FaultScore

FaultScore report

1993 Mitsubishi Expo problems

Owners have filed 13 complaints about the 1993 Mitsubishi Expo with NHTSA between 1996 and 2004. The largest single group is the seat belts. Across this model's run it ranks 3 of 3 worst.

B

FaultScore 28/100

Higher is worse. Measured against the other years of the Mitsubishi Expo.

How this is worked out

The numbers

13

Complaints

0

Crashes reported

0

Fires reported

0

Injuries reported

What kind of bad

The letter says how bad. This says what kind — whether this year drew an unusual number of complaints, unusually dangerous ones, or failures that arrived unusually early.

Complaint volume 44 vs 50 Severity 0 vs 50 Early failure not reported
The dashed ring is 50 — the national norm. Further out is worse.
Complaint volume — 44
Against the median year of the Mitsubishi Expo. 50 means typical for this model; 100 means roughly double.
Severity — 0
0% of these complaints involved a crash, fire, injury or death, against a national rate of 9.7%.
Early failure — not reported
Too few complaints recorded a mileage to measure this.

How 1993 compares with every other Mitsubishi Expo

Click any bar to open that year's report.

Complaints filed with NHTSA, by model year. Bar colour is the FaultScore grade: A B C D F ungraded

What breaks on a 1993 Mitsubishi Expo

Every complaint is filed against a part. Follow any row for the complaints about that part alone.

Seat Belts 7 53.8%
Brakes 3 23.1%
Doors, Latches & Locks 1 7.7%

Median failure at 99,000 miles

Transmission & Drivetrain 1 7.7%
Engine & Cooling 1 7.7%

When owners complained

A spike years after the car went on sale usually means a part wearing out on schedule across the whole fleet — the kind of pattern no single owner can see from inside their own car.

Mar 1996 peak 2 Apr 2004

NHTSA investigations into the 1993 Mitsubishi Expo

An investigation is the step before a recall: the agency has seen enough complaints to look into a pattern itself. An open one means it thinks something may be wrong and nothing has been fixed yet.

EA98002 Opened 30 Jan 1998 Closed 30 Apr 1998 WHEELS

TRANSFER CASE LOCKUP

The most recent complaints

In the owners' own words, exactly as filed with NHTSA.

at 99,000 miles Tucson, AZ

LATCHES/LOCKS/LINKAGES:DOORS:LATCH

THERE WAS A RECALL (97V063001) CONCERNING THE DOOR LATCH WHICH COULD MALFUNCTION WHICH WOULD CAUSE THE SHOULDER BELT ANCHORAGE TO REMAIN AT THE A-PILLAR WHEN THE DOOR WAS CLOSED. WHEN THE VEHICLE WAS STARTED, THE AUTOMATIC SEAT BELTS DID NOT ENGAGE. THE SEAT BELT DID NOT SLIDE ON THE RAIL PROPERLY. THERE WAS A RECALL FOR THE SAME VEHICLE ONLY ONE YEAR EARLIER, BUT THE CONSUMER'S VEHICLE WAS NOT INCLUDED DUE TO VIN. *AK (RIGHT REAR DOOR) *SC

NHTSA complaint #10067406 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.

Decatur, GA

POWER TRAIN:AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION

I GOT THIS CAR FROM A USED LOT, THE TRANSMISSION FAILED TAT SAME DAY. I WANT TO MAKE THIS COMPLAINT AGAINT THE DEALER CAR CITY OUTLET.

NHTSA complaint #763364 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.

Merchantville, NJ

SEAT BELTS

PASSENGER'S SEAT BELT WOULD INTERMITTENTLY NOT ENGAGE WHEN CLOSING THE DOOR, LEAVING PASSENGER WITHOUT ANY RESTRAINT. DEALER AND MANUFACTURER WERE NOT NOTIFIED AT THIS TIME. FEEL FREE TO PROVIDE ANY FURTHER INFORMATION.

NHTSA complaint #8012020 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.

Attleboro, MA

SERVICE BRAKES, HYDRAULIC:ANTILOCK/TRACTION CONTROL/ELECTRONIC LIMITED SLIP

ABS-DISC BRAKE ROTORS NOT ROBUST CAUSING POOR BRAKING AND OWNER EXPENSE. SHOULD BE A MFG RECALL TO REPLACE WITH MUCH MORE DURABLE DESIGN.

NHTSA complaint #743665 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.

Attleboro, MA

SERVICE BRAKES, HYDRAULIC:FOUNDATION COMPONENTS:DISC

ABS-DISC BRAKE ROTORS NOT ROBUST CAUSING POOR BRAKING AND OWNER EXPENSE. SHOULD BE A MFG RECALL TO REPLACE WITH MUCH MORE DURABLE DESIGN.

NHTSA complaint #743665 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.

Coral Springs, FL

SEAT BELTS:FRONT:ANCHORAGE

THE SEAT BELTS DOESN'T WORK AT ALL SINCE I BOUGHT THIS VEHICLE.

NHTSA complaint #717323 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.

Farminton, NM

SEAT BELTS

IN AUGUST 1998, MY WIFE GOT IN HER VEHICLE TO START AND WARM UP HER ENGINE PRIOR TO DEPARTING FOR WORK. WHEN SHE TURN OFF IGNITION HER MOTORIZED SHOULDER BELT ON THE DRIVERS SIDE REMAINED IN THE FORWARD POSITION. APPARENTLY, THE MOTOR FOR RETRACTING THE SHOULDER BELT RAN IN REVERSE., INSTEAD OF PULLING OR PLACING TENSION ON THE CABLE TO RETRACT, THE CABLE WAS COMPRESSED. WITH THE SYSTEM ALREADY IN THE FORWARD POSITION, THE CABLE WAS FORCED OUT OF ITS TRACK. WHEN LOOKED AT BY LOCAL DEALER, THE SHOP MANAGER THOUGHT THIS MAY FALL UNDER A RECALL NOTICE (SR-97-002). WE HADN'T RECEIVED A NOTICE AND WEREN'T SURE WHAT HE WAS REFERRING TO. THE REGIONAL MANAGER HAPPENED TO BE IN TOWN WHEN WE TOOK OUR MINI VAN IN. HE LOOKED AT THE FAILURE AND DENIED THE FAILURE AS BEING ASSOCIATED WITH THE RECALL. HIS REASONING WAS THAT THE MOTOR FAILED. OUR COST FOR REPAIRS WOULD BE $700. ON NOVEMBER 30, 1998 WE RECEIVED A SECOND NOTICE OF RECALL. WHEN READING THE NOTICE I FELT THAT THERE HAD BEEN AN ERROR IN THE FIRST DECISION MADE BY THE REGIONAL MANAGER. I QUESTIONED PERFORMANCE MOTORS ABOUT THE MALFUNCTIONING SWITCH. MY BELT FAILED IN THE FORWARD POSITION. WAS THERE POTENTIAL FOR A SHORT OR MALFUNCTION IN THE RECALL SWITCH TO CAUSE THE DAMAGE WE EXPIERENCED? THEY COULDN'T TELL ME WHAT TESTS WERE CONDUCTED TO GENERATE THEIR CONCLUSSIONS. ON JANUARY 5, 1999, I CALLED MITSUBISHI CORPORATE CUSTOMER SERVICE DEPT FILE REFERENCE #245316. AFTER DESCRIBING MY SITUATION, CUSTOMER SERVICE AGENT, ALEX, THOUGHT MY VEHICLE WARRANTED ANOTHER LOOK. ON JANUARY 9, 1999 AT 8:00AM I ARRIVED FOR MY APPOINTMENT. THE REGIONAL MANAGER HAD ALREADY CONTACTED THE DEALER AND DENIED ANY CLAIM. I ASKED IF ANYONE HAD LOOKED AT MY DOOR SWITCHES AS PER THE RECALL? THEY HAVE NO RECORD. JANUARY 19TH, CALLED CORPORATE OFFICE AGAIN. ASKED WHY MY SWITCHES HAVE NOT BEEN LOOKED AT. CORPORATE WAS TO GET BACK WITH ME BY THE 21ST. TO DATE, I'VE HEARD NOTHING, I HAVE A RECALL NOTICE & A FAILURE, THERE'S BEEN NO INSPECTION.

NHTSA complaint #702689 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.

Saint Loui, MN

SERVICE BRAKES, HYDRAULIC:FOUNDATION COMPONENTS:DISC:ROTOR

NOTICED THAT VEHICLE LABORED UNDER ACCELERATION AND FRONT BRAKES SMELLED AFTER BEING PARKED. SYMTPOMS GRADUALLY WORSENED UNTIL VEHICLE WOULD NO LONGER MOVE UNDER ITS OWN POWER. AFTER BEING TOWED TO DEALER WAS ADVISED THAT HYDRAULIC BRAKE FLUID HAD BEEN CONTAMINATED AND THAT RUBBER COMPONENTS NEEDED TO BE REPLACES. APPROX. 1 YR LATER SAME SYMTOMS BEGAN. WAS ADVISED THAT ROTORS WERE WARPED AND REQUIRED REPLACEMENT. ROTORS AND PAD REPLACED. NOW (9/98) HEARING SOUNDS OF STRESS IN FRONT END WHEN BRAKING.

NHTSA complaint #541667 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.

Sunrise, FL

ENGINE AND ENGINE COOLING:ENGINE

ENGINE GASKETS FAILED CAUSING ENGINE OIL TO LEAK ONTO HOT PORTIONS OF EXHAUST MANIFOLD AND TRANSAXLE.

NHTSA complaint #527785 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.

Peterson, MN

SEAT BELTS:FRONT:WEBBING

SHOULDER BELT ATTACHED TO DOOR & COMES OUT WHEN DOOR IS OPENED & STAYS; WILL NOT BEE IN A RETRACTING POSITION; CAN UNLOCK LAP BELT & FASTEN IT.

NHTSA complaint #811740 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.

Housten, TX

SEAT BELTS:FRONT:RETRACTOR

BELT RETRACTORS FOR SHOULDER BELTS FAILED, ONLY CAME ACROSS SHOULDER OCCASIONALLY PRIOR TO RECALL 97V-063.

NHTSA complaint #808408 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.

Duleth, MN

SEAT BELTS:FRONT:RETRACTOR

BOTH SEAT BELTS LOCK UP WHEN TRYINGTO PULL AROUND DRIVER AND PASSENGER. ALSO THEY WILL NOT RETRACT WHEN IN USE.

NHTSA complaint #808346 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.

Mesilla Park, NM

SEAT BELTS:FRONT:BUCKLE ASSEMBLY

DRIVER SEAT BELT LOCKED UP AND WOULD NOT RELEASE, PASSENAGER BELT DID NOT RETRACTOR, REPLACED BOTH.

NHTSA complaint #980867 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.