What went wrong?

>good gas mileage.

caranddriver.com/reviews/2014-mitsubishi-mirage-es-test-review

>Small-car shoppers likely will be more interested in the Mirage’s 37-mpg city/44-mpg highway fuel efficiency. We couldn’t verify those numbers, though; we managed an unimpressive 26 mpg, mostly because we found ourselves using every bit of the 1.2’s power just to keep from being run over by pelotons of shouting cyclists.

EPA cycle != real world economy

They were always an off-brand Subaru.

>off-brand Subaru.

So a Subaru?

Because Americans don't know how to drive small cars.
you can accelerate in normal speed and stick on the right lane and have good gas mileage.
I bet every time they accelerate they passed the 3k rom, hell even 3.5

It's because americans are fortunate enough to not have to deal with NA I-3's on a daily basis

The mirage is a truly terrible car, you can get much better, even new for the same price.

> you can get much better, even new for the same price.

like what?

Hyundai Accent
Ford Fiesta
Nissan Versa Note
Toyota Yaris
Chevy Sonic

Honda fit a like $1500 more and way better too

they are all cost more.
are you taking about new cars?

They cost $1000 - $2000 more for an infinitely better car

Point is, if you buy a mirage you might be retarded. It's just one of those cars no one should have to buy.

...

Because of this OP....

I didn't buy it

Your still probably retarded

No, I'm not it's just my English because I'm not native english speaker.
you still gave me more expensive car.
For example instead of Nissan versa you should have compare it to the Nissan micra and instead of the Chevrolet Sonic, the Chevrolet spark
You idiot

>that interior

Micra and spark are also nicer, thanks for adding to my list of cars within 2k of that mirage shitbox

Pearl Harbor left Americlaps forever assmad, and hopping in bed with Chrysler stained their reputation for reliability.

Also they have this habit of making something good and doing nothing with it while the (cheaper) competition catches up and eventually overtakes them.

Mitsubishi models sell fine everywhere other than Clapistan. They sell those kei cars in Japan and crossovers everywhere else. There's always the complaint of bland interiors and the Lancer having shit fuel mileage compared to its competitors, but never any complaint about reliability. CVTs are shit but their manual transmissions are solid.

(((Safety))) standards and modern car design. And mores the pity that the DSMs and later Eclipses were exclusive to North America.

It's a pity the Ralliart performance arm was so underused. If they had continued making the top Eclipse trims into AWD/turbo Evo coupes they would've at least escaped the hairdressers' car reputation.

Nothing went wrong at all.

Also their air conditioner units are god tier.

They do have that habit
Lancer was a great car when first released but it's like a 10 year old platform and they are still charging normal price for it..

Meh, i don't think the 4th gen i ugly, but they done goofed by not offering turbo engines and awd.

Do you suppose the partial merge with Nii-san will help it along, or will we get stuck with a rebadged Pulsar while (((Ghosn))) forces them to crank out CVT crossovers and SUVs?

say what you want. i will shill 'til i die.

there is nothing wrong with mitsubishi.

they not only have made the glorious sirius family of engines, but have contributed greatly to the automotive industry.

Industrializing Japan was a mistake

>evo is faster than the wrx
>wrx stole the styling of the evo x
>but Mitsubishi is the off brand
K

...

This.
>Subaru's asspain when their flash new prototype widebody WRC Impreza continues to be dominated by a production Evo Lancer for four years running

They stopped making these.

They also didn't make the FTO available in the US.