View Full Version : galant or lancer??
vince31324
11-14-2002, 03:08 PM
what should i get in a few months a galant or lancer?? and why?
what one got the other aint?
pinoyesv6
11-14-2002, 03:38 PM
the lancer has a manual tranny, the galant don't
the lancer is cheaper, the galant isn't
the lancer doesn't have ABS (in the US), most galants do
the lancer will get better aftermarket support than the galant
the lancer is smaller than the galant
the lancer is slower (stock) than the galant
the lancer doesn't come in a v6 platform
o yea im talking about the current ES LS OZ rally edition lancers...the evo is another story
mochanges
11-14-2002, 04:28 PM
If you can wait until next year, they will release a version of the Lancer with the 2.4 liter engine with about 170 hp. They wanted to fill the gap between the OZ and the Evo.
-Mohammad
toc8g
11-14-2002, 05:48 PM
Check out these dyno Results made by AEM
3G Eclipse GS(4G64SOHC same as I-4 Galant) AEM Dyno ('http://www.aempower.com/pdf/results/21-433%202000-2001%20Mitsubishi%20Eclipse%20GS%204%20Cyl%20CAS.p df')
Lancer AEM Dyno ('http://www.aempower.com/pdf/results/21-4342002LancerOZCAS.pdf')
Auto-9
11-14-2002, 06:17 PM
I'd get neither at this point https://www.thegalantcenter.org/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif The new generation Galant is coming out in about a year give or take a few months, and I'd rather settle for the Evo than a regular Lancer https://www.thegalantcenter.org/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif
Supernova
11-14-2002, 09:01 PM
Galant over Lancer anyday. Galants look better, way better IMO. Evo. of course i'd get the Evo. But that will never happen.... :roll:
Btw.... whats a CAS?
Auto-9
11-14-2002, 09:42 PM
another wording for CAI I'd be willing to believe...
toc8g
11-14-2002, 09:44 PM
Cold Air System
pinoyesv6
11-14-2002, 09:57 PM
should i also mention that the autmatic lancer doesn't have a cai
toc8g
11-14-2002, 10:39 PM
Why don't they?
manybrews
11-14-2002, 11:10 PM
the lancer is a much better car all around.
stronger, better built, handles better, blah blah blah.
just 'cause it isnt as powerful really has no bearing on if its a better car or not.
toc8g
11-14-2002, 11:41 PM
So if any of you guys have cared to look at AEM's dyno result you would see they have the OZ lancer creating more hp then the I-4 3G Eclipse. What are your thoughts on that?
My coworker has the Lancer and she says it's gutless, lol. I think the Galant is nice b/c I like the extra room and power, hehe. And the Lancer only handles better b/c of it's size. BTW, the OZ trim is a joke.
As for the graphs, uh..... the difference of 2 HP really doesn't say too much. However, if I had to explain that difference, I'd say the Lancer had a bigger gain from the AEM intake b/c of the poorer stock design to begin with so hence more gain when you replace that part. That's just my stab at an explaination and has no bearing on actual facts, lol.
pinoyesv6
11-15-2002, 01:29 AM
My coworker has the Lancer and she says it's gutless, lol. I think the Galant is nice b/c I like the extra room and power, hehe. And the Lancer only handles better b/c of it's size. BTW, the OZ trim is a joke.
As for the graphs, uh..... the difference of 2 HP really doesn't say too much. However, if I had to explain that difference, I'd say the Lancer had a bigger gain from the AEM intake b/c of the poorer stock design to begin with so hence more gain when you replace that part. That's just my stab at an explaination and has no bearing on actual facts, lol.
i dunno, the lancer's oem intake has a better design IMO. i mean it starts off with a funnel. like ours but instead of going down and around like ours, it goes str8 to the airbox, which is next to the valve cover then str8 to the TB. better design but maybe its a lil warmer cuz its close to the engine.
what im wondering is what kinda tranny was in that GS. I mean i know the OZ was a manual since the auto can't use a CAI. i mean if it was a GS i can see why there was the power graph like that since the auto tranny isnt' as efficient as the manual in the eclipse's case
good points but I was just comparing the differences btwn stock and with CAI and made that deduction on the gains compared to itself. And the comment on the OZ level Lancer is b/c it does absolutely nothing for performance and it's just cosmetics.
toc8g
11-15-2002, 03:03 AM
See,.. the only thing I think of as to why the GS did so poorly is because 1. the GS was Automatic, 2. The GS was a Cali Spec,...I mean I am sure the Lancer was also but it had a m/t to its benifit. I think if you had a Fed Spec Galant that was a I-4 even a/t or a Fed spec GS with m/t or a/t it would have beem a different story. Thes reason I know for a fact the CAli spec manifold and pre cat make such a big difference is 1. I have personal experiance driving both. 2. I got beat(stock) by a completly stock Fed Spec Galant by about 2 cars and also by another Fed spec with a filter and muffler by 3 cars. So yes thats why I feel the Cali spec exhaust manifold and pre cat is a serious handicap. Other then that the engines are identical.
Gspeedvr42k1
11-15-2002, 04:23 AM
The lancer (AUTO) is .5 seconds faster if u go stock to stock on a lancer and galant. and the Manual is .7 faster. [Power to Wait Ratio]
my friends stock 5spd lancer would shit on my i4 everytime, even tho i kill him off the line, hehe. But then he would just blow by...
my sister just got the 2k3 lancer a/t and i have my 2k1 galant...I smoke her everytime...and i have nothing done under the hood yet...in comparison, the only thing i like about her car more than mine is the fact that their corners come clear from the factory...pissed me off. personally, the rest of the car is ugly and weak.
Tiptronic
11-15-2002, 06:52 AM
ultimately, the lancer
EvoLuTioN
11-15-2002, 04:19 PM
Buy Me
<---------------
Smoke All...
Technically not me... I'm the 5th Generation... but my older brother's a badass too... hehe...
One...
Gspeedvr42k1
11-15-2002, 11:19 PM
an a/t lancer maybe slower not the manual...
I think you're starting to get away from the original topic. I believe the comparisons are only on the current U.S. spec Galant and Lancer. And I'm sorry but the current Lancer here in the U.S. is weak even as a manual. It is probably more fun and better handling b/c of the size and weight but you're not getting much of a car. That's just my opinion.
toc8g
11-16-2002, 12:11 AM
Right Combo,...I was just thinking that. Also I think the comparison would be with the I-4 Galant/GS,RS Eclipse.
manybrews
11-16-2002, 12:11 AM
heres a few specs for all of you whom think the lancer is "less" of a car.
headroom in the lancer = 38.8 inches in the front 36.7 in the rear
headroom in the galant = 39.9 inches in the front 37.7 in the rear
legroom in the lancer = 43.2 inches in front, 36.6 in the rear
legroom in the galant = 43.5 inches in front, 36.3 in rear.
hip room in the lancer = 51.2 front, 50.2 rear
hip room in the galant = 52.4 front, 53.9 rear.
total passenger volumn in the lancer = 93.9 cubic feet
total passenger volumn in the galant = 97.6 cubic feet.
wheelbase lancer = 102.4 inches
wheelbase galant = 103.7 inches.
width lancer = 66.7 inches
width galant = 68.5 inches.
curb weight lancer = 2646 lbs
curb weight galant = 3031 lbs.
power to weight in the lancer = 22.05 lbs per horsepower
power to weight in the galant = 21.65 lbs per horsepower.
so basically, your getting a car thats about 2 percent smaller (although actually bigger in a few areas), about 400 lbs. lighter, and engineered and assembled MUCH better.
now, i AM comparing the base lancer to the base galant. i did not include the V6 for a few reasons... the main one being that if you include the high power galant, you need to include the high power lancer (and although its not here yet, i GARANTEE it will make the galant its bitch).
really, i know its a personal preference..
but when youre around them all day, its pretty obvious the lancer is a generally better car. (styling not included)
toc8g
11-16-2002, 12:19 AM
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> you need to include the high power lancer (and although its not here yet, i GARANTEE it will make the galant its bitch).</div>
I don't think anyone is disputing that, the EVO is a bad ass car. But as far as what we are talking about is that the Lancer now having more power then the I-4 Galant or 3G Eclipse or RS or GS. When compared to the I-4 Cali Spec Galant I think the Lancer is the winner but A fed spec I-4 Galant I think its the loser. I mean I beat my cousins GS I-4 Cali Spec Eclipse m/t on a role in my Silver Galant and it was a I-4 but I find it real hard tto fathom the GS m/t Eclipse Cali spec would lose to a Cali Spec m/t Lancer. I have driven my Cousins GS and he definatly should have beaten me but he didn't know how to drive stick that well,....but when he did he would beat me off the line and stay ahead by a hood. I dunno,....I find it very hard to belive a OZ lancer is gonna beat a GS. And the reason I am making comaperison to the GS is because AEM has the OZ making more HP then the GS. I dunno this topic is turning my brain into a noodle!!!! AHHHHHHHHHHHH! :spinner:
Valid points manybrews. And you'll save some money too on the base models. I guess I'm biased b/c I have the V6 and that wouldn't be a fair comparison, lol. And more bias b/c I feel more room is more car, guess it depends on how you look at it. Some like tight little packages. How does the features compare. Is everything you can get on the Galant is also available on the Lancer like ABS, Traction control, leather option, decent sound system, airbags, etc.?
manybrews
11-16-2002, 12:26 AM
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(toc8g)</div><div class='quotemain'>
I don't think anyone is disputing that, the EVO is a bad ass car. But as far as what we are talking about is that the Lancer now having more power then the I-4 Galant or 3G Eclipse or RS or GS. When compared to the I-4 Cali Spec Galant I think the Lancer is the winner but A fed spec I-4 Galant I think its the loser. I mean I beat my cousins GS I-4 Cali Spec Eclipse m/t on a role in my Silver Galant and it was a I-4 but I find it real hard tto fathom the GS m/t Eclipse Cali spec would lose to a Cali Spec m/t Lancer. I have driven my Cousins GS and he definatly should have beaten me but he didn't know how to drive stick that well,....but when he did he would beat me off the line and stay ahead by a hood. I dunno,....I find it very hard to belive a OZ lancer is gonna beat a GS. And the reason I am making comaperison to the GS is because AEM has the OZ making more HP then the GS. I dunno this topic is turning my brain into a noodle!!!! Â*AHHHHHHHHHHHH! :spinner:</div>
well, you gotta remember one thing.. the GS eclipse from 95 to 99 was actually a chrysler powertrain.. straight out of a neon. and it only had 140 HP too (identical to the base 4 cylinder galant).
both of these cars SHOULD beat a lancer.. i never meant to imply they wouldnt, as they both have a (SLIGHTLY) higher power to weight ratio than the current lancer.
but for real car people, power is a very small part of the total car equation. i would MUCH rather have a car with a suburb chassis and brakes with a low power engine than the opposite. American musclecars of the 60s were like that, and in general they are seriously shitty cars to drive... poor handling, poor performance in anything but straight line attacks, poor drivability, you name it.
manybrews
11-16-2002, 12:28 AM
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TJC)</div><div class='quotemain'>How does the features compare. Is everything you can get on the Galant is also available on the Lancer like ABS, Traction control, leather option, decent sound system, airbags, etc.?</div>
most of its available, but not all..
and it depends on the model, too.
obviously, the car is in a "cheaper" class, so its not quite as optioned out as the galant. although youde be surprised at what is available.
keep in mind that a turbo, AWD model is on the way, something that isnt available at all on the galant.
and also remember that you cant get a galant with a manual. (not a big deal to most, but i love a manual tranny).
toc8g
11-16-2002, 12:38 AM
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(manybrews)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(toc8g)</div><div class='quotemain'>
I don't think anyone is disputing that, the EVO is a bad ass car. But as far as what we are talking about is that the Lancer now having more power then the I-4 Galant or 3G Eclipse or RS or GS. When compared to the I-4 Cali Spec Galant I think the Lancer is the winner but A fed spec I-4 Galant I think its the loser. I mean I beat my cousins GS I-4 Cali Spec Eclipse m/t on a role in my Silver Galant and it was a I-4 but I find it real hard tto fathom the GS m/t Eclipse Cali spec would lose to a Cali Spec m/t Lancer. I have driven my Cousins GS and he definatly should have beaten me but he didn't know how to drive stick that well,....but when he did he would beat me off the line and stay ahead by a hood. I dunno,....I find it very hard to belive a OZ lancer is gonna beat a GS. And the reason I am making comaperison to the GS is because AEM has the OZ making more HP then the GS. I dunno this topic is turning my brain into a noodle!!!! Â*AHHHHHHHHHHHH! :spinner:</div>
well, you gotta remember one thing.. the GS eclipse from 95 to 99 was actually a chrysler powertrain.. straight out of a neon. and it only had 140 HP too (identical to the base 4 cylinder galant).
both of these cars SHOULD beat a lancer.. i never meant to imply they wouldnt, as they both have a (SLIGHTLY) higher power to weight ratio than the current lancer.
but for real car people, power is a very small part of the total car equation. i would MUCH rather have a car with a suburb chassis and brakes with a low power engine than the opposite. American musclecars of the 60s were like that, and in general they are seriously shitty cars to drive... poor handling, poor performance in anything but straight line attacks, poor drivability, you name it.</div>
My bad I was stricktly mean the 3G Rs or GS, I didn't mean to put 3G or RS, GS,...sorry. As far as the RS, GS 2G Eclipse I have beaten a few on the highway,.....but then again they would probably give me a hassle on the street in my old I-4 Fed spec but then again i don't have that anymore and have a slow ass I-4 Cali Spec Galnt,...atleast untill I get that SAFC and Header!!! https://www.thegalantcenter.org/style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(manybrews)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TJC)</div><div class='quotemain'>How does the features compare. Is everything you can get on the Galant is also available on the Lancer like ABS, Traction control, leather option, decent sound system, airbags, etc.?</div>
most of its available, but not all..
and it depends on the model, too.
obviously, the car is in a "cheaper" class, so its not quite as optioned out as the galant. although youde be surprised at what is available.
keep in mind that a turbo, AWD model is on the way, something that isnt available at all on the galant.
and also remember that you cant get a galant with a manual. (not a big deal to most, but i love a manual tranny).</div>
true, true. Not disputing the new EVO either; no comparison there. I personally would love a manual but was thinking of my wife so the Galant in auto was it... and of course that's all it comes in, lol. If it was just for me, manual all the way. However, I would still not choose the Lancer over the Galant (V6 of course) b/c of it's size and power. The EVO I love though.
BTW, did you ever find out for me manybrews if the knuckle was the same on the 2000 Eclipse GT and Galant V6's with twin-pistons? Sorry for the sidebar, lol.
manybrews
11-16-2002, 09:40 AM
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TJC)</div><div class='quotemain'>
BTW, did you ever find out for me manybrews if the knuckle was the same on the 2000 Eclipse GT and Galant V6's with twin-pistons? Sorry for the sidebar, lol.</div>
SHIT!
totally forgot about it.
i apologize.. im a bit absent minded.
ill TRY to remember on monday. (i also missed tuesday and wenesday last week due to illness, although thats probably just an excuse on my part).
No problem bro and I appreciate it. Just get well first manybrews. Specs can wait cause my new wheels are still en route so it will be maybe 2 weeks before I start shopping for replacement brakes.
GalantT3
11-21-2002, 03:25 PM
You cant compare which car offers more for less because Mitsubishi is kind of lacking in the features department. Almost all 2003 family sedans offer a navigation system or On star or something. Mitsubishi on the other hand is way behind and the most you can get are power seats, a cd player and changer, ABS, and traction control. And a bra! https://www.thegalantcenter.org/style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif https://www.thegalantcenter.org/style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif
Choosing between the Lancer and the Galant basically comes down to what you can afford. I think the Galant is better looking, so I would tell you to get the Galant. But if you dont have the money for the Galant and you feel the Lancer would be the better deal then get the Lancer.
But if you can swing it get the Galant!!!!! https://www.thegalantcenter.org/style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif
Gspeedvr42k1
11-23-2002, 04:53 PM
getting a new car witch one u think i should look at...
2003 Lancer EVO VII or 2003 Galant GTZ 3.0L V6?
GalantT3
11-23-2002, 11:08 PM
Well if your talking about the Lancer EVO good luck getting one!
The Lancer EVO wins out over a Galant GTZ easily!!!! I thought you were comparing the Galant GTZ and the Lancer OZ rally! https://www.thegalantcenter.org/style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif In that case get the GTZ either way I see you getting the GTZ because only a select few will be getting the Lancer EVO.
Heres why:
It appears that 5 EVO's is a high number per dealership. Many stores won't get that many and some stores will get none so availability is going to be tight. So unless you left a deposit or your on some kind of waiting list odds are your only choice is going to be the Galant.
vBulletin® v4.2.2, Copyright ©2000-2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.