Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Subcompact Culture's response to the Doug DeMuro Video

  1. #1
    Member Subcompact Culture's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    93
    Thanks
    4
    Thanked 60 Times in 26 Posts

    Subcompact Culture's response to the Doug DeMuro Video

    Name:  20171122_142215.jpg
Views: 106
Size:  100.4 KB

    After having several people forward me the DeMuro review of the Mirage, I figured I'd write my two cents on Subcompact Culture. Have a look.

    http://www.subcompactculture.com/201...itsubishi.html



  2. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Subcompact Culture For This Useful Post:

    01-7700 (01-04-2018),2of9 (01-16-2018),Cobrajet (01-11-2018),Daox (01-04-2018),emdeplam (01-04-2018),inuvik (01-04-2018),Marklovski (01-04-2018),MetroMPG (01-04-2018),Siper2 (01-11-2018)

  3. #2
    Administrator Daox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Germantown, WI
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    3,506
    Thanks
    1,618
    Thanked 842 Times in 512 Posts
    This made me LOL.

    He makes more noise about the car's shortcomings than the the Mirage's CVT at full throttle.


    Excellent points made. A lot of people like the things Doug complains about, myself included.

        __________________________________________

        click to view fuel log View my fuel log 2015 Mirage DE 1.2 manual: 42.1 mpg (US) ... 17.9 km/L ... 5.6 L/100 km ... 50.6 mpg (Imp)


  4. #3
    Administrator MetroMPG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    1000 Islands, Ontario
    Country
    Canada
    Posts
    6,173
    Thanks
    1,939
    Thanked 1,642 Times in 1,014 Posts
    Nice!

    You were right to call him on the fact that he reviewed a pre-2017 Mirage, which Mitsubishi improved significantly (suspension, steering, NVH, brakes - eg. New 2017 Mirage SE vs 2015 Mirage ES (comparison of differences/improvements)

    Also, you mention that the Versa sells like hotcakes, but have you seen the proportion of fleet sales for that model?? 35%!

    It's sometimes hard to make a case for the Mirage because it's a car that most people buy with their heads and not with their hearts.

    But that was a good read!

        __________________________________________

        click to view fuel log View my fuel log 2014 Mirage base ES 1.2 manual: 54.0 mpg (US) ... 23.0 km/L ... 4.4 L/100 km ... 64.9 mpg (Imp)


  5. The Following User Says Thank You to MetroMPG For This Useful Post:

    Subcompact Culture (01-04-2018)

  6. #4
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Harrisburg, PA
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    10
    Garage empty: add car
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 5 Times in 2 Posts
    Great post, and I like your sense of humor. Even though I like snakes..........except when one catches me by surprise when I'm mowing the grass. Last time it was a six foot black rat snake, but they're harmless.

    I'm considering a '17/'18 Mirage and have been perusing everything I can find on it. The only thing that has me a bit concerned is the IIHS "Marginal" rating of the Front Small Overlap crash test, but otherwise I think it'd be something to seriously consider. There's a dealer about 50 min. south of my house with four or five ES 5MT hatchbacks, the exact model I'd want. All listed on the website for ~$10K and that's before negotiation and Mitsu's current $500 rebate through late January.

    The crash test thing is a definite point to ponder, as I have a 48-minute commute which is 1/2+ highway. I'm a Subaru nut, having owned six (our most recent is a '15 Outback 3.6R we bought under two months ago), but the high fuel mileage of something like this is appealing.

    So.... we'll see.

  7. #5
    Administrator MetroMPG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    1000 Islands, Ontario
    Country
    Canada
    Posts
    6,173
    Thanks
    1,939
    Thanked 1,642 Times in 1,014 Posts
    The thing to consider is: the Mirage was already designed and in production before the small overlap test was introduced.

    A few automakers in a similar position engineered and added reinforcements to their existing models to improve on the small overlap result. Others decided to wait for the next generation. As a low-margin, low volume economy car, it was no surprise what Mitsu chose to do.

    So the 7th gen Mirage due in a year or 2 will probably do better on all tests, but it will be a bit heavier. And the mileage will probably be a bit lower (all else being equal). And the same will probably be true of the 8th gen Mirage, ad infinitum.

        __________________________________________

        click to view fuel log View my fuel log 2014 Mirage base ES 1.2 manual: 54.0 mpg (US) ... 23.0 km/L ... 4.4 L/100 km ... 64.9 mpg (Imp)


  8. #6
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Harrisburg, PA
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    10
    Garage empty: add car
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 5 Times in 2 Posts
    Yep, it's a pretty new test. I drive a 2001 Outback 3.0 with 248K miles, and I'm not sure it'd pass that test if it was subjected to it. Perhaps it would, there's really no way to tell. That being said, it's still an extremely safe car. Anything made much more recently still has a bazillion more airbags though, plus mandatory backup cameras as of 2018.

    So it's not a deal-breaker, but certainly noteworthy.

  9. #7
    Senior Member Cobrajet's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Olympia, WA
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    1,315
    Thanks
    416
    Thanked 714 Times in 420 Posts
    There is a website somewhere that allows you to view the actual breakdown of an IIHS crash test. You can see what portions of the dummy were subjected to what forces. This allows you to interpret just what kind of injury that "Poor" score might make you more susceptible to in a crash.

    Because of the Mirage's "Poor" score on the Small Offset crash, your chances of a lower leg injury are somewhat higher than average. That's it.

    Many people think that any car which gets rated "Poor" on anything must be some kind of death trap. It isn't true, and I'd wager that cars getting a "Poor" score today are likely safer than cars which got a "Good" score even as late as 10 years ago.

  10. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Cobrajet For This Useful Post:

    Daox (01-11-2018),Eggman (01-11-2018)

  11. #8
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Harrisburg, PA
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    10
    Garage empty: add car
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 5 Times in 2 Posts
    Indeed, one particular rating does not dictate the whole. The rest of its ratings were Good on IIHS as I recall, and 4/5 on NHTSA.



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •