1991 Mitsubishi Magna Reviews - Page 3 of 3

1991 Mitsubishi Magna TR Executive 2.6 4 cylinder EFI from Australia and New Zealand

Model year1992
Year of manufacture1991
First year of ownership2005
Most recent year of ownership2005
Engine and transmission 2.6 4 cylinder EFI Automatic
Performance marks 3 / 10
Reliability marks 8 / 10
Comfort marks 9 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 3 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
5.8 / 10
Distance when acquired135000 kilometres
Most recent distance167000 kilometres
Previous carFord Telstar

Summary:

Bloody beautiful, mate!

Faults:

Timing belts replaced - 150,000k's.

Inner left door latch replaced - 155,000k's.

Oil change - 160,000k's. Service station 'forgot' to put oil back in. Nearly blew heads, but was repaired. Solved an unrelated low-revving issue.

Paint on roof starting to fade (but this is Australia!).

A fink ran into my parked Magna and put a guage in the driver's door that is starting to rust.

At 167,000k's, steering is feeling a little heavy. Am getting fluid levels looked at soon.

General Comments:

I love this car! My mum got it 8 years ago at 135,000k's. I've learnt to drive in it, and am driving it today. I've had it for about 3 months, and I find it so comfortable. The seats are large and supportive. My medium frame does slide around a bit.

Compared to Commodores and Falcons of the same age, it has less body roll.

I'm 186cm tall, and my legs thank me everytime I drive for being able to put the seat back so far. My rear seat passengers don't complain either.

In terms of a first car, it's great. The thing feels like it has its own postcode, but I feel very safe in the Magna. I was in possession of a 1988 Ford Telstar just after I got my licence (I sold it, mental head smack), and while that car was better in many respects, the Magna deadens more road noise and bumps.

This thing drinks fuel in traffic! I'm lucky to get 350k's out of the tank in heavy traffic, but I drove between Sydney and Albury NSW on a tank and a quarter.

Handling is a little skitterish. One needs to keep the steering wheel in check around corners. It tends to follow deep ruts. At highway speeds, the car is really stable, and surprisingly quiet.

The sound system is shocking! Maybe OK for Mum's who like to listen to AM radio, but for us funky monkeys who need to impress the ladies (yes, I realise the irony in such a vehicle!), it doesn't make the grade! However, it's not a huge issue for me.

If you need convicing to get a 1992 Magna, I say, go for it! A$3000 should get you one (in April 2005). It likes petrol in the way that I like air, but it is so comfortable to drive. It's also a car that the authories won't look twice at.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 15th April, 2005

17th Feb 2006, 18:52

Hi.

As the poster of this review, I'd like to give an update on the car. Sadly, I sold it as I encountered some trouble with either the gearbox or ECU computer. I was travelling home from work one night, and the car seemed to loose pressure in the gearbox, and wouldn't shift into second gear. This is by no means something to be especially wary of, as I had not maintained the car properly, and as in any car, the ECU doesn't last forever.

If you are thinking about getting a Magna, get an August 1993 or later V6. They are more powerful (130kW v 88kW), more economical (12L/100km city v 16L/100km) and more reliable than the 2.6L 4cyl (no comparison!). As of February 2006, one such example with 130,000km on the clock will cost around $3,500. Make sure the owner can produce a service history; as the gearbox, exhaust system, oil system and belts are abnormally high maintenance areas. Most people maintain the Magna as they would a Falcon or Commodore, and grizzle when it starts stuffing up!

My personal favourite is a 1995 manual V6. They have a bit of juice!

6th Mar 2007, 07:31

The previous comments are WRONG! A 4cyl 92 magna has 98kw (unless it's a GLX version, 88kw) and a V6 93 magna has 120kw. Fuel economy figures are roughly 12L/100 (V6) and 11/100 (4cyl). Just thought I'd clear that up.

22nd Jul 2007, 07:09

Agreed, these cars are solid built and great performers, especially when well maintained. Despite ours having a few faults here and there, they've always been easily resolved and the car has never been off the road once, not bad for it's age.

25th Apr 2008, 01:37

The Astron 2.6 litre four cylinder engine does not have a timing belt, or timing belts. It has a timing chain.

29th Nov 2010, 19:05

The previous poster speaks the truth; I have replaced a cylinder head on an Astron 4 cylinder and they do indeed have a timing chain, not timing belt.

Furthermore, the Astron motor is just a piece of crap.

1991 Mitsubishi Magna SE 2.6 from Australia and New Zealand

Year of manufacture1991
First year of ownership2000
Most recent year of ownership2004
Engine and transmission 2.6 Automatic
Performance marks 2 / 10
Reliability marks 3 / 10
Comfort marks 7 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
4.0 / 10
Distance when acquired180000 kilometres
Most recent distance280000 kilometres
Previous carHonda Accord

Summary:

An absolute lemon. Scared me away from Mitsubishi for life

Faults:

Roof lining sagging.

Front suspension struts barely working - always banged loudly on average size dips.

Alternator replaced.

Water pump replaced.

2 fuel injectors replaced.

Automatic transmission computer replaced.

Rain leaking into and filling up spare tyre well in boot/trunk.

Interior door handles (both front doors) broke.

More problems existed, but I gladly threw out my large collection of repair receipts when I got rid of this car.

General Comments:

This car was an absolute lemon. I don't know whether this vehicle was indicative of all instances of this model, or just a singular problem.

It was well maintained, but rarely made it between services before it had to go in to the mechanic for major repairs.

I did like the comfort levels of the car, finding it much more pleasant than similar model Commodores and Falcons.

The engine was incredibly lacking in power. It would often end up shifting down to 1st gear to get up hills, and acceleration at traffic lights was equally embarrassing.

The gear box was clunky, and obviously on its last legs, as it often violently jerked down a gear when the car was simply slowing down to a stop.

I basically gave the car away when I realised that it required at least twice as much money spent on repairs as it was worth.

Despite being attracted to later model Magnas this car was so horrendous that I don't think I'll ever be able to buy another Mitsubishi Magna again. I am so relieved to have this thing out of my life.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 9th September, 2004

1991 Mitsubishi Magna TR Elite 2.6i from Australia and New Zealand

Year of manufacture1991
First year of ownership2001
Most recent year of ownership2004
Engine and transmission 2.6i Automatic
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 7 / 10
Comfort marks 8 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 6 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.0 / 10
Distance when acquired140000 kilometres
Most recent distance152000 kilometres
Previous carHolden Commodore

Summary:

A well appointed car lacking an power

Faults:

Electrical problems mainly ignition problems and engine control computer burnt out which is a common problem. interior roof lining came loose and dropped down (common fault). rough idling. door lock trims keeps coming loose.

General Comments:

The car drives quite smoothly besides the engine running a bit rough. power is lacking a bit on overtaking. handling is nice and stable. Interior is finished nicely besides the roof lining. Seats are comfortable. has power windows, steering, aerial and 6 speaker radio cassette.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Don't Know

Review Date: 15th March, 2004

1991 Mitsubishi Magna Executive 2.6 4 cylinder petrol from Australia and New Zealand

Year of manufacture1991
First year of ownership1999
Most recent year of ownership2002
Engine and transmission 2.6 4 cylinder petrol Manual
Performance marks 10 / 10
Reliability marks 9 / 10
Comfort marks 10 / 10
Dealer Service marks 8 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 10 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
9.4 / 10
Distance when acquired107500 kilometres
Most recent distance198500 kilometres
Previous carMitsubishi Magna

Summary:

A very reliable, economical, comfortable car

Faults:

Interior door handles broke at 185,000km.

Minor oil leaks around head gasket.

General Comments:

This TR Magna has been a very reliable, economical, comfortable and powerful to drive.

Highway driving I achieved 650km for about 58 litres and about 480km in the city.

I had the car for two years, travelled 91,000km and sold it for only $2,000 less that what I bought it for.

I spent about $1,000 the whole period of owning it, most of this on general servicing and preventative maintenance. It never broke down.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 27th July, 2002

1st Feb 2005, 03:04

I must say you have writen a good review they are pretty reliable. But in the first paragraph you said that it was powerful. I must disagree because the max it puts out is only 88 kilowatts.

12th Nov 2005, 00:14

I need to disagree with that comment. According to workshop manuals. The SOHC 3.0 V6 puts out 175hp@5500rpm 130kw and the DOHC 3.0 V6 puts out 202hp@6000 151kw in the 1992 model.

12th Nov 2005, 15:34

There were no V6 engines in the 91 Magnas they were 2600 Astron 2 engines either EFI or Carb.

19th Dec 2005, 17:02

I agree with the above comments. I used to have a 1991 Magna, and it has the 2.6 Astron EFI engine. The thing was a tortoise! I miss the comfort on long trips, but I don't miss the crappy handling, the gearbox or the bad depreciation!

Average review marks: 6.6 / 10, based on 10 reviews