Lancer 2017

>>16634936
>Is it as bad as people say?
No, but it's no better than the 2008 model. It's quite literally the same vehicle as it was almost a decade ago.

It's plain. Fuel mileage isn't great but the 4B11 paired with the 5spd manual is a bulletproof combo. The CVT auto will make you suicidal. The interior is plain and lacks infotainment; not a bad thing if you feel like customizing it yourself and hate the huge iScreens in modern cars.

As stated earlier, you can pick up a used 2008 model and get the exact same vehicle as what you're looking at new.

In japan we somehow called this garant fortis

>>16634994
no kidding, that's so.. random?

>>16634950
this, look at the reviews of an 08 and 17. Everything is the same. I think the 17 has apple play/andoid auto.... that's it

>>16635044
What I found attractive for me is the Sound Package it comes with. I was thinking of getting the 2017 Corolla but has no sound package...(subs, tweets, etc..) If i aftermarket sounds, the warranty is void... :/

>>16634936
Why not buy a 3k civic?

For the same price you could buy a 400hp Pontiac GTO and customize the audio however you please.

buy evo, that is a real lanca ya funk

>>16635528
Because he's not a poorfag.

>>16635538
This is also a good alternative if you want cheap, reliable performance instead of something that just "looks" sporty.

It's not that it bad it's just that it's the same fucking car as it was 10 years ago and the industry has since moved on

Enjoy your crank walk bro.

>>16637536
>wanting to buy a shitty new econobox that hasn't changed in 10 years
>not a poorfag
Pick one.

>>16637975
>"I... I'm not a poorfag I'm just rational."

If he's in the position to blow money on a "new" commuter he's not a poorfag. An idiot, perhaps, but a not salty $3k Civic tier povo cunt who has a fit when he hears about parents giving their kids new cars.

>>16637942
crank walk?

Funny thing is there's a good chance of getting a 2008 civic for $4k these days and it would be newer than a 2017 lancer

>>16635117
The rockford fosgate sound system is fucking amazing I have to tell you. It will not leave you hanging.

The 2008-2016 model has the same sound system as the new 2017 model. If you get a 2008-2016 model, get a vrx/gts (the one with the 2.4l engine, the 2l feels much more sluggish). The 2.4 is still sluggish but it's not bad for a daily.

Treat it well and it will be light on fuel. It is pretty comfortable, but don't expect a race car, or even a car that is fun to drive.

The cvt is great for city traffic and highway, but again it is just awful if you want performance.

>>16640239
OP here.
The Rockford Fosgate sound system is what's pulling me toward the Lancer so far. I will take your word for that.

Just some thoughts; I'm not a person who drives a car because it's fun... I would mostly use it to get to places. (And not a person who would go lengths to show off a car, etc..)

I do like the somewhat dated exterior of the Lancer; it reminds me of the 2000s, it's like... a "classic" feel of some sort.

I have to decide in the next few days.

It's either the Lancer or the Corolla...

>>16640254
I haven't driven a corolla so I can't vouch for them.

The lancer is a solid car. It holds its value well and is a reliable car. If you aren't bothered about performance it is a great car.

I've had my 2010 lancer vrx for around 2 years now and it has served me well. Make sure to test drive one though, most people don't like the cvt but personally myself I do like it.

>>16640254
>buying a car for the stereo

>>16640326
elaborate pls

>>16640333
Buying the car you are for a stereo system is very stupid because Lancers have a lot of road noise and little sound deadening. Compact cars in general do not have good stereos because road noise.

What you want is a 6 cylinder Camry or Lexus ES because they have quieter cabins than most vehicles, and if you want something less boring get a V6 accord. Car speakers themselves aren't too hard to upgrade yourself and aren't expensive, a pair of good car speakers is like $60. Installing an amp and sub is a different thing, but higher trim Camry and accord have subs built in.

>>16634936
Just buy a Civic or Mazda 3 and not make yourself suffer.

>>16640446
>>16640502
hmmm,looking into the mazda 3

It's a decent car if you can get it for cheap. There's always discounts and rebates on every Mitsubishi so look into that. Try and haggle on price too.

File: f3a.png (299KB, 600x594px) Image search: [Google]

299KB, 600x594px

OP, I am in your same ocean of consideration.

I like Lancers. I love the "dated" look of Lancers like you said. It's a nice look. I'd also use it to get places. Sadly, like many have said, compare the interior of an 09 to a 17. Nearly the exact same except for differences in the infotainment system.

There was a 2015 Lancer going for $12.5k with 30k miles, but it looks like that got scooped up. Nothing else around here with low-ish miles.

The thing I worry about is this: Mitsubishi isn't doing too hot, and the Lancer is no more after this year. However, Mitsu has an incredible 10 year 100000 mile warranty that is seriously enticing.

Personally though, as an anon also looking for a Lancer (GTS btw), I wouldn't buy new. Dont like depreciation. Also not much of a fan of their higher trims (exterior-wise). I like 09-15. Or maybe I would buy new if I could get a good deal. I dunno. Anyways, do 2017 Lancers even offer a "GTS" trim? All I'm seeing is this SE/SEL AWC.

Let us know what you do. And other anons thanks for pitching in too.

I was also seriously considering a Mazda3 as I hear they are excellent cars, and really, their 2015+ ones look phenomenal both in and out. But as my first "big" purchase, I'm probably going to aim for a Lancer while they're still around.

>>16640629
>subishi isn't doing too hot, and the Lancer is no more after this year. However, Mitsu has an incredible 10 year 100000 mile warranty that is seriously enticing.
>Personally though, as an anon also looking for a Lancer (GTS btw), I wouldn't buy new. Dont like depreciation

im so conflicted right now..

I own a 2016 Lancer Es Sport, so this thread is right up my alley.
The fundamental thing about lancers in the modern age, is that they're stuck in a time capsule. They haven't changed - except for aesthetics. Is this a bad thing? Not necessarily.

Lancers are RENOWNED for their reliability. Considering the car has had the same engine for the last 10 years, virtually all the kinks have been worked out, and the thing is bullet proof.

Fuel economy? Nothing special. Not terrible, not amazing. Just average.

Interior quality. People love to bitch about the lancer's interior quality, and I will admit, it's certainly not luxurious, but what do you expect for such a cheap car?

I absolutely love the way the lancer looks. It's just a seriously sexy car.

It handles amazing. Such a light car, it just glides around corners. The steering feels phenomenal. I have the huge spoiler on the back that comes factory as well, so lots of downforce to give you even more of an edge.

Overall, I'd honestly recommend a lancer to anyone. Incredible reliability. Very fun to drive.

The only thing I would caution you on is the CVT. I hear that they feel very uninspiring and lack power. I personally have the five speed manual transmission, so it's not something I have to worry about.

Good luck OP, hope I helped!

>>16640446
Can also second the ES and Accord, daily drive both and they're great

>>16634936
Why the fuck would you buy a brand new 10 year old car?

>>16640554
Just get a clean 01-05 civic on craigslist. Surely you were going to put down at least 3k... There's no point in paying a premium for such an old car.

>>16640205
Don't listen to him, that meme died in the 90's

>>16640554
I own a 2016 hatch 3
>Good overall car with the 6 speed
>Sucks ass in snow
>Had decent Bluetooth with S4 but the Pixel is autistic and won't talk to it
>No CD player
>260 miles for a tank, but I'm an aggressive teenager, and it's cold as all hell and I want it to heat up
>2.0 engine does its job in the right gear, weak down low and up high

Bumping for interest

>>16640254
Lancer over the corrola. Thats an easy choice

>>16634950

What's wrong with the CVT auto?

>>16641615
noisy, unreliable, kills fun, a sign of being cucked by the government.

>>16640757
great feedback

File: IwbAUX9h.jpg (143KB, 1024x681px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 1024x681px

Just bought 06 lancer for 1500

>>16640809
I also have one with the 6 speed and 2.0 but not the hatch. I wish I had the 2.5 engine because a little more torque would be nice, although I like everything else about the car

>>16641615
from my experiences driving them on fleet they are horrible. You go to accelerate hard say to merge onto the highway, it thinks... it them begins to rev high.

There is that typical mitsubishi 2.0 farty engine noise filling the cabin, but slow acceleration. sure its smooth but it makes the car feel fat, boring and horrible.

Basically imagine riding a 50cc scooter, that is how it felt. The manual was much better.

>>16642648
Did you do the wheels yourself?

>>16641615
>>16643539

Can it be adjusted at all to improve it?

>>16645124
The CVT in the lancers is probably the worst CVT of any vehicle

They have so many issues, they overheat if you drive the car hard, they require more maintenance, and people have had them just flat out die at 30k miles.

Seriously, there is no reason to buy this car, just stop it, you are making a horrible decision

>>16645124
No. Just get the manual if you're looking at a Lancer. It's quite literally the only redeeming feature for the target audience of wannabe-speedbois who can't afford an Evo but still want to row through gears on the daily commute.

>>16645159

IDK man, all of the info in this thread points to an otherwise solid if mediocre choice. I like the styling, don't care about noise insulation, like the fact that the engine is reliable etc, etc. Trouble is I definitely want an auto, so to hear that the tranny is shit is, well, shit.

How far back does it go? Are there any fairly recent models that have a different auto?

>>16645189
Well then fucking buy it and deal with having the worst compact car on the market with the worst resale value with the worst transmission of any vehicle, just have $5000 set aside to compensate for your preference on looks.

>>16645189
>How far back does it go?
INVECS-III has been in use since 2000. You're shit out of luck, mate.

>Trouble is I definitely want an auto, so to hear that the tranny is shit is
All CVT automatics are shit. If you're set on an automatic you'll have to look at one of the two models with a DCT automatic; the Ralliart or Evo X MR. It's infinitely superior to CVT or torque converter automatics but also very expensive. If it grenades you're fucked. Also it's a total waste to have the DCT if you don't know how to shift in the first place.

>>16645200
How mad are you?

File: 1418588464460.jpg (29KB, 320x340px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 320x340px

>>16645189
>this post

Other anon who is still considering buying a used Lancer here. Man, I feel you on that one OP. after reading earlier replies i was like "yep, def getting a Lancer now", but fuck me man. im going back and forth, back and forth on decision making.

File: Rally_Innovations_MOD2012_Evolution_Sportback_Front_zps81eaebb2.jpg (128KB, 1024x682px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 1024x682px

>>16645260
I'll make it easy for you niggers.

>2017 Lancer is the same as 2007 Lancer
>interior sucks, but you can fix that yourself
>CVT a shit, if you want an automatic look elsewhere
>5MT is indestructible
>4B11/2 is thirsty but pretty reliable
>don't buy riced examples, if you want an Evo lookalike rice it out yourself
>the hatchback is cool too
>don't buy from ethnics

>>16644703
Plastidip

>>16645305
Not a bad job at all, though I reckon the Mitsubishi emblems would look cool in red.

This is the most normie fucking thread I've ever seen

>>16645330
Ya was thinking I'll get around to that.
Really want to get a spoiler but should save the money.
The vortex generator is a must

>>16640333
You are basing the decision on what car to buy (or god forbid, finance) on what the stereo in it is like.

That's like ordering a two or three hundred dollar meal at a high end restaurant because you liked the napkins.

How good a factory stereo is literally doesn't matter, because if it's shit you can just replace it with some decent speakers and a head unit.

Lancers are shit desu, Mitsubishi has gone down the drain and I can't see them getting any better any time soon.

Get a Corolla or Mazda 3.

>>16640757
I am this anon ^
Seeing you're still having trouble, let me make it easy for you.
>Manual. Buy the lancer. 10/10 choice.
>I insist on getting an auto. Don't go for the lancer then. CVT is shit.
Honestly though, why do you refuse to opt for the standard transmission..