1991 Mitsubishi Montero Mpv With Safari Rack, 136k Miles on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2014 Mitsubishi Outlander earns Top Safety Pick+ award [w/video]

The Mitsubishi Outlander officially is a safe vehicle, earning a good rating in all of the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety crash test categories - good enough for the agency to give it the Top Safety Pick+ award. The small sport utility vehicle's little sibling, the Outlander Sport, received the Top Safety Pick award earlier this year.
According to the IIHS, to earn the Top Safety Pick+ rating vehicles must be rated good in at least four out of the five crash tests (including the difficult small overlap front test) and earn no less than acceptable in the rear crash test. The Top Safety Pick rating requires that vehicles be rated good in the moderate overlap front, side, rollover and rear tests, but there's no minimum rating on the small overlap front crash test.
Mitsubishi designed the Outlander to have greater roof strength (the roof now can support up to five times the SUV's weight) and to withstand the moderate overlap front crash test and the recently introduced small overlap front crash test, both of which evaluate the ability of vehicles to protect their occupants in crashes that bypass the traditional front crumple zone. Crumple zones are designed into vehicles to allow them to deform in a way that protects passengers in the event of a crash. The Outlander was one of two small SUVs to earn a good rating in the small overlap test, the other being the 2014 Subaru Forester. The Subaru earned a Top Safety Pick rating.

Mitsubishi and Renault-Nissan expand partnership, US will get new sedan

Mitsubishi and Renault-Nissan have just inked an alliance that might, hopefully, reverse the ailing fortunes of the Mitsubishi brand in the US market. The big chunk of news is that Mitsubishi will produce two Renualt-based models for sale in the US market, and that they'll be built at the Renault-Samsung factory in Busan, South Korea.
The plans call for a D-segment sedan to be followed by a C-segment offering. Based on the cars built at the Busan factory, that means Mitsubishi will be getting the SM5 and the SM3, a pair of handsome sedans that are based on Renault-Nissan's D and C platforms, respectively. These same platforms underpin a number of US market Nissans (not to mention a number of cars from Renault), namely the Pathfinder, Maxima, Quest and Murano for the D platform and the last-generation Rogue and Sentra for the C platform.
Besides the sedan production, Nissan and Mitsubishi will be expanding their joint-venture company, NMKV, which produces Kei cars for the Japanese market. A new, all-electric offering will be born from the partnership, likely based on a Kei car platform. The partnership between the three brands will also lead to increased sharing of technology, particularly relating to electric cars.

Mitsubishi denies plans for Toyota/Subaru rival sports coupe

Forgive us for being wistful, but there was a time when Mitsubishi coupes and sports cars were the downright awesome. The 1990s brought us the all-wheel drive, turbocharged Eclipse GSX and the twin-turbocharged 3000GT VR-4 (seen here). The times, they were good.
Fast-forward to today, and the Lancer Evolution exists as Mitsubishi's sole, true performance offering. Mitsubishi killed off the Eclipse last year, by which time it had lost much the luster of its predecessors. With an affordable Japanese sports car fomenting underway thanks to Scion FR-S and Subaru BRZ, one may think that it's an ideal time for a brand like Mitsubishi to jump back into the performance coupe game. A rear-drive Mitsubishi sports car to take on the Toyobaru twins could be just what the brand needs to gain some mindshare among consumers.
Not so, says Osamu Masuko. The president and executive director of Mitsubishi told reporters at the Sydney Motor Show, "Our engineers are very prominent to investigate new technologies, but to use that technology they are not that good to bring the revenue to make that money." Read: the engineers want to do it, but the company does not find it to be financially responsible.