Mitsubishi CA-MiEV Specs Released In Geneva

4 years ago by Jay Cole 5

Mitsubishi CA-MiEV Concept Car (image via Autocar)

Mitsubishi CA-MiEV Concept Car (image via Autocar)

Is the current Mitsubishi i-MiEV just a little bit too small for your liking?  Does it need more range?  More eye-appeal?

If you answered yes to any of those questions, you probably believe, as we do, that the CA-MiEV Concept is a huge step forward for the company.

Mitsu’s extra-large mini EV hit the stage today in Geneva, boasting many of the features that current i-MiEV owners say they would like to see in a future generation of the car.

CA-MiEV From Behind

CA-MiEV From Behind

The automaker calls this vehicle their “suburban EV” thanks to its 300 km range (185 miles).

As always, it pays to know what standard is being used to achieve these range projections; in this case it is the overly optimistic Japanese JC-08.  In the US, this car would be rated at approximately 110 miles, which is still excellent compared to other entry-level electric vehicle offerings.  The current i-MiEV achieves 62 miles of range today.

The CA-MiEV is 160″ long, 70″ wide and 61″ high.  This compares to the current i-MiEV at 145″ in length, 62″ wide and 63″ high.

Even more importantly, Mitsu has finally learned that when designing an electric vehicle, aerodynamics means something.  The current i-MiEV is a highway brick, with a cd of .35, causing the super small kei-car to be rated at only 99MPGe on the highway, while getting 126 MPGe in the city.

The new CA-MiEV, thanks to a more sculpted body, a flat undercarriage…and chopping off the side rear-view mirrors (which we are pretty sure you can’t do in the real world) gives the sleek concept a drag co-efficient of .26.

The CA-MiEV Is Like The Current i-MiEV All Grown Up

The CA-MiEV Is Like The Current i-MiEV All Grown Up

Some more CA-MiEV Specs:

  • 80 kW motor (107 hp)
  • 28 kWh compact flat battery pack, which Mitsu says “helps with packaging, especially for possible later applications like range extender”
  • inductive wireless charging technology
  • high density energy Lithium-ion battery, which Mitsubishi doesn’t elaborate on, but notes this new battery “helps with energy efficiency and also with packaging”
  • seating for 5

So will the CA-MiEV see the light of day?  Mitsubishi will only say officially that “whilst at this stage (the CA-MiEV) is not planned for production.”  A wishy-washy answer repeated by Mitsu president, Osamu Masuko, ” the CA-MiEV…showcases various technologies that Mitsubishi will look to introduce in the future.”

Will say, just go ahead and built it…just don’t forget to put the side mirrors back on first.

Mitsubishi CA-MiEV Gallery: (double click)

(top photo via Autocar, show photos in gallery via samochodyelektryczne)

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

5 responses to "Mitsubishi CA-MiEV Specs Released In Geneva"

  1. Warren says:

    Hey, a sleek .26 Cd. Right in there with a 1970 Citroën SM. But that was a production car…with mirrors. We’ve come a long way baby. 🙂

  2. Brian says:

    Honestly, if Mitsubishi cleaned up the look of the i, and gave it a 28kWh battery while keeping the price in line with the Leaf, it would become a hit pretty quickly.

    1. David Murray says:

      I think the two biggest factors against the i-Miev are the looks and the price. The range is fine for a low-priced entry level commuter car. The problem has been that the price has not matched the low-end entry level commuter car category. Also it is ugly. I agree it would be possible to improve the looks with some minor tweaks to the exterior design.

      1. Brian says:

        I would say “value” instead of “price”. If they can keep a similar price, but offer a 28kWh battery with a real-world 100 mile range, Mitsubishi will be back in the game. As today’s model stands, the i is all but dead.

        1. danpatgal says:

          Almost 600 buyers of the iMiev in the last two months indicates the iMiev is far from dead. I agree that this car is not so great on the highway and therefore many US drivers passed it up. But, it’s great in the city, has great utility, road visibility, and economy. The CA version seems to be an improvement, but I still think the original has a lot to offer.