Talk:Mitsubishi GTO

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Mitsubishi GTO article.
Article policies
Cars Portal
This article is within the scope of Wikipedia Project Automobiles, a collective approach to creating a comprehensive guide to the world of automobiles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you are encouraged to visit the project page, where you can contribute to the discussion.
Stub This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the Project's quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.

Unless there are any objections, I'm going to move this article to Mitsubishi GTO in a few days. It was called the GTO in the home Japanese market, and although the 3000GT name was notable, it should just redirect in. --Milkmandan 23:48, 2005 Mar 9 (UTC)

Done. I've cleaned up all the double redirects and most of the linked-in pages, also. As usual, I've tried to maintain context in the articles (e.g., if an article really means the 3000GT, it gets linked to the 3000GT) and I'm letting the redirects do the work. --Milkmandan 17:01, 2005 Mar 11 (UTC)

Could we get a redirect to Mitsubishi GTO/3000GT and merge the 2 pages? That way it would match the entry for the Pajero/Montero entry, which is a similar situation. Two namesakes, which are the exact same vehicle, released at the same time, just in 2 different markets. (See: Talk:Mitsubishi 3000GT) - Adolphus79 20:06, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Front/midengine?

Do Anyone know if GTO is a front or midengine? Heck, what Japanese cars are mid/rear engines?

The GTO is transverse front-engined and is either 4WD or FWD, depending on the trim. The only mass-market modern mid- or rear-engined Japanese cars I can think of are the Toyota MR2 and the Honda NSX, although many older examples (Subaru 360, etc.) exist. The Toyota Previa (so-called in the US) had an engine under the passenger compartment, I think. Daihatsu makes a light 3-speed utility truck which has an engine under the truck bed, as I remember.
I just noticed that there's a category for this: Category:Mid-engined vehicles. It looks like I only missed the Honda Beat and the Autozam AZ-1, although it's pretty clear that the list is nonexhaustive. --Milkmandan 03:54, July 15, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Revision, 1 August 2006

I took an offline copy of both the Mitsubishi GTO and Mitsubishi 3000GT articles and edited their content together as best I could. I deleted the stuff about tranmission reliability and a lawsuit involving Getrag as unsourced (and not really encyclopedic - this isn't an online workshop manual), but the rest of it seems to be there. Personally, I reckon we should add more stuff on the Dodge Stealth since it redirects to this page, but my assistance in this would be limited to keeping the article tidy and contiguous.

I've also omitted stuff about wheel/tyre sizes, as the info given here conflicted with that found elsewhere, and though I was tempted to draw up a table showing Nagoya's production numbers for the US/Canadian market, I decided a link to the page was enough for now. It can be done later.

So, I think this is is now ready for merging, i.e. the 3000GT page can now redirect here. --DeLarge 14:34, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Revert, GTO MR figures (360 PS, 506 Nm)

According to the same source I referenced all the stats, the MR version has the same 280 PS / 427 Nm as mentioned in the article. I can only presume the figures given by 82.109.66.144 are an aftermarket model. I'd like to see a source before I allow such figures back in, thankyouverymuch. --DeLarge 23:19, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

ps isnt same as horsepwer and they make the same power as jdm in america

[edit] A great car, but discontinued.

Just... a great car, but why did it be discontinued???

Sales were down, it couldn't meet emissions standards, and it was an eleven year old design.
I also removed the cleanup tags from this page and the Mitsubishi Galant GTO article. There's nothing wrong with the grammar, formatting, etc, which is what the Cleanup tag is for. If you have something specific to complain about (besides the fact that I keep reverting your nonsensical page moves), you need to put it on the talk page so other editors know what your objection is. --DeLarge 07:44, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Why Dodge stealth redirects here?

If I am not wrong, in Smokey and the bandit page, they talk about dodge stealth. It couldn't be this car, obviusly.

--Alan92rttt 15:26, 6 November 2006 (UTC) My bet is that the people that are editing the entries are not true car people. They do not understand that while the GTO the 3000GT and the stealth were made from the same platform their are difference in the vehicle and look that deserve separate content. When the GTO and 3000GT pages were merged alot of good information was left in the 3000GT entry.

the stealth body style was used in alot of movies im not sure of this one the music video had stealth version

[edit] Infobox image

I'm going to replace the infobox image placed by User:PrimeAKF11, as a Commons image[1] was already in place, so there was no need for a new picture.

According to one of his edit summaries, "A non turbo base model is not a good representation of a 3000GT / Stealth, which is regarded as one of the highest performance vehicles of its day". However, as per the production stats at Stealth316.com and Suthnr.com, in North America the base and SL (non-turbo) versions both outsold the turbo by a margin of 2:1. In fact, overall the turbo version accounts for less than 20% of all 3000GT sales. Therefore, the non-turbo version is a better representation of a typical vehicle than the VR-4. --DeLarge 09:53, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

the base model and sl are just striped down vr4 but the place to stick the parts for vr4 are still on the dash and in engine bay

http://www.cars.com/go/crp/research.jsp?section=summary&crpPage=summary.jsp&makeid=12&modelid=154&year=1994&myid=2968&acode=USA40DOC041A0&mode=&aff=hertimes —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jay173 (talk • contribs) 11:49, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Trivia

There's precisely one cited fact in the trivia section, which I'm going to extract and integrate into the main text. The rest of it does not deserve inclusion. For those who disagree, consider these WP policies and guidelines:

  • Wikipedia:Verifiability: ""Verifiable" in this context means that any reader should be able to check that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source."
  • Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not: "Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of items of information."
  • Wikipedia:Avoid trivia sections in articles: "Avoid organizing articles as lists of isolated facts regarding the topic."
  • Wikipedia:Notability: "All topics must meet a minimum threshold of notability in order for an article on that topic to be included in Wikipedia." If the car's appearance in a movie or TV show received less than four (or even five) stars at the Internet Movie Cars Database, it's unlikely to meet Wikipedia's standards of notability. --DeLarge 22:38, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
What about for the TV & movie appearances, we make a List of GTO appearances in media article? (or if someone can think of a better title...) I have added a few of those listings myself, due to my obsession with the car, and I thought about it the last time I added an entry... I will create the new article and move them over in the next couple days unless someone has a better idea... Adolphus79 07:25, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
Done... see List of Mitsubishi GTO appearances in media... Adolphus79 21:24, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] links

The Stealth 3000gt and GTO are all three diffrent versions of the same car basicly diff body styles. Please put the links back i just edited there names they where on there for couple years now. 3si is resurce for owners of these cars stealth316 has many links and resources for these cars, as well as team3s. If not here where else. please stop messing up this artical i love my car i do own one. there is no non personal pages that help out resources for this page and for car owners aswell and people that want to work on these rare hard to find cars. Thecar is known as mitsubishi 3000gt/stealth in america and the mitsubishi gto body style was sold everywhere else besides north america. Basicly the mitsubishi gto should be like it is now link to 3000gt/stealth wich shows details on gto aswell. --Jay173 17:18, 10 May 2007 (UTC)


I tried to trace through the history and find where/why the links were modified and was unable to do so. Could the person that did it explain why the technical resource links were removed?

Would a link to the 3S Wiki be acceptable?

--Alan92rttt 19:10, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

We use the {{dmoz}} template now to replace all external links and avoid spam build up, as per WP:NOT#LINK and WP:EL. It was added to the page to replace the various individual links on May 9, 2007. The 3Si.org site is already linked to via this. If you think a link should be added which isn't covered there, you should submit it to the Open Directory Project and they can assess whether it's good enough. --DeLarge 09:32, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dodge Stealth vs Mitsubishi

Although the Dodge and Mitsubishi versions were fairly different in terms of styling, over time they became closer alike, eventually becoming almost identical (more so that when they were originally introduced). Jon the dodgeboy 07:04, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

They are the same body in front only the doors and spoiler where diffrent and fact it said stealth instead of 3000gt they never where diffrent in anyway I have put my 91 up close to alot of diffrent years during 3000gt/stealth gatherings the stealth had extra back window trim styling and 3000gt just had it ferrari style doors while stealth r/t tt had its one indent I have yet to see ecs, tunible exaust, active aero specs for this car listed as part of the artical. 15:34, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

I've added a split suggestion tag to the article. It is misleading for the introduction paragraph to suggest that the Mitsubishi GTO was sold as the Dodge Stealth in North America. After all, the Mitsubishi 3000 GT was also sold in North America. Yes, the two share the same platform, but that does not mean they have to share an article. A separate Stealth article will help avoid confusion and indicate better the differences it has from the Mitsubishi model. --Vossanova o< 17:24, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

You mean reversing the merge discussed at the top of this page, and implemented late last year?[2] And also discussed at Talk:Mitsubishi 3000GT? *Bonks head on table*
How is the lead paragraph "misleading"? Manufactured in Japan by Mitsubishi, and sold in the United States as a 3000GT, and "also" as a Dodge Stealth captive import. Quite commonplace in Mitsubishi's history; see Dodge Conquest/Chrysler Conquest/Plymouth Conquest --> Mitsubishi Starion, or Mitsubishi Expo/Eagle Vista Wagon/Dodge Colt Wagon/Plymouth Colt Wagon --> Mitsubishi Chariot for similar examples. For the reverse, see the Mitsubishi Precis, also sold as the Hyundai Excel. Same market, one manufacturer, two different cars. And the Mitsubishi redirects to the "original".
There is a precedence for not merging, in examples like the Mitsubishi Sapporo/Dodge Challenger, but that's because the latter name spans several generations of vehicles which had nothing to do with Mitsubishi; those two pages are like a venn diagram where the two circles barely overlap. Contrast that with the GTO/3000GT/Stealth. Three circles which almost entirely overlap each other. If there were any generations of Dodge Stealths not built in Japan the two pages would never have been merged, but there isn't. There's only minor variations on a single Japanese original.
Also, what "confusion" are you referring to? Over the two talk pages I see a lot more people admitting they're the same car than saying they're different. I'd say that there'd be more confusion splitting the pages, because readers might wonder why we're spreading one car article over two different pages. Some people claim that "there's differences" (Here. Here. Here. Here). But I've yet to hear what those differences are. Can't be the engine. Can't be the drivetrain. Can't be the chassis. So... the headlights? The rear spoiler? A couple of characters in the VIN codes? --DeLarge 19:16, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

I think that the Stealh and 3000GT/GTO should infact be split into seperate pages. Grouping these together would be like putting all of the 1980's GM G-Body (Regal, Monte Carlo, Cutlass, Grand Prix) styles all on one page. There is not much different other than appearance in those cars either. They may be built on the same platform, but they are seperate cars. The earlier Stealths especially looked very different from the 3000GT at the time. I have included a photo of each car to display the difference between the 2 makes so you can see how they differ. You can also view more photos as well as scans of photos from both cars from the cars owner's manuals here

1991 Dodge Stealth
91 3000 GT.jpg

1991 3000GT/GTO

--DJKotel 22:30, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

I think the Stealth should be split into another page. Even though the Stealth was just a rebadged GTO/3000GT, the Toyota Soarer and Lexus SC get different pages. OfficerPhil 23:57, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
The Soarer and the SC overlap but there was a generation of the Soarer not sold as a Lexus and they could probably be merged in anycase. As the 3000GT and the Stealth are pure badge engineering sold at the same time I don't feel a separate page is needed unless the article becomes unwieldy in trying to describe the differences. --Daniel J. Leivick 00:00, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
The thing is, the Stealth wasn't just a rebadged 3000GT - the exterior design was very different. Also, the production timespan of the Stealth was shorter than that of the GTO. Not to get into a precedence debate, but there are plenty of "badge engineered" models with their own pages (the Mitsubishi Eclipse, Plymouth Laser, and Eagle Talon, for example), so if splitting those is okay, why wouldn't splitting this be? --Vossanova o< 19:11, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
The situation with the 3000GT/Stealth is the same as with the Eclipse/Talon, however the Eclipse and Talon articles are split. The Stealth is a different car in its own right and deserves to be seperated from the GTO article, much like the latter example. Despite being mechanically identical, it does not share the same history that the GTO does. The difference in features/lifespan/cosmetics is worth mentioning, so splitting the article and mentioning that Stealth=GTO mechanically in the first sentence would be appropriate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.222.158.132 (talk) 16:44, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
If you ask me we should be merging the Eclipse/Talon/Laser pages as well, although God knows there'll be plenty of fanboys keen to revert. They should be treated as a single entity, since that's what they are. As for the G-Body argument, those cars shared a platform, a common occurrence in the auto industry. Not the same as badge engineering, which is what the GTO/3000GT/Stealth is. --DeLarge 11:57, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for bringing this up about the Eclipse/Talon/Laser pages, now done the job, can't wait to have a party with the fanboys. Willirennen 21:03, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

It happens to be the same car with a diffrent spoiler and doors and made in the same plant, the stealth is clsoer to the 3000gt/GTO than the diffrences of Eclipse/Talon/Laser wich had some major diffrences but underneith the same. http://www.ypass.net/3s/

[edit] Horsepower discrepancy

In the trim level listings for the last generation, the VR-4's power is listed as 221kW (320 PS), which is not a valid conversion. I'm not sure which of the listed powers, if either, is valid. Scott Paeth 10:13, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Maybe a copy/paste error from a while back, since 221kW equates to 300hp (see previous entries). --DeLarge 11:57, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Completely Different

These are 2 completely different cars. Some split it up please! FogDevil 19:53, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Completely different how? I keep asking, and no-one's replied. Same engines, same transmissions, same platform, built on the same production line. What're the differences, FogDevil? --DeLarge 20:14, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
DeLarge is correct, they are the same (badge-engineered), i strongly oppose splitting the article..., i suggest expanding the article by incorporating dodge stealth...---MitsuFreak 21:38, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
Just look at the picture above and these.

Hmm... FogDevil 21:05, 26 September 2007 (UTC) --

-- ""Im tired of this i own a dodge stealth and all clubs i belong to are for 3000gt and stealth owners they are exact same car with diffrent look major diffrences are spoiler and doors and the stealth body style is more in common with mitsubishi gto altho trims for a gto match the 3000gt. Do what you guys want you messed up a perfect artical. these cars arnt dsm but they are closer related than a dsm platform vehical such as the ecplise, talon, laser was wich actuly had some major diffrences"" --Jay173 11:20, 11 November 2007 (UTC) --

Alan92rttt 18:22, 9 October 2007 (UTC) If you search the wiki you can find many many examples of vehicles which share a common manufacturing platform but are allowed to have separate entries(Chevy Camaro, Pontiac Trans am), (Dodge Stratus (and its twins, the Chrysler Cirrus and Plymouth Breeze)(Geo Metro, Suzuki Cultus) (Geo Tracker,SuSubscript textzuki Escudo)(Mitsubishi Lancer,Dodge Colt)(shall I keep looking?) These pages are separate and even link to each other. I have searched and was not able to find another case where cars from different companies had their pages merged into one just because they were manufacturered on the same assembly line. A case can be made that the GTO and the 3000GT should share a page. The Dodge Stealth should be seperate. Any attempt to merge the other platforms am would be met would enough resistannce to stop it. These entries should be split as each vehicle has enough unique history to deserve their own entry.

The Dodge Colt was based on two different Mitsubishis during its history, so cannot be accurately merged with either Mitsubishi Galant or Mitsubishi Lancer. If you want another example where "twins" are merged into a single article, see Hyundai Excel/Mitsubishi Precis, Daewoo Kalos/Chevrolet Aveo/Pontiac Wave, Mitsubishi eK/Nissan Otti, Lexus GS/Toyota Aristo, etc etc etc. Also, see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS; we don't use the existing untidy state of the various articles across WP as justification for making things worse.
Second, and I keep saying this over and over with no response, what "unique history"? Remember that this is an encyclopedia, and despite what you see in most car pages, we're not here to simply regurgitate every piece of trivia you can find on fan sites elsewhere. Ironically, the most "notable" fact in the article (its non-role at the 1991 Indy 500, cited in the NY Times) is demonstration that the two cars are inextricably linked: the Stealth was denied pace car duties because the UAW saw it for what it was: a Japanese-built piece of badge engineering.
And let me say this. If some fanboy wants to create a Dodge Stealth page which isn't a redirect to Mitsubishi GTO like it should be, I'm not going to stop him. Like (Mitsubishi-owning) User:Alan92rttt has pointed out, there's already plenty of crap on WP scattered to the four winds already; I'm not going to fight a battle to consolidate it. However, I will continue to maintain this page as it should be, i.e. a summarization of the Mitsubishi GTO and other vehicles it was badged as. There will be no removal of information just because it pertains to the Dodge Stealth. As a result, there'll be enormous amounts of duplicated info, and that will undoubtedly lead to future merge proposals since there's no need of two pages when one will do. --DeLarge 08:38, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Seeing that the two main opponents to splitting the article appear to be fans of Mitsubishi (see User:DeLarge/Mitsubishi, and User:Mitsufreak is self-explanatory), arguing against them for a split will be futile. I suggest you be bold and perform the split. --Vossanova o< 14:38, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

@look gto, 3000gt, stealth same car under diffrent look@

[edit] Reverts of 14 November

I undid the latest additions because...

  • As can be seen at Category:Dodge vehicles, the Dodge Stealth redirect is already categorized correctly, specifically to avoid the necessity of categorizing this page.
  • The Dodge Avenger was not a successor to the GTO. Aside from the fact that the two were for a time available simultaneously, there's the small matter of their target markets. The MSRP of an Avenger ES was $17,191 in 1995, while the Stealth range was $23,236 to $37,905; a 35% difference between a top-of-the line Avenger and a base model Stealth. Regards, --DeLarge 10:16, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Revision, 10th feb 2008

I added stealth316 to externel links because people can find any websites relating to the 3000gt and stealth on it under technical and garage sections. Yes I have owned a stealth for more than a year and hang out with 3000gt stealth owners. This should help enthuisist needing help with there older cars finding parts and repairing it there self.

sighned stealthguy

Revision, 10th feb 2008

[edit] AWS?

I don't see the AWS feature of the first generation (91-93) of the Stealth being mentioned. Stealths never had Active Aero, but they did have All Wheel Steering, a feature I enjoy and would love to know more about. Why isn't it mentioned anywhere? WereTiger (talk) 19:51, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Final production year

The infobox has "1990-2001" for production years, and yet, the last section states "Production for the Japanese domestic market finally ceased in 2000". So which is it, 2000 or 2001? Remember, this is final production year, not the final year in which new models were sold. --Vossanova o< 20:28, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Production ceased during the 2000 financial year, which ended on 31 March 2001. The final sales were in the 2001 financial year, which ended on 31 March 2002.
As for the infobox, I'd question your interpretation of what the dates represent. How do we know that production of the car didn't begin sometime in 1989? The start date is based on first sales, so for consistency, so should the finish date. See Mitsubishi i for a parallel. It's listed as being from "2006–present", quite rightly since it was released on January 24, 2006. However, in order to have enough models ready for sale, production actually began at the factory in December 2005. In that particular case I know all the dates and can cite references to support them, so all the information is present in the article. In the case of the GTO/3000GT it's more difficult, so all we can do is provide the best available info. Regards, --DeLarge (talk) 08:02, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
The dates represent production. It says "Production" next to the dates, right? Also, the first sentence states "The Mitsubishi GTO is a sports grand tourer built by Japanese automaker Mitsubishi Motors between 1990 and 2001", so that too contradicts the line "Production for the Japanese domestic market finally ceased in 2000", since, in my mind, "built" = production. Now, depending on whether we're going with model years or calendar years, it should start when production started. So if we're going with calendar years and production started in 1989, then yes, 1989 is good. --Vossanova o< 20:49, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
OK, so which is it? Using reliable sources, I can only say it might have been 1989 that production began, and it might have been 1990, while production ceased in 2000 or 2001 (depending on how late into the 2000 fiscal year they were still building them). --DeLarge (talk) 19:35, 14 May 2008 (UTC)