Talk:Toyota Starlet

Starlet saloons?
I just found this site today: It seems to list some very obscure Toyotas, including EP82 and EP91 Starlet saloons. Did these ever even go into production? The pictures do look like photoshop jobs though. --Zilog Jones 15:02, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Definitely not factory Toyotas. I agree, someone's been photo-chopping! --PBurnett 09:25, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

The description in the first paragraph says it's a "microcar"....lol given that a Starlet can seat 5 people (believe me, mine has done so many times) it's hardly a microcar!

In addition, under "Other variants" it states they are "known" for being "dull but dependable" - surely this is a purely subjective comment? Surely there's no fixed objective definition of a "dull" car (I think Holden Commodores are dull, but some people love them). Can't speak for the others, but my unmodified 1999 1.3L Starlet's power to weight ratio puts it on par with some older Mazda MX5s as far as acceleration is concerned (and it easily reaches 140km/h on the highway).

Merge from Toyota Starlet GT Turbo
Re: merging Toyota Starlet GT Turbo into Toyota Starlet


 * support. Both articles are not particularly big, so merging the turbo model into the Starlet article makes sense. The turbo article should then be redirected to the new section in the Starlet article. Same for the Toyota Starlet Glanza.  Stepho   (talk) 04:55, 24 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Support - I see no need for the standalones.  ⊂ Mr.choppers ⊃   (talk) 18:09, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

mpg in 1980
Here in Colorado, I have a memory of just one Starlet, at a dealership about 1980. It has remained in my memory because the window sticker said I'm sure, 50+ mpg. There were many cars getting 30mpg at the time, and a few getting 40mpg, but this amazed me. Can someone varify that a Starlet at that time could get crazy fuel economy? And why weren't more imported to the US?Flight Risk (talk) 04:27, 6 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Just to clarify imperial vs metric units for the non Americans:
 * 30 mpgus
 * 40 mpgus
 * 50 mpgus
 * Off the top of my head, I can't verify 50mpg but it can't be too far off considering the car's small size (smaller than a Corolla) and small engine (gutless for the base model). But compare the small size and gutless engine to expectations of the US market for large, comfortable cars and the fading memory of the 1973 oil crisis (cheap fuel means economical cars don't sell well), I'm not surprised it wasn't high on the US shopping list.  Stepho  talk 04:59, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

80 series end date
Does anybody know if Indonesian production ended in March 1997 or March 1998 ? The article gives both dates but no reliable references.  Stepho  talk 01:29, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Dependable but dull... but there are exceptions?
The unattributed statement that Starlets are "normally... dependable but dull... but there were exceptions" seems to be an editor's personal opinion and a blatant violation of the central Wikipedia tenet of neutral point of view. This statement needs to be attributed to an outside writer or it needs to be removed to maintain NPOV. Carguychris (talk) 19:24, 21 January 2019 (UTC)


 * That statement can be said of almost every Toyota vehicle - rock solid reliable but hardly exciting. But you are quite right, without a supporting reference then it can be deleted.  Stepho  talk 20:52, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Categorization
Hello IP from Reading, UK. Please read WP:SUBCAT and discuss before reverting any more. Category:1970s cars is not needed because Category:Cars introduced in 1973 is already contained within that parent category. As for "body type" or "bodytype", both styles are perfectly fine. When both are accepted variants, we do not change them back and forth because it is a huge waste of time. Just accept that there are regional variations and whatever style the article was first written in generally overrides. See WP:ENGVAR. Thanks for your time and for being such a pleasant person to deal with.  Mr.choppers &#124;  ✎  03:23, 11 November 2019 (UTC)