Not Bad

Post by **dstocks** » Mon Jul 30, 2007 9:55 pm

This one looks quite good on paper (or screen):

http://cgi.ebay.com.au/A-Mitsubishi-FTO ... dZViewItem

rock_it · Post by **rock_it** » Mon Jul 30, 2007 10:16 pm

dstocks wrote:This one looks quite good on paper (or screen):

http://cgi.ebay.com.au/A-Mitsubishi-FTO ... dZViewItem

Yeah saw that the other day ... 28,057 k's though ... You would want to see the service history and confirmation on that one...

devil2004 · Post by **devil2004** » Tue Jul 31, 2007 4:04 pm

I don't think it's a genuine version R. Just looks like a face lift with version R seats and wing on it.

I remember the Version R to having blue door trims and steel handles.

correct me if I'm wrong....

JOeJOe · Post by **JOeJOe** » Tue Jul 31, 2007 4:11 pm

That car is advertised in the For Sale section.

It's a version r with no strut braces.

khunjeng · Post by **khunjeng** » Tue Jul 31, 2007 4:29 pm

I would prefer a GPX with all Type R running gear and facelift front so i got the CC.

Looks like a good car. Kms? hmm but if its in good nick, doesnt matter much.

Post by **aza013** » Tue Jul 31, 2007 6:01 pm

devil2004 wrote:I don't think it's a genuine version R. Just looks like a face lift with version R seats and wing on it.

I remember the Version R to having blue door trims and steel handles.

correct me if I'm wrong....

the Vr dos not have steel handles or blue door trims may be if it was a customer that asked for it dut not as standard.
and a lot of the times the car yards take off the strut braces they did with my one any way

Post by **dstocks** » Tue Jul 31, 2007 8:13 pm

More likely the compliance shops actually. They dont know that the GpvR came with them standard (or dont have compliance test data to support them being left on)

FTO AUSTRALIA

Not Bad

Not Bad

Re: Not Bad

More Likely