View Full Version : mitsubishi colt
flat6
03-25-2004, 09:44 PM
I like the design.
http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/large/1922-1.jpg
http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/large/1922-2.jpg
http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/large/1922-3.jpg
RacingManiac
03-25-2004, 09:57 PM
too nose heavy IMO.....
Tom J.
03-26-2004, 05:47 AM
No, it's not that it's too nose heavy, the rear end is too short after the rear wheels. They should've made the rear like at least 18 inches longer.
RacingManiac
03-26-2004, 06:51 AM
I think the rear is fine as is, but the car sits too much on the front axle...
The "mecca" project
03-26-2004, 08:44 AM
Does it have a 4g63 in it? If no, it stanks.
electronlude
03-26-2004, 06:26 PM
Does it have a 4g63 in it? If no, it stanks.
doubt it, Im sure they wanted it to be reliable...
The "mecca" project
03-27-2004, 06:04 AM
LOL, because the SR20 is the most reliable thing ever right?
4g63 > SR20
4g63 > RB20
Just know your car is slow and is trendy among ricers who desire to drift.
LotusGT1
03-27-2004, 06:07 AM
Now you act like the DSM isn't the wet dream of everybody that thinks the Fast and the Furious is the best film since Barb Wire....
Victor
03-27-2004, 10:58 AM
Looks pretty much similar to the Peugeot 206 and from the rear you can see clearly a Seat Ibiza.
electronlude
03-27-2004, 11:32 AM
LOL, because the SR20 is the most reliable thing ever right?
4g63 > SR20
4g63 > RB20
Just know your car is slow and is trendy among ricers who desire to drift.
LOL, its a hell of a lot more reliable than the 4g63. and please do clarify how the 4g is better than the Sr? Im not even gonna argue about the rb cuz thats not all that great...
And yeah I know my shit is trendy, but I really dont give a ****.
King_Tut
03-28-2004, 01:12 PM
I drove one the other day, well not the newest one, but they just dont do justice to the name of the predecessor. Not enuff power.
Tom J.
03-29-2004, 05:40 AM
I think the rear is fine as is, but the car sits too much on the front axle...
No it's not, for what the car is, the front end is fine. The rear should either be extended or have the rear wheels moved up. That's what's killing the car's overall design.
electronlude
03-29-2004, 10:19 AM
Tom if you look at a lot of cars in this class this is the stance that they have. Making the car longer would just completely kill the point of this car. This car is meant to be tiny so that it can be usefull in the rediculously crowded and narrow streets of Japanese and European cities. Also if you move the rear wheels in it will kill the interior room. This car is an example of function over form.
King_Tut
03-29-2004, 05:30 PM
This car is an example of function over form.
That way of thinking should really be left to the Germans, I mean look at the new Rolls Royce.
Tom J.
03-29-2004, 08:27 PM
Dude, you're trying to compare an econobox to a top end luxury car? That's makes about as much sense as calling a hotdog "health food".
Victor
03-29-2004, 08:42 PM
:D LOL!
King_Tut
03-29-2004, 11:46 PM
all Im saying is that it was taken over by germans, and wat do ya get, an oversized hideous piece of work that is functional as hell, thats all Im trying to say.
Tom J.
04-01-2004, 05:24 AM
Yeah, but if ya wanna do a proper comparison, pick a car that's closer to the model in question. :)
vBulletin® v3.5.8, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2005-2007 CarForums.net. All Rights Reserved