Mitsubishi 3000GT
Jeno M. Bratts
I would like to know everything there is to know about the Mitsubishi
3000GT. Anything, positive or negative about this car I'd like to read it. I
hope someone out there can help... Thanks.
JB
Bob Kehoe
One of the cars I drove last weekend. Well actually, it was the VR-4
version. Only had about 15 minutes in it, so couldn't make a good enuf
judgement. This was also about the 13th car of the day and I was
getting
pretty rummy. By that time, the synchros were a bit messed up so I
was having some difficulty on 2-3-4 and back down. Gobs of power, but
overall a little too gaudy for my tastes.
Hard to make a judgement in such a short time.
-cannonball-
eliot
4000 pounds. 'nuff said
eliot
Curtis Eng
Well, I own a 91 Dodge Stealth R/T which is exactly the same except for the body
style although the width, length, and height are the same. Anyways, I pretty
impressed with it. I don't have the turbo model but the 3.0 liter V6 24 valve
DOHC engine gives me 222 hp. The car is heavy though. About 3,800 lbs but it
still cooks when I tell it to. The suspension is very stiff which makes for a
rough ride but kick-ass cornering. My fiancee gets car sick in it because she
feels every bump and also because I take corners fast. For the R/T, you get Good
year 225/55 VR Gatorbacks. Good tires but expensive. I blew one out and it cost
me $235 to replace it. This series of tire is specially made for the Stealth R/T
so they are hard to come by. By the way, I blew it out because I ran over a
bolt, not because I was driving like a maniac. For the R/T turbo, I think you
get 250 series. There is a button that enables the toggling between tour or
sport suspension but even on tour it's still pretty stiff.
The interior of the Stealth and 3000GT are identicle unlike the exterior. I have
the leather package so the seats are very comfy and hold you in nice and tight.
I don't know how the non-leather package seats are. Anyways, the controls and
displays are well lit and easy to see. They don't use a digital speedometer or
tach because real racing cars don't use that stuff. All instruments use the
needle pointing to the number method but they look good. Trust me. The steering
wheel is very thick and easy to hold on to. The air bag doesn't effect it in
anyway IMO. There are controls on the steering wheel to operate your stereo
system. I guess the designers didn't want you to get in a wreck while your
fiddling with your stereo. I have the stock CD/tape deck/tuner system and it
sounds really good. In my previous car I had a Nakamichi deck with ADS speakers,
amps, etc. so I'm comparing the Stealth's stereo to some pretty good stuff. For
stock equipment, it's pretty decent. Visibility inside is not so good. Because
of the low roof, there's less window to look out of all around you. Sometimes I
bump my head on the top of the windshield when I look out of my left view mirror
but that's only when I trying to make sure there's nobody in my blind spot. The
back seats are pretty much useless. There's 0 leg room and the roof is so low
that some tall people might bump their head. The seats are pretty comfy though.
The engine compartment is crammed to the max with this and that. It's a bitch to
work on. You can't even see or get to the plugs unless you take the valve cover
off. Very stupid. Changing the oil and filter is O.K. but anything else could
be a real task.
The car is fun and nice but a definite money pit. Between my car loan payment,
insurance, tabs, gas (20 gallon tank of high-octane), and unexpected tires
blowing out, it's hurting my pocket book in a big and special way. Take this
kind of stuff into consideration before you buy this car because this car is very
expensive to own.
T. Steegman
300 bhp
all wheel drive
superior ergonomics
4 wheel abs discs
>
>eliot
James W. Adams
>4000 pounds. 'nuff said
Yeah, Danny Sullivan said (in the recent R&T handling test) it was the
only car he drove where he felt truly sorry for the tires.
--
James W. Adams -- NIH Scientific Computing Resource Center
Building 12A, Room 1050 phone: (301) 402-3488
National Institutes of Health uucp: uunet!nih-csl!jwa
Bethesda, MD 20892 Internet: j...@alw.nih.gov
Damien Hanna
V6 twin turbo
0-60 is 5.7 secs
Top speed circa 160mhp
4WD
4WS
Mega-electronics (check out the air-conditioning system with air current
monitoring and graphical display).
Very "chippable"
There is a UK company re-chipping the Nissan 300ZX to boost performance
from its stock 275bhp to 444bhp ! The cost - a measly 1000 pounds. The
0-60 time is reputed to be circa 4.1 secs !!!!! I love computer technology !
BTW, anyone seen the road test on the McLaren F1 road car ? We are talking
performance here ... 0-60 3.8 secs, top speed, wait for it, circa 260mph !!!!
No joke, its real. Now if only I could get insured .....
Damien.
Guy.Humpage
>
>There is a UK company re-chipping the Nissan 300ZX to boost performance
>from its stock 275bhp to 444bhp ! The cost - a measly 1000 pounds. The
>0-60 time is reputed to be circa 4.1 secs !!!!! I love computer technology !
>
There is one company who made a chipped 300ZX with 420 Bhp and then painted
the car with 420 pictures of horses, the final result; a car with a zebra
style body... v.nice indeed
>BTW, anyone seen the road test on the McLaren F1 road car ? We are talking
>performance here ... 0-60 3.8 secs, top speed, wait for it, circa 260mph !!!!
>No joke, its real. Now if only I could get insured .....
>
>Damien.
The McLaren F1 hasn't actually been built yet, just a preproduction model,
at this weeks launch in Monaco, journalists weren't even allowed to sit
in the car!!
This week's Autocar and this month's CAR magazines both have articles on
the F1, it looks gorgeous.... one slight problem though, in fact 530,000
very big problems (plus tax) (thats pound sterling NOT US dollars !!!!)
I've got the CAR article on the F1 here in front of me....
Some technical highlights/features....
3 seats (centre driving position)
6.1 litre BWM V12 engine
550 BHP at 7500rpm
441 lb ft between 4000 and 7000 rpm (260 lb ft at 1500rpm)
Six gears
only 300 to be made at the rate of 50 a year
168.8 inches long
71.6 inches wide
0.34 Cd
Fan operated 'ground-effect' system
2244lb weight
2x 4.0 cu ft storage capacity
double wishbones f+r
front anti-roll bar
Bilstein dampers
Kenwood CD player (no radio)
Brembo Discs with active brake coolant (flaps open to direct air onto discs)
NO ABS
I think that's about it...
Guy
--
Guy Humpage | G.M.H...@Bradford.ac.uk | A.K.A. Captain Crimson
Dept. of Computing |----------------------------------------------------------
Univ. of Bradford |'Some People have got a Parrot (parrot),but I have got a
W Yorkshire England.| Hammer (hammer),and I hit,Nails in with it-Griff Pilchard
Unknown
Does seem a tad overweight doesnt it. My cast iron '77 T/A is considered a tank
at 3800 lbs.
$0.02
Ericy
Unknown
|> In article <Bppno...@acsu.buffalo.edu> apy...@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (T. Steegman) writes:
|> >In article <Jun11.230...@engr.washington.edu>, el...@lanmola.engr.washington.edu (eliot) writes...
|> >>In article <jbra...@sph.unc.edu> jbr...@sph.unc.edu (Jeno M. Bratts) writes:
|> >>> I would like to know everything there is to know about the Mitsubishi
|> >>>3000GT. Anything, positive or negative about this car I'd like to read it. I
|> >>>hope someone out there can help... Thanks.
|> >>
|> >>4000 pounds. 'nuff said
|> >Well, there is a little more...
|> >300 bhp
|> >all wheel drive
|> >superior ergonomics
|> >4 wheel abs discs
|> >
|> >
|>
|> V6 twin turbo
|> 0-60 is 5.7 secs
Only if you abuse the machinery (According to Consumer Reports)
|> Top speed circa 160mhp
|> 4WD
|> 4WS
|> Mega-electronics (check out the air-conditioning system with air current
|> monitoring and graphical display).
|> Very "chippable"
|>
|> There is a UK company re-chipping the Nissan 300ZX to boost performance
|> from its stock 275bhp to 444bhp ! The cost - a measly 1000 pounds. The
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Hmmmm....
Don't believe everything you read. Nissan does not waste design resources building
engines that produce this kind of power and then de-tune by ~170 hp. Sure, there
are chips that make the most of what you've got but I'll lay money down that says
you wont see a ~60% jump in power. You'd be lucky to boost by 10% with software
alone.
Bottom line: Speed & power are a function of money. How fast you wanna go?
$0.02
Ericy
Jonathan
> |> 0-60 is 5.7 secs
> ^^^^^^^^
> Only if you abuse the machinery (According to Consumer Reports)
Oh come on..."abuse" is the CR way of saying "taking it to it's
limits, if we've got the stones to try". I pity the person who looks
to Consumer Reports as being the authority on sports cars.
Cris Hannu
> superior ergonomics
> 4 wheel abs discs
>
cars in it's price range with as good of lines.
- yeah, the 3,800 lbs is on the hefty side but it's still loads o' fun
to drive, and the 222 bhp seems to scoot it along just fine (I've only
had it up to 140, so far)!
- the adjustable suspension is nice. I've heard people say it could be
softer (on the touring setting) and stiffer (on the sport setting) but
I think you're asking for quite a bit for a car that rides like a
Cadillac or a Porsche at the press of a button.
- The roof is a tad low (I'm 6'2" and I just about have to recomb my hair
every time I get back out).
- the interior ergonomics, gauge layout, etc.. is great!
- there does seem to be a fair sized blind spot between the rear and side
windows.
- don't know about maintenance, yet, but it looks like the plugs are going
to be a royal pain in the ass to change.
If the 222 bhp of the basic GT and the GT SL aren't enough for you, then
you can spend the extra ~$5k for the 300 bhp VR4 (plus extra insurance,
etc...). If that's not enough, you can spend another $15k for another 150 hp
(see July's C&D).
my .02
Cris
Unknown
Who is an authority?
I have yet to see *any* publication which routinely tests autos post a 0-60
time as low as the manufacturer claims. The reference to CR was merely a quote
from a first hand report. It adds more fuel to the speculation that Mits is
massaging the data a bit for thier advertising. Which is not to say that the
car is 'incapable' of achieving those numbers just unlikely without pushing the
hardware. I agree there's nothing wrong with taking it to the limit, but there
is a price to pay.
$0.02
Ericy
ps - please dont pity me. 8^)
eliot
>In article <1992Jun12....@bnr.ca> (Eric Youngblood) writes:
>> |> 0-60 is 5.7 secs
>> Only if you abuse the machinery (According to Consumer Reports)
>Oh come on..."abuse" is the CR way of saying "taking it to it's
>limits, if we've got the stones to try". I pity the person who looks
>to Consumer Reports as being the authority on sports cars.
while i think that 0-60 measurements are particularly stressful for
4wd cars, it is not that much kinder to 2wd ones. if people want to
measure 0-60, then they should just put aside their mechanical
sympathy and just gun it. either that or don't bother doing it at
all.. after all, how many of you out there have actually subjected
your cars to 0-60 measurements? (i mean all out drag). i think that
C/D has done something good for once by introducing 5-60 measurements.
anyway, CR's whining about abusing the machinery is so typical of
them. sounds to me like they didn't have the skill or b*lls to really
push the Mitsi and ended up with very embarassing numbers.
eliot
Jeff Chilton
[deleted]
> - yeah, the 3,800 lbs is on the hefty side but it's still loads o' fun
> to drive, and the 222 bhp seems to scoot it along just fine (I've only
> had it up to 140, so far)!
I know a lot are you are going to cry "FOUL" on this one...
But, were you aware that at 3800 lbs and 222 hp this car has
almost the same hp to weight ratio as a Sentra SE-R?
(Yes, I know there is no comparison... but, the numbers *are* amusing ;-)
Scott Whitman
Well, I felt compelled to right a wrong here. The Dodge Stealth R/T and
the Mitsubishi 3000GT SL do NOT weigh, 3800 lbs. Actually, it is more like
3300 lbs. On the other hand, the turbo versions of these cars do weigh
3800 lbs. Why the difference? Simply, the turbo versions add all wheel
drive and all wheel steering (not to mention assorted other stuff). In
actuality, although I've never compared them side by side, one test
rag stated that the SL and R/T are faster off the line than the turbos
due to the lower weight. Of course, the turbos pass them shortly thereafter,
though.
--------------------------------------------------------
Scott Whitman sl...@tazdevil.llnl.gov
LLNL, L-416, P.O. Box 808 (510) 294-4109
Livermore, CA 94550
Unknown
snicker, snicker.... 8^)
But, you have to admit they look *damn* good!
$0.02
Ericy
Dan Steinmark
> I've got the CAR article on the [McLaren] F1 here in front of me....
>
> Some technical highlights/features....
> 550 BHP at 7500rpm
> 441 lb ft between 4000 and 7000 rpm (260 lb ft at 1500rpm)
>
> Fan operated 'ground-effect' system
Sheesh! Now it can't even be driven in Amod. :-(.
-Dan
Larry Smith
Make a hell of a lawnmower, though!
Larry Smith (sm...@ctron.com) No, I don't speak for Cabletron.
-------------------------------------------------------------
I have come to the conclusion that one useless man is called a "disgrace",
that two are called a "law firm", and that three or more become a "Congress".
Shane Roach
> |> Oh come on..."abuse" is the CR way of saying "taking it to it's
> |> limits, if we've got the stones to try". I pity the person who looks
> |> to Consumer Reports as being the authority on sports cars.
>
> Who is an authority?
>
> I have yet to see *any* publication which routinely tests autos post a 0-60
> time as low as the manufacturer claims. The reference to CR was merely a quote
> from a first hand report. It adds more fuel to the speculation that Mits is
> massaging the data a bit for thier advertising. Which is not to say that the
> car is 'incapable' of achieving those numbers just unlikely without pushing the
> hardware. I agree there's nothing wrong with taking it to the limit, but there
> is a price to pay.
>
>
published in magazines because it likely doesn't bother Mitsubishi or whoever
if they overrev a few engines or burn up a couple of clutches or thrash a
gearbox or two in the search for "The Number". Of course there are a few
carmakers(Mercedes-Benz comes to mind) whose 0-60 claims are generally a few
ticks on the conservative side.
Shane Roach
csr...@eng.clemson.edu
Jonathan
>In article <Jun.12.14.39....@dartagnan.rutgers.edu>, tru...@dartagnan.rutgers.edu (Jonathan) writes:
>|> Oh come on..."abuse" is the CR way of saying "taking it to it's
>|> limits, if we've got the stones to try". I pity the person who looks
>|> to Consumer Reports as being the authority on sports cars.
>Who is an authority?
>I have yet to see *any* publication which routinely tests autos post a 0-60
>time as low as the manufacturer claims. The reference to CR was merely a quote
>from a first hand report.
No, I haven't seen any, either. I also pity the person who looks to
the manufacturer's claims as to 0-60 times. I should note that the
most consistent magazine I've seen is Car and Driver - they claim to
test all their results with as equal conditions as possible, and they
have a small section where they include stats for the most recently
tested cars ( they wrote an article within the last year or so about
How We Test Cars).
What I meant to say is that I trust a car magazine more than I trust
CR for squeezing the most out of a car. That's all.
Jeffrey S. Curtis
}style although the width, length, and height are the same.
Not really - the 3000GT VR/4 has the fully active ground effects and
whatnot: about ~43mph, the rear spoiler kicks up around 16 degrees, and
the front air dam lowers around 3 inches. Mitsubishi based this car
on their HSR II (High Speed Research vehicle), which I'm told can go
around 300mph, and needs all sorts of ground effects to keep it on the
ground and to have some turning ability. The HSR II has wings that "fly"
the car around corners at high speeds - they expand out from the body
above some speed level. It also has the active spoiler and air dam which
Mitsu encompassed into the 3000GT VR/4. The Dodge version doesn't have
any of this, but is slightly cheaper. Also, Dodge has a 24 valve SOHC
base model around $16k, as opposed to Mitsu's 24 valve DOHC base model
at around $22k. The difference for that $6k is about 62bhp - probably
money well spent.
Jeff
--
Jeffrey S. Curtis | Internet: cur...@anl.gov bitnet:
Computing and Telecommunications | BITnet: curtis at anlvm
Argonne National Laboratory | X.400: /PN=Jeffrey.Curtis/O=olivia
+1 708/252-5031 | /PRMD=anl/ADMD= /C=US/
Unknown
I agree completely, Mags that specialize in a particular area have a greater
incentive to provide accurate & reliable data to its readers. But, the more
data you can collect from independent sources gives you a chance to evaluate
and compare results yourself. I am eagerly awaiting for C&D to road test the
3000GT (anybody got the scoop on when this will happen?)
to see how their results compare to all the other tests published to date.
$0.02
Ericy