Regarding Celica vs Evo 7
Jul 16, 2002, 10:19 PM
#1
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Regarding Celica vs Evo 7
I am a Celica owner from www.newcelica.org
I came attention to this page when ChicagoMike posted http://www.lancerforums.com/forums/t5421.html trying to brand a negative image of Celica owners
Making it seem that we Celica owners think our cars are better than Evo, WRX, etc. He takes a newbie comment out of context and tries to generalize all Celica owners as a whole. He is nothing but a ignorant instigator.
We Celica owners as a whole are informed and knowledgable about our cars and yes, we do have newbies who don't know much about their Celica, much less knowing about Evo's to make statements to say which is better. But no, we don't think Celica's are better.
His post:
I've been told from some Celica drivers that I should get a Celica and not an EVO because:
1. It's not as reliable as the new Celica (I know this can't be true, the Celica has had lots of mechanical problems).
2. It will beat the Celica off the line, but once you're rolling it gets slow, and the Celica and many other cars will beat it. They said it's only good for off-the-line acceleration, it's slow on the freeway????
3. The new Celica handles better than the EVO. Sport Compact Car reports it has a better Slalom time than the EVO. Huh????
4. Bad on gas, too expensive, and ugly.
1. Yes our Celica are very reliable. No we don't have "a lot" of mechanical problems. If any at all. Name one. Personally I had nothing but oil change for the last 30k miles. The ratio of people who don't have any problem with the celi to people who had is very high. Studies have shown that the Celi lead the "sporty couple" category in reliabilty.
As far as reliabilty with previous gen Evo, and Mitsubishi in particular, they are not known for their reliability. And Toyota are.
2. What the Celica owner probably meant was that like all AWD car, its usually faster off the line and the rate of accelerations decrease as you lose the traction advantage of AWD and drivetrain efficiency plays a bigger role and even aerodynamics are important as you go faster. Front wheel drive cars are slower off the line because of traction but has better drivetrain efficiency to put more power down to the wheels when traction is not a issue at higher speed. That is why a Celica traps a much higher speed than WRX in the quarter takes longer to get there. In no way do we think a Celica is faster than Evo.
3. Handling is very subjective. How car a FWD car outhandle a 4WD car? Well the Hotchkis Celica with suspension upgrades and exhaust did beat a (STOCK) Evo 7 around a track course by 1 second. Why? Because probably the Celica weights only 2500lbs. Anyways, its hard to compare a modded car vs a stock car. Evo is made for Rally so its hard to argue who handles better. The Celi is light and nimble and among the best in FWD cars.
4. A lot of Celica-GTS owners get 400miles+ to a tank of 12 gallons. 32+mpg is pretty common. So no arguement on gas mileage.
At any rate, the Celi can't compare to the Evo because they are very different cars.
And as a Celica GTS owner, I do plan to purchase a Evo 7 in the future. Yes I will be keeping the GT-S to be my Track car.
I came attention to this page when ChicagoMike posted http://www.lancerforums.com/forums/t5421.html trying to brand a negative image of Celica owners
Making it seem that we Celica owners think our cars are better than Evo, WRX, etc. He takes a newbie comment out of context and tries to generalize all Celica owners as a whole. He is nothing but a ignorant instigator.
We Celica owners as a whole are informed and knowledgable about our cars and yes, we do have newbies who don't know much about their Celica, much less knowing about Evo's to make statements to say which is better. But no, we don't think Celica's are better.
His post:
I've been told from some Celica drivers that I should get a Celica and not an EVO because:
1. It's not as reliable as the new Celica (I know this can't be true, the Celica has had lots of mechanical problems).
2. It will beat the Celica off the line, but once you're rolling it gets slow, and the Celica and many other cars will beat it. They said it's only good for off-the-line acceleration, it's slow on the freeway????
3. The new Celica handles better than the EVO. Sport Compact Car reports it has a better Slalom time than the EVO. Huh????
4. Bad on gas, too expensive, and ugly.
1. Yes our Celica are very reliable. No we don't have "a lot" of mechanical problems. If any at all. Name one. Personally I had nothing but oil change for the last 30k miles. The ratio of people who don't have any problem with the celi to people who had is very high. Studies have shown that the Celi lead the "sporty couple" category in reliabilty.
As far as reliabilty with previous gen Evo, and Mitsubishi in particular, they are not known for their reliability. And Toyota are.
2. What the Celica owner probably meant was that like all AWD car, its usually faster off the line and the rate of accelerations decrease as you lose the traction advantage of AWD and drivetrain efficiency plays a bigger role and even aerodynamics are important as you go faster. Front wheel drive cars are slower off the line because of traction but has better drivetrain efficiency to put more power down to the wheels when traction is not a issue at higher speed. That is why a Celica traps a much higher speed than WRX in the quarter takes longer to get there. In no way do we think a Celica is faster than Evo.
3. Handling is very subjective. How car a FWD car outhandle a 4WD car? Well the Hotchkis Celica with suspension upgrades and exhaust did beat a (STOCK) Evo 7 around a track course by 1 second. Why? Because probably the Celica weights only 2500lbs. Anyways, its hard to compare a modded car vs a stock car. Evo is made for Rally so its hard to argue who handles better. The Celi is light and nimble and among the best in FWD cars.
4. A lot of Celica-GTS owners get 400miles+ to a tank of 12 gallons. 32+mpg is pretty common. So no arguement on gas mileage.
At any rate, the Celi can't compare to the Evo because they are very different cars.
And as a Celica GTS owner, I do plan to purchase a Evo 7 in the future. Yes I will be keeping the GT-S to be my Track car.
Jul 17, 2002, 12:29 AM
#2
Newbie
Join Date: May 2002
Location: So Cal OC
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We are talking about an Evolution here for god's sake. A celica has NOTHING on an Evo. Your preference is the Celica but mine isn't. IMO it's an ugly car and it's slow; take that with a grain of salt. I never liked Toyota and I never liked Lexus either. Comparing a champion rally car to something like a Celica and talking about reliability....your asking for trouble there. Give credit where it's due and Mitsu/Evo deserve alot of credit. This is an Evo forum....what did you expect me to say?
Comparing a track Celica and a stock Evo...what's your point?
EVII
Comparing a track Celica and a stock Evo...what's your point?
EVII
Last edited by Evolution Se7en; Jul 17, 2002 at 12:40 AM.
Jul 17, 2002, 12:43 AM
#5
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My point being is that,
Stock EVO runs 13.4 in Quarter Mile
Hotchkis Celica Runs 15.1 in Quarter Mile.
Its quite a big difference.
But I'm saying that the handling of the modified Celica more than made up for lack of acceleration on the real track. All I'm saying is that the underdog has more potential than most people think. In that SCC test, the Celica blew away 2 out of 3 handling record.
Feel flatter that the Evo was use as the benchmark to beat, beacuse it flat out smokes a modified WRX.
Stock EVO runs 13.4 in Quarter Mile
Hotchkis Celica Runs 15.1 in Quarter Mile.
Its quite a big difference.
But I'm saying that the handling of the modified Celica more than made up for lack of acceleration on the real track. All I'm saying is that the underdog has more potential than most people think. In that SCC test, the Celica blew away 2 out of 3 handling record.
Feel flatter that the Evo was use as the benchmark to beat, beacuse it flat out smokes a modified WRX.
Jul 17, 2002, 12:47 AM
#6
Evolving Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't know why you keep bringing up the Hotchkis celica.
It's got over $3500 in suspension modifications, different wheels, and special tires. Just for a better SLALOM time. Whoopie.
It's got over $3500 in suspension modifications, different wheels, and special tires. Just for a better SLALOM time. Whoopie.
Trending Topics
Jul 17, 2002, 01:02 AM
#8
Evolved Member
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Posts: 1,618
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Regarding Celica vs Evo 7
Originally posted by nyoneway
1. Yes our Celica are very reliable. No we don't have "a lot" of mechanical problems. If any at all. Name one. Personally I had nothing but oil change for the last 30k miles. The ratio of people who don't have any problem with the celi to people who had is very high. Studies have shown that the Celi lead the "sporty couple" category in reliabilty.
As far as reliabilty with previous gen Evo, and Mitsubishi in particular, they are not known for their reliability. And Toyota are.
2. What the Celica owner probably meant was that like all AWD car, its usually faster off the line and the rate of accelerations decrease as you lose the traction advantage of AWD and drivetrain efficiency plays a bigger role and even aerodynamics are important as you go faster. Front wheel drive cars are slower off the line because of traction but has better drivetrain efficiency to put more power down to the wheels when traction is not a issue at higher speed. That is why a Celica traps a much higher speed than WRX in the quarter takes longer to get there. In no way do we think a Celica is faster than Evo.
3. Handling is very subjective. How car a FWD car outhandle a 4WD car? Well the Hotchkis Celica with suspension upgrades and exhaust did beat a (STOCK) Evo 7 around a track course by 1 second. Why? Because probably the Celica weights only 2500lbs. Anyways, its hard to compare a modded car vs a stock car. Evo is made for Rally so its hard to argue who handles better. The Celi is light and nimble and among the best in FWD cars.
4. A lot of Celica-GTS owners get 400miles+ to a tank of 12 gallons. 32+mpg is pretty common. So no arguement on gas mileage.
At any rate, the Celi can't compare to the Evo because they are very different cars.
And as a Celica GTS owner, I do plan to purchase a Evo 7 in the future. Yes I will be keeping the GT-S to be my Track car.
1. Yes our Celica are very reliable. No we don't have "a lot" of mechanical problems. If any at all. Name one. Personally I had nothing but oil change for the last 30k miles. The ratio of people who don't have any problem with the celi to people who had is very high. Studies have shown that the Celi lead the "sporty couple" category in reliabilty.
As far as reliabilty with previous gen Evo, and Mitsubishi in particular, they are not known for their reliability. And Toyota are.
2. What the Celica owner probably meant was that like all AWD car, its usually faster off the line and the rate of accelerations decrease as you lose the traction advantage of AWD and drivetrain efficiency plays a bigger role and even aerodynamics are important as you go faster. Front wheel drive cars are slower off the line because of traction but has better drivetrain efficiency to put more power down to the wheels when traction is not a issue at higher speed. That is why a Celica traps a much higher speed than WRX in the quarter takes longer to get there. In no way do we think a Celica is faster than Evo.
3. Handling is very subjective. How car a FWD car outhandle a 4WD car? Well the Hotchkis Celica with suspension upgrades and exhaust did beat a (STOCK) Evo 7 around a track course by 1 second. Why? Because probably the Celica weights only 2500lbs. Anyways, its hard to compare a modded car vs a stock car. Evo is made for Rally so its hard to argue who handles better. The Celi is light and nimble and among the best in FWD cars.
4. A lot of Celica-GTS owners get 400miles+ to a tank of 12 gallons. 32+mpg is pretty common. So no arguement on gas mileage.
At any rate, the Celi can't compare to the Evo because they are very different cars.
And as a Celica GTS owner, I do plan to purchase a Evo 7 in the future. Yes I will be keeping the GT-S to be my Track car.
Your comments are very logical
that clear up a lot of misunderstanding in the original post/comments. 1. I never doubt the quality of Toyota, they are reliable cars. However, reliability is not the only issues to consider when buying a performance car
. But still it's a plus.2/3/4. Agreed.
It's glad to know not all the Celica owners are subjective and make comments like the original post. However, true meaning might be lost during communication on Internet...well, who knows?
Anyhow, welcome.
Jul 17, 2002, 01:05 AM
#9
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Because that's the only time when a Celica was tested and compared to a Evo.
And it also proves that handling do make up for just quicker acceleration, not to mention the potential of the Celica being a track car (not a rally car mind you).
And it also proves that handling do make up for just quicker acceleration, not to mention the potential of the Celica being a track car (not a rally car mind you).
Jul 17, 2002, 01:58 AM
#11
EvoM Staff Alumni
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Long Island
Posts: 7,701
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm sticking with my "people who think the celica is better than the Evo VII are on acid" sentiment. Apples and oranges. I also agree with the "grain of salt" response. 
From what I've experienced the Celicas (speaking especially of the gt-s 6spds) are very capable cars, BUT they are so differently designed as well. I happen to think the new Celicas are fairly unattractive, but I love the older gens (dunno numbers exactly but pre 90's pretty much) I wouldn't take that thread to heart though. Keep in mind the severe bias here. I've pretty much come to expect that kind of cross-brand trash talking on automotive forums. Mixed import forums are the most interesting imho.
Anywho, you raise good points and more power to you for posting. I hope you stick around after the thread. Welcome to the Lancer Forums for whatever it's worth.
From what I've experienced the Celicas (speaking especially of the gt-s 6spds) are very capable cars, BUT they are so differently designed as well. I happen to think the new Celicas are fairly unattractive, but I love the older gens (dunno numbers exactly but pre 90's pretty much) I wouldn't take that thread to heart though. Keep in mind the severe bias here. I've pretty much come to expect that kind of cross-brand trash talking on automotive forums.
Mixed import forums are the most interesting imho. Anywho, you raise good points and more power to you for posting. I hope you stick around after the thread. Welcome to the Lancer Forums for whatever it's worth.
Jul 17, 2002, 02:29 AM
#13
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyways do your research before you post.
GT-S does not have the same engine as the Corolla
If the Celica's interior is cheap, its better made and quality than the WRX. I heard the Evo 7 interior ain't too great either.
But that's besides the case. Celica is made to be light and if less and lighter material is used, then I'll live with it.
None of those mention cars are luxury or semi luxury cars. They are a step above economy and most of the money is spend on the frame, engine, tranny and suspension. That's why the WRX, EVO, Celica is under 30k.
The car only weights 2500lbs for chris sakes.
GT-S does not have the same engine as the Corolla
If the Celica's interior is cheap, its better made and quality than the WRX. I heard the Evo 7 interior ain't too great either.
But that's besides the case. Celica is made to be light and if less and lighter material is used, then I'll live with it.
None of those mention cars are luxury or semi luxury cars. They are a step above economy and most of the money is spend on the frame, engine, tranny and suspension. That's why the WRX, EVO, Celica is under 30k.
The car only weights 2500lbs for chris sakes.
Jul 17, 2002, 02:34 AM
#15
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
About the Celica's looks....
People love it a lot more than the current WRX...
And the Evo 7 is the ugliest Evo so far. 6.5 is the nicest.
Anyways, here's a pic of mine. Flame away.
People love it a lot more than the current WRX...
And the Evo 7 is the ugliest Evo so far. 6.5 is the nicest.
Anyways, here's a pic of mine. Flame away.
