Bought a Galant

[CrackRabbit]

Originally posted by: sniperruff

Originally posted by: mpitts
I had a 2000 that I just traded in.

I was never impressed with the car, but I was never disappointed either. It was average.

basically that sums it up. it's just an ok, average car, selling for thousands less than a honda/toyo/nissan for similar specs

look on edmunds, the galant, esp. the post 00' model, gets around a ~8 score. that is pretty good for a car that you can now buy for about $6k with 70k miles or so. at that price you'd be hard-pressed to find a 94' accord with higher milage.

i mean the galant was generally made to compete with lower trims of accord/camry and altima, and does a decent job at it. it is just meant for people transport and that's pretty much it.

and ford? give me a break. you are actually saying you'd prefer a big fat heavy taurus, from a company that has numerous recalls every year (read: focus), over a galant?

it's just my personal preference. i know that camry and accord's have better interior than the galant. but as for buying a used car, a used galant is a bargain for what little you pay for.

Yep, I would rather have an overweight Taurus with a crappy transmission than a Mitsu thats crappy all over. And if you haven't noticed the Focus has gotten quite a bit better than the first 2 years it was out.
Put it this way, how many older Fords (99 and below) do you see on the road, now think about the same thing for Mitsus. You will probably have 1/4 the amount (yes i know mitsu probably sold ALOT fewer cars than ford)
Also like i said earlier I would rather buy a ford knowing that there is an excelent chance they will be in business years down the road when the car will need parts and service, where as mitsu is on its deathbed with not much hope of getting better.
With that said I cant belive im defending ford...

 

[sniperruff]

Originally posted by: CrackRabbit

Originally posted by: sniperruff

Originally posted by: mpitts
I had a 2000 that I just traded in.

I was never impressed with the car, but I was never disappointed either. It was average.

basically that sums it up. it's just an ok, average car, selling for thousands less than a honda/toyo/nissan for similar specs

look on edmunds, the galant, esp. the post 00' model, gets around a ~8 score. that is pretty good for a car that you can now buy for about $6k with 70k miles or so. at that price you'd be hard-pressed to find a 94' accord with higher milage.

i mean the galant was generally made to compete with lower trims of accord/camry and altima, and does a decent job at it. it is just meant for people transport and that's pretty much it.

and ford? give me a break. you are actually saying you'd prefer a big fat heavy taurus, from a company that has numerous recalls every year (read: focus), over a galant?

it's just my personal preference. i know that camry and accord's have better interior than the galant. but as for buying a used car, a used galant is a bargain for what little you pay for.

Yep, I would rather have an overweight Taurus with a crappy transmission than a Mitsu thats crappy all over. And if you haven't noticed the Focus has gotten quite a bit better than the first 2 years it was out.
Put it this way, how many older Fords (99 and below) do you see on the road, now think about the same thing for Mitsus. You will probably have 1/4 the amount (yes i know mitsu probably sold ALOT fewer cars than ford)
Also like i said earlier I would rather buy a ford knowing that there is an excelent chance they will be in business years down the road when the car will need parts and service, where as mitsu is on its deathbed with not much hope of getting better.
With that said I cant belive im defending ford...

i see a lot more taurus' on the road... ONLY they are the 89'-95' models, NOT the 96' and past taurus...

and honestly you have mentioned that mits sell less cars than ford, yet i see quite a lot of galants around the NY area, from the 94' to 04' models. it's not the case with ford where you only see the old taurus... i see a lot of last gen galant's too.

with that said, i'd still prefer a galant over a taurus, grand am, malibu, and intrepid. i prefer to look at cars based on model, not by manufacturer (impala is an excellent car)

 

[Operandi]

Originally posted by: CrackRabbit

Originally posted by: sniperruff

Originally posted by: mpitts
I had a 2000 that I just traded in.

I was never impressed with the car, but I was never disappointed either. It was average.

basically that sums it up. it's just an ok, average car, selling for thousands less than a honda/toyo/nissan for similar specs

look on edmunds, the galant, esp. the post 00' model, gets around a ~8 score. that is pretty good for a car that you can now buy for about $6k with 70k miles or so. at that price you'd be hard-pressed to find a 94' accord with higher milage.

i mean the galant was generally made to compete with lower trims of accord/camry and altima, and does a decent job at it. it is just meant for people transport and that's pretty much it.

and ford? give me a break. you are actually saying you'd prefer a big fat heavy taurus, from a company that has numerous recalls every year (read: focus), over a galant?

it's just my personal preference. i know that camry and accord's have better interior than the galant. but as for buying a used car, a used galant is a bargain for what little you pay for.

Yep, I would rather have an overweight Taurus with a crappy transmission than a Mitsu thats crappy all over. And if you haven't noticed the Focus has gotten quite a bit better than the first 2 years it was out.
Put it this way, how many older Fords (99 and below) do you see on the road, now think about the same thing for Mitsus. You will probably have 1/4 the amount (yes i know mitsu probably sold ALOT fewer cars than ford)
Also like i said earlier I would rather buy a ford knowing that there is an excelent chance they will be in business years down the road when the car will need parts and service, where as mitsu is on its deathbed with not much hope of getting better.
With that said I cant belive im defending ford...

I haven't had any problems with 99 SHO, I've put over 30k on it and the worst thing to happen thus far is a dead battery. Overall I think ford makes fairly boring cars but I don't think quality or reliability is an issue however this is only my 2nd car so my experience is limited.

 

[whattaguy]

Yeah...the receipts to rebuild my engine came out to be $4500...thank God for extended warranties.

 

[GroovyAsh]

History

I thought they started by making rice cookers. Looks like they were a shipping company.
As for their cars, we had one and it had all sorts of problems.

 

[C'DaleRider]

Originally posted by: sniperruff

Originally posted by: CrackRabbit

Originally posted by: sniperruff

Originally posted by: mpitts
I had a 2000 that I just traded in.

I was never impressed with the car, but I was never disappointed either. It was average.

basically that sums it up. it's just an ok, average car, selling for thousands less than a honda/toyo/nissan for similar specs

look on edmunds, the galant, esp. the post 00' model, gets around a ~8 score. that is pretty good for a car that you can now buy for about $6k with 70k miles or so. at that price you'd be hard-pressed to find a 94' accord with higher milage.

i mean the galant was generally made to compete with lower trims of accord/camry and altima, and does a decent job at it. it is just meant for people transport and that's pretty much it.

and ford? give me a break. you are actually saying you'd prefer a big fat heavy taurus, from a company that has numerous recalls every year (read: focus), over a galant?

it's just my personal preference. i know that camry and accord's have better interior than the galant. but as for buying a used car, a used galant is a bargain for what little you pay for.

Yep, I would rather have an overweight Taurus with a crappy transmission than a Mitsu thats crappy all over. And if you haven't noticed the Focus has gotten quite a bit better than the first 2 years it was out.
Put it this way, how many older Fords (99 and below) do you see on the road, now think about the same thing for Mitsus. You will probably have 1/4 the amount (yes i know mitsu probably sold ALOT fewer cars than ford)
Also like i said earlier I would rather buy a ford knowing that there is an excelent chance they will be in business years down the road when the car will need parts and service, where as mitsu is on its deathbed with not much hope of getting better.
With that said I cant belive im defending ford...

i see a lot more taurus' on the road... ONLY they are the 89'-95' models, NOT the 96' and past taurus...

and honestly you have mentioned that mits sell less cars than ford, yet i see quite a lot of galants around the NY area, from the 94' to 04' models. it's not the case with ford where you only see the old taurus... i see a lot of last gen galant's too.

with that said, i'd still prefer a galant over a taurus, grand am, malibu, and intrepid. i prefer to look at cars based on model, not by manufacturer (impala is an excellent car)

Just to dredge up an old thread..............I just wanted to correct sniperpup's comments about the Taurus being big, fat, heavy, and overweight. Apparently someone speaks without knowing a damned thing.....again, but what can one expect from the 16 y.o. "experts" on this board?

As for the '04 Taurus and its contemporaries:


Taurus
Length 197.6 in.
Width 73 in.
Height 56.1 in.
Weight 3306 lbs.
Wheel Base 108.5 in.


Accord
Length 189.5 in.
Width 71.5 in.
Height 57.1 in.
Weight 3384 lbs.
Wheel Base 107.9 in.


Galant
Length 190.4 in.
Width 72.4 in.
Height 57.9 in.
Weight 3560 lbs.
Wheel Base 108.3 in.



Altima
Length 192.3 in.
Width 70.4 in.
Height 57.9 in.
Weight 3274 lbs.
Wheel Base 110.2 in.


This was sourced from Edmunds in similarly equipped cars, all V6's, all automatic trannys. Seems that fat, big, bloated ole Ford Taurus ISN'T exactly the heaviest of the cars......it's outweighed by the Accord and Galant. While the Taurus is the longest and widest, its width is only marginally greater than the narrowest of the cars.......2.6" wider than the Altima, 1.5" wider than the Accord, not exactly something ANYONE can easily discern at any viewing distance without actually measuring the bloody cars. The Taurus definitely IS NOT the heaviest......that distinction goes to the Galant. The Taurus is LIGHTER than even the Accord!!!

As for the Galant, I've got a '94 with 160K+ miles on the clock. Tranny failed at 150K miles, otherwise it's still running well. Handles VERY well for its intended market....engine still has quite a lot of power dispite its high mileage.

As for the tranny's cost...........Mitsu transmissions aren't cheap. A rebuilt-by-Mitsubishi transmission, with all the updates, cost the repair shop $1400....not the end-consumer cost, the shop's cost!!! Used but in good shape transmissions from the same vehicles fetch around $1000 routinely.

 

[Scarpozzi]

I had a 1994 Galant. It was a great car and got around 30+ MPG...

The transmission blew at 140k....which isn't bad for a hard driven import. Import transmissions cost about $1500-2200 to replace depending on where you are, etc. Just keep in mind you always want to take it to a dealership or someone who knows mitsubishis for tranny replacement. I found out that they use their own transmission fluid for some models....the fluid is slicker than the normal ATF you get at Autozone and only Mitsu Dealers sell it. You'd have to find out if your car has one of those types in it by reading the manual.

Overall, the car had plenty of pep for a 2.4L 4 cylinder. The transmission made this and gave it incredible power for the size of the car/engine. I definitely thought it could outperform the Honda Civics that I've driven. As far as quality goes though, as it's already been said, little things tend to break. Warranty usually doesn't cover everything and that why I wouldn't buy one of these new. They just started putting the V6 in these in 2000 so I'd stay away from that year unless you get the 2.4L. 2000-2001 had some nice looking chrome on the grill that made the car look classy and it was redesigned a couple of times since then for cosmetic stuff. I've seen 2003s with the 2.4L and 20k miles for $7900 on car lots locally. I'm sure you can find the same deal where you are. The car is an excellent value, but don't complain when little things break....also, be sure to replace the radio. The 2003 still had an LCD display rather than LEDs....it looks very similar to the 1994 I used to drive, yet it's almost 10 years newer.

 

[spaceman]

i really like the body style.:/

 

[sniperruff]

Originally posted by: C'DaleRider

Originally posted by: sniperruff

Originally posted by: CrackRabbit

Originally posted by: sniperruff

Originally posted by: mpitts
I had a 2000 that I just traded in.

I was never impressed with the car, but I was never disappointed either. It was average.

basically that sums it up. it's just an ok, average car, selling for thousands less than a honda/toyo/nissan for similar specs

look on edmunds, the galant, esp. the post 00' model, gets around a ~8 score. that is pretty good for a car that you can now buy for about $6k with 70k miles or so. at that price you'd be hard-pressed to find a 94' accord with higher milage.

i mean the galant was generally made to compete with lower trims of accord/camry and altima, and does a decent job at it. it is just meant for people transport and that's pretty much it.

and ford? give me a break. you are actually saying you'd prefer a big fat heavy taurus, from a company that has numerous recalls every year (read: focus), over a galant?

it's just my personal preference. i know that camry and accord's have better interior than the galant. but as for buying a used car, a used galant is a bargain for what little you pay for.

Yep, I would rather have an overweight Taurus with a crappy transmission than a Mitsu thats crappy all over. And if you haven't noticed the Focus has gotten quite a bit better than the first 2 years it was out.
Put it this way, how many older Fords (99 and below) do you see on the road, now think about the same thing for Mitsus. You will probably have 1/4 the amount (yes i know mitsu probably sold ALOT fewer cars than ford)
Also like i said earlier I would rather buy a ford knowing that there is an excelent chance they will be in business years down the road when the car will need parts and service, where as mitsu is on its deathbed with not much hope of getting better.
With that said I cant belive im defending ford...

i see a lot more taurus' on the road... ONLY they are the 89'-95' models, NOT the 96' and past taurus...

and honestly you have mentioned that mits sell less cars than ford, yet i see quite a lot of galants around the NY area, from the 94' to 04' models. it's not the case with ford where you only see the old taurus... i see a lot of last gen galant's too.

with that said, i'd still prefer a galant over a taurus, grand am, malibu, and intrepid. i prefer to look at cars based on model, not by manufacturer (impala is an excellent car)

Just to dredge up an old thread..............I just wanted to correct sniperpup's comments about the Taurus being big, fat, heavy, and overweight. Apparently someone speaks without knowing a damned thing.....again, but what can one expect from the 16 y.o. "experts" on this board?

As for the '04 Taurus and its contemporaries:


Taurus
Length 197.6 in.
Width 73 in.
Height 56.1 in.
Weight 3306 lbs.
Wheel Base 108.5 in.


Accord
Length 189.5 in.
Width 71.5 in.
Height 57.1 in.
Weight 3384 lbs.
Wheel Base 107.9 in.


Galant
Length 190.4 in.
Width 72.4 in.
Height 57.9 in.
Weight 3560 lbs.
Wheel Base 108.3 in.



Altima
Length 192.3 in.
Width 70.4 in.
Height 57.9 in.
Weight 3274 lbs.
Wheel Base 110.2 in.


This was sourced from Edmunds in similarly equipped cars, all V6's, all automatic trannys. Seems that fat, big, bloated ole Ford Taurus ISN'T exactly the heaviest of the cars......it's outweighed by the Accord and Galant. While the Taurus is the longest and widest, its width is only marginally greater than the narrowest of the cars.......2.6" wider than the Altima, 1.5" wider than the Accord, not exactly something ANYONE can easily discern at any viewing distance without actually measuring the bloody cars. The Taurus definitely IS NOT the heaviest......that distinction goes to the Galant. The Taurus is LIGHTER than even the Accord!!!

As for the Galant, I've got a '94 with 160K+ miles on the clock. Tranny failed at 150K miles, otherwise it's still running well. Handles VERY well for its intended market....engine still has quite a lot of power dispite its high mileage.

As for the tranny's cost...........Mitsu transmissions aren't cheap. A rebuilt-by-Mitsubishi transmission, with all the updates, cost the repair shop $1400....not the end-consumer cost, the shop's cost!!! Used but in good shape transmissions from the same vehicles fetch around $1000 routinely.

like i said in my PM, which one of the cars have the weakest engine? which car is used as a fleet rental/government vechicle and has a low low resale value? which one has the worst interior? which company has so many recalls on either the car or the tires that the company is nick-named "found on road dead"? given the power/weight ratio, which one will be slowest car?

as i have also said, i was referring to the 99'-03' galant, hence a couple of years ago, the taurus would probably be the largest car anyway. just because i don't dig up the specs from edmund does not mean that i am in 5th grade.

like i said, in my opinon ford is a pretty shabby company. i don't like the new galants either, but at least it's faster and looks better than a taurus, which was once a great car.

 

[spaceman]

i bought it anyway
i love how it handled..the price was right and i have a good mechanic

 

[Epoman]

Sorry

Hopefully one day you can afford a good car. But for now at least you have transportation.







J/k

 

[sniperruff]

how much was it?

 

[spaceman]

Originally posted by: sniperruff
how much was it?

6500 with 90 day bumper to bumper
edit oh yah..i threw in my pos 92 legacy with 229k!
bondo beat it was...but ran great.

 

[Deeko]

Wow, that looks JUST like my car that I just totalled.

 

[sniperruff]

its a decent price for a fairly new car with low milage. congrats.

 

[spaceman]

Originally posted by: Deeko
Wow, that looks JUST like my car that I just totalled.

youre going to jinx me

 

[spaceman]

Originally posted by: sniperruff
its a decent price for a fairly new car with low milage. congrats.

thnx man after quite the run with POS's itll be nice to park a car and not run in with a bag over my head. lol.