anime52k8 Posted March 4, 2011 Posted March 4, 2011 Kiss my arse, and put 110 octane in the tank. Noisy, smelly, heard to maintain vehicles that get 12mpg when gas is $4.00+ for regular are AWESOME.
jenius Posted March 4, 2011 Posted March 4, 2011 I, for one, like the noises. Priuses and other electric cars are like sharks... I'm always worried I'm going to cross the street while walking my dogs and step into an electric car that has quietly sneaked around a corner.
mikeszekely Posted March 4, 2011 Posted March 4, 2011 (edited) Noisy, smelly, heard to maintain vehicles that get 12mpg when gas is $4.00+ for regular are AWESOME. No one is denying the need for alternative fuels and new technologies in engines. But that's no reason for Mitsubishi to say "screw our motorsport heritage", kill one of their most iconic and beloved cars, and then replacing it with this crap, while Honda, Porsche, Mercedes-Benz, Tesla, Fisker, etc are coming out with all-electric or hybrid cars that don't look like golf carts and escape pods. Edited March 4, 2011 by mikeszekely
Shadow Posted March 4, 2011 Posted March 4, 2011 (edited) I can't help but think that Mitsubishi Motors is just putting the nails into its own coffin with this move. They've been struggling for awhile now and I don't see how jumping onto the EV bandwagon is going to get them out of their hole. Still hoping Subaru doesn't decide to follow the same route. I understand the need to go to alternative energy although I think hydrogen electric is the better long term alternative than just pure electric. Edited March 4, 2011 by Shadow
Bri Posted March 4, 2011 Posted March 4, 2011 (edited) Noisy, smelly, heard to maintain vehicles that get 12mpg when gas is $4.00+ for regular are AWESOME. $4.00+ for regular... I'd fill up my car with a smile on my face . Prices at the local station just went over $9.00+. Edited March 4, 2011 by Bri
reddsun1 Posted March 4, 2011 Posted March 4, 2011 (edited) I guess it was the whole "...and maybe someday we can do a motor race by electric vehicles" thing that got the knee jerk reaction out of me. As a motor racing fan, the only thing I could think was--well, this guy puts it pretty succinctly: I'd be willing to do my part, have a family vehicle that's ultra-low emissions, or what have you. But you can have the keys to my Falcon when you pry them from my cold, dead hands! Edited March 4, 2011 by reddsun1
Vifam7 Posted March 4, 2011 Posted March 4, 2011 I can't help but think that Mitsubishi Motors is just putting the nails into its own coffin with this move. They've been struggling for awhile now and I don't see how jumping onto the EV bandwagon is going to get them out of their hole. Still hoping Subaru doesn't decide to follow the same route. I understand the need to go to alternative energy although I think hydrogen electric is the better long term alternative than just pure electric. EVOs get publicity but they're not exactly practical cars and I doubt they are Mitsubishi's highest-selling money-making car. In order to make money, they've got to sell cars - and it seems that EVs and hybrids sell. I guess they also need to stay with the other makers in terms of EV/hybrid technology.
mikeszekely Posted March 4, 2011 Posted March 4, 2011 EVOs get publicity but they're not exactly practical cars and I doubt they are Mitsubishi's highest-selling money-making car. In order to make money, they've got to sell cars - and it seems that EVs and hybrids sell. I guess they also need to stay with the other makers in terms of EV/hybrid technology. All-wheel drive, traction control, and actually having a back seat make it a more practical choice than, say, a Mazda Miata. And yeah, the Evo isn't Mitsubishi's biggest seller. If my local dealer is indicative of Mitsubishi in general, their biggest sellers are the non-Evo Lancers and the Outlanders. But it's that motorsport-inspired design that's made the current generation Lancer so popular... there's not a lot of cosmetic difference between the Lancer GTS and the Evo X. In killing the Evo, Mitsubishi isn't just saying that they're killing off a $45,000 rally car that gets 18mpg, they're also saying that the Evo doesn't fit image the company wants. And judging by their stated goals and their recently unveiled e-Compact, good-looking, fun-to-drive cars are out, hippie-green pods are in. And that's what'll actually kill them. They could make hybrid versions of every car in their fleet, including the Evo, if they wanted to. They just don't want to. Popularity of the Prius aside (a popularity that's been waning, I might add), people don't want pods.
emajnthis Posted March 6, 2011 Posted March 6, 2011 Noisy, smelly, heard to maintain vehicles that get 12mpg when gas is $4.00+ for regular are AWESOME. On that note, I wrecked my Audi last week (sigh) and my co-worker has given me an offer i couldn't refuse on his 2005 Mazda RX-8 with 29,700 miles ($9k, clean title, never been in an accident, just put new tires on it). So i'm now the owner of a Noisy (spins up to 9k rpm) smelly (i presume any car that's not electric is smelly) vehicle that gets 20mpg (not 12 but pretty close) is absolutely impractical and even IMO looks awkward (and i'm the owner) but IS AWESOME. Sorry, maybe it's because i'm still young, but you only live once, and i'm of the camp of people who feels that driving a car should be a treat not a chore.
emajnthis Posted March 6, 2011 Posted March 6, 2011 All-wheel drive, traction control, and actually having a back seat make it a more practical choice than, say, a Mazda Miata. And yeah, the Evo isn't Mitsubishi's biggest seller. If my local dealer is indicative of Mitsubishi in general, their biggest sellers are the non-Evo Lancers and the Outlanders. But it's that motorsport-inspired design that's made the current generation Lancer so popular... there's not a lot of cosmetic difference between the Lancer GTS and the Evo X. In killing the Evo, Mitsubishi isn't just saying that they're killing off a $45,000 rally car that gets 18mpg, they're also saying that the Evo doesn't fit image the company wants. And judging by their stated goals and their recently unveiled e-Compact, good-looking, fun-to-drive cars are out, hippie-green pods are in. And that's what'll actually kill them. They could make hybrid versions of every car in their fleet, including the Evo, if they wanted to. They just don't want to. Popularity of the Prius aside (a popularity that's been waning, I might add), people don't want pods. I think just in general Mitsubishi has no idea what they're doing. In Japan, they have everything done right, but in the US i dunno where the disconnect is, but it's like they're purposely making poor decisions. I guess what i'm getting at has more to do with their lineup, their lineup is fine with the exception of the fact that their motors and drivetrains all suck unless you own an EVO. In Japan, their 2.0L turbo and AWD are at least available options for just about every model, they took a more Subaru approach to things (look at Subaru's current lineup to see what i mean), but in the US they settle for the mundane. It wouldn't take much for Mitsubishi to be relevant again, but to me the only car that seems to sell for them is the lancer. The Galant and Eclipse look like hell and are both the most boring cars on the road. Why not bring the Galant up to compete with the Legacy, or give the Eclipse AWD, something that makes them relevant to the consumer. It seems to me that Mitsu has just given up on the US market, we never saw a lot of the cars that were released overseas and i just tried to "build" a galant on their website and i only get one motor and drivetrain option (or rather lack there of), that's bull crap.
Retracting Head Ter Ter Posted March 6, 2011 Posted March 6, 2011 (edited) On the subject of Mitsubishi, back when I first got my licence, the car I lusted after was a Colt Starion Turbo (nothing to do with Jackie Chan and the Cannonball run movie though, I just liked the Turbo RWD). And some time later, there was this beautiful car called the 3000 GTO. As for Subaru, I hate the fact that they had to nerf all their export engines. I really wish my Legacy GT had a bit more compression ratio because the boost takes really long to come on and without boost, the low compression block is a real sluggard. Edited March 6, 2011 by Retracting Head Ter Ter
reddsun1 Posted March 6, 2011 Posted March 6, 2011 Best recall ever. Aw, Son Of A Bit*h! ......I have a '10 Mazda6.
Beltane70 Posted March 6, 2011 Posted March 6, 2011 From what a friend of mine in Japan has said, Mitsubishi Motors doesn't have a good reputation in Japan, either. I'm inclined to believe her, since everytime that I've been in Japan, there were never that many Mitsubishi cars around, at least not compared to the number of Toyotas, Nissans, and Hondas.
emajnthis Posted March 6, 2011 Posted March 6, 2011 On the subject of Mitsubishi, back when I first got my licence, the car I lusted after was a Colt Starion Turbo (nothing to do with Jackie Chan and the Cannonball run movie though, I just liked the Turbo RWD). And some time later, there was this beautiful car called the 3000 GTO. As for Subaru, I hate the fact that they had to nerf all their export engines. I really wish my Legacy GT had a bit more compression ratio because the boost takes really long to come on and without boost, the low compression block is a real sluggard. But the 3000GT (GTO in Japan) got the axe in 99 so we got the last gen facelift for only one year, plus they were riddled with drivetrain failures (crank walk, blown transfer cases, transmissions falling apart) and were a pretty poor design in general (there's just no efficient way to setup a transverse mounted v6 turbo). We never got the FTO which would've been a hot sell, i'd be looking for one right now if we got them stateside. The point is, Mitsu needs to start making their lineup more attractive or their doomed, i don't think they're going to accomplish that by getting rid of the EVO. As it stands, the EVO is the only thing that brings the younger market in the door to sell them a Lancer.
Retracting Head Ter Ter Posted March 7, 2011 Posted March 7, 2011 But the 3000GT (GTO in Japan) got the axe in 99 so we got the last gen facelift for only one year, plus they were riddled with drivetrain failures (crank walk, blown transfer cases, transmissions falling apart) and were a pretty poor design in general (there's just no efficient way to setup a transverse mounted v6 turbo). We never got the FTO which would've been a hot sell, i'd be looking for one right now if we got them stateside. The point is, Mitsu needs to start making their lineup more attractive or their doomed, i don't think they're going to accomplish that by getting rid of the EVO. As it stands, the EVO is the only thing that brings the younger market in the door to sell them a Lancer. I don't live in the US. So we got the FTO here. Did not sell too well and I don't see any on the roads now. We also got the Galant-VR4 (the last 2.5 v6 one). Cousin had one and it was nice. I wonder though, how many of the current non-turbo Lancer owners actually would have bought a different car if there had been no Evo X?
mikeszekely Posted March 7, 2011 Posted March 7, 2011 I don't live in the US. So we got the FTO here. Did not sell too well and I don't see any on the roads now. We also got the Galant-VR4 (the last 2.5 v6 one). Cousin had one and it was nice. I wonder though, how many of the current non-turbo Lancer owners actually would have bought a different car if there had been no Evo X? I might have. My current '10 Lancer GTS is actually my third Mitsubishi. Right out of college I bought an '02 Mirage, because the financing worked out for my thoughts on buying a car were 1.) no American cars, as they were kind of crappy at the time, and 2.) no Civics, which every poser who'd seen The Fast and the Furious was driving at the time. The Mirage was sporty enough, in my price range, and fit that criteria. Because we had a relationship with that dealer, we bought a used '04 Lancer for my wife. Despite it being newer, I never really liked it as much as my Mirage. It was hard to imagine a Lancer that was further from the Evo at the time (it was the VIII, although the IX wasn't long after). While the front end was perhaps more distinctive than, say, a Corolla, the interior was just bland. Still, it's been reliable enough, and it handled well enough for its class. Now, considering that I didn't have any bad experience with my first two Mitsubishis, and that I had a pretty good rapport with the dealer, it's possible that I might have bought another one anyway. Especially if they were still selling the Evo IX and the current body debuted on the vanilla Lancers... this body was love at first sight for me. But as much as I've wanted an Evo, they've always been sitting nicely at around double my budget. When they debuted the current Lancers back in... I guess it was the '08 model? Whenever it was, I figured that'd be the closest I'd get to owning an Evo for awhile, so I started planning to buy one. The stars happened to align for me this past summer (Mirage needed a lot of expensive exhaust work after 8 Pennsylvania winters, parts were becoming harder to find for it since they stopped making them the year I bought it, I had some extra money, and I was offered no interest for 60 months). And I really like it... the CVT takes some getting used to, but its been a great ride so far. I'd figured that I'd probably keep buying Mitsubishis, but I can't stand Mitsubishi's new direction. Between hearing that they're going to kill the Evo and the unveiling of their yawn-inducing e-Compact, it's pretty obvious they're not interested in making cars for me anymore (ie, inexpensive cars that still look sporty and are fun to drive).
Vifam7 Posted March 7, 2011 Posted March 7, 2011 I wonder though, how many of the current non-turbo Lancer owners actually would have bought a different car if there had been no Evo X? My story is somewhat similar to mikeszekely above. My first car too was a Mirage ('01 coupe). I purchased it back then because I needed to buy a reliable Japanese car and the price/financing for it was good. At the time I knew nothing about the Evolution cars. Fast foward 8 years to Fall-2009 and I was looking to upgrade to a 4-door hatchback or sedan. After looking at numerous cars, it came down to either the Lancer or Subaru's Impreza. By this time I knew about Mitsu's EVO and Subaru's WRX, but they never really factored into my decision making. It just so happened that the Lancer and Impreza fit the type of car I wanted. I was really considering to buy a non-turbo Lancer. I too liked my Mirage so I was a bit partial to Mitsubishi. But in the end, things just worked in favor of Subaru's Impreza (which I ended up buying). I never considered buying the EVO or WRX. Daily driving of a gas-guzzling turbo in NY traffic does not make sense.
areaseven Posted March 7, 2011 Author Posted March 7, 2011 Just wondering, when did Mitsubishi cars start to have problems - before or after their association with Chrysler?
Retracting Head Ter Ter Posted March 7, 2011 Posted March 7, 2011 Yeah, first cars tend to leave some lasting impression on drivers. Mine was a beat up KE70 1.3 carb 4-spd manual. Still have a soft spot for old Toyotas thanks to it.
emajnthis Posted March 7, 2011 Posted March 7, 2011 Just wondering, when did Mitsubishi cars start to have problems - before or after their association with Chrysler? The joint venture with Chrysler, better known as Diamond Star Motors is the most notable. They were responsible for the Talon/Laser/Eclipse which in its basic form was pretty reliable and harmless but if you got a GST or GSX you were in for a world of hurt (especially with the GSX). Poor build quality was just the start, but IMO design flaws in their AWD system for the GSX was also to blame. Similarly, with the Stealth/3000GT the transfer cases would leak and you would also hear of severe cases of crank walk. If you do searches for demotivational posters regarding DSM you'll find your fair share that should tell the story all on its own. It seemed to really be exclusive to Mitsubishi's highest trim model, if you got a basic trim Eclipse or 3000GT they were mostly reliable (slow, but reliable). I'm jaded by the 3000GT after working on my friends VR-4, it seemed like no matter how much effort and time you put into fixing it and getting it back on the road it somehow always ended up back in your garage. I think a good example of how poor the build quality is for the 3000GT is just go do a parts search at autozone. You can buy a transmission rebuild kit for the 3000GT, i don't know of any other car that i can walk down to my local auto parts store and purchase a full transmission rebuild kit (for a good price to boot!). In fact, i went and found it on their website http://www.autozone.com/autozone/parts/Atc-Pro-King-Manual-Transmission-Rebuild-Kit/1995-Mitsubishi-3000GT/_/N-j1m96Z6o2tw?counter=1&itemIdentifier=438637_14444_5207_31130 $266 and you can have a rebuilt transmission, that will almost certainly rip itself apart 20,000 miles later.
areaseven Posted March 8, 2011 Author Posted March 8, 2011 There are new cars that still have cassette players? Cassettes Finally Retired from New Vehicles; How Long for CDs?
Retracting Head Ter Ter Posted March 8, 2011 Posted March 8, 2011 The 2010 Lexus SC430 _had_ a cassette deck?!?!?!? WOW!!! Maybe the marketing dept at Lexus had figures that showed most of the buyers came from the mix-tape generation or something...
emajnthis Posted March 8, 2011 Posted March 8, 2011 I didn't even know the SC430 was still being sold, that car is way out of date. The only reason i can think of that would keep the tape deck around in that car was just the expense of sending a redesign to R&D.
areaseven Posted March 9, 2011 Author Posted March 9, 2011 The new Mustang Boss 302 has been tested, and its numbers make you forget about the Shelby GT500. 0-60: 4.0 sec 1/4 mile: 12.3 sec @ 115.8 mph 60-0 Braking: 108 ft Lateral Acceleration: 0.97 g
ron5864 Posted March 9, 2011 Posted March 9, 2011 Yup. I just read the Mustang Boss 302 performance stats and it is incredible. It would be the best performance buy this decade if not for the dealership markup. I would trade in my MazdaSpeed3 for this car since it gets slightly better gas mileage. You know...to help the environment and all that. Hope Ford will put that engine into future Mustang editions.
Retracting Head Ter Ter Posted March 9, 2011 Posted March 9, 2011 ... were a pretty poor design in general (there's just no efficient way to setup a transverse mounted v6 turbo)... We got the Galant VR-4s here (also transverse V6 twin-turbo) and no nightmare reliability stories.
emajnthis Posted March 9, 2011 Posted March 9, 2011 We got the Galant VR-4s here (also transverse V6 twin-turbo) and no nightmare reliability stories. We didn't get them in the US, only the sixth gen ones with the 4g63 motor (2.0l turbo AWD) they weren't a part of the ones built by the DSM plant, and to be honest i'm not sure of their reliability, i just know first hand that the VR4 3000GT's weren't well known for having a lot of time on the road. I had several opportunities to own a 3000GT VR-4, (the last one i had cash in hand and was about to sign paperwork), but every time i pop the hood and see the layout then drive it and remember how huge the car is (yet how small the interior is) i remember why i don't want one. It's crossed my mind to buy a 300zx and do a motor swap, but i know i don't have the time for it between my work and kids.
reddsun1 Posted March 9, 2011 Posted March 9, 2011 The new Mustang Boss 302 has been tested, and its numbers make you forget about the Shelby GT500. 0-60: 4.0 sec 1/4 mile: 12.3 sec @ 115.8 mph 60-0 Braking: 108 ft Lateral Acceleration: 0.97 g For those with practical needs (pshuh, right), like family hauling (a$$) duties, the Aussies have taken the Coyote motor, put a huffer on it, and wedged it into their 4-door RWD Falcon platform to make a hot sedan that'll go toe to toe with Holden's HSV cars. And what does Ford offer us here in the US? The Taurus SHO? *meh* Methinks that the new Taurus SHO was something of a shot-in-the-dark by Ford. They really should have just gone with new badging for the model, as it is unlikely to sell in any significant numbers. While it's performance numbers seem pretty impressive, the price range and brand imaging associated with Ford's long-time rental-fleet mainstay are going to effectively make it a red-headed step child. Traditional Taurus buyers are going to look at it and go: you want me to pay $39,000+ for a Taurus? While the target buyers they may have been aiming at (what, 300C; Cadillac; maybe prospective entry-level BMW/Benz buyers?) are going to look at it and go: you want me to pay $39,000+ for a Taurus?
emajnthis Posted March 9, 2011 Posted March 9, 2011 For those with practical needs (pshuh, right), like family hauling (a$$) duties, the Aussies have taken the Coyote motor, put a huffer on it, and wedged it into their 4-door RWD Falcon platform to make a hot sedan that'll go toe to toe with Holden's HSV cars. And what does Ford offer us here in the US? The Taurus SHO? *meh* Methinks that the new Taurus SHO was something of a shot-in-the-dark by Ford. They really should have just gone with new badging for the model, as it is unlikely to sell in any significant numbers. While it's performance numbers seem pretty impressive, the price range and brand imaging associated with Ford's long-time rental-fleet mainstay are going to effectively make it a red-headed step child. Traditional Taurus buyers are going to look at it and go: you want me to pay $39,000+ for a Taurus? While the target buyers they may have been aiming at (what, 300C; Cadillac; maybe prospective entry-level BMW/Benz buyers?) are going to look at it and go: you want me to pay $39,000+ for a Taurus? I completely agree, when i saw the motor/drivetrain and the numbers produced by the SHO they should've immediately gone with a different branding. They could've brought back a retired name (retired in the US not AUS) like Falcon and i'm sure sales would've been considerably different. "Taurus" is not the name that comes to mind when you hear V6 turbo AWD, the only thing i wish they did with this car (which is the one thing that made the original SHO special) was give it a manual gear box.
reddsun1 Posted March 9, 2011 Posted March 9, 2011 (edited) But not to distract from areaseven's orig post; the new BOSS seems to be a real kick-a$$ car. Almost makes me wanna enter here: http://view.exacttarget.com/?j=fe67167275650574751d&m=feee1c79726702&ls=fdf31070716001747d167273&l=fe92157173660d7b71&s=fe2012797467017e701378&jb=ffcf14&ju=fe2b16747666067f7d1d74&r=0 At first I think: how cool would that be, eh? to win 2 Boss 'Stangs would definitely be something to crow about. But I've heard before that these contests are pretty much a rip-off in the sense that: the taxes (on the assessed value?) are due up-front before you can take possession of the car(s) won? So I figure that the taxes you'd have to pony-up on these cars--the '69 Boss in particular--would EAT YO' A$$ UP. So, you pretty much gotta be a rich f'er that can afford to buy one of these cars in the first place, to really even bother trying to win one. Edited March 9, 2011 by reddsun1
anime52k8 Posted March 9, 2011 Posted March 9, 2011 So it turns out one of the tires on my car has a leak. I took it in to get it patched, and it turns out they won't do it because the tire doesn't have enough tread left. now I'll looking at close to $800 for new tires. This of course is after having to shill out $500 to replace a power steering pump, $750 for a rebuilt rack and pinion and $1000 for new struts all within the last 4 months...
mikeszekely Posted March 9, 2011 Posted March 9, 2011 So it turns out one of the tires on my car has a leak. I took it in to get it patched, and it turns out they won't do it because the tire doesn't have enough tread left. now I'll looking at close to $800 for new tires. This of course is after having to shill out $500 to replace a power steering pump, $750 for a rebuilt rack and pinion and $1000 for new struts all within the last 4 months... $800? Suddenly I'm not feeling so bad about mine running $650.
myk Posted March 12, 2011 Posted March 12, 2011 (edited) $800? Suddenly I'm not feeling so bad about mine running $650. One of my tires on the '99 T/A got slashed the other night. It's gonna be about $800 for me also because it's about that time to change 'em all out anyway. So it turns out one of the tires on my car has a leak. I took it in to get it patched, and it turns out they won't do it because the tire doesn't have enough tread left. now I'll looking at close to $800 for new tires. This of course is after having to shill out $500 to replace a power steering pump, $750 for a rebuilt rack and pinion and $1000 for new struts all within the last 4 months... What are you driving man? I'm tellin ya fellas. Once I get that sport-bike I ain't ever looking back. Course, I'll probably be dead anyway so looking won't be an option, but you get my drift... Edited March 12, 2011 by myk
Recommended Posts