything you do will void your warranty.




Anyway, all that aside, my point for number one was mostly in my eyes. It's like the "console wars". Nintendo may be number one currently, but The PS3 way outperforms it. Microsoft may have the most profit, but Mac's and Linux easily beat Windows.

So, I suppose Toyota is the most successful, yes. But I wish they'd work more in the performance area. Regardless, I don't see performance being profitable in any sort of way. Why? Because it takes so much more research, development, time, and there's way more competition. You could put years and million of dollars into researching this new kick ass engine, which I'm sure Toyota did, but then some other punk comes along with a much crappier engine, but their car still sells way more in the performance market.

A perfect example of this is the tC (ironic no?). It's pretty crappy performance wise, but it sells way more than the Celica even in the sports car category...

[lVlemphizStylez]

I agree.

I will keep getting used cars for a while. But when I can, I plan to buy a new car.

I like being able to customize the options right there on the spot, rather than looking at cars and being stuck with whatever options are already on the vehicle.

I like the peace of mind knowing that everything is covered in the vehicle. I like knowing everything that's happened to it, and knowing it's history, where it's been and everything.

New cars do actually somewhat have a trade-off point where they are cheaper than used cars. Mainly in repairs, since it's all under warranty. Especially with warranties getting better and better. You may pay $5,000 more, but 50,000 miles later, that will pay for itself.

One downside to buying a new car and with it's warranties, is your modding options are limited. Anything you do will void your warranty.




Anyway, all that aside, my point for number one was mostly in my eyes. It's like the "console wars". Nintendo may be number one currently, but The PS3 way outperforms it. Microsoft may have the most profit, but Mac's and Linux easily beat Windows.

So, I suppose Toyota is the most successful, yes. But I wish they'd work more in the performance area. Regardless, I don't see performance being profitable in any sort of way. Why? Because it takes so much more research, development, time, and there's way more competition. You could put years and million of dollars into researching this new kick ass engine, which I'm sure Toyota did, but then some other punk comes along with a much crappier engine, but their car still sells way more in the performance market.

A perfect example of this is the tC (ironic no?). It's pretty crappy performance wise, but it sells way more than the Celica even in the sports car category...

lol the 2zz wasn't a milestone in performance....Not in the least bit lmao. Better than the TC motor yes, but how much is that really saying??

[Boosted2.0]

Ok, so heres the story. Today I pulled into the Stealership to pick up my 104 dollar OEM shift knob. I parked to the right of a brand new 08 Tc. The First thing i noticed when i looked out my window at the window sticker on the Tc was the MGP ratings? 21 in the city and 28 or 29 on the Highway (i dont exactly remember). So on my way to the Parts dept im thinking about it. My 7 year old car that is essentially the predecessor to the Tc get way better gas milage than its replacement. I generally get about 32-33 on the highway and about 25-28 in the city. (and i don't drive like a old lady) so apon further inspection when i got done in the parts dept, i found that the Tc had a 2.4L instead of my 1.8L so i started to understand this until i saw that that big gas sucking 2.4L is only rated for 161bhp.

so inconclusion.

after 3-4 years of development toyota and scion have secsessfully built a car that is heavier, weaker(powerwise), slower, not as good looking and get not near as good gas milage.... than a 2000 celica GTS.

Discuss :popcorn:


Its very simple. The Celica was killed due to poor sales. The poor sales were due to high price.

2000 GTS 6Speed - $21K base
2005 Scion tC - $16K base with 17" alloy wheels, nice stereo, panoramic roof, etc. etc. etc. (and thats 5 years later)

Nuff said.

[techgeekwill]

Scion (Toyota) are doing just fine.

The R&D costs for the xB, xD, and tC are low. Why? Becuase they are using a lot of the same things that are used on a lot of other Toyota cars globally. It's called scale-ability. It's cost effective and helps them churn out a better quality product.

Scions are cheap for what you get. Compared to the new xB, the Element (similarly equipped) starts at $21k for the "SC" while you can get an xB for $16500. The tC is the same way, the only other car that comes close to it in the market right now is really the G5 GT/ Cobalt SS n/a. Those start at $21k also and you get less, as well as an ugly car.

They are in no-way built cheaply either. The use the same QC process as every other Toyota.

Anyone who thinks that Toyota is f-ing up with the Scion brand is simple minded and needs to take a business/marketing class.

The only thing I think they need to do is develop a better 2.4l than what is currently offered. Something with better economy, but similar power.

[techgeekwill]

lol the 2zz wasn't a milestone in performance....Not in the least bit lmao. Better than the TC motor yes, but how much is that really saying??


Nope, tC motor has torque. That is what makes the wheels turn.

[lVlemphizStylez]

Nope, tC motor has torque. That is what makes the wheels turn.

ok what was the point of this post?? 160 ft lbs of torque is hardly torque to be commended on...So I truly hope that wasn't the point you were trying to get across..

[techgeekwill]

ok what was the point of this post?? 160 ft lbs of torque is hardly torque to be commended on...So I truly hope that wasn't the point you were trying to get across..


No, but compared to the 2ZZ, it's a lot more useful as a DD.

[lVlemphizStylez]

My post was referencing performance (the one you replied to)...So tell me again how is your post relevant??

[Boosted2.0]

lol the 2zz wasn't a milestone in performance....Not in the least bit lmao. Better than the TC motor yes, but how much is that really saying??


Sure it was. 100 HP/Liter production motor with excellent emissions and fuel economy. NOTHING built before it and precious little built since could match it interms of combined performance, economy, and emissions.

[lVlemphizStylez]

Honda hit the 100hp/liter marker 5+ years before that...with the b16 (1.6l 160hp)and went beyond 100hp/liter still 3+ years before the 2zz with the b18c (1.8l 200 hp)...and b16b (1.6l 185 hp). When I say milestone, I usually mean the first. Maybe they had firsts in the emissions department but as far as hp/liter I know for a fact they were far from first with small displacement high rev motors N/A

And all those above motors sans the b16b were emissions passing and very fuel efficient

[Boosted2.0]

Honda hit the 100hp/liter marker 5+ years before that...with the b16 (1.6l 160hp)and went beyond 100hp/liter still 3+ years before the 2zz with the b18c (1.8l 200 hp)...and b16b (1.6l 185 hp). When I say milestone, I usually mean the first. Maybe they had firsts in the emissions department but as far as hp/liter I know for a fact they were far from first with small displacement high rev motors N/A

And all those above motors sans the b16b were emissions passing and very fuel efficient


reread my post. Toyota hit the 100 HP/Liter mark before Honda (the 4A-GE 20 valve back in 89 - 1.6L 170HP)

What made the 2ZZ remarkable was that they hit that performance level with a full production motor (no hand porting like those Honda jobs) while at the same time achieving fantastic fuel economy and SULEV emissions. Honda (and everyone else for that matter) has yet to build an engine that does all 3 as well as the 2ZZ. The K20 and the S2000 motor are great engines, but neither is particularly long on efficiency or emissions. the B16 and B18c were no-where near as efficient or clean as the GTS. Think about it - how many cars are on the road that can turn a high 14 and still get 38 MPG average in actual real world driving in a 2500 lb car?

Had Toyota's goal been to build the most powerful 1.8L ever, they could have done so quite easily, but the 2ZZ, like the 7th Gen Celica, was designed as a healthy all-rounder.

[lVlemphizStylez]

while I can't argue efficiencies or emissions with you (because I have no information on that subject with regard to Toyota or Honda), I see what you're saying. But as an aside, the b16 was a full production motor (no hand porting 160 hp 1.6l).

[nonexistant1]

ok lets get back to the topic at hand, i own both an 04 GT and an 05 tc. so i think i can give my 2 cents about the better car. they both have almost the same features. sun roof avalible action package, upgrade sound system. My celica has the manual 5spd and the action package it is the performance 4 me. my tc, is an automatic it is the daily driver. and honestly the only option i wish the celica had that the tc has is the outside temrature option. because other than that the celica has better seats (racing style) lighter, better looking with much better stock suspension trust me i have tested both. the celica is the performance, fun to drive and agressive looking body i like it better. the overall package when you talk about gas milage and performance and overall looks, hands down its the celica. i do enjoy my tc and i also enjoy the fact thet everyone and there mothe has one. they are like Cockroaches they are everywwhere. but it has great bang for the buck so i guess you can say the tc is the celicas younger brother because scion (tc= Toyota celica) have pictures of both. :closed:

[silentchaos]

thank you. i couldnt have said it better myself. maybe the Tc out sell celica, but it seems like a step backwards. technology wise.

[CatalepsicFox]

I can see what everyone been saying here. but if you also look at the price tag of the tC vs the Celica.... tC is much much cheaper. I only got what I can afford or else I would have gotten a Celica. All in all... i like the fact that the tC has a lil bit of more torque.... so flooring it uphill is like nothing for the tC.

[Carbonized_GT]

Go back to SL damnit James.

[Barabaika]

after 3-4 years of development toyota and scion have secsessfully built a car that is heavier, weaker(powerwise), slower, not as good looking and get not near as good gas milage.... than a 2000 celica GTS.


Scion tC is a coupe based on European Avensis or Japanese Premio.
As it usually happens, for the American market Toyota offers only the largest and least economical 2.4l engine.

In the UK, Avensis is offered with 5 engines, 3 of them are economical diesels.
In Japan, Premio can have one of 3 engines: 1.5L 1NZ-F (42 mpg), 1.8L 2ZR-FE (40 mpg), 2.0L 3ZR-FAE (36.7 mpg).

So, Toyota still develops economical engines.

[phaqgm]

http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g133/Joey03_VVT-I/CelicaNation4.jpg


Holy sh!t, I haven't seen that for a while. I took that photo when I lived in FL about 5 years ago.

[CatalepsicFox]

Go back to SL damnit James.
HAHA.... i'm invading NC CoMo and SL!!! Mauahaha.

[Punkers7465]

Holy sh!t, I haven't seen that for a while. I took that photo when I lived in FL about 5 years ago.

Could I have a large resolution of that photo please? Thanks! :)

[phaqgm]

the tc is the celicas younger brother because scion (tc= Toyota celica) have pictures of both.


Correction: tC = Touring Coupe

[Punkers7465]

Could I have a large resolution of that photo please?

Anybody? Can someone post it?

[Zero]

the tc is the celicas younger brother because scion (tc= Toyota celica) have pictures of both.


Correction: tC = Touring Coupe

It's funny how the kids call it the Toyota Celica and claim its the 8th gen, trying to add some prestige to the new kid on the block. Once the replacement for the tC comes out, will that be the 9th?

[silentchaos]

i just got a ride back to the dorm from my buddy in his tC and a couple other friends and my other friend was like "dude nice car...this is a manual...SWEET!" the whole time im just laughing to myself, at the fact that a 7 year old .6L smaller engine will blow the tC out of the water

[epicwolf]

Because of them we will never have another nice sports car for a TOYOTA brand with toyota logo on it.

[epicwolf]

Clean tC.

Scion also offered to sell a base tC, meaning no options. Sell a tC with a cheap radio, cheap wheels, etc... because they had their customers in mind. This was a previously posted topic. Another genius idea. They actually thought of the customer interested in buying a tC with modifying it in mind. Why buy a tC with the Enkei rims when you'd eventually swap it for better rims? Why sell it with the Pioneer headunit when you could find something better, but cheaper than what they would charge for the upgraded factory headunit?

Do I think the tC is the replacement for the Celica? No, it's actually no where near it. The 7th gen GT-S, stock for stock, was an upgrade to the 6th gen's GT-4 - stock for stock. N/A, the GT-S will out run the GT-4, sure it's got a turbo'd motor and AWD system, but it weighed a lot more.

Toyota did show some real improvement over the past generations, although I think losing the RWD setup was a bad choice (but good for the overall consumer), for the Celica. A new innovative change that made it better than the last. The tC falls short of being the replacement of the Celica. It bumped up to a 2.4L motor that's shared with the Camry, so what? The 5s-fe was also used in the Camry and in the 5th and 6th gen Celicas and had bigger displacement than the 1zz/2zz. For all we know "TC" could stand for Toyota Corolla/Camry/Coupe. Coming from the 6th and 7th gen Celica, it's like Toyota went backward and is just above the 5th gen GT-S/6th gen GT. The tC is just another Toyota that Toyota sells to pick up where their marketing strategy with the Supra, Celica, and MR-2 failed at.


i agree with everything you said Chad except for the last part :gap: I agree that toyota gets lazy and does go backward and not tryin to improve the all around performance for the so called "prodecessor" for the celica. Its slower, doesnt look futuristic and slicker and pretty much cheaper. I dont understand why people compared a TC to an RSX from a celica to tc, integra to rsx. It is not the same. RSX replace integra for the better and if TC replace the celica, i dont believe its for the better. It is going backwards. I dont understand what kind of marketing stradegy they have when other companies coming out with better looking sports cars with better powers and going to blow away the Scion company

[KAT_Ayanami]

^^ haha thats where we differ, i HATE the tC seats, they're made for the avg. overweight American, I can't take a hard turn without sliding around, those suckers don't hug for shiat!

You cannot take a hard turn on a tC. Period!

[Booster1]

People who buy automatic cars like bigger engines that have torque. It may not be as fast, but as long as it "feels" faster thats all that matters.

Yup I tested the 08 tc it felt that it has more torque than my 01 celica gts but it is very slow.

[stealthjet]

Toyota is dominating the car market as of now. AND they don't even have any true performance cars (except their new Lexus IS-F for only a mere $55,000). Toyota is seems to be focused on their Prius trying to hit the 100mpg mark that they are hoping the release after the Venza.

Scion was built with a purpose. And that was to be an affordable, relatively cheap, yet still very reliable to sell to the "YOUNG PEOPLE."

Toyota is investing a lot of time and money into the HYBRID part of the car market (so it seems to me) since a lot of people are starting to think about their gas mileage ever since the gas went up over $1.00/gallon.

They stopped making the Celica because it was not selling very well.
Most people don't know that the Celica is
-Fun to drive
-Good gas mileage
-Looks extremely sexy (i can't think of one better looking car that you can get for $15,000)

[Nineball]

Mike Speck from Modified Magazine had an article in the newest issue about the xB, and he put it very well...

"The scion line is not a desperate effort to tap into the hot tuner market for a quick sales boost, but a calculated long-term attempt to offer truly well-designed entry level vehicles that can be modified to your heart's content."

You're all a bunch of whiny bitches.

[CatalepsicFox]

the tc is the celicas younger brother because scion (tc= Toyota celica) have pictures of both.


Correction: tC = Touring Coupe

It's funny how the kids call it the Toyota Celica and claim its the 8th gen, trying to add some prestige to the new kid on the block. Once the replacement for the tC comes out, will that be the 9th?
tC actually doesn't stand for anything really. All those magazines says it stands for touring coupe but Toyota/Scion never official told us what tC stands for. As for calling it a Toyota Celica... the Scion guys are just pointing of random names they can think of with the initials tC.

[Max654]

Ok, so heres the story. Today I pulled into the Stealership to pick up my 104 dollar OEM shift knob. I parked to the right of a brand new 08 Tc. The First thing i noticed when i looked out my window at the window sticker on the Tc was the MGP ratings? 21 in the city and 28 or 29 on the Highway (i dont exactly remember). So on my way to the Parts dept im thinking about it. My 7 year old car that is essentially the predecessor to the Tc get way better gas milage than its replacement. I generally get about 32-33 on the highway and about 25-28 in the city. (and i don't drive like a old lady) so apon further inspection when i got done in the parts dept, i found that the Tc had a 2.4L instead of my 1.8L so i started to understand this until i saw that that big gas sucking 2.4L is only rated for 161bhp.

so inconclusion.

after 3-4 years of development toyota and scion have secsessfully built a car that is heavier, weaker(powerwise), slower, not as good looking and get not near as good gas milage.... than a 2000 celica GTS.

Discuss :popcorn:


The tC has a less tuned engine and a less sophisticated valve system than the GT-S, making it cheaper to make for a bit less horsepower. And, seeing as how the tC is around 17k base and the GT-S was going for around 25k when it was new, cheap is the name of the game. Also, since the hp is much more evenly distributed at the lower end than the GT-S, gas mileage suffers. And lets not forget one thing that the tC does have that the GT-S doesnt; 162 lbft of torque.

Not that I love the tC that much, I have a GT-S 6spd and love it. But I can respect what the tC does. Its reliable, sporty, and not a bad looking coupe with a decent power band for its very good price of 17k. (Its competing with regular civics and rsx and a gt celica, not the high powered ones). Sure the gas mileage is a bit iffy, but thats what suffers when you have a bit more hp and more torque. The GT-S and rsxs and civic si have better gas mileage because their engines are more tuned and they have sophisticated engine management systems and valves. Theyll get better gas mileage if you're keeping them in the low bands. But try spinning around town in a gt-s in constant lift and see how good the gas mileage is then.

But I still hate how the tC is the most interesting car toyota has to offer nowadays. :bang:

[Boosted2.0]

Actually the reason its called a tC is simply because XC was already taken by Volvo.

[epicwolf]

The tC has a less tuned engine and a less sophisticated valve system than the GT-S, making it cheaper to make for a bit less horsepower. And, seeing as how the tC is around 17k base and the GT-S was going for around 25k when it was new, cheap is the name of the game. Also, since the hp is much more evenly distributed at the lower end than the GT-S, gas mileage suffers. And lets not forget one thing that the tC does have that the GT-S doesnt; 162 lbft of torque.

:



i understand that its cheap to make and its fuel afficient and all that but atleast make it look nice like the celica. I mean look at the sabaru, it looks like crap but the hp is crazy out of this world. So next time when all the Scion heads get together and brainstorming another great idea for a sports car, please make it look nice and agressive. Celica did one thing right. Even though they dont spend a lot of money on the engine power it has that furistic look so even if you buy a 7 gen celica today, it still doesnt look outdated. TC to me already look outdated.

[Mafiesto]

This is my first post since 05 and I've since traded my celica for a Tacoma... Anyhow, my gf has a tC and I have to say I'd much rather have it that my 00 6spd GT-S. You don't have to reem it's guts out to stay in the power band. They're also a lot better for FI than the Celica IMO.

[Gas-n-Grease]

tC = toyota celica?? :eslap:.
gimme a break. far from it.

[drewd]

I had a choice to make a few years back.

Toyota tried to sell me a brand new tC for 15k. Then I saw my car on the lot for the same price, but 3 years old. I made the right choice :D SOOO glad I didn't end up with that "fancy camry".

[whities gts]

+1 When I bought my tC, it was between that and the Mazda 3. The tC is def. a bang for the buck. When i picked it up, there was nothing else on the market that was offering so many standard options for 17k. Plus, unlike silentchaos, I personally think the tC looks better than the Celica. :hitit:

Here's Mine if you don't agree:
http://media3.dropshots.com/photos/44963/20071110/215853.jpg
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1156/1462499272_7b409f1263_o.jpg

Discuss.
the exterior of the tC has clean lines, I find the interior to be very cheap! as for the power not bad but I prefer my vvtl and 6speed in the end the gts gets better mpg's and handles better. the tC is a great car for the money! I was willing to pay a little more for what i think is a better quality car.

[cellicar]

Someone needs to make the Tucker car of the 21st century.

[Lo_Pro_Life]

if you check the ratings toyota is not the number one car on the market. so could we please stop saying that.

(2008 Ranks) http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cars/new-cars/buying-advice/which-companies-make-the-best-cars/overview/0407_best_cars.htm

"Overall, the best cars sold in the U.S. are made by Honda. That's the conclusion of a recent analysis conducted by Consumer Reports that looks at the reliability, performance, fuel economy, comfort, interior fit and finish, and ergonomics of 262 vehicles we've recently tested.

Honda, with an overall score of 78, is followed closely by Toyota (75) and Subaru (72). BMW, Mazda, Nissan, and Volkswagen are tied at 71, after rounding."

sorry toyota...maybe the celica, MR2 and Supra were a bad choice to discontinue. cus now honda is top. toyota has no performance line anymore to compete. and the mystical FT-HS. just we can leave it at this CONCEPT. you will see some things incorporated into newer models from it but that car will not go up for sale to you and me.

hondas got the accord which is very up there with performance and luxury.

example: V6 3.6L 2000+ Accord with EVERYTHING roughly 35G's(new)
and the celica I4 1.8 with EVERYTHING roughly 26G's(new)

Toyota is falling behind and they know it. so they have to do somethin about this and soon or we will have the last some what reputable cars for performance from toyota.

because right now the only cars on the top list from toyota is the Pirus for a Green car which just got over thrown by the new honda that runs purely of water. its a civic to and an SI at that. watch for the commercial youll see it or search it.

im sorry. toyota is going to probably drop off the list of performance and just make shows at the shows(Detroit,Japan,Tokyo) for fun to show they still can produce the exotics.

[xantonin]

Toyota may be falling behind but they have the money to bring themselves back easily. But do they have the knowledge on how to do that?

Maybe. Toyota is pretty good at listening to consumers, and the numbers are pretty good indicators. We'll see how things turn out.

Either way I don't care until the next time I plan to buy a car, which won't be for 6 years or so. It's not like I buy a car every year and that these ratings mean anything to me for every year model.

[Mafiesto]

the exterior of the tC has clean lines, I find the interior to be very cheap! as for the power not bad but I prefer my vvtl and 6speed in the end the gts gets better mpg's and handles better. the tC is a great car for the money! I was willing to pay a little more for what i think is a better quality car.

My celica's interior was just as cheap looking as the tC... The only thing I had over the tC was leather.

That aside, I'm pretty confident that I could walk all over my gf's car with my old celica, even with my jacked 2nd gear.

[silentchaos]

scion is targeting the right demographic to make and sell a Celica successor i don't see why Toyota hasn't built another sport coupe and slap a scion badge on it

[Mafiesto]

I know... That or have a real performance package. Like the ford did with the 03/04 Cobra.

[drewd]

Toyota may be falling behind but they have the money to bring themselves back easily. But do they have the knowledge on how to do that?



dee dee dee. They've been kicking @ss anf biding their time. It's only been 3 years since the Celica was discontinued. They've been raking in the prius, camry and corolla $ and when the time is right, they'll be back to destroy the competition.

[KevinCelicagts]

About the tC being slow...
My friend michael has an 06' tC with a CAI, 4-1 headers, and straight pipes.
that ****ing thing hauls so much ass, its unbeliveable.
I used to whoop his ass all the time with lift in my 00' gts but when he got headers and deleted his cat, his power just went through the roof.
He owns pretty much every b16, b18, k20 honda i've seen.
That torque really gets him off the line.

[Carbonized_GT]

when he got headers and deleted his cat, his power just went through the roof.


oh my what does he have now? a whopping 170hp 170tq?

[The__J__Factor]

Tc = Two-door Camry

Umm yeah they look nothing special, reminds me of a civic coupe.
The other models looks like boxes with wheels. Dont know when boxes became cool?

Lucky we dont sell Scion here

[Yrro]

I think they're a reasonable successor to the GT - cheap, reasonably fun to drive, and don't look half bad. They compared well to the base RSX when I was looking, although the low fuel economy kind of sucks.

It is frustrating Toyota not making any "cool" car right now. They may not be the most profitable branch of a car company, but the performance vehicles, the ones that say "we built this just because we thought it would be awesome" are the soul of the company. They're what keep people interested and excited about the brand, and also what advance the state of the art.

VTEC equivalents are in everything these days, letting people have some power in a little engine that still gets good gas mileage. The trickle down effect from the fast research cars eventually make cars better for everyone. It's frustrating to just not see that development out of Toyota.

[neological]

About the tC being slow...
My friend michael has an 06' tC with a CAI, 4-1 headers, and straight pipes.
that ****ing thing hauls so much ass, its unbeliveable.
I used to whoop his ass all the time with lift in my 00' gts but when he got headers and deleted his cat, his power just went through the roof.
He owns pretty much every b16, b18, k20 honda i've seen.
That torque really gets him off the line.
It's all relative.

You can get 50 whp on an Evo with a $100 reflash. That's a substantial gain. You can probably get 8-12 hp gains with a catless straightpipe and headers on an tC. Not a substantial gain.

[agonystes]

For all we know "TC" could stand for Toyota Corolla/Camry/Coupe.
Tc = Two-door Camry


Umm actually Scions research project "Genesis" developed the 7th Gen Celica and When they did press releases for the new 04' TC they said that the TC part stood for its predecessor the "Toyota Celica."

Just letting you know.

[Carbonized_GT]

"The name tC does not fit in with its stablemates the xA, xB and xD because the name xC has already been taken by Volvo for its XC60, XC70 and XC90 models. According to Scion, tC stands for "Touring Coupe"

You fail.

[agonystes]

"The name tC does not fit in with its stablemates the xA, xB and xD because the name xC has already been taken by Volvo for its XC60, XC70 and XC90 models. According to Scion, tC stands for "Touring Coupe"

You fail.

Not according to press statements in late 03' early 04'

Not fail.