Mitsubishi GTO MR 1999

185
United States
Los Angeles,
This car was the fastest JDM aside from the R34 Skyline. In game, stock to stock, it beat the R32 Skyline GTR from 0 to top speed and left the FD3 TTs and especially the Z32 TTs in the dust.

I have an overwhelming amount of video and magazine evidence, but it also covers the USDM1994-1999 3000GT VR-4, another car I'd love to see.
Links/Vids:

*Best Motoring* is a famous Japanese television show that’s focuses on Japanese performance cars. *They’re drivers are actual race car drivers that have WON AWARDS* They tested all the performance cars of the era. *In 1994 Mitsubishis 3000GT VR4 beat the R32 Skyline GTR a car that weighs 3100 lbs and dynos 270@whp* ! *And then in 1996, the GTO MR, which is identical to the 2G VR4, with 67 less pounds, bested an R33 Skyline GTR pulling a 12.8 quarter mile* *The 1990 300ZX Twin Turbo got 14.1 to the 1/4m for a TT 2+0 Slicktop, the lightest year*
*The Skyline GTR was the fastest model Nissan made, their Halo car. The J spec VR4 is identical to the USDM version, how would it lose to a 300ZX Twin Turbo which is a much less powerful and heavier car than the Skyline GTRs above? These videos alone prove how much faster the VR4 is*

*1990 to 1993*

1. *Road and Track 1989 300ZX Twin Turbo Debut* http://www.300zx.cl/ga2/300zx2/images/ryt895.jpg *0 to 60 / 6.5s. / 0 to 100 16.5s, quarter mile of 15.0@96mph*

2. *Road and Track 1990 3000GT VR4 Debut* https://www.google.com/imgres?imgur...ubOzvpBK3qrEuS6PU=&docid=t4yeibB8a0bzPM&itg=1
*0 to 60 6.3s / 0 to 100 16.2 / quarter mile 14.5@95.0mph* In Road and Track, the VR4 consistently got more praise and better times

4. http://www.300zx.cl/ga3/300zx3/images/car3005.jpg -
*Car and Driver, 1992, Slide the High Country*
*300ZX Twin Turbo - 0 to 60 5.5, quarter mile 14.2@101mph*
*3000GT VR4 - 0 to 60 5.4, quarter mile 14.0@99mph*
Considering the VR4 is 350+ lbs more than the Z, this is a win for the VR4. It also won in handling, the Z pulled .89 and the VR4 .91 in the slalom

5. https://www.caranddriver.com/review...e-stealth-r-t-turbo-archived-comparison-test/ - The 300ZX Twin Turbo won with a faster ET and trap. The Stealth weighed 200 lbs more. *Car and Driver states this is the fastest Z they've ever tested, and can't ever get these numbers again from the Z for over 4 years of testing*


6. http://www.lov2xlr8.no/brochures/mopar/91_4.html -. 1G VR-4 running to 60mph in 4.89 seconds and the quarter mile in 13.67 ET taken from various road tests, with comparisons to other cars' times.

*1994 to 1999*

1. - *MotorWeek, 1994*
*3000GT VR4 0 - 60 in 4.9 and the quarter mile in 13.5@103mph. MW couldn't get the Z faster than 13.7@103, so the VR4 is 3 to 4 car lengths ahead at the same trap speed*

2. https://www.motortrend.com/news/virtual-velocity/
*MotorTrend 1995 Virtual Velocity*
*300ZX Twin Turbo - 13.9@102.0mph*
*3000GT VR4 - 13.5@101.6 mph*
The Z is 4-6 car lengths away and moving .4s mph faster - it physically cannot pass up that much ET difference.

3. -
*Stock 1999 3000GT VR4 quarter mile of 13.2@102.7* This is a thoroughly stock car. It took him over a month to get the launch down.

4. http://www.300zx.cl/ga/300zx/images/rtt10.jpg -
*Road and Track 1994 The 300 HP Club*
*300ZX Twin Turbo - 14.4@99.7mph*
*3000GT VR4 - 14.2@99.0 mph*
Another instance of the VR4 being too far ahead for the Z to catch up to with under a single mph. *It lost by 2 SECONDS around a track to the VR4* http://www.300zx.cl/ga/300zx/images/rtt07.jpg

5. https://www.motortrend.com/news/mitsubishi-3000gt-vr4/ -
The launch was bad for both the Supra TT and VR4, *yet the VR4 did 0-60 in 4.8s* and tied the Supra TT in the 1/4m @ 13.6s, with the Supra trapping substantially higher (Obviously).

6. https://archiv.3000gt.org/viewtopic.php?t=2582
*Popular Mechanics 1999 Acceleration Nation*
*1999 3000GT VR-4 - 0 to 60 in 5.00s, 1/4m in 13.44s @ 101.79mph*
They could have had a better launch, but who cares, no 300ZX Twin Turbo is pulling a 13.4 ET without bolt ons and definitely slick rubber.

7. Seems the Z32 isn't all it's shaped up to be, it lost to a 250HP Corvette by a SECOND around a track and ran identical numbers. QUOTE: *When all was said and done, the Cor¬vette turned laps in the one-minute 38-second range, at an average speed of 64 mph, while the Nissan was almost a second per lap slower. "No big deal," you're saying? On the contrary. It is a big deal in a two-hour race. Far more important, the Corvette—with its hip-hugging seats, smooth power delivery, and neutral handling—is far easier to drive for long peri¬ods at those speeds. To put the Cor¬vette's racetrack prowess into per¬spective, remember that the big V-8 produces 50 fewer horsepower than the twin-turbo terror* (LOL) https://www.caranddriver.com/review...fx3-vs-nissan-300zx-archived-comparison-test/ http://www.300zx.cl/ga2/300zx/images/cvsg4.jpg - *300ZX Twin Turbo - 0 to 60mph 5.6, 0 to 100mph 16.3, quarter mile in 14.6@96mph*
*Car and Driver never got this slow of a time in a 1G VR4 or Stealth Twin Turbo*

8. Publications notice the VR4 being markedly faster than the 300ZX Twin Turbo.
*Since 1996, it became 320 hp and 315 lbft. It feels decisively more punchy than the contemporary 300ZX turbo yet without adding turbo lag* -AutoZine Magazine https://www.autozine.org/Archive/Mitsubishi/old/GTO.html

9. Wikipedia states that the 2G VR4 is faster. *The new 6-speed, while notchy, was geared well and the extra horsepower and torque allowed it to out-accelerate most of its' rivals from a standing start to top speed. Road tests at the time showed the second generation 3000GT VR-4 to be capable of 60 mph (97 km/h) in 4.8 - 5.4 seconds[18] and the quarter mile in 13.5 seconds at 101 to 105 miles per hour (163 to 169 km/h), making it faster in a straight line than the Nissan 300ZX Twin Turbo and Mazda RX-7 Twin Turbo.[19][2][20]* https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitsubishi_GTO Wikipedia has to have sources to prove the above to be true, or it gets taken down.

10. *Where are all the stock Z’s running mid 13s stock? It never tested below a 13.7 ET with a professional driver* The proof is overwhelming - after 1994, the Nissan 300ZX Twin Turbo couldn't touch the Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4.The 1994-2001 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4, with it’s 320HP and 315TQ, is faster than any version of the 1990-1999 Nissan 300ZX Twin Turbo, including earlier models that were slightly lighter.

11. https://www.modernracer.com/mitsubishi3000gtvr4 -. This site averages out *every single time recorded for each car*
*The 2G VR-4 got a 13.5@105.0. Yes, the VR-4 traps higher than the Z most of the time*


12. The gear ratios are better in the VR-4 and the Z32 TT *cannot physically pass the VR4 after the brutal AWD launch that leaves the ZX flailing and two car lengths behind at 150mph.
*Ratios, 1990-1996 Nissan 300ZX Twin Turbo: 40/67/100/130/155 (OD), 3.69:1 final ratio*
*Ratios, 1994-1999 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4: 40/69/106/143/155/159 (OD), 3.87:1 final ratio*
As anyone can guess, the VR-4 holds more boost and for longer. *The VR-4 has 12.5 PSI, the Z only holds 9.5 PSI* To top it off, the Z when stock doesn’t hold boost for long and it drops off before redline; the VR-4 holds boost from 3K-RPM to redline at 6.5K on the tach. Redline shifts on the VR4 make sure it stays in boost, the Z again starts to lose boost at 6,000-RPM, 400 RPM before it’s at it’s 6.4K Redline.
Sources: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.zc...ion-forum/164530-300zx-stock-boost.html?amp=1
https://www.nissanforums.com/threads/300zx-tt-stock-boost.65627/
http://www.300zx.cl/ga/300zx/images/rtt08.jpg

*The proof is OVERWHELMING that the 1994-2001 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4 is faster than the 1989-1998 Nissan 300ZX Twin Turbo stock for stock, and that goes for any model Z, Slicktop to T-Top to 2+2*
 
But we already have this in the game already, albeit the older '91 Twin Turbo model although I think that one has a 5-speed tranny while this one has a 6-speed.

Having said that, if PD considers adding another of this, I just hope it will be the 3000GT this time because it is LHD.
 
But we already have this in the game already, albeit the older '91 Twin Turbo model although I think that one has a 5-speed tranny while this one has a 6-speed.

Having said that, if PD considers adding another of this, I just hope it will be the 3000GT this time because it is LHD.
The 5 speed is **** compared to the 2md models. Heavy, awful gearing, and a disgrace to the namesake imo

But thank you for pointing that out, appreciate it. If they choose the 1g I won't play GT8
 
The 5 speed is **** compared to the 2md models. Heavy, awful gearing, and a disgrace to the namesake imo
I know but why did they choose to put that in the first place if it was like that instead of what you're trying to suggest here? Probably it's because it is the first rendition of the GTO that the brand made in the 90s, I don't know. And by the way, what do you mean by 1g?
 
I know but why did they choose to put that in the first place if it was like that instead of what you're trying to suggest here? Probably it's because it is the first rendition of the GTO that the brand made in the 90s, I don't know. And by the way, what do you mean by 1g?
1G = way less boost and power. I hate the one in GTS Sport, it's not a proper representation of what this car can do. Best case they add botch imo

The two are seperate platforms. 1991-1993 has 300hp/300tq, a 5 speed, pushes out 10PSI and longer gearing. This goes for all regions except Europe which had 13G Turbos for the Autobahn.

The USDM /J spec model upgraded in 1994. Both had worked over internals, a 6 speed, faster spooling 9B Turbos making 12.5PSI and had no extra electronics by 1997 leaving it much lighter. It had 320hp/315tq and the gear ratios were much,much quicker. Even a 1994 US VR4 can attain 13.5@103. 1Gs are quick off the line and fall flat in 4th whereas the 2nd gen doesn't. Driven both extensively.

FYI, all GTO MR models have less weight and deletion of all electronics.

I see the second gen as a better and different car than the '91-'93 I'm down to have both,but a second gen needs to be in there.


1G= 1st Gen 1991-1993
2G= 2nd Gen 1994-1999

There are a small amount of enthusiasts that like the first gen, but its small compared to the second gen fans.
PD put it in bc they hadn't done a 1st Gen since GT2 and thought that's what fans wanted; I checked the forums, only the diehard (small) group of 1G fans plays GTS

Thx for your interest!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The two are seperate platforms. 1991-1993 has 300hp/300tq, a 5 speed, pushes out 10PSI and longer gearing. This goes for all regions except Europe which had 13G Turbos for the Autobahn.

The USDM /J spec model upgraded in 1994. Both had worked over internals, a 6 speed, faster spooling 9B Turbos making 12.5PSI and had no extra electronics by 1997 leaving it much lighter. It had 320hp/315tq and the gear ratios were much,much quicker. Even a 1994 US VR4 can attain 13.5@103. 1Gs are quick off the line and fall flat in 4th whereas the 2nd gen doesn't. Driven both extensively.

FYI, all GTO MR models have less weight and deletion of all electronics.

I see the second gen as a better and different car than the '91-'93 I'm down to have both,but a second gen needs to be in there.
Oh, you forgot to mention also that they're all 4WD unless I'm wrong.
 
Oh, you forgot to mention also that they're all 4WD unless I'm wrong.
Yes, youre correct :) ALL models had 4WS including MRs

In the US there were 3 generations:
1. 1991-1993 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4 (all electronics)
2. 1994-1998 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4 (by 1997 only 4WS was left)
3. 1999 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4 (Sail Wings)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
In the US there were 3 generations:
1. 1991-1993 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4 (all electronics)
2. 1994-1998 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4 (by 1997 only 4WS was left)
3. 1999 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4 (Sail Wings)
Also those generations had different headlamps too. The 1999 one in particular has a front that looks somewhat similar to an older Dodge Viper but that's just me.
 
Hmm, if you mean only 90s, then NSX Type S was faster. Both on track and drag strip. I also think RX7 of that time was faster, but not sure which exact model. Evo 6 was possibly faster too.

Anyway, it would be nice to see this car back. I think it has a chance, but not in GTS, unfortunately. More likely in next GT title.
 
mitsubishi_gto_88.jpeg
 
Hmm, if you mean only 90s, then NSX Type S was faster. Both on track and drag strip. I also think RX7 of that time was faster, but not sure which exact model. Evo 6 was possibly faster too.

Anyway, it would be nice to see this car back. I think it has a chance, but not in GTS, unfortunately. More likely in next GT title.

The last model RX7 ran pretty much the same numbers as the GTO MR, a bit slower due to not having as strong of a top end (it was faster than non MR models).
As far as the NSX Type R, you may be correct (I know it's faster around any track for sure) - the whole episode of the debut of the GTO MR had the NSX Type R in it as well. I'd have to go find the video on YT.
The Evo 6 was slower by quite a bit than even a non MR GTO - it falls flat after 110mph or so and doesn't have as strong of a top end. I owned a stock 1996 VR4 and have raced Evo 8-10 and I pass all of them around 100mph. All Evos are faster off the line I think.

All good thoughts! Thank you for your comment.
 
I've spent a LOT of time playing with the GTO, all stock, in GTS. It's high mid tier in N300 and ranked higher than it's peers on GTS websites:
https://www.designphreak.com/gtsport/
The above website ranks all the cars. If you look at the far right there's a column called "Avg" which averages all the stats out (or something). The list is very accurate if you click "Avg" and make the list start from highest (4.20ish) to lowest (2.90ish).
The GTO is ranked higher than the Supra TT and RX7 TT and, as I suspected, the 89 Fairlady 300ZX Twin Turbo is last in the group of these 90s JDM classics.

The GTO beats the Z from 0-125+mph with the Z getting the head start. This means that any track that doesn't go above 130mph, the GTO will win. Imo it has way better handling and stability and is much faster low end and mid range. Tracks like Goodwood are perfect for the GTO Twin Turbo and awful for the Z.
In GT5, the 98 GTO MR is a Level 6 and 96 GTO TT a Level 5. The 89 Fairlady Z TT is a level 4. All Z32s are level 4.

Compared to the later gens, the '91 Mitsubishi GTO Twin Turbo is definitely a nerf. The later gens are much much faster - they're able to beat any Z32 or FD3 from 0-Top Speed and the Supra Twin Turbo couldn't pass the VR-4/GTO until 130-150mph.

But this GTO holds it's own, and that's impressive considering it's missing 45HP and a 6 speed transmission with shorter gears. It's actually quite quick and in the higher end of the mid N300 tier.
 
Last edited:
Well what about a bolt on z32 vs bpu 3000gt vr4?

How fast do bolt on vr4s trap? 107- 108? What about z32s? I think probably over 112. As soon as it hooks, it's gonna reel in the vr4 and pass it quick.
 
Last edited:
Well what about a bolt on z32 vs bpu 3000gt vr4?

How fast do bolt on vr4s trap? 107- 108? What about z32s? I think probably over 112. As soon as it hooks, it's gonna reel in the vr4 and pass it quick.
bro
1. its been 2 years lol. salt. the vr4 will reach the 420 mark much faster bpu vs bpu
2. the guy specifically said stock only. not bpu.
2. I had a 1992 twin tubo 300zx, stock to stock the 6 speed vr4 is faster. I raced a guy with a 1998 vr4 back when we were both stock,from a dig he was a car length ahead at 140-ish mph from a dig so they don't reel it in. low speed rolls were pretty even. the late gen vr4 is just the faster car, it feels faster as well. The z corners better and has a better interior and is more engaging to drive.later gen vr4 wins in a straight line if both are stock
 
Back