3000GT = any car killer, i mean ANY!

  • Thread starter Thread starter WanganDreams
  • 113 comments
  • 9,263 views
Originally posted by Famine
Spot on.
It may not blitz the "quarter mile", but what use would that be in Japan exactly? Or "Europe"? Or anywhere but a country with a large amount of dead straight roads?
Click to expand...
I wouldn't suggest taking sharp swithchbacks or high speed curves in the VR-4. The active aws is a bit fidgety, and makes an extremely unstable feeling.

Most GTO/VR-4 tuners in Japan focus on the 400m. Bee-Racing brought their GTO all the way from Japan to America on a few occasions, just to drag race it.

Having owned an early model '91 VR-4, and a later '94, I can say these cars are at home on a drag strip.
 
Originally posted by Monster7
Most GTO/VR-4 tuners in Japan focus on the 400m.
Click to expand...

And those of us who like to drive cars as they come?

A standard 3000GT (we only get the top model) or GTO VR-4 will kick the ass of most other standard cars in the twisties.
 
As someone mentioned, they're expensive to insure. Heavy. Their 400M times aren't great (from the chart someone showed). but if that information is accurate, i dont see the problem with 3000GT's. They're great looking, and at higher speeds, they feel great. Personally, I'd own one over most cars (aside from an RX-7..).
 
GTO is not a nimble car.. if you got passed by one in a corner either you took a crap line, being super conservative, or are in a very very very slow car.
 
Originally posted by Viper Zero
Heavy? No heavier than a 4th gen Supra.
Click to expand...

200+lbs. more than a 4th gen. Supra.


It doesn't matter, though, because at 3,600lbs, or 3,800lbs, you're still driving a boat on 4 wheels.:p


And what's with the Tahoe vs. VR-4 crap? If anyone honestly believes that a stock Tahoe could hang anywhere near a stock VR-4 with equal drivers they're obviously intoxicated, or retarted.
 
Originally posted by Seito4Counter
GTO is not a nimble car.. if you got passed by one in a corner either you took a crap line, being super conservative, or are in a very very very slow car.
Click to expand...

You are a pillock.

For the third time in this thread - for your benefit since you seem to be incapable of reading back in the thread - I will say that, at 35-40mph (above the legal speed limit there) I was passed in a 90 degree corner on a 3 lane road by a GTO doing 75mph and accelerating.

Lines don't come into it - I was on a public road and staying in my lane. Perhaps though you would have liked me to "clip the apex", and take the nose off the GTO? That make more sense to you? After all, every other car on the road is just another guy to beat, isn't it? Potential car speed doesn't come into it - it's a 30 mph limit road. Conservacy doesn't come into it - it's a 30 mph limit road. Unless you like breaking speed limits excessively through built up areas - in which case I hope the kids' parents sue you to hell and back.


Furthermore either/or is used for two terms only - not three. If you would like to continue attempting to insult me, please do it properly.


Back on topic now - how is the GTO "not a very nimble car"? Compared to, say, an MR car like the NSX, or another famous 4WD/AWS car, the Nissan Skyline (R32/R33/R34), it's not going to be going through the corners quite as quick. But I'd lay odds on it being quicker than any FR with similar power (and I'm thinking Supra here - and you won't find many bigger Supra admirers than me. Except Josh, obv. - and the 300ZX) down the twisties. I'd say that well over 90% of the cars on British roads won't be able to live with it - and I'd lay odds on that 90% or more of cars on American roads won't either. Or Japanese ones for that matter. Does that mean 90% of cars in these regions are "very very very slow" (sic)?

Very, very, very slow to me conjures up the Trabant, Perodua Nippa, Vauxhall/Opel Corsa 1.0, Ford Ranger, FIAT Berlingo. My car, not that it matters, is precisely twice as quick to 60mph as a Vauxhall/Opel Corsa 1.0, and 50% slower than a GTO to the same mark. But yet the only cars a GTO can beat are "very very very slow" (sic)? Of course, the fact he has 4WD, 4WS, active downforce and, most importantly, twice the width of rubber on the tarmac would make no difference, would it? No, it's me... I'm crap at driving, too conservative and drive a slow car. You tit.
 
Because I've been driving for a long time and can judge the speeds of other traffic on the roads. It's not a hard skill to learn. If you don't, you die.
 
To help solve this dilemma, while I was home for christmas break, I got a chance to talk to my 3000GT buddy. He had just installed a cold air intake and a new stage 2 clutch. It was looking pretty fly. We decided to race again, for some reason. I have bald tires though, :(, they have over 80k miles on them. So we raced to 100mph, because that's where my Tahoe tops out, due to the ecu. It's a 1996 Tahoe, not like the yellow one pictured. After '98 GMC switched engines from the larger 353 cu. "350" to the 342 cu. "350" engine, as their V-8. So I have the bigger nicer old engine, which, fortunately also has the EFI because of the year it came out. For all who don't have an idea what I'm saying, the 1996 Chevrolet Tahoe Sport, which I have, had the most hp. and torque out of any Tahoe yet, as well as the newer ones. Not as fuel efficient, but it's fairly quick.

Now, back to the story, we lined up and started off (I was in 2wd). I lost traction a little, so I ducked the RPM's down a little and he got about 2 cars ahead. I gained traction and pulled up to a door to door situation, the auto. tranny in mine shifted and I lunged ahead of him by about a car. As we neared my top speed, he caught up and won, because my car topped out :(. I need to get that fixed.

We tried again, this time I used 4wd. Off the line, we were neck and neck, and as we accelerated I kept up, and we pretty much stayed tied the whole race.

For everyone's information: he drove as fast as the car would allow, I had two different friends tell me. They road seperately in his vehicle, per race.

So stop arguing, this is what happened.
 
The 3000GT VR4/GTO is not at all slow. It does have alot of weight but it can get to the 1/4 in around mid 13s thats not slow at all!

Car-Stats.com Report for 1997 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4
Obtained from MT May, 1997
0-60: 4.8 Transmission: Manual
1/4 Mile: 13.6
1/4 Speed: 100

Thats 97' VR4 the latest model i could find stats on carstats.com. Thats pretty incredibly fast for a car that weights that much.

I have seen a Japanese verison of the 3000GT VR4 (GTO) run a flat out 13.0s in the 400M (roughly 1/4). Thats fast but it was during the winter time, and the wind was strong. Thats incredible time tho. Also in that video a R33 did 12.7 all cars did fast time due to the wind and condition on the track.
 
Originally posted by WanganDreams
I looked up some specifications online and wanted to share the information. Correct me if I'm wrong...I had to go to many different web sites and im not sure how trustworthy the information is.

--------------------VR4------Supra RZ------R34 GTR
Horsepower:---320---------320-------------327
Torque:----------315---------315-----------(293) <-- I'm sure this is wrong
0-60:-------------5.5----------5.1------------5.2
1/4 mile:--------13.9--------13.3----------13.7
Weight:--------3737--------3505---------3395

Ok, its slower, by a couple of milliseconds, but guys...comon, its not SLOW. It's not that much heavier either.

-GhostVR4
Click to expand...

The Supra RZ time is pretty good 13.3 is a very good time for the Toyota Supra. The fastest stock Supra time i have seen is flat out 13.0. The VR4 was alittle slow, the 97 VR4 did 13.6 so its quite a nice and fast car to drive in (i see alot in ATL :) was there this afternoon saw like 3 VR4 and 1 SL).

That GT-R time was very slow. They can do way better. 12.8-13.0 is the normal time for the Skyline GT-R's. The all out best time i seen on best motoring was 12.2 and that was one of the windest day and it set the record for best 400m for a stock GT-R but the wind was so strong. The Lancer Evolution 6 ran 12.5, The Impreza STi did around 12.6 those times arent normal they are so fast because of the wind that is how much wind and track condition matters.
 
I'm gonna add my two cents now.
The GTO compared to cars like Ferrari's is slow. Compared to your average road car is quick.
My dad recently managed to inherit enough money so he could buy either a 3000GT or 300ZX. Both of these car IMO are underdogs and don't get a mention compared to their bigger brothers, like the Supra RZ's and Skylines. But my main point is that these cars are really GT cars. And what does GT stand fro everybody.... Gran Touring. They're main purpose and what they're best at is touring at high speeds. I can speak from experiance. My dad went for the 300ZX in the end (mainly because he got one for a stupid price). He's also got a kit AC Cobra. The cobra has a bigger engine a lot lighter, but we were quite surprised the other day when we timed the Cobra up to 60mph and 100mph and the Nissan up to 60mph and 100mph and higher on a clear bit of road. To 60mph the Cobra completly owned the Nissan, but the Nissan suddenly came into it's element when the turbos really kicked in, and ended up caining the Cobra at 100mph above.
My point is we were told and my dad says (he's driven a 3000GT as well) that the 3000GT and 300ZX are both similar cars to drive. They certainly have very similar performance figures. Stock 300ZX 0-60mph: 5.5 secs, stock 3000GT 0-60mph: 5.5 secs. And the 300ZX really came into it's element when we went over to france in it and went down the very long and open french roads. It was very comfortable as well. In the Cobra (really a proper sports car) after 30 mins on a motor at even doing a steady 80/90 mph, it's gets uncomfortable and unbarable.
Over here (in Engeland) 3000GT's and 3000ZX's are cheaper than a brand new Ford Focus. I know which car I would go for if I had the cash to spend. Be it the 3000GT is expensive to ensure, for a second hand one you certainly get a lot of bang for your buck.
Also over here there's no real point in having a super fast car, as there just aren't the roads round where I live to drive it. So I think that the 3000GT is a real underdog and good car.
My two cents anyway...
 
The VR-4 is slower compared to cars like Ferrari's, and it also cost's over $100,000 less. :lol:

Does your dads 300zx have active suspension?
 
Yeah. We were speaking to the original owner the other day and he said how, because of the active suspension, one day he got air born over a hump back bridge (the road was clear - early in the morning) and suddenly the computer just couldn't cope with the fact that none of the wheels were touching the ground or something. So when he landed even though he had the steering wheel striaght, the wheels were just doing something completly different and he lost it when he landed. He got away with it and the car wasn't damaged at all, but he never did that again.
 
Originally posted by WanganDreams
I looked up some specifications online and wanted to share the information. Correct me if I'm wrong...I had to go to many different web sites and im not sure how trustworthy the information is.

--------------------VR4------Supra RZ------R34 GTR
Horsepower:---320---------320-------------327
Torque:----------315---------315-----------(293) <-- I'm sure this is wrong
0-60:-------------5.5----------5.1------------5.2
1/4 mile:--------13.9--------13.3----------13.7
Weight:--------3737--------3505---------3395

Ok, its slower, by a couple of milliseconds, but guys...comon, its not SLOW. It's not that much heavier either.

-GhostVR4
Click to expand...

I think theres something wrong... since when does a stock Supra take a GT-R? specially when it weighs less, obviously that driver sucked cos Ive heard of stock 13.1-2s in an R34.
 
It depends on the driver and car. If you ask anyone in the Supra community about the 13.3 Supra they will tell you that car was a "freak" and the driver was a professional.

Meaning, you will probably never see a stock Supra T go 13.3. That just rhymed.. :lol:

And 13.7 is the highest time I have ever seen for an R34 GT-R.
 
The car is far to heavy and the only people in the UK with one are all people who can't afford Skylines or Impreza and spray them luminescent and give them dumb bodykits.
 
Is it the cars fault that a lot of people in the UK have bad taste when it comes to modifying a car?

The U.S seems to be the same way when it comes to the 3000GT. There are few exceptions..
 
3000 GT VR-4 is like the coolest car that i've seen, i guess i've seen too much Supra TT, 300ZX, and all other cars that was name in this thread that was compare to the VR-4. I've hardly seen a 99 VR-4, my brother use to got a 3000GT SL and it was pretty fast on the straight line, but when people see a 3000 GT, they hardly know about that kind of car. When my brother went to Kreggen Auto Parts, the guy who works in there thought it was a new Eclipse, i was like "what the hell". My brother also got pull over by a cop because some ricer was trying to race him, and he was just tail gating the stupid ricer with his BADASS accord, so anyways, the cops pull my brother over because he was in the back, the cop told him that he has a nice car and never seen that kind of car before, the cop also said "why didn't you beat that accord, your car looks like a $50 thousand dollar car man" so my brother just tell him that he doesnt want to beat that accord, then the cops just tell my brother to drive careful next time and then thats all, NO TICKETS. Most people dont know 3000 GT, because hardly there isnt any on the road, im also Lucky to see a VR-4, because they are so rare, i think i know the reasons why, from my brother's 91 3000 GT SL, it was hard to fix, i mean very hard if you dont know nothing about electronic stuff in the car, even the car shop cant fix it. They waste over $3000 trying to fix it and it wont work, so then we have to take it to the Mitsubishi Dealer and finally they fix itfor $4000, then after one year, it broke down again, it wont pass smog, then my brother decided that, if he's going to want that car still, he's going to have spend another $2000 on that car to pass smog, and i mean its just an SL not a VR-4, if the VR-4 was mess up, times the price of the SL by 2 times or more. PLus the Insurance was $500 a month for the SL. Anyways my brother decided not to spend money on trying to fix it to pass smog, if he spend that much money on the SL trying to get it run good, why dont just buy a freaken integra and make it faster with $2000. SO he throw the damn 3000 GT and got his $6000 and then went for the integra, now when something is wrong, its easy to fix with only just couple hundred bucks. There goes my story of 3000 GT. WHen i get old, i might get a 99 VR-4, because i know i will have enough money to buy it and pay for insurance and maintenance.
 
Originally posted by Monster7
It depends on the driver and car. If you ask anyone in the Supra community about the 13.3 Supra they will tell you that car was a "freak" and the driver was a professional.

Meaning, you will probably never see a stock Supra T go 13.3. That just rhymed.. :lol:

And 13.7 is the highest time I have ever seen for an R34 GT-R.
Click to expand...

Actually although 13.3 is very fast for a Supra, They have broken that time alot in stock supras. The fastest was 13.0 flat.
 
Originally posted by rollazn
Actually although 13.3 is very fast for a Supra, They have broken that time alot in stock supras. The fastest was 13.0 flat.
Click to expand...
In America? Stock tires, drivetrain, powertrain?
 

Latest Posts

Back