OnlineAlias

Well spoken...at the New York auto show they had some executive up there towting how the RalliArt name was going to be huge in the US, and they were going to do all this stuff blah blah blah. I think talk of all this has gone to crap since they have found themselves in this cash strapped situation.

Ralliart dealers would be good for us, I but isn't that kind of the same thing that Ford has been trying to do with its SVT stuff only to have it fail over and over again?

evomk8

Excellent commentary. You make superb observations and I agree with many of them. I would like to comment on a few points though.
corporate culture in general has been the problem. For example, Steven Torok, who left , was aware of Gagnon's lax credit policy, yet did nothing about it. Also, decision-making as to what models were to be sold in the U.S. had to pass though MMC in Japan. Many mistakes were made here.
In terms of quality, MMMA (the Normal plant) was, and to some degree, is still a problem. The Galant and Eclipes have long been the top sellers in the U.S. These cars have also been the lowest quality cars MMC sells here. This has led to a disproportionate ownership experience of "good" vehicles versus "bad". The result has been poor J.D. Power scores, which have had their effect on public opinion.
I really like this one . Your observation is very true for vehicles dated after 1992. Prior to that year, had high-tech gadgetry throughout their line-up (bar the Mirage). Montero came with an adjustable suspension, as did the Diamante (with TCL), the VR-4 system used in 3000GT and Galant you mentioned, etc. The prolem was marketing. MMC never marketed itself properly or established a real brand identity. Like you observed, it was as though people bought cars by accident...
Finbarr O'Neill is finally heading in the right direction, but with so much dammage already done, it will take a while. Fortunately, despite the automotive press, the current line-up (yes, even the new Galant) is much more competetive than previously. has an image problem, not a product problem.
Yeah... dealers on average do suck. There is a serious need for improvement here.
The comparison of EVO v.s. ST-165 is incongruent. You will likely disagree with me here, but the EVO is much more of a track car than the ST-165 was (yes I know Toyota used a modded version in the WRC). In addition, we're looking at a very different automotive market today. IMHO the Eclipse GSX, or even the Galant VR-4, would be a closer comparison.
MMC could equal BMW class performance if they could sell cars at the same price point. has trouble selling cars at $30k...
Now, if you look at in Europe, they do not have this problem. MMC has a much better rep there. Part of the reason being, was that they have been considered a reliable brand. Especially in Germany.
MMC has and can build high-quality cars. The Montero is a great example of superb build quality (unfortunately it's a bit under-powered).
RalliArt dealers would be great, as long as they are fully trained and held to a higher standard (both ethically and service-wise).

DGS

Living in MA, I'm quite aware that there are those who have no interest in precise vehicle control, lane discipline, or any clue that it's difficult to merge with 60 MPH traffic if you full stop at the bottom of the on-ramp.

But until the roads become automated public transportation rail lines with individual operatorless "trams", I'm not inclined to ignore the notion that "drive" is a transitive verb. Automatic transmission, cruise control, etc, still doesn't allow you to gab on the phone, read the newspaper, snort down Starbucks, without paying any attention to the road. People do drive without a clue. I'm not inclined to say that this is a good trend, although I understand that the manufacturers will cater to it ... as it's easier to build trucks for that market.

I still drive the Alfa because the Ferrari and EVO will (usually) let you get away with bad habits in daily traffic -- habits that will get you in bad trouble in snow or on a sand-covered corner. The right line through a turn is the right line whether you're in a 575M at 200KPH or in a Caravan at 45 MPH. People who dismiss the value of vehicle control in daily traffic are why I'm paying over $3K/year for insurance, despite a nearly flawless driving record. (It would be over $4K without the safe driver discount.) Speed doesn't kill -- driving beyond your attention span does. Boring vehicles are dangerous. If smokers are blamed for higher health insurance, what about the effect of inattentive drivers on auto insurance and highway safety?

The wrench that did the 45K service on my Ferrari left Mitsu when the 3000GT went away, and now works for an independent F-car shop.

You seem to be arguing that Mitsu can't afford a flagship product line like the EVO. But your arguments summarize a number of the reasons that other companies created flagship marques in the first place -- The separate marketing, service departments, specially trained mechanics ... and the higher prices to pay for such things.

For what it's worth, keep in mind that, out of the whole Fiat auto group, it's the flagship Ferrari marque that runs a profit.

DGS

I did look at the then-new Eclipse before I bought my ST165. The eyebrow roofline impaired forward visibility (for a 6'4" driver), and the dealer treated the car as an annoyance rather than part of the product line -- which is part of the marketing issue you mentioned.

You're right -- I disagree. The ST165 was built by the rally operation -- which was a problem for service as no two were exactly alike. For the ST185, they out-sourced rally operations and moved production into the factory. But my ST165 was about 90% identical to the machine Carlos Sainz won the '90 championship in. (Not couting the leather uphostery, climate control, etc.) It was a different WRC, back then. The ST165 was a product of the homologation era, where the WRC cars had to be closer to the showroom product than today.

The "track car" approach to the EVO keeps the prices down. (The ST165 ran $28K at a time when an M3 was stickered at $31K.) With the bells and whistles, the EVO would cost closer to $45K -- and Mitsu can't sell cars at that price against their current US image ... at least, not with the Mitsu marque on them. (Or should that be "the Mitsu stigma"?)

Tristar

iTrader: (7)

Things like interior quality, navigation, more gears etc are personal preferences. I believe Mitsu cars, for the money, are not bad automobiles. However, if I ever consider buying another one something will have to be done about the dreadful service departments. I really want an RS next spring, but unless there are major changes to service Im going with a Subie. Im sure many Evo owners will back my poor service claims.

And for those who think adding things to Mitsu vehicles is necessary to dig them out of the hole, heres a arguement. Saturn has always had decent sales from their inception, even though their cars are often inferior to others in their class. (Honda, Toyota) Why did sales still manage to have decent numbers? It was/is the way they deal with their customers, and how service takes care of vehicles. I honestly thing a restructuring of dealer and service departments could go a long way to perserving Mitsu's U.S. market.

I really do like the idea of a Ralliart dealer network though. I would go one step further though and develop a performance identity to the whole brand in the U.S. Bring over the turbo Airtrek (isnt that the name? sorry its 4 in the morning, you guys know what I mean, the JDM Outlander), restore performance to the Eclipse line, do a VR-4 Galant, and rid some of the dead wieght products from the line. I honestly dont think Mitsu can compete toe to toe with common place sedans from the high volume companies, but if they create a nitch market much like Subaru did in the early 90's (every vehicle in the line would be awd from that point on) Mitsu might pick itself up.

GPTourer

Wait, so you're saying people who don't care about the Evos abilities, all fall into the category of inattentive drivers who read, swill coffee or gab on the celly while driving?

You've got to be kidding. Or are you saying that other then the Evo, none of Mitsus cars have the ability to merge safely, avoid accidents or otherwise have the means to get out of there own way without being a hazard. Visit www.seewhathappens.com to see the Galant outhandle and out accelerate the Accord and Camry. Read any review of the Endeavor and Outlander and see how they have class leading specs, out slalom and have higher skidpad figures.

Your comments about the country's driver's being divided into only two categories ie safe enthusiast driver's with capable cars and inattentive regular car drivers with sloppy handling vehicles is very cynical and not backed up by facts.

Yeah, the guy gets paid more to work on only Ferraris. Your area probably has enough business to support him. Do we even have to discuss the relative reliability issues of the average Lancer or Galant compared to a typical Ferrari?

Let's analyze this extra dealership thing everybody claims would be so great. The players, of ocurse are: Acura, Lexus, Infiniti, and SVT. The standout name in that lineup is by far Lexus. The other three have had mixed success. The only model that even comes close would be SVT because a Ralliart branch for Mitsu wouldn't have the luxury SUVS or big sedans like Acura, Lexus or Infiniti. So how can we justify building seperate buildings for just the Evo? I know everybody will say bring back the 3000GT,the GSX, a Pajero Evolution and Galant Vr-4 would round out the lineup because everybody would want one and the sales would be great. I don't think that's true and history agrees with me. Internet talk is pretty cheap and unless those complaining have either a GSX or VR-4 (or Evo) that they bought brand new sitting in their driveway (or owned one new in the past) their "promises" to buy would carry little weight with Mitsubishi and its dealer group. I think it would be great too, but it does not seem marketable enough in this country to create a separate dealer network of just sports cars when your core linup isn't getting it done. They cannot afford to take the "build it and they will come" mentality. But we will find out a little more next year when the Evo lineup swells to three models - RS, GSR and MR. A Ralliart Galant is still a consideration, and Lord knows what the 4G Eclipse will actually be like. The product and servide must come first. The pretty buildings, fountains, trees and fancy signs can wait.

DGS

Cynical? Probably. Not backed up by the facts? I remind you that Boston just hit the top of the "hostile drivers" survey.

First you reference , and then you start bragging about the performance of the Gallant compared to Accord or Camry? Are you touting "medium performance"?

But my response was to your implication that performance only becomes significant when you're "exceeding the limits of daily driving", and people don't care about the EVO, People who care about maintaining control of the vehicle tend to buy vehicles with good handling. Good mechanics take care of their tools, good programmers keep their computer disks organized. And people who take pride in their driving also take some interest in what they drive.

People who see "daily driving" as sitting in gridlock do tend to be inattentive drivers -- look around on the roads and see for yourself. Or check the auto forums. I've seen people on four different continents complaining about Camry drivers being road hogs.

Does that mean that every Camry driver is bad? Of course not. I've seen one Camry V6 driver doing some good driving. But I've also seen a whole lot of Camry drivers not paying any attention ... or going out of their way to get in everyone else's (e.g. blocking the left lane).

The notion that a large percentage of people who make a minimum investment in a entry level econobox are attentive drivers who focus on driving with precision is not substantiated by the traffic anywhere around here.

I had a Sunbird rental car once. I could turn the steering wheel 45 degrees either side of center without having any effect on the car's direction of travel. When you build cars like that, you're catering to those who aren't paying attention to how much they turn the wheel. Come to think of it, a few years back, I had a Gran Prix that was almost as bad. I won't accept GM rental cars anymore. (Granted, these were rental cars, so not quite showroom new.)

Even the auto mag reviews that preferred the STi to the EVO frequently cited that the EVO's steering was "too sensitive" -- they couldn't zone out behind the wheel.

If you want to brag that entry level Mitsus out-handle the competition, that's fine. But don't try to justify (perceived) mediocre handling by claiming that perfectly good drivers don't care whether the steering wheel makes the car turn.

Actually, Beemer mechanics make far more than F-car wrenches. There are more "routine" service jobs and more cars not owner-maintained.

Apparently.

I've owned my Alfa for 25 years. It's let me down exactly three times. (Twice due to fuel contamination and once because the mechanic installed a fan shroud on the radiator -- forgetting that a belt driven fan moves with the lump under torque.) My Ferrari was my daily driver -- until it got a bad service. And by 2000, my '88 Ferrari was far more reliable than my '88 Toyota ... because the Toy dealers didn't have a clue how to service an AllTrac. You want to compare Mitsus to Toyota reliability?

Proper maintenance is the key to reliability. If your dealers can't maintain an EVO -- or a Gallant -- forget reliability as a selling point.

Gee, it's really astounding that dealers have no history of good sales of a vehicle they don't carry for sale. (Duh).

There's a Toy dealer near me with the same outlook. They claim the Celica has poor sales -- because they don't carry any. They don't carry any because it doesn't sell well. This dealer will also tell you that the Camry doesn't sell well -- because all he carries are Corollas, Tundras, and RAV-4s.

This kind of circular logic is endemic among car dealers.

Will a VR4 sell as well as a Camry? Fat chance. Econoboxes do out-sell "good" cars, because people don't care about their cars or their driving. Does the entire Lexus product line out-sell Camrys? Check the numbers. Does Lexus go away because not everyone owns one? The number of Peugot 307s sold every year is on a par with the number of Ferraris sold ... EVER. But Ferrari still makes money.

evomk8

Lots of topic branching going on here... :P
IMHO, though personal experiences with a car you own are important, they are only relevant to you, the owner. With no offense intended, a single ownership is not an accurate measure of the overall reliability of a manufacturers' line-up. Don't get me wrong, I am glad that your cars have been reliable.
Focusing back on MMC. As mentioned, 's dealer service on average is, unfortunately, quite poor. And I have to agree with DGS that quality service and maintenance could do wonders in terms of customer loyality and repeat business for .
GPTourer, as mentioned earlier, I do not believe has a product problem. Both the Galant and Endeavor are competetive vehicles, and overall, MMC cars are more reliable than they are given credit. IMHO, the problem is the consumer perception. This perception was partly created by the lack of brand recognition, the one-sided press, the polarized reliability surveys (Galant/Eclipse owners), and the poor service provided.
These are the issues must address in order to revive itself and re-establish itself as a respected brand.

GPTourer

<----Sighs and rolls up his sleeves.

My comment about the Evo's abilities that can only be used to their fullest when breaking the law. Those aren't my personal feelings, that's just what the typical customer perceives of the Evo when they hear about what it can do. But even still every car need not have Evo capabilities to be "safe." That's why I pointed out how well the Galant does.

What? When did I ever say this?

I bet they do. More BMW's and Benz's on the road and they cost a lot to maintain, tend to be driven more. Lots more daily driven German sedans then Italian exotics. My dad has two. He'll swear up and down that Mercedes is the best car in the world, yet his yearly maintenance bills far outweigh the cost of ownership on my Mitsubishi. I tried turning the wheel 45 degrees on my ex rental car Pontiac Grand Prix that I've had for ten years that has only had to be towed once for a bad fuel pump, but I coudln't do it without risking leaving the road BTW.

Okay sure. Make sure when you research it you remove Lexus from their reliability numbers. You compare your experience with a low volume highly technical Toyo when I'm talking about mainstream low tech everday rides. Well no wonder. My modded Eclipse is a good ride too, I thoroughly enjoy - she's never let me down either.

They don't MAKE 3000's or GSX's anymore. I'd be glad to carry them, but I can't ORDER them anymore. How is my mentality the same as some goofy *** Toyota dealer you know that won't carry a car currently being produced?

Ferrari makes money because of high demand and low supply. Their cars demand a premium and they get it. People with money line up eager to spend it. Some get turned away despite.