菱帅撞击安全性zt|三菱蓝瑟_蓝瑟_菱帅_东南菱帅_菱帅论坛_菱帅改装_Lancer - 东南汽车俱乐部_三菱翼神_翼神_君阁_ 欧蓝德_v3菱悦_蓝瑟_菱帅_富利卡_得利卡

只看楼主更多操作 0楼发表于: 2005-05-12

菱帅不是一部最完美的车，但他却是一部实用性很高的车子。如果我没有预算上的考量，说实在话，我最想买的是宝马的M3，我开车注重性能，又不喜欢车子太大，还要车子的高科技性很足，以这个角度来看M3最能满足我的需要。但回到社会现实来看，目前众多的国产车中，菱帅无疑是一个实用性很高的车子，可以满足大部分人的需求。究竟这部车的实用性在哪里呢？以下我将为大家细说，我还会附上国外的各种参考资料，看不懂英文的朋友，你可要拿英汉字典慢慢的有耐心的翻译，为了避免有人说我是鬼扯淡说话没根据，我还是坚持附原文资料，不做中文翻译，请大家体谅。

实用之一：强劲的4G18发动机和智慧型INVESE II四速手自一体变速箱

4G18发动机是三菱最新一代的全铝合金16气门发动机，不仅动力强而且省油。动力方面0~100公里加速只要10.7秒，比1.6升20气门发动机宝来的11.1秒还要快。动力性好不好看的就是这个数据。油耗方面，90%以上的车主实证手动档平均百公里6~7升，自动档8~9升，高速公路哪怕是自动档匀速都可以达到7升以下，手动档就更省了。这种油耗大家可以比较，比新三样还有其它同级别的1.6升车都省。而智慧型的四速手自一体变速箱虽然不是三菱最新的产品，但这颗变速箱的科技性仍是目前国产车中的佼佼者，INVESE II在换档过程中的顿挫感是目前所有国产车中最小的，智慧学习驾驶者的驾驶习惯更是他的特点，其实菱帅最大的卖点也就在这颗变速箱。国外媒体怎么评价4G18发动机呢？请大家看以下原文资料：

Drivetrain

The Lancer will be equipped with Mitsubishi\'s ECI-MULTI 4G18 4-cylinder engine with displacement of 1 584cc, which delivers excellent performance without sacrificing good fuel efficiency, traits expected in this competitive market segment.

The fuel-injected engine delivers 77kW @ 6 000 r/min and 138 Nm @ 4 500 r/min. It has a 9.5:1 compression ratio and a bore and stroke of 76.0 X 87.3 mm. This long-stroke design allows the Lancer to accelerate from standstill to 100km/h in a class-leading 10.7 seconds.

The four-valve per cylinder design provides excellent breathing efficiency, especially at higher engine speeds. The combustion chamber with its pentroof design and centrally located sparkplug contributes to more efficient combustion, increasing power output while minimizing emissions. The intake manifold further improves efficiency by enabling smoother airflow.

A single overhead camshaft actuates twin rocker shafts with needle-bearing rocker arms. The cam lobes \'roll\' along the contact area of the proprietary roller rocker arm, rather than sliding along sintering chips. A compact, lightweight Y-shaped rocker arm actuates both exhaust valves to further reduce friction losses. Mitsubishi tests have shown that the resulting reduction in friction, especially in the low to medium rev ranges, improves fuel efficiency by as much as 9 per cent.

A steel crankshaft with eight counterweights offsets the vibration created by the long-stroke design. The counterweights reduce flexural stress by evenly distributing force, for quieter performance and better durability. Tests have shown with the throttle all the way open, engine-generated noise is reduced by 2 to 3 decibels.

The plug-top ignition coil system on the ECI-MULTI engine provides accurate, reliable ignition timing. This system requires very little maintenance due to the low voltage connection and the lack of rotating components.

A 32-bit electronic control unit (ECU) monitors throttle position and air intake volume to determine the best fuel mixture and timing. Multi-port injection ensures that each port receives the correct amount of fuel, resulting in more power and fewer harmful emissions.

实用之二：保有目前国产车中最好的品质

或许很多人会反驳我这个说法，认为丰田花冠和马自达福美来的质量都要高于菱帅。但车子的质量除了要看组装的技术外还要看零部件的供应厂够不够QUALTIFY。东南厂的绝大部分零部件供应商都是台湾中华汽车指定台湾的配套厂来福建配合生产供货的，东南也向他们保证不会向别的供应商采购。如此可以避免低价进货买到次品的情况发生。而且这些供应商过去在台湾都和中华配合过，对菱帅的各种技术规格和要求都甚为熟悉，自然的可以保证零部件的质量水平达到和国外一样的标准。但反观丰田，本田，马自达甚至大众这些车厂，他们都是在本地重新开发新的供应商，而这些供应商都要有适应车子规格的过渡期，自然的不能像菱帅那样稳定车子的质量。另外，东南的供应商都将在2006年准备为奔驰轻客车供应零件，在奔驰的要求下，藉着ISO和QS等质量体系的落实，间接的也能提升东南车的质量。

不管是七代菱帅还是八代菱帅在台湾都曾经写下过单一车种销售冠军的历史，足见人们对中华汽车生产的菱帅的肯定。2003年至今三菱集团虽然因为扶桑卡车事件赔掉了不少信誉。但是在德国汽车画报，JD POWER, AUTOCAR, WHICH等国际专业汽车媒体的各种消费者满意度调查中，至少还居于中上的位置，排名不如其他大的日本车厂，但还胜过绝大部分的欧美车系，足见三菱仍保有日本车一贯的高质量。以下转载新浪网上的消息，请大家参考：

德国质量报告显示：日本车质量超过德国车

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.sina.com.cn 2004年12月02日 09:00 国际金融报

　　日本车的质量真的比德国车高吗？从近年来的各种汽车报告看，答案是肯定的。

　　近日，来自德国《汽车画报》的最新质量报告显示：排名前六的汽车品牌中有5个是日本车，依次为日本马自达、日本丰田、日本本田、韩国现代、日本尼桑和日本三菱。接下来是欧宝排名第7、富豪第8、Smart第9、福特第10、奔驰和雪铁龙并列第11名、Seat第13、奥迪和宝马并列第14名、标志第16，雷诺、斯科达和大众并列第17名，最后第20名是菲亚特。

　　从排名看，德国车集体总分远远低于日本车。据悉，德国《汽车画报》每年发表一次质量报告，从可靠性、长时间质量和顾客满意度几个方面对最重要的20种汽车品牌进行评价。这个评价是根据对24666名开车人的民意调查、700万例技术检查、对修车行的调查、各车的保修情况和10万公里长时间试验综合得出的。

　　德国《汽车画报》对最新质量报告的评价是：导致德国汽车分数低落的原因是德国车的各种毛病和汽车被召回事件，其中大多数是由于电子方面的问题引起的。

　　另外，英国和美国的媒体发表的报告也显示出类似结果，即日本汽车质量比德国好。

　　据悉英国消费者刊物《Which?》把大众汽车归入了差档。把原来排在“最佳”档里的奔驰车降到了“一般”档，把原来排“好”档里的奥迪和宝马降到了“较差”档。美国J.D.PowerandAssociates发表的报告中，德国汽车相互间的次序略有不同。据此，世界1000辆汽车平均有269个问题。宝马有264个问题；奥迪有295个问题；奔驰有327个问题；大众以386个问题垫底。

　　近年来，日本汽车质量的不断提高是众所周知的事实，尤其是日本新车在电子方面的毛病明显少于德国新车。各种质量报告的揭晓，对原本在德国国内销售已经普遍不景气的德国车无疑是雪上加霜。(林梦达)

实用之三：坚强的安全性

很多人习惯用铁皮的厚薄来和安全性扯上关系，这种说法只对了一部分但并不是全部。菱帅采用的是90年代乃至现在至为流行的高张力钢板技术，说穿了这和道家说的以柔克刚的原理是一样的，当发生事故的时候高张力钢板的溃缩性可以分散撞击力量，使驾驶者不受到太大的伤害。有人说日本车发生事故后要花比较大的费用才能修复，其实这也是一个谬误。大家可以想一想发生车祸的时候你是要保命重要还是保车重要呢？如果你能保全性命，哪怕车子全毁又有何关系呢？毕竟命比车重要啊，车子毁了可以再买，何况还可以要求肇事方和保险公司理赔呢！但命没了就什么都没了。国产菱帅采用的是CAE电脑设计的刚性车身和结构，车子的每一个影响安全的关键结构都是经过电脑详细计算的。大家可以看看，菱帅的四个车门都有防撞安全钢梁，中央仪表台内还有一根连接车身两边的钢梁，这根钢梁比四个门内的还要粗。从这些小地方中，就可以看出车体结构的刚性。菱帅的保险杠还是美规设计，所以保险杠比一般的车子长至少5公分，国产车中除了通用别克车系外，同级车中没有别的车子有这样的设计，这也是菱帅关心驾驶者安全的实际表现。从菱帅上市至今，发生过的车祸当中，菱帅车主的伤亡率非常的低，这可以向各保养厂打听的出来。

其实在国外的碰撞试验中，是以车内假人身上贴的各个感应点在撞击后的反应评断车子的安全的，而不是以车子毁损多少程度打分的。其实这也正好呼应我上面所提的，保命比保车重要,菱帅（LANCER）的测试结果相当的好，甚至在美国IIHS的碰撞试验中成绩还优于有“陆地坦克”之称的VOLVO的S40。足见菱帅的安全性值得大家信赖。以下附IIHS的调查报告原文：

CRASH TEST RESULTS: THREE SMALL CARS EARN GOOD OVERALL RATINGS;
PASSENGER VAN IS ACCEPTABLE, AND LARGE PICKUP IMPROVES TO GOOD
ARLINGTON, VA -- A recent series of frontal offset crash tests by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety included three new small car designs -- Subaru Impreza, Mitsubishi Lancer, and Volvo S40 -- plus a newly designed large pickup, the Dodge Ram, and a new minivan, the Kia Sedona. All three small cars earn good crashworthiness evaluations, and the Sedona is rated acceptable overall. The Ram is rated good -- a big improvement compared with the 2001 Ram, which the Institute rated poor. All five vehicles are 2002 models.

The small car results "are good news. All three are good performers and two of them, the Impreza and Lancer, earn our ‘best pick\' designation," says Institute president Brian O\'Neill. "This brings to 7 the number of good performers among the 15 current small car designs we\'ve evaluated, and 4 of the 7 are best picks. In contrast, a few years ago we only had one good performer among the small cars."

Vehicle ratings reflect performance in 40 mph frontal offset crash tests into a deformable barrier. Based on the results, the Institute evaluates the crashworthiness of passenger vehicles, assigning each vehicle a rating from good overall to poor.

Impreza is top-rated small car: The occupant compartment of the Subaru Impreza maintained its shape extremely well in the offset test, and the dummy\'s movement was well controlled. All measures recorded on the dummy indicated low risk of injury. "This was a very good performance," O\'Neill says.

Lancer improves compared with predecessor Mirage: The new Mitsubishi Lancer replaces the four-door Mirage (a two-door Mirage still is being sold), which was a poor performer in the Institute\'s offset test. There was major intrusion into the Mirage\'s occupant compartment, and measures from the dummy\'s right leg indicated significant injury likelihood. Plus there was too much steering column movement, which compromised restraint performance. In contrast, the Lancer\'s occupant compartment held up well and injury measures were low. Lower intrusion measures indicate a vehicle\'s structure is doing what it\'s supposed to do (keep the occupant compartment intact, with little or no intrusion into the driver\'s space), and all 10 measures of intrusion and steering wheel movement are dramatically lower (better) for the new Lancer design compared with the Mirage:

Performance of S40 is good, but not as good as Impreza and Lancer: The Volvo S40 performed well in the Institute\'s offset test. There was minimal to moderate intrusion into the occupant compartment. Forces on the dummy\'s right tibia indicated the possibility of injury, and the dummy\'s movement could have been better controlled during the crash.

Kia Sedona minivan: There was moderate intrusion into the occupant compartment during the offset test. The dummy\'s head struck the steering wheel through the airbag, in part because of too much steering column movement. During rebound, the head went partway out the window before it struck the B-pillar. "This is poor control of the dummy," O\'Neill points out, "and it compromised restraint system performance."

Dramatic improvement in Ram pickup design: The performance of the predecessor 2001 Ram was poor. There was significant intrusion into the occupant compartment and poor control of dummy movement during the offset test. The airbag deployed late, which contributed to high head and neck injury measures. In contrast, the new Ram design is a good performer. Nine of 10 measures of intrusion and steering wheel movement are dramatically lower (better):

Structural design is key to good performance: The Institute\'s frontal offset crash test into a deformable barrier is especially demanding of vehicle structure. The driver side hits the barrier, so a relatively small area of the vehicle\'s front-end structure must manage the crash energy. This means intrusion into the occupant compartment is more likely to occur than in a full-width test.

"Good structural design is the key to good performance in the offset test," O\'Neill notes. "If a car\'s front-end structure absorbs and manages the crash energy so the occupant compartment remains largely intact, with little or no intrusion into the driver\'s space, then the dummy\'s movement is likely to be controlled, and injury measures are likely to be low. In contrast, poor structural design means greater likelihood of poor control of the dummy and high injury measures."

Institute and government crash tests complement each other: The Institute\'s crashworthiness evaluations are based on results of frontal offset crash tests at 40 mph. Each vehicle\'s overall evaluation is based on three aspects of performance -- measurements of occupant compartment intrusion, injury measures from a Hybrid III dummy positioned in the driver seat, and analysis of slow-motion film to assess how well the restraint system controlled dummy movement during the test.

The federal government has been testing new passenger vehicles in 35 mph full-front crash tests since 1978. This New Car Assessment Program has been a major contributor to crashworthiness improvements -- in particular, improved restraint systems in new passenger vehicles. The Institute\'s offset tests, conducted since 1995, involve 40 percent of a vehicle\'s front end hitting a deformable barrier at 40 mph. This test complements the federal test involving the full width of the front end hitting a rigid barrier. Both tests are contributing to improvements in crashworthiness -- in particular improved crumple zones and safety cages.

The same 40 mph offset crash test is used to evaluate new cars by the European Union in cooperation with motor clubs and by an Australian consortium of state governments and motor clubs.