joelbay86

My dream car for now =)

tauren

Any reason why?

shin-kyo

which yr's model? old model? current model? or the 2008 model?

lol.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

ComicDLegacy

Yeah I am looking to get 93 lancer GLXi too ~ Not sure whether thats the one.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
- The Comics Hunting, Selling & Rental Service Provider.

antisocial

that's an old car... how's come it's your dream car? :handsup:

GeneKoh

The new Lancer Ralliart looks good... Reasonable price, Evo-look, plus good power...

shin-kyo

ya. it look nice. seen quite afew on the road. actually, other than the engine capacity and the bhp different, do u think is wise to spend almost another 20k just to get that 2 different?

Normal Lancer: 1584cc and 106BHP
Lancer Ralliart: 1833cc and 165BHP

i find that, u can actually dress up the normal lancer to look like the ralliart and will cost u less then 10k, u will still have another 10k to pump ur petrol, pay ur season parking, road tax, insurance and maintainance. the road tax and insurance will be cheaper if u get the normal lancer. i believe normal lancer will have a better FC compare to Lancer Ralliart.

but again, is still up to ur choice. if u really like the Lancer Ralliart alot and u are willing to fork out the extra amount, u can go ahead. but make sure u have done ur calculation and dont suffer urself by eating grass every month.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

AverageJoe81

Lancer quite a nice car. One of the most cheapest Japanese cars in the market. There are also quite alot of aftermarket parts for tuning. But one thing to take note of is Lancer share the same engine with Proton Waja. Proton have been using Mitsubishi engines all along except their Proton Gen 2, which is their own production.

I recommend buying manual transmission is a better choice than auto because manual provides better pickup, better FC & it is also more reliable. Auto gearbox have no standard wear & tear part to replace. Manual gearbox still can change clutch disc & clutch bearing. Auto gearbox have to overhaul the whole gearbox. Comparing Japanese cars, Honda & Mitsubishi auto gearbox more famous for shorter lifespan. Auto gearbox also cannot tahan high revs. PM me if you need more advice.

shin-kyo

i agreed manual have better pick up, cause u can rev more than auto. but there's a button which prevent u to rev too high, if u turn off that, u can rev very high also. but still have to depend wat car u driving.

ya is true that auto doesnt have much wear and tear part to replace. but now in sg market, there's more and more auto car on the road. even a Subaru WRX will be having a septronic version soon. so wont be long enough i believe the market will have more wear and tear parts for auto.

i dont agree that u saying manual gear have better FC than auto. if u were to go check around, auto car can maintain 100km between 1900rpm to 2100rpm where by manual is between 2300rpm to 2500rpm. so u are saying the higher the rpm the more petrol saving u got?

i know is abit off topic. but my current ride is septronic and i always use auto mode to drive, i can keep 100km at 1900rpm to 2100rpm and it give me 15-16km/l. and when i change to manual gear, it will be 100km at 2500rpm, and give me 10-12km/l.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

AverageJoe81

The button which you mentioned is the overdrive button. During cruising, if you switch it on, your car will run on the last gear. The last gear is named as the overdrive gear. but if you switch it off the car will step down to it's 2nd last gear, the direct drive gear. This button is used for overtaking purpose if you feel that the gearchange response is not fast enough when you kick down the pedal.

Manual car have better FC because the flywheel of a manual gearbox is lighter than the torque convertor of a auto gearbox. Except for newer cars like the 1.8L Honda Civic have a lighter torque convertor. FC is also based on the engine rpm. Running the engine at 1900rpm compared to 2100rpm makes a difference.If you're basing on a crusing speed of 100km/hr, the difference in the rpm lies in the gearbox ratio. Try comparing a manual and auto car, same make & model, running at the same rpm then you will know what I mean.

A steptronic car is still considered as auto transmission because it runs on a torque convertor, not clutch & flywheel. Regardless it's in manual or auto mode. Except for Volkswagen's DSG gearbox, which runs on electronic actuated twin clutches.

Auto gearbox do not have wear & tear part(at the moment)If you go to auto transmission workshops, they won't change the clutch for you. Because there's no clutch to change. Only the components in valve body can be changed. The gearbox still have to be overhauled.

Hopes this clarifies your doubts..:biggrin4: I'm a export sales assistant in exporting automotive spare parts.

shin-kyo

cool. thanks for the info. but this also prove that not all auto are bad in FC wat.

anyway, currently the most petrol saving is the honda civic hybrid 1.3cc?
and wats the current FC for honda fit now?

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

AverageJoe81

Most Hybrid cars are very good in FC because of the Hybrid engine design. Except the Civic Hybrid is over publicised. There are also Hybrids like Lexus RX400 & Toyota Prius worth mentioning.

The FC for Honda fit(1.5L) should be around 15 to 16km/L. Most Japanese makes now have improved on their torque convertor designs so the FC should'nt be so horrible. But Mitsubishi Lancer is still based on the old design. I have frens complaining that the auto Lancer FC quite bad. Full Tank go 410 to 420km only. But I also dun know their driving habits. Maybe they always loot the accelerator.

But one thing to take note of is that the FC also depends the power to weight ratio. Comparing the Civic sedan for example , though supposingly 1.6L consume less fuel than the 1.8L, but because the 1.6L engine not enough power to move the car, you will have to step harder on the accelerator to move the car. This results in higher FC.(Mazda 3 is also 1 example) The 1.8L i-VTEC is also designed to lower fuel consumption. i-VTEC is similar to combining VVTi & VTEC into one. Toyota have a similar technology called VVTi-L.But so far I only see it in Celica SS2. The engine can rev up to 8000rpm like VTEC.

:biggrin4:

shin-kyo

seriously, buying the RX400 is kind of crazy. i think u are throwing ur money in the road tax and insurance more.
i remember around 2 yrs back, im seeing alot of places saying that the FC for honda fit is doing 20km/l. Mazda is quite famous in petrol sucking. but afterall still depend how the driver is going to step the accelerator.

btw, got any info for the new toyota vios?

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

AverageJoe81

No news from Toyota developing any new engines leh. I think this is another facelift model only.