It was the mid ’90s and our immediate Supervisor had just bought a 3000GT (Dodge Stealth, GTO in Japan), Mitsubishi’s excess-for-its-own-sake sports model. At the office my pals looked at the purchase with envy, while gals scoffed at it in terms too foul to share.
My car-nut Greek friend eventually had a ‘car talk’ with our Supervisor during lunchtime. At his return, I queried him: “So, what did he say about the car?” He looked at me evasively, finally replying: “You know? He hates to drive it! It’s just too much car for the city… He actually has to work to keep it under control!”
There, another teenage dream shattered by real life.
Too much power to keep under control? No such worries were to be had with the Celeste, conceived at a time when sporty was a far more modest idea. It certainly looked rakish, which was the main point of the exercise. The market would have to wait another decade or so for Japanese carmakers to bring serious earth scorchers to showrooms. When they finally did, manly ideals of performance generally proved impossible to live with on a daily basis. Who drives a Lola GT to a Safeway? Not even Phil Hill.
Mitsubishi’s A70 Lancer/Colt was repurposed for the Celeste, sharing chassis, engines and mechanicals with nary a change. The company did put effort in developing an attractive aerodynamic shape courtesy of wind tunnel testing. Being the 70’s, attention was paid to growing pollution concerns; with the model’s name alluding to ‘clean blue skies.’ That’s if we’re to trust Mitsu’s PR department (Celeste means light blue in Spanish). The model also benefited from Mitsubishi’s new balance shaft technology, bringing smoother inline-4 performance to the world.
Hindsight being 20/20, time would show Mitsubishi never established much of a brand identity. This in spite of a few outstanding vehicles here and there. That might explain why a multitude of monikers were used on the model: Plymouth Arrow, Dodge Celeste, Lancer Celeste, Colt Celeste, Valiant Lancer, etc. You get the idea. Schizophrenia, thy name is Mitsubishi. And that Chrysler alliance didn’t help matters either on that front.
Japanese cars already had quite a rep for good assembly by the mid 70’s, and Chrysler didn’t hide away the little import’s provenance in US dealers. A young twenty something in look for a reliable and sporty model could find in the Celeste an intriguing proposition, as a previous COAL shows. And from anecdotal evidence, the model acquitted itself well with its intended market. Its dynamics were nothing but average, but considering the 70’s automotive landscape, it more than sufficed.
In Central America the car stood out greatly in traffic, especially with its jaunty 70’s graphics. Surrounded by a sea of Sunnys, Corollas and utilitarian trucks and pickups, the sporty lines of the Celeste looked fast. To my kiddie eyes, the model looked like a shrunken Mustang Mach I. And now that I think about it, the cavernous back seat was probably just as uncomfortable.
Talking about packaging, the A70 Colt/Lancer had better passenger quarters, though the Celeste came with a practical lift gate and storage area. All in the effort of selling an ‘active’ lifestyle, a nouvel concept in Asia and nondeveloped countries.
Sales were average both in Japan and the US (around 77K and 130K respectively). Understandable considering Mitsubishi was still establishing its –confusing- sales network. Numbers have dwindled considerably since, and coming across a sample is now a rather rare occurrence.
I knew of this car’s existence as it had been on the FB Marketplace for some time. A really lenghty and somewhat funny ad, with the owner going at lenght on a tirade of grievances: “If you don’t know how hard it is to restore a car… don’t contact me and waste my time! This is no concours car, but fair is fair!” Etc. Etc.
Sounds like far too many “interested” parties offered nothing but pennies for the vehicle.
I’ll admit most shots on the sales ad proved the owner did go through a lot of trouble to put the car back together. I take issue with the Sentra carpeting on the trunk area; but heck, what are the chances of coming across an original Celeste one?
It was a lazy Sunday afternoon when I came across the Marketplace Celeste. Me and my wife were calmly taking a stroll in our neighborhood park when the car appeared in the distance, backing into a space by the highway exit. Did I get lucky or is this just a small town? And would it look as good up close?
No profile photos this time, as quarters were just too tight. Too bad, as it is a nice profile. For once online photos didn’t lie, and the car looked just as nice in the real. Glad to see one in this condition, as the few samples I’ve come across are generally in rather junky condition.
Back to the beginning of this post. The Mitsu 3000GT didn’t last much, selling away after a few months. Meanwhile, my Greek friend purchased a new ’98 Audi TT. In the following days a couple of gals from work actually asked if he could take them out for a ride. Proof that brute force always inspires awe, but most humans prefer to keep it at arm’s distance.
More on the Celeste/Arrow:
Curbside Classic: 1977 Plymouth Arrow GS – Celeste Before The Fire
Road And Track Vintage Review: 1976 Plymouth Arrow GT – Balance Shafts To The Rescue
COAL: 1976 Plymouth Arrow – Hitting The Bullseye Dead Center
Quite neat little cars not really at the early 70s Mitsu GTO level but a nice car all the same, I cant remember when I last saw one.
The older I get the madder I get at my teenage/early 20s self that never paid any attention at all to the Mitsu offerings at Mopar dealers. After graduation, a high school classmate bought his first new car, a 78 Dodge Challenger. I was polite, but it didn’t interest me at all. Dumb, dumb, dumb. This being smaller and less expensive, I would probably have been even less interested.
Today, I would be first in line with a deposit if something like one of these were introduced at a dealership near me. It is probably a good thing you didn’t say how much this one is selling for because I would waste too much of my day looking into transport options and import hassles.
Well, to ease your mind, the Celeste sold not long before I made this post. At some point I misplaced some screenshots showing the original condition of the car, which I found this week. Hardly any rust, but still lots of work to restore!
Car and Driver gave a favorable review to the Fire Arrow, which was the highest performance variant of the Celeste offered here. They said it was like a small Trans Am, and that was after years of championing the Trans Am over the Corvette as the best American driver’s car. I believe they also said the Fire Arrow was the second fastest Chrysler product at the time, only being outrun through the quarter by a special Chrysler 300 revival based on the Cordoba. I also remember Hendrik Blok and Steve Nowicki doing quite well in SCCA Pro Rally with Arrows.
Personal trivia: this is the first car I ever drove with 5 forward gears.
The outside USA versions of this car look so much better. Partially the bumpers of course, but I think Plymouth realized that the buyers of such a car would be mostly female and skewed the wheel and striping choices pretty far in their direction and made sure they could get a torqueflite.
The bumpers really do make a lot of difference. Most of the Japanese car designs of the mid-to-late 70s make much more sense, and are more attractive, when they are seen with the bumpers intended for them.
That last brochure photo in your post…the one of the Celeste with the hatchback open…evokes a better-looking (longer) version of the Pinto. I don’t know why I just saw that, but now I’m seeing it in all views of the car except for those taken from the front. Hummmmm.
Really enjoyed reading this – thank you. Big fan of the Plymouth Arrow, here. This is one small hatchback of the ’70s that somehow gets the proportions like 90% correct for such a small wheelbase. I prefer its looks to the Celica liftback, and many other cars like them. And that Silent Shaft engine and its smooth operation must have seemed like a revelation at the time.
I hope this one finds a good, new owner who really appreciates it.
Loved these cars. So much more stylish than anything from Toyota or Nissan in this size.
A lot of the schizophrenic naming was at Chrysler’s instigation, for export sales. Until I read your story I’d forgotten Chrysler Australia’s short-lived fad (a la Oldsmobile with the Cutlass) for putting the Valiant badge on everything – Valiant Galant, Valiant Lancer. I only ever knew these as the Lancer Hatchback (original, eh?), and never paid any attention to the extraneous script. Late teen me knew this was no Valiant – where’s the Hemi six then?
Mitsubishi kind of got even when they bought out Chrysler Australia; the final Valiants bore Mitsubishi Australia build plates. Not badged outwardly as Mitsubishis, but technically, maybe…. 🙂
What a nice looking small car, they have a scaled down Mopar vibe to them, and the details are not too fussy, unlike how other Japanese cars could be.
Didn’t appreciate them back in the day, would love one now.
I seem to remember they were quite a good product as well, with a good reputation.
These looked great in their original form. The 5mph bumpers thoroughly ruined the Plymouth version, but also the front and rear lighting changes, in particular the square headlight ones – yuck. Bad colors and accessories too, I’ve literally only seen Arrows in old brochures and to me those selected featured examples typify every bad aesthetic applied on 70s cars, it’s amazing how bad a car can look badly dressed, just imagine a split window vette lived into the 70s and got the brown on brown canopy top treatment, tri-tone earth-tone accent stripes, massive bumpers and square lights!
Got a 76 Plymouth Arrow as a wedding present from the new in-laws who couldn’t stand the thought of their daughter having to drive an “old” 1955 Chevrolet Belair 2 door hardtop with an unbelievable 48K on the odo. After all it was a new car and who was I to look a gift horse in the mouth. Not too many miles later (right after the manufacturer’s warranty expired IIRC) the Arrow started running very rough, it seems the Mitsubishi 4G32 engine had a second timing chain which ran 2 counter weighted balance shafts to smooth out the engine vibrations… the chain had stretched, or the tensioner failed, of course the dealer was happy to charge big bucks to repair it. I did it the work myself and it ran fine for a few years. Finally, when it came time to sell, the buyer was going to put a Mopar big block in it and race it. Oh, I let my then wife talk me into selling the 55 Chevy and have regretted that ever since. Such is life!
I really liked these back when I was driving my ’74 Datsun 710 in college…they were hatchbacks, that had lots more style than my daily driver. Later on, in the early 80’s I was to work with a guy who owned both a ’78 Plymouth Sapporo and a ’83 Dodge Challenger…what are the odds of that? Why would he buy essentially the same car twice, and an obscure model at that?
Well…The Sapporo/Challenger were coupes, not hatchbacks, but their rear seat really wasn’t bad to sit in (at least compared to the ’78 Scirocco I’d gotten after I had the 710). Ironically, right before I met the guy with the coupes, I was in a carpool with 2 others (they eventually got married…41 years ago) and all of us had small 2 door hatchbacks…I had the Scirocco, the lady had a ’79 Datsun 310 Coupe, and her husband to be had a ’78 Ford Festiva…all of them manuals. I haven’t seen them in years, but next month they are coming to my town (live 1900 miles away now) so looking forward to reminiscing.