It's Finally Here: Mitsubishi i

[Sturtles]

I agree its spacious, but a proton wira has the same space for less money.. mine's an auto, and the cvt is known to break and expensive to repair.

 

At 40,000 km, the engine mount has died. replacement is imminent. replaced a front wheel bearing, skimmed the warped rotors. but luckily, it can still start everyday..

 

non-variable timing makes power available only at either low end, or high end and not both so this engine is poor

 

if bought at 50k, this car is cheap. but at above that, it has no good points.

[Ctchome]

well, what can i say ..

 

Firstly, you bought a CVT, i guess that's the reason you are not enjoying this ride.

it's good for ppl who don't like sudden acceleration.

my uncle who happens to like CVT a lot, he say very smooth .. can't feel the change of

gear at all. and he don't overtake much .. just cruise along .

 

The manual version is okay, infact, when you familiarise with the characterisitcs

of the car, you would be enjoying every min of it. serious ... i am one of them.

 

Mine reach 120k KM and i have not replace the mount yet, though i can feel the engine moving much more. no problems whatsoever with the bearings too.

 

As for rotors, tell you something, during 20k, one of my mechanic told me my rotors has warp, during that time, i experience "uneven" braking, but was using 17" rims then. i don't belive what he said.

 

After a while, i change to 15" and my problems are gone, i believe sometimes, it's due to the rims, tyres combo rather than the rotor itself. my rotors lasted till today 120k mileage and it's still in perfect condition, and using mintex brake pads as well.

 

As for the poor power of the engine, it's due to the CVT, trust me.

 

maybe you got a lemon ? For my case, i have got a bad gearbox, 2nd gear has to be bit slanted then can slot in, i have tried other lancers, no such problems.

 

lastly, don't believe the test drive vehicle. i have test drive the new lancer at C&C leng kee. it's very bad, no power despite manual trans.

 

after i got the new ride, it's totally different. much much better ! world of difference.

 

anyway, it's based on my personal experience lah ..

 

Actually, i believe some of us lancers owners are enjoying every min of it driving !

 

Cheers !

Edited May 16, 2006 by Ctchome

[Sturtles]

Glad you liked it.

 

Just as a whole, the car is second rate.

 

After sometime, i've got used to it, accepting this is what a lancer is, and the fact i have to drive it for another 3 years.

 

This is my cmi car

 

http://www.mycarforum.com/forum/General_C1...ancer_P1125420/

[Nutty]

Your ride is ok wat

 

Why you say cmi?

[Sturtles]

As mentioned in the previous posts, the car when in stock form is disappointing.

 

Noise, poor paint, poor build quality spoils the "made in japan" tag. So even made in japan cars can be built badly.. the cost cutting measures are so evident when i took out the doors and carpet to soundproof, even when compared to my friend's similarly priced sunny. Of course, among cars of this range, lancer is a slightly better looker from my personal opinion.

[Gary84]

no way man....$55k for tat kinda car...wahhaa TC ah?...look at tat pathetic 64hp....anyway top spd 18kmh oso no use, at tat spd the car might be floating liao..

[Turbonetics]

the Copen cost much more than this....

[Cbx750p]

There would be some takers for this babe but $55K for such a small car although it is turbocharged, seems too high for me IMHO. For that price, I can get a nice Chevrolet Optra5 1.6 auto ! Why go for such a cramp, small car ? The only reasons I could think off is the saving on the road tax but the insurance involved for a TURBO, would be high.

 

CBX

[Elfenstar]

Hmm... is there any use for turbocharged engine on such a small cc car?

 

With the hp given, still very bad for turbo charged car...too ex already!

 

Turbos arent always abt high end power. if small enough they can contribute to a lot of low and mid end power and torque and considering the targeted usage of this car, thats exactly the kind of power people need.

[Elfenstar]

Very popular in Japan because of the price and "potential"... Relatively good FC and best of all, it's a Rear Engine Rear Wheel drive layout.

 

RR format. even at $55k, I'm sold.

[Elfenstar]

it has a very short front, i wonder wat will happen in head on collisions...

 

Its safer actually. The engine at the front is NOT a good thing. Reduces the crushable impact zone. the key aim in safety is an extremly ridgid passenger saftey cell with crushable zones throughout to reduce the force of impact before it reaches the passenger cell. Thats why Merc and now BMW have designed for their engines to slide under the car in a frontal impact. It allows the front area to become a crushable zone without the engine going into the safety cell.

Edited May 17, 2006 by Elfenstar

[Elfenstar]

Without a turbo, this car would only produce a measly 40 hp.. and the 'i' becomes a road hazard

 

Turbos make engines more efficient by using the wastegases to improve output.

 

Only in singapore, turbo is being discriminated.. everywhere else, turbos are being exploited to be better emissions and FC

 

Cant be said any better!!!!

[Elfenstar]

bulk of stereotype: turbos mean fast car, and if got turbo, means the car power.

 

like the VW caddy drivers and mercedes merc cabs.. think their turbo big F.

 

Manufacturers only FI their cars to give better FC and emissions.

 

Without these restrictions, they rather dump a v8 or v10 in the hood for linearity and cheaper maintanence

 

Evos and Stis are for rallying, and the engine sizes are restricted to under 2000cc.

 

Because of the arms race, a non turbo car would almost certainly loose in a straight line. so if 1 brand lub turbo, the rest have to follow

 

Pretty much on the dot. Other than TC cars for racing applications, turbos are generally the most efficent power/torque increaser as they use the gases and heat that otherwise go to waste in a NA car.

[Elfenstar]

no way man....$55k for tat kinda car...wahhaa TC ah?...look at tat pathetic 64hp....anyway top spd 18kmh oso no use, at tat spd the car might be floating liao..

 

Its not the power thats important. its the power to weight. Speaking of which the Sera that i bought is IMHO a slowpoke (not to mention a miserly 110bhp from the 1.5l engine) yet when the power to weight ratio is looked at, it is only slightly under the eg dohc VTI's and is higher than the EK sohc vti's. When you look at the torque curve you'll realise that most of the power is in the midrange which is perfect for the grocery getter which i intend it to be.

[Elfenstar]

There would be some takers for this babe but $55K for such a small car although it is turbocharged, seems too high for me IMHO. For that price, I can get a nice Chevrolet Optra5 1.6 auto ! Why go for such a cramp, small car ? The only reasons I could think off is the saving on the road tax but the insurance involved for a TURBO, would be high.

 

CBX

 

Well you've listed the cons, but the pros are due to its layout, and engine size are

1) v.good handling char due to the RR layout,

2) cheaper road tax

3) given a worst case scenario it should still do about 19-20km per litre

4)Frontal impact crush zone is optimised by having the engine at the rear

5) due to size and layout it would be a perfect nippy little city car that is easy to manuver and park

 

the main cons would be insurance and the lack of space for more than 4 people. In a hatchback car, the "bootspace" can be increased hugely if the rear seats are folded down so that shouldnt be a prob.

Edited May 17, 2006 by Elfenstar

[Chenqien]

can explain why the RR layout is so desirable to u??? and why say increase in handling capabilites... wun the average user oversteer and spin out quite a lot as like older porsches...

Edited May 17, 2006 by Chenqien

[Weihui]

Can drift

[Elfenstar]

Aiyah the mitsu will sure to tune the suspension settings to have some understeer instead. Oversteer allows you to enter corners faster and leave faster but understeer allows you to make a tiny bit of mistake in corner entry speeds both have their pros and cons with regards to driving. personally i prefer oversteer to udnersteer as personally I feel i have more control over the car.