Hey guys I am looking at a 1996 Eagle Talon esi 4cyl with 193 000kms I dont know too much about these cars so can anybody give me some insight on these things. How is the 4 cyl motor??? what are some major problems these cars have???
DSM = horrible reliability, even if it's not a turbo. Expect something new to need replacing once every couple weeks if you're lucky.
hmmmmmmmm the reviews on them seem to be pretty good.
Well all the engine is is a DOHC Neon motor. With that high of mileage I would be concerned about the head gasket and the timing belt. Other then that I am not too familiar with the non-turbo DSMs.
Ive always noticed that with those cars, expect to pay a few thousand in maintenence in the next year or so if you do buy it.
the engine is a 420a i think, thats a ok engine if there maintaned.
my friend hasa sebring with is almost the same car and he has the 420a with almost 200k and runs great
Ty (Loves teh roras) wrote:the engine is a 420a i think, thats a ok engine if there maintaned.
my friend hasa sebring with is almost the same car and he has the 420a with almost 200k and runs great
Yup you are correct it is a 420a which is actually the more reliable motor.. The other N/A one they used was the 1.8 SOHC in the 1st gens.. Then halfway through they changed it to the N/A 4g63.
Had to change sig because some dickhead is mad it went 1 letter over size
Even though the 4-cyl is slower than the turbo, they're a huge amount of fun. My friend was going to buy a Tsi (205hp), but an Asian woman drove into it and it was totalled the day before he was supposed to get it. And it was parked, too.
I was happy when I heard my car ran 10s. Then I found out that was 0-60.
SpcmnSpff302 (The Link Master) wrote:DSM = horrible reliability, even if it's not a turbo. Expect something new to need replacing once every couple weeks if you're lucky.
hey look another dumb ass opening his mouth and not knowing a damn thing.
this isnt a dsm. this is a talon with a neon motor, its reliable but slow.
Kyle Kurtz wrote:SpcmnSpff302 (The Link Master) wrote:DSM = horrible reliability, even if it's not a turbo. Expect something new to need replacing once every couple weeks if you're lucky.
hey look another dumb ass opening his mouth and not knowing a damn thing.
this isnt a dsm. this is a talon with a neon motor, its reliable but slow.
LOL... Pretty much.
420A = decent engine.
2nd Gen 4G63 = possible crank walk = the poo = swap a 1st Gen engine = no more crank walk.
Crank walk isn't the only thing that makes DSM's unreliable. I'm talking just the above-average rate of normal things that go wrong. Sensors, fuel system, ignition system, computer, etc. I've never had a friend own any form of DSM that didn't suck repair money faster than I thought was possible.
the 420a is a decent motor my buddy has a 95 avenger with this motor 5speed and it has over 250,000kms with no major problems yet. when he bought the car it needed a head gasket and a timing belt, thats the two major things that were wrong with that car... it drove nice, honestly it was the easiest 5spd car i've ever driven.. the way the car shifted was so smooth, he had the damn stock shifter cut almost short enough that the knob was inside the boot...
and the ESi is a DSM car, even my buddies avenger has the DSM plaque under the hood. not only turbo car were DSM n/a 3000gt's and stealths were DSM's too...
if you do pick up the car or want to do more research on the car vist 2gnt.com lots of good info there plus forums with lots of friendly members.
-----------
ayo 8 Iz Enuff
They fell under the colaboration between Chrysler and Mitsubishi. Diamond Star Motors died around 95 I believe though. I may be mistaken, but I think I read this somewhere back when I had my 93 DSM.
SpcmnSpff302 (The Link Master) wrote:Crank walk isn't the only thing that makes DSM's unreliable. I'm talking just the above-average rate of normal things that go wrong. Sensors, fuel system, ignition system, computer, etc. I've never had a friend own any form of DSM that didn't suck repair money faster than I thought was possible.
I'm sorry you feel that way, it sucks your friends had those experiences. Listen, I've been around Mitsubishis since I was old enough to pick up a wrench. Most of my family owns a Mitsubishi of one type or another, be it Eclipses or Galants or Monteros. It happens when your aunt runs the local dealership. I myself have been working on 4G63s for the last few years. Four of my closest friends have Galant VR4s (one owns two), another has an Eagle Talon, and one friend just came home from being stationed in Japan and while he was there he drove an EVO III, and the biggest issues we see are the result of blatant abuse. Broken axles, fried clutches, blown head gaskets, but that's expected when you try to push 400+ HP out of those cars. Admittedly, the 4G63 has issues, the 2nd Gen has more because of the crank problems that nobody can explain. It's well known the 4G63 is a maintanance hungry slut, I'll give you that. But most of the problems I've seen are due to either neglecting to do routine maintanance, lack of knowledge of how to properly maintain the engine, or again, abuse. Sure there are quirks. The timing belts get weak after about 80-100K miles and if it breaks you're screwed. The fuel system again shows signs of problems with high miles, so does the ignition. But that's ANY car, not just Mitsu's. The ECU thing I'm guessing you're referring to the capacitor leaks, and yeah we've seen that too, but I have no clue what causes it.
Alright, I will easily admit that many of the problems come from lack of care and abuse. But the problem is, most of these cars weren't cared for and were overly abused, so buying one when you don't know how it was taken care of is a risk that most people (that I know) end up regretting.
Given a fair shot, I'm sure they have average reliability. The fact of the matter is, most of them haven't been given their fair shot, and a realistic view is that they tend to suffer from reliability issues more than other comparable cars.
SpcmnSpff302 (The Link Master) wrote:Crank walk isn't the only thing that makes DSM's unreliable. I'm talking just the above-average rate of normal things that go wrong. Sensors, fuel system, ignition system, computer, etc. I've never had a friend own any form of DSM that didn't suck repair money faster than I thought was possible.
no no no no no and no.
dsms have a bad name due to dumbkids throwing power to stock fuel systems and messing there cars up. dumb kids driving them like dumbasses and breaking them. they arnt the most reliable car in the world by any means. but if taken care of they will last you years.
once again the esi is not a dsm, for two reasons. IT HAS A DODGE MOTOR> NOTHING MAKES THIS CAR ANYTHING LIKE THE TURBO MODELS BESIDEDS THE BODY. everything is changed.
the second reason the partnership was disbanned in 1994 (maybe 93, dont remember for sure) they just used left over motors and threw them in the 2g cars. you see the logo because the avenger is based on the same platform as the talons and eclipses. just because it has a badge doesnt make it that.
Not having a 4G63 doesn't disqualify it from being a DSM. DSMs were a colaboration between Daimler Chrysler (Dodge and Plymouth) and Mitsubishi. Body styling, engine, suspension, interior, etc. were all things shared between the companies. The Dodge Stratus and 3rd Gen Eclipse never had 4G63 engines, but guess what, they're still DSMs even if the hardcore 1st Gen lovers won't admit it. The V6 used in those models was the 6G72, which is a Mitsubishi engine. The 420A was used in the base Eclipse, certain Neon models, Stratus, Avenger, etc. The 1st and 2nd Gen Eclipse, Talon and Lasers are all DSMs whether they had the 4G63 or the 420A.
ln2johnny wrote:Not having a 4G63 doesn't disqualify it from being a DSM. DSMs were a colaboration between Daimler Chrysler (Dodge and Plymouth) and Mitsubishi. Body styling, engine, suspension, interior, etc. were all things shared between the companies. The Dodge Stratus and 3rd Gen Eclipse never had 4G63 engines, but guess what, they're still DSMs even if the hardcore 1st Gen lovers won't admit it. The V6 used in those models was the 6G72, which is a Mitsubishi engine. The 420A was used in the base Eclipse, certain Neon models, Stratus, Avenger, etc. The 1st and 2nd Gen Eclipse, Talon and Lasers are all DSMs whether they had the 4G63 or the 420A.
dude you are so wrong about this its not even funny. NO 2gs were tecnically considered dsms because the partnnership was disbanned after the 1gs's they used left over motors for the 2g's so yes you can say they are dsms but really if you want to get technical they are not. and 3g's are in no way shape or form dsms' ive never even heard that before and ive been listening to dumb ass dsm miths for a few years now. that is so wrong its not even funny. why dont you google dsm or something, thats insane that you even think that.
Why don't you go die or something? Nobody cares about your "DSM fanboi pride".
Kyle Kurtz wrote:ln2johnny wrote:Not having a 4G63 doesn't disqualify it from being a DSM. DSMs were a colaboration between Daimler Chrysler (Dodge and Plymouth) and Mitsubishi. Body styling, engine, suspension, interior, etc. were all things shared between the companies. The Dodge Stratus and 3rd Gen Eclipse never had 4G63 engines, but guess what, they're still DSMs even if the hardcore 1st Gen lovers won't admit it. The V6 used in those models was the 6G72, which is a Mitsubishi engine. The 420A was used in the base Eclipse, certain Neon models, Stratus, Avenger, etc. The 1st and 2nd Gen Eclipse, Talon and Lasers are all DSMs whether they had the 4G63 or the 420A.
dude you are so wrong about this its not even funny. NO 2gs were tecnically considered dsms because the partnnership was disbanned after the 1gs's they used left over motors for the 2g's so yes you can say they are dsms but really if you want to get technical they are not. and 3g's are in no way shape or form dsms' ive never even heard that before and ive been listening to dumb ass dsm miths for a few years now. that is so wrong its not even funny. why dont you google dsm or something, thats insane that you even think that.
OMFG Are you seriously that fukking anal? "Dude, you're so wrong, dude why dont you google, dude, my pussy hurts... " Dude, DSM stands for Diamond Star Motors. "Diamond" for Mitsubishi, "Star" for Plymouth (and Dodge, and Eagle, and Chrysler). The DSMs were a joint effort between the two companies. Eclipse, Talon, Laser. Starion and Conquest. Avenger, 2G Eclipse. Stratus, 3rd Gen Eclipse. Stealth, 3KGT. Dodge chassis, Mitsubishi engines. Hell, the new Mitsubishi truck? It's a fricken Dakota. The SRT4's engine? Same engine used by Mitsubishi, and even Hyundai. It's reality, like it or not.
As much as it pains me to say this kyle is right.
a 3g is not a dsm in any way shape or form. Show me a chysler 3g and I'll eat my shoe. For any body that gives a @!#$.............
Quote:
Are 2Gs (second generation, 1995+ cars) really DSMs?
2G cars are considered DSMs because they are direct descendants of the original DSM cars. Although they were technically not built by Diamond Star Motors, their connection to the original line is unmistakable, as they share the name, trim levels and original intention of the 1G cars.
Also, some early 95 cars have DSM labeling on them, leading many to believe that all 2Gs were built by Diamond Star Motors. This is not the case, as Diamond Star Motors officially ceased to exist in mid-1993, when Chrysler sold off all of its Mitsubishi holdings, technically making the 1994 cars the last of the DSMs. This type of hair-splitting is not important for Club purposes, however, and the Club has decided that 2Gers have as much right to be included as earlier owners.
The Galant VR-4 is something of an oddity in the club, but the VR-4 shares many important components with the 1G cars, including the unusual AWD drivetrain. It can be argued that the Galant VR-4 is the "parent" of all DSMs: the original concept for the DSM in North America was a four-door. Also the VR-4 platform was originally concieved to be Mitsubishi's entry into the rally racing circuit before DSM existed.
A similar situation exists with the 2G Spyder convertible, but it's connection with the other 2G cars is unmistakable. Thus the Spyder and VR4 are included in the scope of the Talon Digest.
Other pseudo-related cars, such as the non-USA Lancer and Mirage, are not included in the Digest.
Are 3Gs (third generation, 1995+ cars) really DSMs?
The relationship between the 1G, 2G and 3G cars can be summarized as follows:
* 3Gs were not built by Diamond Star Motors, which was dissolved in 1993,
* they do not have the same engine lineup as the 1990-1999 cars,
* they do not have the same transmission lineup as the 1990-1999 cars,
* they share few parts with the 1990-1999 cars,
* they share few upgrade parts or upgrade paths with the 1990-1999 cars.
Are Sebrings and Avengers DSMs?
Aside from the fact that Sebring and Avenger cars are built in the same MMMA plant as the 2G cars, there is nothing to connect them to the DSM name. They do not share heritage, appearance, upgrade paths or many parts with DSMs. For this reason, these two models are not considered DSMs, and discussion regarding these cars is not part of the Talon Digest or most UBB systems concentrating on DSMs.
Having said that, the Avenger enthusiasts are quick to point out that the Avenger/Sebring platform and the second-generation non-turbo DSM platform do share some similarities. They have similar interiors, bodies, and suspension, and several of the non-turbo upgrades for the NT DSMs work on the A/S cars, since some A/S cars have the same 420A Chrysler motor. Also, some A/S cars have a 2.5L NT similar to the 3.0L NT found in third-generation Eclipses. (Information provided by Tomas Ely.) It could be argued that the A/S cars are cousins to the DSMs - not the same, but similar.
does they say dsm's were over in 1993??? hmm i didnt know that. wierd huh????
DSM was a seperate company (no unions either) and was dissolved in 1994. They did not use "left over" 4G63Ts for the 2G DSMs, they continued to build by purchasing engines. The 2Gs were built by Mitsubishi of America and sold through both Mitsu and Chryco dealers. They are the same platform with the same powertrain and therefore are considered DSMs. The 3G is a new car, not a DSM at all.
Simply having parts from both companies does not make it a a DSM. It needs the design element which was completed for the 2G before 1994, but not marketed until 1995. Anything designed after that is not a DSM. If it wasn't built at the plant in Normal IL then it's not a DSM either. The Steath and 3000GT are NOT DSMs as they were built in Japan by Mitsu.
The Avenger is a Chrysler design, but was built in Normal, so that one is debateable but most DSM owners would deny it's membership. The 3G Eclipse (no Talon notice) is the Sebring with different plastic glued on, Not a DSM.
The parts thing has been around for a long long time, but that isn't enough to call something a DSM. Heck Chryco had been using Mitsu engine long before they formed DSM, and I'm sure other companies do the same.
In the 1G DSMs bothe the 1.8l and the 2.0 (4G63) NA engines were available for the non-turbo cars. There was not a mid gen change, they were both available the whole time. After DSM dissolved, the only non-turbo was the 420A. A desent, reliable engine from Chryco. Unfortunately it doesn't have the potential of the 4G63, but it is still a good engine. It was not used in the Neon, but was in the Avenger.
Hope that clears up some stuff.
PAX
