Mitsubishi -- worst car company

  • Thread starter Thread starter oosacker
  • 19 comments
  • 1,086 views
Messages
1,847
Notice of apology on Mitsubishi's website:
top_owabi_a.gif


Two people have died in Japan from a fault in Mitsubishi trucks.

One was from a broken clutch housing, which caused the brakes to fail, and the truck crashed into a wall, killing the driver.

Another was the fault with the hub, where it could come off when driving. The wheel came off and hit a pedestrian, who also died.

After this happened, Mistubishi Motors finally decided on a recall of all the their faulty cars, trucks and buses. It was found that they had been hiding these faults for years, and were trying to fix them secretly during tune-ups and check-ups. The company boss and some others were arrested.
 
Do you have links to any articles?
 
riiiggggghhhhhttttt......And I'm driving one of those, gullull
 
oosacker
Notice of apology on Mitsubishi's website:
After this happened, Mistubishi Motors finally decided on a recall of all the their faulty cars, trucks and buses. It was found that they had been hiding these faults for years, and were trying to fix them secretly during tune-ups and check-ups. The company boss and some others were arrested.
First off, this is ancient news - at least 4 years old.

Second, this really belongs in the Cars In General forum, and so I'll move it there.
 
lol thats why i dont like you driving that lancer near my house blake! lol jokin. the only good mits in my view is an evo lancer, the rest are a waste. (i know someone is now going to point out another mits that i like and ruin my whole point against mitsubishi) :lol:
 
Shizzle, i got the 89 Dodge ram 50, a rebadged Mitsubishi Mighty Max. I am gonna die!!!

Nah, I am too good a driver ;)
 
Didn't Ford totally ignore tyre failures on Explorers, then pass the buck to Firestone (who passed it right back again) to get out of the expense?
 
Famine
Didn't Ford totally ignore tyre failures on Explorers, then pass the buck to Firestone (who passed it right back again) to get out of the expense?

Not quite - in my opinion, this has been blown out of proportion.

To start, the Ford Explorer was produced in two places from 1995-2001, the 'affected' years: Decatur, Illinois, and Saint Louis, Missouri. Saint Louis vehicles had Goodyear tires while Decatur vehicles had what turned out to be the ill-fated Firestone tires.

Once the Firestone scandal broke (and Ford/Firestone hadn't exactly been hiding it - the scandal was public from the first Firestone tire recall in 2000), there was a lot of finger-pointing, but nobody tried to hide anything - they were assholes in public. Originally, in mid-2001, Firestone saw the problem brewing (after a 2000 tire recall, which involved 7 million tires) and stopped all business with Ford, ending a 95-year relationship with the automaker. Following that, Ford and then-boss Jacques Nasser decided to recall more than a million Explorers (along with Mercury Mountaineers, the Explorer's twin, as well as Ford Ranger and twin Mazda B-series pickups) solely to replace the Firestone-made Wilderness tyres, embarassingly for Firestone.

Really, the fighting has made it easier for lawsuits - basically, there's two parties to settle with, and speaking of lawsuits, Ford and Firestone have filed several against each other regarding the whole matter. The odd thing is that neither seems to be wrong - Explorers and Mountaineers made in Saint Louis, Missouri, which carried Goodyear tires, had no problems, yet Firestone Wilderness tires were also installed on Ford Rangers and Mazda B-series pickups, neither of which had tread separation problems. Even General Motors used Firestone Wilderness tires on several vehicles without a problem.

The problem I find is that most people think that if it's an Explorer with a Firestone tire (ie an Explorer manufactured in Decatur, Illinois), it's going to have a problem, and that's simply not true - claims were filed on just 338 of the 1,800,000 tires (one in 5325 tires) put on vehicles at that plant, and furthermore, the Explorer has been the most popular SUV in the country for thirteen straight model years with several million vehicles now on the road. It's gone through three generations and, hey, it's only been directly responsible for 174 deaths. In reality, at this point, all Explorers are perfectly safe regarding tire seperation, and even at the high point of the scandal (1999-2001), 99.99% of Explorers were safe. Factoring in the Explorer's derivatives (since 1997, the Mercury Mountaineer; since 1991, the Explorer Sport [2-dr] and since 2001 the Explorer Sport Trac [4-dr pickup]), the percentage of 'safe' models is even higher - not one complaint of tread separation has been leveled against the Mountaineer, Explorer Sport, or Explorer Sport Trac.
 
Ford UK decided they wouldn't tell anyone in the UK about it though, even though Ford UK's Explorers were supplied with the exact tyre "affected".
 
Famine
Ford UK decided they wouldn't tell anyone in the UK about it though, even though Ford UK's Explorers were supplied with the exact tyre "affected".

Yeah, but it's okay because not a single person bought an Explorer in the UK, right? :D
 
My dad had one at the time... :D
 
He liked 4x4s after a previous car and had had his left hip replaced, so wanted an auto and something he didn't have to climb out of (to replace the Probe). Our local garage is a Ford dealer... Badda-bing (as they say)!
 
neon_duke
First off, this is ancient news - at least 4 years old.

Second, this really belongs in the Cars In General forum, and so I'll move it there.


This is not ancient news... the fact that they were hiding many faults were finally made clear this year.
 
Famine
He liked 4x4s after a previous car and had had his left hip replaced, so wanted an auto and something he didn't have to climb out of (to replace the Probe). Our local garage is a Ford dealer... Badda-bing (as they say)!

He couldn't go Maverick? Or were they not around then?

oosacker
This is not ancient news... the fact that they were hiding many faults were finally made clear this year.

I've heard it before about just about every Japanese company. Even if it's not old news, it's nothing new (got that?). Boring...
 
Heh the 3000GT is some what american made like the eclipse (Diamond Star Motors made it and it only existed in the USA then imported to Japan) ever notice how large the steering wheels in these cars are compared to jpn made cars?
 
M5Power
He couldn't go Maverick? Or were they not around then?

That was the previous car... :D

Besides, the 2.7 diesel in the Maverick wasn't what he was looking for - more practical, yes, but as an ex-amateur rally driver not really his scene. The 4.0 Explorer rang his bell a little better - it sounded better and was better appointed inside too (he IS old after all).

The new Maverick wasn't on the scene yet - this was late 1999.
 
we still have a 2001 Ford Explorer XLS, and at the time, it did have Firestone Wilderness Ats. We never sent our vehicle back for recall and it turned ot fine. I think its partly driver error too that caused rollovers.
 
Innotech
we still have a 2001 Ford Explorer XLS, and at the time, it did have Firestone Wilderness Ats. We never sent our vehicle back for recall and it turned ot fine. I think its partly driver error too that caused rollovers.

Ah, no - the tread on the tires separated, leading to the vehicle careening out of control. If it happened on the highway, the vehicle rolled over - period - and there was no way to stop it. Driver error frequently leads to rollovers, but not in this case.

The new Maverick wasn't on the scene yet - this was late 1999.

So the old one was just a rebadged Nissan Terrano? Ick.
 
Back