MITSUS?

My freinds mom had a 3000 GT and he got ahold of it one night and took me for a "spin" in it. It felt quick and nimble, but my Mustang would brush it off in a straight line race. They are fun cars though, sooo much tighter (body and suspension wise) feeling than my Mustang, haha.

Now, on the other hand... a VR-4 3000 GT would kill ya. They are turbo charged (like 320hp or so) and AWD.

Anyway, I think the stock non VR-4's run a mid or lower 15 in the 1/4 mile. A stock 99+ auto GT should be consistantly in the mid 14's, some people have gotten lower 14's stock from them..:nice:
 
I actually really dig the looks of the 3000GTs :drool: They seem to hold their value really well so I can't get my hands on one :(

You shouldn't have a problem with one performance wise, though they are still a sweet ride :nice:
 
BurningRubber said:
My freinds mom had a 3000 GT and he got ahold of it one night and took me for a "spin" in it. It felt quick and nimble, but my Mustang would brush it off in a straight line race. They are fun cars though, sooo much tighter (body and suspension wise) feeling than my Mustang, haha.

Now, on the other hand... a VR-4 3000 GT would kill ya. They are turbo charged (like 320hp or so) and AWD.

Anyway, I think the stock non VR-4's run a mid or lower 15 in the 1/4 mile. A stock 99+ auto GT should be consistantly in the mid 14's, some people have gotten lower 14's stock from them..:nice:

A VR-4 guy wanted to race me at the track a few weeks ago talking **** about how bad he would beat me. The results were not in his favor shall we say. Me 12.7 vs. his 14.6. Yes it was a VR-4, we checked each others cars out before hand. Bye bye Mitsu. They suck for an AWD twin turbo car. Teenie weenie turbo's :nonono: Here's the timeslip. View attachment 446438
 
a 2.32 60' for an AWD car. He sucks at life.
Judging by his MPH I'd say he was stock. Vr4's can be bad rides but they need a few things. It's like supra's one might be a slow pig the next might be a dyno queen that still is slow, then there might be one in the middle that lays waste to your ego.
 
TweekedGT said:
A VR-4 guy wanted to race me at the track a few weeks ago talking **** about how bad he would beat me. The results were not in his favor shall we say. Me 12.7 vs. his 14.6. Yes it was a VR-4, we checked each others cars out before hand. Bye bye Mitsu. They suck for an AWD twin turbo car. Teenie weenie turbo's :nonono: Here's the timeslip. View attachment 446408

WOW even with his .07 reaction time against your .6:eek:
 
2001 Mustang GT vs. 1992 3000GT VR-4

I can actually talk with some conviction on this, being that I owned both cars. Yes, the 3000GT is heavy- mine was about 3,750 lbs. The 3000GT was faster, but it is not nearly as fun to drive. The AWD kicks ass in the handling department, but it just lacks the v-8 rwd fun. I spent a lot of money on upkeep with the Mitsu too. Both cars are gone now, but I have Mustangs on my mind. Stock for stock- VR-4 wins (the awd is tough to launch though, so you may win on account of driver error).

BTW, if you wasnt to see a 10 second vr-4, check out the videos on http://www.dynamicracing.com.