Just test drove a Ralliart
05-02-2004
#1
Registered!!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Crystal Lake, IL
Age: 39
Posts: 371
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rep Power: 0 
Just test drove a Ralliart
Hey guys,
As the subject title says, yesterday I drove a Ralliart from Mitsubishi. (For Fun) The car was pretty cool, it had a 5 speed, custom red/black two tone leather, and it was bright red. It also had the sun/sound package with a 315 watt, 7 speaker sound system from Infinity with a 8'' sub in the trunk. The guy let me take it out by myself with one of my own cds to listen to. So, i took it out for about 15 minutes, and it was a blast. The 162 hp are a great change from the lousy 127 in my EX, and the torque really helps in getting it going. The sound system is really sweet. I was thumping around, and it felt so cool, I wish that I could get that feeling from my civic, so i think I am going to get a sub/amp box to see how that works.
Otherwise, the car was super sweet, more room, more power, better sound system, sportier exhaust note from stock exhaust (similar to stock 00-04 Eclipse), STRONG shifter, and a more substantial feel to it.
I like it, but with Mitsu's horrible reputation, recommending it to anyone is pretty hard.
As the subject title says, yesterday I drove a Ralliart from Mitsubishi. (For Fun) The car was pretty cool, it had a 5 speed, custom red/black two tone leather, and it was bright red. It also had the sun/sound package with a 315 watt, 7 speaker sound system from Infinity with a 8'' sub in the trunk. The guy let me take it out by myself with one of my own cds to listen to. So, i took it out for about 15 minutes, and it was a blast. The 162 hp are a great change from the lousy 127 in my EX, and the torque really helps in getting it going. The sound system is really sweet. I was thumping around, and it felt so cool, I wish that I could get that feeling from my civic, so i think I am going to get a sub/amp box to see how that works.
Otherwise, the car was super sweet, more room, more power, better sound system, sportier exhaust note from stock exhaust (similar to stock 00-04 Eclipse), STRONG shifter, and a more substantial feel to it.
I like it, but with Mitsu's horrible reputation, recommending it to anyone is pretty hard.
05-02-2004
#3
Owned By Slo Rex
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Fair Oaks Ranch, Texas
Age: 37
Posts: 5,688
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rep Power: 317 
yeah my friends lancer evo has 12,000 miles and has been in the shop like 5 times, not to mention how often he has had to deal with recalls, the ralliart sounds nice too bad its a mitsu...
05-02-2004
#4
Registered!!
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,096
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rep Power: 0 Mitsu's going down dude....
Their sales have dropped like CRAZY.... they've resorted to biting Hyundai styles, and offering crazy 10 year warranty now, hoping people will buy.
It ain't smart to go toe-to-toe against Honda/Toyota.. they're too ****ing good. They have to either go upmarket (which they can't), or downmarket.. which will probably happen...
Mitsubishi = The Next Suzuki
Their sales have dropped like CRAZY.... they've resorted to biting Hyundai styles, and offering crazy 10 year warranty now, hoping people will buy.
It ain't smart to go toe-to-toe against Honda/Toyota.. they're too ****ing good. They have to either go upmarket (which they can't), or downmarket.. which will probably happen...
Mitsubishi = The Next Suzuki
05-02-2004
#7
Registered!!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Crystal Lake, IL
Age: 39
Posts: 371
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rep Power: 0 Yeah, I do believe that Mitsu is going down also, and I drove a 02 spec v while i was at the dealership. It had 30,000 miles on it, and it was soooooo loose, it felt like it had 120,000 miles on it. so, that didn't impress me either.
05-02-2004
#11
Banned
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2003
Age: 40
Posts: 459
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rep Power: 0 Mitsubishi's problem is that they don't really have a mainstream car that a shopper would think about purchasing. And as for the Ralliart, i think it's a great car...Motor Trend did a test on this car and it broke into the high 14's while running on regular gas (name a car out there that runs a 14 sec 1/4 mile on 87 octane and is priced under 18 grand). As for build quality, 2 of my buds also have an Evo and the interior is built more solid than our 7th gen civics. Earlier 7thgen civic owners can tell tell u about the rattles and crappy rocking seats that plagued our cars.
05-02-2004
#12
Registered!!
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Austin, TX
Age: 40
Posts: 488
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rep Power: 0 I know a guy that works at a Mitsu dealership, this is what him and I have come up with as far as fatal flaws with mitsubishis:
1. they burn abnormall amounts of oil from mile 1
2. they use old technology and expect new results
3. their build quality is fantastic at the begining, but give a mitsu 2 years, and it will be falling apart
4. chrysler parts all around (not SRT-4 parts either, so no flaming)
really, with thier sales in the US as bad as they are, its probably best for them to drop out over here, they just dont make a car thats appealing, and that can stand the tests of time well.
1. they burn abnormall amounts of oil from mile 1
2. they use old technology and expect new results
3. their build quality is fantastic at the begining, but give a mitsu 2 years, and it will be falling apart
4. chrysler parts all around (not SRT-4 parts either, so no flaming)
really, with thier sales in the US as bad as they are, its probably best for them to drop out over here, they just dont make a car thats appealing, and that can stand the tests of time well.
05-03-2004
#16
Registered!!
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,096
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rep Power: 0 Originally posted by Ramones
Mitsubishi's problem is that they don't really have a mainstream car that a shopper would think about purchasing. And as for the Ralliart, i think it's a great car...Motor Trend did a test on this car and it broke into the high 14's while running on regular gas (name a car out there that runs a 14 sec 1/4 mile on 87 octane and is priced under 18 grand). As for build quality, 2 of my buds also have an Evo and the interior is built more solid than our 7th gen civics. Earlier 7thgen civic owners can tell tell u about the rattles and crappy rocking seats that plagued our cars.
Mitsubishi's problem is that they don't really have a mainstream car that a shopper would think about purchasing. And as for the Ralliart, i think it's a great car...Motor Trend did a test on this car and it broke into the high 14's while running on regular gas (name a car out there that runs a 14 sec 1/4 mile on 87 octane and is priced under 18 grand). As for build quality, 2 of my buds also have an Evo and the interior is built more solid than our 7th gen civics. Earlier 7thgen civic owners can tell tell u about the rattles and crappy rocking seats that plagued our cars.
They have Lancer to go against the Civic... and Galant to take on the Accord. But the question is--why would you buy a Lancer over a Civic? Top requirements for an econobox? Reliability, gas consumption, and size.
Does it offer more room? No. Better gas mileage? No. Better reliability? No.
Mitsubish is an inferior brand to Honda/Toyota. For them to gain a respectable marketshare, they need to offer a product that is 10% superior at a reduced price. Right now, they offer an inferior product at the same price. That is exactly why they have a dinky little marketshare that in continuing to drop.... the only people getting Mitsubishis are people who have a need to "stand out" from the crowd by getting something different.
The best 1/4 mile time & cheap sticker price doesn't sell cars. If that was the case, SRT-4 would have been the best selling car of all time. But it's far from the truth. People look for VALUE--the most important part of any car. This is precisely why Hyundai & Kia is doing better & better every single year. In Canada, they surpassed Nissan & Mazda 2 years ago.... and are nipping at the heels of Chrysler.
Mitsu does offer some cool cars like Lancer Evo, but they need to BUILD on it. For example, Subaru is on this AWD kick. They built an entire dynasty on WRX's success in rally racing. Mitsubishi has done equally well in racing, if not better, yet has gone no where with it. The Evo's image does not trickle down into the rest of the product's lineup. Subaru on the other hand, does well with their Legacy & Forresters. Even Outback with its rugged looks, do well. They are smart, because they avoid direct competition against Honda/Toyota by offering something unique--that being AWD standard item in their cars.
Mitsubishi continues to go head-to-head against Honda/Toyota, and they are going to go down hard... and it'll be just a matter of time until Chrysler engulfs them and that's when they'll become the next Suzuki & Mazda--another bitch to a domestic company.
05-03-2004
#17
§C§H§O§C§O§B§O
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: San Diego
Age: 40
Posts: 1,808
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rep Power: 0 youre all right about mitsu's market value falls, and with the price tag they have on their cars, its no wonder their economy continue to falll...for cars with reputation such as theirs, and a price tag that surpases other more reliable coporations (honda, toyota, etc), they aren't going to make any sales...
last time i tried to talk a dealer to sell me a ralliart for 17 grand, and the guy totally b*tched me out, talking about how top-of-the-line the ralliarts were 2nd to the evo, and how 17 grand wouldn't even pay "UNCLE SAM'S PENNIES" which had no F*Cking clue what he ways saying. (Philipino guy who couldn't say Evolution, called it "WEVOWUSHIN" ... LOL)
Asides from all that, we'll just have to let time tell, how the ralliart stands up to time. If it become mitsu's first reliable car, then i'm willin to pay for it...its a damn fun car to drive non the less!
last time i tried to talk a dealer to sell me a ralliart for 17 grand, and the guy totally b*tched me out, talking about how top-of-the-line the ralliarts were 2nd to the evo, and how 17 grand wouldn't even pay "UNCLE SAM'S PENNIES" which had no F*Cking clue what he ways saying. (Philipino guy who couldn't say Evolution, called it "WEVOWUSHIN" ... LOL)
Asides from all that, we'll just have to let time tell, how the ralliart stands up to time. If it become mitsu's first reliable car, then i'm willin to pay for it...its a damn fun car to drive non the less!
05-03-2004
#18
Registered!!
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Age: 40
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rep Power: 265 Originally posted by O1Coupe
and it'll be just a matter of time until Chrysler engulfs them and that's when they'll become the next Suzuki & Mazda--another bitch to a domestic company.
and it'll be just a matter of time until Chrysler engulfs them and that's when they'll become the next Suzuki & Mazda--another bitch to a domestic company.
chrysler wont engulf them, they wont bail them out, they might just let mitsu die. haha
05-03-2004
#19
I wish I was asian
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: chantilly, Virginia, US
Age: 39
Posts: 5,083
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rep Power: 313 Originally posted by O1Coupe
It's not the fact that Mitsubishi doesn't have mainstream cars--they actually have everything.
They have Lancer to go against the Civic... and Galant to take on the Accord. But the question is--why would you buy a Lancer over a Civic? Top requirements for an econobox? Reliability, gas consumption, and size.
Does it offer more room? No. Better gas mileage? No. Better reliability? No.
It's not the fact that Mitsubishi doesn't have mainstream cars--they actually have everything.
They have Lancer to go against the Civic... and Galant to take on the Accord. But the question is--why would you buy a Lancer over a Civic? Top requirements for an econobox? Reliability, gas consumption, and size.
Does it offer more room? No. Better gas mileage? No. Better reliability? No.
Civic:
Front Head Room: 38 in.
Front Hip Room: 51.2 in.
Front Shoulder Room: 52.6 in.
Rear Head Room: 36.3 in.
Rear Shoulder Room: 52 in.
Rear Hip Room: 49.8 in.
Front Leg Room: 42.2 in.
Rear Leg Room: 36 in.
Luggage Capacity: 12.9 cu. ft.
Lancer:
Front Head Room: 38.8 in.
Front Hip Room: 51.2 in.
Front Shoulder Room: 54.1 in.
Rear Head Room: 36.7 in.
Rear Shoulder Room: 53.3 in.
Rear Hip Room: 50.2 in.
Front Leg Room: 43.2 in.
Rear Leg Room: 36.6 in.
Luggage Capacity: 11.3 cu. ft.
The Lancer only loses to the Civic in roominess by luggage capacity. The lancer also uses a 2 Liter engine compared to Honda's 1.7 Liter D-series engine. In doing so, Mitsu has been able to offer more torque than Civic (130 ft lbs vs. 114 ft lbs) almost 600 rpms earlier. Although the horsepower is 7 horses lower than the Civic, it's max horsepower comes in 800 rpms earlier as well. The Lancer also has a tighter turning radius than the civic (32.8 ft vs. 34.1 ft).
05-03-2004
#20
RESIDENT ROTOR HEAD
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: , Other, ZEBRA
Age: 42
Posts: 3,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rep Power: 305 Originally posted by O1Coupe
Mazda--another bitch to a domestic company.
Mazda--another bitch to a domestic company.
lease: Don't even start with that ****. I'm just gonna copy paste the same **** I've been saying on this board over and over again.Ford is a 33% shareholder in Mazda, as well as Aston Martin, Jaguar, and Range Rover. Mazda still operates 100% independently of the parent company, meaning they research, design, and produce their cars in Japan. There are a few exceptions, like Honda, some Mazdas are built in North America. A few 6's and 3's I believe. The only thing Mazda gets from Ford is funding. Ford technologies are available to Mazda, so that Mazda can take what it wants, but of course this is all at Mazda's own discretion.
Think about it like this. If you owned an Italian Restaurant, and had a large investment in a Chinese Restaurant, but not large enough to run the place, just large enough to make some money out of it.....wouldn't you advertise the Chinese Restaurant in your Restaurant as a good place to try? It's all economics and marketing people. Don't believe the ricer hype.
Mazda was the only Japanese car manufacturer to win the 24 hour Le Mans endurance championship. Mazda is the only company that directly sponsors teams that drive its cars. Other marques, such as BMW and Acura, pay for good finishes in their cars. For example, win in a BMW and the company rewards you with $4000. But only Mazda directly supports Protégé racers. Four teams, including the tri-point team receive undisclosed dollars from Mazda. The benefit is obvious: Give some realism to the “zoom zoom” ad campaign in a series where its 16,400 car runs with a BMW. Last year, Proteges won three times.
http://www.tripointmotorsports.com/index.html
Mazda has rich road racing heritage. Just because you drive a really really fast civic, doesn't mean that you shouldn't try to appreciate other cars in the automotive world.
Domestics' bitch huh?
Tell that to these guys
http://www.mazda.co.jp/mazdaspeed/
05-03-2004
#21
Registered!!
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,096
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rep Power: 0 Originally posted by cambo
The lancer also uses a 2 Liter engine compared to Honda's 1.7 Liter D-series engine. In doing so, Mitsu has been able to offer more torque than Civic (130 ft lbs vs. 114 ft lbs) almost 600 rpms earlier. Although the horsepower is 7 horses lower than the Civic, it's max horsepower comes in 800 rpms earlier as well.
The lancer also uses a 2 Liter engine compared to Honda's 1.7 Liter D-series engine. In doing so, Mitsu has been able to offer more torque than Civic (130 ft lbs vs. 114 ft lbs) almost 600 rpms earlier. Although the horsepower is 7 horses lower than the Civic, it's max horsepower comes in 800 rpms earlier as well.
Obviously the Lancer is going to be better than the Civic in SOME things, but it falls behind the rest. There's some other things I did not bother mentioning because it was obvious, but I will now--resale value? Fit & finish? Number of dealerships? Maintence costs?
Tally it all up, and this is why Lancer falls behind.
05-03-2004
#22
Registered!!
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,096
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rep Power: 0 Originally posted by nookiemonster
lease: Don't even start with that ****. I'm just gonna copy paste the same **** I've been saying on this board over and over again.
Ford is a 33% shareholder in Mazda, as well as Aston Martin, Jaguar, and Range Rover. Mazda still operates 100% independently of the parent company, meaning they research, design, and produce their cars in Japan. There are a few exceptions, like Honda, some Mazdas are built in North America. A few 6's and 3's I believe. The only thing Mazda gets from Ford is funding. Ford technologies are available to Mazda, so that Mazda can take what it wants, but of course this is all at Mazda's own discretion.
Think about it like this. If you owned an Italian Restaurant, and had a large investment in a Chinese Restaurant, but not large enough to run the place, just large enough to make some money out of it.....wouldn't you advertise the Chinese Restaurant in your Restaurant as a good place to try? It's all economics and marketing people. Don't believe the ricer hype.
Mazda was the only Japanese car manufacturer to win the 24 hour Le Mans endurance championship. Mazda is the only company that directly sponsors teams that drive its cars. Other marques, such as BMW and Acura, pay for good finishes in their cars. For example, win in a BMW and the company rewards you with $4000. But only Mazda directly supports Protégé racers. Four teams, including the tri-point team receive undisclosed dollars from Mazda. The benefit is obvious: Give some realism to the “zoom zoom” ad campaign in a series where its 16,400 car runs with a BMW. Last year, Proteges won three times.
http://www.tripointmotorsports.com/index.html
Mazda has rich road racing heritage. Just because you drive a really really fast civic, doesn't mean that you shouldn't try to appreciate other cars in the automotive world.
Domestics' bitch huh?
Tell that to these guys
http://www.mazda.co.jp/mazdaspeed/
lease: Don't even start with that ****. I'm just gonna copy paste the same **** I've been saying on this board over and over again.Ford is a 33% shareholder in Mazda, as well as Aston Martin, Jaguar, and Range Rover. Mazda still operates 100% independently of the parent company, meaning they research, design, and produce their cars in Japan. There are a few exceptions, like Honda, some Mazdas are built in North America. A few 6's and 3's I believe. The only thing Mazda gets from Ford is funding. Ford technologies are available to Mazda, so that Mazda can take what it wants, but of course this is all at Mazda's own discretion.
Think about it like this. If you owned an Italian Restaurant, and had a large investment in a Chinese Restaurant, but not large enough to run the place, just large enough to make some money out of it.....wouldn't you advertise the Chinese Restaurant in your Restaurant as a good place to try? It's all economics and marketing people. Don't believe the ricer hype.
Mazda was the only Japanese car manufacturer to win the 24 hour Le Mans endurance championship. Mazda is the only company that directly sponsors teams that drive its cars. Other marques, such as BMW and Acura, pay for good finishes in their cars. For example, win in a BMW and the company rewards you with $4000. But only Mazda directly supports Protégé racers. Four teams, including the tri-point team receive undisclosed dollars from Mazda. The benefit is obvious: Give some realism to the “zoom zoom” ad campaign in a series where its 16,400 car runs with a BMW. Last year, Proteges won three times.
http://www.tripointmotorsports.com/index.html
Mazda has rich road racing heritage. Just because you drive a really really fast civic, doesn't mean that you shouldn't try to appreciate other cars in the automotive world.
Domestics' bitch huh?
Tell that to these guys
http://www.mazda.co.jp/mazdaspeed/
Dude, WAKE UP... Mazda *IS* Ford's bitch. 100% indpendent??? HAHAHAHA. 100% independent would be if you made your cars, with all your parts, and be completely financially independent.
Explain to me why Mazda is UNDER FORD'S CORPORATE UMBERELLA now (refer to Ford.com)
- Explain why Mazda uses a re-skinned Ford Escape as their small SUV.
- Explain why Mazda B-Series is a re-skinned Ford Ranger.
- Explain why Mazda 3 uses next-gen Ford Focus chassis.
- Explain why Mazda MPV uses Ford's Duratec motor from the Tauras.
- Explain why Mazda will provide all 4-cyl motor for Ford from here-on.
- Explain why Mazda RX-8's rotary program was stalled by Ford, then re-approved after 4 years, again, by Ford's management
It's because MAZDA IS FORD'S BITCH. That is the TRUTH. I know this hurts your feelings, but it's the reality my friend. Want some hard proof now?
http://www.monito.com/wankel/ford.html
"Ford will boost its stake in Mazda to 33.4 percent from 22.54 percent and install a seconded Ford executive as Mazda's president, the statement said. Analysts say the one-third stake will give the U.S. car giant a greater say in the running of Mazda, Japan's fifth-largest vehicle manufacturer."
"The two companies said in a joint statement Friday that Ford would increase its share in Mazda to 33.4%, and that Mazda's president would step aside, ceding management control to a former Ford executive."
http://www.autointell.com/asian_comp...on-ford-01.htm
"1997 January - Autrama Inc. becomes Ford Sales Japan. March Mazda and Ford agree to a synchronized product cycle plan and to communize platforms and powertrains progressively. November James E. Miller is appointed president of Mazda Motor Corporation." - Source, MAZDA
100% independent MY ***. And don't bother feeding us the racing heretige of Mazda, that's completely off topic from this. Besides, who gives a fly **** about some race they won back in 70s'. Ford & Chev won more Lemans than Mazda, and it doesn't mean they make kick *** products either. It's just 1 racing program they had success in 1 year..... big whooping deal. You buy a car for QUALITY & VALUE, not because of some race they won before you were probably even born.
If Mazda made such kick *** cars, THEY WOULDN'T LET FORD HAVE SO MUCH CONTROL. Do you see Honda selling their shares to GM? Do you see Toyota selling their shares to Ford? Hell no. They are financially STRONG (especially Toyota, who recently declared that they have **ZERO** dollars in debts).
All the Ford's bitch companies, like Jag, Aston Martin, Volvo, etc were doing BAD. They got bought out, because they were LOSING MONEY. Even Aston Martin uses Ford engines now. Give it up. It's called bending over for the big brother. End of story.
Last edited by O1Coupe; 05-03-2004 at 10:10 AM.
05-03-2004
#23
Riceburners Bitch
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Salisbury,Maryland
Age: 39
Posts: 417
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rep Power: 0 this is what i was gonna share with you all got this info from the dodge forum being that mitsu is daimlerchrysler
from a DC Press release:
"Board of Management and Supervisory Board decide on Mitsubishi Motors
Stuttgart, Apr 22, 2004
In an extraordinary meeting on April 22, 2004, the Board of Management and the Supervisory Board of DaimlerChrysler have decided not to participate in a capital increase planned by Mitsubishi Motors Corporation (MMC) and to cease further financial support for MMC.
After the earnings collapse of MMC in fiscal 2003, MMC has established a new business plan with the strong support of DaimlerChrysler. According to this plan, substantial financial resources are required to guarantee a sustainable financial recovery of the company. Together with the major shareholders of the Mitsubishi Group DaimlerChrysler has tried hard to establish a solid financial structure. However, it was not possible to find a solution leading to an acceptable result for DaimlerChrysler.
April 23rd, 2004: Conference Call on DaimlerChrysler AG's position regarding Mitsubishi Motors
Global Conference Call, 11:00 a.m. CEST / 05:00 a.m. EDT
On April 23rd, 2004 DaimlerChrysler AG will host a conference call to discuss it’s position regarding Mitsubishi Motors. We would like to invite you to listen to this call via the link provided below. The replay will be available immediately after the end of the call. www.daimlerchrysler.com/ir/mmc_e "
__________________
"DaimlerChrysler AG said Thursday it will not proceed with a $6 billion-plus bailout of Mitsubishi Motors, leaving the future of the struggling Japanese automaker in doubt. The announcement is an about-face from reports last week that the German automaker would increase its stake from 37 percent to more than 50 percent by 2007 at a cost of $3.8 billion by buying up more stock as part of a broader bailout that involved Japanese creditors.
"In an extraordinary meeting on April 22, 2004, the Board of Management and the Supervisory Board of DaimlerChrysler have decided not to participate in a capital increase planned by Mitsubishi Motors Corporation (MMC) and to cease further financial support for MMC," said an official statement from DaimlerChrysler.
"This clearly means separation," a DaimlerChrysler spokesman told Reuters, adding that the 37-percent stake would be booked as discontinued business until a buyer could be found. The decision will be explained by DaimlerChrysler chairman Juergen Schrempp today.
On the minds of many in the U.S. is how a pull-out from Mitsubishi will impact a joint four-cylinder "world engine" development program between Chrysler and Mitsubishi, as well as development of small and mid-size cars between the two companies. Chrysler executives have boasted about how much money they are saving in development and purchasing by combining with Mitsubishi. Wolfgang Bernhard, outgoing Chrysler chief operating officer who is about to take over as chief of Mercedes-Benz, said earlier this month that no action regarding Mitsubishi would derail those programs. But analysts have doubted that Mitsubishi can survive independently without DaimlerChrysler, and no other buyers have surfaced.
David Healy, an auto industry analyst with Burnham Securities, said that in "pulling the plug" on Mitsubishi it looked as if group board members had "finally rebelled against Schrempp's pouring money down that financial black hole." Shareholders have called for Schrempp's replacement. But the supervisory board has continued to back him despite acquisitions of Chrysler and Mitsubishi draining more than $40 billion in shareholder value since 1998. Mitsubishi expects to post a loss of $686 million for the year ended March 31. That would bring the company's losses over seven years to $3 billion. Mitsubishi sales in the USA, down 26 percet last year, have slid 19 percent so far this year. DaimlerChrysler recently dispatched Andreas Renschler, former head of its Smart minicar division, to Mitsubishi to assemble a rescue plan. Renschler was expected to replace Mitsubishi CEO Rolf Eckrodt as early as this month. "
follow up story:
" DC hopes to keep best of Mitsu DaimlerChrysler chairman Juergen Schrempp made it clear Friday that his company won't be pumping more money into the struggling Mitsubishi Motors, certainly not the $3 billion-plus it was expected to send to Japan as part of a $6 billion-plus bailout. The company also tried to make clear that its joint ventures with Mitsubishi, such as the co-development of small and mid-size cars between Chrysler and Mitsubishi and the world engine to be built in Michigan to benefit Chrysler, Mitsubishi, Hyundai, and Smart, won't be affected by the company's decision to hold its 37-percent stake and hold back additional funds. Two things happened last week to change what had been an expected bailout that would have increased DaimlerChrysler's holding in Mitsubishi to greater than 50 percent by 2007: The DaimlerChrysler supervisory board balked at pumping another $3.8 billion into the company; and Japanese creditor banks were looking for even more generous terms of the bailout plan that would have reduced their contributions. Chief financial officer Manfred Gentz said the decision was "very difficult." But, he added, an exhaustive review by a DaimlerChrysler team showed that a turnaround for debt-laden Mitsubishi was "only feasible with very high capital inflow."
i think its quite a shame and hope they can turn themselves around enough this year for DC to give them some more money because personally i love the stylings of quite a few of their vehicles
btw dude with the daimlerchrysler merger almost all the new cars from chrysler and mecedes have parts shared between them, and i know you guys wouldnt be calling mercedes pieces of junk
from a DC Press release:
"Board of Management and Supervisory Board decide on Mitsubishi Motors
Stuttgart, Apr 22, 2004
In an extraordinary meeting on April 22, 2004, the Board of Management and the Supervisory Board of DaimlerChrysler have decided not to participate in a capital increase planned by Mitsubishi Motors Corporation (MMC) and to cease further financial support for MMC.
After the earnings collapse of MMC in fiscal 2003, MMC has established a new business plan with the strong support of DaimlerChrysler. According to this plan, substantial financial resources are required to guarantee a sustainable financial recovery of the company. Together with the major shareholders of the Mitsubishi Group DaimlerChrysler has tried hard to establish a solid financial structure. However, it was not possible to find a solution leading to an acceptable result for DaimlerChrysler.
April 23rd, 2004: Conference Call on DaimlerChrysler AG's position regarding Mitsubishi Motors
Global Conference Call, 11:00 a.m. CEST / 05:00 a.m. EDT
On April 23rd, 2004 DaimlerChrysler AG will host a conference call to discuss it’s position regarding Mitsubishi Motors. We would like to invite you to listen to this call via the link provided below. The replay will be available immediately after the end of the call. www.daimlerchrysler.com/ir/mmc_e "
__________________
"DaimlerChrysler AG said Thursday it will not proceed with a $6 billion-plus bailout of Mitsubishi Motors, leaving the future of the struggling Japanese automaker in doubt. The announcement is an about-face from reports last week that the German automaker would increase its stake from 37 percent to more than 50 percent by 2007 at a cost of $3.8 billion by buying up more stock as part of a broader bailout that involved Japanese creditors.
"In an extraordinary meeting on April 22, 2004, the Board of Management and the Supervisory Board of DaimlerChrysler have decided not to participate in a capital increase planned by Mitsubishi Motors Corporation (MMC) and to cease further financial support for MMC," said an official statement from DaimlerChrysler.
"This clearly means separation," a DaimlerChrysler spokesman told Reuters, adding that the 37-percent stake would be booked as discontinued business until a buyer could be found. The decision will be explained by DaimlerChrysler chairman Juergen Schrempp today.
On the minds of many in the U.S. is how a pull-out from Mitsubishi will impact a joint four-cylinder "world engine" development program between Chrysler and Mitsubishi, as well as development of small and mid-size cars between the two companies. Chrysler executives have boasted about how much money they are saving in development and purchasing by combining with Mitsubishi. Wolfgang Bernhard, outgoing Chrysler chief operating officer who is about to take over as chief of Mercedes-Benz, said earlier this month that no action regarding Mitsubishi would derail those programs. But analysts have doubted that Mitsubishi can survive independently without DaimlerChrysler, and no other buyers have surfaced.
David Healy, an auto industry analyst with Burnham Securities, said that in "pulling the plug" on Mitsubishi it looked as if group board members had "finally rebelled against Schrempp's pouring money down that financial black hole." Shareholders have called for Schrempp's replacement. But the supervisory board has continued to back him despite acquisitions of Chrysler and Mitsubishi draining more than $40 billion in shareholder value since 1998. Mitsubishi expects to post a loss of $686 million for the year ended March 31. That would bring the company's losses over seven years to $3 billion. Mitsubishi sales in the USA, down 26 percet last year, have slid 19 percent so far this year. DaimlerChrysler recently dispatched Andreas Renschler, former head of its Smart minicar division, to Mitsubishi to assemble a rescue plan. Renschler was expected to replace Mitsubishi CEO Rolf Eckrodt as early as this month. "
follow up story:
" DC hopes to keep best of Mitsu DaimlerChrysler chairman Juergen Schrempp made it clear Friday that his company won't be pumping more money into the struggling Mitsubishi Motors, certainly not the $3 billion-plus it was expected to send to Japan as part of a $6 billion-plus bailout. The company also tried to make clear that its joint ventures with Mitsubishi, such as the co-development of small and mid-size cars between Chrysler and Mitsubishi and the world engine to be built in Michigan to benefit Chrysler, Mitsubishi, Hyundai, and Smart, won't be affected by the company's decision to hold its 37-percent stake and hold back additional funds. Two things happened last week to change what had been an expected bailout that would have increased DaimlerChrysler's holding in Mitsubishi to greater than 50 percent by 2007: The DaimlerChrysler supervisory board balked at pumping another $3.8 billion into the company; and Japanese creditor banks were looking for even more generous terms of the bailout plan that would have reduced their contributions. Chief financial officer Manfred Gentz said the decision was "very difficult." But, he added, an exhaustive review by a DaimlerChrysler team showed that a turnaround for debt-laden Mitsubishi was "only feasible with very high capital inflow."
i think its quite a shame and hope they can turn themselves around enough this year for DC to give them some more money because personally i love the stylings of quite a few of their vehicles
btw dude with the daimlerchrysler merger almost all the new cars from chrysler and mecedes have parts shared between them, and i know you guys wouldnt be calling mercedes pieces of junk
05-03-2004
#24
Registered!!
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,096
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rep Power: 0 Mercedes IS a piece of junk... it officially made 2004 JD Power's worst customer satisfaction list.. due to reliability issues.
On the opposite end of the spectrum, Lexus cleaned up the satisfaction ratings--in entry level, mid-size, full-size AND SUV luxo class. Just Another reason why Lexus #1 selling luxury brand in US... you don't screw around with Toyota.
Yeah, Mitsubishi Motors sounds like it's done......... I hope somebody helps them out. I'd hate to see Evo go down the drain.
On the opposite end of the spectrum, Lexus cleaned up the satisfaction ratings--in entry level, mid-size, full-size AND SUV luxo class. Just Another reason why Lexus #1 selling luxury brand in US... you don't screw around with Toyota.
Yeah, Mitsubishi Motors sounds like it's done......... I hope somebody helps them out. I'd hate to see Evo go down the drain.
05-03-2004
#25
§C§H§O§C§O§B§O
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: San Diego
Age: 40
Posts: 1,808
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rep Power: 0 wow...i read all of that half way, and now i'm just soo lost...everything is merging with everything... everyone is being swallowed by someone else... i hope honda doesn't fall into something like this...i'll stick with my good ol honda...screw merc, mitsu, ford, gmc, chevy blah blah blah blah...pretty soon we'll all be driving different cars made with the same ****! ^_^
05-03-2004
#26
RESIDENT ROTOR HEAD
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: , Other, ZEBRA
Age: 42
Posts: 3,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rep Power: 305 Dude I don't know where you've been but Mazda won the Le Mans Championship in the early 90's, (1993) I believe, and it was a BIG deal at the time. I don't know about anyone else, but a car company winning a 24 hour endurance championship is a fine display of solid engineering. What do you think was the original intent of the WRC and why manufacturers got involved?
All of the Mazda vehicles you mentioned are actually Mazda designs. Ford reskinned them and sold many of them as Fords. My aunt's Ford Escape says Mazda Motors all over the damn thing. As for Mazda using the Focus Chassis, I don't know go ask Mazda. I do know that Volvo also borrowed the design. But the 3 has received nothing but praise, and I still have yet to read a bad review on the focus anyways. I wouldn't drive one, but it is by no means, a bad car.
The rotaries have been in production in Japan for quite some time, and only left the Japanese Market for a short while. Just because we didn't see them in the States doesn't mean they're not in production somewhere else. So your comment about the RX-8 really is pointless being that the RX-7 was in production until just a few years ago.
And as for Mazda doing all of the 4 cylinder designs for Ford in the future, all I can say is look for an improvement in Ford vehicles. Being partly owned by Ford is the best thing that ever happened to any of these companies. Now they have the financial backing to do the R&D they want to do. If the companies were doing bad financially before Ford, it was most likely because all of them are very UNIQUE. None of them really followed the trend of all the big manufacturers. One thing I find in common among all of the daughter companies is that they are all autos based on either luxury or sporty designs. Think about it. They are cars aimed at a certain market, and that market is a very small percentage of the population, be it the young driver who enjoys handling and rigid designs, or the sleepy old man who enjoys his luxury jag. This is why they were doing poorly.
Ford knows their cars are shitty, so what do they do? Go and buy out large shares of the competition. Now you have access to all of their R&D and to their profits. Pretty sneaky eh? They also know that if they back these companies financially, they will own a piece of every aspect of the market. This is why Ford has established that all of it's daughter companies develop their cars independently. Why control them when the bottom line is profit? Ford makes money off of their efforts anyways, so they let them diversify from Ford in order to ensure they make a dollar no matter where the consumer goes.
By the way most of that info you posted (good info none the less) is all pertaining to Ford borrowing from Mazda. So what? Expect better Fords once again.
I really don't care that Ford owns Mazda, I know there are good and bad products from Mazda themselves regardless of whether or not they're Ford's "bitch." It's just really immature of alot of the people here who claim the company is **** because they associate with Ford. So don't tell me it hurts my feelings or what have you because honestly, I don't give a ****. I just hate reading immature, uneducated responses to the whole merging of american and japanese companies.
Everyone is so sprung nuts on subies, yet GM owns a very large share in Subarus stock.
All of the Mazda vehicles you mentioned are actually Mazda designs. Ford reskinned them and sold many of them as Fords. My aunt's Ford Escape says Mazda Motors all over the damn thing. As for Mazda using the Focus Chassis, I don't know go ask Mazda. I do know that Volvo also borrowed the design. But the 3 has received nothing but praise, and I still have yet to read a bad review on the focus anyways. I wouldn't drive one, but it is by no means, a bad car.
The rotaries have been in production in Japan for quite some time, and only left the Japanese Market for a short while. Just because we didn't see them in the States doesn't mean they're not in production somewhere else. So your comment about the RX-8 really is pointless being that the RX-7 was in production until just a few years ago.
And as for Mazda doing all of the 4 cylinder designs for Ford in the future, all I can say is look for an improvement in Ford vehicles. Being partly owned by Ford is the best thing that ever happened to any of these companies. Now they have the financial backing to do the R&D they want to do. If the companies were doing bad financially before Ford, it was most likely because all of them are very UNIQUE. None of them really followed the trend of all the big manufacturers. One thing I find in common among all of the daughter companies is that they are all autos based on either luxury or sporty designs. Think about it. They are cars aimed at a certain market, and that market is a very small percentage of the population, be it the young driver who enjoys handling and rigid designs, or the sleepy old man who enjoys his luxury jag. This is why they were doing poorly.
Ford knows their cars are shitty, so what do they do? Go and buy out large shares of the competition. Now you have access to all of their R&D and to their profits. Pretty sneaky eh? They also know that if they back these companies financially, they will own a piece of every aspect of the market. This is why Ford has established that all of it's daughter companies develop their cars independently. Why control them when the bottom line is profit? Ford makes money off of their efforts anyways, so they let them diversify from Ford in order to ensure they make a dollar no matter where the consumer goes.
By the way most of that info you posted (good info none the less) is all pertaining to Ford borrowing from Mazda. So what? Expect better Fords once again.
I really don't care that Ford owns Mazda, I know there are good and bad products from Mazda themselves regardless of whether or not they're Ford's "bitch." It's just really immature of alot of the people here who claim the company is **** because they associate with Ford. So don't tell me it hurts my feelings or what have you because honestly, I don't give a ****. I just hate reading immature, uneducated responses to the whole merging of american and japanese companies.
Everyone is so sprung nuts on subies, yet GM owns a very large share in Subarus stock.
Last edited by nookiemonster; 05-03-2004 at 03:56 PM.
05-03-2004
#27
RESIDENT ROTOR HEAD
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: , Other, ZEBRA
Age: 42
Posts: 3,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rep Power: 305 Originally posted by O1Coupe
Even Aston Martin uses Ford engines now. Give it up. It's called bending over for the big brother. End of story.
Even Aston Martin uses Ford engines now. Give it up. It's called bending over for the big brother. End of story.
lease: . Where you got that one, I don't know, but damn pass the ganja. 
Last edited by nookiemonster; 05-03-2004 at 03:46 PM.
05-03-2004
#28
§C§H§O§C§O§B§O
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: San Diego
Age: 40
Posts: 1,808
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rep Power: 0 ^^^ not to dissagree with you about ford > mazda or mazda > ford or anything, but just because mazda won the le mans championship doesn't mean that their consumer cars will all live up to those standards...
i love the mazda 3, and i don't care if its based on a focus platform or whatever, that cars drives and feels like a speed demon!!!
the 2005 focus look VERY promissing, and i aint' shutting myself from any car just because it has a bad history, and people should also learn to do that.
Personally, i'm going to give the ralliart a chance, just to see what comes of it, and as for mazda, i'll keep my eyes open for the 3
just my 02 cents
i love the mazda 3, and i don't care if its based on a focus platform or whatever, that cars drives and feels like a speed demon!!!
the 2005 focus look VERY promissing, and i aint' shutting myself from any car just because it has a bad history, and people should also learn to do that.
Personally, i'm going to give the ralliart a chance, just to see what comes of it, and as for mazda, i'll keep my eyes open for the 3
just my 02 cents
05-03-2004
#29
Registered!!
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,096
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rep Power: 0 OMG... you wanna talk about history?
Check Mazda's past reliability history. They WERE an EXCELLENT company. Their durability was close to Toyota. Until they started USING FORD PARTS.
For example, mid-90's Mazda 626 Cronos used Ford's 4-Speed automatic. As you might have guess... the only major problem people had were the tranny.
Mazda Tribute recently made the LEMON list. Mazda does not normally get into those lists, but it officially made it. And you're all for merging?
Merging help REALLY shitty companies like JAGUAR to improve on their qualities. Before the merger, Mazda was going to start up a new company called AMATI. This company was to take on Acura, and at the time, a smaller Lexus. However, it was scraped, thanks to FORD. This new AMATI factory was supposively better than Lexus's factory at the time.
Bottom line: Mazda's quality has gone down the drain since the merger with Ford. And that's the truth.
Check Mazda's past reliability history. They WERE an EXCELLENT company. Their durability was close to Toyota. Until they started USING FORD PARTS.
For example, mid-90's Mazda 626 Cronos used Ford's 4-Speed automatic. As you might have guess... the only major problem people had were the tranny.
Mazda Tribute recently made the LEMON list. Mazda does not normally get into those lists, but it officially made it. And you're all for merging?
Merging help REALLY shitty companies like JAGUAR to improve on their qualities. Before the merger, Mazda was going to start up a new company called AMATI. This company was to take on Acura, and at the time, a smaller Lexus. However, it was scraped, thanks to FORD. This new AMATI factory was supposively better than Lexus's factory at the time.
Bottom line: Mazda's quality has gone down the drain since the merger with Ford. And that's the truth.
05-03-2004
#30
RESIDENT ROTOR HEAD
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: , Other, ZEBRA
Age: 42
Posts: 3,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rep Power: 305 I'll agree with you on that one regarding the late 90's 626's, and we all know about the AMATI marquee and the ill fated millenia, which was also a great car. I don't know much about the Tribute making the lemon list, but I have an aunt who drives an Escape, and a friend who drives a tribute, never seen anything bad with those cars.
However besides that we still have the Mazda 6, (and yes I know uses many Ford parts especially the V6 model), the Mazda 3, the RX-8, and the Miata. All of these cars have received nothing but praise, and the long term review on the 6 in car and driver reviewed it as an exceptionally reliable car. So for you to base the overall quality of Mazda on the Tribute is pretty narrowminded wouldn't you agree?
How about the Protege?
Pros: Tight suspension, powerful brakes, superb steering feel, comfortable seats, attractive exterior styling.
Cons: Suspension may be too stiff for some buyers, more horsepower couldn't hurt.
What Edmunds.com says: When it comes to small, snappy sedans, the Protege is a tough act to beat.
Edmonds.com rated it "editors most wanted." 9.1 consumer rating.
The P5, MP3, and Mazdaspeed are all based off of this platform, and received even better reviews. So where you get Mazda quality going down I don't know.
Here's a page with more ratings: http://www.edmunds.com/used/type/200...excontent..0.*
Mazdaspeed 9.1? Nahhh...it's a low quality car right?
TMV® Dealer Retail: $18,602 - $19,192
Pros: Sports car handling, aggressive looks, incredible sound system.
Cons: Frustrating stereo controls, overdone rear spoiler.
What Edmunds.com says: Mazda gives its MP3 a much appreciated horsepower injection, turning an already capable performer into a potential segment killer.
And out of curiousity I put in a 2003 MSP with 9500 miles into their database and after a year, it's still worth 16-17.5 K. Wow shouldn't a crappy low quality rabadged Ford be losing value faster than that? My civic sure did.
Check this page out: http://www.edmunds.com/used/type/200...excontent..0.*
Looks like our beloved Civic only got a 8.6 rating. Explain that one. Maybe Honda's quality is going down huh? Naww...couldn't be...
However besides that we still have the Mazda 6, (and yes I know uses many Ford parts especially the V6 model), the Mazda 3, the RX-8, and the Miata. All of these cars have received nothing but praise, and the long term review on the 6 in car and driver reviewed it as an exceptionally reliable car. So for you to base the overall quality of Mazda on the Tribute is pretty narrowminded wouldn't you agree?
How about the Protege?
Pros: Tight suspension, powerful brakes, superb steering feel, comfortable seats, attractive exterior styling.
Cons: Suspension may be too stiff for some buyers, more horsepower couldn't hurt.
What Edmunds.com says: When it comes to small, snappy sedans, the Protege is a tough act to beat.
Edmonds.com rated it "editors most wanted." 9.1 consumer rating.
The P5, MP3, and Mazdaspeed are all based off of this platform, and received even better reviews. So where you get Mazda quality going down I don't know.
Here's a page with more ratings: http://www.edmunds.com/used/type/200...excontent..0.*
Mazdaspeed 9.1? Nahhh...it's a low quality car right?
TMV® Dealer Retail: $18,602 - $19,192
Pros: Sports car handling, aggressive looks, incredible sound system.
Cons: Frustrating stereo controls, overdone rear spoiler.
What Edmunds.com says: Mazda gives its MP3 a much appreciated horsepower injection, turning an already capable performer into a potential segment killer.
And out of curiousity I put in a 2003 MSP with 9500 miles into their database and after a year, it's still worth 16-17.5 K. Wow shouldn't a crappy low quality rabadged Ford be losing value faster than that? My civic sure did.
Check this page out: http://www.edmunds.com/used/type/200...excontent..0.*
Looks like our beloved Civic only got a 8.6 rating. Explain that one. Maybe Honda's quality is going down huh? Naww...couldn't be...
Last edited by nookiemonster; 05-03-2004 at 04:53 PM.
