Why can we have this here???
|
|
Post by bruskibomb on Feb 28, 2012 23:09:57 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by nayrlladnar on Feb 29, 2012 8:25:48 GMT -5
Seriously. It's even left-hand drive already. If it's good enough for the Philippines, it's good enough for us, right?
|
|
|
|
Post by bruskibomb on Feb 29, 2012 12:38:31 GMT -5
Mitsubishi just needs to focus on a "niche" and not try to have to the Sport appeal to all people. There's no room in the market for that. I'd say focus on the off road niche and make the Sport the bad *** off road suv that it is in other countries. Learn from the mistakes and complaints that people have for the new FJs. Give us a turbo or twin turbo diesel option. Give us aftermarket support-or even mods from Mitsubishi themselves. If you build the right one, we will come!!!
Oh! and don't worry about making it a 7 seater!! Make that a Mod option for people that need it.
Give us solid axles us front and in back! Give us body on frame! Give us front and rear air lockers from the factory! Bring back the good ol' days.
|
|
|
|
Post by LimitedOThree on Mar 1, 2012 21:04:04 GMT -5
this what the 2013 outlander looks like. the grills are dif. but it's the same. sorta ugly.
|
|
|
|
Post by monty98 on Mar 5, 2012 0:53:13 GMT -5
Mitsubishi just needs to focus on a "niche" and not try to have to the Sport appeal to all people. There's no room in the market for that. I'd say focus on the off road niche and make the Sport the bad *** off road suv that it is in other countries. Learn from the mistakes and complaints that people have for the new FJs. Give us a turbo or twin turbo diesel option. Give us aftermarket support-or even mods from Mitsubishi themselves. If you build the right one, we will come!!! Oh! and don't worry about making it a 7 seater!! Make that a Mod option for people that need it. Give us solid axles us front and in back! Give us body on frame! Give us front and rear air lockers from the factory! Bring back the good ol' days. Amen to that  I'm constantly frustrated whenever I look at other countries and the vehicles manufacturers "assume" Americans just won't like are kept in those countries! I wish the auto manufacturers would ask the common consumer what they want and then build off of that rather than just assume what we want...makes me glad some auto companies are struggling, they have stopped listening... |
|
|
|
Post by JAY97 on Sept 28, 2012 15:46:35 GMT -5
We should just start a petition to bring it back. I'm due for a new car next year  . Jay |
|
|
|
Post by mudrunner on May 31, 2013 17:49:01 GMT -5
Most of the reason is either emissions or safety, as to why we can't have these cool vehicles here in the US. I however believe that the most important thing to do would be to make a world wide standard for both emissions and safety, that way we could have any car made anywhere in the world! Also to boot it would cut down on cost for manufacturing all the different car models used in different parts of the world. So I say it is a win win for everyone!!!!! And then I could still get awesome cars that they have chosen to stop making/selling here in the states. And for one maybe we could get diesels here and have people understand they are not just smelly noisy truck things.
|
|
|
|
Post by Renzo7 on Aug 22, 2013 9:19:57 GMT -5
I'm so tempted to buying one in Japan and then having it shipped here to the US. haha! I really don't understand why they stopped importing these to the US. In my honest opinion, the Montero Sport is far more superior to the 4Runner or the Pathfinder.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrgalantguy on Oct 16, 2015 11:57:44 GMT -5
Its more about the good ol' USA Govt blocking and assessing heavy import tax on importing vehicles to the US and selling them here. Look at Toyota...we have the Tacoma, a decent truck but NOWHERE as badazz to the Helix sold everywhere else except in the U.S. Toyota has the means to establish another platform and cater it to the North American market, but even Toyota deemed it too expensive to import and meet US spec to sell it over here. This goes for many of the other Japanese car companies and even U.S car companies like Ford. Most of Fords best cars are outside of the U.S for many years like the Focus, Fiesta etc and even the Ranger is still sold in Europe. We have been getting watered down versions recently here in the U.S.
This is why cars like the Supra, NSX, 240(Silvia),3Kgt VR4's etc stopped selling in the U.S..but continued to be offered in other world markets for several more years.
Mitsubishi has some pretty badass vehicles that we never saw like the the 2nd gen Montero Sport/Pajero Sport, Triton/L200, Delica, Gen 3.5 Montero/Pajero, Galant VR4, FTO, Airtek, etc etc. It was more cost effective for MMC to have MMCNA develope N.A. market vehicles like the Eclipse, Endeavor, Raider (Flop), and even the 9th Gen Galant which failed to compete and take or maintain market share to where several years ago the main guys of Mitsubishi decided to close MMCNA operations and have all design and engineering from Japan HQ's.
|
|
|
|
Post by colted on Oct 16, 2015 14:33:14 GMT -5
well, dream on....we'll never see the light and just struggle to keep our legacy Montys rolling... link |
|
|
|
Post by ES_97Sport on Oct 16, 2015 17:14:52 GMT -5
well, dream on....we'll never see the light and just struggle to keep our legacy Montys rolling... linkAgree there. No. Mitsu has built in the US since, what, '98? Toy and the rest could built whatever it wanted right here in 'the good 'ol US of A'. No, the problem is this country is owned by a bunch of rampant, short term thinking consumers that think that everything should be free or dang close. Mitsubishi's entire business philosophy is completely the opposite of the way the majority of the US public thinks. No, what the US public has is the China, or Wal-Mart, philosophy. Cheap crap and lots of it. People think that this is some kind of government conspiracy. Its not. Its business. More precisely - its economics. You can sell a $40,000 product for $80,000 but you can't sell an $80,000 product for $40,000. Unlike Elon's Tesla, the US population isn't subsidizing Mitsubishi. Edward |
|
|
|
Post by mrgalantguy on Oct 19, 2015 9:24:15 GMT -5
You make some valid points BUT the U.S. FMVSS starndards make is difficult and expensive for automakers to sell many vehicles outside the U.S. market which makes this look a lot like what you call a "non-tariff trade barrier." That means it's a way to keep foreign cars out of America by making it expensive to sell them here. Automakers technically only need to make 2 versions of a vehicle..Right hand drive version and a Left hand drive version.
BUT if they want to make a vehicle available to sell in the U.S and Canadian market they have to make a additional version to meet U.S and Canadian safety standards. I mean..the ECE (world vehicle safety standard) is just as, even better than the U.S FMVSS standards...so why do we have to have our own? As a result of the large costs involved in retooling a car only for the American/Canadian market, most manufacturers won't even dream of spending all of the money to rebuild a model unless they think that it will be a reasonable success in North America. Consequently, the US and Canada actually have a shockingly low number of car models available compared to most other places.
The U.S govt does have a part of preventing a large amount of vehicles from automakers produce that are not sold here in the U.S. Look up other Non-Tarriff barriers like these:
Buy American Act 1933
Surface Transportation Assistance Act 1983
Fair Packaging and Labeling Act 1966
You do have a point about majority of the consumers here in the U.S thinking things should be free or close though and that just doesn't go for just products, but services also.
|
|
|
|
Post by ES_97Sport on Oct 19, 2015 18:39:52 GMT -5
... I mean..the ECE (world vehicle safety standard) is just as, even better than the U.S FMVSS standards...so why do we have to have our own? As a result of the large costs involved in retooling a car only for the American/Canadian market, most manufacturers won't even dream of spending all of the money to rebuild a model unless they think that it will be a reasonable success in North America. Consequently, the US and Canada actually have a shockingly low number of car models available compared to most other places. Yep. Absolutely correct. And we still have different standards between CA and the rest of the US. Which just makes it worse.  Also correct. My point was - without getting too verbose - was that for the manufacturers, it still comes down to economics. With all the barriers - which include our retarded public - its just not economically feasible. Its unfortunate because you're correct, outside the US there are LOTS more models available. But, in the end I believe the primary problem isn't regulation, its the public. US auto manufactures have the same problems. Producing a vehicle here is insanely expensive and its insanely expensive for ALL manufacturers. Safety regulations and emissions regulations costs can not be entirely passed on to the consumer. Manufacturers 'regulate' their cost by decreasing the number of models. Fuel economy regulations work the same way. You just can not have a factory tooled up for 30 models - or more realistically 5-10 factories. The only way manufacturers have managed to contain costs up until now has been to modularize vehicles. Which really means that there are fewer 'models' than there really were 30 years ago because they're all the same car with different body panels. I won't deny that government regulation like you noted above makes a difference but the real problem isn't that, its the public. The US public demands a great deal that's impossible. They demand 100% safety. 0% emissions. New wiz-bang gee-gaws every couple years. And they demand all this for less than they paid for the last vehicle they bought. And they use our government to force the manufacturers to try to do all that. So, if you rescinded all the import/export tariffs on foreign autos and parts, nothing would change. Manufactures wouldn't start making new models. Now, I agree entirely, that if you'd done this 20-30 years ago, it would have made a huge difference. Now? No. The consumer is the biggest cost to the manufacturers now. Stuff the public demands that no one needs: ABS, 30 air bags, self-parking, back-up cameras, home entertainment systems, tire air pressure alerts, the dozens of brake, skid, steer, alert 'safety' systems, 30 computer systems to make all this work, Internet access, .... The worst part is, this isn't a comprehensive list! But, you can't sell a car anymore unless it has this and more. And somehow you have to be able to sell it for the same price the model would have cost in 1995. Believe me, I have been up, down and backwards through this. My business partner and talked about manufacturing a car for years. An actual CAR. That just drives. And gets you places. With the technology available now it would be possible to build a sedan the size of an Accord that got 50 MPG. It'd weight like 1800 lbs and anyone could work on it. And it'd be faster than snot probably. But, after going through the regulations and taking a real long hard look at the US consumer base ... not a chance in hell. If I wanted to throw away few $100M dollars, it'd be a lot easier to wait until the wind blows and toss it off my patio. And now the public is starting to demand 'self driving' vehicles. Manufacturers have started coming up with ballpark consumer costs. Projections are looking like the lowest cost models will be in the $60-80K range. I think those costs are low since I'm almost positive that these are assuming normal model sales. You can't produce a Honda Accord and sell it for $20K if you only sell 10, or 100, or 10,000 or 100,000 of them a year. Contrary to popular belief, technology isn't free not does technology make things free. But, this is what the general public believes. How long before 'self driving' is perceived as a must-have safety feature and this is added to the every growing list of required vehicle features via regulations? Manufacturers will be expected to 'eat' the extra costs involved because the public is going to expect to pay $25K for their Accord no matter what it costs to make it. No, like I said above 20-30 years ago, but now the general public through the government does more to limit what manufacturers can and will do than the government does strictly on its own. My crystal ball gazing for the next 20-30 years? Even fewer models. A major upswing in the 'car sharing' model because most of the population won't be able to afford to buy a car on their own. Older vehicles will be deemed 'unsafe' and a hazard. The days of everyone taking their vehicles to the dealership for service will come back - by necessity, since no one else will be able to work on them. Like in some European countries - that would be 'unsafe'. People will get what they think they want, but it won't be what they thought it would be. Yep. True. Edward |
|
|
.
