Mitsubishi GTO

jcs4, Nov 30, 3:16pm
Early 90s, The 3l v6, What are these
Ike to drive, how are they in terms of reliability and fuel usage! It's an automatic
fiatracer, Nov 30, 4:07pm
heavy. complex and therefore prone to various failures.
leighfrancesca, Nov 30, 4:36pm
A good friend of mine decribed them as"a sheep in wolf's clothing".
lyndapotty, Nov 30, 5:36pm
I'll admit there not very reliable. not too bad on fuel, I get 450k's out of a tank, $140 to fill and that's with a TT. If you we're going to get one. I'd defintaly suggest going with a TT otherwise you don't get the full enjoyment. But they are very comfortable and quiet if it doesn't have a modded exhaust.
smac, Nov 30, 5:47pm
Knew a guy who did Feilding - Foxton in one in under 15 minutes.
phillip.weston, Nov 30, 6:04pm
Definitely getting old now. The automatic (which will be non-turbo) will be the slowest out of the lot and still heavy on fuel. Basically Diamante running gear in a heavier coupe body shell.
curlcrown, Nov 30, 10:59pm
The non turbo autos are suprisigly sluggish.
curlcrown, Nov 30, 11:00pm
Iv'e heard someone say that about a Rover 2000 as well!
foxdonut, Nov 30, 11:03pm
You'd be better off getting a 300ZX

And thats saying something.
unbeatabull, Nov 30, 11:53pm
+1 . me owning a ZX has nothing to do with that though.

V6's are always a pain to work on . the GTO is transverse and is even harder. They have a lot of problems, aren't nice to work on at all.

When they are going the TT ones do go well, but they are heavy and feel like it as well. For a 2 door car they feel more like a 4 door Coon or Commodore.
cuda.340, Dec 1, 12:05am
i've got a dead '96 GTO in the back shed. tidy car that some raghead serviced & failed on the cambelt replacement. i got good money for the computer as after '95 they changed away for oil filled capacitors on the pc board so if you're buying, after '95 is the best option so i'm told. i bought this car cheap because of the failure. was thinking of changing the front suspension & put a V8 in it sometime when i feel like working on it. they look cool even if in std form they're pigs.
mike107, Dec 1, 1:18am
Money pit!
smac, Dec 1, 3:15am
Actually just remembered, did a few laps next to one at a Taupo track day. Not only was I keeping up in the mini, but whenever there was a break back in pits his brakes smelled like they were on fire.smoking like crazy, stunk the place out. Says a lot about the weight versus drive train/suspension etc
copper1, Dec 1, 3:28am
Often called "The poor man's Ferrari". I have a '91 Auto. Fantastic ride, quite economical as long as you don't go overboard with the right foot, very high specs for a 20 year old car (over a $100k new) and in my opinion one of the nicest-looking cars around. Get one that's been looked after and treasure it!
jcs4, Dec 1, 4:26am
Hmm sounds like its heavy, hard to work on and not that fast, looks nice though.
sprinkle, Dec 1, 5:01am
I had a 5 spd non turbo. It was heavy to take off at a stand still but it flew like a bat out of hell when moving.I put it against a RS legacy twin turbo and that was close but the top end power was not enough in the RS as it cut out at 176.
lyndapotty, Dec 1, 5:27am
I don't get why people say just cos there heavy. there slow. I put my TT GTO against my bro's TT supra. But the GTO still won.
mellisa2000, Dec 1, 5:36am
Nutshell.
phillip.weston, Apr 22, 11:07am
Yep the MR version from the mid 90s was faster than the R33 GT-R V-Spec in the 1/4 mile, but perhaps totally another story when it came to corners on a race track.