UK to get Mitsubishi i city car

[1X83Z]

And you've got your behemoths which don't do Burnley or pass gas stations.

Exactly. It's absurd. And people wonder why I like practical cars.

So, am I to assume, that in the US, you've got cars that fit into all those categories? I'd be particularly interested in the 2 seaters that can accommodate passengers...

How come every single British person on this website assumes, when I'm speaking in general terms, that I'm taking shots at Britain?

 

[skip0110]

Keep it away from me. 0.6 liters? Jesus.

Exactly. It's absurd. And people wonder why I like practical cars.

Maybe if it had an automatic with a funky gate you'd like it better?

 

[YSSMAN]

...That might help him Skip...

 

[Race Idiot]

Which for a city car, is not a big deal. We can get by perfectly well without using motorways.

I dunno, I used to drive a 1100cc carbed fiesta with a slipping clutch, slowly dying from a main bearing faliure and I had no trouble with motorway driving. After I got the clutch fixed it was even better. I got to drive a more modern 999cc 16v polo a couple of times and it was more than adequate at 70mph, I had no problems merging, it felt just as good as my old 1.4 8v polo did.

I doubt this horrible mitsubishi would have problems with the odd motorway trip

 

[Famine]

I dunno, I used to drive a 1100cc carbed fiesta with a slipping clutch, slowly dying from a main bearing faliure and I had no trouble with motorway driving. After I got the clutch fixed it was even better. I got to drive a more modern 999cc 16v polo a couple of times and it was more than adequate at 70mph, I had no problems merging, it felt just as good as my old 1.4 8v polo did.

I doubt this horrible mitsubishi would have problems with the odd motorway trip

Our motorway sliproads are hyyyyyyyyy-owge compared to US on-ramps. Think post service-station A1 sliproads.

 

[Race Idiot]

Our motorway sliproads are hyyyyyyyyy-owge compared to US on-ramps. Think post service-station A1 sliproads.

Oh I never knew that, it must be a bit of a pain if theres allot of traffic then. But this horrible car isn't going to be sold in the us anyway, so does it realy matter if it's too slow to merge onto an american highway?

 

[Roo]

What's the 0-60 in this thing? If its less than 9 or so seconds it might not be so bad.

From the Mitsubishi website: 0-50 takes 11.2 seconds, estimated top speed is 90mph.

In any case, it's a city car. The traffic will ensure they'll never be driven above 20mph anyway.

If I had to chose a new car, I'd still rather have an Aygo.

 

[skip0110]

Our motorway sliproads are hyyyyyyyyy-owge compared to US on-ramps. Think post service-station A1 sliproads.

There is a junction near my house where you need to come to a full stop before merging with traffic where the speed limit is 55 mph, up a hill.

 

[Philly]

Our motorway sliproads are hyyyyyyyyy-owge compared to US on-ramps. Think post service-station A1 sliproads.

Um, I found I-90 to be pretty comparable to the M4. The M1 had ramps of pretty much the same lenght as I-5.

Oh, and I'm sure if the car came over here, it would have a bigger engine. Maybe a 1.5? I'm sure Americans won't be willing to test their maximum acceleration everytime they get on a freeway.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

I would doubt the bigger engine way of thinking; for a 1.5, Mitsubishi would be silly not to give us the Colt instead, as it's more in line with the Yaris/Fit class. The i probably can't fit a much bigger engine, as it was designed around the 2/3L engine, and it's placed in the rear.

Personally, I think it's a neat idea for a city car, and very much an accessory, yes... but that's a huge selling point for city cars. It's like a giant driveable iPod, not to mention since it seats four it's a hell of a lot more useable than a ForTwo.

As an aside, the ForTwo sells quite well in bigger city centres here, I see them all the time in Toronto and slightly less so here in Hamilton. I've even seen a few out in the country, and when you're never seeing anything more than 70mph it's really not too much of a problem. That bouncy suspension and jerky gearbox, though, probably are.

 

[YSSMAN]

Oh, and I'm sure if the car came over here, it would have a bigger engine. Maybe a 1.5? I'm sure Americans won't be willing to test their maximum acceleration everytime they get on a freeway.

Probably not. As noted above, the chances are that the 'i' would come without the bigger engine, as they would be better off just giving us the Colt in the process... Something that Mitsubishi has been "thinking about" for a while as I had understood it. My guess is likely that Mitsubishi is looking to see how models like the ForTwo and the various small-cars from the big Japanese companies work out.

...But as I have noted time and time again, Mitsubishi (at least in America) is on a dangerous teeter-toter when it comes to selling new cars and trucks, and not being a viable alternative in various markets that could be captured by other brands is a serious mistake. Why not send the 'i' to America and theoretically undercut the ForTwo in price and capability? Why not give us the Colt and show the Mazda 2 and Honda Fit who's boss?

I'm slowly losing faith in Mitsubishi, make no mistake, they have everything to lose. I have to wonder what the plans for the future at Mitsubishi North America look like, if there are any at all. They can't afford to lose out, and this is a good position for them to lose out again...

 

[1X83Z]

Maybe if it had an automatic with a funky gate you'd like it better?

Yum.