GTP Cool Wall: 1999 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4
- Thread starter White & Nerdy
- 83 comments
- 7,412 views
- 1,591
- Under the Hood
Maybe for the '99, I'm talking about when they first came out:
http://www.edmunds.com/mitsubishi/3000gt/1999/road-test.html
http://www.cars.com/mitsubishi/3000gt/1991/expert-reviews
Toyota Celica GT-Four
Eclipse GSX
Talon TSi
BMW 325ix
Subaru Alcyone SVX
Audi Quattro
- 3,200
- Murcie LP710
- 17,865
- 509
The price I referenced was for the '95 model, and that 30 grand price point vanished pretty fast.
And I'd rather have the 325ix out of that list, but for the money they wanted for the VR-4 you could just buy an E36 M3 in '95 and save several grand.
And I'd rather have the 325ix out of that list, but for the money they wanted for the VR-4 you could just buy an E36 M3 in '95 and save several grand.
- 3,200
- Murcie LP710
Which is why the VR-4 was ahead of anything else at the time
....What?
The 3000GT competed with the likes of the 300ZX, Skyline GT-R, Supra, RX-7 and, rather worryingly, the Honda/Acura NSX.
Now, taking the Skyline out of the picture for North America, the 3000GT was admittedly more technologically advanced. However, the technology didn't actually seem to do anything to aid the performance of the vehicle except add more and more weight. It was quick off the line but sluggish at a roll, it had a shedload of body roll and it understeered like a pig.
And it was also significantly less reliable than its more popular competitors. Several owners will attest to the fact that you have to absolutely love the looks of the vehicle in order to get over the fact that you're going to be spending a heck of a lot more dough keeping the 3000GT running tip top. Gearbox failures in particular are prominent, as well as the ECU and the very tech you're saying makes it far above anything else from the time.
- 4,035
- Gothenburg
- Agremont
Cool. I've always liked them. Especially the older look.
- 1,591
- Under the Hood
Obviously those cars are miles ahead on performance. If you read what I actually posted I was comparing the VR-4 to other AWD sports cars available at that time. Any serious attempts to pack technology into an AWD car before 1991 was basically zero (excluding exotics like 959). The VR-4 helped clear the path for the Evo and STi today.
- 1,591
- Under the Hood
? The two other all-wheel drive cars cited in this thread weren't serious?
All-wheel drive, turbocharging, all-wheel steering. 1989
All-wheel drive, turbocharging, all-wheel steering. 1988. Homologation special, to boot.
Like I said, "basically zero"
R32 is good, but you're comparing a Galant with a GTO? Might as well compare an Eclipse GSX to Evo MR...
- 3,200
- Murcie LP710
- 23,800
- Philippines
Like I said, "basically zero"
R32 is good, but you're comparing a Galant with a GTO? Might as well compare an Eclipse GSX to Evo MR...
As Toronado says:
The 3000GT was based on a shortened Diamante platform... yet somehow... somehow came out heavier than the four-door Galant VR4. The first VR4 was just a four-cylinder, but the last one had a slightly smaller twin-turbo V6, with AYC and all the other handling goodies, was lighter than the concurrent 3000GT and about just as quick.
The 3000GT may have sounded good on paper, and it was a truly powerful car, but it was basically a front-wheel drive full-sized sedan clothed in a coupe body and fitted with twin turbos and a transfer case. Which is why it doesn't get nearly as much love as the Supra or the Z.
