American Motors Corporation followed a simple formula to make its Gremlin subcompact. First, take a popular compact. Second, cut off the rear end. Voilà, a subcompact, albeit one that wasn’t terribly space-efficient, economical or satisfying to drive. Who would’ve though that, years later, Mitsubishi would follow the same formula and end up with a much better result.
Mitsubishi has been shuffling names around for a while now. What North Americans knew as the Mirage from 1995-2003, Australians knew as the Lancer. Today, in both markets, there is a subcompact known as the Mirage. Its critical reception in North America has been chilly, with the new small Mitsubishi being chided for being tinny and cheap. It really is more of a microcar than a subcompact and it is very different in concept from the last car Australians knew as the Mirage.
It’s funny what a repositioning can do. The 1996 Lancer was never considered a class-leader – Which Car? magazine ranked it 6th out of 10 compacts in a 1998 megatest – but as soon as Mitsubishi chopped off the tail and priced it up against the Ford Festiva, it became a critical darling. This was much the same as how the 1996 Mitsubishi Magna/Verada (Diamante) was far better-received as a family sedan in Australia than it was as a near-luxury offering in North America.
Unlike America, where subcompact (B-Segment) sales take a dive every time fuel prices go down, this segment has long been consistently popular in Australia, particularly with first-time car buyers. And unsurprisingly in this price-conscious segment, bang for buyers’ bucks goes a long way: witness the extraordinary success of the 1995 Hyundai Excel (Accent), whose driveaway pricing and almost Corolla-rivalling dimensions catapulted it to the very top (and even briefly the #1 slot) of the sales charts. The Mirage charmed buyers by making them feel they had more car for their money than a Festiva or Starlet buyer and scarcely less car than a base Lancer which retailed for around $4k more.
The 1.5 single overhead cam four-cylinder engine (92 hp, 92 ft-lbs) had been criticised for being too weak for a base engine in a compact. In the Mirage, it became the most powerful engine in the segment. The interior, shared with the Lancer, was criticised for having materials merely adequate for the compact class. At the Mirage’s price point it was considered much more pleasing. The ride and handling balance was praised. Mitsubishi Motors Australia had been missing a B-segment car since the aged, Aussie-built Colt was retired in 1989. With the Mirage, Mitsubishi had found the formula for success in an intensely competitive segment. Sharp pricing helped seal the deal: the Mirage, most years, was priced at $13,990 driveaway, the same as a base model Hyundai Excel.
A mild 1998 facelift freshened the styling and after that, the Mirage stayed mostly put. It still continued to earn plaudits and, although it was generally outsold by a small handful of rivals, it remained a strong seller right until the end. In its final full year on sale, 2003, an impressive 6,661 Mirages were sold, making it the 5th best-selling car in its class and besting rivals from Ford, Holden and Mazda. This was even more commendable considering almost all of its rivals offered a much more practical five-door body style.
The Mirage would be replaced by the tall and boxy Colt, dusting off an old nameplate, but that car never achieved the critical acclaim or commercial success of the Mirage. It wasn’t a bad car but it was rather forgettable.
I have fond memories of the Mirage as one of my best friends, Betsy, bought one in 11th grade (2006). As I was yet to obtain my license, being several months younger than her, she often played the role of chauffeur for me and our friends. As testament to the car’s excellent reliability, Betsy still has her Mirage today and it has well over 200,000kms on the odometer. It never felt like a penalty box to passengers; despite a rather low seating position, the cabin was commendably spacious and even the back seat had acceptable legroom for someone of my height (5’11’’). The only major criticism levelled at the Mirage during its run was the level of road noise that permeated the cabin but I never found it to be too raucous.
The Mirage was a solid hit for Mitsubishi and provided a compelling blend of space, value, economy and driving dynamics. The Gremlin Formula proved to be a recipe for success.
Related Reading:
Automotive History: Trying To Make (Business Coupe) Sense Of The Gremlin
Over here this car was known as the Mitsubishi Colt. It was popular with young women when it was new, but since many of them have graduated to bigger vehicles it is now a popular car with the “boy racer” set, since you can drop an Evo engine in it and naturally it has a much better power-to-weight ratio than its Lancer big brother.
Mitsubishi has been doing this for years, basically every version of the Mirage since time immemorial has been a hatch version of the Lancer sedan. In New Zealand in the 80’s the Lancer was discontinued in favour of the Mirage with the sedan model called a Mirage Geneva, this carried on till about 1988/89 when the Lancer sedan came back as a pair to the Mirage hatch. The 84-88 Mirage wagon was renamed Lancer and carried on till the 1992 Lancer wagon arrived.
A “Gremlin without the gremlins”?
An AMC Gremlin was much more fun, at least in our case, and a whole lot better-looking.
A Gremlin not satisfying to drive?
It is when it’s packin’ a 401 under the hood!
You were able to shoehorn a Javelin/AMX engine in a Gremlin? Ouch. Something tells me your front to back weight distribution ratio must’ve been WAY off.
I’m even surprised at Bajan Dave’s post above that says boy racers down-under crammed a EVO engines into the Mirage. My wife has a 2009 Lancer. (The current one is pretty much the same car.) She saw a picture of Mirage and said, “How cute. I want one!” – then I pointed one out to her on the road. She chenged her mind real quick. They’re REALLY tiny. How could an EVO engine even fit?
The 304 was offered from the factory, and all of the second-gen AMC V8’s have essentially the same dimensions.
I did not know that… Thanks!
A buddy of mine had 74 Javelin with the 304 back in the day. I had no idea the 401 was the same size physically.
That might have made a Gremlin based AMX more believable to wear that nameplate.
Check this out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMC_Gremlin#Randall_401-XR apparently it was done, albeit on a VERY limited basis.
My car was a ,72 Gremlin X, originally equipped with a 304. The 401 was a straight bolt in. Further, it already had the larger radiator, brakes and axles. It was great fun, and pretty bulletproof.
A friend of mine had a V8 Vega, at the time which required a complete re-engineering of the car to get the same results.
The whole underhood area is the same size on this as on the Evo IV, V and VI. No problem.
EVO is only a tuned turbo Lancer/Mirage of course it fits its the same car.
One thing the AMC Gremlin? ●was● good at was stopping; I recall Popular Science testers noting it “broke all records” in braking distance.
With a stupid name like that, I’m surprised AMC sold as many as they did (thus refuting the thesis that Bad Names Don’t Sell). Recall the Twilight Zone episode about that, starring William Shatner (one of those stealth Canadian actors).
An interesting car, and it makes a lot of sense as you described it. Offering a subcompact by removing 20% of a compact? Brilliant! However, it loses its effectiveness the bigger you get. Offering a compact by removing 20% of a midsize? Err… It sort of worked for the Gremlin, though it wasn’t that great of a car. BMW saw the same thing when it chopped the tail and dumbed-down the rear suspension of the E36 to give us the 318ti…not a strong seller, at least in the USA anyway.
The Mirage was always seen as kind of a throwaway compact here (except for people who tried to turn them into Lancer Evo copies before we started getting the real thing). But some of them had to be solid…a former co-worker owned a late 90’s example, and while it had become relegated to “spare car” status for their household, she said she liked driving it better than her newer Grand Cherokee.
The Gremlin was a bit more than just a “trunk-ecotmy” – 12″ of wheelbase was removed from the Hornet platform behind the B-pillar.
Studebaker did the same thing in the late 50’s. Took the full sized Studebaker(which was smaller in comparison to the big 3’s full size cars) and chopped of the front and rear and came up with the compact sized(at least for those days) Lark. The theme has been recycled many times over in the last 60-70 years.
This was another Japanese car sold (in very small numbers) in Austria to – mostly – pensioners on account of its perceived reliability. Evos were always available here so it never became coveted by the ricer brigade. Hardly seen nowadays but I suppose a survivor may make sense as a student vehicle…
Also available in OZ in Hyundai flavour albeit with a mild restyle.
I think we had these in the UK as a Colt, but not big sellers.
There were one or two on the Avis fleet when I worked there – they felt very tinny compared to most competitors, and to me, had the general feel of an 80s Japanese car.
Along with the Hyundai Coupe and Accent and maybe the Shogun Pinin, I think they were the only cars in the fleet with the indicator stalk on the right, wipers on the left. The Nedcar-built Carisma was the other way round.
I seriously looked into buying one of these at one stage, but couldn’t get over the cheap and plasticky interior. No meaningful upgrade available. Mitsubishi were determined not to let you forget you were buying a cheap car.
In Japan there was the Mirage Cyborg that had 170hp, a few were brought out as race and rally cars.