I actually had to think pretty hard about Monday’s Autopian Asks question. The early-mid 2000s were just a great time for cars in general. My favorite, though, was the Mazdaspeed Protege, the winged and turbocharged version of my humble white DX sedan. That’s one car I’d have to seriously consider if the right one came up for sale for the right price. There were a lot of other really good sporty sedans for sale back then, and it’s strange to think that that entire genre of cars has all but disappeared in the last 20 years. So today, we’re going to look at a couple of them.
Our focus yesterday was on vans, and I was surprised by the result. I thought for sure you all would see a Toyota and a Volkswagen, and dismiss the Volkswagen out of hand. But as it turns out, the VW Eurovan won, and not by a small margin. The Toyota’s homebuilt nature didn’t do it any favors, I don’t think; we’ve all known that one guy who built his own camper van, and most of us didn’t want to ride in it, let alone buy it.
The Volkswagen is an easy choice for me. It’s in much better cosmetic shape, even with the faded paint, and I like starting out with a stock vehicle. Plus it’s half the price. I do wish it had a five-speed manual, though; VW automatics aren’t known for their robustness.
Compact sport sedans were all the rage in the 2000s, but far too many of them ended up with dumb modifications due to the influence of Those Damn Movies. Loud exhausts, short-throw shifters, and lowered suspensions found their way onto way too many cars. Luckily, however, all that stuff just bolts on, so if you have access to the stock parts, or replacements thereof, you can put them back to factory spec with a weekend or two of work. Both of today’s cars have been lowered, and at least one of them has a loud exhaust, but they’re both manuals, and they both started out as pretty nice cars to drive. With a little love, they probably could be again. Let’s check them out.
2003 Mitsubishi Lancer O-Z Rally – $4,800
Engine/drivetrain: 2.0-liter OHC inline 4, five-speed manual, FWD
Location: Grants Pass, OR
Odometer reading: 189,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well, but aftermarket suspension is “shot”
Car names are funny things. The Mitsubishi Lancer nameplate goes all the way back to 1973 in Japan, but we didn’t get it here in the US until 2002. That doesn’t mean we didn’t get the cars, though. The car known in Japan as the Lancer was sold here as the Dodge Colt, or later as the Mitsubishi Mirage sedan. Meanwhile, Dodge sold its own car called the Lancer twice, once from 1955-1962, and then again from 1985-1989. When we did finally get the Mitsubishi Lancer under its own name, we got a few fun versions of it, including at long last the mighty AWD turbocharged Lancer Evolution. But what if you couldn’t afford one of those? Mitsubishi had you covered: witness the O-Z Rally edition. It’s just a regular Lancer under all the ground effects and spoilers, but that’s not entirely a bad thing.
The Lancer is powered by a 4G94 four-cylinder engine, displacing 2.0 liters and making 120 horsepower, about in line with other small sedans of the time. This one has a five-speed manual, and the seller says it runs great. It does, however, need some suspension work. It has what the seller describes as “cheap eBay coilovers” on it, and that they’re “shot.” From everything I’ve heard about those cheap shocks and struts from eBay, I’m not surprised. The seller says they plan to replace them with a “race suspension kit” before the car is sold, but I wonder if you couldn’t convince them to knock off a few bucks and just order some nice stock replacement struts from RockAuto instead.
The interior looks decent, and it’s more or less stock, but I’ve never understood those cylindrical shift knobs. How is that more comfortable than a nice normal round knob? How are you supposed to hold it? I’d replace it with a ball immediately, I think. And I own a shop vac, so the rest of the interior issues could be remedied pretty quickly as well.
It’s hard to tell, since the seller apparently took the photos from the next town over, but I think the exterior is in good shape. Those aren’t the original O-Z wheels the car came with and was named after, though, and a closeup photo in the ad shows some curb rash on the rims. And the low-profile tires can’t be doing the ride any favors. I bet with stock suspension components and wheels (if you can find them), this car would be a lot more pleasant.
2006 Mazda 6s Liftback – $4,500
Engine/drivetrain: 3.0-liter DOHC V6, five-speed manual, FWD
Location: Gresham, OR
Odometer reading: 145,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well
Mazda was on a roll in the 2000s. The NB Miata and BJ Protege were excellent, the RX-8 carried on the tradition of fragile, high-strung rotary sports coupes, and the humdrum 626 was finally put out to pasture and replaced by this car, the Mazda 6. These were the cars used in the “Mazda Rev It Up” autocross events in 2003, and thousands of enthusiasts, including me, had a ball tossing them around a bunch of orange cones. Zoom-zoom, indeed.
Like the Rev It Up cars, this is the sporty 6s model, with a 240-horsepower Ford Duratec 3.0-liter V6. Unlike the Rev It Up cars, however, this one has a five-speed manual. I’ve never driven a 6 with this drivetrain combination, but the four-cylinder with a manual is excellent, and the V6 has plenty of power, so I’m sure this one is a hoot to drive. The seller doesn’t say anything about the suspension, but it has obviously been lowered. How much of a problem that is depends on how it rides, I suppose. They do say it has an aftermarket exhaust, which is “not obnoxiously loud,” but obnoxious is in the eye – I mean, ear – of the beholder. Personally, I think I’d go back to a stock exhaust just on principle.
It looks pretty good inside, but again, it needs a vacuuming. I’ll never understand why someone chooses to try to sell a car with crud all over the floor. The only thing wrong with the interior, according to the seller, is a droopy headliner, which could be fixed if it ends up being annoying.
The 6 came in three body styles: a regular four-door sedan, a wagon, and this five-door liftback, similar to the old 626 Touring Sedan. It doesn’t have any more cargo room than the sedan, really, but it’s easier to get stuff in and out of. It also has a rear wiper, which is a nice bonus. It looks like it’s in good shape outside, and since it’s a Pacific Northwest car, it should have escaped the Mazda rust curse.
I still maintain that we didn’t know how good we had it with cars twenty years ago, and we probably won’t ever have it that good again. These cars are modern enough to be reliable, but still analog and mechanical. They just feel better. And if you don’t believe me, go drive one, and then go back to your modern car. You’ll probably think the prices of these are a little steep, and I agree, but they aren’t making any more of them. And as more of us get fed up with the numb feel and software-related bullshit in new cars, good older cars are going to be in higher demand. These both have some bullshit of their own that needs to be undone, but they’re both fundamentally good cars. Which one is worth a little tinkering?
Here’s a story for you that involves both of these cars.
When I had to replace my totaled Pontiac in 2005, I first looked at one of those Lancers with my dad. Liked it, although I had problems with getting smooth shifts from the clutch. Sales guy was super pushy too so we left. Went next door to Honda to look at an Accord but they didn’t have a manual version. Civic did nothing for me.
Driving home, I pointed out the Mazda dealer and we pulled in. On their showroom they had a gray Mazda6 with the 3.0 and a manual. Drove it, loved it, couldn’t afford it. Sales guy then showed me a Mazda3 with a manual and the bigger 2.3 liter engine. Liked it even more surprisingly as it felt more nimble and agile. Worked an okay-ish deal out as they had three literally lined up outside being purchased that day. Put a deposit on a Titanium Gray one they had.
Came back two weeks (dealer held it the entire time) and spend 11 wonderful years in that car modifying it and beating the ever loving crap out of it without an issue.
Still wish I had gotten the 6 so that’s what I voted for.
I’ll go Mazda. I’ve recently become a liftback convert/evangelist so it’s clearly the best choice. A manual seals the deal.
In reality, though, I’d pick neither. I don’t want to have to deal with repairing or removing obviously crappy mods – I’ve seen that movie and a lot of weekends died by the end.
Yeah, definitely do not want the can’t afford an Evo but still going to act like it is an Evo. Couldn’t afford a real Evo, couldn’t afford real coilovers, who knows where else corners were cut here. There’s nothing wrong with buying a cheaper version of a car, they just aren’t leftovers I want 20 years later. Gimme the Mazda.
I had two friends who had this gen of the Mazda 6, one of which we drove from Austin to Lake Charles and back for a Saturday casino trip. I did a fair share of driving and it was great car for the trip, and just generally a pretty underrated car. Normally I’m leery of transverse V6’s, but I’ll make an exception in this case.
I just can’t decide… ok the Mitsu.
I have no interest in a Lancer that is not a Evolution model,they are just standard boring cars. The Mazda is probably not all that interesting either,but at least it has better power and is also likely a better car to drive.
If you are going to have a wing like that on your car, you best have the ponies under the hood to back it up.
In Texas they call that all hat, no cattle.
Mazda all day.
Mark, I like you and your writing, but this is Eternal Boomer Mindset….”Cars peaked with the ’57 Chevy”, “Can’t have that new-fangled fuel injection” etc. just pushed forward in time a bit.
Fine to have preferences of course, but man alive this is depressing to read. I’ve owned and daily driven cars from the early ’90s to the ’20s, and the best ones have all been made more recently than either of these.
I love cars, I’ve loved cars for almost 40 years, and a big reason I do is excitement at what’s coming next and what manufacturers are going to do to improve the already great stuff they sell right now. The minute I stop looking forward and only look back is the moment I lose something as an enthusiast.
Mazda is my vote of this pair.
I get your point,but twenty years ago the ’57 Chevy was still a classic. I think I will agree with Mark here,that cars in the rear end of the 2000’s were sort of a sweet-spot.
Yeah, certainly appreciating something nice is fine, and I think there are gems in every era, but I disagree vehemently with the idea that cars as a whole “peaked” in the ’50s, the ’60s, the ’90s, the ’00s, or any time in the past.
You had me at “Mazda6 Liftback”
Oh man, I really wish that Mazda6 wasn’t a V6 🙁
So I had to vote for the Lancer.
The 6 hatch was available with a 4-cylinder, but unfortunately, the wagon only came with the V6.
The Mazda is not only faster, it’s a nicer place to be, and doesn’t have the Evo pretensions of the Lancer. I once had a co-worker who told people he had an Evo, when he had one of these instead, an automatic one at that.
I’d fix the suspension and exhaust, clean the interior and give the paint a good scrub and ceramic coating, add some modern HiFi, and put something fun on the headliner. I’m thinking a nice paisley print.
I’d fix the suspension and exhaust, clean the interior and give the paint a good scrub and ceramic coating, add some modern HiFi, and put something fun on the headliner. I’m thinking a nice paisley print.
I like the cut of your jib.
Mazda all day. My father had one of these brand new back then, just the slightly fancier one with leather. Biggest complaint I had is the slight lag in the drive by wire throttle that could sometimes make gear changes less smooth. You could remove 1 of the resonators or a flap, can’t fully remember, from the intake and it didn’t really effect the cruising noise, but really made the car sound more sporty under throttle.
“Not obnoxiously loud” = “not obnoxiously loud to me,” which means “very obnoxiously loud to anyone else.” So I’d fix that forthwith.
And I’d put the ride height back where it belongs, because it’s a four-door sedan. V6 and stick notwithstanding, this isn’t an autocrosser. You want to get over the speedbumps without expensive noises. These up-front costs notwithstanding, Mazda. If only for the fact that I already have unhappy experience with the 4G64 engine and don’t want any more, Mazda.
That, and the Mitsu’s not-original suspension is “shot?” How hard did they flog it that a suspension with less miles than the chassis is already toast? And how expensive will it be to discover that other, less easily replaced things are also toast? Hard pass. Mazda it is!
That’s such a a great observation! It’s seemingly become an axiom in the automotive world that if someone feels the need to preemptively defend something they’ve done to their ride, it’s nearly always a guaranteed problem.
Neither. If they have screwed up the suspension and put on a fart can who know what else needs to be fixed. I’m not going to pay a premium to then spend thousands fixing the car.
(Note that the car in Gresham, OR car has Washington plates – likely because it can’t pass Oregon emission testing)
Also analog and mechanical isn’t better.
I had an ’08 EVO X. That car was an absolute hoot to drive…when it wasn’t actively trying to kill me with the way the turbo kicked in. The OZ editions were a body kit without any real go-fast goodies. I’ll take the Mazda today. It’s more honest.
2 sorta sporty enthusiast cars and neither have under hood shots (shakes fist at clouds.)
Picking the Mazda for the clean and simple dash/cockpit. I agree it was a great time for cars. Sitting in and driving my son’s 2000 Audi TT is a joy.
the Duratec V6 kind of scared me, but it looks like they did not bury the water pump inside the timing system. Though it should have the VVT and AFM of that era, so still kind of a toss up. I would probably still do the Mazda with a manual and a V6 though.
I wanted to vote Lancer, but jeeze, not the original OZ Rally wheels?! That’s pretty much what made the entire package a thing back then. This is a car that was influenced by a car that was influenced by a rally car. Mazda’s much more authentic.
I’m actually going Lancer. I know the 6 is “more stock,” but the Lancer seems more thoroughly done and it’s cleaner inside. I might not even raise it, just stick higher quality coilovers on it, tear off the “arrest me” tint, and put a ball shifter on it. Those cylinder knobs are inspired by the sequential shifters in rally and touring cars, and I don’t like them for h-pattern.
But, otherwise, leave it the way it is. It’s not something I want to daily, and that’s not why I’m buying it. This is a hangout car for the Cars&Coffee to me. I know everyone else will be practical, but cars are irrational and I might as well vote with my heart when it speaks.
I still secretly want a yellow Lancer with the OZ Rally package. Don’t tell anyone
I’m with you. A regular Lancer can still be a fun little sedan for everyday driving, and as time goes by, the random stripe and spoiler packages that manufacturers would offer become more and more charming in my book.
Looks like the Mazda is the safe bet today. I mean if it’s just something like Eibach springs it isn’t a big deal at all. A cat back is an easy thing to replace if you need to.
And that shift knob in the OZ I will say works well if you prefer to grab from the side, versus the top. Depends on the height of the shift lever.