<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Hypermiling, Fuel Economy, and EcoModding News - EcoModder.com &#187; ES</title>
	<atom:link href="http://ecomodder.com/blog/tag/es/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://ecomodder.com/blog</link>
	<description>Wrench smart - driver smarter - save fuel</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 May 2012 17:00:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>2009 Mistubishi Galant ES (36.5 MPG)</title>
		<link>http://ecomodder.com/blog/2009-mistubishi-galant-es-365-mpg/</link>
		<comments>http://ecomodder.com/blog/2009-mistubishi-galant-es-365-mpg/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Jul 2008 21:05:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Rick Harrell</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[New Car Reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2009]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ES]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fuel economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gas mileage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mistubishi Galant]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Review]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ecomodder.com/blog/2008/07/13/2009-mistubishi-galant-es-365-mpg/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[+ Efficient for Size + Good Torque Response + Improved Exterior Styling - Bargain-Basement Interior and Defects - Expected Reliability - Sponge-Tastic Tires Introduction: I’ll admit it.  I have mixed feelings for Mitsubishi.  I once owned a 2003.5 Lancer Evolution VIII that was a blast to drive, yet was plagued with factory defects.  Most owners [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p><img src="http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com//pictures/VEHICLE/2009/Mitsubishi/2009.mitsubishi.galant.20212556-E.jpg" alt="Galant Front" width="500" height="315" /></p>
<p>+ Efficient for Size<br />
+ Good Torque Response<br />
+ Improved Exterior Styling</p>
<p>- Bargain-Basement Interior and Defects<br />
- Expected Reliability<br />
- Sponge-Tastic Tires</p>
<p><u>Introduction:</u> I’ll admit it.  I have mixed feelings for <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitsubishi_Motors" title="Mitsubishi Motors" rel="wikipedia" class="zem_slink">Mitsubishi</a>.  I once owned a 2003.5 <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitsubishi_Lancer_Evolution" title="Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution" rel="wikipedia" class="zem_slink">Lancer Evolution</a> VIII that was a blast to drive, yet was plagued with factory defects.  Most owners of that conveyance have since traded it for a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subaru_Impreza" title="Subaru Impreza" rel="wikipedia" class="zem_slink">Subaru Impreza</a> STI, or something else, before it catastrophically failed.</p>
<p>The Galant was the only 4-cylinder offering in which to choose from the lineup in Rental Row.  Among with the Impalas, SUVs, and Chrysler 300’s, the Galant offered the most promise in it’s small 2.4L “World” engine (that’s the same one shared with many Chrysler-based vehicles &#8212; such as the Sebring, Avenger, and high-trimmed Caliber.  The FE may just save this vehicle’s shortcomings.</p>
<p><u>On the Outside:</u> The front-end harkens images of the ill-fated Diamante, with the rear ¾ view taking after the youthful <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitsubishi_Lancer" title="Mitsubishi Lancer" rel="wikipedia" class="zem_slink">Lancer</a>.  I would classify it “awkwardly average” with an air of some class.</p>
<p><img src="http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com//pictures/VEHICLE/2009/Mitsubishi/2009.mitsubishi.galant.20212558-E.jpg" alt="Galant Front 3/4" width="500" height="315" /></p>
<p>Mitsubishi has had its fair share of trouble lately.  Before the Chrysler buy-out from Cerberus, Mitsubishi was left wondering were to go and was struggling to gain a foot-hold on the U.S. market while still sharing engines.  The Eclipse bloated-up, the Galant itself was slipping in simplicity, and the brand was viewed as a risk to buy.  Now, the Chrysler brand has broken free any new design sharing, but retains the venerable 2.4L, DOHC, 4-cylinder that powers much of its lineup.  The question: has Mitz redeemed itself lately?</p>
<p><img src="http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com//pictures/VEHICLE/2009/Mitsubishi/2009.mitsubishi.galant.20212567-E.jpg" alt="Galant Rear 3/4" width="500" height="315" /></p>
<p><u>On the Inside:</u> Ugh.  The interior is cut-and-pasted from the Endeavor SUV, which is at best, mediocre (or vice-versa).  The biggest complaint is the driver’s seat comfort.  Height adjustment is available in this trim via knob, but lumbar is fixed in the Hunchback Position.  The wheel/column only tilts and doesn’t telescope.  Even the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Cobalt" title="Chevrolet Cobalt" rel="wikipedia" class="zem_slink">Chevy Cobalt</a> offers a telescoping wheel.  Not good.  The HVAC and radio controls are cheaply lit, and hard to see in bright light.  Is the A/C on or not?</p>
<p><img src="http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com//pictures/VEHICLE/2009/Mitsubishi/2009.mitsubishi.galant.20212561-E.jpg" alt="Galant Interior" width="500" height="315" /></p>
<p>Reporting in all fairness, blind-spots were abundant and sound system was utterly awful.  The bass boost was in full-force.  A full adjustment to “-6” on that setting still announced the authority of the thump.  Conclusion: it’s uncomfortable in there.</p>
<p>Otherwise, expect faux-wood trim, a bit of extra room and some added safety features.</p>
<p><img src="http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com//pictures/VEHICLE/2009/Mitsubishi/2009.mitsubishi.galant.20212566-E.jpg" alt="Interior II" width="500" height="315" /></p>
<p><u>Safety:</u>Tire Pressure Monitoring, depowered drivers bag, side airbags, and ABS with EBD.</p>
<p><u>Efficiency:</u> This is the only reason why I bothered to report on this car.  Over 73.4 miles of Cincinnati hills and gridlock, the car only used a smidge under 2 gallons of fuel.  Let’s assume the previous renter filled-up a ways-out from the lot, and give it 73 miles at 2 gallons.  That’s [B]36.5 MPG[/B].  I could hardly believe it!  Honestly, I didn’t go easy on the go pedal at all.  On the highway (when it opened-up), I set the cruise for about 65-70 and went around town with the traffic (at their hefty pace and acceleration).  The only technique I used was to force an upshift from the slap-shift gear selector.  Otherwise, it was business as usual.</p>
<p><img src="http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com//pictures/VEHICLE/2009/Mitsubishi/2009.mitsubishi.galant.20212559-E.jpg" alt="Engine" width="500" height="315" /></p>
<p><u>The Drive:</u> Perhaps this is where the Galant makes up for it’s shortcomings.  Steering feedback is precise, torque is well-pronounced, and transmission feel is rather appropriate.  The ride is well-adjusted for the vehicle’s size, which promotes some driving confidence.  Where it starts to sponge out, is during corners with its marshmallow tire sidewall strength.  Save cash on manufacturing where you can, I suppose.</p>
<p><u>For the Energy Conscious:</u> This car competes with some pretty heavy-hitters in the FE lineup: Accord, Camry, Sonata, Malibu, Fusion.  Further testing would be required, but the only advantage I can see is: 1) Potential FE, and 2) being different (with choice #1 actually paying for itself).</p>
<p>As always, consider the size of vehicle you need. This car may fit the bill for folks looking for a new car with low financing and a gracious warranty.</p>
<p>For an efficient, mid-sized sedan, others are out there.</p>
<p><strong>Raw Data &#8212; Specs:</strong><br />
Model: 2009 <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitsubishi_Galant" title="Mitsubishi Galant" rel="wikipedia" class="zem_slink">Mitsubishi Galant</a><br />
Trim: ES (Base)<br />
Class Size: Mid-Sized Sedan<br />
Transmission: 4-speed automatic with lock-up torque converter<br />
Engine: 2.4L SOHC, 16-Valve, “MIVEC” Variable Valve Timing, I-4<br />
Rating: 160 hp at 5500 RPM and 155 ft-lbs. @ 4000 rpm<br />
Drivetrain: FWD<br />
Seating Capacity: 5 (very snug) at 2+3 or 4 more comfortably at 2+2<br />
RPM @ 60 MPH: 2400<br />
Price as Tested: $21,000 USD (June, 2008)<br />
Curb Weight: 3483 lbs.<br />
EPA: 20/27<br />
EPA Average Fuel Cost per Year: TBD<br />
Emissions: ULEV</p>
<p><strong><u>Raw Data &#8212; Stats:</u></strong><br />
EcoModder Tested Mileage: [B]36.5 MPG[/B]<br />
Speed Avg: ~40 MPH<br />
Time of Operation: ~1.0 hours<br />
Distance Driven: 73.4 Miles<br />
Ambient Outside Temp: 75-95F<br />
Cruise Speed: 65-70 MPH<br />
Test Loop: Metro Cincinnati,  OH<br />
A/C Usage: 100% of time<br />
Wind/Weather: Warm, Humid – Wind calm<br />
Driving Style: Average (including some rush hour jams)</p>
<p>Photos: <em><a href="http://www.edmunds.com" title="Edmunds">Edmunds.com</a></em></p>
<p style="margin-top: 10px; height: 15px" class="zemanta-pixie"><a href="http://reblog.zemanta.com/zemified/036b6782-0d62-43bf-8298-3f91e6ea1db0/" class="zemanta-pixie-a" title="Zemified by Zemanta"><img src="http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=036b6782-0d62-43bf-8298-3f91e6ea1db0" style="border: medium none ; float: right" class="zemanta-pixie-img" alt="Zemanta Pixie" /></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://ecomodder.com/blog/2009-mistubishi-galant-es-365-mpg/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

