1993 Mitsubishi Lancer Reviews - Page 3 of 3

1993 Mitsubishi Lancer mr 1.6 mivec from Australia and New Zealand

Year of manufacture1993
First year of ownership1998
Most recent year of ownership2003
Engine and transmission 1.6 mivec Manual
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 7 / 10
Dealer Service marks 10 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 5 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.8 / 10
Distance when acquired80000 kilometres
Most recent distance136000 kilometres
Previous carMitsubishi Lancer

Summary:

Watch out 4 lemon's!

Faults:

Well, kinda, cooked the motor at 7500 rpm, blew head gasket, on further inspection needed new rings bearings so had full top end and bottom end re-con =) this was at 100000 k's

RUSTY ROOF'S MAYBE A PROBLEM!!!

General Comments:

This car is, well quick enough, can beat most v6's up to around 160kph, very good long 3rd gear from about 80 to 140 its all go!! MIVEC dosen't really kick in until over about 5500 but sill has good lower end power.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 16th May, 2003

30th Apr 2007, 19:07

Why on Earth would you be revving a small family car up to that speed? And you wonder why you have the problems you do! I have this car which has now done over 220,000km and never had these problems.

You should treat your car with respect, it will thank you.

1993 Mitsubishi Lancer GSR 1.8 turbo from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture1993
First year of ownership1998
Most recent year of ownership2000
Engine and transmission 1.8 turbo Manual
Performance marks 9 / 10
Reliability marks 8 / 10
Comfort marks 6 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 3 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
6.5 / 10
Distance when acquired50000 kilometres
Most recent distance106000 kilometres
Previous carFiat Cinquecento

Summary:

Scooby-eating stealth machine that still makes me feel good after 2 years

Faults:

Well, nothing that hasn't been my fault...

I blew the alternator jump starting it from a Cavalier which handily had an orange cover on the negative terminal and nothing on the positive.... it was early in the morning, so that's my excuse.

I slid into a kerb last Xmas and fubared an alloy, but that gave me an excuse to get nice 16" rims :)

And apart from regular serviving, replacing the clutch, and pads once or twice, that's been it.

General Comments:

If you can find one, it's a bargain. Mega sleeper potential due to the lack of Evo-type scoops and wings, but basically the same performance.

Insurance is a bit of a killer as they tend to get lumped in with the Evos by the insurance companies and 22-25mpg ain't all that, but hey, what do you expect?

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 27th December, 2000

16th Jun 2003, 22:43

I disagree. A GSR will not perform on an equal standard as an evo. GSR's are only 1.8L as opposed to 2L with the evo. Also GSR's have TDO4's (turbo) and the evo has a TDO6 which is a big difference. also having the extra 200cc of displacement for the evo it is going to have more potential. I have owned both and modified both. driven both (ofcourse) and the only good thing about the GSR over the EVO is the lighter body, and the fact that having a smaller turbo will spool up quicker reducing lag.

5th Feb 2004, 01:25

Well I am from NZ, and we have EVO's and GSR's as well, and I agree with the 2 comments above; a GSR has a power output of 149 KW (same as the 1989 Galant VR4), and an Evo has the nudge, nudge, wink, wink power output of 206 KW.

The GSR's aren't that great; I've beaten a few standard ones in both my stock VR4 and (now I'll cop some flak) my 1997 Honda Prelude, which has only had exhaust and air filter mods, and was 25% cheaper than a GSR.

24th Mar 2004, 23:52

I agree with all the comments. Generally an EVO will blow a GSR away. However, the GSR does have a lighter body. BUT!!! I've driven a modified EVO VII and nothing compares to its neck snapping performance. I have a few questions however. I bought my Lancers in 1993 and 1995 (can you tell that I like them) and did modified it over the years. It eats Civic Si's, Integra's and Preludes for breakfast. With some tweaking the 1.8 in the GSR can be made to do more than 149Kw. I know because my GSR made 201Kw and my GLXi made 189Kw.

25th Apr 2009, 05:17

A GSR could only be 1.8, but we tried using a twin side weber carb and it's a monster on the road.

1993 Mitsubishi Lancer GLXi 1.8 petrol from Australia and New Zealand

Year of manufacture1993
First year of ownership1999
Most recent year of ownership2000
Engine and transmission 1.8 petrol Manual
Performance marks 8 / 10
Reliability marks 9 / 10
Comfort marks 8 / 10
Dealer Service marks 8 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 7 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.0 / 10
Distance when acquired84500 kilometres
Most recent distance110000 kilometres
Previous carFord Fairlane

Summary:

Not the best, but not the worst either

Faults:

Not gone wrong to the point of the car not moving, but:

Clutch master and slave cylinders were replaced.

Front discs had to be machined.

Roof has mysteriously rusted (Ouch, new turret), possibly a poor previous repair from hail.

Shock absorbers need replacing, very bad roads in my area.

General Comments:

Generally a good little car, comfortable and surprisingly capacious considering it's a coupe.

Can be very fast if the need arises.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 17th December, 2000

10th Dec 2002, 15:33

For the Aussies.

The mysterious rust in the roof is a defect in the vehicle that mitsubish will pay for if you ask them. I only got half mine payed, but that was better than nothing. It was caused due to the wrong glue being used in the securing of the 3 struts under the turret.

1993 Mitsubishi Lancer GLI 1.3i petrol from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture1993
Engine and transmission 1.3i petrol
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 8 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 10 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.8 / 10

Faults:

Nothing. 80,000 miles and it has only been in the garage for servicing.

Not that fast but nippy for a small engined car.

General Comments:

Hard to part with it.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 3rd December, 1998

1993 Mitsubishi Lancer GSR 1.8 turbo petrol 4wd from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture1993
Engine and transmission 1.8 turbo petrol 4wd
Performance marks 9 / 10
Reliability marks 8 / 10
Comfort marks 8 / 10
Dealer Service marks 6 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 4 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.0 / 10

Faults:

CV boots are very prone to ware and splitting. Plastic trimmings on door sills prone to dropping off. Very prone to stone chips, large frontal area.

General Comments:

Car is all in all great. You can see it has a motorsport background as the car is not painted all that well. Most GSR's were built to satisfy the homologation aspects for the world rally scene. Very hard to get a hold of if not impossible.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 26th August, 1997

27th Dec 2000, 09:30

If you have a GSR engine in your Satria, WRXs shouldn't worry you at all :)

Hop on over to the gsr_evo group for help in making your car as fast as it should be!

http://autos.groups.yahoo.com/group/gsr_evo/

30th Dec 2000, 18:07

About the Lancer GSR (4WD Turbo 1.8) being hard to obtain in whatever country it was. Some of you should move to NZ or Australia. Here we easily get immaculate Jap imports for bloody ridiculously cheap prices. ie a 92 GSR manual turbo 4WD (usually with very low ks) averages around $9k (3000 pounds).

3rd Apr 2001, 20:24

If your GTi Satria with a GSR motor doesn't beat rexs, then you're either not running enough boost (easily solved :) ) or can't drive mate!

Go the GSR/Evo group! Bunch of hard lads! (Luznit is a nutcase). Very informative for all Lancer/Evo information.

31st Oct 2001, 08:32

Hello..

I want to know what year were the Satria GTis on sale in your country? If anyone wants to know more about Proton cars, e-mail me OK.

My e-mail:

c_takuya@hotmail.com

c_takuya@yahoo.com

Average review marks: 7.3 / 10, based on 15 reviews