I was cruising around Edmunds.com when I saw the link to the JD Power Initial Quality results for the Evo: http://www.edmunds.com/used/2003/mit....5.Mitsubishi*

Anyway, a 3/5 overall rating, but what gets me is the 3/5 performance rating. What the heck? 3/5 Translates to "Does not really stand out"... um, compared to what? Other evos?

Here's the quote for "performance":
I guess I'm just missing something? Maybe "Feature and Accessory Quality" (a 3/5 rating) was transposed with "Performance"? Makes you wonder about where JD Power gets their information.

 

That's prolly just transposed from the regualar Lancer...

 

Not necessarily....most dealers report to JD on car purchases. Then JD sends out a letter asking about how you liked the vehicle. I for one put down every gripe I had with the warping of the rotors, 1-2 shift grind, service attitudes from people that were working on my car, crappy clutch, etc. That is how they determine the rating. It's basically by popular vote more or less so who ever turns in a survey is responsible for the ratings. I gave the actual performance a 10. But did mention my gripes about the car.

 

But all that would mean is that the performance components (rotors, clutch etc.) are flawed or low quality, meaning it is still a quality issue. Whether or not the performance components are high or low quality, if a car performs well, then thats just it. It performs well.

 

Even muscle car guys give the cars performance a 10. Must be based on the regular lancer.

 

2/5 for styling?? that's got to be a regular lancer...

 

Someone email an important person to tell them that they are hurting our resale value with their mistakes.

 

Resale value is all about public perception. Most people agree that honda and toyota/lexus are high quality and mitsubushi is a lower level. I am not saying this is true but it like trying to tell people that BOSE is overpriced. You are never going to change there mind.