Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Mitsubishi Galant

1434446484981

Comments

  • alpha01alpha01 Posts: 4,747
    For 2004:
    3.0L V6 210hp and 220 foot lbs.
    3.3L V6 225hp and 240 foot lbs.

    gkearns- where did you learn/what source do you have that Camry power will go up for 2005? Perhaps did you mean a different car?

    ~alpha
  • "alpha01": At the recent Detroit Auto show Toyota had a Camry which was jazzed up with the front facial and side kit; along with a sign that noted a bump in HP. This car was noted as a "concept" Just like the new '04 Acura TL already has a "concept" car with all the sport dressing too. The person at their display said it may be late '05 or early '06 with these modifications. Infiniti is doing this to their G35 AWD in 2005. (My wife has a 2003). The dealer noted 300 HP for the 2005 G35; the Acura TL already has their hot rod on display at the Detroit's 2004 North American International Auto Show (NAIAS). Here is a weblink with hundreds of pictures from the show. I gave this link previously for what future cars will entail. These guys rock: www.autospies.com. In summary, the Galant will again be a step behind. Get rid of the cheap plastics and ugly front head lights.
  • lngtonge18lngtonge18 Posts: 2,228
    The Galant V6 may not have the highest hp in the class, but it is definitely more then competitive. What you have failed to notice, however, is the class leading torque figures. Here, the 3.8 V6 excels.

    Galant: 250
    Altima: 246
    Camry: 240
    Malibu: 220
    Accord: 212
    Passat: 206
    Mazda6: 192
    Sebring: 190

    Looking at the above numbers really makes the Galant stand out. It not only provides good hp but excellent torque as well. This leads to strong around town performance, which is what people like to feel. Nothing about the Galant's current engine makes it a step behind. What is holding it back are the lack of certain features, hefty weight, and some cheap interior plastics.

    The Acura TL and G35 are in a totally different class and shouldn't be compared to the Galant. They may make more hp but they are also more expensive and don't compete in the family sedan category.
  • "by lngtonge18": The point you make about torque is well taken. Though, I think there is one minor point you may have overlooked. The Mitsubishi uses a 3.8 liter engine to achieve those numbers. This is an important point in any car. I'm originally from Detroit; have a brother who is an engineer at Ford Motor Company. One thing he has always noted was the importance of torque. This is dramatically changed based on several factors; one of them being engine size and displacement. A 3.8 liter engine should have more torque then 2.3 liter. Yes the Galant has more torque but uses a larger engine displacement to achieve this. What is the compression ratio since this is a larger displacement engine. A good example (in a different class) is the Nissan 3.5 VQ series engines which all have various HP and torque ratings based on which car it is used in (Altima, Pathfinder, Maxima, G35) but based on that 3.5 liter displacement. Some companies are able to do "more" with "less". Acura's TL uses a 3.2 liter engine with 270 HP rated compared to the Infinit G35 is about 265 using the 3.5 liter. My point if these companies wanted to increase their engine size to 3.8 (which Nissan will be offering a 4.0 in their 2005 Pathfinder) I'm sure their HP would go up. This is defintely evident by Acura's new RL 2005 that will (finally) be redesigned. Honda opted NOT to go with a V8 like the Lexus or Infiniti because they were able to crank out 310-320 HP from the 3.5 liter V6 that will be used in this new car. Now that's really nice. In summary, Galant will still be a step behind because of too much plastic (interior) and people will continue to expect more; also all companies keep raising the bar of standard equipment. Thus, Galant a nice car but not a class leader.
  • lngtonge18lngtonge18 Posts: 2,228
    There is always a compromise in engine tuning. Mitsubishi has always been more interested in torque figures then hp, whereas Honda likes hp and hasn't cared much about torque. The Acura TL you mention is a prime example of Honda's philosophy. Yes, the 3.2 VTEC makes a lot of hp out of its smaller size, but that comes at the expense of torque, which is only an average 238 lb ft.

    Mitsubishi on the other hand tunes their engines for strong low end torque, which sacrifices higher rpm power (a compromise that comes from a long stroke motor and how the cam is tuned). It's not that they aren't capable of designing a similar size engine with the same hp as the TL; they just have different objectives which leads to different size engines with different tuning. My former 02 Lancer had a 2.0 engine specifically designed to maximize low end torque, which by design, limited its hp to an average 120 and its redline to 6k. This helped the engine perform well around town with an automatic. They could have given it DOHC and variable valve timing and designed it for more top end power, but that went against their objective of strong low end torque, so they didn't do it. My current 03 Diamante 3.5 almost matches the torque output of the TL at 231 lb ft but the hp is only 205 (this good low end torque was achieved without DOHC or variable valve timing). Mitsu could have upped the hp some by just retuning the engine but they elected to give the engine a strong feel down low rather then impress with hp numbers. And it pays off. The 3.5 feels darn strong around town and I have yet to feel the need to exceed 4k rpms.

    In short, which car grabs your attention is based on which aspect of engine tuning attracts you most. Obviously, Nissan, Honda, and Acura will wow you with their hp figures and in the case of H/A, their high revving nature. Mitsu will impress those who like strong engine performance without the need to rev the engine to death. I prefer the latter and am glad Mitsu designs the engines the way they do.
  • by lngtonge18: Lets help Mitsu a little on the design work. I had a Galant (89) and really liked it. I like the design of that new Lancer. They could have been a little more creative on the front end of this car (headlights. Mitsu has always been able to squeeze great low end torque from the cars. Some people (not old enough to remember) that Mitsubishi was the company to create the "zero" plane from WWII. The battle fronts are now in the showroom. Many analyst predict some of the smaller car companies may not be around in 10 years. So how are they "luring" or trying to attract these potential new buyers. Give them more standard options & features, more hp/torque and provide a few car washes during service (BMW, Lexus, Infiniti, Acura, etc). I think its a nice car, they merely need to meet what the others are offering and raise the ante. They can do this.
  • alpha01alpha01 Posts: 4,747
    One short coming of the 3.8L engine which you are ignoring is the MPG, which is none too impressive, given that the Camry 3.3L produces but 10 foot pounds less and gets 29 MPG on the highway. Also, the Honda engine which you cite- the 3.2L in the TL- has 90% of its peak 238 foot pounds avaliable from 2200 RPM up until the peak figure RPM, which is plenty for around town driving, which, as you state, is what people feel.

    Another interesting fact about Mitusbishi: People here percieve its quality to be substantially higher than it actually is, according to an article in the USA Today. check usatoday.com, in the Money section, for details.

    ~alpha
  • lngtonge18lngtonge18 Posts: 2,228
    The fuel economy is by no means horrible or non competitive. Of course the smaller 3.3 and 3.0 V6s will get better mileage, but we are talking 2mpg, not 5. However, the 3.8 matches or beats Nissan's 3.5 and beats the Mitsu 3.5 in rated mileage. Heck, it even almost matches the previous Galant's 3.0 (19/27 compared to 20/27)! I think its a pretty good feat to increase the engine size and still offer better mileage, especially when the new Galant weighs more then the Diamante, Altima, and former Galant.
  • First up I'm glad to see we have people who understand the importance of tourque. In the MT comparison test, the GTS "topped the handling charts, posting the groups' best numbers on the skid pad and in the slalom." and it was the heaviest car tested (2nd in braking from 60-0) The GTS was meant to be a serious SPORT sedan, and that it is. Questions concerning interior build materials weather cheap or not is totally irrevelant to me. The interior does not LOOK cheap but SPORTY. And to take two more quotes from Motor Trend " Mitsubishi's new midsizer steps into the class with one feature its competitors lack: ATTITUDE." AND " Family-sedan shoppers looking for some edge in the sport and style departments will definitely want to consider this compelling new mitsubishi." I originally ordered a black GTS, but they found a silver one so i will be picking it up this weekend. 400k accords and camrys are sold every year and rightfully so, but the galant is for someone who wants to go off the beaten path as they say. All the critics are treating the Galant like it's a 1990 hyundai. This will be my first Mitsu. and I've never looked at a Mitsu in the past. So the this car definitely caught my eye when i saw it. accords, camrys, mazda 6, 3.5SE, malibus, L300s did nothing to make me say "WOW LOOK AT THAT CAR. I'VE GOT TO GET ONE OF THOSE?" The Galant GTS did make me feel that way.
  • We all see how automakers are trying to unseat the BMW 3-series as the best near luxury sedan.The G35 and the Acura 3.2 made great attempts, but the the 3-series with its 184 and 225hp is still the king. All they are doing is "out horsepowering" the the 3. I do not think that those cars are even close to the 3-bimmer. In the family/midsize market the accord and camry may be the best, but the gap is much closer. The altima, 6, galant have made it much tighter. These cars may not sell 400k units/yr. but i sure hope that this galant does well because it is very worthy competitor.
  • Even with all of it's low-end torque (which one would expect from what is essentially a truck engine) the Galant was not the fastest sedan in the recent MT comparison test. Surprising considering that the Galant had .8L more displacement and 38 more lb-ft torque at a lower RPM than the fastest sedan in the test. And by 100 MPH the fastest sedan in that test has a 1.3 second advantage which shows the fastest engine is still pulling while the Mitsu is lagging. And that's on premium vs. regular for the best-performing sedan in the MT test.

    As for gas mileage the Malibu posts 6 MPG better on the highway and 5 MPG better in the city even though it too uses a larger V6.

    And lest we forget, even though the Galant finished a respectable second place, MT states "our winner ran away in a landslide: Every one of our six editors ranked the xxxxx first in this comparo." Page 100 of the February 2004 issue of MT. So while the Galant may be improved in some areas low-end torque and big wheels will only get you so far.
  • lngtonge18lngtonge18 Posts: 2,228
    I'm assuming the Accord was the winner in the test, so I'm not surprised it can beat the Galant. It is considerably lighter and has 5 speeds in its auto, but its main gain occurs at higher speeds and higher rpms. This extra speed to 100mph is of little interest since who here has the ability or need to accelerate from 0-100 in their normal daily drives? I'm willing to bet the Galant feels considerably stronger off the line and its this impression and feeling of power that is satisfying to some people. I hate to rev engines high because I feel I'm taking away from their lifespan, so Mitsu's strong low end performance attracts me. However, if you enjoy revving high often, the Accord does have a sweeter engine in that regard.

    As for the Malibu, it does post impressive gas mileage and good 0-60, but the car is way too bland and low tech. The Malibu is the king of fuel economy and not much else. The Maxx is a neat idea though. I almost considered looking into one before buying the Diamante.

    Lastly, you should give the Galant some credit for making it to 2nd place! It's low end torque and big wheels apparently was plenty to pass right by the competition and slingshot it to 2nd place. If it was rated last or near the bottom in its first year out, Mitsu would have a serious problem on their hands and I would admit it needs some big improvements. As it stands, the Galant appears to be an excellent alternative to the mom and pop me-too Accord/Camry. It has a more youthful sporty personality and isn't as common. For some people, these attributes are very important.

    Oh yea, the 3.8 V6 is NOT a truck engine. It is simply a bored out version of the 3.5 V6, which was a bored out multivalve version of the 3.0 V6 that was used in the late 80s and early 90s. In case you didn't know, the 3.0 V6 was used mainly in cars and made its debut in the Galant Sigma. The only trucks to ever use the engine was the Montero and Montero Sport, and now the car based Endeavor. If the 3.8 was designed specifically for use in their sport utes (like Ford does with the Triton series and Chevy with the Vortec) and then later dropped in their cars, you could call it a truck engine. But thats not what happened here. It's a car engine plain and simple. It's low end power makes it acceptable as an engine for use in their trucks, so they save money by using the same engines across the board.
  • by lngtonge18: You go. I see you "defend" your Galant to several members; that's cool. However this still doesn't change the fact that the Galant's interior uses too much plastic which lowers the overall appearance and prestiage feel of an interior cabin. Any car today isn't cheap to purchase. For a car with a larger engine liter displacement it SHOULD have the most low end torque in it's class. This car will not outsell the other midsize cars because it needs to "raise the bar"; not just equal them. It doesn't do this especially in the interior. "Concrete1717" noted with his recent USA today article indicates Mitsu quality still needs to improve (this car is built in Normal, ILL factory). JD Powers has ranked them average or below. If you want people like myself to return to a product (owned an '89), then you need to ensure the quality is there; quit equipping interior's with CHEAP looking trims inside. Meet the challenge of other car markers by surpassing them with more standard options. GM has finally been awaken with this regard because their Grand Am and Grand Prix always had those HUGE cladding of 18" at the bottom. Bob Lutz, Pontiac's big cheese, smelled the coffee. Their new models on both these cars have done away with the plastic. So tell the folks in the Mitsubishi design studio to please add higher quality material to the inside cabin and get rid of those after-the-fact looking headlights in front.
  • I sold my 2002 Galant after only 18 months of ownership and at quite a loss because of major brake issues that I ultimately had to fix myself with the sledgehammer method (replaced the whole brake system), and because of many minor problems.

    Minor problems included an intermittent noise from the dashboard that sounded like rustling plastic trashbags and was loud enough to interfere with conversation, a loud rattling metal-on-metal sound from the driver's lock mechanism that was fixed twice under warranty and kept returning, extremely poor fuel economy, which while vastly improved after the brake job (constant friction), was still much worse than other cars in its class or what the window sticker promised, and finally, it was starting to have some electrical gremlins, intermittent cancelling of the cruise control for no apparent reason and premature burnout of dashboard light bulbs, which are not easy to get in and replace.

    While it was under warranty I gave Mitsubishi the benefit of the doubt that they would sort things with it, but once it hit 36,000 miles I started looking for a replacement. I know one thing, I'll not buy another one for a very long time, and I'm filing suit in small claims court to recover for the brakes.

    What attracted me to the Galant was the styling (I really like the look of the 1999-2003) and the very plush and quiet ride (when I don't hear trash bags from the dash).
  • aperry1aperry1 Posts: 13
    I attended the auto show yesterday here in Baltimore, and boy did I have fun. I was really anxious to see the new Galant up close and personal. It is not that bad looking, but I would never buy one, primarily because I bought a Mazda6 in October. The Galant was a choice of mine, but they had yet to release it here. Anyway, I liked it. Although the GTZ is the top of the line, and would be my primary choice, the back light are so ugly. I guess as an owner, one would get used to them, but they are just ugly. Besides that, the car is an okay car. They tried to get fancy with the radio buttons, but that is okay. Good luck on all you 2004 Galant buyers.
  • I've seen both of these models - LS & GTS and if i'm going to choose between the two, I would rather choose the LS model, since it has the same engine at 3.8L / V6 / 230 hp. then just upgrade & choose an option package. The back lights for an LS is better than the GTS and it goes with "Kalapana Black" exterior color - good combination!!!.Install them w/ a 17" alloy wheels instead of the 16" alloy, put some "lip spoiler", sunroof then "leather package" and "diamond package" with a 270 watts infinity stereo and baammmm!!!!!it will look like a GTS model too!!! ABS & Traction control are standard features on both trims except for the "white face" gauge which is only available for GTS trims. What can you say Mitsu buyers???
  • I'll be picking up my 2004 GTS tomorrow. Sterling Silver w/ black leather. Thought hard about the LS but the GTS was not that much more than the LS w/ sunroof, diamond, and leather pkg. The 17" rims and tires, sport tuned suspension and the rear lights did it for me, as well as the chrome tipped exhaust. Either way you cannot go wrong with the LS.
  • I'm glad you made the right decision on buying the new '04 Galant GTS!!!! Congrats and feel the difference, Wake Up & Drive it.....give me some insights upon driving it in the freeway. As for me, i have to wait until middle of this year (June) perhaps, since I just financed my '02 Galant ES last July'03 and if given a good deal, I have to purchase or lease an '04 Galant LS or GTS and get rid off my old '02 Mitsu. Enjoy the ride and 270-watts infinity stereo!!! It's the no. 1 car audio!!! How much did it cost you including taxes, etc???
  • regfootballregfootball Posts: 2,166
    congrats, keep us posted!
  • Picked it up today and I'm so thrilled.

    1. vehicle price: $26,667.00. got heated seats/mirrors.

    2. service contract: $1895.00 (extends bumper to bumper)

    3. tax 8.75(n.y.) $1799.17

    4. lic and title $24.25

    5. other fees: $42.50

    6. total cash price: $30,427.92

    7. APR @ 4.9 = $3501.44 finance charge

    8. trade in for 2002 sonata gls(all paid for) $8,000

    9. $25,929.36 to be paid by me over 72 mo. @ $360.13

    The stereo sounds great built in amp no need to adjust bass or treble. i do not think there are buttons for those anyway. 6 disc changer works great. And the "cool blue" lighting on the dash and center pod looks awesome. I'm going to wait and tint the windows so other cars at nite can see the interior lit up. Oh they are also installing a remote start and upgraded alarm on Saturday. No antenna to worry about built into windshield. The ride feels absolutely great considering the sport tuned suspension. The car is just ready to be driven and let loose. The interior does not look cheap or feel cheap, it's just really sporty. Just keep in mind that i never in my life looked at a mitsubishi as car that i would buy, maybe the montero if i could have afforded it, and of course the EVO, if i could drive a stick well. This is the perfect car for me, a big powerful luxurious sedan. And just think, I was going to buy a used 325i for $25,000. Good luck to you all hope ya get one.
  • regfootballregfootball Posts: 2,166
    did you get the 10/100 powertrain warranty?
  • Hey man, I'm so jealous on your New '04 Glant GTS!!! So,did you feel the difference now??? I assume that you got the 10/100K warranty too!!! or is it 7 yrs.?? You could adjust your bass & treble on your stereo, just read your brochure, I can't wait driving a new one too, I already saw their new TV ads on TV last night for all local channels bet. 7 - 11pm. Enjoy the ride!!!!! I would also prefer if they could offer a 5 speed manual transmission bec. I'm used to drive a "stick" shift- regards & HAVE FUN ON YOUR NEW '04 GALANT GTS MODEL - VVVRRRROOOMMMMMMM!!!!!
  • FEEL THE DIFFERENCE, I'VE BEEN DRIVING A HYUNDAI SONATA FOR THE PAST TWO YEARS! Whut's up guys. Yeah i got the 10/100,000. i did not read the car manual yet. I'm a merchandiser so i travel from store to store on long island so i'm on the express/park ways alot. AND THAT'S GREAT NOW. The car just feels really good and nimble, does not feel big and bulky. One thing i have noticed is the handling especially on the on/off ramps off parkways. Traction and 17" tires definitely doing their job. Acceleration is great as well as passing power. You know what it's certainly not my sonata. I hope I'm not coming off as bragging, but this car will do it to ya! I would love to email a pic of the car to ya. If so shoot me an e-mail and i'll send a pic. One other note, there is no remote fuel door inside the car, you have to open outside by pressing the left side of the fuel door, no locks. Now that's a little cheap, but it does not matter at all. P.S. I turned alot of heads today. later
  • JUST REALIZED THAT ALL E-MAIL ADRESSES ARE KEPT PRIVATE. THOUGHT WE HAD OPTION TO MAKE PUBLIC. DO NOT KNOW WHAT THE WEB SITE RULES ARE.
  • patpat Posts: 10,421
    STOP SHOUTING, WE HEAR YOU! :)

    "Update Profile" should give you that choice.

    However, some changes have just been made to how the profiles are displayed. Are you saying that you do not see an option to make your email address public even if you use the "Update Profile" link (on the upper left side of the page)?

    If so, please go to the Our Software discussion to report/ask about this.
  • Just click on my user name and you'll see my email so you could send me some pics. ofyour new 04'Galant. Wish you good driving and again....VVVRRRROOOMMMMMM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • cracoviancracovian Posts: 337
    Congrats on your purchase, however... I can't believe you agreed to pay the MSRP! That's a lot of mullah for a Galant no matter how cool it is. As far as affording the Montero it only costs one thousand dollars and change more (2003) than what you paid (I got quotes for less than 28K myself including the $500 education discount). Don't get me wrong, I'm happy that you happy and the dealer is very happy, so I guess it's all good...
  • What I said about the Montero, I was talking about 2 years ago when I had to "settle" for the 2002 Sonata GLS, and never looked at a base Galant or any Galant for that matter. At that time that was my budget, but in two years I got several raises and a great promotion at my job and that obviously raised my standards. And by the way i refinanced my home and paid off the sonata, all credit card bills and pocketed a nice sum for a rainy day. They are giving me the remote start and upgraded alarm for free as a courtesy, took them forever to find the car. Do you really think that $26k is alot of mullah for a car like this. It's not a XG350, Optima, or an Amanti.
  • cracoviancracovian Posts: 337
    I think it's a good value for the money, no doubt, but my local CarMax (Atlanta) is selling the GTS for over $1K off the MSRP. Local dealers can be squeezed even further. Plus, just yesterday I got a certificate from Mitsubishi for an ADDITIONAL $1K at that CarMax location. Plus I could take the advantage of the $500 education edge discount since I got my MBA not so long ago. Plus... I didn't ask CarMax yet (will go for a test drive to claim my CD and $25 on Saturday) but the loyalty rebate (got another old Mitsu here) of, you guessed it, $1K should apply to all 2004s... See where I'm going? Not all of those could be applicable to you (there's a "hidden" Manufacturer to Dealer $1K marketing incentive though) but there's definitely room for some negotiating here. But it's too late to do anything about it anyway, so forget about everything I just said and enjoy this cool car.
Sign In or Register to comment.