As the very happy owner of three i-MiEVs (one purchased new, two used) in the family and with over 50K miles now racked up on these vehicles, I find myself constantly needing to correct the misperceptions promulgated by the media about the i-MiEV, the most egregious of which was Consumer Reports a couple of years ago - see the detailed rebuttal at http://myimiev.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=1286
This article has quite a few personal biases thrown in, which I guess is to be expected. Phrases such as "one could tolerate the 2016 Mitsubishi i-MiEV" countered by "it’s not a bad little car" in the same sentence leave me wondering about the point the author is trying to make. Unfortunately, throughout the article the author keeps comparing the i-MiEV to vehicles much more expensive as the i-MiEV, especially after rebates are taken into account. Let's examine the sentence "The Mitsubishi i-MiEV just feels cheap with doors that seem to have the heft of cat food cans and an interior filled with hard plastic surfaces." In the interest of efficiency, the i-MiEV's design seriously targeted weight reduction throughout, so, yes, the car's body panels are thin. I happen to prefer the interior plastic as it's easy to keep clean. That said, the author could have mentioned the desire for better acoustical and thermal insulation in those doors - it might have given him a more satisfying "thunk" when he slammed the door. To his credit, the author was very realistic in acknowledging the car's single-charge range (easily >70 miles with EPA=62miles) and consistent predictive Range Remaining, but dwelled unnecessarily on charging times and port locations. Yes, the car has a CHAdeMO port (standard equipment) on the left rear and J1772 on the right rear, and the range is such that the i-MiEV meets more than 99% of our family's trip needs around the greater San Francisco Bay Area. On the topic of instrumentation, there are two identically-sized very-readable gauges to the left and right of the main display (which shows instantaneous power/regen and the speedometer): these are the fuel gauge on the left and a multi-purpose gauge on the right, which most of us leave in the Range Remaining mode. Thus, I don't understand what the author meant when he said "One flaw is the instrument gauges. Too much space is devoted to a faux fuel gauge that shows remaining charge. Because the miles-left gauge is what people are going to rely on, it should be more prominent." I don't understand what the author meant by "On the highway, you need to be in D to stand any chance of changing lanes" as peak power is the same in all three driving modes. The i-MiEV has yet to fail me in getting up to speed for California freeway merging or, for that matter, staying with the greater-than-speed-limit traffic. I'm constantly irked by references to the optional (and expensive) multi-media and navigation package - while nice to have (especially for the backup camera), we're talking about an every-day commuter and family workhorse typically used for trips of less than an hour. A sentence such as "Without the nav package, the Mitsubishi i-MiEV is lacking in technology beyond the heated seats." means the author didn't explore, for example, the Active Stability Control System limits nor give credit to the battery management system, smooth motor control, and seamless regen/braking integration (to name a few). I'm afraid I was especially irked by the author's conslusions: "The Mitsubishi i-MiEV feels too unsubstantial as a car to be a viable choice as an electric vehicle. It has a cramped interior, an awkward design, and a power deficit not overcome by instant torque." Wow - here's my counter: CRAMPED INTERIOR The interior is anything but cramped, especially for a small vehicle. Get onto Edmunds.com and compare interior dimensions and you'll be surprised. My 6'-3" son has no trouble fitting inside this car with room to spare above his head, and ingress/egress is especially easy compared with most other cars. With the back seats down, the storage volume available is twice that of, for example, the Leaf, and the i-MiEV has a continuous FLAT FLOOR and not humps back there. AWKWARD DESIGN Duh, it's a very practical and utilitarian tall hatchback - a modern functional "station wagon" with a token attempt at aerodynamics with its slightly elongated snout. Beauty and style are in the eye of the beholder. POWER DEFICIT NOT OVERCOME BY INSTANT TORQUE The i-MiEV is a torquey EV that reminds me how unresponsive ICE vehicles are every time I drive one. With a top speed of over 80mph (governed) what "power deficit" is the author talking about? Although the author gives it credit for being inexpensive, I contend that the i-MiEV's attributes make it a viable and preferable everyday utilitarian vehicle even when price is not the primary parameter. Sadly, the author failed to mention many of the car's attributes: the usual EV silence, a turning radius bested only by a London taxi and a Smart car, decent responsive handling, good all-round visibility (especially if unnecessary headrests are removed), small exterior dimensions for great parking access, and well-established reliability. Besides, it is simply FUN TO DRIVE. Apologies for getting carried away... ----- Joe Siudzinski -- View this message in context: http://electric-vehicle-discussion-list.413529.n4.nabble.com/Re-EVLN-i-MiEV-is-America-s-lowest-cost-EV-for-a-reason-tp4678237p4678358.html Sent from the Electric Vehicle Discussion List mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/ Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
