Opinions on this FTO

[Kangz]

Originally posted by snavy
if you think they understeer like hell, obviously you havent driven one.

Steering is light and airy? you serious? the steering is on the heavy side.

Also for its class it isnt slow. In the GTP cup or whatever, it always come first in its class. Beating the integras, BMW and all the other cars in that class.

Driven one? Driven a few, my old man has owned a couple.

They are not a good thing.

Let's compare it to something that is similar, an ITR. Surely we all agree that they are nothing compared to an ITR...

Some people here are obviously owners and are getting their noses out of joint about this. The car did not inspire me at all. Of the few examples I have driven, one was adequate, but had a fair bit of money thrown at it in the way of suspension. For $20 odd or a bit less, they are just not worth the money.

[snavy]

totally agree, they dont handle as well as the ITG, but also its not setup as harsh as the ITG. But you cant say, they dont handle well, for its class, it handles extremly well.

[Captiva Fan]

Originally posted by Suzmot
Pretty sure they're all V6 forgie...

Can someone else confirm or deny?
I thought the quicker (and less common) one was the GPX with a variable valve-timing n/a version of the 2.0 V6 they used in the last Galant here, and the rest of them had a twin-cam 16v 4G63 with considerably less power?

[3gig4me]

You can get a pov-pack one with a 4 cyl engine, then a non Mivec v6 and the Mivec v6...

Mate had one with full veilside kit, lowered, 17s and HKS exhaust and it was ok. looked shit hot and pulled heaps of attention, then again, anything in Darwin pulls attention... was a tiptronic, on the g-tec it got a 16 flat... not that impressive, but with a manual tranny i would expect it to do a mid 15, his was a MIVEC.

[DoctorB]

Originally posted by Iruka
sometimes it is more fun to drive than a linear powered car than a turbo.

umm.....when ?? FTO isnt linear either with the MIVEC sytem.

[Iruka]

The Mivec system in the FTO is different with the VTECs.
It gives a very linear power delivery thruout the rev range.

But I mean, it is just fun sometimes to drive an N/A thru a corner, as the lack of torque (but not lack of high rev power) makes it very stable in terms of cornering grip.

[BALISTC]

Never buy an FTO GR, always make sure its a GPX...

The FTO GR is SOOOOO SLOW, I beat one in my girlfriends Hyundai

[Evo_Lee]

Oh another query on a female Supra. I think that's enough to explain, it ain't no screamer but should provide adequate excitement to for a daily drive. A lady friend had 5 years back when they were a little rare.

The FTO actually started production back in 1971 with a 4G32 SOHC 1.6L with 110ps. But we're mostly familiar with the 94 release ones.

Models in 94:
-1.8 GS (4G93 SOHC 125ps/16.5kgm)
-2.0 GR (6A12 DOHC24V V6 170ps/19kgm)
-2.0 GPX (6A12 MIVEC DOHC24V V6 200ps/20.4kgm)

From 96 a GP model was introduced with the 2.0 Mivec engine.
-2.0 GP (6A12 MIVEC DOHC24V V6 200ps/20.4kgm)

From 97 a GP Version R was introduced and the GR was given a little more power.
-2.0 GR (6A12 DOHC24V V6 180ps/19.5kgm).
-2.0 GP Version R (6A12 MIVEC DOHC24V V6 200ps/20.4kgm)

T

[DRIFTIN]

Originally posted by 3gig4me
You can get a pov-pack one with a 4 cyl engine, then a non Mivec v6 and the Mivec v6...

Mate had one with full veilside kit, lowered, 17s and HKS exhaust and it was ok. looked shit hot and pulled heaps of attention, then again, anything in Darwin pulls attention... was a tiptronic, on the g-tec it got a 16 flat... not that impressive, but with a manual tranny i would expect it to do a mid 15, his was a MIVEC.

You talking about Shane's? What sort of car does he drive now?

Adam

[DaiOni]

`in their day` they were more than equal (ie: better) than the equivalent integra/civic. Nowdays they are well behind the type-r in performance, handling and equipment level.

But, in their class, they are a gem. The fact that they are import-only raises their price tag, which is what makes them `not so great`. There ain`t much wrong with them if you remove price tag from the equation.

Of course, how you view them depends on what you compare them to. I`m not an owner, now or previously, but I can appreciate them for what they are (they fit into my scheme of categorisation as a small capacity NA fwd `sports` car). I certainly wouldn`t buy one - but I wouldn`t look at a type-r either.

The power delivery can be called linear, but only in comparison to a vtec. I think you could say, for lack of a better comparison, that the vtec `comes on` like a turbo, while this mivec system is closer to a supercharger. As far as torque levels go, they have around 200nm - which isn`t too bad for their size.

[Evo_Lee]

Projectmagna: I agree the Mitsubishi MIVEC has lost a bit of sting to the Vtecs. But in their time the Cyborg R and the FTO were the front runners.

T

[Chapman]

Come on, they aren't that bad. U can say they are very good car.
with 2L , it makes 200hp@flywheel, very impressive. Specially with the technology of 1994!
And i remeber, FTO has been name Japan Car of the year of...96?
The only problem is they are too expensive.

[BEV11S]

they do handle really well, my mate used to have one...until he put it into a wall

[Charlie]

I love the way the fto has to be defended by things like 'in it's class' and 'if you remove price from the equation'...
________
Washington Marijuana Dispensaries

[Kangz]

Wasn't MIVEC a copy of VTEC, leased from Honda by Mitsubishi?