St Really Slow?

[corollags]

Hey guys!

I dont really know much about Celicas 2B honest! Im looking at a 1996 version which is the ST 1.8 (the GT is like £500 more for me to insure!)

Is the ST version really ALOT slower than the GT?

Ad

[Calisto]

A little bit slower than the GT''s yeah :P by how much I really dont know....If you can afford it get the GTi coz you will only want more zoooom when ya get the ST.

[Carrera_C]

Have to agree with Hot Gen 5, if you really want the zoooom factor then save for a bit more and get a GT.

The ST is still a good car, but it falls about 40bhp behind the GT. Which does make a difference.

[mikeb]

According to some people it 'feels' faster. Whether it's true, or down to their misconception or bias I don't know. Personally, I wouldn't have one - you might as well buy a carina if you want that engine.

[sotal]

oi mike - you're getting cheeky now - go on gold so I can swear at you ;)

I can confirm that the ST is definatley slower. In our very rough tests the GT outperformed the ST by about a second on a 0-60 run.

Some people (celica_dave for one) have driven both and reckon that the ST feels faster. I can't vouch for that but I am looking for one at a garage nearby so I can take it for a test drive!

The ST is a completely different setup to the GT. Most of the GT's power is at the top end. Whilst good for doing high speeds (80mph+) it isn't the most useful area. The ST's engine (which a similar engine is used in the Carina - but isn't as good performance wise as the celica!!) is setup to give power quite low down. From this I would say it takes the ST to feeling very much like the GT early on (ie from lights etc you probably couldn't tell the difference) But the GT definatley will be faster from about 60mph+ but then again is that much use on our roads????

Having said all that I have owned the ST for about 18 months and am now looking for something a little faster but I don't think the GT will be enough of a gain. Also watch out for the oil problems on the ST's. A lot of ST's use oil quite a bit (as mine does!)

[mikeb]

oi mike - you're getting cheeky now - go on gold so I can swear at you ;)

←

I think the word "OIL", is the worst swear word for an st owner. :P

I can confirm that the ST is definatley slower. In our very rough tests the GT outperformed the ST by about a second on a 0-60 run.

Some people (celica_dave for one) have driven both and reckon that the ST feels faster. I can't vouch for that but I am looking for one at a garage nearby so I can take it for a test drive!

The ST is a completely different setup to the GT. Most of the GT's power is at the top end. Whilst good for doing high speeds (80mph+) it isn't the most useful area. The ST's engine (which a similar engine is used in the Carina - but isn't as good performance wise as the celica!!) is setup to give power quite low down. From this I would say it takes the ST to feeling very much like the GT early on (ie from lights etc you probably couldn't tell the difference) But the GT definatley will be faster from about 60mph+ but then again is that much use on our roads????

Having said all that I have owned the ST for about 18 months and am now looking for something a little faster but I don't think the GT will be enough of a gain. Also watch out for the oil problems on the ST's. A lot of ST's use oil quite a bit (as mine does!)

←

I can't see how they can be "about the same" from a standing start (assuming traction isn't a limitation). The ST runs out of puff past 5600 rpm, the GT pulls strongly up to 7000 rpm. You'll be fumbling about looking for 2nd gear whilst the GT is running off into the distance, still in 1st gear. Factor in the slightly higher gearing of the GT, and it makes the difference even bigger. IMO half of the advantage of the GT over the ST is flexibility anyway - I rarely use 4th gear, and can just go straight for 5th from 3rd quite comfortably.

Looking at it a different way - that GT makes 125 hp at 4800 rpm, so even if you never took it past 5000 rpm it would keep up with an ST. The ST peaks at 115 hp and thats 1000 rpm higher than when the GT is making 125hp. At 4800 rpm the ST can only be putting out a maximum of 105 hp (but probably more like 90).

If you compared both cars by making them change gear at 3000 rpm, then yes the ST would probably have the edge. But that's like comparing petrol and diesel engines. I normally change up before 2500 rpm, but it's nice to know there's plenty in reserve for those occasions when you want to have a bit of fun.

I stand by my 30% difference that I stated previously, but I could well understand you wanting to take a bigger step up than going to a GT. That's what the GT4 is for!

[sotal]

Well I have no firm evidence at the moment so I am probably going too much on what others have said etc, I will try and get a test drive in a GT then I'll know a bit more!

For some reason I just don't fancy the GT4. I used to want one but I can't even explain why but I just don't really want one! I guess it's probably a combination of cost for the age / fuel consumption / insurance costs / attracts too much unwanted attention / likelyhood of having it stolen etc etc.

So I really don't know but I am thinking about a gen 7, or an IS200 at the moment. Probably get a gen GT though if anything just for a bit of a change and to stop the oil - see you've got me going round in circles!!! I really am stuck in one of thepositions where I really don't quite know what to do!!!!

[Cubic Incubi]

ST 0-60 9.9 seconds - lets call it 10.

GT 0-60 7.9 seconds - lets call it 8.

The ST has better low down grunt, so 'feels' faster as its torque we feel.

The GT has better acceleration with high revving and gets its power in later in the rpm band.

So the 3sge IS faster, but you want a car that feels fast.

I have no idea what a 3SFE JDM feels like but as it has virtualy the same block it probs 'feels' slower than the ST but is in fact faster.

The GT has over 50bhp on the ST.

ST 7AFE - 114 bhp

GT 3SGE - 168-173 bhp. combined fuel consumption is 30mpg.

[littlewener]

sotal if you want next time i'm in the area in my gen 6 import ss2 you can have a play in it

[sotal]

ST 0-60 9.9 seconds - lets call it 10.

GT 0-60 7.9 seconds - lets call it 8.

The ST has better low down grunt, so 'feels' faster as its torque we feel.

The GT has better acceleration with high revving and gets its power in later in the rpm band.

So the 3sge IS faster, but you want a car that feels fast.

I have no idea what a 3SFE JDM feels like but as it has virtualy the same block it probs 'feels' slower than the ST but is in fact faster.

The GT has over 50bhp on the ST.

ST 7AFE - 114 bhp

GT 3SGE - 168-173 bhp. combined fuel consumption is 30mpg.

←

That's basically what I was trying to say! Me and MIP have both done tests with a video recorder in the car so that we could compare the cars. (both UK his is a GT mine is an ST) Watching the videos seperatley I would say they were identical in how I perceived things going past - ie trees etc. Placing time markers on the video at the point when you set off and the point where you reach 60, I got about 9.5 seconds for the GT and about 10.5 seconds from my ST. Our method was completely flawed from a scientific point of view but it does give a good indication and from it I can definatley say the GT IS FASTER. I'm not arguing that fact, it is just how much faster and personally I don't think it's enough faster, so the ST would be better with it's better MPG. (just a shame about oil control!)

sotal if you want next time i'm in the area in my gen 6 import ss2 you can have a play in it

←

Great stuff - I'll take you up on that! I'll let you drive though and you can show me what it can do!!! Are you out of the area at the moment??

[Calisto]

Yay for the GT. :group-cuddles:

[Cubic Incubi]

yay - your gen 5 gt is either 158bhp at 7.9 seconds or facelift with car is 154bhp with 8.4 seconds 0-60.

hey anyways it dont matter, all celica's are equal in the eyes of the lord :D

[Calisto]

yay - your gen 5 gt is either 158bhp at 7.9 seconds or facelift with car is 154bhp with 8.4 seconds 0-60.

hey anyways it dont matter, all celica's are equal in the eyes of the lord :D

←

Not soooo fast their hun....... Now the lord and I are on speaking terms OK and he knows that The GT-R and the GT-4 are way up their above the rest when

we are talking Celica's..... then their is the GTi and then the ST. :shutit:

Luv Ash.x

[celica dave]

have a road test from top gear on the 140 and there figures to sixty and top speed (not toyotas figures) are about the same as my st. so make your mind up if you think the st is slow!

[adamgt]

Dont bother with the ST or the GT... go straight for the beast... GT4 :P I had a GT and it is much quicker than the ST! 2 seconds on 0-60 is a big difference.

Now have a GT4 running 0-60 in just over 5 seconds

[daktari]

Now have a GT4 running 0-60 in just over 5 seconds

←

Whats wrong with it????

[GT4 BOOSTER]

i prefer the ss1 2 litre 3sfe over the 3sge for off the mark speed , i hated the gear ratios on my st202 3sge way too long 1st and 2nd gears , the ss1 is way more torquey and more fun off the mark. still love the gt4 over all the others though. ;)