Not long ago, Toyota Cressidas were very plentiful in Eugene. They had a loyal following, given their status as high priest in the Church of Toyota. These six cylinder sedans (and wagons) were never cheap, and one could buy a lot bigger car for the money from Detroit. But of course, buyers of Cressidas weren’t even looking that way.
Realistically, Cressidas were not “conquest” car, designed to get Americans out of their beloved Olds Cutlass Supreme Broughams and into one of these instead. It was a step-up car for loyal Toyota buyers, the ones that had started out with Corollas in the early 70s, then bought a Corona, and were ready for something nicer, as befitted their climb up the socio-economic ladder.
And they were quite nice; built with high quality materials put together in that typical Toyota way. This was as close to a Toyota Brougham as it got. But under its skin, changes were happening.
The Cressida was essentially the Japanese market Mark II, and also sold in a Toyota Chaser version. Outside of the US, a wide variety of four and six cylinder engines powered them, but the biggest 2.8 six, the same basic engine that also found itself in the was the Supra, was the only one in US-bound Cressidas. For American standards, that was a good call.
This generation Cressida was built from 1981 through 1984. But the 1983 and 1984 models had some significant differences, including the 5M-GE DOHC version of the 2.8 six, which made a pretty healthy 145 hp, for the times. And the solid rear axle gave way to a semi-trailing link independent rear suspension. Both of these were also used on the Supra.
This was the transitional Cressida; it’s successor had legitimate sports-luxury sedan creds. The Cressida evolved from a Brougham chaser to BMW chaser, and it mostly happened under the same exterior skin.
This generation Cressida was still rather dorky on the outside, but it was undergoing a quiet and subtle metamorphosis. While its successor wasn’t quite as overtly sporty as a BMW, it was probably about as close as its buyer base wanted it to be.
This edition of the Cressida even looked better than its future successor the Avalon. Cressida since it was considered a luxurious version and flagship of Toyota after the Crown which was no longer imported in North America, was just a stepping stone model of upscale Toyotas until Toyota introduced the Lexus brand in 1990 for the North American market and soon others to compete with the likes of Cadillac, Lincoln, Mercedes Benz and BMW. I am not sure though whether the Cressida or Mark II of that era had a 2 Door Coupe version like the previous generation’s. The Soarer (only available in Japan) produced during that time might be considered one or not since its running gear and platform might be closer to the Supra’s than Cressida’s.
This vintage (X60) Mark II/Chaser no longer offered a two-door hardtop, instead adding a pillared four-door “hardtop” like the Crown’s. Most Japanese rivals in this class, like the Nissan Laurel, did the same thing, so I gather the two-doors became passe pretty quickly in Japan.
One could argue that the Soarer filled that role, but the Soarer was really a personal luxury coupe — in American terms, it was the difference between, say, a two-door LeSabre and a Riviera. Obviously, there were mechanical commonalities, but they really weren’t the same thing and weren’t marketed that way.
I loved the look of the 1976-80 Cressida (sold in Canada starting in ’78) but quickly lost interest in the second generation. Always thought the styling was too bland and generic, never did anything for me.
The hardtop models of this generation were significantly more attractive, in my opinion. It’s too bad they never made any Cressida versions (this particular example is a Chaser).
Now then you mentionned the hardtop, Ate Up With Motor posted an article about the Japanese 4-door hardtop sedan. http://ateupwithmotor.com/model-histories/japanese-four-door-hardtops/
Yeah, I’m honestly kind of surprised they didn’t. Unlike the Nissans, the Toyota four-door hardtops were mostly of the pillared variety, so I don’t think they would have posed any particular challenges for U.S. crash testing, and they were better-looking. My strong impression is that in Japan, the four-door hardtop versions were the ones aimed at buyers spending their own money, with the pillared versions going more to fleets and company cars, so that’s not terribly surprising.
It’s a little bland, but it’s handsome. Also like the six-window treatment, one of the few (slightly) unusual things about it.
The original Cressida was too much of a brougham mini-me. It always looked like it was trying to be a shrunken, 4-door Cordoba.
The 2G 1981-84 Toyota Cressida with the six window treatment looked similar to Volvo 240/260 series and the 1978-80 Chevrolet Malibu 4 Door Sedan. The 1G version 1977-80 just looks to old but it does have a very little design similarities to the 1975-78 Chevrolet Nova 4 Door Sedan but with the ugly 1975-77 Chrysler Cordoba front end though.
A work colleague and friend bought a new white 83 Cressida wagon – I recognize that blue plush interior. What a great car. She drove it for about 20 years and 300K until replacing it with a Subaru Outback. These were drum tight, quiet, smooth, dependable cars that were all over SoCal for a long time. I always thought the wagon looked better than the sedan. The later Cressidas owned by friends seemed to be somewhat less reliable – perhaps due to increasingly complicated electronics. I have a friend who still drives her mother’s later model (I think it’s an 89) Cressida. You still see a few around but most were driven into the ground. All the power accessories still worked like new on the 83 wagon when it was traded in but the engine and transmission were finally wearing out.
These were nice cars only a size down from the Crown Super Saloon but still with all its amenities, the Cressida didnt get the turbo diesels that the MK11 range offered at least the export models didnt, but with the right bellhousing the mighty 5M is a bolt in swap to the 4Runner Hilux pickups giving them a welcome hp increase, We have Chasers here ex JDM including the 2door coupes rare but nice looking cars.
These cars were just wonderful, and were my number one cheapo used car pick for a long time, perhaps up until a few years ago. They are now simply to old to be a good cheap car, and they are still out there for those who want to risk at 25 year old car:
http://vancouver.craigslist.ca/bnc/cto/5013268037.html
The go to cheapo car here is now the Toyota Matrix. They have absurd resale values. Lots of people around here buy them for a specific, short term purpose and sell them on for no loss.
Funny thing is around here (n.e. Ohio) Pontiac Vibes go dirt cheap. Some people just can’t get past the GM nameplate, I guess.
At this point, it might also be a reflection of the demise of Pontiac. Being from an orphan brand seldom does resale value any favors.
I haven’t seen too many Cressidas of any generation, especially these ones. Granted it’s an early-80s Toyota, but I find this design overly sleep-educing to the point of unattractiveness. While similarly-styled, I find the Maxima of this period much more appealing.
It looks like a Japanese Fairmont to me! It has the similar size ( either a narrower Detroit car, or wider Japanese car ) similar engine ( inline six if optioned alike ) similar character ( both more European than their typical products ) and very anonymous ’80s quad lights and imposing looking exterior even though they are both small and thin.
They may look similar, but the Cressida was in fact a very well engineered car for its day. It was based on the Mark II, a mid-level executive car in Japan at the time. This was also so long ago that we got the full zoot JDM treatment, and the cars were practically identical. other than steering wheel location, that is. They were not cheap at all, and were very popular with older, more discerning buyers. The 2.8 litre DOHC EFI straight six was a lot different than the 3.3 in the Fairmont.
As a teenager, I worked as a groundskeeper on an large estate, owned by a forestry magnate. He bought a 1982 and I was quite impressed with it when he let me drive it.
That’s the paradox about the Fairmont; while its size was comparable to many luxurious foreign cars, it was always a budget compact in Ford’s planning, and engineered accordingly. Thus, its uninspired driveline.
Toyota’s willingness to invest in a mass-market, injected twincam six shows how far ahead of Detroit they were technically, even if they hadn’t equaled the Germans in other respects, as yet. And I was impressed with the build quality of every ’80s Toyota in my experience.
I think the Toyota M-series six (and the Nissan L-series six, for that matter) was always OHC. There were carbureted versions until the late ’70s; electronic fuel injection was initially added as a step-up option for the 2-liter versions, since Japanese tax laws made bigger engines punitively expensive to own. I think the combination of displacement-based vehicle taxes and emissions controls was really the main driver — the mildly tuned “small” engines offered in the U.S. Fairmont would have been very costly.
Also, the Mark II and Chaser were more upmarket products in Japan than the Fairmont was in the U.S. The Fairmont was a cheap compact; the Mark II/Chaser and Nissan Laurel were largish luxury cars by home market standards.
I ran across a 3rd generation Cressida on a local Craigslist about 2 weeks ago. Unfortunately, that one had a banged up front quarter.
I too thought the 1st generation was a bit more interesting. My “dream” Cressida was a 2 door with a manual transmission and the DOHC 6 cylinder engine.
Funny to think that a “large” 6 cylinder engine that produced 145 horsepower was once considered to be more than adequate power for a large, near luxury, sedan. At least by the 3rd generation this engine was producing 190 horsepower.
When I was younger my mother had four of these at different times from about 2001-2005, all purchased under $500. She got them because they were the among the cheapest running cars available but also because she really liked them, 80’s Toyota boxes are her type of car. I remember the first one we got, a beige ’81 that replaced our ’90 Ford Escort. The Cressida blew me away with the power windows and sunroof. I remember it being a very quick car . My favorite generation is the 89-92, they look like mini LS400’s and were the height of the flagship before the dowdy Avalon replaced it. I would love to have a refreshed 91-92 model, they just seemed so classy with those aluminum wheels and the Toyota ‘T’ logo.
This is one of very few cars that provokes a real, deep emotional response for me. My dad owned 2 Cressidas successively when I was a kid, an ’82 followed by an ’85. He still talks about the ’85 occasionally, as a solid car and a relative rocket ship for the times with the Supra engine. He eventually sold it to my grandfather, who drove it for several years until, to my eternal chagrin, he sold it in the few months between my 16th birthday and our annual visit (they lived 600 miles away). I can’t blame him, since I imagine parts for a fairly uncommon Toyota were not easy to come by in their rural locality, far from the nearest Toyota dealer. But still, in the slim chance an opportunity arises to drive one for even a few minutes, you can bet I’ll jump at it. Maybe it won’t live up to the nostalgia, but I’m willing to risk it.
These were outstanding cars for the times, smooth, quiet, and refined.
I had an 84 Cressida wagon same color of blue as your example. Bought it used and drove it several years. Always loved the smooth and powerful drive train but thought the ride itself was typical of Japanese cars in general – that is pretty smooth but not particularly comfortable seats and the suspension seemed hard. It was very like our 93 Maxima bought later in many ways. The Maxima we bought new and drove for 10 years and 250,000 miles. I don’t recall how long we had the Cressida but it was 4 or 5 years old when purchased and probably drive for 3 years or so.
Later iterations of the Mark II and Mark X (after the Cressida left the U.S.) strove to become progressively more European in focus. How effective that was in practice is an interesting question, but on paper, it certainly hit a lot of the right marks: RWD or AWD, double wishbone suspension all around, straight sixes in 2.0/2.5/3.0 sizes (and 2.5 turbo), etc.
It’s a pity that this class of car — a largish but not huge ‘semi-premium’ sedan for people who want something more luxurious and more polished than a D-segment family sedan, but who either can’t or don’t want to pay a bazillion dollars for a posh badge — has largely died out.
The problem is that almost all cars are nicer. Compare a modern Impala to an 80s version. People still like Buick luxuries, but they only have to pay for a Chevrolet badge.
I haven’t driven or even sat in one, so maybe I’m way off, but that seems to be where they’re trying to position the Buick Regal. Above your standard family sedan, a would-be competitor to Lexus/Infiniti but at a lower price point. But it does seem to be a declining/dead classification for the most part.
These were truly well engineered and built cars compared to their US and European counterparts. But they had two problems; they were quite expensive and due to having to comply with Japanese size restrictions, also quite narrow.
I had a 88 JDM version (Mark II) and it had Lexus refinement before there was a Lexus……
I really like the obviously Japanese detailing on this car. It shows a confidence in the product, when a design team is proud to show who they are. That Toyota had model specific emblems, coat of arms really, was to me one of the coolest things they were doing. Giving Toyota buyers a high rung to aspire to was a great thing.
The volunteer import quotas of the day mean the vehicle could have been so much more though. Limiting numbers through a sales quota meant Toyota had to go upmarket on models like this from Japan. The suspension and noise control were simply not up to world standards, neither smoother and quieter than an Olds nor as tight handling as a BMW. Therefore if those buyers cross shopped, the Cressida wouldn’t have measured up. Later Lexus set the new standard for a smooth luxury car. The 16 year older, cheaper LTD a few post down was quieter and smoother, and a 13 year older BMW Bavaria handled better. This limited the Cressida to Toyota faithful.
I had a memorable ride in a Cressida, a private cab in Costa Rica. What made it memorable was the immaculate condition of the car; most Central American cabs are complete wrecks – Nissans and Mitsubishis are most popular – but it was obvious that this driver loved his car.
I could understand why – it was exceptionally well made, the doors closing easily, windows working smoothly, everything running like a top, even considering that the car was already ten years old at the time. It’s probably still running, for all I know.
That was when Toyota really put their corporate soul into making every detail perfect.
In case my point about this generation of Cressida not being quiet enough proved controversial, or God forbid incorrect, I looked up a Car & Driver road test summary from the March 82 issue to see how it compared. It registered 73db at 70 mph. This is within a db of a Maxima, a Volvo GLT, a 300TD, a 528e, a Cimmaron, a pug 505TD, or even an XJ6. The quieter cars were around 68db. These included Town Car, Deville, Imperial, 380SEL,fox Continental, and Rolls. Even Grand Prix Diesels and Regal Turbos registered 71db.
For those who like Toyotas.
Did Toyota ever offer a “Troilus” option on the Cressida?
So someone knows Shakespeare! The play was a bit bawdy (thus not one you’d hear much about in your English Lit class), but many other of his plays were too, once you translate the flowery Elizabethan slang.
On their release in Australia, ‘Wheels’ magazine proclaimed “Toyota turns the corner”
Not with with me. Not now, not then & probably never.