1996 Toyota Tercel Reviews - Page 2 of 3

1996 Toyota Tercel DX 1.6 from North America

Model year1996
Year of manufacture1996
First year of ownership2003
Most recent year of ownership2007
Engine and transmission 1.6 Automatic
Performance marks 8 / 10
Reliability marks 8 / 10
Comfort marks 3 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 10 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.3 / 10
Distance when acquired93000 kilometres
Most recent distance197000 kilometres
Previous carBMW 3 Series

Summary:

Simple car

Faults:

Little things such as Back Oxygen Sensor died after 12 years. Engine light is on for 2 years and it is running fine. Gas consumption should of gone up without this sensor, but I haven't noticed it.

General Comments:

Very little and simple car. It is easy and cheap to fix. Little gas consumption.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 19th November, 2007

1996 Toyota Tercel 1.5 from Jordan

Model year1996
Year of manufacture1996
First year of ownership2007
Most recent year of ownership2007
Engine and transmission 1.5 Automatic
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 3 / 10
Comfort marks 3 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 3 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
4.0 / 10
Distance when acquired105000 kilometres
Most recent distance110000 kilometres
Previous carSAAB 900

Summary:

Basic, budget and unreliable

Faults:

Engine leaking/consuming oil (since I got it).

Rust developed in the engine compartment causing water leaks and engine overheating.

Transmission completely went at 110000 (left me stranded o the side of the road).

Steering became too heavy.

Brake discs and drums very rusty.

Carburettor needs to be rebuilt.

Interior trim falling apart.

A/C blowing hot air.

A few electrical faults, bulbs, lousy radio reception..etc..

General Comments:

This car has been totally unreliable, things keep blowing away at such a (relatively) low mileage.

Fuel consumption is way too high for such a small car (or a small plane for that mater), thanks to the dated fragile carburettor instead of a fuel-injected engine.

The interior is very basic and the dashboard is made up of annoyingly cheap plastic with a few rattles, gauges are crappy (with no rpm).

Body seems to dent easily enough and is really light, coupled with the lack of safety features (no ABS, no airbags), the good deal of wheel spin and the noticeably bad handling in the wet makes for a very unsafe ride..

On the plus side, the car is peppy and the auto transmission is smooth enough (although it's a 3-speed with no overdrive). The paint job is not bad either.

This car can be summed up as a basic A-B transportation (city driving only) that completely ignores safety and comfort/features. I think it is really not up to standards and that every effort has been made to cut the cost of this car.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 16th May, 2007

8th May 2008, 19:07

The '96 Tercel is throttle body fuel injected. It did not have a carburetor.

10th May 2008, 06:15

96 Tercel with a carb? I don't think so.

Impossible to keep nontechnical people happy. Way too easy to fool them, it's no wonder so many shops sell unneeded repairs. Its not the cars fault that the owner agrees to usless and unneeded repairs.

27th May 2008, 19:03

'95-'99 Tercels actually have multi-port fuel injection - and air bags were standard on that final generation of Tercel. Incidentally, if fuel consumption was high on this car, even taking into account it's an automatic, something must've been seriously wrong with it.

2nd Jun 2008, 15:39

I bought a 96 tercel about 3 months ago. With gas prices on the rise and travel over 60 miles day it seemed to be a good deal (I still have my 04 Tundra Double Cab). I get on average 32-33 mpg. Had to put on a new starter (ebay $65.00) and new tires. Pretty good trade off I think. Car is great!! For every dollar in gas that I put into the Tercel saves me more than 2 times what would have been in my truck. Love both my Yoter's!!! I don't know what the original person bought, but my Tercel is great!!

2nd Jun 2008, 20:52

Actually, all cars '96 and later, and some before (but not Toyota because they were always behind the technology curve) have sequential-port (not multi-port) fuel injection.

It is a requirement to be in conformance with OBDII.

27th Jun 2009, 13:58

Actually the 95+ had direct injection on the 5EFE.

1996 Toyota Tercel Standard 1.5 from North America

Model year1996
Year of manufacture1995
First year of ownership1996
Most recent year of ownership2005
Engine and transmission 1.5 Manual
Performance marks 3 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 3 / 10
Dealer Service marks 8 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 10 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
6.8 / 10
Distance when acquired20 miles
Most recent distance141000 miles
Previous carToyota Corona

Summary:

The Tercel is a cheap and reliable gasmizer

Faults:

The car is extremely easy to maintain. The only time it has been in the shop was to change the timing belt (every 60000 miles, about $250) and the oxygen sensor went bad at 118000 miles ($400.-).

I performed all other scheduled maintainance on the vehicle on a regular basis. To date it has never let me down, not once.

General Comments:

The standard 4-speed Tercel I own is just reliable basic transportation. It handles OK, but it certainly is not a muscle car. I get between 37 mpg in the city and 44 mpg on the highway going about 65-70 mph. Mileage drops to around 41 mpg if I go 80-85 mph. Yes, it can actually go that fast! Over the life of the car I averaged around 40 mpg (5.9L/100 km).

Recently it started using some oil which it didn't do in its younger years. There is no oil on the plugs and the performance (or lack there off) has not changed noticeably.

The interior held up pretty well over the years and the seats still look nice after 9 years of daily use.

The handling of the car is good with a tight turning radius and responsive steering.

The 4-speed transmission has huge gaps between the gears which doesn't help acceleration either. The 4th gear is laid out as an overdrive which helps fuel economy, but hurts performance.

In summary I would recommend this car if you are looking for basic, cheap and reliable transportation. If you like comfort and/or performance look elsewhere.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 14th April, 2005

Average review marks: 7.0 / 10, based on 11 reviews