14th Dec 2005, 13:51

I've owned two Legnums, I only got rid of the first one because I needed to tow a large boat which required a big 4WD. Have just bought a 99 VR4 Legnum and it's a great car. I don't know how you guys were driving your cars, but considering mine is 4WD and twin turbo, I'm still getting around 400-450km on a tank of gas doing city driving.

I have to go to Wellington over the Christmas break so I'll see how it goes on the highway. Never had a problem with power even with the non-turbo version. It definitely pays to shop around and get a good one though as I did test-drive another VR4 which was a dog.

I would never have even looked at the 1800 version because it's just too small an engine for a car of that size. But if you can find a Legnum in good condition then they really are fantastic cars.

10th Jan 2006, 00:47

Sounds like the writer bought a faulty example of this model. I own a 1997 Legnum 2.5 Wagon and think it's a great car, it handles well (4WD makes the difference in a large estate car) and is a really good family vehicle. The best thing about it is the smooth and powerful engine V6 engine although I find it quite thirsty, the person who's getting 400-450kms in the city is obviously a better driver than me!

11th Feb 2006, 16:21

I owned a GDI 1.8 Legnum for a year and a half, and found that it was fairly gutless. I could get about 600km out of 50 litres from it.

I now own a VR-4, and I get about 500km out of 50 litres, as well as I get a huge increase in performance.

The overall quality of both cars is really good, and I wouldn't hesitate to recommend another person to buy one, but the GDI ones do seem to have a variety of power and fuel consumption problems. You are best to buy a 2.5L V6 or VR-4, and stay away from the 1.8, 2.0, and 2.4 GDI models.

www.clubvr4.com is a great website for info on all the models in the range.

28th Jun 2006, 04:29

Bought a 1996 VR4 Legnum 3 years ago. Thought it was a bit thirsty from the start, but let's be real. Twin turbo, V6, 4WD, reasonable size - that's gonna work it a little.

What are the trade offs, airbags, car sticks to the road like glue, corners like a roller coaster, ie: won't let go there either, ABS, moves out like a rocket if you feel the need, otherwise cruises with the best of them, no dip in power for AC, leather interior, sequential shift is fun once you work it out and the wife secretly loves it. The only way it's gonna crash is if someone hits you or you drive like an idiot.

Got around 450-500km each time on a full tank between Hamilton and Wellington at highway speeds, so it prefers the long roads. It's had a few mods fitted prior to my purchasing - 3 inch exhaust, BOV, POD Filter, lowered, window tints, 16's... long story short, a lot of car for the money.

After reading and asking around, I'm guessing the thirstiness (performance car here remember) may be remedied with modifications to the air flow management. Interested to here opinions on this as I may look at a Hi-clone or something or other in the future to see if this helps with mileage...

1st Aug 2006, 11:59

Someone here mentioned that the dealer recommended using high octane gas with this car. Well, it is a very sound recommendation. The GDI engine is very fuzzy about octane ratings. If you run the GDI on fuel with anything less than 98RON with low sulphur levels, performance and fuel economy will both drop noticeably. As many here seem to have noticed.

Comparing it to the VR4 is pointless. The VR4 engine is a twin turbo multipoint injection engine, not direct injection like the GDI model.

The VR4 is recommended to run at 98RON, but will get by on lower ratings much better than a GDI. The VR4 will loose some power with lower octane ratings, but fuel economy will not take a comparable hit.

Of course, that the car can only handle high grade fuel well is a point in itself. But whether or not that point can be held against the car is for each to decide for themselves, no other GDI engine deals much better with this problem. I just wanted to make sure that the decision is based on the facts, rather than the lack of them.

18th Oct 2006, 17:23

Hi All.

I take it that the car is thirsty if you get a badly looked after one or if you have a heavy right foot!!

7th Nov 2006, 17:48

Hi Guys and dolls.

I have purchased a VR4 V6 24 VALVE Legnum and to be frank the car is a beast and I love it. The car is 10 years old and is an import from Japan. Yes it is thirsty, but it is not too bad if you drive sensibly.

It looks the part and is the quickest car that I have had and that has been a few. 28-30 mile to the gallon on a long run and around 18-20 city driving. Still a top car and recommend them.

Makki.

13th Nov 2006, 01:50

I have a 97 ST-R legnum, the 2.5 V6 with no turbo's. It's an awesome car. I just had it's transmission flushed with a Wyns trans-flusher. It made a huge difference in the performance of the transmission and makes gear changes smoother. The Mitsubishi service centre recommended it to be done every 80,000kms. Quite worthwhile if it saves you $4000 for a new one!

22nd Apr 2007, 21:39

Hi.

I've got a 99 2.4 GDI. Not bad off the mark, considering my previous car was a Skyline. Love the room & nice car to drive on long trips.

6th May 2007, 01:30

I own a 1997 Legnum ST-R 2.5V6. I fitted a K&N free-flow air filter which gave an instant improvement of 10% better fuel economy. I have had the same experience with fitting K&N filters in a 1.6L Mazda, a Nissan Primera SR20 engine, plus a Holden 5.7L V8. The vehicles improved around 10% in fuel consumption with 10% power gains as an added bonus. Consider that the filter can be cleaned and used over and over, it's a free mod over a period of time.