Howdy, Stranger!

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





Mitsubishi Galant

16162646667122

Comments

  • Guess you cleared that up! I am going to pick up my SL on Friday!
  • lngtonge18lngtonge18 Posts: 2,228
    I'm sure the Maxima is a better car, but I'm also sure noleasegalant is going to pay a lot more for the car too. I don't quite understand why he was even cross shopping these cars. The 03 Galant is in a totally different size and performance class from the Maxima. If money was no object, I would pick the nicer more expensive car too!
  • No particular reason why; I just narrowed my choices between a Nissan and Mitsubishi. Also I don't mind paying a little more $$$$ for quality.
  • The Galant is a decent car, but the resale value really ruins the value equation. I paid $17K for my 2002, and today it is only worth 8K as a trade. My wife's 2001 Saturn L200, another car known for poor resale, is still worth $10K, despite a lower purchase price and an extra year of depreciation.

    My next car will be a Honda or Toyota, I just refuse to get stung like this again.
  • You only paid $17K for your 2002!!!!! What trim and options did you get??
  • lngtonge18lngtonge18 Posts: 2,228
    The 04 Galant info is up on Mitsu's website. My buddy, who is the shop foreman for the Mitsu dealer, drove the new 4 cylinder ES and was impressed with the power of the MIVEC engine. He said it was quite a bit faster then the old engine.

    Here's the link: http://www.mitsubishicars.com/galant/index.html
  • I had a 1999 ES V6 myself and it took off like the wind! I'm a little disappointed in how they made the 04 body. I liked the BMW look of the previous models, which is one of the reasons I'm a Nissan man now.
  • alpha01alpha01 Posts: 4,747
    Car and Driver tested the new Galant 4cyl at 9.2 to 60, not bad, but not class leading.

    Motor Trend has gotten a similar time for the Camry (they've tested the 4cyl/auto twice, one ran 9.2 and the other 9.5), and quicker times for Accord and Altima.

    What are the EPA ratings for the new Galant 4?

    I am hoping to take advantage of Mitsubishis test drive offer soon, so, with a bit of luck, I'll be able to comment on the cars dynamics more explictly.

    ~alpha
  • lngtonge18lngtonge18 Posts: 2,228
    According to Mitsu's site, the EPA rating for the four cylinder is 23/30. Not bad considering my 02 Lancer 2.0 liter automatic was rated at 24/30 (it increased in 03), but it's definitely lower then the Accord and Camry.
  • alpha01alpha01 Posts: 4,747
    I test drove a Galant ES (no options) over a pretty varied 11 miles. Overall, a nice package, but not superior to the class leaders. And yes, looks are subjective, but exterior of DE/ES/LS not nearly as peculiar or disjointed as the GTS, and this car looks better in person (High rear-end, though) than in photos.

    When I have more time, I will certainly be commenting with my detailed impressions. The car is definitely much more akin to Toyota's Camry than Honda's Accord.

    Time will tell if this new approach works for Mitsubishi.
    ~alpha
  • I test drove the '04 Galant ES model 4 cyl. 160 hp - and results are not that convincing as i'm expecting. The trunk is really small as compared to their 00-03 models w/ no folding rear seats. Engine is not that bad at 4 cyl. 160 hp but it's quite noisy bec. of their Mivec engine designs - I've spoke w/ their salesman and the reason why it's noisy bec. of the pads they installed under the car hood that acc. to them, it's kinda more thinner than the old models BUT it's fire proof!!! I don;t know how the V6 engine sounds - but in totality, i would prefer the V6 LS or GTS models bec. both exterior & interiors are well designed and far more better than the Altimas, Camry & Accords and a little bit similar to the Maximas. This '04 Galant is surely competitive among the other leading mid-size sedans!!!!It's more roomy, heavier, stable, well-designed and a little bit cheaper than the leading brands in this category(midsize sedans).
  • alpha01alpha01 Posts: 4,747
    Wow. Two of your comments were my major issues with the car. My impressions overall:

    1) The lack of split folding rear seats is a major detriment to this vehicle, whose trunk is 1.3 cubic feet smaller than its predecessor, and smaller than the trunks of many smaller competitors, at 13.3 cu. ft. How can a car this big have such a small trunk. But, silver lining: cleverly, Mitsu chose NOT to use gooseneck hinges, but rather, the more sophisticated design which does not infringe on capacity.

    2) The MIVEC 2.4L 4 feels decently peppy, and offers good power, but is SIGNIFICANTLY noisier than the Accord and Camry 2.4L engines, while returning 1-2 MPG fewer in city and 3-4 fewer in highway travel, according to EPA estimates. If you dont rev above 4000 RPM, you might not notice the extra noise, as this is when it becomes obtrusive. Unfortuantely, due to the MIVEC design, this is when the engine reaches its peak torque and starts to feel alive. Midrange power borders on impressive, and the transmission works well with the engine, delivering very smooth, appropriate shifts. The vehicle feels a bit pokey out of the gate, such as from a standstill at a stoplight, an impression that I didnt feel from the Accord and Camry, however. Overall, an improvement over the last generation non-MIVEC 4 cyl.

    3) The front seats are firm and supportive, and felt excellent in my short trip. I got the impression that the comfort wouldn't fade. The seat is better than the Camry's, which suffers from a too-short lower cushion. However, the Camry offers standard 8 way power drivers seat, where as the Galant's is 6 way manually adjustable.

    4) The ride is good, quite smooth, but felt somewhat floaty and decidedly Camry-like, especially compared to the previous generation Galant. Handling is a direct hit at the needs of 99% of buyers: NO SURPRISES, just roll and understeer. Steering is not up to Accord levels, but is decent overall, although on-center is vague, perhaps even more so than in the Camry, though I prefer the Mitsubishi's weighting.

    5) My test-drive car did not have ABS. The pedal felt somewhat spongy intially, though fairly firm through its travel, which seemed a bit long, as in the drum equipped Camry LE.

    6) The 16 inch wheel covers are very ugly, and do nothing to enhance the look of this car. The alloys that are part of the Diamond Package seem worth the price of that package by themselves, given the cheapness exuded by the wheel covers. Tires are a nice size, I personally like the extra tread width.

    7) I found the interior well constructed, and pleasingly designed. Since my drive was at dusk, I had the lights on, and I enjoyed the bright blue instrumentation on black background. The dash is not overwrought as it is in the Endeavor, and I feel it hits its mark. The steering wheel however, is textured rather.... interestingly, and I'm not convinced.

    OVERALL: This is a well conceived effort, and if Mitsu can boost resale (by not offering heavy discounts and significant fleetage), will prove a good choice if reliability is strong. Car and Driver correctly summed it up - the Galant does not do refinement, isolation, and comfort quite as well the Camry, nor does it do precision engineering and an involving driving experience as well as the Accord, but it is less expensive, won't be a dime a dozen, and offers a pleasing overall mainstream drive.

    The car's major caveats are its engine noise and lowish MPG, small trunk/no folding rear seat, strange steering wheel, and unfortunate wheel covers. I also cant comprehend Mitsubishi's disinclusion of side chest and front and rear curtain airbags as an option, since Accord, Camry, Altima, 6, and Passat all offer this ideal combination of side impact protection.

    ~alpha

    PS- My test drive was of a no-option ES 4cyl, which stickered, including destination charge, at $19,592.
  • lngtonge18lngtonge18 Posts: 2,228
    I have to agree with you on the steering wheel and the wheel covers. The hubcaps are so plain, boring, and downright ugly. Heck, the Lancer ES hubcaps look a lot better. The steering wheel's surface feels rough and nasty in my hands. The Endeavor has the same wheel. Way to industrial grade in its feel. The first upgrade would be a leather cover! And I too am disappointed in the no fold down rear seat. What were they thinking??? The fuel economy I can live with. My Lancer is averaging 3 mpg better then the city rating and that's the only type of driving it sees, so I expect the Galant to do better then its rating.

    I'm a bit surprised to hear about the engine noise. I'm wondering if you mean only when the engine is pushed hard? My Lancer has an extremely quiet engine under light acceleration and on the highway (Car and Driver compared its quiet idle to that of a Lexus), but it does get buzzy and boomy when you rev it past 4k. Under most conditions though, it impresses me with how smooth and quiet it is. I remember this characteristic in the 00 Galant that I test drove as well. If the Mivec four is the same way (which it ought to be unless the new frame transmits more noise), I'll be satisfied. I'll have to test drive one so I can check out this new engine!
  • alpha01alpha01 Posts: 4,747
    The MIVEC sounded louder and less refined than the 4s in the Camry and Accord at anything greater than 4000 RPM, which I dont really consider "pushing it". The Camry and Accord seem quieter at full throttle than the MIVEC at this RPM. Like I said, the Galant feels a bit pokey off the line, so 4000 in first isnt that much of a stretch. The car felt peppy if you stab the accelerator hard enough to upshift at about 4250 RPM, and kept pressure consistent until reaching your target speed.

    ~alpha
  • I'm not sure if I'm on the right board or not, so if I'm not, please let me know.

    The problem: I leased a 2001 Galant, met my (now) husband a few months later, married into the military a year after that, and now we're stationed in Korea (the lease is not up until '04). Due to the cretins at MMCA we are unable to get out of the lease even though we are living on the other side of the world per military orders. The car is in stateside storage at our expense because we were unauthorized to ship a car here and were unable to "sublease" it out to family or friends prior to moving (as an aside, The Soldiers' & Sailors' Act does not cover car leases only apartment leases).

    What we are doing: We are continuing to pay on the car even though it is in storage (to boot, MMCA gave us extensive problems about storing the car, too--like we had a choice in the matter) and we'll have to pay out of pocket to fly home next year just to turn the car in at the termination of the lease (we are stationed here in Korea until 2006). Just so you get a true picture of MMCA, they wanted us to sign over to them a full power of attorney for the entire time the car would be in storage in case we defaulted on the lease in any way shape or form (in the lease agreement, they already HAVE that authority)--after consulting JAG, they backed off. Unbelievable.

    My questions:
    1.) Can I tow the car in and not be penalized? I ask this because it will have been sitting in storage for a year-and-a-half by the time we turn it in.
    2.) When do I actually turn the car in? I leased it in October of 2000, it is a 48 month lease, so do I turn it in the same month that I bought it?--October 2004?

    I'd really appreciate any information that I can get on these questions and any other comments or advice would be great, too.

    Chris
  • patpat Posts: 10,421
    Wow! Someone here may have some suggestions for you, but I'd also check out the discussions on our Finance, Warranty & Insurance board. You might want to create a new discussion for this one.

    Good luck - I hope it all works out for you.
  • Some highlights from that article:
    1. "The four-cylnder has the coarse sound of an aged tractor".
    2. "Nice as the four-speed automatic is, it's behind the competitive curve".
    3. "Otherwise, the Galants seem unusually quiet inside for midlevel cars".
  • Well after constant brake problems, rattles and now a busted axle halfshaft (pothole), I have gotten rid of my 2002 Galant ES.

    At 38,700 miles the car, no longer under warranty, felt looser than my wife's 2001 Saturn L200 which has 50,000, or the Nissan Sentra I traded to buy the Galant two-years-ago, which at the time at 84,000.

    As predicted, resale value was horrid, and I was only able to replace this P.O.S. because of the very aggress rebates on Mazda Proteges.

    I will never buy a Mitsubishi again, no matter how attractive the price or the offer.
  • sandman46sandman46 Posts: 1,798
    I had looked at the Protege also, but ended up buying the Sentra. Wish the gas mileage was better, my only complaint actually. Really prefered the P5, but they weren't as aggressive to sell it.

    The Sandman :-)
  • lngtonge18lngtonge18 Posts: 2,228
    May I ask why you would trade in your Galant after wasting $1000 on totaling replacing the problematic brake system, the only major issue you had with the car? And to make matters worse you traded a low resale car for another! That to me is like throwing money right out the window. Sounds to me like your desire for a new car simply took over.
Sign In or Register to comment.