Mitsubishi Motors i MiEV

[Cobos]

As I probably have mentioned having an acceleration of 9 secs is generally by car reviewers seen as pretty decent here.
Looking at a recent review of the new Audi A4 2.0 TDI they comment that it's 9.4 sec 0-100km/h accelleration is very good in this class (premium sedans).
So comparing the MiEV to the Norwegian Think I daresay then MiEV in standard version is seen as both speedy and good. The range in my eyes could have been extended around 25-50% especially since winter range is usually a lot shorter..

In other words this should be a pretty good competitor for the new Think. As well as our most popular NEV - the Buddy.

Cobos

 

[DDB]

I don't get it.


So, I can't help wondering if that's Mitsubishi's strategy here. . . They're making a car that's deliberately limited so that it can't cut into sales of their already established, already profitable gas cars.

That's a strategy I don't buy. If you're going with the idea that it's only a PR move to get people looking at their company in hopes of buying other gas cars...I've never bought in to that. For the people in my shoes, looking for the first reasonably affordable EV that isn't as ugly as a ZAP that is AVAILABLE, this thing looks pretty good. I agree the range needs a boost if it is to catch on. But I'll tell you what, the Aptera seems to be selling like there's no tomorrow and for the life of me I can't figure out why. Can we say deathtrap? Or bankruptcy?

 

[DDB]

In other words this should be a pretty good competitor for the new Think. As well as our most popular NEV - the Buddy.

Cobos

I'd like it to be a competitor for the smart-for-two.

 

[Cobos]

I'd like it to be a competitor for the smart-for-two.

Considering that the iMiEV is about the same size as a Citroen C1 in 5 door version and comparing the iMiEV to the Smart I would without a doubt go for the bigger car. Simply because for a measly 70cm (2' 3'' and some change) you get 2 more seats, an extra set of doors and you still can't park the Smart sideways in Norway anyway (as it's longer than the max 2,5m). The iMiEV sounds like a much more versatile car as it can work as a number 2 car AND a number 1 car if your size requirements are modest. Compared to the Smart which simply has almost no cargo capacity. And being able to bring 3 friends to the cinema or a party or whatever short trip you are doing is pretty usefull. The same arguments I've got against the Smart can be used against the Think as well as it also only has 2 seats.

Cobos

 

[DDB]

Considering that the iMiEV is about the same size as a Citroen C1 in 5 door version and comparing the iMiEV to the Smart I would without a doubt go for the bigger car. Simply because for a measly 70cm (2' 3'' and some change) you get 2 more seats, an extra set of doors and you still can't park the Smart sideways in Norway anyway (as it's longer than the max 2,5m). The iMiEV sounds like a much more versatile car as it can work as a number 2 car AND a number 1 car if your size requirements are modest. Compared to the Smart which simply has almost no cargo capacity. And being able to bring 3 friends to the cinema or a party or whatever short trip you are doing is pretty usefull. The same arguments I've got against the Smart can be used against the Think as well as it also only has 2 seats.

Cobos

Well, someone here is going to point out that the smart is a gasser--the obvious difference. But I certainly would argue it's not a punishment car.

 

[tonybelding]

But I'll tell you what, the Aptera seems to be selling like there's no tomorrow and for the life of me I can't figure out why. Can we say deathtrap? Or bankruptcy?

I wouldn't say either of those things.

Why would you say deathtrap? I don't know why it would be any more dangerous than other small-and-lightweight vehicles we are looking at here. It's apparently going through the whole crash-worthiness regimen.

Why would you say bankruptcy? They appear to be way out in front of wannabe companies like Commuter Cars or UEV. There's lots of investment in "green tech" these days, and Aptera is one of the front runners in the electric car space.

 

[DDB]

I wouldn't say either of those things.

Why would you say deathtrap? I don't know why it would be any more dangerous than other small-and-lightweight vehicles we are looking at here. It's apparently going through the whole crash-worthiness regimen.

Why would you say bankruptcy? They appear to be way out in front of wannabe companies like Commuter Cars or UEV. There's lots of investment in "green tech" these days, and Aptera is one of the front runners in the electric car space.

Anything classified as a motorcycle and not subject to crash tests I just don't trust.

I'm also skeptical of start-ups. History will prove that automobile start-ups, and motorcycle start-ups, just don't do well. Check out the history of the corbin sparrow, Delorian, and about 15 others. I'm just saying cash on delivery. Tesla seems to have a little more credibility because of the financial backing of Musk, among others, which in my view helps consumers.

 

[tonybelding]

Anything classified as a motorcycle and not subject to crash tests I just don't trust.

My understanding was that Aptera are crash-testing it.

They aren't required to by federal law, but you can't blame Aptera for that. They can't change the law and require themselves to crash-test it, only the Congress can do that.

I'm also skeptical of start-ups. History will prove that automobile start-ups, and motorcycle start-ups, just don't do well. Check out the history of the corbin sparrow, Delorian, and about 15 others. I'm just saying cash on delivery. Tesla seems to have a little more credibility because of the financial backing of Musk, among others, which in my view helps consumers.

Tesla falls squarely into the same category, Musk or no Musk. He's said that he will back Tesla with his personal fortune if necessary, but his personal fortune is pocket change compared to the capital requirements of a serious car manufacturer.

Don't get me wrong, an "angel" investor is fantastic for getting a company off the ground, and I'd give Musk full credit for doing that. Seeing it through to established success is another matter.

 

[Hunter]

A couple people have said the price seems steep. I just wanted to note that the article says Japan's ZEV subsidies cut that in half. $12k for a car with these specs just sounds fantastic. Obviously this price wouldn't carry over to the U.S., but then neither will the car near as I can tell. When they come here I would guess it'll be with something much longer range at say $30k.

 

[vfx]

A mini turbine??!!???

Mitsubishi to test i MiEV electric car this fall in U.S. | Automotive News Blog - Wide Open Throttle

 

[DDB]

A mini turbine??!!???

Mitsubishi to test i MiEV electric car this fall in U.S. | Automotive News Blog - Wide Open Throttle

Good catch. That's the first I think I've heard about it. This has been discussed at length, wind turbines and such, which has always resulted in that it would create too much drag. That was a very general article so I'm skeptical.

 

[WarpedOne]

A mini turbine??!!???

Bah....

First I understood it as 'a mini gas-turbine' which would made sense but this air-turbine is nonsense. How much power would it produce? 10wats? And weigh how much? 10kilos?

 

[TEG]

Video: iMiEV has wind turbine in the grill, solar panel on the roof - AutoblogGreen
"The iMiEV's lithium-ion batteries can be charged via a wireless microwave charger in your garage floor which means you don't have to struggle to plug it in."
"the iMiEV has solar panels on the roof and micro wind turbines in the front grill"

They are doing a disservice to the EV community by offering these "hype features" that are not useful, cost effective or efficient.

Why use expensive, inefficient microwave charging when a cheap cable would work much better. Why use expensive solar panels on the roof that will add so little in the way of range? Is that little fan in the hood actually supposed to generate power? Nonsense idea.

 

[domenick]

Why use expensive, inefficient microwave charging when a cheap cable would work much better. Why use expensive solar panels on the roof that will add so little in the way of range? Is that little fan in the hood actually supposed to generate power? Nonsense idea.

Because it's a concept vehicle. Concept vehicles, if they make it to the real world, often lose many of the car show wiz-bang gimmickery along the way.

An example of that would be the Volt front fascia and poly-whatever roof.

I expect if Mitsubishi actually brings the Sport to market, it will keep only the more cost-effective features.

 

[vfx]

But even concept vehicles should not try to defy the laws of physics.

The maker just ends up looking stupid.

 

[Cobos]

VFX you mean the "recommondations" of physics.....

Seriously, I agree that it does make the producer look silly, since everyone that knows their natural sciences can tell it's plain silly. But as most onlookers in a car show or most car journalists often does NOT know their physics it can work as way to catch attention among all the other products there. But it is letting the marketers win over the sensible engineers...

Cobos

 

[domenick]

The idea behind the fans is too scavenge energy as the vehicle slows, therefore not physics-defying. I can't imagine them being very effective though and agree they are a bit on the superflous side.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Because it's a concept vehicle. Concept vehicles, if they make it to the real world, often lose many of the car show wiz-bang gimmickery along the way.

An example of that would be the Volt front fascia and poly-whatever roof.

I expect if Mitsubishi actually brings the Sport to market, it will keep only the more cost-effective features.

Yeah, I agree with this point. Concept vehicles don't have to make practical sense.

The idea behind the fans is too scavenge energy as the vehicle slows, therefore not physics-defying. I can't imagine them being very effective though and agree they are a bit on the superflous side.

The thing I got from reading about it, is that it is sort of like a regenerative air brake (by air brake I mean the kind that uses drag to slow you down, kind of like some of the spoilers in some supercars that lift up when braking to slow down the car). It only spins when you need to brake. If they can keep it hidden, minimizing additional drag, it may make some energy back. But I can't imagine it will be significant, seems more like gimmick to me. Traditional Regen braking should be a lot more effective.

 

[doug]

Mitsubishi's electric car plans revealed - AutoblogGreen

Mitsubishi would like to have a "lease type agreement" with individual customers (yes, we can hear your groans)
A larger model iMiEV is in the works though the focus will be on the current configuration (pictured above) until after it launches
In-wheel motors should be used by Mitsubishi in 5 to 10 years though a smaller companies may use them sooner
Mitsubishi will add a range extender in future for larger models though it is unlikely to be a fuel cell (yes, we can hear your cheers)
Mitsubishi has no interest in making Neighborhood Electric Vehicles (NEVs) and will continue to manufacture cars with doors and seating for four (more cheers)

EVWORLD FEATURE: Mitsubishi's Electric Car Future: i MiEV Electric Car | Mitsubishi Motors | G8 Summit

 

[vfx]

Hydrids too.
Bloomberg.com: Asia
Interesting they say how they are first.