Very interesting, thanks for the summary. One thing I noticed is they also have a lower "range" quoted on the Canadian models than the U.S.A. models. My dashboard shows around 81km of range on EV during the warm months but they say it will do 61km on the website. I think they lowered the advertised range so when people come to them with battery issues in 5-10 years they and it's below the threshold to replace they can say they only advertised 61km, so it hasn't met that threshold yet.I have heard that same information from a sales manager whom I trust (yes I said that - but he has told/done many things not to his advantage during the time I've dealt with him), another sales manager, and a service manager who only heard it from the dealership's tech when I asked her and she asked him - then I talked to him and he said as a tech he had to go looking to confirm it. (I think we share the same dealer tikan)
Pretty clearly Mitsu got caught with their pants down on this and try to slide one by.
I spent a couple hours last night reading through the Quebec class action filing requesting certification for class action. It was in French so it was a struggle (Thank you Miss Bishop for what you tried to teach me, sorry for not paying better attention - you did say "you live in Canada - this will come in handy some time")
Some of what I (think) I derived from it included:
To my mind the ask fell well short. I would have liked to see the buyer have to option to return the vehicle. After all, if I go to the hardware store and buy a cordless drill and it doesn't work, I take it back.
- there were ~4600 Outlanders leased/sold in Canada last year (seems low to me)
- the plaintiff on behalf of the members of the class seeks compensation for
- extra fuel consumed because of the failure of EV to work in the cold
- money for lost value/failure to deliver
- inconvenience and loss of use
- additional $ for being naughty and failing to address the issue
- total as I read it ~$22k per customer
- I couldn't fully discern whether the expectation was to make the battery work
The dimension that hasn't been talked about and I think could/should bring some heavyweights to the table has to do with government EV rebates associated with the vehicle. I believe that the engineering changes that upped the theoretical EV range and allowed the vehicle to qualify for federal and provincial rebates verges on fraud. When the vehicle does start in the cold, it runs off the ICE, and has reduced maximum range - a range that would not qualify for some/full rebates.
In response do you think Mitsu would say "Hey - we did contribute to carbon reduction by making a vehicle that burned no fuel at all because they wouldn't start"?
I think our governments have been had as well.
I definitely think they removed the batteries to either allow them to advertise more range or hit the 50km range threshold for the IZEV rebate. This could potentially get them in hot water for sure.