undersized battery that could not be secured firmly with the original
larger battery clamp. Starter cranking was also sluggish. When I
complained at my local EON outlet I was told to refer to outlet that I
purchased from who promptly swaped it with the original Japanese OEM
battery from another LANCER. However the paint-work damaged by battery
acid has to be rectified at EON PDI section. When I tried to have an
appointment, I was told that slot is not available. I tried to contact the
workshop exec MR Ngiam. Left a message for him to return my call but yet
to hear from him.
I also notice markings on one headlamp and body which the dealer claim to
be glue. However the ones on the lamp are scratches.
I was told by my local EON service centre that new instruction requires
engine oil and filter changes at 1K service chargeable to owner which is
contrary to service schedule. If the car warrants fluid changes due to
long stowage it should be carried out at PDI and not at 1K which only
involves insp. and fault memory check/retrival.
I will be seeing Mr Ngiam/Samsuddin soon for my 1K insp.and their
performance in handling this case will determined how I will close this
posting.
Could Mitsubish Motors Malaysia (MMM) CEO F. Minami and his team look into
this basic new CBU comformance standards before it deteriorates to CKD
standards. Is it acceptable to have two years old tyres/battery on a newly
delivered car?
My family owns a Pajero, Townbox Wide besides this Lancer. MMM pls.take
some actions to keep your Mitsubishi loyalists happy.
![Angry](http://i1.autoworld.com.my/forum/images/emoticons/smile_angry.gif)
![Frown](http://i1.autoworld.com.my/forum/images/emoticons/smile_sad.gif)
![Disapprove](http://i1.autoworld.com.my/forum/images/emoticons/smile_disapprove.gif)