This website has consistently and persistently lambasted The Big 2.5 for depending on fleet sales to keep the factories churning. As reported here and elsewhere, Detroit has finally responded to industry criticism that cranking-out sub-par transportation for fleet consumption drags down vehicle quality, resale value and image. They’ve sworn off rental car crack. Gradually, eventually, they’ll leave Alamo, Hertz, Avis, etc. behind and take their chances on the dealer’s lot. All of which makes room for… the Mitsubishi Galant!
The ninth gen Galant gets some new threads. The proportions aren’t bad, and its strong, chiseled shoulders meld into perfectly proportioned, smoked Altezza taillights. (Who knew that Malibu and sake mixed?) From the side, the Galant’s soaring beltline conforms to The Law of Unintended Aesthetic Consequences; the rear doors look like Lulu the Fat Lady’s thighs. Up front, the aesthetically challenged hood blister meets up with a finned grille, complete with shiny-happy chrome smile underneath. All in all, the Galant is handsome enough– to wear the rental car cloak of invisibility.
As befitting this erstwhile honor, the Galant's interior is as about as cool as drinking milk from a sports bottle. From its brittle switchgear to its rotary knobs soaked in molasses to its rubbery steering wheel, Mitsubishi's sedan-starlet does the near-impossible: falls to match GM's mediocre advancements in interior excellence. While the Mitsu's panel gaps are fingernail thin and the aluminum-effect trim livens-up the dour dollops of flat black, the cabin’s mix of jutting planes, bloated curves and cheap plastics make the Galant ready for the rental car return row, like, now.
Grab your luggage and another problem creeps up; the Galant's strut assists make closing the decklid a challenge for one hand, and unnecessary effort for two. The resonating "thonk" following said action is about as reassuring as a stand up comic moonlighting as a bereavement counselor. The Galant's lack of fold down rear seating is another solid miss.
That said, the rear accommodations are more than slightly salubrious. The fabrics are a pleasing blend of luxury, style and durability, wrapping the finest set of foam cushioning this side of an Olds 88 Royale Brougham. Who needs a folding park bench when the alternative is so much better for the back and the booty? The couch isn't just the Galant's best attribute; it’s class-leading mother-in-law kvetch protection.
The Galant’s standard 140-watt, six speaker, MP3-ready sound system also deserves special mention. Actually that's a lie. By itself, the beatbox is nothing special. Factor in its ability to overpower the Galant's 2.4-liter buzz box under the hood and it becomes an absolute lifesaver. The MIVEC-tuned four-pot motor makes a respectable 160hp @ 5500 revs, but clock the tachometer above 3500rpm and this mill is ready to rattle itself to pieces. Runs to redline are accompanied by an intake-wheez so strong you can feel the Galant begging for your right foot for mercy.
The Galant’s “Sportronic” automatic serves-up a quartet of cogs with wide-ass gear ratios; a holdover from a time when it was OK to keep a rock as a pet (don’t ask). The Galant's powertrain– and I use that term in its full ironic sense– is no match for the smooth operators available in baseline Camrys and Accords. Even worse, with 3439 pounds of sedan to tote from the airport to the meeting/Disneyworld and back, the Galant's wounded snail pace (zero to 60 in 8.9 very loud seconds) should come as no surprise– at least until you try to merge on the highway.
Curiously, the entry level Galant doesn’t offer ABS braking as standard; you have to upgrade to the ES or “Extra Stuff” model (I swear I’m not making that up) to get Electronic Brakeforce Distribution. At least the Galant has enough airbags to seduce the Stay Puft Man and a front and side five-star government safety rating.
Which is just as well. Although the Galant is about as close to being a rocket ship as a block of cement, it can, eventually, reach normal automotive speeds. Once there, drivers will discover that the Galant's steering, shifting and throttle response were originally extras in The Dead Hate the Living.
The harder you push the Galant, the dumber you feel for bothering. Before unloading SUV-levels of understeer, the Galant pitches under cornering load and dives prodigiously in panic stops. Thrifty drivers on a Budget will get no kicks remembering the Alamo on a twisty on ramp or, more likely, circling for a parking space in a hotel parking lot. At least the four corner disc brakes keep the "fun" in check without hesitation or complaint.
Years ago, the market decided Mitsubishi's bread-and-butter sedan couldn’t hold a spent glow stick to the Camcordima. The market is still right; the Galant deserves its place in rental car infamy. As you will someday learn.
66 Comments on “Mitsubishi Galant Review...”
Back to TopLeave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
You can also login using Facebook Connect.
It’s nice to see that the ugliness of the Galant and Endeavor will be short lived, as the new Outlander and Lancer show. Interestingly, the new Lancer looks a lot like the last gen Galant.
And just think. Mitsu made this “America” platform just for us!! They do hate us…..
Would you like some torque steer with that?
Mitsubishi also offers their Altima knock-off with a 3.8-liter V6 and more curve-worthy suspension tuning in the GTS (which I’ve had the luck to have driven) and Ralliart trims. The last is good for 258 horsepower, 98 more than the four.
Specs, price comparisons:
http://www.truedelta.com/models/Galant.php
Good review. Maybe a quick look at the 3.8 wouldn’t be a bad idea… to see whether added power corrupts your view.
And a nit to pick:
“As befitting this erstwhile honor, the Galant’s interior…”
Surely, you meant “ersatz”…
I’m glad this car got reviewed–it was my nominee for a TWAT.
Shapeless, styleless, cheap, OK for a 2am trip to WalMart but not for a first date: Galant is automotive sweatpants.
Remember when the Diamante was representative of the new Japanese value in entry-lux? (around 1988-1990, before Lexus)
I think they really squandered their first-to-market advantage there.
Ugh, this thing is a nightmare. Small wonder Mitsubishi is losing money like my father in law is losing his hair. I’m excited for the new lancer, but the rest of their lineup had better improve quick if that company is going to be around in the next 5 years. Death watch Mitsubishi and see how far they are from the crypt.
Great review, you’re quite a wordsmith.
I can’t believe this is the same company that puts out the Evo.
Because the Evo interior is top notch?
A lot of a company’s direction is influenced by their financing policies, which in turn decides your clientele, which in turn decides how others perceive the car, its condition over time, and its owners.
Let’s just say that where I live, Mitsu is “Kia for the upwardly mobile” (no offense to Kia).
But how do you wean your 8-year-financing, negative equity trade-in clientele off that teat? I think they have a more difficult battle ahead of tham than Ford and GM, at least in that regard.
Isn’t the Galant up for a redesign soon? The Outlander is all new, the Lancer and Evo are coming this year and next. The Eclipse was recently redone (for good or bad) so I’d think its time for the Galant to be redesigned.
I’d like to see Mitsubishi succeed if for nothing else that the Evo X is on my list of cars to try for my next car.
That grill looks like it has a serious under bite.
No, the Evo is not meant to be top notch in the interior, but the performance for the money quotient is high. I’d never buy one for more practical reasons, like expensive brakes/insurance/repairs/etc, but they are fun to think about.
But how do you wean your 8-year-financing, negative equity trade-in clientele off that teat? I think they have a more difficult battle ahead of tham than Ford and GM, at least in that regard.
Agreed. And that's one reason why I think the Galant will "bite" when the fleet customers come a calling.
What a shame. I remember horsing around in a new 1988 Galant. It wasn’t beautiful but it wasn’t ugly like the late models are. It had a sweet 6-cylinder and composed suspension that smoked contemporary Camry’s and Accord’s. Its high-tech voice-activated everything insides made driving it like piloting the Starship Enterprise. How did it get so bad? No wonder DCX dumped this once competitive brand. It’s a disgrace.
Didn’t they have a Galant that was AWD? I don’t think it was turbo in the USA, but maybe in japan? That might have been another winner if they’d have kept it up, competition with the Mazda 6 AWD and a ‘grown up’ Evo that would be more livable.
Mitsubishi just makes me sad; their lineup used to be really good (well, at least in my eyes.)
I mean they really just used to have some winners, thing of the early to mid ninties:
Diamante was nice, if an absolute dinosaur as far as power – a 3.0L single cam with a whopping 145bhp meant this car was “shoot me” slow. My ex’s mum had a Diamante wagon with every option, i think a 1994? The seats were supremely comfy, hte drivetrain was whisper quiet, isolating suspension, the car would cruise at 80 like it was nothing – it just took forEVER to get there. It was a really nice car, and i really think they missed the boat not maintaining that car as an entry-lux.
Galanjt VR-4: today we have the stupid Ralliart, a GTS with 28 more horsepower, still directed at the wrong wheels. the new altima has what, 270? And it still doesn’t have the torque steer of the Ralliart. But back in the early ninties you could get the VR-4, a midsizer with electronic AWD and a turbo’d 4G63. It wasn’t exciting looking but at least it wasn’t ugly like the current one.
DSM’s (Eclipse): ran the gamut from slow 8v with good mileage to “pants on fire” 195bhp turbo GS-X model. It was far an away the best in the class. Now look at the eclipse: it’s more a competitor for a Solara than a Mustang. Crap.
3000GT VR-4: Remember when Mitsu had a badass, class leading pseudo-supercar? Well ok, maybe not class leading but certainly badass and VERY fast. 300bhp, twin turbo, AWD, AWS, as wide as a house… They def. don’t have the balls to make a car like that again, ever.
now we just have crap. Grrr.
Other models include a DE (deleted equipment) Sanjeev’s ES (extra stuff) the GTS (grand torque steer) and the ralliart which includes such options as a cargo organiser (which I thought of as some sort of butler) The smokers kit (humidor, anyone?) a ralliart nose mask ( which brings to mind a plastic groucho marx glasses noses & tache’ set although it doesn’t say if thats for the car or the buyer)
and then of course there are those time tested signs of automotive excellence, a galant brushed keytag and matching plate frame.
The car includes (I’m quoting from the mitsubishi website) safety features that work; a “sportronic auto that learns”(possibly too late that its in a galant) and…wait for it Geo – mechanical styling… good thing its “safe from the frame up”
yes this car is truely “refuses to blend in”. I wander if that why mitsi dealer lots are overrun with the dammed things.
Galant is automotive sweatpants.
Nice
The Galant VR-4 was a unique automobile, like it’s bad-ass brother, the 3000GT. Remember the old smokin’ turbo four-banger AWD Eclipses, too? Maybe not the best quality, but fun nonetheless.
My father’s company is owned by Mitsubishi, and he knows a lot of happy owners from the past. For example, someone had an early 90’s Montero that went 150,000 miles needing only brakes in that time. But no one he works with now wants any Mitsubishi, even though employees and family members can get virtually any model practically at cost. I really hope the rest of the product line gets overhauled the same way the Lancer and Outlander are going.
I also agree that the new Lancer looks a lot like a continuation of the last generation Galant. I think the Lancer looks better all around, too.
I’ve got the Ralliart version in two weeks, gee, I can hardly wait to to try out its “extra stuff.”
I rented one of these on a longish Florida trip a couple of years ago. It really didn’t stand out as any better or worse than other rental fare, except that it was a bit larger than many I’ve had (a plus). It is perfect for that function and was unobtrusive in its blandness and functionality.
It has all the attractiveness of a Camry, albeit with a bit less polish. But who cared?
Nicely written piece. Keep this up Sajeev and C&D will be sending me emails to locate you. I heard they needed someone with an interesting enough name to replace Csaba Csere. Would you have any problem changing your nom de plume to Sajeev Sajere?
Wow, I absolutely didn’t know that there were still cars (other than Ariel Atoms and radical stuff alike) without ABS. Seems to have to do with the american definition of safety: Putting a lot of airbags in to make it more comfy when you crash. (Instead of putting equipment like ABS, ESP… in to make it less likely to crash at all…)
Anyway, I remember an older Galant generation (mid-90s) that looked perfectly right. Like a mild evolution of the BMW E34 5-series. So right in fact that if I were in charge at BMW, I would replace Bangle with the guy who was responsible for that styling.
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bild:Mitsubishi_Galant_GDi_silver_vr.jpg
It even has a Hofmeister kink…
Anyway, I remember an older Galant generation (mid-90s) that looked perfectly right.
Yeah, too bad we never got the Japanese engine to go with the looks.
Didn’t they have a Galant that was AWD?
Oh yeah, the VR-4. IIRC it was a four door AWD Eclipse turbo. Total stealth bomber, could be hopped up to make sick power just like the old Eclipse. Too bad Mitsubishi gave up on hi-po Galants and Eclipses a long time ago.
Would you have any problem changing your nom de plume to Sajeev Sajere?
Now that wouldn’t come cheap, my friend. LOL :)
Anyway, I remember an older Galant generation (mid-90s) that looked perfectly right. Like a mild evolution of the BMW E34 5-series.
Agreed, that was a beautiful design. The interior wasn’t very nice (mouse fur cloths, tacky center stack) but they nailed the exterior. I’d love a hopped up VR-4 (maybe a mild 12-sec quarter mile killer) version of that bodystyle in my dream garage.
It’s not *that* bad, is it? I drove a Galant GTS back-to-back with an Accord EX and Camry XLE a couple years back, and was fairly impressed with the thing’s dynamics. The Accord felt a little soft and woefully under-tired afterwards (though I understand that was addressed in ‘06).
I suppose the four-cylinder models could be a great deal worse than the V6s.
As far as I could tell, though, the only Galant’s only glaring flaws relative to the CamCord were its fixed seatback, its four-speed auto, and Mitsubishi’s piss-poor resale value.
So with Mitsubishi’s already bad resale value, it won’t make a lot of difference if they churn out as many as possible from the Normal, Illinois plant and sell them to Hertavisprise renta-wheels all over the US of A. (Nope, not making up the name of the town where Mitsubishi built a plant, originally as a joint venture with Chrysler).
I thought I read “somewhere” that the next generation Galant was going to be based upon a stretched Lancer/Evo platform, which shares much with the new Outlook platform?
Who was it that said “well…. noplace to go but up”?
There are reasons why I read this site and about as reassuring as a stand up comic moonlighting as a bereavement counselor and NICKNICKs automotive sweatpants are two of them!
Yes, the Galant is a true TWAT contender. I had one as a rental and was so traumatized buy it that I was impressed by the HHR I picked up at Hertz the following day! But I got over that illusion quickly half-way up an I-95 on-ramp.
I swear I nominated this car for TWAT… or did I just say anything made by mitsubishi today?
The seats in the Gallant are comfortable but don’t have much leg room. A friend had one of these. When the guys went out as a group my Regal (similar sized car) usually got the nod over the Mitsu because no one felt like seeing a doctor about thier knees the next day.
Here’s the sweet old Galant VR-4. What happened, Mitsubishi?
http://www.galantvr4.org/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Board=UBB12&Number=437856&page=0&fpart=1
Mitsu seems to have forgotten themselves, even worse than Nissan (Nissan can still point to the Altima) has. The older Galants and Eclipses were sharp, fun cars. The new ones…ehh.
qfrog:
I swear I nominated this car for TWAT… or did I just say anything made by mitsubishi today?
I didn’t track who made the nominations, but the Galant was a nominee for the TWAT. As were the Raider, Lancer, Endeavor and Eclipse.
FWIW I nominated the Galant for a TWAT on the grounds that I forgot they were still making them until I passed one on the way to work.
I wasn’t mistaken as if I heard they went out of production and was then proven wrong. Nope, they just plain slipped my mind. *that’s* vanilla
They definitely took the Galant in the direction of the Camry: more bloated, soft, wobly, icky i4, they made it just as detestable. The previous gen at least looked sharp, I don’t know how it drove.
They should have taken it to Mazda6 territory, sharp, good handling, tight, enjoyable to drive.
But what do I know? I like to drive.
tms1999, I’d argue that they did take it in that direction.
From ‘94 to ‘98, the Galant was only available with a Four. The ‘99-onward models were better, but even with the V6, they were lucky to do 0-60 in less than nine seconds, and interior quality was marginal.
The current model–with the V6–is among the faster cars in that class; most tests return 0-60 in the high sixes or low sevens. They beefed up the control efforts quite a bit, too–the ‘99-’03’s steering was much too light for my tastes.
It doesn’t feel agile in the manner of the Mazda6, but it does feel more planted and substantial (my personal preference).
It’s sad to see how far Mitsu has fallen, and even if they do manage to produce a shining star (okay, maybe just a competitive vehicle not styled by Suzuki Aerio devotees) the aformentioned abysmal resale value makes it a horrible purchase for all but the severely credit impaired.
Rest in peace, Mitsubishi. We’ll remember you fondly.
Sajeev,
IIRC mitsu made the last gen galant (I spent 5 secconds searching it’s name) in VR4 trim for consumption in places other than North America. I’m pretty sure the Galant VR4 is in Gran Tourismo 3 or 4.
This is a horrible car, but a great review:
is about as reassuring as a stand up comic moonlighting as a bereavement counselor.
Classic.
amclint:
February 2nd, 2007 at 10:21 am
Ugh, this thing is a nightmare. Small wonder Mitsubishi is losing money like my father in law is losing his hair. I’m excited for the new lancer, but the rest of their lineup had better improve quick if that company is going to be around in the next 5 years. Death watch Mitsubishi and see how far they are from the crypt.
Mitsubishi Motors has lost money for every single one of their 30 or so years in the American market, and they are still here. Some Japanese companies are persistent, if not very bright. One of the problems with the North American auto market is the money loosing niche players like Mitsubishi, VW, etc. who just won’t stop throwing good money after bad.
Michael Karesh:
February 2nd, 2007 at 10:26 am
Because the Evo interior is top notch?
Perhaps interiors are consistently poor across the entire lineup (I haven’t been in any recently other than the low-end Lancer). But I’d say Mitsubishi now lacks a distinctive brand identity, which could hurt the company’s ability to survive, especially compared to other brands with low sales volumes.
When I think of Mitsubishi, I think of how the mighty has fallen. There was a time where every car in their lineup had a turbocharged variant (even the lowly Mirage had a fire-breathing turbo version, and I’m not talking about the Lancer Evolutions), but then they just abruptly stopped making cool cars. The Eclipse lost everything that made it fun, the 3000GT became way too expensive (although I do give them credit for making that car last longer than the Supra, 300ZX, and RX-7 that left the US market much earlier for the same reasons), and the rest of the line just went ho-hum boring. It’s a sad thing to think about especially since I own one of their mighty Galant VR-4’s and to think of the technology that Mitsubishi had in these cars, they were ahead of their time in many respects.
The 06 Eclipse showed us that they know how to not make an ugly car, but they still have work to do if they want to be recognized as maker of cool cars that make you want to sacrifice your first born over.
The ‘06 might not be ugly, but it sure is a portly fellow. That HP level would have been fantastic if the car wasn’t 8-900lbs overweight.
OK, my bad….looks like it’s just 5-600lbs overweight (3500lbs curb weight).
MrbOOst,
Odd fact:
Yours, and I believe most, if not all US-bound Diamantes were made in Australia !
It’s the Magna there.
IIRC mitsu made the last gen galant (I spent 5 secconds searching it’s name) in VR4 trim for consumption in places other than North America.
qfrog: yup, but for some reason Mitsu decided to neuter the Galant/Eclipse for the American market. Combined with the not-impressive interior and resale value, it was a bad move for their NA lineup.
Yours, and I believe most, if not all US-bound Diamantes were made in Australia !
powerglide: I think only the wagons were imported from Australia. The Diamonte wagon was another mistake.
sedan diamantes were made in oz as well.
I rented a previous gen galant once and I was pleased with it.
1. suspension soaked up all the bumps and you are made aware that it did absorb them
2. steering was pure springer spaniel. Light, effortless yet stable at highway speeds.
3. fourbanger was quite rev happy and 90 mph was effortless and entertaining as well.
Current gen galant I have no clue about… but previous gen was good. However, on previous gen, they screwed up the front end by making it more aerodynamic and it didnt gel well with rear bmw esque styling.
So what are we saying? That only Toyota and Hyundai can sell marginally acceptable midsized vehicles? I rent Camrys all the time and I gotta say, I’m shocked that anyone would pay their own money to own one. Yet every magazine gushes over how wonderful they are. Actually, about the Camry, magazines are like, “It’s pretty drab, but it probably won’t break down. So we love it.” Yeah, that’s great. A Buick is better looking and the new ones have nicer interiors and they break down even less than a Camry. And still, no one gushes over them. Nor should they.
The bias of automotive publications…
So what if the Galant isn’t as great as a 3 Series, or even a Ford Fusion? It’s basic cheap transportation. And face it… not everyone wants a Camry.
Well just so its clear, I don’t gush over the Camry.
(see the review)
I feel the Camry is better than the Galant, but the Accord trumps them all. Well, at least in the realm of lightly-optioned family cars with an MSRP in the low 20s.
blue adidas:
February 2nd, 2007 at 10:35 pm
“The bias of automotive publications…”
The bias I can understand. That people live and die by these “evaluations” make me just shake my head and laugh.
The beleaguered GM cheerleaders on another message board are jumping up and down telling anybody that will listen(same choir they belong to) that the GM_____ just won “Car of the Year”!!!
While the rest of the world yawns and buys Camrys and Accords.
“… but the Accord trumps them all”
Yes the Accord does. by quite a lot. In spite of the way it looks.