Celica Wins Edmunds.com's "Editors Most Wanted Award For Best Sport Coupe Under $30k"

[Blue Bomber]

After all their complaining and comparisons to a BMW, they finally got something right! :D Their writers complained about the car in the beginning, but when they got used to it, they totally loved it!

Here's the Long Term Road Test for December 2001. (http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/longterm/articles/44024/page019.html)

From Edmunds:
I had recently driven a Mercedes C32 AMG and a Corvette Z06 on the same roads. Despite being half the price of these two cars, the Celica was just as much fun to drive. The Corvette is faster, of course, but it's just too much car for public roads. And the C32, while certainly capable, doesn't involve the driver like the Celica does. For twisty roads, the Celica is just about perfect.

People who test-drive the Celica GT-S at a dealership for the first time will likely be put off. It's only after you've owned the car for a while and become familiar with it that it's entertaining

And my favorite:
"In November, I was driving our long-term PT Cruiser," he commented. "The first day I got into the Celica, it was like getting the holiday Victoria's Secret catalog in the mail after a month of phone bills and incontinence advertisements. Hooray!"

[Dealer Xing]

Well, from my experience a skinnier shift knob improved shifting a lot.

I don't know what the hell are they compalining about the clutch, it's short and precise with light effort. The only problem is burning smell after even slight launching.

I also hit a pothole before at 15mph and bent two wheels, perhaps the wheels were just weak.

[RedNOSceli]

Tip: The stock tires on the GT-S are considered "Low Profile" so there's not much rubber between the ground and the rim....you may wan't to watch out for potholes.

[djm221]

I had no problem with the clutch/tranny when I teset drove it. It was like my 83 Datsun, nice and short, and not heavy, so I guess I was used to that. I hate clutches that are long.

See how many mechanical problems they have with the car... none. I guess just me and them were the only ones that got good cars (or don't abuse the **** out of them).

But how did the Celica win that Editor's choice award after they picked the RSX and Golf as their "recommended" cars?

[RedNOSceli]

Originally posted by djm221

But how did the Celica win that Editor's choice award after they picked the RSX and Golf as their "recommended" cars?

I guess they figured out the Golf just sucked and the RSX was a lot of hype, I dunno..The GT-S is a pretty edgy sports car, lots of performance, not a lot of attention to detail(lots of rattles, very little sound proofing etc, and I wouldnt have it any other way)..The only thing that would beat it out being more "Pure Sports" for a compact would be the late 90's ITR's, those things didn't even have AC as an option.

[t2000gts]

bwahaha they got sucked in and can't escape the celica's charm :D

[zMaN]

Originally posted by djm221

But how did the Celica win that Editor's choice award after they picked the RSX and Golf as their "recommended" cars?


I could be wrong on this one, I have yet to read the article, but I think it means that the celica was the winner but the RSX and Golf were also highly recommended.

[static]

Even boneheaded edmunds editors cannot resist the power of the Celica forever.. lol.

[djm221]

Originally posted by zMaN



I could be wrong on this one, I have yet to read the article, but I think it means that the celica was the winner but the RSX and Golf were also highly recommended.

Well, go read the article. The Celica came in third behind the RSX-S (1) and Golf (2). They did say as far as performance and fun, the Celica wins, but factor in other nancy **** like comfort and more sublt looks, and they would recommend the other two over the Celica. This comparison article was done a few weeks ago.

[Blue Bomber]

Originally posted by djm221
This comparison article was done a few weeks ago. Isn't that enough time for them to get their heads out of their asses? :D

[djm221]

It took them about 9 months with the long term Celica to get their heads out enough to realize it wasn't a BMW, and that, it actually was a pretty great car in it's class. So, no, apparently a few weeks isn't enough for them :sad ;) But, hey, it least it getting recognized and praised somewhere... now only if Edmunds.com started making aftermarket equipment :D

[HilfigerCelica]

Originally posted by RedNOSceli


lots of rattles, very little sound proofing etc, and I wouldnt have it any other way)..The only thing that would beat it out being more "Pure Sports" for a compact would be the late 90's ITR's, those things didn't even have AC as an option.


I wouldn't have it any other way either. The Celica is pretty raw, but not as raw as a Cobra R. I think it's just the right amount of rawness.

I'm not sure about the AC option on the Type R. I think yakkosmurf can fill us in on that.

BTW, what's up with the price on the stock rims? You could get a Volk wheel for that much.

[Blue Bomber]

Originally posted by djm221
now only if Edmunds.com started making aftermarket equipment :D I can see it now:

...colored and Indiglo "BMW" and "M" emblems, Z3 fender vents, "M-Powered" stickers, "Powered By BMW" seatbelt pads...

It'll take a while for them to unwedge their heads again and remember it's still not a BMW. :D

[Keyshawn]

ZmaN,
Check these links out:

http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/comparison/articles/47901/article.html
http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/comparison/articles/47901/page007.html
http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/comparison/articles/47901/page009.html
http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/comparison/articles/47901/page011.html

These fools at Edmunds are so inconsistent. One month they hate the Celi, next month they love it. Amazing how the car can rank third on a list of sporty compacts in November, then be hailed as the best sporty car under $30,000 in December. Dumb-asses.

[zMaN]

Keyshawn,


I remember reading once the article where they choose the Celi as an editors choice for under $30k sports coup. I read the article where they put the celica 3rd later. I tried to get on the forum to tell everyone that there were 2 articles( Comparison , Most Wanted) with different results but I could not get teh page to come up.

Was the forum down or does my isp just suck?


I may be wrong but I think that the difference in results for the 2 articles can be explained by how they defined the rules for the Comparison test.

They said:
1. A fun-to-drive disposition. As their name indicates, sport coupes should have a sporty element to them. This means lively handling and peppy acceleration. Otherwise, we'd have a Chevrolet Monte Carlo in the test.

2. Attractive styling. People buy these cars to get noticed. Cute is fine. Aggressive is fine. Edgy is fine. Bland is not.

3. Practicality. Unlike sports cars, sport coupes are used as daily drivers. They should have a decent interior, useful controls and storage, and a ride quality that isn't abusive.

4. Good value. Sport coupes should offer maximum bang for the buck.

They key statement is # 3. They included practicality as a major part of their comparison test. When you read the article the RSX and GTI narrowly beat the Celica because of practicality issues alone. They were not saying that they would choose the RSX or GTI ahead of the celica only that the RSX and GTI would fit more people's desires for a sporty car. Maybe some of them would choose a RSX or GTI but that was not the point of the test.

In the "Most Wanted" article the editors chose the car they would want to have themselves.

Thus 2 different results.

What do you think of my logic on this one? :)

[Keyshawn]

Zman,
Not bad reasoning. But those guys at Edmunds still don't make sense to me. Here's a quote that DIRECTLY contradicts the fact that they named the Celica the best sport coupe under $30,000 (all these quotes refer to the RSX):

"But in the end, it is clearly the best front-drive sport coupe on the market."

"I still think it's the best sport coupe around, especially considering the price/content relationship."

"Overall, however, it's gonna be the gold standard for sport coupes, and it's the one that I'd lay my money down on."

[zMaN]

Maybe they just have so many writers that they can never get most of them to agree on anything? They do contradict themselves often. Let's just say that I don't go to them first when I want to find out about new car :) Have you noticed hom many different people they have driving the long term Celica? Most, if not all of them, are not really car enthusiasts. They just work in the office. It is always stuff like this:

"This week our jantor Harry was given the keys to our blue pocket rocket. Harry just got his licence last friday by the skin of his teeth but considers himself a good driver so Harry was very disappointed in the difficulty he had using the shifter. He also could not start from first gear without stalling every time. 'This is jsut so much harder than the automatic I learned on.' was his final statement about the car. " :)

[cftofu]

From the article:
When we ordered the special 16-inch GT-S wheel and tire package on our car, it cost us $60. 16-inch Alloy Wheels ($60)

Are the GT-S 16' alloy wheels really $60? That sounded a little bit too cheap. But if true, can i get them at the dealership for that price to replace my black steelies on my GT? :)

[Blue Bomber]

Originally posted by cftofu
From the article:
When we ordered the special 16-inch GT-S wheel and tire package on our car, it cost us $60. 16-inch Alloy Wheels ($60)

Are the GT-S 16' alloy wheels really $60? That sounded a little bit too cheap. But if true, can i get them at the dealership for that price to replace my black steelies on my GT? :) It's an upgrade from the aluminum 15" rims. If you go to the dealership, they'll try and charge you $350+ per rim. :eek: You're better buying them off someone from this board or eBay.