1993 Celica Gt Questions?

[wokeye]

I am going to have a look at a tidy Celica GT, 1993 pop-up headlights, UK car tomorrow it has covered 92K with a FSH and recent clutch. I am just buying it as a stop gap until I save some more cash to buy something quicker, or until I actually find a decent example of a faster car as I am sick of looking at crap!

Anyway I know these cars are reliable if well looked after so hopefully the mileage should not be a problem.

I was just wondering what kind of price am I looking at to change the cambelt, parts & labour (not sure it would go to Toyota!).

Anythings in particular that I should look for?

Reading Parkers used car review of this model they said it only had 147BHP is this correct I thought they were about 170BHP?

The car is also £2250 for 1993 "L" does this sound reasonable?

[antscelicagt]

personally i'd knock it down to £2k. a cambelt change is in the region of £50 for labour. i bought the belt myself for £26 and fitted it myself within an hr.

My car has done 146000miles and still runs as new. i change the oil and filters every 5000miles. 170bhp, is IIRC, for the gen 6 celica gt.

tony

[subzero2]

you maybe thinking of a 1994 onwards model a gen 6 series this 2 ltr engine is about 170bhp. and it 150 quid to change timeing belt from local toyota dealer for gen 6 car belt itself is about 30 quid. the 1993 has less power and is not quite so fast but generally very reliable.

[GT4 BOOSTER]

i was quoted £ 90 for the belt on my gen 6. i'd personally add £ 1500 and shop for a gen 6

[wokeye]

I would of preffered a Gen 6 on looks purely, but are they not a heavier car than the Gen 5 I am on about? What exact BHP does the gen 5 have is it 147BHP or 157BHP? This car has a mongoose stainless exhaust and an indution kit, although I cannot see this makeing a great deal of difference :(

[silvasurfa]

the mileage is not a problem at all, especially as it has full service history, would try and get the price down a bit though or go for a gen 6!

[wokeye]

Went to have a look at this car and it was ok fairly, tidy but the engine seemed a little tired It also didn't seem that fast probably due to the tired engine, think it had had a hard life by some idiot that just didn't look after it I guess. Probably nailing it from cold, or prolonged periods at redline etc. My last car a Primera eGT with similar miles was definitely quicker than this car.

Does this car have the same engine as the later cars after 1994? As when I was revving it listening under the bonnet it was quite loud, and sounded tappety. I have looked at a Celica GT4 ST205 and Revision 3 MR2 Turbo both with similar miles to this car and I was amazed at what a quite engine they are. Is this engine a different one? Or was it just a dog :(

Thanks!

[chocka]

The 147BHP is the gen 4 (upto 1990), the 1993 gen 5 (with cat) has 154BHP but unlike the gen 4 which has a 3500 rpm power band, the real power doesn't kick in until 5000 rpm which is why it might have seemed sluggish, also the gearing is higher on the gen 5 which effects acceleration.

The gen 4 (147BHP), gen 5 (154-158 BHP) & gen 6 (174 BHP) all have the 3s-ge engine but with different head modifications and if well loked after will easily see 175,000 miles. thrashing these engines (once warm) isn't a problem for them as long as they are regulary serviced (my old gen 4 was thrashed for 7 years and with 170,000 miles on the clock in the end, the engine was still good)

[Dan_Q]

Totally agree with above

The ACIS kicks in at 5100 (this is where the inlet fully opens) and to keep the bugger going u can change gear into the red- i know few people who have hit the limiter.

Must admit i thought they were a bit sluggish when i first drove one but u soon learn how to drive them "enthusiastically"

I have a mongoose and a 57i, they do make a difference, albeit subtle. The induction kit on its own just gives more throttle response, but the exhaust, seems to give much better torque low down in the rev range. I used to have a straight through exhaust (oooh the sound :D ) which lost quite a bit of torque, but it revved a lot easier at the top end. ;)

Its up to you if you decide to go for a Gen 6 instead, but from what I hear (don't shoot me for this Gen 6 fans, I wouldnt know I've never driven one) the gearing is a bit incorrect on them, and if you look on paper, the ST202 (Gen 6 GT) ain't got that much legs on the ST182 (Gen 5 GT) despite having extra horsepower due to the higher compression ratio and modified cylinder head.

Its horses for courses, and IMHO I'd go for the one you really want

Hope this helps ;)

[Leeky]

the gearing is a bit incorrect on them, and if you look on paper, the ST202 (Gen 6 GT) ain't got that much legs on the ST182 (Gen 5 GT) despite having extra horsepower due to the higher compression ratio and modified cylinder head.

I'll agree to that!

The gearing sucks! Even on the ST205 (GT4) it only manages a 6sec 0-60.

More power than a standard previous shape scooby but half a second slower.

The first ratio isnt quick enough, but one good thing is the 3rd gear.

3rd gear has more power than 3rd in scooby or evo, know this after driving both.

Damn toyota and their dodgy ratios!

[GT4 BOOSTER]

the ratios are crap , but its good playing catch up on the long stretches.