G_Body_Man
G_Body_Man Dork
11/18/15 7:52 p.m.

I bet you weren't expecting it to grow up. Yes, the baby Mitsubishi sports new lights, fascias, wheels, and a new hood.

It gets a more aggressive cam for more power (78, up from 74), and retuned dampers and springs that hopefully will provide a starchier and better controlled setup. Braking power is also up, with bigger front discs and rear drums, as well as better quality pads and shoes. A manual transmission is standard, with a next generation CVT as an option.

Inside, it gets some new piano black and chrome trim, along with revised instrumentation. Seat fabrics are also new, along with an available Rockford Fosgate EcoPunch 300 watt stereo. This sound system can be mated to a 6.1" navigation system with Apple Carplay and Android Auto integration.

So what does everyone think of the new 2017 Mitsubishi Mirage? Could it be an interesting little city runabout, or is it all just a figment of your imagination?

clutchsmoke
clutchsmoke SuperDork
11/18/15 8:17 p.m.

I'm told the rest of the car is junk and feels like you're driving around a 90s geo metro. I mean if you have to buy new and can't afford better I guess this works?

Gearheadotaku
Gearheadotaku PowerDork
11/18/15 8:59 p.m.

You'd be better off buying a 3 or 4 year old Civic/Cruze/Focus for the same money.

logdog
logdog SuperDork
11/18/15 9:19 p.m.

Looks like this is the basic, simple car that many people on the internet swear they will buy if only somebody would make a simple, basic car.

pointofdeparture
pointofdeparture PowerDork
11/18/15 9:36 p.m.

In case you haven't seen it, these were the victim of possibly the most vicious auto review of this decade. Hopefully they took some of the criticism to heart, Mitsubishi could use the help...

Low expectations don’t guarantee happiness, but at least there isn’t much disappointment. The reborn Mitsubishi Mirage lowers expectations, strangles them and buries their remains in a deep unmarked grave. If this car wasn’t disappointing, it wouldn’t be anything at all.
Rufledt
Rufledt UltraDork
11/18/15 10:08 p.m.

In reply to pointofdeparture:

wow that was harsh

logdog wrote: Looks like this is the basic, simple car that many people on the internet swear they will buy if only somebody would make a simple, basic car.

I think there's a difference between simple/basic, and cheap crap. I would suggest the simple/basic car out there is the mazda 2- it's close in price (starts cheaper than the model used in that test linked by pointofdeparture) and it doesn't blow chunks.

carzan
carzan Dork
11/18/15 10:51 p.m.

Looks like they HAVE made some improvements since the review of the 2014 model. There's an awful lot of hate for a car that no one here has even tried. Here's the Motorweek test of a 2015 model. If the 2017 is an improvement over that, it might be worth a look.

oldopelguy
oldopelguy SuperDork
11/19/15 5:02 a.m.

Over 30k miles on my 2014, including the trip to TX to pick up my new truck. Average just under 40 mpg lifetime, less in the cold and more when warm, 50+ if I am driving the 55 mph back roads in MN back and forth to the family cabin.

I've not had any issues at all so far. I added a rear sway bar and swapped down to 13" rims and tires instead of the stock impossible to find 14" ones, but anything else is cosmetic. It is like a Geo Metro, except with power features, more power, better seats, and a great Bluetooth setup.

Klayfish
Klayfish UltraDork
11/19/15 5:56 a.m.

I looked at them hard about 18 months ago when I was searching for a cheap fuel efficient beater. Local dealers offered me a new ES model (the highest trim level) for right around $12k. If in your mind you had to have a brand new car and wanted something to get you from point A to point B, with some decent creature comforts, I didn't think it was all that horrible. But I also felt that a CPO Corolla, Civic, Cruze would be a better way to spend your money.

Type Q
Type Q Dork
11/19/15 9:44 a.m.

Sounds like a great car for businesses needing inexpensive light duty vehicles. I am thinking pizza delivery and the like.

Duke
Duke MegaDork
11/19/15 9:47 a.m.
G_Body_Man wrote: I bet you weren't expecting it to grow up.

I wasn't expecting Mitsubishi to still be selling cars in 2017.

1988RedT2
1988RedT2 PowerDork
11/19/15 9:59 a.m.

Wasn't the 1989 Galant the last car that Mitsubishi made that garnered critical acclaim? How are they still in the US market, or even still existing at all?

I predict the 2017 Mirage will do nothing to improve their prospects, but what do I know? I predicted their demise twenty years ago.

Klayfish
Klayfish UltraDork
11/19/15 11:25 a.m.
1988RedT2 wrote: Wasn't the 1989 Galant the last car that Mitsubishi made that garnered critical acclaim? How are they still in the US market, or even still existing at all? I predict the 2017 Mirage will do nothing to improve their prospects, but what do I know? I predicted their demise twenty years ago.

When the Evo arrived here, it was very well received. I thought it might spark Mitsu sales, but obviously that didn't happen.

I think the Outlander sells enough here to keep them in business.

Fueled by Caffeine
Fueled by Caffeine MegaDork
11/19/15 11:49 a.m.

I'd rather have a dacia sandero.

1988RedT2
1988RedT2 PowerDork
11/19/15 11:50 a.m.
Klayfish wrote:
1988RedT2 wrote: Wasn't the 1989 Galant the last car that Mitsubishi made that garnered critical acclaim? How are they still in the US market, or even still existing at all? I predict the 2017 Mirage will do nothing to improve their prospects, but what do I know? I predicted their demise twenty years ago.

When the Evo arrived here, it was very well received. I thought it might spark Mitsu sales, but obviously that didn't happen.

I think the Outlander sells enough here to keep them in business.

See, I knew somebody would mention the Evo, but lets face it. A $40k econobox with drivetrain upgrades isn't the kind of car that keeps a company afloat.

Yeah, the SUV Outlander, I suppose.

bravenrace
bravenrace MegaDork
11/19/15 11:56 a.m.

What's a Mitsushibi?

trucke
trucke Dork
11/19/15 12:08 p.m.
bravenrace wrote: What's a Mitsushibi?

bravenrace
bravenrace MegaDork
11/19/15 12:41 p.m.

In reply to trucke:

Really? Its a Mitsushibi, not a Mitsubishi?

mad_machine
mad_machine MegaDork
11/19/15 12:42 p.m.

I think I would buy a Hyundai Accent first.

Maybe it is just the damage done by cheap/broke and hamfisted owners.. but every mitsu I have seen smoked.. and this included my own Mitsu powered Hyundai excel.. by 100,000 miles it was well on it's way to emphysema

Klayfish
Klayfish UltraDork
11/19/15 3:06 p.m.
bravenrace wrote: What's a Mitsushibi?

I actually have this TV, it's awesome.

trucke
trucke Dork
11/19/15 3:32 p.m.
bravenrace wrote: In reply to trucke: Really? Its a Mitsushibi, not a Mitsubishi?

I was trying to downplay your spelling abilities!

Feedyurhed
Feedyurhed SuperDork
11/19/15 6:46 p.m.

I actually really use to like Mitsubishi. The Galant VR4, first gen. Eclipse (Diamond Star) and of course all the Evos. They sure dropped the ball.

tuna55
tuna55 MegaDork
11/20/15 7:02 a.m.

I dunno, I like it...

TGMF
TGMF Reader
11/20/15 7:36 a.m.

Drove a '14 for work. 90's Geo metro feels like the same car. The sound of the three cylinder was entertaining, mostly because it sounds different than almost everything else on the road. But the CVT is lazy, when the gutless engine is finally wound up, you better enjoy the sound, because it will be screaming its funky 3 cylinder noise for a long time as you attempt forward progress. Horrible car is a understatement. A manual trans probably makes it significantly better, but no matter what, you're far better off in the used car market for....well anything other than one of these.

BobOfTheFuture
BobOfTheFuture Dork
11/20/15 8:50 p.m.

I liked this one I saw at STPR

Grassroots Motorsports Magazine

Subscribe Today

Also get your instant access to the digital edition of Grassroots Motorsports Magazine!

Learn More
ElV3AOjmAJsU6IID7noL6R2TqsYaiuzu