Hey guys (and gals), sorry, don't mean to offend anyone -
I have an ethical problem with this thread.
From the perspective of the manufacturer, their engineers did their best to design a battery management system to protect the battery so that Mitsubishi management could stick their necks out and commit to a 8-year (or 10-year) free-replacement warranty (at least, in the US). Mitsubishi was the first to do this with a large format Lithium-ion pack, following their predecessors (Honda and Toyota) who also took a big gamble with their NiMh packs at the turn of the century.
One has to appreciate the technical difficulty of doing this so the battery can not only survive but also operate while soaking in some pretty horrendous temperature extremes, especially without resorting to liquid thermal management. To their credit, Mitsubishi did it better than their successor, Nissan.
One battery replacement probably eats up any profit Mitsubishi made on the sale of that car.
At that point in time, despite accelerated life testing, there simply wasn't enough long-term real-life data available. So, I suspect in order to limit their exposure, Mitsubishi purposely did not warrant a battery degradation percentage - something we were aware of when we bought the car, and certainly not happy about. As early adopters, we joined the manufacturer in taking a chance, and were certainly concerned at what the future battery replacement cost would be.
History has shown a gradual capacity loss of the battery pack that is, to me, better than I expected (I feared 40% within five years). History has also shown that a single cell failure is readily identified by the car's BMS and in every case I know of Mitsubishi has bellied-up to the bar and replaced the pack without a squawk, deeming it a cell failure and not overall pack degradation.
So far, so good.
Now, along comes someone purposely trying to damage the battery in order to cash in on the warranty deal. Not cool, in my opinion.
That said, I am quite upset with Mitsubishi and their failure (to date) to do anything about the charger/dc-dc that their data must now show has had an uptick in module failures. We'll open up a separate thread to discuss that and what recourse we have, as Mitsubishi's replacement price for that one module now comes close to exceeding the value of the car on the used car market.
EVs: 2 Wht/Blu SE Prem., '13 Tesla MS85, 3 156v CorbinSparrows (2 Li-ion), 24v EcoScoot(LiFePO4)
EV Conv: 156v '86 Ram PU, 144v '65 Saab 96
Hybrids: 48v1kW bike
ICE: '88 Isuzu Trooper. Mothballed: '67 Saab (orig.owner), '76 MBZ L206D RHD RV