
2012 Mitsubishi i electric car, New York City, August 2012
2012 Mitsubishi i Electric Car May Be Coming To...
2012 Mitsubishi i Electric Minicar: Drive...
2012 Mitsubishi 'i': Taking The Electric Car On...
It took a while, but we've finally had a chance to spend time with the smallest plug-in electric car sold in the U.S.
The 2012 Mitsubishi i (also known as the i-MiEV) is a battery electric minicar roughly the size of a Mini Cooper. The little hatchback has four doors, four usable seats, and a lot more space inside than you'd imagine from its egg-shaped exterior.
While most i-MiEVs we've seen were white, our test car was a startling shade of Raspberry Metallic purple that led us to nickname it Professor Plum--and made it almost impossible to photograph in sunlight.
During our four-day test running errands and doing short trips in various boroughs of New York City, our longest journey was from lower Manhattan out to City Island, the nautical community in the Bronx that juts off Pelham Bay Park into Long Island Sound.
Our trip followed the tracks of Jerry Seinfeld, who covered the same route in a gorgeous silver-blue classic 1967 Austin-Healey 3000 sports car--with a frequently terrified Ricky Gervais riding shotgun--in the latest episode of his series, "Comedians In Cars Getting Coffee."
While many would say the little Mitsu is simply too small for comfortable use, we found it fine for running around town. It was easy to park, and its tiny 31-foot turning circle let us do U-turns in just two lanes.
The real challenge with the electric Mitsubishi is its range.
The EPA rates it at 62 miles, but that number--as we experienced during a spate of steamy 90-plus-degree weather in NYC--falls dramatically if you use the air conditioning and turn up the fan.
An indicated range of 58 miles with the AC off fell to 41 miles when it was turned on, and to 37 miles with the fan on High. We gained about 1 mile of range each time we lowered fan speed by one or two levels.
While we'd hoped to take it to Breezy Point in the Rockaways (25 miles each way), that seemed like pushing it if we needed to use the AC a lot. So we chose City Island instead, at 17 to 20 miles each way.
We settled for a compromise that mixed opening all the windows with closing them back up and using the lowest AC setting and the lowest fan speed. For two passengers in the front, that proved sufficient--barely--and it didn't cut range as much as cooling the entire cabin would have.
After a full night's recharge, the highest range we saw indicated was 69 miles.
And, to be fair, driving sensibly and letting the car coast down on regenerative braking seemed to stretch the range somewhat beyond the indicated number.
Starting with 58 miles of range, we covered 45.8 miles at a mix of city and freeway speeds, and finished with 16 miles remaining--meaning we'd gained almost 10 percent on the indicated range.
Traveling in the little i wasn't as basic as we'd feared. The two-tone brown and dark grey interior was pleasant, and the hard plastics looked good.
We missed having an armrest, and Mitsubishi could do better on providing space for phones, sunglasses, soda bottles, toll tickets, and all the other stuff you want to store on the console if there's room. The i has one cupholder, behind the parking brake lever, two door bins, and a recess at the front of the console--that's about it.
Vision out the rear window is largely blocked by the rear-seat headrests, which we immediately removed. That made it an easy car to use, with its vertical rear easy to place (the rear-view camera wasn't really needed) and the very short front contributing to ease of parking, even though you can't see it from the driver's seat.
On the freeway, the car showed its two worst traits: First, with the windows open (to save range), it's really, really noisy--more so than most cars.
More worrisome, at speeds above 50 mph, the car's suspension tuning just isn't capable of coping with some types of ripply pavement. With a little more than 1,000 miles on the odometer, New York City pavement surfaces made the car float and wander as if it had worn-out shocks.
That only occurred a few times, but it was the first time we felt unsure of ourselves in the little i. It's more usable even at speeds up to 65 mph than we'd expected--but range will start to dwindle visibly if you take it above 60 mph.
Have an opinion?
Also a little surprised at your problems with the seat and mirror adjustments. I didn't have any problem there, and found outward visibility decent (once I removed the miserable rear-seat headrests that blocked rear vision). I'm 6'0" and average build, not sure about you?
I'm not sure why the U.S. SE models have such lame interiors - browner plastic and seating fabric is not the stuff of upgrades. The U.K. version can really look premium if you want; click here and choose "Tamashii":
http://www.mitsubishi-cars.co.uk/imiev/interior-360.aspx
I really wanted an EV now for some specific reasons, and got the total deal I needed on an i-MiEV ES to make it worth doing. But if you can wait and you're in the right markets (the coasts mainly), I do expect a lot of those SE Premiums to sell at a steep discount, though probably still more than $20k after tax credit.
I still wouldn't buy it nor recommend it to anyone yet...not for at least another year or two so till Mitsu gets the bugs out n range up a little more...for the same price.
62 miles is what they say and it is the lowest range of any EV for sale (excluding EREVs).
Although it is valuable to hear some first-hand anecdotes, I will place my bets with the actual experts (EPA or any large agency consistently testing cars.) and yes, journalists have to go more into the anecdote column of the ledger as doing scientific inquiry is not their strength.
Let me give you an example, one that you are familiar with. Prius Plugins. EPA rated it as 6 miles All Electric range when we know in fact that ranges varies from 0 miles to 15 miles depending on how you drive. So, why the 6 miles Rating? B/c in its test cycle, that is where they "press hard" on the "gas pedal".
So, is that "expert" testing biased without explaining what actual "electric" range is? To pure Prius Fans, their cars can do 15 miles Electric, but in real life, it varies from 0-15 miles...
EPA doesn't provide those information. The journalists and real time "car magzine" reviewers do...
No journalist, car reviewer, or car owner even comes close to providing such accurate information. In fact, most journalists don't really understand the Plug-in Prius and the challenges of measuring the efficiency of a blended mode hybrid and to say otherwise is really giving too much credit to journalists that don't understand the difference between KWH and KW.
I will ask you again, does any PIP owners dare to leave the house with empty tank and go for a 11 miles drive on daily basis?
However, this is the fault of Journalists not the EPA.
Please look at the EPA web site.
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=32484
It says "11 miles gas/elec" Nowhere does it show EV only range. That is a product of bad reporting (mostly).
Compare that with how it is reported on GCR and you will see the problem.
Of course, it would probably be better and cleaner if it worked like an EREV (straight up, no sarcasm implied).
But can you imagine any gasoline car being sold with the advice that it's better not to use it on freeways & not to use the climate control?
That's a sacrifice mainstream buyers will NOT accept. They may accept limited range if it "seems" to be high enough--120 miles was the consensus among commenters earlier--that they "think" it will be enough for their needs.
Quite frankly, no matter how rational the reasons for buying a plug-in car may be, retail car buyers do NOT make particularly rational buying decisions. Try as we may to explain, they persist in buying cars based on what they think. That's reality.
But getting the car-buying public to understand that is a long haul, and if the widespread availability of affordable plug-ins depends on convincing people to buy a car in which they really shouldn't use the AC much--it won't happen.
Re/the Mitsubishi 'i': I liked it, and I could live with a real-world range. But in NYC, it gets hot in the summer. The fact that the range decrease from using the AC prevented me from going to a destination (Breezy Point) within my own city (!!) is a significant drawback.
1) i-MiEV is pessimistic about the effect of A/C on range. But no, I'd still not drive 25 miles to dest w/41 mi. range remaining and no opportunity for charging en route.
2) Nissan Leaf might be a better fit in that environment, given its marginally greater range. It's not a lot, but if it's the difference between making some trips or not, it would be worth a lot.
3) (unhelpful) Contrary to the marketing strategy of the manufacturers, I think the Northeast and SoCal megalopoli are ill-suited to EVs. Too much sitting in traffic running HVAC, huge sprawl, etc. Much better fit for isolated towns w/limited sprawl (I'm in Albuquerque).
69 miles city or
55 miles hwy
This is probably not fair off of reality given the feedback from LEAF owners versus EPA ratings.
If I'm the "so-called expert" who only owns and operates gasoline cars, I can assure you I've driven plug-ins from Nissan, GM, Ford, Toyota, Honda, Fisker, Tesla, Think, Wheego & one or two more I've forgotten.
Any electric car maker expects to sell high volumes of a car that doesn't provide the features of a conventional car--and a "comfortable" range, whether it's 75 or 120 miles--is likely to find the car won't sell. Case in point: Think.
I test plug-ins doing the same things I'd do in a gas car because that's how most owners will use them. Your extreme adaptability is not likely to be replicated by most buyers.
Thank you for your response and sorry for the tone of my previous contribution.
Further to me being EV driver, I have recognized that the range we are talking about is a daily range. Gas drivers (99.9xx% people) are shopping for fuel just like for groceries, they travel to gas stations and this has been habit for a century. The same drivers don't recognize that their daily commute is typically less then, say 40, 60 or 80 miles (you can assign percentile for each, I don't have these figures) and their cars are doing nothing at night. EVs function on a different scheme - you refuel your car in your home overnight and you don't have to travel for fuel. You know it well but consumers do not.
Definitely, EVs are not for long trips.
It seems to me that you are both right. Mr. Jaracz is frustrated because the GCR team tested the Mitsu i as it does other conventional cars during the drive and testing time...with two people, A/C going, and some probably faster then speed limit driving at times. Consequently, range suffers dramatically.
However, many of the first owners of the second gen Prius and current owners of new, efficiency oriented EVs(Mitsu i, Leaf, Focus EV) tend to drive the vehicles at lower speeds and with efficiency more part of our driving experience then the "average American" vehicle driver. Consequently, these drivers usually attain or often surpass EPA estimates.
We are trying to guess future, here, but we are taking part in shaping it. Electrification of US mobility, if successfull would be a hell of a revolution!
And, it is unrealistic and just down right fantasy if anyone thinks that EV builders are really trying or even able to build EVs in "high volumes" in this half of the decade. Small production now leading to higher production later. Leaf wants to be THE green vehicle this decade like Prius was last
Have an opinion?Join the conversation!