legacycentral bbs

more of a comparison. whats the pros and cons of each car? im looking into both vehicles but im goin to get the subaru anyways but i just would like to know some things about each car.

VR-4 > Sport Sedan in stock form.

It's got more power, better suspension, and DOHC.

But parts are scarce, it's not as well balanced, and it's known about even less than the SS.

Go-fast bits for the VR-4 are all very similar to any other 4G63 powered car.

I wish I had a VR-4.

That's pretty handy!

Dayum, talk about apples and apples. I didnt realize they had 4 wheel steering though. Thatsa kinda cool.

VR4's are cool, but like all DSM's arent the most reliable vehicles in the world. Plus Mitsubishi insists on using its retarded FWD based transfer case AWD.

4-wheel steering hurts more than it helps at speed, since the wheels turn in the same direction at speeds above 30 or something.

And it's heavy.

I thought that's why it helps. Turning the rear wheels slightly in the same direction in effect gives the car a longer wheelbase, making it more stable at higher speeds. Also, the VR-4 system is probably lighter than honda's since it uses little hydraulic actuators instead of a mechanical linkage with the front wheels. I assume it uses the p/s pump to operate.

On a related note, my dad's truck has quadrasteer. It's awesome. On the highway if you adjust the side mirror right you can actually see the wheels turning slightly. The truck's already really long, but I hear it's amazing when towing, at any speed. At slow speeds, the wheels turn the opposite direction. The VR-4 turns the rears like 1.5 degrees, right? Quadrasteer will turn them up to 12. It makes parking unbelivably easy for a truck that's longer than a suburban.

wow. what about modding wise? which car would be easier to mod? which is easier to find parts? i just dont like mitsubishi to much because of the reliability issues ive been hearing about them. but subaru i hear good things and i like em.

Ive got an issue of GRM that has a big feature on the Galant VR-4. heres some facts:
2000 units imported in 1991
1000 in 1992
base price: $24,000
195hp
~3300lbs
nice leather interior
The 4G63 will be easier/cheaper to mod, see a site about DSM's for more info
the 4WS is problematic and unstable under load, many owners disable it by welding the tow control links, or installing eclipse rear suspension
price range is $1500 for a POS to $7000 for a creampuff
I'd say head to head its a toss-up, they both have their strengths and weaknesses. Its just a lot easier to find a SS.

So, it looks like they share the same HP rating as the 1st gen DSMs. The thing I like about the VR-4 is the leather seats. It may sound dumb, but god I hate non-leather seats so much. As for the weight it only looks like they are 100-200lbs more then a SS. Personally, I'd much rather have the SS. Not only do they flow better and not have such a boxy look, but they have Subarus AWD system.

jamal wrote:I thought that's why it helps. Turning the rear wheels slightly in the same direction in effect gives the car a longer wheelbase, making it more stable at higher speeds. Also, the VR-4 system is probably lighter than honda's since it uses little hydraulic actuators instead of a mechanical linkage with the front wheels. I assume it uses the p/s pump to operate.

Which is why it hurts. Sure, good for changing lanes at 157mph, but high speed sweepers? I don't know about you, but I'd like my car NOT to crab-walk before entering a turn.

It might be lighter than Honda's 4ws, but it's heavier than Subaru's 2ws.

There's a reason sports cars don't have such unsophisticated 4ws anymore.

They have a cast iron block too I think, so they can take more abuse than the aluminum block our cars have. I raced one a while back with a 16G and pulled on him fairly good before i got my intercooler in, he had a 16G also. He did blow some black smoke out the back when he stepped on it though so i have doubts to the cars condition even tho it looked nice on the outside

I'm not so sure they can take more abuse because of the cast iron. We have stronger bottom ends; shorter crank, completely encapsulated mains (stronger than even a main bearing girdle).

Steve

evolutionmovement wrote:I'm not so sure they can take more abuse because of the cast iron. We have stronger bottom ends; shorter crank, completely encapsulated mains (stronger than even a main bearing girdle).

Steve

I agree, but iron isn't going to expand under heat. Then again, it doesn't cool as fast. Then again...aww hell

i think the legacy has a more intiutive layout for the interior.

but the galant has nicer interior materials.

subaru has the hill holder. thats really nice.

the subaru is WAY easier to work on than the galant.

you can use so much impreza stuff on the legacy it isnt even funny. as everyone says subarus=lego.

Iron is still going to expand under heat. It may have a lower thermal expansion coefficient than aluminum but it will still change noticably over several hundred degrees. There are also different casting methods and alloys to consider. I don't know if it's just a plain gray gast iron or another. Either way I think the boxer engine design in itself just lends it to being stronger. If my engine is still going strong after having crank pulley problems and a slightly off-center pulley for as long as it has, that's saying something about the bottom end.
I also have to agree that I don't want to be crab walking starting into a turn at any speed. Unless it's a big vehicle I personally don't see much merit in four wheel steering other than just an excercise in engineering the mechanics of it. Having previously owned a Dodge Colt Vista (mitsu and dodge got together, mitsu engine and drive train), it wasn't near as easy to work on as my Legacy. Just my two cents.

Greg - The SS doesn't have the Hill Holder. No hydraulicly actuated Subaru Tranny has the hill-holder. I wish we did

I think it's funny that we all say Subaru's are easy to work on. They are easy, because we know them well. Ask most mechanics, and they will commonly agree that the cars are more difficult to work on than most other makes. Bitching about the spark plugs being hard to do or something.

Galant= eclipse. Same engine, chassis, and drivetrain. Having worked on eclipses a bit, i can tell you that the legacy is infinitely easier to work on. There is no space along the sides of the engine where all the guts are.

My understanding is that the iron block holds high stresses better, at the expense of a hotter operating temp.

Thermal expansion is different between block and head whan an alloy head is mated to a cast iron block making head gasket issues more likely.

Any mechanic who thinks Subarus are hard is either terrified by anything different (a sad life), not a real mechanic, or just dropped out of a time vortex from the fifties.

Steve

I dunno, it seems to impress the autotech teachers at my school that I can work on a Subaru's engine.

BAC5.2 wrote:Greg - The SS doesn't have the Hill Holder. No hydraulicly actuated Subaru Tranny has the hill-holder. I wish we did

New foresters do.

Really!? Do you know how they do it, and if it can be retrofitted

I want that in the SS! That would be killer.

I used to like the hill hold feature and living in the middle of mountains there aren't very many level places in town. However, it quit working a long time ago (I know it's just an adjustment that needs made) but now that I'm used to not having it again, it's kinda nice and I don't really miss it. Just gotta be quick with the feet.
And to contribute to the thread's actual content, my old mitsu engine had enough vacume lines to choke a horse, never did figure out half of them. Granted my engine was an 86' but aside from that I still think my suby engine is easier to work on.