← New search

1998 Mitsubishi Galant

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

Similar to other model years

Owner complaints for the 1998 Mitsubishi Galant do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 26.

About this comparison →

How this year compares

Owner complaints by model year

Other model years Selected year
Compare all Galant years →

Counts vary with age, sales and reporting. They are not failure rates.

What owners reported most

All reported categories

Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

Limited mileage data: 12 of 53 reports include usable mileage. There isn’t enough coverage to show a useful chart.

NHTSA’s mileage field refers to the reported incident, not necessarily the filing date. This shows report counts, not the likelihood of a failure.

What to inspect

Issues worth paying extra attention to based on owner reports.

  • Power Train. Review the 12 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Service Brakes, Hydraulic. Review the 12 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Suspension. Review the 8 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

3 crash reports0 fire reports3 injury reports

Suspension complaints

8 reports
Clear category filter
150,000 miles · Sep 26, 2011
Suspension

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1998 MITSUBISHI GALANT. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRONT PASSENGER SIDE LOWER BALL JOINT FAILED. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE NUT THAT HELD THE LOWER BALL JOINT BECAME LOOSE AND DETACHED, CAUSING THE LOWER BALL JOINT FAILURE. THE VEHICLE HAD BEEN REPAIRED THREE TIMES PRIOR FOR THE SAME EXACT FAILURE. THE M…

Read full complaint

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1998 MITSUBISHI GALANT. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRONT PASSENGER SIDE LOWER BALL JOINT FAILED. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE NUT THAT HELD THE LOWER BALL JOINT BECAME LOOSE AND DETACHED, CAUSING THE LOWER BALL JOINT FAILURE. THE VEHICLE HAD BEEN REPAIRED THREE TIMES PRIOR FOR THE SAME EXACT FAILURE. THE MANUFACTURER EXTENDED THE WARRANTY FOR THE PART FOR A LIFETIME HOWEVER, THE CONTACT BELIEVED THE FAILURE TO BE AN EXTREME SAFETY ISSUE BECAUSE THE PART WOULD BECOME LOOSE VERY EASILY. THE VIN WAS NOT AVAILABLE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 150,000.

NHTSA ODI #10427210

135,000 miles · May 26, 2008
SuspensionCrashInjury

LOWER LATERAL ARM BALL JOINT BROKE CAUSED MY CAR TO CRASH INTO A PARKED VEHICLE AS I WAS DRIVING AT A LOW RATE OF SPEED. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10228904

113,200 miles · Aug 25, 2006
Suspension

LOWER CONTROL ARM WAS FOUND TO HAVE A PROBLEM UPON INSPECTION BY A MECHANIC. *JB

NHTSA ODI #10166554

104,810 miles · Apr 16, 2004
Suspension

IN NOVEMBER 2003, WHILE DRIVING BETWEEN 20 TO 25 MPH, FRONT PASSENGER TIRE FELL OFF, VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO INDEPENDENT MECHANIC, WHO DETERMINED THAT BALL JOINTS FAILED. IN APRIL 2004 CONSUMER RECEIVED A RECALL LETTER NOTICE CONCERNING BALL JOINT PROBLEM.*AK

NHTSA ODI #10067260

133,770 miles · Mar 11, 2004
Suspension

BALL JOINTS WERE REPLACED PRIOR TO CONSUMER RECEIVING THE RECALL NOTICE. *PH THE CONSUMER REQUEST REIMBURSEMENT FOR THE REPAIRS. *NM

NHTSA ODI #10065311

55,238 miles · Feb 23, 2004
SuspensionCrashInjury

THE CONSUMER'S DAUGHTER HAD DIFFICULTY WITH THE STEERING WHICH ENDED UP ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE ROAD CRASHING INTO AN EMBANKMENT. 3 YEARS AFTER ACCIDENT, CONSUMER RECEIVED A RECALL NOTICE ON LOWER BALL JOINTS THAT COULD LEAD TO LOSS OF STEERING. *LA THE CONSUMER'S DAUGHTER WAS INJURED AND FEELS THAT THE DEALER SHOULD BE…

Read full complaint

THE CONSUMER'S DAUGHTER HAD DIFFICULTY WITH THE STEERING WHICH ENDED UP ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE ROAD CRASHING INTO AN EMBANKMENT. 3 YEARS AFTER ACCIDENT, CONSUMER RECEIVED A RECALL NOTICE ON LOWER BALL JOINTS THAT COULD LEAD TO LOSS OF STEERING. *LA THE CONSUMER'S DAUGHTER WAS INJURED AND FEELS THAT THE DEALER SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR DAMAGES. RECALL#00V421001. *SC

NHTSA ODI #10060994

Mileage unknown · May 2, 2002
Suspension

RECALL ON LOWER BALL JOINT BOOT WAS DONE IN JANUARY 2002. ON 30 APRIL CONSUMER WAS UNABLE TO STEER AT SLOW SPEED. VEHICLE HAS NOT BEEN TAKEN TO A DEALERSHIP.*JB

NHTSA ODI #8009017

Mileage unknown · May 9, 2001
SuspensionTires

THERE IS A VIBRATION THAT HAPPENS AT HIGHER SPEEDS, APPROXIMATELY 55 + MPH. DEALERSHIP HAS REPEATEDLY INFORMED HER THAT TIRES WERE DEFECTIVE AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. CONSUMER RECEIVED RECALL NOTIFICATION IN MAIL FOR LOWER CONTROL ARM/ BALL JOINT. CONSUMER HAD RECALL TAKEN CARE OF BY DEALERSHIP, BUT VIBRATION CONTINU…

Read full complaint

THERE IS A VIBRATION THAT HAPPENS AT HIGHER SPEEDS, APPROXIMATELY 55 + MPH. DEALERSHIP HAS REPEATEDLY INFORMED HER THAT TIRES WERE DEFECTIVE AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. CONSUMER RECEIVED RECALL NOTIFICATION IN MAIL FOR LOWER CONTROL ARM/ BALL JOINT. CONSUMER HAD RECALL TAKEN CARE OF BY DEALERSHIP, BUT VIBRATION CONTINUES TO OCCUR IN VEHICLE. PLEASE PROVIDE ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION/ATTACHMENTS.*AK

NHTSA ODI #887848

Official recalls

1

00V421001 · Suspension:front:control Arm:lower Ball Joint

Dec 18, 2000

VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: PASSENGER VEHICLES. IF THE RUBBER BOOTS ON THE LOWER LATERAL ARM BALL JOINTS OF THE FRONT SUSPENSION WERE DAMAGED DURING ASSEMBLY, DIRT AND WATER CAN INTRUDE. ALSO, MMC HAS ADDED THE POTENTIAL OF LEAKING MOISTURE, WHICH CAN CAUSE THE BALL STUD TO CORRODE.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: THIS CONDITION COULD CAUSE THE LOWER LATERAL ARM BALL JOINT TO SEPARATE, INCREASING THE RISK OF A VEHICLE CRASH. THIS CAMPAIGN SUPERCEDES MMC'S PREVIOUS SAFETY RECALL CAMPAIGN, SEE 99V-066.

Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSPECT THE LOWER LATERAL ARM BALL JOINT FOR WEAR. BALL JOINTS THAT EXHIBIT WEAR BEYOND THE ESTABLISHED TOLERANCE WILL BE REPLACED WITH NEWLY DESIGNED LATERAL ARM BALL JOINTS. BALL JOINTS THAT ARE WITHIN THE ESTABLISHED TOLERANCE WILL BE CLEANED AND A SPECIAL SEALANT WILL BE APPLIED TO PREVENT INTRUSION OF MOISTURE.

Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗

NHTSA investigations

0

No exact-year investigations in this snapshot.