[Dave]

Originally Posted by Piro

AAAHHHH Wrong!!! Chrysler aproached Mitsu for help with their turbo 4's, remember their ugly omni, well? Back in the early 80's they needed a inexpencive engine and they got it from mitsu and fitted it to their platform,
from there came later the Colt/Champ models. 1.6L 4 in line that was a mitsu engine design but did not well in the US, the much bigger K cars Aries/Relliant did better, then came the Caravan/Voyager ther the same engines as the mitsus counterparts in japan but de-tuned for the US. The truth is Chrysler had been and will be sub-par with many manufacturers simply because of their targeted demografics. If you are going to buy a good car you don't look at Ford, GM, or much less Chrysler, you look at Toyota(Lexus), Nissan(Infinity),or Honda(Acura) at a higher end, Porche or BMW, and if you think that Mercedes is a Chrysler you must be tripping on mayor dope, the only thing that they are doing to Mercedez is killing the company!

BTW Mitsu not only builds cars, that is only a small branch, they are conglomerate, they range from semiconductors, Flat-panels, to Rocket engines, Ships, jet-airplanes, Constrution equipment and more!! Yes Chrysler is a very big corporation but it had more help from other companies that they care to admit and the only thing that saved the company here in the US was the minivan market. Back in the 70's they were doing so bad that they were selling their own cars to them self and storing them on a lot in Canada to make their numbers look better for the Chairholders, but they were in the red ink. but Iacocca came to the picture got a loan from the gov. and saved them!

ahh chrysler asked mitsubishi for help with turbo fours? that must be why the daytona and the cordia both debuted in 83' with turbochargers right? that must be why chrysler turbos came with a number of increasingly advanced multiport fuel injection setups while mitsu kept plodding along with throttle body injection on the 2.6 in their starion (an engine i might note that is known for its general weakness and difficulty to tune) other portions of your post were complete and total fiction as well, the omni frame has nothing to do with japan whatsoever. in fact it draws direct lineage from the french simca, early engines were volkswagon 1.7s which were quickly phased out when the 2.2s and 2.5s came out which btw have direct lineage to the slant sixes NOT the afformentioned weak and inneffectual 2.6. YES chrysler sold mitsubishi cars, if you go back and actually read my original post you'd see that, but that had a whole lot less to do with chrysler couldnt do it and a lot more to do with chrysler was trying to establish mitsu as a brand in the united states. and my technology comment? well, if you look past the glaringly divergent technology in 83 and up theres a few other interesting advancements that were made, such as the adoption of variable vane turbochargers in 89 (for those of you at home keeping score thats SEVENTEEN YEARS before porsche got around to doing it) there were also prototype cvt and awd systems in the works that never made production.