Last post on May 02, 2013 at 11:26 PM
You are in the Toyota Celica
What is this discussion about?
Toyota Celica, Coupe, Hatchback
Jun 06, 2011 (4:15 pm)
The 2000 Celica has about 88,000 miles, and I am doing probably four thousand miles a year nowadays. The brakes (the first replacement set) were toast, and all were replaced including calipers. The water pump and serpentine went bad for the second time. Seems this pump needs replacing every forty-thousand miles. I would think they would put a beefier one in for this high compression engine. Perhaps they saved weight by skimping on the water pump also. I finally got tired of getting hit on the noggin so I had the hatchback shocks replaced. The driver's electronic door latch was starting to fail in cold weather and was replaced. This list cost $1520 from my new best-friend mechanic. (Dealer wanted $2700 after 10 % discount!)
Years ago the moonroof was completely scratched up, and was completely fogged over by the free gas station car wash years ago. I did not know the effects of that big nylon bristle brush until 1 minute too late. I thought the moonroof would have to be replaced at a high cost, so I let it go. Since everything seemed to get fixed lately, I decided to investigate this. I bought the 3M Headlight Restoration kit. I started sanding the moonroof with the 300 grit, and had an "oh crap" moment. I did not really know if the severe sanding I had just done could be rubbed out. So I went through the next 4 steps on the area I had touched, and it ended up looking pretty good. I then applied only the last two steps (a gray buff pad and rubbing compound) to the rest of the moonroof. The result? a couple stains are left, and there are minor swirl marks throughout. But the entire piece is see-through again, and has something like 80% clarity. I could have sanded out the remnants of stains from bird droppings, and worked more on the swirl marks. However, I only have a 550 RPM drill. I think some of the swirls are left because of this - the slow drill grabbed the surface a little too much. So the result is a moonroof that looks decent and the small flaws resemble the rest of the ten year old car and would not stick out to anyone else.
I would recommend the 3M kit to anyone for this purpose. I was terrified of sanding something on the car, but the kit works for the late-model plastic moonroof, and worked fine for a newbie with a slower drill, but lots of time and patience.
The headlight lenses are a little fogged up, and since I had the kit out I applied the last stage of rubbing compound to the lens that was in the worse condition. After 1 minute, it looked better than the other lens. I repeated on the good lens. I am sure if I took the time to use all of the stages that the headlamps would look like brand new.
A remaining "problem" - The fiberglass parts are de-laminating. My opinion is that Toyota used a clearcoat on the plastic, and the clearcoat expands at a different rate than the plastic part and the paint. This would explain bubbling on the side-mirrors, and near total de-lamination of the top of the spoiler. The bumpers have some spider cracks in them at this point. If you are not in a snowy climate you might never see something like this. If the heat alone in your area has the same bad effect, I would be curious to know about it.
I could buy a new wing, front and rear bumpers, and perhaps paint them black. Most of the cost is labor of installation, so I it would probably be the right thing to do to buy new materials rather than re-use the old ones. In terms of color I think a match to the original red is futile and I think the car would look out of place if new paint on the plastics was too different a red tone from the rest of the metal paint. I do not have a good reason to address this today, so this repair will just be hanging out in the back of my mind.
The car has new Bridgestone Blizzak's as of last winter, and new Bridgestone Potenza RE760's, the only 16" Summer Tire that Tirerack had.
I can't complain - the car sounds and drives like brand new. Perhaps I will get a set of red customized mats from floor mat express sometime. I'm sick of paying $90 or so for factory mats that just shred like a chew toy with normal use.
End Car Rant
#1522 of 1543 Re: Updates [guitarzan]
Jun 07, 2011 (12:16 am)
The water pump life you described does not sound normal. This motor does not have significantly higher compression than many other motors that are out there. I assume your 2000 Celica has the 6th generation 5S-FE (also designated as ST-204) motor. This motor has a 9.5-1 compression ratio; which is very much middle of the road as compression ratios go. By comparison; many BMW's have 11-1 compression ratios (and the 1998 only Celica 3S-GE (ST-202) motor had an 11-1 compression ratio; along with 200 HP and a 7,000RPM power peak. By comparison; your motor has been detuned to meet emission standards; and produces about 135 HP and has a 5,400 RPM power peak. So if you inferred that the compression ratio on your motor produces a quicker than normal throttle response, which is stressing the water pump; this simply is not true.
However; if the belt tension is adjusted too tight; that will significantly shorten the life of the water pump bearings. So will using low quality coolant, or using coolant mixed with tap water (rather than the distilled water recommended by Toyota), or using coolant mixed in less than 40% proportion. Some coolant available today comes pre-mixed with 50% water. If you bought that type of coolant; and then mixed it with equal amounts of water; it would shorten the life of the water pump.
Some aftermarket water pump brands do not meet Toyota's quality standards. These pumps will not last as long as the original part.
Jun 07, 2011 (10:54 pm)
The motor for my 2000 GTS is the 2ZZ-GE = 11.5:1 compression. (The GT engine is 1ZZ-FE which I think is 10:1???)
I thought the heat the engine produces may be greater as a result of the compression, and strain the pump more, but I was just guessing. More along the lines of your suggestion of a fast throttle response, the response of this motor is huge, and I think the peak power is at 8400 RPM. So is the problem as straightforward as the pressure on the pump's parts during fast acceleration through the high RPM range?
2ZZ-GE Power Graph
Neither the dealer nor my new mechanic were surprised at 40,000 mile replacements for the water pump. Apparently I was the only one saying, "What the heck people????*($))!#^! This is one cool car, and spectacular engine, but a handful of things have been somewhat quirky!
I originally suspected belt tensioner problems for this model, but I was probably unduly scared by a TSB that exists for it. The mechanics, both Toyota and independent had no concerns about particular problems with the tensioner.
The first pump replacement was OEM and done by Toyota. With its short life, and the cost of repairs at Toyota getting out of hand for a 10-year old car, I went with another mechanic. I do not know if he used an OEM part or not, but for the low cost I am fine with either and would consider an aftermarket pump to be a neat experiment at this point.
Up until now I always had flushes done at the dealer, which I trusted for various reasons, so I think they would follow the recommendations for coolant and water. At what point in history did the car companies figure out that minerals in water caused problems in the engine, and start recommending distilled water?
#1524 of 1543 Re: Motor [guitarzan]
Jun 07, 2011 (11:33 pm)
Thank you for the updated information. It was not previously clear to me that you had a GTS. You might be interested in the following article; which explains the TSB Toyota issued in late 2002 for defective "lift bolts" on the 2ZZ-GE motor: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_ZZ_engine#2ZZ-GE This is a relatively straighforward fix; which could produce a big performance boost if your bolts are bad.
The article also goes into detail on the many different rev limits which were used on different model applications for this motor. The article states that your particular motor is rev limited at between 7,900 and 8,200; depending on model year. You may notice that the dyno graph you posted shows the stock 2ZZ-GE motor having a power peak of 162 Hp7500 RPM.
In general; motors which are tuned to run at high RPM generate LESS cooling system heat than similar motors tuned for lower speeds. But heat would not be an issue in a water pump failure, anyway. Now that I realize this motor was designed by Yamaha; I am not surprised at the pump failures (nor the lift bolt failures). Yamaha has always been known for focussing their efforts on power; and compromising on quality control and long term reliability. Considering the number of oil pump failures in this motor when running at very high RPMs; I would say that the low RPM limit on your motor is a blessing in disguise.
#1525 of 1543 Re: Motor [zaken1]
Jun 08, 2011 (7:07 am)
Actually Toyota manufactures this 2ZZ engine. They ship the engine to Yamaha to assemble the high-speed cam shaft and valve assembly on. The head had the name Yamaha embossed on it.
To make possible the high-rev and quick response, this head was designed with a hollow cam shaft with 2 sets of lobes. It also has many linear moving parts, like valve stems, made with Titanium instead of steel to reduce moving mass.
The engine in Lexus LF-A also has a Yamaha head with similar concepts.
#1526 of 1543 Re: Motor [zaken1]
Jun 08, 2011 (7:58 am)
I've had a 2000 GTS for eleven years now, and 210,000 miles. The 2zz engine and 6MT gearbox have never given me any trouble. The original clutch went out at 205,000 miles. Otherwise it has been a reliable drivetrain for everyday commuting, with normal upkeep like fluid changes. But I've never raced it or abused it.
It's no longer my primary car, but I still use it regularly for commuting and trips to the dog park. So, I rarely take the fancy valvetrain into high lift territory anymore, which I'm sure would be speeding up the wear and tear on everything.
I'm not a huge fan of these variable lift valve systems like Honda's VTEC (and this one) because they tend to look better on paper than they drive on the street. They make for an exciting test drive. But after the honeymoon is over you still have to get to work at normal speeds, get groceries, and all that other mundane stuff. It's like choosing someone to marry--the hot first dates are not always the ones you want to be stuck living with in five years. Many times I have wished for an extra 10 lb-ft of torque at the low end, rather than that extra 40hp on the top end, which I can almost never use. But, at least it seems durable enough in normal use.
Jun 08, 2011 (3:38 pm)
Driving home today in 90° weather I was reminded of the drop in power at high temperatures. Ugh. Feel a little dead to you people under the same conditions? The drop is most noticeable from a start, reminding me, like tgreen implied, that a little more torque would be nice.
I also felt the 6-speed was a good short-term girlfriend, and that a 5-speed would be more appropriate for this car's power curve. But after ten years I still look at this car as very unique, especially compared to the variety of cars that are out there today.
#1528 of 1543 Re: Motor [tgeen]
Jun 10, 2011 (8:56 am)
One more 2000 GTS owner here. I am a bit over 100,000, with less than 3k added each year. Overall, the car has served me well, though I'm looking to sell mine and get something new in 2012, given life style changes over recent years (translation: baby).
I definitely agree with your statement about the VVT. I very rarely go over 6k RPM nowadays. Frankly, I should go over more often, just to allow the engine to "stretch its legs."
I tend to get a fairly lousy 20 mpg, though my driving is entirely stop and go, including through parking garages with stop signs every 10 feet. My other big complaint is that serpentine belt / tensioner / whatever is causing that annoying whinnying noise. I've had the TSB performed several years ago, but the noise seems to come back and require re-servicing / replacement about annually.
#1529 of 1543 Re: Motor [gambit293]
Jun 10, 2011 (4:44 pm)
20 mpg seems very low for this car, in my experience. With the 6MT in routine city commuting (20 mile stop-n-go freeway/surface each way) I have been getting 27-29 mpg per tank, for years. The only time I've seen the low 20s was when I lived in a cold climate and the engine was cold all the time. Do you have a CEL on?
I would not want to try messing around with baby seats in the rear of a Celica. Get something with four doors. When the baby turns 18, you are entitled to your midlife crisis car and you can get whatever you want then. Hopefully someone will still be making a car with a manual transmission in 2029.
Jul 04, 2011 (10:13 am)
I just replaced the air filter with an STP from Autozone. I did not see a directional flow arrow, nor notice a difference in the appearance of each side of the filter. Can anyone confirm that the modern STP filter can be installed in any orientation, up/down and left/right?
My experience with MPG is the same as Gambit. From day one I have gotten about 27-29 MPG. I have been using the AC constantly this summer and I think the number is closer to 25 MPG as a result.