Official Mitsubishi Outlander PHEV SUV thread

CHAdeMO or other quick charge is essential to a serious EV.

Dropping it for the US version is brain dead.

Scratch the long waited for Mitsubishi Outlander from my list.

finman100 said:

I use my Chademo port all the time ('14 Leaf SV).

Here in the PNW the DC chademo chargers are all over the place. everywhere i like to go EV! the coast, the mountains, I-5, clear up into Seattle. you name it. Aeroenvironment is nearly flawless. Others...um, not so much but tolerable for now. I do wish more stalls per location would happen.

dual-power stations seem to be slowly making the scene. CCS and Chademo in one box. Most recently a CCS-only charger in the Albany Freddies parking lot has popped up. Maybe there is a plan for more.

My Leaf is MUCH less usable if it did not have a QC port. Even less usable if had a CCS port! my 2 cents.

Click to expand...

Would you still plug in if it took 30 minutes to get 20 miles of range and you had a gas tank that would give you 400 miles in 3 minutes?

dm33 said:

CHAdeMO or other quick charge is essential to a serious EV.

Dropping it for the US version is brain dead.

Scratch the long waited for Mitsubishi Outlander from my list.

Click to expand...

I kind of see CHAdeMO being not as useful with a smaller pack, you spend 30 minutes to gain what, 20 miles? Will it have 7kW OBC at least? That's a big plus in my book as charging stations at my workplace bill by the hour.

I would use a QC port on my PHEV every time I could, if it was available. Of course, I'm in the minority / enthusiast crowd and want to support the network so it will continue to grow. As far as Ford is concerned, they included one. Like pkulak said; it's on the passenger's side, towards the rear of the car.

finman100 said:

My Leaf is MUCH less usable if it did not have a QC port. Even less usable if had a CCS port! my 2 cents.

Click to expand...

How would your Leaf be any less useful with a CCS port than without a QC port at all? That statement seems silly.

There are fewer CCS charging stations than Chademo. Quite a few less in fact!

Yes, I would plug in whenever possible.

But your comment isn't comparing CHAdeMO to CCS. You are comparing no QC port at all to CCS. So CHAdeMO is completely irrelevant.

Maybe you misspoke?

finman100 said:

My Leaf is MUCH less usable if it did not have a QC port. Even less usable if had a CCS port! my 2 cents.

Click to expand...

GetOffYourGas said:

I would use a QC port on my PHEV every time I could, if it was available. Of course, I'm in the minority / enthusiast crowd and want to support the network so it will continue to grow. As far as Ford is concerned, they included one. Like pkulak said; it's on the passenger's side, towards the rear of the car. <snip>

Click to expand...

I just don't see any point of QC for PHEVs. I think the bolded section is really the point; do we want to build EVs for the enthusiasts, or for the mainstream? I assume that the goal is to build them for the mainstream, and there's no way the mainstream (or me FTM, and I'm way outside the mainstream as far as what accommodations I'm willing to make to reduce fossil fuel use) is going to opt to use more expensive and slower QC when a far faster, cheaper, longer-ranged and universally distributed option is available.

At least, I believe that's the case, and I'd love to see some data on what percentage of i3REx owners also bought the CCS option, and what portion of those actually use it when they can instead just put gas in the car and be on their way again almost immediately. I don't know if Tom Moloughney has CCS on his i3REx, but I note that he posted an article/video about a road trip he took to Vermont, where he made a point of noting how quickly he could fill the gas tank and be back on the road.

GRA said:

GetOffYourGas said:

I would use a QC port on my PHEV every time I could, if it was available. Of course, I'm in the minority / enthusiast crowd and want to support the network so it will continue to grow. As far as Ford is concerned, they included one. Like pkulak said; it's on the passenger's side, towards the rear of the car. <snip>

Click to expand...

I just don't see any point of QC for PHEVs. I think the bolded section is really the point; do we want to build EVs for the enthusiasts, or for the mainstream? I assume that the goal is to build them for the mainstream, and there's no way the mainstream (or me FTM, and I'm way outside the mainstream as far as what accommodations I'm willing to make to reduce fossil fuel use) is going to opt to use more expensive and slower QC when a far faster, cheaper, longer-ranged and universally distributed option is available.

Click to expand...

Agreed 100%. And that's the rub. PHEVs will do wonders to reduce petroleum usage in the next decade. They will even give people the "EV Bug" or whatever you want to call it. What they will not do is provide significant demand for public charging. It just doesn't make sense for the owners.

Over the Thanksgiving weekend, I visited family in Vermont. I frequently charged my PHEV at the downtown parking garage and walked up the hill from there. But I went a little out of my way to 1) reduce gas consumption and 2) support the local public EVSEs. Fortunately for me, they were reasonably priced at $0.17/kWh. Which is roughly equivalent to the price of gas at the time ($2/gallon).

GRA said:

At least, I believe that's the case, and I'd love to see some data on what percentage of i3REx owners also bought the CCS option, and what portion of those actually use it when they can instead just put gas in the car and be on their way again almost immediately. I don't know if Tom Moloughney has CCS on his i3REx, but I note that he posted an article/video about a road trip he took to Vermont, where he made a point of noting how quickly he could fill the gas tank and be back on the road.

Click to expand...

Interesting that you quote Tom's journey. I read his writeup about it on insideEVs, in which he specifically mentions a stop to use his CCS QC at the NA BMW headquarters in NJ. So yes, he has the REx and CCS. And yes, he goes out of his way to charge at the slower (although in this case, free) QCs he comes across. But Tom is also way outside of the mainstream.

So lets look at main stream. in a fleet, like the post office, police department or power Co. the car and trucks go out in the mornings, come back mid day for 20 min, go back out . come back for lunch 30 min. go out for the afternoon. I would like to have the fast charge option on a volt. They go out in the morning, then they are on gas for the rest of the day. the cars never charge to full till they come back at night. the drivers want to know why they have to drive this stupid car, that we are on there ass to plug in when they park. " The car will only gain like 4 miles and I will leave soon anyway get off my back!"
The Mitsubishi looks great, the 3 being tested in Orange county at the RD center work well . I think that for the main steam, a mid size all wheel drive SUV that seats 7 is a home run. this truck will do big things. I hope there is enough of them.

GetOffYourGas said:

GRA said:

At least, I believe that's the case, and I'd love to see some data on what percentage of i3REx owners also bought the CCS option, and what portion of those actually use it when they can instead just put gas in the car and be on their way again almost immediately. I don't know if Tom Moloughney has CCS on his i3REx, but I note that he posted an article/video about a road trip he took to Vermont, where he made a point of noting how quickly he could fill the gas tank and be back on the road.

Click to expand...

Interesting that you quote Tom's journey. I read his writeup about it on insideEVs, in which he specifically mentions a stop to use his CCS QC at the NA BMW headquarters in NJ. So yes, he has the REx and CCS. And yes, he goes out of his way to charge at the slower (although in this case, free) QCs he comes across. But Tom is also way outside of the mainstream.

Click to expand...

Thanks, I'd forgotten many of the details of his trip. I knew he'd installed a 24kW QC at the restaurant, but couldn't remember if he used it or if it was intended just for customers.

speedski97 said:

So lets look at main stream. in a fleet, like the post office, police department or power Co. the car and trucks go out in the mornings, come back mid day for 20 min, go back out . come back for lunch 30 min. go out for the afternoon. I would like to have the fast charge option on a volt. They go out in the morning, then they are on gas for the rest of the day. the cars never charge to full till they come back at night. the drivers want to know why they have to drive this stupid car, that we are on there ass to plug in when they park. " The car will only gain like 4 miles and I will leave soon anyway get off my back!"
The Mitsubishi looks great, the 3 being tested in Orange county at the RD center work well . I think that for the main steam, a mid size all wheel drive SUV that seats 7 is a home run. this truck will do big things. I hope there is enough of them.

Click to expand...

It will be 5 seat with the same boot volume as a normal 5 seat outlander, but not the extra 2 seats of the 7 seater.

Small but important details seem quite improved, initial acceleration, noise and vibration. Its kinda like the got they memo to make the car comparable to what the brits/dutch were trading in, as opposed to just being another Outlander.

(Brits were trading in company lease cars like Land Rover etc.)

and no, in general they look so similar to a the normal Outlander (of same model year) that the main way to tell its a PHEV is if there is a charge/petrol port) on both sides.

Why Mitsubishi Is Making a Big Mistake By Removing CHAdeMO Quick Charging on U.S. Outlander Plug-in Hybrid

...We, like many, are disappointed by this decision. And it leaves us just one question left: does Mitsubishi really want to sell the Outlander PHEV in North America — or is its doubtful attitude to the market going to become a self-fulfilling prophecy of market failure?

Click to expand...

https://transportevolved.com/2016/01/08/why-mitsubishi-is-making-a-big-mistake-by-removing-chademo-quick-charging-on-u-s-outlander-plug-in-hybrid/

While I agree with the writer that this decision By Mitsubishi USA is another example of corporate self-abuse, I think she and others have missed the fundamental reason every vehicle with a significant battery pack should have a DC port.

While today many think of vehicle batteries as only having a single purpose, vehicle propulsion, I think in only a few years this point of view will be widely viewed to have been very short-sighted.

Every kWh in every vehicle pack has the potential to be used for other purposes, vehicle to grid, vehicle to microgrid, or as a mobile electricity source at off-grid locations or during grid failures.

Access the mobile kWh in your vehicle will almost certainly be through a DC port, accessed by an off-vehicle charge/discharge device.

This is one reason why the dedicated CHAdeMO DC port, is superior IMO in concept to any combo AC/DC port, such as the SAE/CCS.

So, Mitsubishi is essentially getting rid of the wrong charge port.

Eventually some "plug-in" manufacturer will have the foresight to omit the truly useless hardware on it's PHEV/ BEV, the AC onboard charger, leaving the single charge port you need on your BEV/BEVx/PHEV, the DC one.

Take my on-board charger...PLEASE!

http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=19953

Oh god no. Put as much hardware in my car and under my control as possible.

My favorite quote from a reviewer about the Mitsubishi Outlander is, "It would have been a good vehicle in 2006... Today, it is simply not even an also-ran..." I think that sums it up nicely!

Mitsu had the PHEV at CES and I looked at it in detail. I walked away very unimpressed...

Is it because of the aging platform or the PHEV tech?

All platform. The drivetrain is really nice.

The aging platform. As a vehicle, it is a full generation behind everything else in the class, even with the recent updates... It simply is uncompetitive.

Valdemar said:

Is it because of the aging platform or the PHEV tech?

Click to expand...

Not that I'd call it gospel but they had someone on Live with Regis(or whatever it's called now) and they were talking about the NY auto show going on now?? Anyway one of the cars they talked about was the Mitsubishi Outlander PHEV. I looked at the Outlander recently at my local auto show but they didn't have the PHEV nor really know anything about it. I was looking at several PHEV's mainly because I wanted a larger vehicle than my Leaf. I really liked the Chrysler Pacifica PHEV but was turned off by it's probable $50K+ initial price, but liked it's possible 30+ EV range and seating for up to 8. The '16 ICE Outlanders started at $22.9K so I had high hopes for the PHEV being reasonably priced. Well on Live they said it would start at $40k and have a range of up to 20 miles electric only If thats the case I'm really disappointed, I mean for $18k I can buy a lot of gas, especially if my range is only 20 miles of pure EV. No wonder Mitsubishi is failing miserably in the US I'm also not too happy I'd lose the 3rd row on the Mits. going with the PHEV(not the case with the Chrysler but one does lose the 2nd row sto-n-go) but I could have probably lived with that.

So what I know for now about the Outlander PHEV vs ICE Outlander:
$18k+ premium on price
Limited 20 mile EV only range
Lose 3rd row seating

Isn't starting to stack up too well IMO.

Again whether it's true or not, one of the sales guys at the Mpls. auto show said within the next 2 weeks(he had an exact date but I forgot it) Mitsubishi was going to announce much more about the PHEV version.

Via GCR:

2017 Mitsubishi Outlander: delayed for U.S. again, specs may change

Click to expand...

http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1103086_2017-mitsubishi-outlander-delayed-for-u-s-againspecs-may-change

Saying November now.

. . .The pack will remain around the 12 kwh it’s currently rated, and it will still be supplied by LEJ, but Fedorak said that some details remain to be finalized. That could mean changes to the battery’s cell chemistry or power characteristics, all aimed at drivability, and getting significant all-electric range in American driving conditions. . . .

“It’s not the European spec" that the company will bring in, he said. "We’re tailoring it for the U.S. market, and that’s affecting range, MPGe, acceleration, and performance numbers, too.”

Click to expand...

^^^ they say it's tailored for the US market but if so then why the heck wouldn't they do as the Volt has done and Pacifica will be doing, instead of making the battery pack 12Kwh upgrade it to 16Kwh for the the maximum rebate :roll: doesn't sound like they really know what the US market is doing.....
22 ish mile range personally I won't be interested unless it could make the magic 30, which could probably be done if they'd opt for the 16 instead of 12....
The lack of a third row is also short sited, I mean it wouldn't have to fold flat(like the Pacifica is doing) but to remain competitive I'd think it should really have the 3rd row as an option, another thing telling me Mitsubishi is clueless AFA the American market.....the way Mitsubishi is going with the delays they'll be lucky to have it out before they bail on the US market for good......