I would expect the deal to close and be approved by regulators, etc. Then the impact on the iMiev product line will eventually be shown. However, I don't expect any change on our warranties or service and would be quite surprised if something negative was announced as to existing owners.
New Sins and Old Sins...Mitsu Fuel Economy
- Thread starter Phximiev
- Start date
Help Support Mitsubishi i-MiEV Forum:
PV1
Well-known member
Fuel Economy fudging does not affect US cars:
http://media.mitsubishicars.com/releases/mitsubishi-motors-north-america-confirms-u-s-vehicles-not-impacted-by-fuel-consumption-testing-data-irregularities
Also, Nissan-Mitsubishi news replicated on Mitsubishi's site:
http://media.mitsubishicars.com/releases/nissan-and-mitsubishi-motrs-forge-strategic-alliance-nissan-to-take-34-stake-in-mitsubishi-motors-for-237-billion-yen
http://media.mitsubishicars.com/releases/mitsubishi-motors-north-america-confirms-u-s-vehicles-not-impacted-by-fuel-consumption-testing-data-irregularities
Also, Nissan-Mitsubishi news replicated on Mitsubishi's site:
http://media.mitsubishicars.com/releases/nissan-and-mitsubishi-motrs-forge-strategic-alliance-nissan-to-take-34-stake-in-mitsubishi-motors-for-237-billion-yen
Mart
Well-known member
Will that be good or bad for BEVs?
PV1
Well-known member
As long as the engineering done on them doesn't change, it may be an improvement. But, if Mitsubishi's engineering team starts following Nissan's standards, it may be a detriment. Yes, the LEAF has better range and faster charging, but the i-MiEV is more robust.
Appears that i-Miev mileage was overstated: http://www.businesstimes.com.sg/transport/mitsubishi-motors-manipulated-mileage-data-on-electric-car
Not exactly sure what that means, miles per gallon, range?
Will we all get a rebate? Recall?
Not exactly sure what that means, miles per gallon, range?
Will we all get a rebate? Recall?
PV1
Well-known member
According to Mitsubishi's NA website, the 2017 i-MiEV has an estimated range of 59 miles, down from the previous 62 miles.
The 98 mile figure quoted before EPA testing seemed high to me, but totally possible in an urban environment. I easily exceed 62 miles on a charge.
The 98 mile figure quoted before EPA testing seemed high to me, but totally possible in an urban environment. I easily exceed 62 miles on a charge.
That's really too bad, because my typical leadfootin' consumption metric yields 32 miles at the halfway point, or 64 miles range on a full charge. Any driver worth his/her salt can beat EPA ratings by at least 20%, irrespective of whether it's ICE, hybrid, PHEV, or BEV.PV1 said:
See also this topic post and related discussions: http://myimiev.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3037&p=27621&hilit=2017#p27621
As to the recent article, perhaps they are referring to range. As to our use (rather than its reputation), it doesn't change anything or our enjoyment of the car. But still, the improper testing and harm to the car's reputation is bothersome.
Scratches head. Is this why the i-Miev is not being sold any more in such places as England, here in the US (and after 2017) and elsewhere? Perhaps the leadership of Mitsubishi worldwide and in each national market knew of this problem way before the whole fuel economy mess became public? It would seem that they had to know before April 2016, as it appears that Mitsubishi changed the range before the date of the above post (in May of 2016)?
:?:
As to the recent article, perhaps they are referring to range. As to our use (rather than its reputation), it doesn't change anything or our enjoyment of the car. But still, the improper testing and harm to the car's reputation is bothersome.
Scratches head. Is this why the i-Miev is not being sold any more in such places as England, here in the US (and after 2017) and elsewhere? Perhaps the leadership of Mitsubishi worldwide and in each national market knew of this problem way before the whole fuel economy mess became public? It would seem that they had to know before April 2016, as it appears that Mitsubishi changed the range before the date of the above post (in May of 2016)?
:?:
PV1
Well-known member
My TPMS light came on this morning, but went off about 3/4 of the way to work. I checked the tire pressure when I got to work. Both left tires are at 32 PSI and the right two are at 30 PSI. I started with 84 miles RR, drove 10.5 miles at 45-50 MPH and arrived at work with 75 miles RR.
Based on RR values and charge gauge alone, I had no idea that my tire pressure dropped that far. I set all four tires at 40 PSI, but it was a while ago when I last checked them. I've been consistently getting high RR values (70-90 RR range in the last month, all sorts of driving) even with (presumably) below recommended tire pressure.
Either way, this was likely the nail in the coffin for the i-MiEV as far as Mitsubishi is concerned. 'Tis a shame, really. The engineers really got this car right.
Based on RR values and charge gauge alone, I had no idea that my tire pressure dropped that far. I set all four tires at 40 PSI, but it was a while ago when I last checked them. I've been consistently getting high RR values (70-90 RR range in the last month, all sorts of driving) even with (presumably) below recommended tire pressure.
Either way, this was likely the nail in the coffin for the i-MiEV as far as Mitsubishi is concerned. 'Tis a shame, really. The engineers really got this car right.
Benjamin Nead
Well-known member
You really have to wonder some days if the best thing that could possibly happen to the i-MiEV is for Mitsubishi to sell off all the tooling and spare parts for it, then have someone else manufacture/market it. 
Maybe everyone here on the My i-MiEV Forum should chip in a few dollars each and make them an offer.
Maybe everyone here on the My i-MiEV Forum should chip in a few dollars each and make them an offer.
