I'm confused. All the Toyota ads and their web site show this:



as the new 03 Celica, with the elongated grille.

But kazi and all the 03's I've seen on the road look like this:



I'm sorry if this was discussed to death somewhere, but it's been bugging me.

edit: Or wait... is the slit looking one the regular and the one in all the ads the "Action Package"?

 

All i gotta say is that it is indeed the ugly one.

 

I think the Action Package carries a unique front bumper.

 

the action package includes the bodykit...front bumper, side skirts, and wing...

 

When the Celica first came out, I thought it looked really good. But its a wonder how almost three years later, the appeal has started to get negative, even before the refresh. The 03 refresh makes the front much uglier. Although the Action Package fixes the front grill a bit better, the bottom front spoiler reminds me very much of the current body style Pontiac Sunfire. :ugh:

 

I actually am completely opposite from you. When it first came out, I think it's butt ugly, but the more I look at it, now it think it looks ok. I still like the previous gen more but it doesn't look as bad anymore. I guess that's the thing about Toyota in general, in the beginning, it might look too plane or too weird, but eventually, the look just grows on me.

 

Honda's (and now BMW's) grow on me, but I can really say, Toyota's styling (minus the Supra) doesnt tickle my fancy at all. I really dont like the tall and fat in the middle look of the Camry, ES300, Echo, Prius; although I do think the Corolla is the best looking car to come out of that whole design theory.

As for the Celica, you can clearly see that the little grill is right under where the front bumper is. Also, check out Celica's site at toyota.com, and you can see the GT-S has the ugly small grill while the Action Package has the larger, better looking one.

As for the 2003 non-action package Celica's, for some reason I think it looks like a fish or something, very very ugly. The ones with the action package do look much better, but I know in 3 years I wont like it at all.

 

That's one of the major reasons why I bought the old Accord Coupe over the Cel...while the Celica looked VERY appealing, I knew in 5 years it would look like ass. Toyota is designing for "now", Honda designs for 5 years from now. That has a huge effect on residual values, which is why Honda has the best in the industry (aside from BMW and Benz).

I find the AP to be nice, except for that damn wing and those ***SEVEN*** openings in the front of the car. Makes it look like a damn Subaru....not classy at all h:

 

Really? Everytime I see a Corolla, it always looks like someone shoved a huge rod up it's ass. It's so tall and it's riding on such dinky tires that it looks like it's running around on it's toes.

 

Are you gonna tell me that Toyotas don't hold their value well? Puhleeze.

I like the GT-S. Sure, the motor's too peaky to be fun around town and the styling's a bit odd. It's got great brakes, light weight, perfect gearing, awesome seats and very nice steering. Not to mention that it actually comes with performance tires stock unlike some other cars that shall remain nameless. It's the closest thing to a turn-key track car in the price range aside from the Miata or MR2 Spyder.

Refinement...well my scale's a bit off. Compared to my '92 GS-R the GT-S is a pussycat on the street.