The Tercels were pretty indestructible cars. My brother in law got close to 300,000 kms on one that he had before salted roads in the winter took their toll in terms of corrosion.
I do concur with Moparlee’s statement about ‘…indestructible cars’.
My brother’s ex-wife had one in medium blue metallic for years. The car gained so many miles and so many minor scars and scratches from misjudging the distance when parking and manoeuvring through the tight spots. My brother loved Tercel for its reliability and durability as well as simplicity in repairing and replacing the components. She became frustrated about driving the demolition derby car and wanted to replace it with something more dignity.
One day, my brother surprised her by buying a 1993 Corolla in fire brigade red. One of the best cars ever. Unfortunately, the torrid love affair didn’t last very long. In 2002, a dumb blonde in Cadillac Escalade prioritised the mobile phone call above her driving and rearranged the Corolla’s rear end into a hatchback.
Guess I’m just a sap when it comes to 45* c columns but i always liked the P1800ES-esque rear hatch on these and on dad’s Corolla liftback, later on the Maxx. But both the Maxx and the Tercel were like the plain girl next door with the hot @ss.
Wow, just 9 years before $5800 odd dollars put you into a full size, fairly luxurious Grand Ville, and now you’d be reduced to this plastic coated penury box with no room in the back seat or trunk. And, Toyota dealers being what they were in 1980, polyglop and side stripes and additional dealer markup would have been standard. What a shock to someone getting ready to replace a 71 anything.
0-60 in 14.8 seconds? 12 inch tyres on the base model? Can you even BUY 12 inch tyres any more? We’re having a tough time finding the 14 inchers for a ’96 Olds Ciera.
I had 12″ tires on my ’69 Corolla, I thought they went 13″ in the early 70’s. It looks like it has disk brakes, mine had the tiniest drum brakes all around that I have ever seen.
A few cars used 12 inch wheels/tires in 1980, the 1st generation Ford Fiesta comes to mind. Since several small European sedans used that size at one time or another, finding replacement tires in 1982 was no big deal.
And before “running down” these cars, keep in mind lots of other manufacturers built “minimalist” transportation like this Tercel, and more than a few buyers found them to be acceptable. And while $5800 plus possible ADM (additional dealer markup) SEEMS expensive, this SR5 liftback was the top model of the Tercel line in 1981.
And the one tested has $815 (almost $2,400 adjusted for inflation) worth of air conditioning and alloy wheels, options that would have made the typical economy car buyer of the time think long and hard.
And in 1951, $5,800 would have bought you a Cadillac Series 75. Inflation is hell. More to the point, the quoted base prices of the Tercel were around the same as a 1980 Chevette, which I couldn’t really call an improvement.
That being said, it’s remarkable how stable new-car prices were between 1946 and 1972 if you compare the former coupes from the “Low-Priced Three” with the latter six-cylinder compacts rather than their full-size line descendants whose prices were “inflated” by size and feature creep.
When I was in college in 1983 a classmate had an ’80 Tercel just like the one reviewed here. He wanted company on the drive to Toronto to pick up his wife at the airport so he asked me to tag along. What I remember was how roomy and comfy this little car was and how well it rode. It seemed peppy enough, easily able to keep up with highway traffic and the manual transmission seemed to shift really smooth (or maybe he was just a skilled driver). Still not my kind of car but I was pretty impressed with it.
I can confirm the indestructibility of these cars. Friend Paul (another Paul) had an SR-5 as his commuter car in the ’90’s and early ’00’s, got it well over 200,000, loved that little car. It had an aftermarket pop-up sunroof, and by the end the sunroof leaked in each Florida shower, and he had to use a stick to prop up the hatch. Finally sold it when it just got too rusty to be safe-but it drove just fine on the way to the junk yard. Fun little car!
Little did anyone knew that 36 years later that the Toyota Tercel will later have plenty of spiritual successors after the last 1999 model released for Canada and the only Southeast Asian model Toyota Soluna which was essentially a lightly redesigned Tercel through 2003. Anyway here are the future progeny/successors to the Toyota Tercel 4 Door Sedan. 1980-83 Toyota Tercel 4 Door Sedan (top row left), 1984-86 Toyota Tercel 4 Door Sedan (top row right), 1987-90 Toyota Tercel (second row left), 1991-94 Toyota Tercel 4 Door Sedan (second row right), 1995-99 (in Canada) Toyota Tercel 4 Door Sedan (third row left), 2000-03 (only available in Southeast Asian Countries)Toyota Soluna 4 Door Sedan (third row right), 1999-12? (production continued in China as an FAW Vela Xiali) Toyota Echo 4 Door Sedan (fourth row left), 2004-14 (only available in Southeast Asian Countries and production of the 1G version continued on in Taiwan until 2014.)Toyota Vios 4 Door Sedan (fourth row right), 1997-03 (1997-99 JDM only) Toyota Prius Hybrid 4 Door Sedan (fifth row left), 2010-present (in India and other selected markets only) Toyota Etios 4 Door Sedan (fifth row right), 2006-current (still produced as limited in other countries) Toyota Yaris (Vios in Southeast Asian Countries) 4 Door Sedan (sixth row left), 2013-current Toyota Vios (only available in Southeast Asian Countries, but its known as the Yaris elsewhere in other selected markets only) 4 Door Sedan (sixth row right), 2013-present (much different than Corollas produced elsewhere including the U.S. JDM and China only. A smaller “downsized” Corolla based on the Vios/Yaris 4 Door Sedan Platform) Toyota Corolla Axio 4 Door Sedan (bottom row left) and the 2016 Scion iA (Toyota Yaris 4 Door Sedan in Canada and its heavily based from the Mazda 2/Demio not available in the U.S. and Canada) 4 Door Sedan (bottom row right).
Side view photo montage compilations but starting with the 1991-94 Toyota Tercel 4 Door Sedan (top row center), 1995-99 Toyota Tercel 4 Door Sedan (second row left), 2000-03 Toyota Soluna 4 Door Sedan (second row right), 1999-12? Toyota Echo 4 Door Sedan (third row left), 2004-14 Toyota Vios 4 Door Sedan (third row right), 1997-03 Toyota Prius Hybrid 4 Door Sedan (fourth row left), 2010-present Toyota Etios 4 Door Sedan (fourth row right), 2006-current Toyota Yaris 4 Door Sedan (fifth row left), 2013-current Toyota Vios 4 Door Sedan (fifth row right), 2013-present Toyota Corolla Axio 4 Door Sedan (bottom row left) and the 2016 Scion iA 4 Door Sedan (bottom row right).
Toyota Corolla Tercel and Toyota Corolla Matrix were the only two Toyota models in the U.S. and Canada to have a “Corolla” moniker even though the Corolla Tercel was an entry level subcompact car one size blow the Corolla while the Corolla Matrix was a shortened wagon and later on a five door hatchback of the Corolla Sedan for the U.S. and Canadian Markets. In the present, the Toyota Corolla Tercel would be somewhat reminiscent to the JDM and China exclusive Corolla Axio.
Toyota and Nissan, for whatever reason, would use the name of another/older model in conjunction with a new model’s name when introducing a new car….at least in the U.S. In Nissan’s case, the name Stanza AND Altima appeared on the 1st year of the new Altima, then the Stanza name disappeared. In Toyota’s case, the Tercel did carry the Corolla name….for 1 year, then the Corolla name disappeared from the Tercel.
The Matrix was NOT called a Corolla in the U.S., except perhaps by dealers who wanted to link the lesser known model to it’s better know “sister” model.
BTW, in markets outside North America the Matrix was called Verso…..not the Corolla Verso.
For one year it was officially called a Corolla Matrix in 2003, but it was just shortened to Matrix in 2004 since the buying public is already aware of its relationship with the Corolla and its strong points. Here is the Wikipedia Page which mentioned it as such: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Matrix
I too had a mid-70s Civic with 12 inch tires…the ones on there when I bought were radial retreads…as I recall the previous owner had bought them at Sears.
As the article suggests, the design of the car is so far behind the competition it would probably have been a failure had it not been offered by a company with a solid reputation.
Longitudinal engine? Who else in that class used such an inefficient arrangement? The Renault R5, because it had a transplanted early 60s R8 powertrain, is the only one that comes to mind.
Dinky hatch? The whole point of a hatch is to get stuff inside the car. By that time, you had a choice of Rabbit, Omnirizon, Fiesta, Colt, Datsun 310, Civic, Accord. The R5’s hatch opened all the way down to the bumper.
This Tercel had to be one of the most timid designs ever. Toyota totally phoned it in.
As the article suggests, the design of the car is so far behind the competition it would probably have been a failure had it not been offered by a company with a solid reputation.
I just read the article, and must have missed a page, because I didn’t read that anywhere. Could you point out where it suggests that?
Longitudinal engine? Who else in that class used such an inefficient arrangement? The Renault R5, because it had a transplanted early 60s R8 powertrain, is the only one that comes to mind.
It’s not inefficient at all, since it’s a very short block and sits directly over the front wheels. It really takes up hardly any more total space than a transverse engine. And it made it eminently suitable for 4WD, as was used in the very popular Tercel 4WD wagon for quite a while.
This Tercel had to be one of the most timid designs ever. Toyota totally phoned it in.
They hardly phoned it in. Yes, Toyota is a conservative company, and wasn’t going to take any leading-edge risks. This was Toyota’s first FWD car, and from the very first model year, these developed a rep for being utterly bulletproof. There’s still a number of these running around Eugene. Who else can say that about their first-ever FWD car?
Of course it’s a bit smaller than several of the cars you listed, as it wasn’t designed to compete in the same class as the Horizon, Rabbit and Accord. That was the Corolla’s job, and once it got FWD, it too quickly established itself as the most durable of the class.
Reading this article, there’s very little negative in it about the Tercel, except perhaps the odd tail lights, given its role as Toyota’s cheapest model. It seems to account quite well for itself, it seems to me, right from the headline “A better car than the styling would indicate”. And that certainly turned out to be the case in the long term.
If anyone “phoned in” their first FWD car, it was GM, with their X cars. Toyota’s strategy in converting over to FWD was the polar opposite of GM’s.
I just read the article, and must have missed a page, because I didn’t read that anywhere. Could you point out where it suggests that?
It starts with the subtitle “a better car than it’s styling would indicate” Then they comment on the inadequacy of the hatch, and the excessive liftover height. Then they talk about how the car is better “than anticipated”. “Damning with faint praise” is written large throughout the test.
It’s not inefficient at all, since it’s a very short block and sits directly over the front wheels. It really takes up hardly any more total space than a transverse engine.
The approach was a dead end. Toyota had to start over with a transverse installation in later iterations. I remember when the Tercel came out and one of the articles I read attributed the orientation to being able to use a derivative of an existing transmission.
Yes, Toyota is a conservative company, and wasn’t going to take any leading-edge risks.
With the market being full of clean sheet designs including the Accord and Rabbit, which were both on the market before Toyota would have started designing the Tercel, the Tercel was not leading-edge, it’s concept wasn’t even equal to it’s competition. It was backward.
Reading this article, there’s very little negative in it about the Tercel,
The car mags rarely risk offending an advertiser. The only really negative reviews I remember were of the Austin Marina, Austin America and Triumph Stag. I read a review of the Mazda RX-2 where the writer was raving about the excellent ergonomics, and, for comparison, described the horrible ergonomics of an unnamed model tested a few issues previously. From his description of the design he did not like in the unnamed car, it was obvious he was talking about the Renault R17 test that had been published a couple months earlier. The R17 test was completely devoid of any criticism of the car’s ergonomics. I remember a test in Motor Trend where they even tried to say that the Triumph TR-6 enjoyed exceptional reliability and durability, to offset their reporting of the parts that broke during their test. (I remember their description of a piece of weather stripping that came adrift and waved in the wind “like a piece of velour spaghetti”)
If anyone “phoned in” their first FWD car, it was GM, with their X cars.
The irony is, I like the X and A bodies. Excellent effort for a clean sheet design, and very timely. The Citation made the Fairmont look like a slightly warmed over 1960 Falcon. Where GM fell down was the execution. If the Citation had had Toyota level reliability, it would be regarded as a watershed event for the industry.
Conversely, what saved the Tercel was Toyota’s excellent execution. It was a horrible, inefficient, backward design, but they made it reliable.
AMC Steve, you were right about everything. A close friend of mine had one of these when I had a Horizon. There was nothing whatsoever designwise in terms of aesthetics, ride, NVH, seats, or practicality about the Tercel that wasn’t ten years behind compared to the Horizon. The Tercel still stands out in my mind as an oddly outdated, awkward, cheap looking and amateur design inside and out.
Mechanical reliability is a whole different topic, not to be confused with the rest. On the other hand in 130K miles on the Horizon the main problems were one CV joint and one fried lean burn computer. The Tercel needed a whole front suspension ball joints etc. replacement and I don’t know what else.
The Tercel was unique though. One time my friend was away for a couple of weeks and I was walking his dog. A Tercel in a different color with different stripes drove by and the dog saw it and froze.
“Horrible, inefficient, backward design…” Dude, I hope you catch as well as you pitch. “Horrible” is quite a statement, with no backing. I rode in Tercels a number of times during this era and they were inexpensive cars that were quite space efficient, easy to drive and good on gas. The inline drive train which you seem to think is so awful was to set up for the four wheel drive. What do you think of the Subaru? That also is inline, and works very well for four wheel drive. I thought the drivetrain was interesting, especially that it was so quiet, something not said about the first Mini which also had a gear drive to the transmission.
There’s still a number of these running around Eugene. Who else can say that about their first-ever FWD car?
The number of early Minis I see and Morris/Austin 1100/1300s still in regular use is quite amazing,
The number of early Minis I see and Morris/Austin 1100/1300s still in regular use is quite amazing,
Sold here as an MG with the 1100, then as the Austin America with the 1300. Another nice design, let down by faulty execution. A shirttail relative of mine worked for British Leyland in New Jersey, and offered me the “A” plan price, but I wasn’t quite hatched as a driver yet. Last time I saw one was when I was in grad school in 81. Love this guy’s America. Built up beyond all reason, but looks like fun.
My father had a 1982 Tercel, a 4 speed non-SR5 liftback model. Here in Canada, they weren’t badged as Corolla.
I saw one for sale recently that was almost like his (a 1981 with chrome door handles and blue interior instead of black/gray). If it were a SR-5, I would have been interested in buying it!
I liked the styling on the first Tercel hatch – the neat frameless door with the chamfered bottom corners and Saab 96-ish taillights. Unique and attractive. The rest of the car was crisp and clean too. The two- and (later) four-door sedans were quite a bit less appealing. More importantly, Toyota’s first FWD car lost none of Toyota’s famed reliability, something that couldn’t be said about Ford and GM’s first mainstream FWD cars for the US from around this time.
The first Corolla Tercel liftback looked just like an MGB GT from the rear. In fact, I’m surprised nobody else has made the connection!
This was the same era in which Toyota cloned the styling of the Jaguar XJ6 for its first-gen Cressida sedan. Both models offered British good looks with decidedly un-British reliability.
This car looks pretty slow through 2021 eyes, but it was TWO SECONDS QUICKER to sixty miles per hour than an Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme with a 260 ci V8.
It’s interesting to see that Toyota management approved this car’s almost-shooting-brake styling in large part because it wasn’t yet another (as inferred) Rabbit/Golf clone.
It’s not that strange when you look at the position this car was in on the JDM market. Unlike here, the Tercel/Corsa twins were not marketed as entry level small cars. Toyota had a real fear that FWD would not be wildly embraced by their typically conservative customer base, so these were to augment the more basic and considerably cheaper Starlet hatchback lineup. That said, the relatively unique choices of semi-sporty 3 door hatch and formal 4 door sedan make sense (there wasn’t a Civic 3-box sedan yet, and the Nissan Cherry sedan was a bizarre fastback). I don’t have numbers in front of me, but I’m fairly certain these were barely, if any, less expensive than an equivalently equipped Corolla/Sprinter.
I drove a Tercel recently, not a pristine new hatchback but a well used ex JDM loan heap for what it was it was ok and the huge mileage it had done said it must have been reliable, nothing spectacular about it really just a cheap econo car but thats all they ever were of you want better anything in a car Toyota has one you’ll like they cater to most tastes.
I want a Renault Le Car. Badly. The design, is, in my mind, sublime. Minimalist but luxe.
Many have told stories of Renault ownership hell, so, of course, perhaps the want is better than having. Nonetheless, the glass back Toyota Tercel is the only other car which I think would have a similar quirk + oddity + coolness.
Regarless, both are far more rare, today than just about any alleged “collector car”.
My understanding is that the Tercel was a very old design when it was launched.
Toyota realised that FWD was going to be a thing and clearly took a hard look at the Triumph 1300 and NSU K70.
Due to their inherent conservatism and the continued success of the Corolla against its FWD contemporaries, it was a long time before it got greenlighted.
Sort of Toyota’s Autobianchi Primula to their FIAT 124.
Wow, I got the year on these terribly wrong; I assumed these came out later (’81 or ’82)?
Probably based on a co-worker who bought one around then. If these were out in ’80 don’t know why I didn’t look at one when I was in the market (Jan 1981) for a fwd car. True, I was more of a Nissan (actually Datsun back then) as I had a ’74 710 which I was trying to replace…lived up north, the Datsun hit some black ice on I89 and bit the guardrail, got it fixed up, but didn’t want a light RWD car anymore. Another co-worker (actually in my dept, lived in same apt complex as I) had a ’79 310 Coupe which was nice, probably more likely to get that then the Toyota…in early ’83 I rented a manual Starlet (only manual car I’ve ever rented) but that was RWD…I had assumed these came out much later than 1980.
While working for Hertz in ’77 and ’78, I’d driven Corolla liftbacks….of course then RWD, back then there weren’t many imports at our location yet (only really remember Toyota and Datsun). Funny story about the liftback, years later I had a co-worker who had one, but his was manual (the ones I drove for Hertz were automatic). Somehow we were talking about the light that illuminated the automatic transmission quadrant between the seats, it floodlit it from above (light was actually on dash aimed at floor). Apparently they forgot to delete the light on at least his manual car (rare inattention to detail by Toyota), and he always wondered why there was a light on his manual transmission shift lever.
Ended up buying a ’78 Scirocco….for about the price this would have been new. It turned me into a confirmed VW owner (never owned another car in 40 years since) but I was also looking at new cars, but couldn’t quite swing one as new employee. My manager at the time was president of the credit union at work (a volunteer position, our jobs didn’t involve finance nor banking) and knowing I was looking for a car he finagled an extra $500 on the loan I got there (it was based on membership term, which as a new employee, I was at minimum level). Inflation was huge back then, I had a friend that got a 24% on a used car, and people were buying cars like Toyotas new, then selling them the next year for more than they paid, essentially getting free ride (exclusive of financing) for that year. Perhaps I just assumed I couldn’t afford a new Toyota; that didn’t stop me from looking at new (last year for the original body style ’81 Scirocco, though it was more dreaming by a car fan). Loved my ’78 though, worst thing was it didn’t have air conditioning and I ended up moving to central Texas 2 years later (still live here almost 40 years later). Didn’t need FWD in Texas, but by then most models were already well underway to abandoning RWD for FWD especially imports. Never did get around to owning a Toyota.
The Tercels were pretty indestructible cars. My brother in law got close to 300,000 kms on one that he had before salted roads in the winter took their toll in terms of corrosion.
I do concur with Moparlee’s statement about ‘…indestructible cars’.
My brother’s ex-wife had one in medium blue metallic for years. The car gained so many miles and so many minor scars and scratches from misjudging the distance when parking and manoeuvring through the tight spots. My brother loved Tercel for its reliability and durability as well as simplicity in repairing and replacing the components. She became frustrated about driving the demolition derby car and wanted to replace it with something more dignity.
One day, my brother surprised her by buying a 1993 Corolla in fire brigade red. One of the best cars ever. Unfortunately, the torrid love affair didn’t last very long. In 2002, a dumb blonde in Cadillac Escalade prioritised the mobile phone call above her driving and rearranged the Corolla’s rear end into a hatchback.
Guess I’m just a sap when it comes to 45* c columns but i always liked the P1800ES-esque rear hatch on these and on dad’s Corolla liftback, later on the Maxx. But both the Maxx and the Tercel were like the plain girl next door with the hot @ss.
I remember her.
Wow, just 9 years before $5800 odd dollars put you into a full size, fairly luxurious Grand Ville, and now you’d be reduced to this plastic coated penury box with no room in the back seat or trunk. And, Toyota dealers being what they were in 1980, polyglop and side stripes and additional dealer markup would have been standard. What a shock to someone getting ready to replace a 71 anything.
0-60 in 14.8 seconds? 12 inch tyres on the base model? Can you even BUY 12 inch tyres any more? We’re having a tough time finding the 14 inchers for a ’96 Olds Ciera.
I had 12″ tires on my ’69 Corolla, I thought they went 13″ in the early 70’s. It looks like it has disk brakes, mine had the tiniest drum brakes all around that I have ever seen.
Base-model JDM Corollas still had 12-inch tires through the E70 — with bias-ply tires, no less!
Read the section about reliability on the spec page and you’ll understand why the people that gave up their Detroit cars were so happy about it.
A few cars used 12 inch wheels/tires in 1980, the 1st generation Ford Fiesta comes to mind. Since several small European sedans used that size at one time or another, finding replacement tires in 1982 was no big deal.
And before “running down” these cars, keep in mind lots of other manufacturers built “minimalist” transportation like this Tercel, and more than a few buyers found them to be acceptable. And while $5800 plus possible ADM (additional dealer markup) SEEMS expensive, this SR5 liftback was the top model of the Tercel line in 1981.
And the one tested has $815 (almost $2,400 adjusted for inflation) worth of air conditioning and alloy wheels, options that would have made the typical economy car buyer of the time think long and hard.
Well, I had one of these particular 1452cc Toyota engines in a mid-80’s 4WD Carib, AND, a zippy nippy car it WAS NOT !! lol
And in 1951, $5,800 would have bought you a Cadillac Series 75. Inflation is hell. More to the point, the quoted base prices of the Tercel were around the same as a 1980 Chevette, which I couldn’t really call an improvement.
That being said, it’s remarkable how stable new-car prices were between 1946 and 1972 if you compare the former coupes from the “Low-Priced Three” with the latter six-cylinder compacts rather than their full-size line descendants whose prices were “inflated” by size and feature creep.
@Savage, try Tire Rack. I got 14’s there.
When I was in college in 1983 a classmate had an ’80 Tercel just like the one reviewed here. He wanted company on the drive to Toronto to pick up his wife at the airport so he asked me to tag along. What I remember was how roomy and comfy this little car was and how well it rode. It seemed peppy enough, easily able to keep up with highway traffic and the manual transmission seemed to shift really smooth (or maybe he was just a skilled driver). Still not my kind of car but I was pretty impressed with it.
But, the ’71 big cars got 10 mpg city/highway, versus 25-30, which was desired in 1980.
Still, inflation was awful in the “good old days”.
I can confirm the indestructibility of these cars. Friend Paul (another Paul) had an SR-5 as his commuter car in the ’90’s and early ’00’s, got it well over 200,000, loved that little car. It had an aftermarket pop-up sunroof, and by the end the sunroof leaked in each Florida shower, and he had to use a stick to prop up the hatch. Finally sold it when it just got too rusty to be safe-but it drove just fine on the way to the junk yard. Fun little car!
There is a Toyota fan(atic) near me in Portland, OR who uses one of these as a comuter vehicle and I find the prominent taillights quirky.
My dad had a white sedam. Always liked the way these hatches looked.
Little did anyone knew that 36 years later that the Toyota Tercel will later have plenty of spiritual successors after the last 1999 model released for Canada and the only Southeast Asian model Toyota Soluna which was essentially a lightly redesigned Tercel through 2003. Anyway here are the future progeny/successors to the Toyota Tercel 4 Door Sedan. 1980-83 Toyota Tercel 4 Door Sedan (top row left), 1984-86 Toyota Tercel 4 Door Sedan (top row right), 1987-90 Toyota Tercel (second row left), 1991-94 Toyota Tercel 4 Door Sedan (second row right), 1995-99 (in Canada) Toyota Tercel 4 Door Sedan (third row left), 2000-03 (only available in Southeast Asian Countries)Toyota Soluna 4 Door Sedan (third row right), 1999-12? (production continued in China as an FAW Vela Xiali) Toyota Echo 4 Door Sedan (fourth row left), 2004-14 (only available in Southeast Asian Countries and production of the 1G version continued on in Taiwan until 2014.)Toyota Vios 4 Door Sedan (fourth row right), 1997-03 (1997-99 JDM only) Toyota Prius Hybrid 4 Door Sedan (fifth row left), 2010-present (in India and other selected markets only) Toyota Etios 4 Door Sedan (fifth row right), 2006-current (still produced as limited in other countries) Toyota Yaris (Vios in Southeast Asian Countries) 4 Door Sedan (sixth row left), 2013-current Toyota Vios (only available in Southeast Asian Countries, but its known as the Yaris elsewhere in other selected markets only) 4 Door Sedan (sixth row right), 2013-present (much different than Corollas produced elsewhere including the U.S. JDM and China only. A smaller “downsized” Corolla based on the Vios/Yaris 4 Door Sedan Platform) Toyota Corolla Axio 4 Door Sedan (bottom row left) and the 2016 Scion iA (Toyota Yaris 4 Door Sedan in Canada and its heavily based from the Mazda 2/Demio not available in the U.S. and Canada) 4 Door Sedan (bottom row right).
Side view photo montage compilations but starting with the 1991-94 Toyota Tercel 4 Door Sedan (top row center), 1995-99 Toyota Tercel 4 Door Sedan (second row left), 2000-03 Toyota Soluna 4 Door Sedan (second row right), 1999-12? Toyota Echo 4 Door Sedan (third row left), 2004-14 Toyota Vios 4 Door Sedan (third row right), 1997-03 Toyota Prius Hybrid 4 Door Sedan (fourth row left), 2010-present Toyota Etios 4 Door Sedan (fourth row right), 2006-current Toyota Yaris 4 Door Sedan (fifth row left), 2013-current Toyota Vios 4 Door Sedan (fifth row right), 2013-present Toyota Corolla Axio 4 Door Sedan (bottom row left) and the 2016 Scion iA 4 Door Sedan (bottom row right).
Toyota Corolla Tercel and Toyota Corolla Matrix were the only two Toyota models in the U.S. and Canada to have a “Corolla” moniker even though the Corolla Tercel was an entry level subcompact car one size blow the Corolla while the Corolla Matrix was a shortened wagon and later on a five door hatchback of the Corolla Sedan for the U.S. and Canadian Markets. In the present, the Toyota Corolla Tercel would be somewhat reminiscent to the JDM and China exclusive Corolla Axio.
Toyota and Nissan, for whatever reason, would use the name of another/older model in conjunction with a new model’s name when introducing a new car….at least in the U.S. In Nissan’s case, the name Stanza AND Altima appeared on the 1st year of the new Altima, then the Stanza name disappeared. In Toyota’s case, the Tercel did carry the Corolla name….for 1 year, then the Corolla name disappeared from the Tercel.
The Matrix was NOT called a Corolla in the U.S., except perhaps by dealers who wanted to link the lesser known model to it’s better know “sister” model.
BTW, in markets outside North America the Matrix was called Verso…..not the Corolla Verso.
For one year it was officially called a Corolla Matrix in 2003, but it was just shortened to Matrix in 2004 since the buying public is already aware of its relationship with the Corolla and its strong points. Here is the Wikipedia Page which mentioned it as such: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Matrix
We did have 2 generations of the Toyota Corolla Verso. First gen (in Europe):
Second gen:
I had a Honda Civic with 12″ tires. I remember buying a set of four brand new Michelins mounted, balanced and on the road for $110.
I too had a mid-70s Civic with 12 inch tires…the ones on there when I bought were radial retreads…as I recall the previous owner had bought them at Sears.
As the article suggests, the design of the car is so far behind the competition it would probably have been a failure had it not been offered by a company with a solid reputation.
Longitudinal engine? Who else in that class used such an inefficient arrangement? The Renault R5, because it had a transplanted early 60s R8 powertrain, is the only one that comes to mind.
Dinky hatch? The whole point of a hatch is to get stuff inside the car. By that time, you had a choice of Rabbit, Omnirizon, Fiesta, Colt, Datsun 310, Civic, Accord. The R5’s hatch opened all the way down to the bumper.
This Tercel had to be one of the most timid designs ever. Toyota totally phoned it in.
As the article suggests, the design of the car is so far behind the competition it would probably have been a failure had it not been offered by a company with a solid reputation.
I just read the article, and must have missed a page, because I didn’t read that anywhere. Could you point out where it suggests that?
Longitudinal engine? Who else in that class used such an inefficient arrangement? The Renault R5, because it had a transplanted early 60s R8 powertrain, is the only one that comes to mind.
It’s not inefficient at all, since it’s a very short block and sits directly over the front wheels. It really takes up hardly any more total space than a transverse engine. And it made it eminently suitable for 4WD, as was used in the very popular Tercel 4WD wagon for quite a while.
This Tercel had to be one of the most timid designs ever. Toyota totally phoned it in.
They hardly phoned it in. Yes, Toyota is a conservative company, and wasn’t going to take any leading-edge risks. This was Toyota’s first FWD car, and from the very first model year, these developed a rep for being utterly bulletproof. There’s still a number of these running around Eugene. Who else can say that about their first-ever FWD car?
Of course it’s a bit smaller than several of the cars you listed, as it wasn’t designed to compete in the same class as the Horizon, Rabbit and Accord. That was the Corolla’s job, and once it got FWD, it too quickly established itself as the most durable of the class.
Reading this article, there’s very little negative in it about the Tercel, except perhaps the odd tail lights, given its role as Toyota’s cheapest model. It seems to account quite well for itself, it seems to me, right from the headline “A better car than the styling would indicate”. And that certainly turned out to be the case in the long term.
If anyone “phoned in” their first FWD car, it was GM, with their X cars. Toyota’s strategy in converting over to FWD was the polar opposite of GM’s.
I just read the article, and must have missed a page, because I didn’t read that anywhere. Could you point out where it suggests that?
It starts with the subtitle “a better car than it’s styling would indicate” Then they comment on the inadequacy of the hatch, and the excessive liftover height. Then they talk about how the car is better “than anticipated”. “Damning with faint praise” is written large throughout the test.
It’s not inefficient at all, since it’s a very short block and sits directly over the front wheels. It really takes up hardly any more total space than a transverse engine.
The approach was a dead end. Toyota had to start over with a transverse installation in later iterations. I remember when the Tercel came out and one of the articles I read attributed the orientation to being able to use a derivative of an existing transmission.
Yes, Toyota is a conservative company, and wasn’t going to take any leading-edge risks.
With the market being full of clean sheet designs including the Accord and Rabbit, which were both on the market before Toyota would have started designing the Tercel, the Tercel was not leading-edge, it’s concept wasn’t even equal to it’s competition. It was backward.
Reading this article, there’s very little negative in it about the Tercel,
The car mags rarely risk offending an advertiser. The only really negative reviews I remember were of the Austin Marina, Austin America and Triumph Stag. I read a review of the Mazda RX-2 where the writer was raving about the excellent ergonomics, and, for comparison, described the horrible ergonomics of an unnamed model tested a few issues previously. From his description of the design he did not like in the unnamed car, it was obvious he was talking about the Renault R17 test that had been published a couple months earlier. The R17 test was completely devoid of any criticism of the car’s ergonomics. I remember a test in Motor Trend where they even tried to say that the Triumph TR-6 enjoyed exceptional reliability and durability, to offset their reporting of the parts that broke during their test. (I remember their description of a piece of weather stripping that came adrift and waved in the wind “like a piece of velour spaghetti”)
If anyone “phoned in” their first FWD car, it was GM, with their X cars.
The irony is, I like the X and A bodies. Excellent effort for a clean sheet design, and very timely. The Citation made the Fairmont look like a slightly warmed over 1960 Falcon. Where GM fell down was the execution. If the Citation had had Toyota level reliability, it would be regarded as a watershed event for the industry.
Conversely, what saved the Tercel was Toyota’s excellent execution. It was a horrible, inefficient, backward design, but they made it reliable.
It was a horrible, inefficient, backward design
Obviously any further semi-objective discussion on this car with you would be a waste of time.
LOL almost as if they didnt like it, plenty did though and the brand lived quite a while.
AMC Steve, you were right about everything. A close friend of mine had one of these when I had a Horizon. There was nothing whatsoever designwise in terms of aesthetics, ride, NVH, seats, or practicality about the Tercel that wasn’t ten years behind compared to the Horizon. The Tercel still stands out in my mind as an oddly outdated, awkward, cheap looking and amateur design inside and out.
Mechanical reliability is a whole different topic, not to be confused with the rest. On the other hand in 130K miles on the Horizon the main problems were one CV joint and one fried lean burn computer. The Tercel needed a whole front suspension ball joints etc. replacement and I don’t know what else.
The Tercel was unique though. One time my friend was away for a couple of weeks and I was walking his dog. A Tercel in a different color with different stripes drove by and the dog saw it and froze.
“Horrible, inefficient, backward design…” Dude, I hope you catch as well as you pitch. “Horrible” is quite a statement, with no backing. I rode in Tercels a number of times during this era and they were inexpensive cars that were quite space efficient, easy to drive and good on gas. The inline drive train which you seem to think is so awful was to set up for the four wheel drive. What do you think of the Subaru? That also is inline, and works very well for four wheel drive. I thought the drivetrain was interesting, especially that it was so quiet, something not said about the first Mini which also had a gear drive to the transmission.
There’s still a number of these running around Eugene. Who else can say that about their first-ever FWD car?
The number of early Minis I see and Morris/Austin 1100/1300s still in regular use is quite amazing,
The number of early Minis I see and Morris/Austin 1100/1300s still in regular use is quite amazing,
Sold here as an MG with the 1100, then as the Austin America with the 1300. Another nice design, let down by faulty execution. A shirttail relative of mine worked for British Leyland in New Jersey, and offered me the “A” plan price, but I wasn’t quite hatched as a driver yet. Last time I saw one was when I was in grad school in 81. Love this guy’s America. Built up beyond all reason, but looks like fun.
I didn’t think they were ugly then, and I still don’t. Surprised to read that the Plymouth Champ was so much quicker, though.
My father had a 1982 Tercel, a 4 speed non-SR5 liftback model. Here in Canada, they weren’t badged as Corolla.
I saw one for sale recently that was almost like his (a 1981 with chrome door handles and blue interior instead of black/gray). If it were a SR-5, I would have been interested in buying it!
I seriously considered 1976 Corolla hatchback when perusing my first new vehicle purchase.
Alas, I bought a Chevy truck. My last new car purchase is also a Chevy – my 2012 Impala. From now on, used for me.
However, through the years, memories of that Corolla occasionally come up in my mind! Woulda, coulda, shoulda? Who knows?
I liked the styling on the first Tercel hatch – the neat frameless door with the chamfered bottom corners and Saab 96-ish taillights. Unique and attractive. The rest of the car was crisp and clean too. The two- and (later) four-door sedans were quite a bit less appealing. More importantly, Toyota’s first FWD car lost none of Toyota’s famed reliability, something that couldn’t be said about Ford and GM’s first mainstream FWD cars for the US from around this time.
The first Corolla Tercel liftback looked just like an MGB GT from the rear. In fact, I’m surprised nobody else has made the connection!
This was the same era in which Toyota cloned the styling of the Jaguar XJ6 for its first-gen Cressida sedan. Both models offered British good looks with decidedly un-British reliability.
_That’s_ what it reminds me of; thank you. I knew the rear styling looked familiar but couldn’t place it.
This car looks pretty slow through 2021 eyes, but it was TWO SECONDS QUICKER to sixty miles per hour than an Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme with a 260 ci V8.
It’s interesting to see that Toyota management approved this car’s almost-shooting-brake styling in large part because it wasn’t yet another (as inferred) Rabbit/Golf clone.
It’s not that strange when you look at the position this car was in on the JDM market. Unlike here, the Tercel/Corsa twins were not marketed as entry level small cars. Toyota had a real fear that FWD would not be wildly embraced by their typically conservative customer base, so these were to augment the more basic and considerably cheaper Starlet hatchback lineup. That said, the relatively unique choices of semi-sporty 3 door hatch and formal 4 door sedan make sense (there wasn’t a Civic 3-box sedan yet, and the Nissan Cherry sedan was a bizarre fastback). I don’t have numbers in front of me, but I’m fairly certain these were barely, if any, less expensive than an equivalently equipped Corolla/Sprinter.
I drove a Tercel recently, not a pristine new hatchback but a well used ex JDM loan heap for what it was it was ok and the huge mileage it had done said it must have been reliable, nothing spectacular about it really just a cheap econo car but thats all they ever were of you want better anything in a car Toyota has one you’ll like they cater to most tastes.
I want a Renault Le Car. Badly. The design, is, in my mind, sublime. Minimalist but luxe.
Many have told stories of Renault ownership hell, so, of course, perhaps the want is better than having. Nonetheless, the glass back Toyota Tercel is the only other car which I think would have a similar quirk + oddity + coolness.
Regarless, both are far more rare, today than just about any alleged “collector car”.
My understanding is that the Tercel was a very old design when it was launched.
Toyota realised that FWD was going to be a thing and clearly took a hard look at the Triumph 1300 and NSU K70.
Due to their inherent conservatism and the continued success of the Corolla against its FWD contemporaries, it was a long time before it got greenlighted.
Sort of Toyota’s Autobianchi Primula to their FIAT 124.
Wow, I got the year on these terribly wrong; I assumed these came out later (’81 or ’82)?
Probably based on a co-worker who bought one around then. If these were out in ’80 don’t know why I didn’t look at one when I was in the market (Jan 1981) for a fwd car. True, I was more of a Nissan (actually Datsun back then) as I had a ’74 710 which I was trying to replace…lived up north, the Datsun hit some black ice on I89 and bit the guardrail, got it fixed up, but didn’t want a light RWD car anymore. Another co-worker (actually in my dept, lived in same apt complex as I) had a ’79 310 Coupe which was nice, probably more likely to get that then the Toyota…in early ’83 I rented a manual Starlet (only manual car I’ve ever rented) but that was RWD…I had assumed these came out much later than 1980.
While working for Hertz in ’77 and ’78, I’d driven Corolla liftbacks….of course then RWD, back then there weren’t many imports at our location yet (only really remember Toyota and Datsun). Funny story about the liftback, years later I had a co-worker who had one, but his was manual (the ones I drove for Hertz were automatic). Somehow we were talking about the light that illuminated the automatic transmission quadrant between the seats, it floodlit it from above (light was actually on dash aimed at floor). Apparently they forgot to delete the light on at least his manual car (rare inattention to detail by Toyota), and he always wondered why there was a light on his manual transmission shift lever.
Ended up buying a ’78 Scirocco….for about the price this would have been new. It turned me into a confirmed VW owner (never owned another car in 40 years since) but I was also looking at new cars, but couldn’t quite swing one as new employee. My manager at the time was president of the credit union at work (a volunteer position, our jobs didn’t involve finance nor banking) and knowing I was looking for a car he finagled an extra $500 on the loan I got there (it was based on membership term, which as a new employee, I was at minimum level). Inflation was huge back then, I had a friend that got a 24% on a used car, and people were buying cars like Toyotas new, then selling them the next year for more than they paid, essentially getting free ride (exclusive of financing) for that year. Perhaps I just assumed I couldn’t afford a new Toyota; that didn’t stop me from looking at new (last year for the original body style ’81 Scirocco, though it was more dreaming by a car fan). Loved my ’78 though, worst thing was it didn’t have air conditioning and I ended up moving to central Texas 2 years later (still live here almost 40 years later). Didn’t need FWD in Texas, but by then most models were already well underway to abandoning RWD for FWD especially imports. Never did get around to owning a Toyota.