(first posted 11/23/2015) Sports cars and sporty coupes have been part of the arsenal the Japanese used to make their huge inroads into the North American market from the very beginning. Datsun’s Fairlady (later 1600/2000) was the first one in 1960, sent to do battle with the then-entrenched MG. Toyota’s sleek and long-hood 2000GT from 1966 was too expensive to sell well, but Nissan’s brilliant and highly-affordable 240Z from 1970 revolutionized the compact sports coupe market, and dominated it for decades. Toyota’s Celica soon played a dominant role in the four-seat compact sporty coupe market.
Although Mitsubishi initially came to the US via Chrysler dealers, it was not content to sit out this exciting chapter either. When Mitsubishi kicked off its own brand in the US in 1982, its line of just three cars included two sporty coupes: the FWD Cordia and the significantly more potent turbocharged RWD Starion. Mitsubishi was sending a strong signal, that it was determined to be a force in the sporty coupe market too. In 1989, the Eclipse made quite a splash in the more affordable sector of the market. But that was not enough: to show just how serious Mitsubishi was, the successor to the Starion was a highly ambitious, tech-laden sports coupe to slot above the Eclipse: the 3000GT. Was it over-reach?
Before I delve into more detail about Mitsubishi’s one-generation wonder of a flagship coupe, I want to point out how excited I was to see one in the metal, however fleeting. See, Australia has long been a rather coupe-averse country. But for short-lived successes like the Holden Monaro, we tend to treat coupes like a drunken one-night stand. “Where did I put my pants? I need to go. No, I can’t stay over. I have a sedan!”
So, it’s tough to talk about these from an Australian point of view. If I had ever seen another one in the metal, it was probably at an auto show when I was a small child. Mitsubishi didn’t help by only offering the twin-turbo VR4 and pricing it so high: in 1992, it listed for $AUD89k, and then the very next year was above the $100k mark. In 1995, it was priced at $119,170, or almost $40k more than a Subaru SV-X, Nissan 300ZX, Mazda RX-7 or Toyota Celica GT-Four (the last Supra was not officially sold here, FYI). The only Japanese sports car more expensive was the Honda NSX, which retailed for $205,000. This was Mitsubishi’s only sports coupe, as we didn’t receive the Eclipse or the FTO (although the latter appeared in fairly high numbers as a gray import).
New York Stealth photos courtesy of my good friend, Jason White
In America during its sports-coupe obsessed era, the 3000GT (known as the GTO in Japan) was more successful, building on the reputation established by the RWD Starion(1982-1988), which in turbocharged form was one of the hotter cars in its class. The Starion was not a really big seller, but had made quite an impact. So as a worthy follow-up, Mitsubishi was determined to make the 3000GT unforgettable, and it and its Dodge counterpart, the mildly restyled Stealth, were released with a storm of buzz.
A lot of that buzz surrounded the flagship models, the 3000GT VR-4 and the Stealth R/T Turbo. Not only were these two equipped with all-wheel-drive with a 45/55 front/rear torque split, they also came with rather faddish four-wheel-steering, an electronically controlled suspension (ECS), an active aerodynamic system that adjusted the front and rear spoilers based on vehicle speed (3000GT only) and even a control to adjust the sound of the exhaust.
Brendan Saur photographed this Stealth, modified to look like a 3000GT
To propel these flagship coupes, Mitsubishi built a twin-turbocharged 3.0 V6 engine with 300 hp and 307 ft-lbs of torque, the latter figure available at just 2500 rpm. There was only one transmission available in the hi-po V6, a Getrag five-speed manual, which was well-suited to the cars’ broad powerband. At as low as 1600 rpm, the two turbochargers would come online and deliver a burst of power. Despite this, the coupes were still quite pleasant to drive around town by most accounts, and had an EPA-estimated 17/23 mpg.
Those seeking a lower sticker price could have purchased—in America and Japan, at least—a naturally-aspirated 3.0 V6, front-wheel-drive model (220 hp, 201 ft-lbs). The Stealth even came with a less powerful 12-valve version of the same engine in its base trim (160 hp, 184 ft-lbs). In 1992, a base Stealth retailed for $17,523 while a base 3000GT cost $20,417. In contrast, an Eclipse GSX Turbo AWD retailed for $19,217 and an Eagle Talon TSI AWD for $17,273. Given the fact even base Stealth/3000GT models were considerably heftier than the DSM triplets and scarcely more powerful or spacious, its not surprising that the flagship versions accounted for a significant chunk of total volume in the first few years.
Mitsubishi’s two differently-sized coupes weren’t so dissimilar under the skin. The larger coupes’ four-wheel independent suspension, with rear double wishbone trailing arms, borrowed heavily from the design of the DSM car’s suspension albeit with a wider track.
With all-wheel-drive, the VR4 and R/T Turbo were fantastically grippy. With its twin-turbocharged V6, it was impressively fast (0-60 in 6 seconds). So why, then, did it have a penchant for finishing last in comparison tests against the Supra and 300ZX Turbos?
Mass. From the very first reviews, automotive journalists made mention of just how darn heavy this coupe was. A 3000GT VR4 weighed almost 3800 lbs, around 250-300 lbs heavier than both the Supra and 300ZX turbos, although they lacked the Mitsu’s (cramped) rear seats. The cheaper, less powerful and yet equally fast Mazda RX-7 was a featherweight in comparison, at 2840 lbs. In fact, the range-topping 3000GT and Stealth were heavier than a Lincoln Mark VIII LSC! Unfortunately, that weight was felt while driving the car. While it was a predictable handler, it was lacking the raw thrills that come from a light and tossable sports car.
When the adjustable suspension was put in “Tour” mode, the VR4 and R/T Turbo had quite a compliant ride befitting of a grand tourer. But if this was supposed to be a grand touring coupe, why was it styled in such a wild fashion? Why was the interior so cramped, gray and with such odd ergonomics? Therein lies the rub: Mitsubishi thought it could tackle the best its automotive industry had to offer in performance coupes by throwing everything and the kitchen sink atop a front-wheel-drive platform. The result was absolutely impressive on paper, but it was no purist’s sports coupe.
By the mid-1990s, the Yen was forcing up the price of the 3000GT. For its 1994 facelift, the 3000GT received projector headlamps, 8 extra pound feet of torque and a six-speed Getrag manual in twin-turbo guise, bigger wheel-and-tired combinations and a redesigned interior. But to keep the costs down, Mitsubishi had to make some cuts: the tuneable exhaust system was gone for 1994, the ECS disappeared the next year, and the active aerodynamics the year after. The biggest cut of all was made in 1997, when Dodge ceased sales of the Stealth. Its base SOHC 12-valve V6 migrated to the 3000GT lineup as a new price leader in 1998, but sales continued to fall. After 1999, the 3000GT was axed from the North American lineup and it lasted just a year longer in its homeland.
Given the scarcity of visual changes throughout their production run and the decline of the sport coupe segment, its not surprising that the 3000GT and Stealth eventually ran out of steam, sales-wise. Looking at the production totals (link here), the 3000GT saw annual production increase each year until it reached a high of 16,103 units in 1994. Production dipped slightly the following year, before tumbling to 5,135 units in 1996 and falling further from there. The once popular (within the lineup) VR4 model saw its production tallies fall each year after 1992, its once healthy percentage of volume falling off a cliff to almost insignificant numbers. As for the Stealth, it outsold the 3000GT most years, but not by as much as you might think.
So the Mitsubishi 3000GT wasn’t one of history’s greatest sports cars. It was, however, very competent. Most importantly, it was yet another affordably-priced, high performance sports coupe in a golden era of Japanese performance cars. After two decades of dwindling performance, Americans were suddenly spoilt for choice when it came to reliable, powerful, attractive cars.
While the Japanese are still making world-class sports coupes (Nissan GT-R, Scion FR-S, etc), their ranks have thinned. Mitsubishi chose not to develop a second-generation 3000GT and even its once successful Eclipse was left to wither on the vine before finally being axed in 2012. With Mitsubishi refusing to even develop its own new Lancer, it is an almost certainty that we will never see another high-performance sports coupe from then again. But when you drive past that sad-looking Mitsubishi lot in town, if you have one, and you see row after row of titchy Mirages and tepid Outlander Sports, remember the three-diamond brand once offered cars like this.
Related Reading:
Curbside Classic: Mitsubishi Starion
Curbside Classic: 1992 Mitsubishi Eclipse
Curbside Classic: 1993 Nissan 300ZX Convertible
Mitsubishi actually kicked off its sport coupe line up in the early 70s with the GTO a 5 speed 2 litre two door styled like a nicer looking Mach 1 Mustang, or did nobody else get them?
In the USA we had the car the GTO was based on (Colt Galant, sold by Dodge and Plymouth Dealers as the Colt) from 1971 but didn’t get the hot version. I’ve personally never seen one of the first generation on the road, but given how 70’s Japanse cars tended to rust, they may have been mostly gone by the time my memories start in the mid 80’s.
The only one I ever saw was a 1/24 scale kit. 🙂
I always saw this as a more competent rival to the Camaro/Firebird. This is the route GM should’ve taken in the early 90’s, the “high-tech” route. In my eyes, this was a better Camaro than the Camaro.
FWD Camaro, really?
We never got the FWD in Sweden, only the 4WD. I didn’t even know they made anything but…
The 1989-1993 Galant V4-R with it’s AWD and turbo engine was a unique offering that had a real chance to make Mitsubishi stand out in the crowded compact midsize import segment in the USA. It was also a great starting place for the DSM coupes, which were really out there fighting for sales against the Celicas, Corrados, and Preludes.
As a basis for a Supra/300ZX/Corvette challenger, not so much. The Starion was much better. The turbo 2.6 started with only 145 hp, but remember that was the same as the Supra and the 280ZX in 1983. The turbo motor was the new technology, and quickly the engine had 188hp and bold fender flares that worked as well on it as it did on the 944. The Starion was a great basis to continue. The style inside and out could have only come from Japan and showed Mitsubishi and Japan was now in the big leagues.
Instead lets go front drive and only talk about the 3800 pound fatso at the top of the line with the optional awd. Built to fail in the marketplace and that’s what it did. What a comedown.
I knew a guy who was fairly well-off who had owned a long line of Lincolns, inclusing a sharp black Mark VII LSC. He got a divorce and bought a red 3000GT, and then I lost track of him. From that time, these screamed “mid-life crisis” at me.
Sounds like your friend’s ex wife’s lawyer did not do his/her job. By the time they were done with him, his mid life crisis car should have been a red Escort ZX2 coupe.
LOL!
A friend of mine has one of the AWD, 6 cyl twin turbo 3000’s. He has replaced as many body parts as he can with carbon fiber to lighten it. The car is a blast to drive according to him as it always needs something when I am available. Beautiful car. On the Eclipse side, my brother set up one for a customer that did 10 sec passes in street trim. That was his fast car, his other is a Viper
Didn’t the VR4 turbos develop a nasty reputation for eating gearboxes and transfer cases?
I’ve known people who owned several of these–two base 3000GTs, a base Stealth, and a 3000GT VR4. I only had the misfortune to ride in one of the base 3000GTs, as a passenger in the rear “seats”–my head was pressed sideways against the hatch glass and I’m not particularly tall (5’10”). Those seats were not meant for full-sized adults…
Definitely attractive, but heavy and not exactly paragons of reliability. The fellow who had the base 3kGT that I did not ride in had unending problems with it. Then he got rid of it and replaced it…with the VR4 version. Very questionable considering how problematic the NA version was, but I guess he just really liked the cars. At least it was fast.
A friend at work still daily drives a mid level (2wd V6) Dodge Stealth in an oh so 90’s shade of Teal. He’s had good luck with reliability but minor systems like the pop up headlights occasionally give him grief, as does declining parts availability. It’s still fun to drive and unmistakable in a sea of silver Camcords and CUVs.
Didn’t they make a retractable hardtop toward the end of the run? I remember it listing at around $60,000 in the U.S.
They definitely did. Made an already overweight car even heavier, but it sure looked cool. If I recall correctly, it was one of the first entrants in the Retractable Resurgence of the late 90’s/00’s. (The SLK may have been first but I’m not sure of the chronology.)
It was the first. Offered in 1995 and discontinued in 1996, it beat Benz to the punch by a year(the Benz SLK hard top arrived in 1996)
The place I got my last few cars from had one for sale a few months ago. It was a base 1994 3000GT with a manual transmission. It was the first one I have seen in years that was not clapped out or riced out. It was literately a time capsule. It was well taken care of and had low miles on it. It was probably the best looking 3000GT I had seen since the 1990’s when they were new.
It had passed state inspection so all it needed was tags and a driver
The dealer put it up for sale at $6000 (which I thought was a bit high) and two weeks later a guy bought it(he literately walked over to his bank(across the street) and came back with a certified check and took the car away. As I was there having them look at something on a car I bought from them and just shooting the crap I witnessed this and asked him why he had bought it and he stated that he had wanted one since they were new in the 1990’s but could not afford it then and had been on the look out for one in good shape these last 2 years.
CAR magazine, if I remember correctly, really liked the FTO. I thought it looked a bit like an also-ran at least as far as styling.
Since they were available at the same time, but not in any market outside of Japan(as far as I know), I kept hoping CAR would muster it’s forces and test an FTO and a comparable Eclipse.
It’s too bad Mitsubishi’s inability to field competitive “large” cars meant the 3000, and eventually the Diamonte would disappear.
I think the 3000GT/GTO managed (and suffered) from the unique feat of being both too ambitious and not ambitious enough. Every technological feature imaginable at the time — but on what was basically a FWD sedan platform. More power than anything else Mitsubishi sold back then — but no more power than a 300ZX Twin Turbo, LT1/LT4 Corvette, or A80 Supra Turbo, which all weighed less and thus were faster.
From a marketing standpoint, the Diamond Star cars were really a better idea. Some high-tech stuff to enliven the sedanish underpinnings, built in the U.S. so they could undercut the imported Celica and Prelude, and priced to take the mickey out of most serious criticism. (Given what they cost even in AWD form, the biggest objection I had to them new was that it took them a frustratingly long time to ditch the mouse belts in favor of airbags.) It’s a pity that the collapse of the coupe market eventually pushed later iterations back toward being basically overstyled Galant coupes.
These were great looking cars. I personally prefer the pop-up light iterations, particularly with the Stealth, but growing up in the 90s they were very common sights, so common that in fact that I was able to gauge just how reliable and durable they were just from observation of their condition – they all looked tired and worn out by the 00s. Chalky paint, sun warped plastic bodywork, “winking” headlights, missing interior pieces, ect. These were firmly in my first car wheelhouse though, and as a kid the Supra, RX7, 300ZX of the same jellybean era were some of my favorite cars ever, the only Japanese ones I’d ever consider at that, and the 3000GT/Stealth were bargains in comparison, and every bit as good looking to my eye. But FWD was a huge disappointment, and they weren’t fast at all(I never could find a twin turbo awd model in my price range).
I kind of look at them as the 90s equivalents of the E body Cuda/Challengers. Excellent styling, let down by being way too hefty and in general I’d say on par in terms of build quality and ergonomics. Similarly the DSMs proved to be better in house bargains like the Dusters/Darts did.
The E-body comparison is very interesting and I think pretty apt, in performance as well as position. You’d think the normally aspirated twin-cam engines would do well enough — 222 hp wasn’t too shabby for the early ’90s — but the FWD cars were still heavy and a lot of them had automatic, so as I recall they were more ‘brisk sedan’ than Supercar.
Yeah all the ones I ever looked at were automatics, my parents were amendment I didn’t buy a manual transmission car for whatever reason at the time, but even still, I sought them out at used car dealers and responded to newspaper ads, which was a roll of the dice, not one I found had a mixing stick.
Ultimately the car I did buy, which I still have, was a V8 Cougar. Most would look at the two and think apples and oranges but I was much more pleasantly surprised driving it for the first time than I was the Stealth/3000gt, which was a textbook “don’t meet your heros” experience.
I’ve told the story before, bought a 1995 VR4 new in Dec 1994, when I got rid of it in June of 1997, it had 137,xxx miles on it. Yes, it was heavy, but it was a great long distance machine. Not the greatest car in the twisties, but it had it’s moments. Depending on the driver, it could give any other sport coupe of the day a run for the money. At just under 100,000 miles (still under warranty, thank god), the water pump went, and had a number of warranty items taken care of. Transmission replaced under a recall, some odds and ends. The car was never babied at all. Fastest I ever had the car, empty straight desert roads, was 157mph indicated, which matched what the mags at the time had gotten. After the warranty work, had no more problems with it for the last 37,000 miles, just brakes & tires.
It seems that we’ve left off the TRUE gem of the GTO/3000GT range, as Mitsubishi offered a Retractable convertible that helped sales but didn’t have the panache generated by the Eclipse spyder. I really wanted a 3000 GT convertible, and Dodge had planned to offer a convertible version of the Stealth (even if they would’ve, I’d still pick the Turbo coupe!) but the bottom fell out of the Yen, and Chrysler thought that there was a better alternative with the DSM Trio (Laser, Eclipse and Talon) and for a less loftier price.
—Though I’d yearn for a 3000 GT Convertible, one in British Green please!
This was part of the 300 hp breakthrough of the Nineties. As stated, the Corvette, Turbo Supra, and turbo 300ZX were considered to be almost supercars. The earlier Starion was RWD with four wheel independent suspension, which had more potential for handling performance. These Mitsus were incredibly cramped inside, when compared to the size of the outside. Look at the picture with the door open, the door looks almost a foot thick! The Stealth followed the same plan of the early Mustang, offering several levels of performance, the base Stealth had the same 3.0 V as my Dodge Caravan which was a good motor but hardly exciting. The twin turbos were quite impressive, but besides the FWD basic architecture (Wrong!) the impact was diluted by so many pedestrian models. The Prelude and Celicas were well respected but on a lower performance rung, but it was the Diamond Star twins that really carried the performance standard at the time.
I had a ’92 Nissan 300ZX with the n/a 222 hp. engine with five speed, a batter choice.
I actually owned a 1991 Nissan 300ZX TT 5 speed and a 1998 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4 at the same time. Both were bone stock, Z had 67k miles and the VR-4 had 73k miles. I bought the Z in 2004 and the VR-4 in 2005, sold both in 2011. They’re both great cars but very different.
The first gen 1991-1993 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4s ran almost identical times to the Nissan 300ZX TT while weighing much more. The 1994-1999 3000GT VR-4s were much faster in a straight line than the Nissan 300ZX TT and Mazda RX-7 TT stock to stock. They ran mid/low 13s stock at the same trap as the Z. My 98 VR-4 ran consistent 13.3-13.4@102-104mph, my 91 300ZX TT ran consistent 13.8-13.9@100-104mph. From a standing start the Z gets gapped and doesn’t pass – I used to race them frequently. Around 135mph-140mph the 300ZX TT is about 1.5 car lengths behind the VR-4 and as soon as it shifts into 5th the VR-4 just continues to walk.
The Mitsubishi 3000GT got lighter by the year, and by 1994 it had 320HP/315TQ and a 6 speed to match the almighty A80 Supra TT (an overrated car in stock form imho). Magazines got 0-60 in 4.8-5.1s and the 1/4m in 13.4-13.6@101-105mph and that was with a sub optimal launch; Edmunds of all publications trapped a 99 VR-4 at 105mph. MotorTrend did a test in 1995 with all 4 – https://www.motortrend.com/reviews/virtual-velocity/
Quarter Mile Results:
1995 Nissan 300ZX TT: 13.9@102.0mph
1995 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4: 13.5@101.7mph
1995 Mazda RX-7 TT: 14.1@99
1995 Toyota Supra TT: 13.5@106.9mph
MotorWeek tested a 1994 3000GT VR-4 and got 0-60 in 4.9s and the 1/4m in 13.5@103mph, beating the Nissan 300ZX TTs and Mazda RX-7s best times on that show – https://youtu.be/kBTwc8h-cnI
Popular Mechanics tested a 99 VR-4 and ran a 13.44@101.7mph…no stock 300ZX TT can run a 13.4 ET stock, in fact the Z32s fastest recorded ET is 13.7 and that was in one test by Car and Driver and no publication ever reproduced that time nor did C&D get another 13.7 ET, most Z32s ran 13.9s-14.2s on average.
The Nissan 300ZX TT handles better and is more engaging to drive than the VR-4, but the acceleration difference is noticeable, the Mitsubishi just pulls much harder in any gear.
There’s also the J spec GTO MR, a lighter version made for Japan, which is identical to the 94-99 USDM VR-4s but they weigh a bit less. Well, the GTO MR beat the R32 Nissan Skyline GT-R over a mile, ran 0-400m in 12.888s beating an R33 Skyline GT-R and was a high 12s car stock.
People sleep on these cars due to their weight, but they accelerate extremely hard and are capable of beating modern sports cars, something a stock Z32 TT isn’t known for. The 300ZX TT was fast in 1990, but by 1994 the competition surpassed it.