-Drocay+Sep 21, 2004 - 10:12 AM

Errr. The ST205 runs 15psi as standard.

They sold very few ST185s. The ST205 was more expensive than a Porsche 944 new. Would you pay 60K USD for a Toyota in 1994?

99.9% of the US public wouldn't have known a rally car if it ran them over in 1994.

Firstly, don't even think about comparing it with Evos and Wrxs. The car has better handling, is a true rally car (before the 4 door versions and full commercial WRC ones) and its built to last. Toyota is producing so many models that it didn't worth to bring this too.

-neoklis+Nov 24, 2004 - 10:23 AM

Sorry, but id say evos and sti's have both evolved past the GTfour's capability. Sorry to burst your bubble, but rally cars have never been defined by a number of doors, or drive wheels, or engine tyup, etc.... only by victories.

I think the reason Toyota didn't bring the GTFour was because the market wasn't ready for it. 1994 was 4 years "BGT" or "Before Gran Turismo". The mainstream still didn't understand the potential of four cyliders and most people would't see the GTFour as a good value. Hell, even to this day I'm suprised at how many people can look at an S2000 and say "that's alot of money for a four banger" or an STi and say "for thirty large I'd expect at least a six".

It may sound silly to pin it on Gran Turismo but if you think back- when did people really start talking about Evos and WRXs and GT-Rs? As I recall it was around the time GT blew up. It's a full on pop phenomenon.

-neoklis+Nov 24, 2004 - 9:23 AM

as much as I wish i could agree with you there, this simply isnt true... the GT-4 on a road car comparison mabey, but on the rally scene it was a completely different story. The ST205 was too large to be able to compete with cars from its day, the long nose especially making it difficult to cut corners properly, and second it had an ILLEGAL turbo restrictor that could be adjusted to larger than 34 mm to get more power to haul its sheer size around better... it only one a handful of rallies compared to the dominance the ST185 had enjoyed before it... TTE had to resort to cheating just to make the car competitive with the 555 and Evos in its day, so to say that it is a superior car really dosent make too much sense...

Hmmm. The turbo restriction was a constructive interpretation of the rules. They broke the spirit, not the letter of the legistlation. F1 cars get away with lots more. It was worth another 50-100bhp. And WRC cars really aren't about power.

The reason they dropped the 205 in favour of the corolla was two fold. The kit car rules meant they didn't have to produce a 4wd turbo nutter corolla available for the public, and the corolla was shorter and taller, enabling better vision and yes, it's more useful on the modern tight technical stages.

Subary used to race the Legacy very sucessfully, and that's a biiiig car. The rallys changed.

The corolla, by the way, was pretty much the ST205 chassis, engine and drivetrain but in a different bodyshell.

Oh, and the engine wasn't a 3S-GTE. It was a 3S-GE BEAMs block with a custom turbocharger and head. And pistons. And pretty much everything else.....

>>

It was a damn fine rally car. It's a shame we never saw it fully developed and racing for several seasons.

-Mr_E+Nov 25, 2004 - 5:33 AM

I cant say i agree that it was an interprtaion of the rules gone wrong in this senario whatsoever... For those who dont know the full story- here it is. For 1995, the FIA changed the rules with regulation turbo restrictor size, going from 38 mm to 34 mm being the maximum allowed diameter. The celica, already in a so-so position being such a large car, now was deprived of its power advantage it enjoyed in the 1994 season (where the car ran only in the later half, replacing the ST185). All three works drivers we not happy with the situation, and in turn, someone made the decision to have a cleverly concealed and highly illegal moveable restrictor fitted to the cars (nobody ever owned up to making the decision officially, but it is believed to have been Dieter Bulling's idea, TTE Chief Engineer). When this part was checked by officials, it looked exactly as the other teams, but internally, it could be adjusted without having to break the seal, which in turn restored the cars power advantage by increasing the airflow... FIA wasnt the wiser for most of the season until the Langley Park stages in Rally Austrailia, where there were side by side special stage runs with 2 cars at once. The celicas were noticeably faster then their similar output and weight competitors, which prompted an extensive investigation. 6 weeks later at the end of Rally Catalonia the FIA released their findings of the turbo air restrictor, which damningly were previously date stamped in May of 95. TTE was in turn banned from rallying for 12 months, and as a result, Bulling resigned. This pretty much sealed the coffin for the ST205, but it did continue to run in privateer hands until the corolla debuted, with the help of TTE works drivers in some cases. Also, the car was continued to be developed within the privateers, with the fitting of conventional struts to replace the fragile "superstruts", active differentials, and a narrower track, which sorted out the early car's erractic handling tendancies... neverthless the car was never a real competitior anymore mainly due to the lack of the big budget that TTE had previously provided.

If you read the regulations they clearly state that "On inspection, the restictor shall be 34mm".

It was. On inspection.

It was exactly the same as the ride hight rule in F1 that stated the cars "shall be 'x'mm high in the pitlane"

They were. The drivers just jacked them down on the track. Farcical I know.

The FIA accepted that all 3 drivers in Toyotas case knew nothing about the 'modification'

-tengys+Sep 20, 2004 - 5:48 PM
the 6g GT4 has better brakes then those cars.

and i meen stock >>

ive never driven those cars so i wont judge the handling or transmission

but the suspension in the gt4 is very good

I love how you guys are comparing a 10 year old car with cars that is just coming out now, how cool is it to say that toyota beat subaro, etc buy 10 years >>

I also think that it was more the market for them than anything else, withough a market there is no reson to sell them here, all other factors are less segnificant, (in my opinion)

Side note: i wonder how much it would cast to get toyota to build me a new stock 94 gt4, I bet for the right price I could get one with 0 miles. that would be so tight.

I love the way people comment on the speed and handling of cars they have never seen let alone driven.Ill tell you from personal experience i have foddered many sti's even a 03 wrx sti when i was in stock form. Evos on the other hands are a different matter, I have only ever raced one evo, on a road local to me, and its handling was unbeleiveable.

PS my gt4 runs 12psi stock and 17 psi high boost

Youve also got to look at it another way. When the mitsubishi 3000gt/gto was released in england it cost 48000!! the 300zx cost 35000, probably similar in the us.How many bought these cars? gotta say probably less than 1000. So it wasnt worth bringing the gt4 into the states. If brian used it the the fast and the furious though im pretty sure toyota would have changd their mind lol. Much like mitsubishi with the evo

This post has been edited by uzthedentist: Nov 27, 2004 - 10:20 AM

after poor sales in 93 they ended the all trac for the us. emissions would be easy to stick on the 3s. they did it in the mr2 and all trac in the us, im sure it woldnt been a problem for the next gen 3s too.