Mitsubishi on the other hand has always struck me as more corporate and less soulful. Though I loved my 91 Turbo Colt it only went 95K before the Turbo quit and even at the age of 9 was starting to suffer from lack of dealer parts support. Their new product has never really spun my prop. Not particularly attractive or innovative. I wouldn’t really miss them at all.

Problem is, the Evo, especially the Evo X, especially the Evo X MR, is just _so damn good_. I absolutely love mine.

Suzuki? Give to me and I’ll turn it around…but it would take awhile and some cash. I have never ever understood why Suzuki cars doesn’t lean on Suzuki bike’s reputation and build sporty cars like they build sport bikes…and why only econo-class cars? Why not something more upmarket? Again, calling upon the bike side’s reputation I would start by pulling out of the U.S. market and stay away for a few years. Over the next few years, I would try and build a no-excuses sports car…something with Corvette levels of performance for around $40,000. Then I would build a true small 2-seat roadster (think Honda Beat/Miata/MR2 Spyder) for around $25,000….Then I would build a Lancer Evo/Subie WRX competitive sedan and like the EVO/WRX, you can buy it as a base model FWD sedan for $18K, and all the way up to a 300HP AWD $40,000 super-rally car…I think Suzuki should study their bike reputation, understand what makes that very successful for them, look at Lotus and Porsche’s line of vehicles(minus Cayenne) and move in THAT direction and stop trying to be an econo-car builder. You’ve got a great rep…use it.

but the fact remains that this was a fun car to drive which is more than can be said of the Rav 4 or CRV. I now drive an 03 Honda Pilot. Very reliable but it bores me close to death each time i drive it.

I miss my Outlander :-(

The problem with Mitsubishi is that in the US the only good vehicles they have are the Oulander & Lancer. As others suggest adding the L200 (with diesel) & the Colt to the range and then work to replace the Galant with something people want.

Both Mazda & Subaru compete with the Toyota’s & Honda’s by creating cars that are reliable AND fun to drive – based on the Outlander lancer twins Mitsu could do the same

Suzuki needs to stick to what it knows best ie. small cars. The Kizashi is nice enough concept but I fail to see it gaining any traction as a production model.

*Shrug*

Cars like the Focus and the Swift would be a deal-maker against the Mini in my opinion, but sadly, we cant buy anything cool and economical here in the land of fast food.

But I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. WRC surrender-monkeys don’t get much sympathy from me. If these two brands leave, please take Subaru with you. Maybe the three of you can put your chest hair together and make something that will give a kid in India some goosebumps.

Lastly, why is it that Europe and Japan, both smaller markets, seem to support so many different brands, while the U.S. seems to be heading towards a world of less choice?

Because both market run to similar tastes… which tend towards the smaller side compared to the US market. Smaller players who sell their products across a wider range of markets can have better success than a big player whose products only work in one.

Kei cars are an exception… they’re Japan’s SUV… or, more accurately… their own car-buyer tax-loophole. One that keeps the Kei market alive, despite the cars being much too small for serious export elsewhere.

The US, on the other hand… granted their car-buyer tax loophole to SUVs. Now, SUVs, unlike Kei cars, are large, luxurious, and pretty guzzly. How much of Ford or GM’s European and Asian sales do you think is made up of SUVs? Not much… thanks to higher gas taxes, narrower roads and the fact that they cost a hell of a lot outside the US. The fact that they sell at all is only because businessmen and politicians need something big and sturdy to armor-plate, but many European brands offer better luxury and in-house armor-plating… Ford and GM only have strong presences in foreign markets because of their foreign arms… Opel, GMDAT, Mazda, Ford Europe… which make cars that the rest of the world actually wants.

The US market can’t support many manufacturers because to sell in the US, you need something different from what is sold elsewhere. Or that’s what the car companies think. Numbers back it up, though… the Ford Mondeo/Contour… the Saturn Astra… the Holden… errh… Pontiac G8… all well-received in their home markets, but just not competitive in the US.

Suzuki is in a good position for this crisis… except in the US… where it’s forced to sell GMDAT products. Selling a wide variety of cars, kei cars, motorcycles and scooters, they have a good connection with young consumers… not to mention the fact that their Alto and Swift nameplates sell pretty well under the Maruti brand in India. Shorn of its links to GM, Suzuki should survive. In fact, it ought to do better.

Mitsubishi, on the other hand, is a basketcase. They only have two decent products… the Outlander/Lancer platform and the Strada/L200 (noteworthy as the best performing ladder-frame pick-up in EuroNCAP crash-testing). Their Galant/Endeavor/Eclipse line is a mess… the Pajero is no longer competitive and way overdue for an overhaul… the Colt might have some merit, but is saddled by design excess worse than the previous “Boulay” nose saga.

I really would like to see Mitsubishi live, but I doubt they can survive in this climate.

probably because there is no uniform standard re. opacity and some states ban tinting on front windows.

Laws for truck/SUV/van tinting are different than for sedans.

He has a 2004 Toyota Matrix. 66,000 miles with only some minor problems (and an ill-fitting windshield) Runs good, decent gas mileage.

The only thing that bothers him is that his drivers side door lock is malfunctioning. The cost for repairing that? $480.00

Yep, $480.00

I don’t really believe it’s a “Mitsubishi” problem.

Truth is..this country needs more junkyards, not less.

It seems to me that this line undercuts the argument that Suzuki and Mitsubishi need to leave the US market. After all, nobody is compelled to “pay a salary” to either firm (such as is the case with Gummint Motors and New ChryCo). Those of us who prefer their products freely pay to purchase them. Further, should the US market be deprived of automotive tubas and piccolos, simply to increase the sale of violins and trumpets? If so, then I expect a call for Maserati, Bugatti and other specialty makes to leave the US market.

Contrast the presence of Suzuki and Mitsubishi in the US market with that of other firms, and ask yourself who is paying for what unpopular musicians….

The only thing that bothers me about my Outlander is that my AC/Heat knob is about to not be able to switch from AC to heat. The cost for repairing that? $800…

Yep, $800…

Other than that, great vehicle. Next one though…Toyota…Honda…or Nissan…

Suzuki’s best hope is to leverage their microcar and motorcycle strengths into the US market (think Hayabusa/Wagon-R), and if Mitsubishi can make the MiEV thing commercially viable they could go in that direction. Basically, they need to be where the big lumbering giants of the market aren’t.

I’ve never been able to figure out whether most Mitsubishis burn oil because their engines suck or because they are bought by people who never change the oil.

Oh and the Evo is hideously expensive. Being more $$$ then nearly every entry-level luxury car is a bad idea. An MR can zoom past $40K with options. That’s 335i/IS350/G37 territory.

spyspeed: “why the hell can’t I buy a sedan, ANY SEDAN, with factory privacy glass?”

Because (a) window tint is easily applied by dealers and other aftermarket vendors; and (b) what a buyer considers to be a car with trendy “privacy glass” a state may ban as an unsafe blacked-out mafiamobile.

If Mitsubishi brough Diamante in, I would seriously consider getting it. I’m in the market for something like it right now. But since there was such a big gap in Diamante availability, it should be considered 1MY car now.

The ultimate goal for them still has to be to make profit. Obviously, they can make money elsewhere, at least Suzuki.So,it should be OK for everyone.

They would be in good company, too. Nobody in the US, for example, really misses Peugeots, Citroens, Fiats, Alfas, although they have some interesting cars. Maybe too little, to cover the US market.

It’s been proven time and again. If you have a pulse, you can be bought by Suzuki or Mitsu.