HiWire

This is bittersweet (MotorWeek correctly foresaw the cancellations of the Japanese sports cars in North America), but it's also a nice reminder of how much the original cars cost and how well they performed in stock form:

kensin

iTrader: (22)

it's an amazing machine

Spalato

iTrader: (33)

FD killing it at a significant HP disadvantage

And when I see that super heavy VR-4 with the transversely mounted engine...

HiWire

... and everyone wants more power. This quick review reminds us of how far the tuning scene has come. I'm glad there is a lot more quality information out there and some great aftermarket support (I'd love for Mazda to step up with rotary car parts support the way Nissan did with the Skyline):

Sgtblue

iTrader: (16)

What??? Where is the "energy impact score" with the barrels of oil use figures? What about MPG? Where is the geeky guy telling me how comfortable the car is and how to use the seat adjusters? Oh... and how much for a hybrid version?

It's been a while. Enjoyed it.

Natey

iTrader: (19)

Whats up with the panel fitment on the hood of that Supra? Did they forget to close the hood, or...?

Another thing I noticed, is the 3000GT was almost 10K more expensive than the RX-7, and it was even more expensive than the reigning king of 90's Japanese cars, the Supra.

Moment of silence for the poor saps that bought the Mits. If you've ever driven one, you know.

HiWire

You can easily get into a cheap 3000GT or Stealth, for good reasons. It was my buddy's dream car as a kid, but even he admits they are rolling disasters.

MattGold

iTrader: (103)

Great video.

I always loved this article talking about the heyday of the Japanese Supercars:
Seven Samurai: A look back at Japan?s warrior supercars | Driving

Balefire

Fun to reminisce. Thx

arghx

iTrader: (3)

There's a lot of VR-4 hate in this thread. I like them a lot. The fixed all the big problems by 1995 model year, much like the FD. There is a bit of wannabe Testarossa to it though.

They weigh about as much as a current generation Mustang GT, and they are AWD.


Regarding the price, it is amazing how different Mitsubishi was back then. They had upmarket aspirations like Hyundai does today. Now Mitsubishi is Hyundai and Hyundai is Mitsubishi.

Sgtblue

iTrader: (16)

I did too. Liked the looks and interior. I actually seriously considered a low-mile Spyder that the local dealership got in...would have around been 96 or 97. That was probably even heavier than the normal VR4 ...and felt like it. But not why I didn't get it....they just wanted too much.

Natey

iTrader: (19)

I'm not hating, and if that was the path to the Evolution, then I'm all for the 3000GT. I had Starion back in the day and had tons o fun in it, so I'm definitely not a Mits hater.

I just had a chance to trade cars at the track one day with a friend who has an insanely clean 3000GT and could not believe how bad the brakes were and how much it pushed through tight corners.

It's a car to hop on the freeway, set the CC at 80 and put the miles on. Like a Mercedes 500SL maybe. Super comfortable Grand Tourer, but no FD on a road course.

My point with the last line of my previous post was about resale value. If you bought a TT Supra in '94 you will have doubled your money by now. The Mits buyer loses 40k for his investment, if he's lucky and took care of the car.

Spalato

iTrader: (33)

The weight I can deal with...but that front-transverse engine on a long 2-door AWD coupe...I just can't handle it It just feels wrong...

Mid-rear transverse?...Like the old school Ferrari's and the NSX heh I can live with that

Am I the only one that feel this way?

HiWire

I apologize for repeating hearsay. One of my first experiences with Japanese supercars was a long, educational chat with a 3000GT owner who was passionate about his car. I'd like to drive all of the Japanese sports cars of the '90s at least once.

arghx

iTrader: (3)

no different than an Evo. I mean, they had to make it fit all that in there somehow didn't they? It would probably be even more nose heavy if they had made it longitudinal, and even more expensive if it had been mid engine.

Remember that there was a base model Dodge version of that car with basically a minivan engine in it (single over head cam non turbo version). I don't know what the volumes were but I wouldn't be surprised if the 3000GT/Stealth in all its various trims (base/SOHC, SL which is still FWD but DOHC, and AWD twin turbo Vr-4) sold way way better than the FD and actually made Mitsubishi/Chrysler money.

Spalato

iTrader: (33)

Exactly why I dislike the Evo

I don't think there are any significant front end weight distribution difference between the Evo (transverse) and WRX (longitudinal)....I think they are both equally nose heavy...

But I'm maybe just old school and prefer longitudinal engine placement...especially in a performance car

djseven

iTrader: (56)

I think what us old timers on the forum are reminded of here after watching these videos is "the seven cant lose"!

Its great to see how capable they were in stock form. Very few FD owners today will ever know what a joy they are to drive before you get out of control with the mods and kill the little bit of civility they came with.

arghx

iTrader: (3)

A flat 4 is a lot easier to package than a 60 degree V6. If the 3000GT Vr-4 had been longitudinally mounted, like a 300ZX twin turbo, they probably would have had trouble packaging the transfer case and all the AWD stuff without putting more weight over the front axle.

That's why my '95 is basically stock except a catback and JDM downpipe. Even the non R1 suspension is pretty stiff if you have bumpy roads in your area. The stock clutch and flywheel are not easy to drive. The cabin gets really hot if you don't have A/C and all the heat shielding. Aftermarket pads make a lot of noise and/or dust, big wheels with low profile tires make the ride stiffer, pulling the interior apart for audio changes breaks all the fasteners and makes the panels rattle... the list goes on and on.

BLUE TII

iTrader: (9)

The NSX and the FD are sports cars.

The Supra, 300ZX and 3000GT are Grand Touring cars.

A Japanese test with the 20B Cosmo in there with the other GT cruisers and the Skyline GTR thrown in too would be cool.

In the tuner segment the Greddy 2nd gen Eclipse ('95+) would have been awesome. It is like the later Evo models, but with better double wishbone front suspension.

Those Eclipse have VERY high performance potential.

BLUE TII

iTrader: (9)

Then why does Subaru screw it up so bad placing the entire engine well in front of the front axle centerline for crap handling?

Notably, Audi did Subaru one further and balanced a straight 5 completely in front of the front axle centerline in their early Quattros.

Later when Audi "just" went to the 3cyl long V6 perched out front handling was greatly improved, but still pretty bad.

I guess I am saying it is not so much packaging as the **** handling that results from putting the engine way up front that stopped other manufacturers from doing longitudinal AWD drivetrains.

ACR_RX-7

iTrader: (1)

You answered your own question. The AWD longitudinal drivetrain is the issue. Audis, Subarus, and VW had the front diff in damn near the center of the transmission. Nissan did it better with the VQ35 AWD variants and the GTR by putting the diff integral with the front sump and had a transfer case off the back of the transmission like a truck. I think the easiest explanation for the other makes is probably cost. It's probably cheaper to make it one unit, also the VW has a FWD longitudinal engine, similar to a Chrysler 300M or an Intrepid.

At least the engines are really easy to remove in that configuration.

BLUE TII

iTrader: (9)

Happens often with rhetorical questions.

Spirit-RE

iTrader: (25)

The evo is a brilliant chassis compared to respectable sportscars, and is especially impressive considering its derived from an ecobox.

In cases where the front diff is in the trans, I don't understand the transverse vs longitudinal argument. Audi and subaru are longitudinal, and place the engine in the front bumper. Tell me how a v8 hanging off the front axle is a performance improvement over transverse in an awd application? The tuning and engineering is the bigger factor than layout from how I see it.


Right. Worse yet, they are at that Hyundai level AND now a subsidiary of Nissan.


Turns out, "saving your way to a profit" doesn't work in the car industry. Its crazy that for the behemoth that Mitsubishi group is, they hardly give two ***** about the car company.

Moe Greene

iTrader: (2)

I love when people who think Mitsubishi is just a car company tell me that they are going out of business. If only they knew how big and profitable Mitsubishi group really is.

Moe Greene

iTrader: (2)

Don't jump to conclusions on the 3000gt VR4. People think that the 3000gt VR4 is bad and unreliable because of idiots who don't take care of the car and mod them without a proper tune.... sound familiar?

But I have spoken to VR4Jon, his conclusion on the car is:
Not great on the track but on the street and on twisty mountains it starts to shine. Also this car was very ahead of its time in terms of tech, if you get a chance read on what tech it had I'm sure you will be surprised.