In reply to Swank Force One:
15 years would be the EVO vs. the MRS, Celica, and FRS.
30 year would be the 4 cars vs. the above plus the Supra and the MR2 family.
So I still count Toyota more sporting than Mitsu.
In reply to Swank Force One:
15 years would be the EVO vs. the MRS, Celica, and FRS.
30 year would be the 4 cars vs. the above plus the Supra and the MR2 family.
So I still count Toyota more sporting than Mitsu.
In reply to alfadriver:
We don't count scion with anything.....they're the Daewoo of Toyota.
alfadriver wrote: In reply to Swank Force One: 15 years would be the EVO vs. the MRS, Celica, and FRS. 30 year would be the 4 cars vs. the above plus the Supra and the MR2 family. So I still count Toyota more sporting than Mitsu.
If you're including Celica, the Eclipse has to play, and the Lancer in general, honestly.
MR-S is still MR2 family, can't count it twice.
But yeah, i get the point. Neither company is sporty. 
Is the Scion tC remotely sporty?
G_Body_Man wrote: Is the Scion tC remotely sporty?
Sporty.....ish.
1st gens, at least.
Swank Force One wrote:G_Body_Man wrote: Is the Scion tC remotely sporty?Sporty.....ish. 1st gens, at least.
They're the successor to the Celica, just without any real, useable power.
G_Body_Man wrote:Swank Force One wrote:They're the successor to the Celica, just without any real, useable power.G_Body_Man wrote: Is the Scion tC remotely sporty?Sporty.....ish. 1st gens, at least.
More like more usable power, and i say that as someone who holds the Celica as their favorite FWD car ever.
Swank Force One wrote:G_Body_Man wrote:More like more usable power, and i say that as someone who holds the Celica as their favorite FWD car ever.Swank Force One wrote:They're the successor to the Celica, just without any real, useable power.G_Body_Man wrote: Is the Scion tC remotely sporty?Sporty.....ish. 1st gens, at least.
Fair enough. For useable power, the ZZ motors sucked. However, build the revs on a 2ZZ and HNNGH!
So much facepalm in one thread.
Maybe I should regurgitate the story about how a stock 2zz car I was driving ran dead even with a supercharged 3.8 regal (which ran 15.4 bone stock) while the 2zz was OUT of lift. When it hit lift it pulled.
Swank Force One wrote:G_Body_Man wrote:More like more usable power, and i say that as someone who holds the Celica as their favorite FWD car ever.Swank Force One wrote:They're the successor to the Celica, just without any real, useable power.G_Body_Man wrote: Is the Scion tC remotely sporty?Sporty.....ish. 1st gens, at least.
I think I heard it on here, but "The Scion TC: When you want the looks of a sports car and the performance of a minivan"
I told that joke to my brother who at the time was selling Toyota's. He said that was insulting to the Sienna.
Anyways, realistically speaking Mitsubishi in the last 15 years has had the EVO and a lot of mediocrity. Comparing them to Toyota is stupid, since the Toyota's were all really good appliances if they weren't sporty. Can't say the same about Mitsubishi.
Oh, and Toyota has had the FRS, Celica, MR-2/S, LFA, and the IS-F, not to mention the TRD line. Mitsubishi has had the Lancer/EVO and the Eclipse. Although I'd argue that if you were going to include the Eclipse you should also include a Solara.
Vigo wrote: So much facepalm in one thread. Maybe I should regurgitate the story about how a stock 2zz car I was driving ran dead even with a supercharged 3.8 regal (which ran 15.4 bone stock) while the 2zz was OUT of lift. When it hit lift it pulled.
That's a cool story about some glacially slow cars.
Vigo wrote: We should probably strive for a higher proportion of informed opinion in this thread. So we're to be comfortable criticizing the way Mitsubishi is run without knowing even the most basic things about their product line over the last few years? I am VERY glad the current Mirage exists and is sold here (yes i have driven one and checked it out on a lift). The Outlander Sport is doing very well in spite of the fact that it's below par for its segment in numerous ways. I don't understand the design direction they've taken with the 'big' Outlander this time around, and it doesn't seem to be working in the market. The Lancer is horribly outdated. The Evolution was too niche to have any real impact other than on the opinions of people who don't know a damn thing else about Mitsubishi and weren't buying a new Evo anyway. The current problems go back a long way but it seems to me that the main problem right now is that they havent put money into keeping the Lancer competitive/relevant and they have no cohesive brand image/persona that their US product jives with. I think the evo's main problem is that it's a trim level on a car that's embarassingly old to be putting on a new car lot for new car money. The fact that there's no new evo is a side effect of the fact that there's no new Lancer to put it on.
Mitsubishi Motors North America is a tiny, tiny arm of Mitsubishi as a whole. Even at their peak, they were a very small part of the Mitsubishi portfolio. I'm sad to see the Evo go, but in America, they were a 3rd tier Japanese company, Mitsubishi was well aware of that fact, and they're doing what any smart business would do; divesting themselves of vestigial limbs
Toyota should also get credit for the IS300 and the wagon variant, IS300 sportcross? RWD with a nice straight six should get sport points. Also SC300 with a manual trans. SC400 and 430 were also sportyish. The real takeaway is that Toyota's appliance cars were at or near the top in every category, and they still had fun cars available. I hope Mitsubishi comes up with an Evo replacement.
Yeah, except where are the electric cars? Just like the last boss of Lotus had all kinds of plans that never materialized. I'm all for a heavily EV-reliant Mitsubishi, but I don't see the product coming along in the US market anytime soon.
I drove an I-miev and didn't hate it. It was definitely the cheapest new EV for a reason, but like the Mirage, I'm glad it exists. Unlike the Mirage, there don't seem to be a hundred thousand paying Americans who agree with me. 
Fueled by Caffeine wrote: They are isuzu Jr.
Easy, there. 
Not really an apples and apples comparison, Isuzu is a truck and diesel engine manufacturer which branched out into passenger cars for a while. They are the single biggest supplier of all those small Euro diesels everybody here says they love. Diesel Honda in Europe? Powered by Isuzu. 
Stationary diesels (gensets, pumps, etc)? CAT owns the US market, elsewhere it's Isuzu.
Mitsubishi is, as noted elsewhere, a huge conglomerate of which passenger cars are a small niche. You'll see the Diamond Star on all kinds of components: switches, alternators, starters, control units, etc. They typically are a contract manufacturer; bring them your plans and specs and they'll build to your needs. I've seen their logo on stuff going back to the 1970's on all kinds of stuff: motorcycles, cars, tractors, stationary engines, you name it. They also manufacture their own line of consumer electronics but more importantly they are also a contract manufacturer for others.
The Evo wasn't even a rounding error on their bottom line and honestly it would not surprise me to see them pull out of the US in the next few years.
Oh, you guys didn't hear? Mitsubishi and Subaru are actually two feuding races of aliens that came to earth to settle the galactic war once and for all by having a series of rally races. Long story short- the subaruians won. And mitsubiE36 M3es have conceded loss.
Think I'm nuts? Two terms: Pleiades. Diamond STAR motors.
I loved it back in the day in WRC when Subaru and Mitsu battled it out. Those were the days but long, long gone now. Mitsubishi started to lose it when the took the Eclipse from an AWD turbo snorter to a FWD cruiser with an automatic. Then the long decline of the Evo began. Good up until the end but essentially no improvements along the way. Thanks to Subaru for seeing the light and continually improving. Now they have the Golf R and the Focus RS to contend with. Good stuff. Competition improves the breed.
Desmond wrote: Did Mitsubishi ever make a RWD car?
Mitsubishi currently makes a RWD car and sells it in the US. Motor in the back too. Tons of torque. Small. Lightweight. Affordable.
Mitsubishi Cars are no longer owned by Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI). They are part of the Mitsubishi corporation but not MHI. MHI is very quick to point this out. Although they still have some operational partnerships, different company now. It only got back to Mitsubishi ownership after being part of Pheonix Capital, and DaimlerChrysler before that. You are looing at 89-90 since MHI had anything to do with the cars.
Mitsubishi Heavy as put stuff into space, builds bullet trains, elevators, tvs, air conditioners, big diesel engines, bigger diesel engines, scientific equipment, etc. etc. etc. They are the Japanese GE. Into EVERYTHING (banking too)
Oh yeah, they do a pretty kick ass turbo, if you are interested.
Mitsubishi makes airplanes. Toyota does not.
Appleseed wrote: Mitsubishi makes airplanes. Toyota does not.
So did Saab...
Swank Force One wrote:jstein77 wrote: C&D tested the latest Mirage and pronounced it dreadful. Nonetheless, I see quite a few of them on the road, mostly because they're cheap (the Yugo syndrome).I tested the latest Mirage and pronounced it horrifying.
I looked at the new Mirage and pronounced it horrifying.
You'll need to log in to post.
