It's possible!
What is this I am hearing in the first video? The Cayenne was running poorly because someone had sabotaged it in order to get a cheaper buying price. According to Hoovie this practice is "pretty common" - WTF!? :confused:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=icFmVEidCis
www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIldkaiE6F4
If I had courage and gross levels of dispensible income - I'd be all over a 2nd gen GTS
It's actually scary how much vintage Porsches are bringing these days. Even the 914 is getting pricey.
Jesus, those vids are unwatchable. So annoying.
The sabotage thing was bogus.
Quote from: GoCougs on June 14, 2017, 10:59:04 AM
Jesus, those vids are unwatchable. So annoying.
The sabotage thing was bogus.
I actually think this is one of the few objective and fun reviewers out there. I also like his videos about the cars he buys, fixes up and sells. Check out this video about a 1970s Lincoln Coupe and a Honda/Acura NSX!
Based on the thumbnails, I have zero interest in anything this guy has to say.
Can't stand Hoovie
Quote from: shp4man on June 14, 2017, 10:24:08 AM
It's actually scary how much vintage Porsches are bringing these days. Even the 914 is getting pricey.
I'm all for it; I would love to get back what I put into the 944 eventually. :mask:
Why don't you guys like Hoovie?
I don't like Doug DeMuro, Vehicle Virgins and pretty much most of these car reviewers who get into some boring family sedan / economy car and immediately complain about the lack of power, handling and fun...
Chris Harris and Hoovie are some of the few car reviewers who in my opinion are objective. Ok, Hoovie isn't a car reviewer, but I like the way he reviews cars. He never complained about the handling or "lack of fun" when he reviewed his 1970s Lincoln coupe for example. Others would have been bitching about the boaty and floaty drive etc.
I'm too millennial to be entertained by hoovie
Quote from: 68_427 on June 16, 2017, 01:17:41 PM
I'm too millennial to be entertained by hoovie
His videos are cheesy, but his cheerful personality has to count for something! ;)
Doug DeMuro is a twat.
Quote from: Rupert on June 16, 2017, 05:37:05 PM
Doug DeMuro is a twat.
I cringe so hard whenever he leans on someone's nice expensive car. I don't really even care about paint that much but shit try to respect other's property.
So much hate here for Doug. I actually like him. Goofy guy but comes across pretty authentic and honest. He's just a dorky guy trying to have fun.
The 'SPIN seems to be on its collective period this week. Hoovie is OK with me, weak chin and all. He's got money and a family, so I think a lot of his dorkiness is an act.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on June 17, 2017, 08:38:05 AM
The 'SPIN seems to be on its collective period this week. Hoovie is OK with me, weak chin and all. He's got money and a family, so I think a lot of his dorkiness is an act.
Are you implying if you're dorky, you can't have money or family? :wtf:
Quote from: SVT_Power on June 17, 2017, 09:16:23 AM
Are you implying if you're dorky, you can't have money or family? :wtf:
He doesn't come across as "Silicon Valley" dorky. Just regular dorky
I'm bored of watching people do car reviews and the only thing that qualifies them as an "enthusiast" is their bank account.
Quote from: r0tor on June 17, 2017, 09:59:14 AM
I'm bored of watching people do car reviews and the only thing that qualifies them as an "enthusiast" is their bank account.
Then don't watch them :huh: Unless you're that hard pressed to find something to whine about.
Plus a lot of the "qualified" reviewers are just paid shills.
I don't really watch many online reviews to begin with, but the one time I tried to watch one of Demuro's videos I got bored after like 30 seconds and turned it off.
The charisma of the "reviewer" (professional or not) is important. They need to come across as friendly, charming and also [technically] educated about cars.
Doug D. is a competent reviewer, but he comes across as a little annoying often times. Vehicle Virgins are way too serious, like no humor; none. Shmee150 comes across as spoiled and annoying. The list goes on...
I really can't stand arrogant types who get into cars and then act as if they know the target market for a particular car. It's especially amusing (and annoying) when they bitch about something that doesn't matter - blazing performance in an economy car for example. Nobody interested in say a 2017 Mitsubishi Mirage cares about smoking tires or 1/4 mile times.
Chris Harris is a great all-round package. And so is Hoovie - at least for me. I mean this is the guy who put in a manual transmission into a 300SD Turbodiesel and explained in great and friendly detail how he did it. I was glued to that video because of the way he presented it - and I for one would never want a manual transmission in any W126 S-Class (just does not suit the character of the car).
In the end it's really all subjective. I can make it through a Doug DeMuro video, learn something new, but I don't have to enjoy it... :tounge:
Quote from: cawimmer430 on June 17, 2017, 01:14:02 PM
I really can't stand arrogant types who get into cars and then act as if they know the target market for a particular car. It's especially amusing (and annoying) when they bitch about something that doesn't matter - blazing performance in an economy car for example. Nobody interested in say a 2017 Mitsubishi Mirage cares about smoking tires or 1/4 mile times.
Certain things matter to certain audiences. This is why Chris Harris will never review something like that Mirage.
Quote from: MrH on June 17, 2017, 07:59:19 AM
So much hate here for Doug. I actually like him. Goofy guy but comes across pretty authentic and honest. He's just a dorky guy trying to have fun.
He's a huge mouth breather - when he's not talking his mouth just hangs open. Bugs the jesus out of me.
Also, he looks 40+ but turns out he's only like 29...
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on June 17, 2017, 01:53:18 PM
Certain things matter to certain audiences. This is why Chris Harris will never review something like that Mirage.
But if he did review one he would at least be objective about it. He wouldn't criticize its power shortcomings or its miserable handling.
Have you seen his review about his very own Citroen 2CV? It was refreshing to hear him speak of that car in a completely objective manner. And although he owned the car, his review didn't come across as biased at all. It came across as very passionate but also objective. ;)
Quote from: cawimmer430 on June 16, 2017, 01:11:07 PM
Why don't you guys like Hoovie?
I don't like Doug DeMuro, Vehicle Virgins and pretty much most of these car reviewers who get into some boring family sedan / economy car and immediately complain about the lack of power, handling and fun...
Chris Harris and Hoovie are some of the few car reviewers who in my opinion are objective. Ok, Hoovie isn't a car reviewer, but I like the way he reviews cars. He never complained about the handling or "lack of fun" when he reviewed his 1970s Lincoln coupe for example. Others would have been bitching about the boaty and floaty drive etc.
I can't say I've seen many of the "notable" online car reviewers review a family or econo car and complain because it's slower than a performance car.
For starters, I've never seen DeMuro review a family or econo car, and a quick glimpse at his channel shows that outside of trucks/SUVs (most of the ones he's reviewed aren't exactly mainstream mom-mobiles), practically everything he's reviewed is a performance car.
Quote from: GoCougs on June 17, 2017, 01:58:13 PM
He's a huge mouth breather - when he's not talking his mouth just hangs open. Bugs the jesus out of me.
Also, he looks 40+ but turns out he's only like 29...
He's only 29? :confused: now I feel kind of bad for him.
Mouth breather or not, give me Doug DeMuro over someone like Tavarish any day.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on June 17, 2017, 02:02:02 PM
But if he did review one he would at least be objective about it. He wouldn't criticize its power shortcomings or its miserable handling.
Have you seen his review about his very own Citroen 2CV? It was refreshing to hear him speak of that car in a completely objective manner. And although he owned the car, his review didn't come across as biased at all. It came across as very passionate but also objective. ;)
Sure he would. The Mirage gets criticized not because it's simply slow or handles poorly, but because it's significantly slower and worse handling than its chief competitors (Fiesta, Yaris, Rio, Accent, Spark, Fit), none of which are particularly fast cars. There are expectations that cars within a certain price point should deliver a certain level of content (creature comforts) and performance. The Mirage is outside of the target.
No one is going to get in a 2CV and rip it apart for being a slow car for the same reason no one would get in a Model T or original VW Type I Beetle and trash them for being slow. They were cars designed and built for a very different time (a time when all cars were much slower than today) and cars that were, in their own ways, innovative or ground-breaking or historically significant. There is nothing innovative, ground-breaking, or historically significant about the latest Mirage. It's simply a cheap, slow, ill-driving economy car that is significantly worse than other cars that cost the same money.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on June 17, 2017, 02:02:02 PM
But if he did review one he would at least be objective about it. He wouldn't criticize its power shortcomings or its miserable handling.
Have you seen his review about his very own Citroen 2CV? It was refreshing to hear him speak of that car in a completely objective manner. And although he owned the car, his review didn't come across as biased at all. It came across as very passionate but also objective. ;)
Again, who are these reviewers dumping on the Mirage for not being a track beast? I feel like you make these "reviewers" up.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on June 17, 2017, 12:22:43 PM
Then don't watch them :huh: Unless you're that hard pressed to find something to whine about.
Plus a lot of the "qualified" reviewers are just paid shills.
I don't watch them anymore... Life isn't long enough to waste another minute on the likes of schmee
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on June 17, 2017, 01:53:18 PM
Certain things matter to certain audiences. This is why Chris Harris will never review something like that Mirage.
I know, I know. But if he did I'd have a feeling that he'd at least be objective! ;)
Quote from: MX793 on June 17, 2017, 03:19:21 PMSure he would. The Mirage gets criticized not because it's simply slow or handles poorly, but because it's significantly slower and worse handling than its chief competitors (Fiesta, Yaris, Rio, Accent, Spark, Fit), none of which are particularly fast cars. There are expectations that cars within a certain price point should deliver a certain level of content (creature comforts) and performance. The Mirage is outside of the target.
I assume the Mirage is also the cheapest car in this class, correct? In that case the car would sell on price and most owners probably don't have any high expectations. They need or want something cheap and fuel efficient to bring them from A to B.
There is an affordable Sushi restaurant on my street and as I recently discovered the Vietnamese owners have a beat up
Space Star (your Mirage) which they seem to use to drive to their suppliers, pick up the ingredients and transport them back to their restaurant. For those purposes the car seems fine. And if they use the car for private purposes it gets them from A to B.
Looks like this...
(https://i.wheelsage.org/image/format/picture/picture-gallery-full/m/mitsubishi/space_star/mitsubishi_space_star_627.jpg)
No doubt it's not a good car for us enthusiasts, but for some people out there who just want/need something cheap it's an appealing package, I suppose.
Quote from: MX793 on June 17, 2017, 03:19:21 PMNo one is going to get in a 2CV and rip it apart for being a slow car for the same reason no one would get in a Model T or original VW Type I Beetle and trash them for being slow. They were cars designed and built for a very different time (a time when all cars were much slower than today) and cars that were, in their own ways, innovative or ground-breaking or historically significant. There is nothing innovative, ground-breaking, or historically significant about the latest Mirage. It's simply a cheap, slow, ill-driving economy car that is significantly worse than other cars that cost the same money.
Good points. :ohyeah:
It would be interesting to read up on the reasons why a Mirage/Space Star owner bought the car in the first place. My guess would be price (especially in Europe where this thing is dirt cheap).
Quote from: cawimmer430 on June 18, 2017, 06:09:11 AM
I assume the Mirage is also the cheapest car in this class, correct?
Chevy Spark is the same price and the Versa sedan is ~$1000 cheaper (just comparing base trims of all cars in discussion), if it's purely a "get me the cheapest new car available" discussion. Feature content is pretty comparable.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on June 18, 2017, 06:09:11 AM
I assume the Mirage is also the cheapest car in this class, correct? In that case the car would sell on price and most owners probably don't have any high expectations. They need or want something cheap and fuel efficient to bring them from A to B.
The reviewer's job is to let the consumer know what they're giving up to get that price. :huh: If the sole appeal to the consumer is price, then they'll ignore the review and buy anyway.
The Mirage is a dumpy car, and only sells so well in the US because Mitsubishi has easy credit and they're practically giving them away.
It looks, handles, and drives like trash. Why do you keep saying otherwise.
Quote from: 2o6 on June 18, 2017, 09:59:32 AM
The Mirage is a dumpy car, and only sells so well in the US because Mitsubishi has easy credit and they're practically giving them away.
It looks, handles, and drives like trash. Why do you keep saying otherwise.
Cheap/Easy credit is basically the only reason Mitsu is still selling cars in the US, and it's the same practice that nearly sunk them in the late 90s when all of those people who couldn't get credit anywhere else (for good reason) defaulted on their car loans.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on June 16, 2017, 02:21:22 PM
His videos are cheesy, but his cheerful personality has to count for something! ;)
His videos are pretty campy but I like that type of thing sometimes.
How did Mitsubishi end up becoming the joke that it is in the US at the moment?
When I think back to say the mid-1990s they had a pretty strong and competitive lineup. Cars like the Galant, Diamante, Montero, Eclipse and Lancer would never touch the other Japanese brands in terms of sales, but you could say these products were unique and appealing and above all competitive.
How did they fall so badly? What happened?
Quote from: cawimmer430 on June 18, 2017, 05:45:44 AM
I know, I know. But if he did I'd have a feeling that he'd at least be objective! ;)
Eh. I think you are seeking out the wrong things from these reviews. Their main purpose is largely entertainment, not objective info to help people make buying decisions.
Even the most unbiased source, Consumer Reports, has bias. They dinged my wife's car for its infotainment system. "Too complicated!" they whined. We both like it. So everything has to be taken with a grain of salt. I think you call things "unbiased" when the reviewer's bias matches your own. Not bad to seek out similar viewpoints, but stop painting it as "objective".
Quote from: cawimmer430 on June 18, 2017, 01:35:42 PM
How did Mitsubishi end up becoming the joke that it is in the US at the moment?
When I think back to say the mid-1990s they had a pretty strong and competitive lineup. Cars like the Galant, Diamante, Montero, Eclipse and Lancer would never touch the other Japanese brands in terms of sales, but you could say these products were unique and appealing and above all competitive.
How did they fall so badly? What happened?
It's one of many zombie Japanese firms (Google the term). It should have went out of business long ago, but the JApanese govt won't let it fail.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on June 18, 2017, 01:35:42 PM
How did Mitsubishi end up becoming the joke that it is in the US at the moment?
When I think back to say the mid-1990s they had a pretty strong and competitive lineup. Cars like the Galant, Diamante, Montero, Eclipse and Lancer would never touch the other Japanese brands in terms of sales, but you could say these products were unique and appealing and above all competitive.
How did they fall so badly? What happened?
Lots of factors at play. For starters, they partnered with Chrysler (and at one point Chrysler owned a sizeable portion) in the 80s through the 90s. Chrysler is America's Fiat, so you can imagine that they didn't exactly have a positive influence. Mitsu never had the reliability reputation of Toyota or Honda, or to a lesser extent Nissan.
The Japanese economy was completely in the toilet in the mid to late 90s. All of the Japanese companies took a beating and it showed in their products. Japanese cars or the very late 90s and early 00s were, IMO, worse in many respects than their immediate forebears. There was a cheapening in terms of materials and fit and finish.
Then you had MMNA offering their 0-0-0 (0 down payment, 0 interest, 0 payments for 12 months) financing deal in the early 00s to chase sales volume in the US. This deal nearly sunk them. A large number of customers who took advantage of this deal defaulted at the end of the 12 month period and stuck MMNA with a whole lot of cars for which they hadn't been paid a cent for and that were worth less than they cost to make.
Also in the early 00s, Mitsu got caught up in a huge recall cover-up scandal (mostly affected Japanese market vehicles) which further dented their finances with recalls and penalties.
Add it all together, and Mitsu's finances were in dire straights and they were badly in debt. This showed in their products, as they stretched product cycles out longer and cheapened their cars, making them even less competitive at a time when the other major Japanese makes were starting on an upswing. After they dropped the 0-0-0 financing deal that nearly sank them, sales volume also dropped sharply (not that those cars they basically gave away for free can count towards "sales"). At this time, Daimler-Chrysler also abruptly cut ties, which cut off funds. As Mitsu got less competitive with the larger Japanese makes, you had the Koreans making huge strides in the value segment in the early to mid 00s, offering long warranties and a lot of value for money. They sort of entered a death spiral. Tanking sales, dropping revenues, aging products, and no money to overhaul their lineup and make it competitive again.
Ohhhhhhhhhh yeeeeeeeeaaaa, I totally forgot about the 0-0-0-0-0-0-0 deal. I remember those commercials as a kid. Even in like middle school I thought "theres no way that can work :lol:"
0-0-0 made the cars seriously declassé.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on June 18, 2017, 02:08:26 PM
Eh. I think you are seeking out the wrong things from these reviews. Their main purpose is largely entertainment, not objective info to help people make buying decisions.
Even the most unbiased source, Consumer Reports, has bias. They dinged my wife's car for its infotainment system. "Too complicated!" they whined. We both like it. So everything has to be taken with a grain of salt. I think you call things "unbiased" when the reviewer's bias matches your own. Not bad to seek out similar viewpoints, but stop painting it as "objective".
Indeed, most reviews seem to have an entertainment/bias factor factored in.
I have long been wary of the way
Consumer Reports rates cars for quality or reliability. For example I've read that if a car's infotainment system or a particular feature is difficult to use the car will receive poor quality or even poor reliability marks. It just seems bizarre. Once owners get used to the feature, operating it should not be a problem, so this whole "confusing to use" aspect should not be used by the organization.
Quote from: MX793 on June 18, 2017, 02:25:28 PM
Lots of factors at play. For starters, they partnered with Chrysler (and at one point Chrysler owned a sizeable portion) in the 80s through the 90s. Chrysler is America's Fiat, so you can imagine that they didn't exactly have a positive influence. Mitsu never had the reliability reputation of Toyota or Honda, or to a lesser extent Nissan.
The Japanese economy was completely in the toilet in the mid to late 90s. All of the Japanese companies took a beating and it showed in their products. Japanese cars or the very late 90s and early 00s were, IMO, worse in many respects than their immediate forebears. There was a cheapening in terms of materials and fit and finish.
Then you had MMNA offering their 0-0-0 (0 down payment, 0 interest, 0 payments for 12 months) financing deal in the early 00s to chase sales volume in the US. This deal nearly sunk them. A large number of customers who took advantage of this deal defaulted at the end of the 12 month period and stuck MMNA with a whole lot of cars for which they hadn't been paid a cent for and that were worth less than they cost to make.
Also in the early 00s, Mitsu got caught up in a huge recall cover-up scandal (mostly affected Japanese market vehicles) which further dented their finances with recalls and penalties.
Add it all together, and Mitsu's finances were in dire straights and they were badly in debt. This showed in their products, as they stretched product cycles out longer and cheapened their cars, making them even less competitive at a time when the other major Japanese makes were starting on an upswing. After they dropped the 0-0-0 financing deal that nearly sank them, sales volume also dropped sharply (not that those cars they basically gave away for free can count towards "sales"). At this time, Daimler-Chrysler also abruptly cut ties, which cut off funds. As Mitsu got less competitive with the larger Japanese makes, you had the Koreans making huge strides in the value segment in the early to mid 00s, offering long warranties and a lot of value for money. They sort of entered a death spiral. Tanking sales, dropping revenues, aging products, and no money to overhaul their lineup and make it competitive again.
Interesting and thanks for the explanation. It does sound like their finance deals hurt them in the end.
During the 1990s my family was big on Mitsubishis. We had a 1989 Galant 1600 Super Saloon and a 1992 Galant GTI 2.0 DOHC 16V as well as a 1996 Pajero 2500 Intercooler Turbo[diesel]. These were great cars by all accounts. The only thing ever went wrong as the A/C system failing on all of them at 60,000 km and on the GTI the suspension gave out at 70,000 km. Other than that they were great cars that were fun to drive and left me with a positive impression of the brand.
We even had a late 1970s Mitsubishi Galant, the car I grew up in. I remember it being very reliable and good-looking (I mean check it out!).
(https://i.wheelsage.org/pictures/mitsubishi/galant/autowp.ru_mitsubishi_galant_sigma_10.jpg)
I still have a soft spot for Mitsubishi, mostly because of my childhood memories, and of course because I genuinely liked their past designs over those of their Japanese rivals. At a time when Toyota, Nissan, Honda and Mazda were churning out dull cars, it seemed to me that Mitsubishi was the only one placing emphasis on design.
Their lineup (also in Europe) has since become dull, uncompetitive and a joke. It's sad. :frown:
Quote from: MX793 on June 18, 2017, 02:25:28 PM
Lots of factors at play. For starters, they partnered with Chrysler (and at one point Chrysler owned a sizeable portion) in the 80s through the 90s. Chrysler is America's Fiat, so you can imagine that they didn't exactly have a positive influence. Mitsu never had the reliability reputation of Toyota or Honda, or to a lesser extent Nissan.
The Japanese economy was completely in the toilet in the mid to late 90s. All of the Japanese companies took a beating and it showed in their products. Japanese cars or the very late 90s and early 00s were, IMO, worse in many respects than their immediate forebears. There was a cheapening in terms of materials and fit and finish.
Then you had MMNA offering their 0-0-0 (0 down payment, 0 interest, 0 payments for 12 months) financing deal in the early 00s to chase sales volume in the US. This deal nearly sunk them. A large number of customers who took advantage of this deal defaulted at the end of the 12 month period and stuck MMNA with a whole lot of cars for which they hadn't been paid a cent for and that were worth less than they cost to make.
Also in the early 00s, Mitsu got caught up in a huge recall cover-up scandal (mostly affected Japanese market vehicles) which further dented their finances with recalls and penalties.
Add it all together, and Mitsu's finances were in dire straights and they were badly in debt. This showed in their products, as they stretched product cycles out longer and cheapened their cars, making them even less competitive at a time when the other major Japanese makes were starting on an upswing. After they dropped the 0-0-0 financing deal that nearly sank them, sales volume also dropped sharply (not that those cars they basically gave away for free can count towards "sales"). At this time, Daimler-Chrysler also abruptly cut ties, which cut off funds. As Mitsu got less competitive with the larger Japanese makes, you had the Koreans making huge strides in the value segment in the early to mid 00s, offering long warranties and a lot of value for money. They sort of entered a death spiral. Tanking sales, dropping revenues, aging products, and no money to overhaul their lineup and make it competitive again.
Oh man, I remember that. Even as a high schooler, I was like "How are these motherfuckers going to stay in business?" They've been on the verge of death for a while now; I can't imagine getting into one without know where I can get it serviced as time moves on and Mitsubishi pulls out of the US.
It's crazy. I've never owned a Mitsubishi product that wasn't quality. Phones, TVs, et al. Mitsubishi is one of the original zaibatsus, one of the Japanese giants. Hard to believe that they can't put together a decent and marketable car.
I see a lot of Mitsus here, cheap Subaru knockoffs?...
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on June 20, 2017, 09:29:37 AM
I see a lot of Mitsus here, cheap Subaru knockoffs?...
Same reason Hyndai/Kia are hugely popular in economically depressed Upstate. Cheap and/or easier to get financing.