PIAZZAworld's Australian Review Page. Last Modified: 20 April 1997

BIG BUCKS
Published Pages 42 to 57 Wheels Magazine Mid 1986
The masculine macho end of the motoring spectrum is filled by the sports coupes. There have never been so many to choose from, or such obvious displays of automotive muscle. Now this traditionally European class has been taken over almost entirely by Japanese cars. Do they live up to their big buck style? Do they justify their big buck prices? There's only one way to find out.

It has been easy. In the past, to convince ourselves that the Japanese car makers, for all their undoubted skills as manufacturers of value-for money motoring, still had not learned the subtleties of dynamics. Conventional wisdom of the western motoring world was that the armies of small, intense Toyosan engineers didn't understand the proper relationship between spring and damper, rates or the way to set up a car to handle precisely and neutrally while keeping a supple ride. Only the Europeans. it was said and WHEELS was one of the voices saying it knew how to produce the character and the engineering qualities that made good European cars so good. No more. There has been a revolution that is turning the tables on the European establishment.

At the forefront of this dramatic change is. surprisingly. not Honda or Mazda (who have led the way in philosophical terms) but Toyota. The once sleepy giant is now confidently flexing its muscles with a range of breathtakingly good cars that will surely win over the most biased enthusiast. And nowhere is this new found excellence more apparent than with the new generation of coupes. the front drive Celica and the rear drive Supra. (Of course. there is also the mid-engined MR2. but that's not vet for Australia: what a formidable trio that must be in markets lucky enough to score all three!) The sports cars of the `80s and the'90s will come from Japan. Almost without exception the nine Japanese car makers already have. or are developing. sporting vehicles aimed at the heart of Europe and the wallet of America. Consider the facts. The Datsun 240Z started the move in 1969 and quickly became the world's best selling sports car. MG (remember MG?) simply sat down and was run over. Eight years later the Mazda RX7 rocked the scene. and since then there has been a flood of fine cars that shows no signs of slowing. And the best of them. as we shall see are showing Europe how in areas that have always been Japanese weaknesses in the past. This enormous creative energy span is presently training more engineers than Europe and America combined has now been applied to mid-engined machines and cheaper. low-cost open two seaters.

But that is looking to the next generation. What we have here is a comparison of the seven most sporting coupes on offer in Australia at sub-Porsche prices. Ominously. six of them are Japanese, it is left to the Alfa Romeo GTV6 to uphold the honor and image of Europe. Sadly. it is a task that is beyond this once trend-setting coupe. now into its 13th year of production. Even the revitalizing inclusion of the V6 engine hasn't staved off the talents of Japan.

Heavier than the old RX7 and far more expensive. the new-style RX7 used in this comparison couldn't equal the performance figures obtained from our original test car but, from other examples we've driven and run performance figures on, this lesser performance seems to be the norm. The Turbo version due for release about the time this magazine goes on sale will give this fine handling small car the performance its chassis is clearly capable of accepting. The new Celica and Supra are by now very familiar to WHEELS readers. Perhaps we need only add that they come from the same styling studio within Toyota and not the California arm and were the responsibility of the same engineering team. One of the aims of this comparison was to see if the $22.000 Celica really did belong in this company. The results speak for themselves.

Nissan gave us the much improved 300ZX Turbo but this gaudy, wasteful coupe has clearly been outclassed by the Toyotas while the Mitsubishi Starion bridges the gap between the GT style cars the Supra and 300ZX and the more sporting RX7. Now showing its age, it was released in 1982. The Starion is still a competent car in many ways and one that some testers really liked while others felt uneasy. Which leaves the Holden Piazza and even it's superb Giugiaro-styled body can't hide the fact that this car is overpriced and outclassed by all the others. A clear loser on almost all counts, the Piazza is in desperate need of suspension development. Judge Japan's coupes by this standard of car and the Europeans would have nothing to worry about. But there are other car makers in Japan.
ENGINES/PERFORMANCE

SPORTS COUPES engine compartments. the Japanese filled ones in particular, have become a battleground of new technology. a showcase of multi-valve. turbocharged. twin-cam. high-efficiency high-tech. And more than at any other time it's available here, thanks mainly to the advent of unleaded fuel which. no pun intended, has been the catalyst for change, with the change has come more power. Sometimes. as the big guns of Japanese industry race each other to the highest kilowatt figures, the change has brought significantly more power. And with the extra-power new models has come more weight, for none among the Japanese has displayed the slightest inclination to shed bulk. Solidity. equipment and metal for the money are seen as being far too important to forsake in the sports coupe class, if the cars are to be fast they will be very heavy, very powerful fast cars the all knowing Americans like them that way.

Thus Nissan needs to endow its 300ZX Turbo with 155 kW more power than a Porsche 911 can boast, if you believe the figure in order to get its 1450 kg bulk moving with the gusto people expect. The Nissan has the best power to weight ratio of the group, but this alone is far from enough to give it the sort of performance you'd expect. It's fair to say Nissan is living in the past if the best it can do with a 155 kW two-plus-two is a 0-100 km/h time of 9.1 seconds. Although slightly brisker 0-100, the Supra is even worse off. The Alfa GTV has never been considered an especially light car. certainly not Lotus light, but the Supra manages to be 300 kg, a third of a tonne almost, heavier than the Italian. It doesn't take long behind the Supra's wheel, or the ZX's. to realize what better cars they would be without these heavyweight handicaps.

The Mazda, Holden and Mitsubishi equally have nothing to be proud of in this department. showing again that for the Japanese makers it's a lot easier bunging in the kW than it is taking out the kg. The Nissan and the Toyota have a considerable power buffer between themselves and the other cars. So they should, since they have an awful lot more engine: there're a litre of capacity and two cylinders up on the Holden, Starion and Celica. While the Nissan's water cooled turbo and the Toyota's twin-cam multivalve head are enough to distance them from the only other six-cylinder engine here, the Alfa's 2.5-litre. As usual. Mazda's twin-chamber rotary engine doesn't fit into a category in power, the fuel-injected 13B engine. new to Australia. is a match for the turbo four-cylinder powerpacks of Holden and Mitsubishi. though as we have come to expect from the rotary, torque is not its strong point. The rotary engine's strong points are in fact, few by the standards of its equally-priced or less expensive peers. Yes. The engine is still uncannily smooth at high rpm, has a broad rev range, a bulletproof nature and decent response. Once upon a time these things were enough to make the RX7 a winner today there are more responsive and quieter engines, even engines as smooth or smoother in the low and mid ranges, though still without the rotary's extraordinarily unstressed feel at high revs. But that is far from enough to save the Mazda exiting this comparison rapidly stage left with egg on its face, for the bottom line is that performance falls short of the current class standard and in-gears flexibility is still disappointingly sluggish, especially in the newly extended fifth gear.

The fact that the RX7 drinks more petrol than the others. more even than Nissan's powerhouse. is further evidence that the injected 13B is too little too late for the RX7 to come anywhere near retaining its performance honors. For a car that costs almost $40.000 and weighs 1271 kg the car is thoroughly under-engined. The Mitsubishi Starion and the Holden Piazza claim the same power as the RX7, 110 kW but have rather more torque and smaller power bands, concentrating the accelerative effort to make both feel much quicker than the Mazda. With 400 m limes of 16.4 and 16.3 sec both are usefully quicker in fact, too. The engines in both are 2.0-litre turbocharged fours. Weight. gearing and overall performance times are exceptionally close and there is, you would think. little to choose between them, Wrong.

A previous WHEELS sports coupe comparison champion, the Starion these days shows its age. In the areas of turbo lag. flat low down response and fuel economy it hasn't kept pace. It reels and (with various twittering and boiling-kettle noises from the turbo) sounds obviously like a turbocharged engine, which these days isn't good enough. (good points include its smoothness. strong top end. easy gearchange and excellent engine sound proofing. a combination that makes it as much of a force as ever it was on fast cross-country trips. Overall. though. it has neither the response and smooth power delivery or the fuel economy to be judged a good engine in 1986. There must also be a question mark over its performance, the first ULP Starion we tested was noticeably slower than this one, figures for which are rather too good for a unleaded 110 kW.

The Piazza for its faults, has a turbo engine which is very much second generation, unlike the Starion's. The gearchange is notchier and the clutch prone to grab. but overall this is easier car of the two to drive in all conditions, turbo coming on stream very low in the rev range and pulling the higher ratios through traffic in a way the Starion or the Mazda cannot. Turbo lag is present but undetectable in normal road driving response anywhere in rev range prompt and powerful. Other than at very high revs where both power refinement fall away sharply, the Piazza just doesn't the same sweet top end as the Starion, neither does have the Mitsubishi's good sound deadening or mid-range smoothness, for the Piazza's engine is noticeably coarser and louder under acceleration, the throaty induction roar another dent in the svelte image. The Piazza's fuel loop figure of 11.6 km/l (32.8 mpg) is better than the Starion's and this, together with the superior low-down response, tips the scales in the Holden's favor, though neither engine is one to actually just after. In some ways the Alfa's V6 is worthy of lusting after. Next to the wonderful body its the best thing about the car, and if you're after a Ferrari at a third the price this Alfa of all the cars here, is the only one to come near. It's a wonderfully charismatic engine. smooth running, beautifully responsive and torquey with a musical exhaust note, and it backs all this up with performance line ball with the 2.0-litre turbo's but with fuel economy (our overall figure of 8.9 km/l or 25.1 mpg is better even than the Celica) that makes all the others look thirsty. The Alfa's trim weight is certainly a consideration here.

All this represents a powerful combination, and indeed as an engine the V6 is one of the best, a powerful and pleasurable statement of Italian character. Trouble is. you can't take the engine in isolation: you have to look at both the driveline as a whole and at refinement levels, both of which are nowhere near good enough. Simply. the gearchange and clutch make driving the Alfa a real pain in city traffic (and only marginally better on the open road), while the constant engine noise is tiring in the extreme

The AIfa's performance figures relate to an earlier, leaded-fuel model. The latest test car (also running leaded fuel: the ULP version due June), is said to he just one kW down on power) was unable to complete our performance testing. An over-tightened seat belt bolt. easily cured later by Alfa. fouled the torque tube, with expensive-sounding graunching noises on fast take-offs. We are left with the two Toyotas and the Nissan. Since this is essentially a test of luxury grand tourers the Celica must take this opportunity to bow out: it just can't compete in that one area essential to any grand tourer. long distance, high-speed cruising. Whatever its other strengths. and they are many. it is not ideal transport on. say, a Sydney to Adelaide run; it has neither the long legs nor the engine quietness. or indeed an ideal amount of torque, easily to dismiss such a demanding (and essential, with the GP coming up) journey. In some ways. though. the Celica's 16 valve 2.0-litre four is the best engine here.

It's as responsive as the Alfa. more flexible than the Mazda (and almost as good its the turbo fours). emits just the right buzz of excitement under acceleration, is smooth and willing throughout its broad, broad range. and is mated to a super-smooth and light gearchange. Moreover, with up to 12.8 km/l (36 mpg) available on give and take driving it is pleasingly economical, it has its boom periods. and overall it is not quite as crisp as Toyota's 1.6 16 valver in the MR2 and Corolla twin-cam, but overall it's a delight. with top speed and straight line acceleration well able to pitch the Celica right into the middle of the group, which makes it by a country mile the performance bargain of this test.

With their substantial power and torque outputs, the Supra and the 300ZX Turbo are the fastest cars here, both on paper and in the real world, As mentioned previously in the reference to weight, neither is a super sprinter. only the Supra managing to get below nine seconds for the 0-100 dash respectably quick but hardly neck-straining, Both engines, however. the Nissan's particularly, succeed in other areas, those more in line with the cars' primary role of providing high-speed. long distance touring.

Rather like the turbo fours, the big sixes have a lot in common cubic capacity, fuel economy, in-gears flexibility (with the advantage here just going the Supra's way), its gearing in fifth being much shorter than the Nissan's as well as the overall performance levels. Powerhouse though the Nissan's engine is, everything considered it's not in the class of the Supra. The watercooled turbo endows the 3.0 litre V6 with pleasing low-end mid-range punch, but. rather like the Piazza and so unlike the Starion, never with the on-off power delivery of turbo's of old. Here is another engine which neither feels nor sounds like a blown unit. It's very strong very low in the rev range, is commendably smooth and quiet under load and in fifth gear it pulls tall 41.5 km/h per 1000 rpm gearing to marvelous. distance-demolishing effect. .There are chinks, however. Refinement and power deteriorate at high revs. way short of the red line, and there is an intrusive resonance on a trailing Throttle, most noticeable when you hurry the car along through the gears. Enthusiastic drivers will like neither the lack of an encouraging engine note (in normal use mechanical and exhaust is non existent) or the gearchange, easier than the Alfa's but even so unpleasantly notchy and vague.

The Supra's drive-train lakes some beating. Sure, there is a hint of the Nissan's trailing throttle resonance at high revs, overall noise suppression is not as good as the Nissan. response not as eager as the Celica, or, probably, the Alfa. and smoothness is not the 24 valve straight six's greatest strength. It's greatest strength is its completeness, its ability to be all things to all drivers.

On the one hand the short gear ratios (the shortest of the group). a smooth and positive gearshift, just the right amount of aural stimulation and the engine's eagerness and broad rev range make the Supra a rewarding and capable back roads blaster. On the other, the six's good spread of torque and overall unobtrusive, easy nature make it as relaxed and undemanding as any of the others over big freeway distances. It's a fine mix . Improvements? We've said before the Supra could easily handle more power. It certainly could. What the car needs first of all, though, is less weight to maximize the power it already has. Two hundred kilos less would give the car the sharper edge which at present it really ought to have but which somehow never quite materializes. Then it could be given another 20 or so kilowatts. Wishful thinking? We say not. Until Mazda gets its house in order and gives us the RX7 turbo (which should have been here from the beginning), the Supra is the one Japanese car that takes a big chunk out of the gap to Porsche. To come so tantalizingly close and then stop would be unthinkable.

Dynamics

That demanding and sometimes disagreeable piece of highway between Richmond and Bathurst was chosen to evaluate touring performance on the open road. Switching around drivers every 30-40 km ensured all testers were familiar with the cars in all conditions. The most serious phase of this evaluation came on the western side of Lithgow when one by one the cars were pounded over a seven kilometer stretch of twisting broken concrete roadway to compare their ride comfort. A few reputations were sullied, others enhanced.

The Oran Park Raceway high speed work was conducted in relative safety and with an eye for the foibles which a race track seems to uncover in cars that other wise feel wonderful. Two series of rests were conducted. One was a slalom run. to determine the cars turn-in capabilities and composure during directional changes. The other was an appraisal of the vehicles' all round abilities, speed. handling, steering braking as determined by lap times.

New to Australia. but already feeling dated, the turbo Holden Piazza reveals coarse engineering under its nice Giugiaro sheet-metal. and the cockpit hardly throws out a welcome mat, there is black plastic everywhere, an abortion of a console, a crook steering wheel and awful seats. The engine is enthusiastic, but noisy. Even at modest touring speeds on the open road, the Piazza has some evil ways. The front end tends to skate about and the car lacks steering sensitivity. Bumps send it off line and damper control is desperately inadequate. And hard braking causes rear axle hop reminiscent of the old rear-drive Gemini.

Achieving any consistency on the slalom was difficult. given the Piazza's unsocial behavior. It digs in. settles on its suspension and then leaps. II finished sixth in a field of seven. The Piazza also made a meal of the Oran Park circuit, terminal understeer coming to the fore when it was pushed to its Iearlvl limits. Steering response is not good: cornering is done in a welter of understeer and tyre squeal. Ordinary tires. a Yokohama brand called Aspec, did not help adhesion, looks do deceive. The Piazza is not a refined package. At S34.500. best of luck. Holden. Piazza gets our vote for the car most likely to scare and maim.

Age does weary the Alfa GTV6. but of its litany of faults not all can be blamed on advancing years, although it is incredible that more than a decade has rolled on by and Alfa engineers still have not cured design faults that Japanese car makers would have fixed in weeks. Abnormally-long clutch pedal travel makes for ponderous, imprecise gear changing (already difficult enough because of the nebulous gearbox/linkage which is at its worst around town). The lest was run to the accompaniment of the usual Alfa V6 symphony orchestra augmented once again by Mr Squeak and Mr Rattle, and the regular thumping underneath as the torque tube reacted to gear changes. Driving the Alfa is a theatrical occasion; noise. drama, histrionics. Everything but fun and reassurance. Body roll is excessive, understeer ever-present. steering an effort (it is the one car of the seven not to have a power-assisted wheel).The torsion bar suspension is all marshmallow and Jello, which isn't to suggest the ride quality is anything to get excited about, although it copes over some corrugations far better than all but the best of the Japanese. The slowest through our slalom course, the Alfa lurched, flopped rolled and rocked.

Its tangle-legged, stretched-arms driving position criticized until we're blue in the face doesn't help ultimate control. The Alfa demands to be muscled, yet the relationship of pedals. wheel and seat simply doesn't allow a driver of normal physique to move sufficiently close to the wheel; Around the race circuit the G'IV revealed all its glaring inadequacies. On turn-in leaned horribly, pitched onto its nose and then steadfastly refused to respond to any subtle direct changes via the throttle. Steering kickback. made worse by the absence of power assistance, was it yet another shortcoming, remember too that, like all cars on test, the tyre pressures in the Pirelli P6's had been set at the maker's recommended maximum. Alter the required laps of Oran Park, an exercise accompanied by much steering input by the driver. it was no shock to learn the Alfa's best time was second slowest of all. When it gets the unleaded V6 engine you can bet it won't be quicker. Struggling for something Positive to write about the Alfa, I jotted down "good seats" and "nice engine note." Not a lot to be enthusiastic about there. Technical Editor Mike McCarthy summed up the GT-V6 beautifully: "it offends me."

The Mazda RX7's cabin creates a positive first impression. Ergonomically it's first class and the driver feels part of the action, although the computer-designed front buckets are bloody awful. Fire that computer! its rotary 13B is smooth gel lacks squirt below 4500 rpm. It feels like it'll rev forever, far beyond the warning buzzer set al a conservative 6500 revs, although even in the upper reaches it's short of real grunt. The Chassis is splendid on road and track The Mazda points into corners beautifully and shows no unsettling traits. The car has neutral handling and an overall balance, and responds to being steered with the throttle.

As for the sophisticated new Mazda self-steer rear end, we couldn't discern any great difference between the RX7 and other top handlers. New rack and pinion steering is sensibly damped and weighted. although it retains a touch of the initial vagueness of the earlier model. The gearshift movement is positive and firm. The Mazda's strong handling showed up on the slalom course. where it was second fastest by a mere 0.02 sec. The load on the steering remained pleasurably constant. Its lack of power was evident on the circuit. Handling showed slight initial understeer on entry; moving smoothly into oversteer on exit. Brakes were generally superb. and Bridgestone's 60series Potenzas are surprisingly effective.

A driver's car, the new RX7's superior chassis cries out for the added engine performance of the turbo model. Doubts had been expressed about the ability of the Toyota Celica the lone front-wheel-drive car in the group to cut the mustard in the handling department. Those fears were scrapped, this little jewel kept its sparkle when measured against more expensive rear drive rivals, and showed it has steering and suspension to complement its enthusiastic twin cam engine and silky transmission. The Celica was fourth fastest through the slalom and around the circuit, impressive results given the known disadvantages of front-drive on a racetrack. The Celica feels less firm than the others, but this softness doesn't translate to sloppiness when the car is punted along. Naturally it will understeer when treated harshly, but it has lovely throttle steer which easily brings the nose hack in to line. It's a forgiving motor car. Seats don't look much, but they're comfortable and offer good support to the hard driver. A lovely car.

The high scuttle layout suggests Mitsubishi's flagship Starion, launched in 1982, is getting on in years. Driver's accommodation isn't spacious but controls. pedals and key instrumentation are where they should be. Thanks to lower gearing in the 1986 ULP version, the Starion still has plenty of squirt once the tacho reaches 3500 rpm. The rear end doesn't take care of the bumps quite as well as more recent designs, and the car sometimes "walks" across undulations. But its brakes are as good as any. Steering response is fantastic, even though it is too light at high speeds. But through the slalom, where second gear was employed. the Starion was unbeatable despite tyre howl from the 60-series Potenzas and a feeling the tail wanted to let go. On the track where, like the others, it was given three timed laps, it rated third. The Mitsubishi had no obvious bad habits. Its rear suspension appeared not to have the ultimate refinement of the front, and the car does sometimes transmit the feeling that it might lose rear-end adhesion but it never does, Eighteen months ago the Starion was the performance king among the medium priced sporty coupes. As good as it is in several areas, the pace of car design is so fast that today the Starion is shaded by the newcomers. Nevertheless it feels solid, quick and predictable.

The Nissan 300ZX was the quirky one of the seven, the car hardest to hang a label on. It has the most powerful engine of the bunch and is also nicely composed when driven quickly. But the ZX becomes a touch insecure when fully extended good at eight-tenths, it becomes a handful at ten-tenths. It has a reluctance to turn in, and then falls into serious understeer. For a car designed for the over 40s, the ride quality leaves a bit to be desired, the gear shift is heavy. but it is positive and at least gives the impression of being accurate. The brakes are also reassuring. and there were no signs of the fade which has been detected on early non-turbo 280s and 300s.

The slalom exercise unsettled the ZX. Its power steering, so pleasant in regular day-to-day conditions,: loaded up a little and the big Nissan lurched from one change of direction to the next. The shockers didn't feel up to the task. Tires are identical to those on the Starion in size, compound and brand, 215/60 VR 15 Potenzas,-so there should be no problem there. The main straight at Oran Park allowed the big Zed to cut loose and it fell the fastest of the group. But the understeer made the driver's task awkward in the twisty bits. Under brakes there was a suggestion of rear lock up. Second place overall was more through speed than cornering. Dynamically. the Nissan was not far from being a very motor car. Ninety percent of its owners wouldn't reach its limits. But; that's no excuse for not finishing the job.

The Toyota Supra feels overweigh until driven the way its designer obvious intended, fast. It's an under 40 grand sporting car that hold its own with many the really pricey exotics. The Supra does not have obvious deficiencies. Its start with the splendidly designed driver's accommodation with four-way adjustable steering, electronically-adjustable lumbar and so on. Head into a corner at breakneck speed and it turns and sticks, just like that, there's no need for steering or throttle adjustment. It's a big car that shrinks around the driver. The slalom didn't disturb the Supra's serenity. The abrupt sequence of left-right-left was a breeze for the steering and suspension, although the car's weight was noticeable and certainly a factor in obtaining no better than third placing, behind the Starion and RX7. Strangely too it showed a propensity to break traction, despite having the biggest tire-print of the test cars.

The Supra must be driven very hard before its capabilities can be fully appreciated. Until then it feels good but probably no better than the RX7. Try very hard though. and the Toyota noses ahead. it will not understeer; the front grips and the tail follows, until power comes in. It is difficult to determine how much the fatter lower profile rubber contributes to the superiority of the Supra over other pleasantly behaved coupes such as the RX7. Celica and Starion. The 225/50 VR16 Goodyear Eagles certainly gave the Toyota a tenacious grip with less sidewall squirm than the others. But tires are part of the overall handling package of all the cars and so must be included in any evaluation. It's a tribute to the Toyota's chassis that every one of the WHEELS road testers believed the Supra could do with more power. Yet even so it was the fastest in the most telling of all trials, the lap dash at Oran Park. But it is true; its marvelous dynamics cry out for an engine of even greater power. The Supra must surely be the best handling mass-produced road car in production.

The Celica factor

CAN YOU really have your cake and eat it too? It was that question, more than any other, that prompted our seven car compare, because we wanted to present a detailed examination of what we called "the Celica factor" At a time when sticker shock has de-torqued the jaws of many buyers. Toyota's oh-so-sweet 16 valve Celica looked like a fairy tale. This radical yet refined coupe promised to match the top-weights at their own game. yet humiliate them in any showroom showdown with a sensational, good price-tag like between $10.000 and $15,000 less than the acknowledged champions! 'This was the Celica factor, the way one car could come so close to the best in terms of performance, yet make them all look so wrong in terms of price. Single-car testing is fine. We thought. but this problem demanded the toughest. most revealing examination of them all trial by comparison. For there is no better way to unearth the relative strengths and weaknesses of any car than back to back combat on the same stretch of road or racetrack. On paper the Celica had already produced the figures to substantiate its claim for a shot at the title. In the metal we knew from previous solo testing that it had the credentials to clearly outpoint anything in its class. But we weren't about to loss the Celica into the ring with the powder-puff Gazelle or the all-hash. no-dash Vortex. No. this was to be heavyweight company. over I5 rounds, where a good big 'un is supposed to be able to beat a good little 'un every time.

At least that's conventional thinking, Surely a two-litre front wheel drive car couldn't hack it with anything up to three litres plus turbo and good old RWD? It didn't turn out to be so simple. As the kays were logged it became obvious to every member of the test team that the Celica had to be taken very seriously.

On the racetrack II provided proof that it had the jump on more than half the pack. What it lacked in outright mumbo and it didn't lack much it made up for with a chassis so well balanced you could play it like a concert piano even with fresh air under the inside rear wheel. That balance was surprising. for so often a good road car will degenerate into an understeering. brakefaded lump when pounded around the pacer's pavement for half a dozen hot laps. The Celica performed as if it had been born there which. if the word we hear is true, it was. Mr Wada. the Celica's chief designer/engineer happily concedes his mates from Lotus did some "test driving" of the prototype. On the road the news was just as good. On the Bell Line west of Sydney, there is a hill called Kurrajong. It's a sleep pinch. all hairpins and second gear stuff with a few snatches of third. On that climb. the Celica buried itself into the bumper bar of the GTV6 and looked for a way around. So much for V6 torque! The Celica could have driven around the out sided of the Alfa, such was the accuracy and ease of its handling and steering. And therein lies the secret of this close coupled gem. Of all seven sporting coupes. it is by a clear margin the easiest of them to drive.

Two words describe this car, balance and coordination. After very few kilometer's it moulds around the driver in an almost tactile way. It feels right, from the linear brake pedal to the weight of the steering, to a shift that feels too good to be merely mechanical. All that sensitivity is coupled to great vision through that big bowed windscreen. a more then acceptable driving position and a mix-master instead of a motor under the bonnet: kerr-ist it loves a rev! And there's practicality too, with a decent rear seat and the best boot of the lot. The downside? Well. maybe the suspension travel a wee bit short, for there's occasional crash-through the front end. And that rasping exhaust note can be come tiresome after an hour or two at maximum warp, long term, the bubble topped bodv may be less granite-strong, and the emergence of a few squeaks and rattles wouldn't surprise us.

Then of course there's the optional equipment. The Celica has hardly any. At lime of writing. Toyota's white-shoes had priced the Celica at $22,250. By the lime you read this we've reason to believe that the price may have grown by as much as a grand. the lip is that Celica will creep on upwards and upwards al the rate of about $450 a month until Dr Toyoda's boys get their yen money back. So call it 23 for now. Air cond adds $1100, metallic paint $110. rear spoiler $315, sun roof $1105. The only other options listed an: a six way seat (a la Supra) at $580, cruise control at $360 (which kinda defeats the purpose!) and two tone paintwork at $475. So to put an egg-nished Celica on the road with rear spoiler and metallised paint is going to cost about 25.5 Gs. When you consider that in the UK the Celica costs the same as an Alfa GTV6 or a Honda prelude, we believe more than ever that there's no better value performance coupe on our market.

So the Celica factor really does exist. What does it actually mean? It means that fairy tales occasionally do come true.

Accommodation

THERE ARE some clearly defined roles here. The 300ZX and Supra are logical Grand Touring rivals with some pretensions to being proper two-plus-two cars, or so you might think given their respective lengths. The smaller Celica and Piazza are far more effective as occasional four seaters, but then they are not as overtly sporting as the strictly two-seater RX7 and Starion. The GTV6. small though it is in external dimensions, has a very respectable pair of rear seats but headroom is a problem for adults, as it is in all these except the Piazza. The Piazza is the only one we haven't road tested in an earlier issue: there is a separate test on the pages following this comparison. So there's little that needs to be said here beyond the fact that the Piazza has marvelous visibility (despite a shallow screen) by any standards and is way ahead of most of these cars which, with he exception of the Celica, all have massive and dangerously wide rear pillars. The Piazza's high level of equipment is spoiled by the number of rattles and creaks which the test car had, or developed during our time with the car.

The Supra is also superbly equipped and has a far more tasteful interior than the 300ZX with its mock wood, its chrome and oh-so-many colors. It feels big, bigger even than the Nissan, but is beautifully integrated in a restrained manner. Its simple instruments with their white on black dials are far easier to read than the digital affairs on the Piazza and 300ZX. The driving position, with the fully adjustable steering wheel and seats, should fit a very wide range of people. Air conditioning is, surprisingly, an option. 'The Celica is more simple and less well equipped though nobody could call it a poverty model. Option up air conditioning and there is little else it lacks beyond central locking. On these cars we could happily do without power windows.

Again, the driving position is excellent though the seats don't have the range of adjustment of the Supra and some testers round the buckets lacked lumbar support. The Celica has easily the biggest boot and its split rear seal folds down to give a massive luggage area none of its rivals can come near equaling. The instruments are clear and easy to read. the controls straight forward. In contrast to the others the Starion's driving position is almost sedan like in the way the bucket seals force you to sit up. The interior is now fitted out in an overwhelming red velour (rather than the leather of the original model) Which seems out of place given the relative simplicity of the rest of the interior. Tall drivers will find there isn't enough rear travel for the cushion although the seats are adjustable in a staggering variety of directions. The Starion has the smallest boot and it's too shallow for anything but flat bags; however. the rear seat is split so there should be sufficient room for luggage for two. The controls give the appearance of having been designed for finger-tip operation. but they are beyond reach if the driver keeps his hands on the wheel. Mitsubishi has, however, got the radio controls right for they are big enough to use without taking your eves off the road and easy to adjust. The seat belts reels are still mounted on the doors, and the top of the door is sucked out by the wind at any speed above 130 km/h to greatly increase the wind noise.

Nissan's designers clearly look to America for inspiration for the 300ZX interior. It's garish, gaudy and doesn't work especially well. Set the driving position so that the clutch can be fully depressed and the steering wheel is then too close; move the seal back for a long-arm driving position and you won't be able to push the clutch to the floor. It means making a compromise that could annoy many drivers. The seats themselves are comfortable but the interior is messy, not surprising perhaps in view of the very high equipment level. Remember the Nissan's the only car with something close to a targa-top. The boot net is huge, the boot relatively small and the rear seats a joke considering this is long wheel base version. Mazda's RX7 would be close to perfect in its close coupled interior if it weren't for the seats. They are truly dreadful in their cushion design and lack any kind of adjustment so that all our drivers complained of a lack of thigh support from the too-flat seat. This is a two seater only and the interior is obviously intended for more. This is an advantage for the RX7 feels integrated without any wasted space. The controls and the instruments are easy to use and the Piazza's satellite switches are better and they lake getting used to and standard of finish is high though not quite up to matching the Supra. A space saver spare wheel helps boot to be bigger than expected but the rear seat back isn't split, although it does fold down, and there is cover for the luggage.

The interior of Alfa's GTV6 is an unfortunate mix, the instruments are now in front of the driver but console controls and the air-conditioning unit are in the extreme for a car in this company and price bracket. The driving position is still Italian-ape and clutch engagement in the last few mm's of travel adds to the irritation of the high pedal positions. The instruments are still covered in that glass that reflects badly, the seat doesn't fold down to increase the size of the boot (the petrol tank sits between the rear seat and the luggage compartment) the indicator stalk is still on the left of the steering column, and there is no vanity mirror. The wipers are small, the fan very noisy and many drivers felt the top of the steep sloping windscreen was too close to their heads. If the Alfa is to survive for another three or four years until it's replacement arrives, it needs a new interior and quickly.

The more tests we did and the farther we drove, the clearer it became that the cars were sorting themselves into a fairly well defined pecking order. The emerging order was largely a reflection of the car's test results and general driver appeal. Which was largely a reflection of the car's test results and general drivers appeal. Which was it should be since whether they're sportsters or grand-tourers, these seven are to be drivers' cars above all else. Even without any formal accounting of standings it obvious that the Toyota Supra shaped up as the leader of the pack. while the long running Alfa coupe and all new Holden Piazza slipped back. After all the testing was complete and all the driving done. The crew raced one last task rating the sporty seven best to worst in nine categories. Some of the headings. Performance and Dynamics for example. are based on objective results and findings. Others. including Styling and Driver Appeal. are used to rate the subjective aspects.

It comes as no surprise that the Supra leads the group home by a fairly broad margin. Having already scored highly in the tests. the Toyota was voted outright best in five of the assessment categories. In three of those five it was the six-man panel's unanimous choice. It also scores a second. a third. a fourth and a fifth in other categories. and is the only car in the group not to rate a sixth and/or seventh placing. Toyota also takes the runner-up spot for the Celica drives its point home with two firsts, two seconds, four thirds and a sixth.

Third on ballot box results is the Mazda RX7; a car for which our enthusiasm was tempered only by its price, lack-luster performance (Comparatively speaking), its unseemly thirst and el cheapo seats. The Mazda doesn't top any category but scores four solid seconds. two thirds and a fifth. only to be the wooden-spooner in Performance and (unanimously) Accommodation.

The Starion pips the 300ZX .for fourth place, thereby reinforcing our faith in the ballot system. It's significant that the Mitsubishi's single best placing is a third for Value for Money but it follows this up with six fourth placing's, a remarkably accurate insight to its natural position in this group. Time and again throughout the test the Starion presented itself as the demarcation line between the front runner and the also-rans.

Inconsistencies placed the 300ZX further back than some might expect. It beats the rest for Equipment level and is a fast finishing runner-up in Performance.

The Alfa and Piazza about line ball at the tail of the field, though they arrive there by different means. The Alfa polls best with a third in Accommodation and a fourth in Styling.

Almost whichever way one looks at it, the Piazza is a disappointment. The fact that it tops the poll in Accommodation and is placed second in Equipment can't compensate for its finishing with two fifth places and for getting the losing vote in no fewer than five categories.