The Toyota Celica does 25.1 mpg combined (22.5 city, 29.1 highway), which works out to about $1,530 a year in fuel at $3.20 a gallon and 12,000 miles. Engine choice matters more than you'd think: 1.8L 4-cyl does 27.5 mpg while 2.8L 6-cyl does 19 — a difference of $625 a year. Against other 4-cyl cars it sits below the average of 25.4 mpg.
Every Toyota Celica engine, compared
Picking the right version of the same car often saves more fuel than picking a different car altogether. Yearly cost assumes 12,000 miles at $3.20 a gallon.
| Engine | Combined | City / Highway | Years | Fuel per year |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.8L 4-cyl | 24.6 / 31.9 | 1994–2005 | $1,396 | |
| 1.6L 4-cyl | 23 / 29.5 | 1990–1993 | $1,506 | |
| 2L 4-cyl | 22.5 / 29.3 | 1986–1989 | $1,536 | |
| 2.4L 4-cyl | 21 / 27 | 1984–1985 | $1,634 | |
| 2.2L 4-cyl | 20 / 27 | 1998–1999 | $1,670 | |
| 2.8L 6-cyl | 17.3 / 22 | 1984–1986 | $2,021 |
What that actually costs
Miles per gallon is an abstraction; the fuel bill is not. Here it is in money, at 12,000 miles a year and $3.20 a gallon.
| Measure | Value |
|---|---|
| Cost per mile | $0.127 |
| Fuel per year | $1,530 |
| Fuel over five years | $7,650 |
| Against other 4-cyl cars | +$18 a year |
| EPA's own estimate | $2,576 a year |
City or highway — who is this car for
The gap between city and highway figures tells you whom the car suits. A wide gap punishes stop-and-start traffic; a narrow one means the car doesn't care where you drive it.
| Measure | Value | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| City | 22.5 mpg | $1,707 a year if you only drive in town |
| Highway | 29.1 mpg | $1,320 a year if you mostly commute |
| Gap | +6.6 mpg (29%) | Typical for its type |
How the Celica changed over the years
Combined figure by model year. Jumps usually mark a new generation or a new engine; dips often mean a heavier body or added all-wheel drive.
| Model year | Combined | City / Highway | Engines offered | Fuel per year |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2005 | 25 / 33 | 1 | $1,371 | |
| 2004 | 25 / 33 | 1 | $1,371 | |
| 2003 | 25 / 33 | 1 | $1,371 | |
| 2002 | 25 / 32 | 1 | $1,371 | |
| 2001 | 25 / 32 | 1 | $1,371 | |
| 2000 | 24 / 31 | 1 | $1,422 | |
| 1999 | 20 / 27 | 1 | $1,670 | |
| 1998 | 20 / 27 | 1 | $1,670 | |
| 1997 | 25 / 32 | 1 | $1,371 | |
| 1996 | 25 / 31 | 1 | $1,422 | |
| 1995 | 24 / 31 | 1 | $1,422 | |
| 1994 | 23 / 31 | 1 | $1,477 | |
| 1993 | 22 / 29 | 1 | $1,536 | |
| 1992 | 22 / 29 | 1 | $1,536 | |
| 1991 | 24 / 30 | 1 | $1,477 | |
| 1990 | 24 / 30 | 1 | $1,477 | |
| 1989 | 23 / 29 | 1 | $1,536 | |
| 1988 | 22 / 29 | 1 | $1,536 | |
| 1987 | 23 / 31 | 1 | $1,477 | |
| 1986 | 19.5 / 25 | 2 | $1,786 | |
| 1985 | 19 / 25 | 2 | $1,786 | |
| 1984 | 19.5 / 24 | 2 | $1,829 |
MPG is a number. Dollars per year is the answer.
- Fuel profile built from your actual mileage and local prices
- Fuel tracker: what you really spend, month by month
- Insurance and fuel folded into 5-year cost to own
- Compare any two cars on total cost, not sticker price
- No ads, no tracking — and much more
How we count
Fuel-economy figures come from EPA fueleconomy.gov — the same laboratory numbers printed on the window sticker. We don't adjust them; real-world consumption depends on how and where you drive.
What we add is money. Yearly cost assumes 12,000 miles at $3.20 a gallon — change either and the ranking stays, only the size of the bill moves. Cost per mile is the same figure divided out, useful when comparing a commute against a weekend car.
Frequently asked questions
What mpg does the Toyota Celica get?
25.1 mpg combined on average — 22.5 in the city and 29.1 on the highway, per EPA ratings across 1984–2005.
How much does a Toyota Celica cost in fuel per year?
About $1,530 at 12,000 miles and $3.20 a gallon — roughly $7,650 over five years, or 0.127 dollars a mile.
Which Celica engine is the most economical?
The 1.8L 4-cyl at 27.5 mpg, against 19 for the 2.8L 6-cyl — a difference of about $625 a year.
Is the Celica good on fuel compared with similar cars?
Against other 4-cyl cars it sits below the average of 25.4 mpg, computed across 6877 ratings.
Are these real-world figures?
No — they are EPA laboratory ratings, the same ones on the window sticker. Real consumption depends on driving style, terrain, load and weather, and is typically a little worse.