Model-year record
2013 Mitsubishi Lancer
See the complaints, recalls, crash rating, and fuel economy in the public record. Then check the mileage and history of the car you found.
This page shows records, not a buy or avoid call.
The same model year can include a well-kept car and a neglected one. Use these records to plan what to check. Use the specific-car check when you know the mileage.
Complaints filed
12
Reports to NHTSA, 2013
Safety recalls
0
NHTSA campaigns on record
NHTSA crash test
Overall NCAP rating
Combined MPG
26
EPA estimate
Known issues
Power Train issues lead owner complaints (42% of 12 reports), followed by unknown or other (33%).
Share of all 12 NHTSA complaints for this model year, grouped by the component owners named. Bars are scaled to the largest category. Examples: ODI 11232148, ODI 11130276, ODI 11016098, ODI 10651868, ODI 11352420.
Individual complaint reports(12)
Showing the 12 most recent reportsSuspensionMay 2023 · ODI 11520697Details +Close −
The vehicle's right front lower control arm is no longer secured to it's inner rear mounting location at the front crossmember. This condition allows for unintended movement of the right front wheel and was caused by structural failure of the front crossmember at the control arm to chassis attachment point due to corrosion exactly as described in SR-20-003REV_2. SR-20-003REV_2 only applies to certain earlier model year vehicles of the same type and design (Lancer model years 2008-2010). Later model years 2011-2015 are not mentioned in SR-20-003REV_2. The subject of this complaint is a 2013 Lancer Evolution. SR-20-003REV_2 should be expanded to include newer model year vehicles as the remaining fleet continues to age and deteriorate. A Mitsubishi dealer has confirmed the problem. Repair estimate out of pocket cost exceeds $5500.00 (replacement parts plus 25 hours labor). The vehicle is now considered unsafe to operate on public roads and must be towed away from the dealer.
- Reported
- May 2023
- Incident date
- Mar 2021
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Unknown Or OtherMar 2022 · ODI 11457354Details +Close −
Sunroof assembly detached cables broke while driving . The sunroof could have case an accident with the right vibration and wind intake while stuck open and couldn't shut. We took ot to mitsubishi dealer in Augusta maine the next morning since the incident happened at 840pm on thursday 3/17/22 in Woolwich We were hopping for servicing to see if it could be reattached and cables fixes jad the dealer disable the moonroof and closed the sunroof. We have an 08 lancer that had the recall and fixed the year prior now our 2013 actually has it happen and currently had no recall . The dealer as of Friday approximately at 340 told us the whole assembly has to be replaced. Way to expensive for use to replace at the moment we were quoted $1740
- Reported
- Mar 2022
- Incident date
- Mar 2022
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Power TrainSep 2020 · ODI 11352420Details +Close −
VEHICLE HESITATES DURING ACCELERATION, CAR IS EQUIPPED WITH A CONTINUOUSLY VARIABLE TRANSMISSION, HESITATION IS EXTREMELY SEVERE AT MUCH LOWER SPEEDS, OFTEN THE CAR WILL LUNGE FORWARD AT A SEVERE RATE BECAUSE THE ACCELERATOR WILL BE ALMOST TO THE FLOOR IN AN ATTEMPT TO OVERCOME THE HESITATION, VEHICLE DOES THIS EVERY TIME, IT ISN'T AN ISOLATED INCIDENT AND I'VE ALREADY HAD A MECHANIC EXPRESS CONCERN ABOUT THE TRANSMISSION "SHIFTING VERY FUNNY" DURING A TRANSMISSION FLUID EXCHANGE DONE A FEW WEEKS PRIOR. IT DOESN'T MATTER IF THE CAR IS ON THE HIGHWAY OR IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA, THIS ISSUE EXISTS.
- Reported
- Sep 2020
- Incident date
- Aug 2020
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Unknown Or OtherJun 2020 · ODI 11328225Details +Close −
MASTER CYLINDER CLUTCH IS FAULTY CAUSING THE PROBLEMS IN SHIFTING OUT OF PARK. AN ARTICLE ONLINE STATED THERE WAS A RECALL FROM 2008-2013 REGARDING THIS ISSUE. WHY IS MY VIN NOT INCLUDED IN THE RECALL. PER WEB ARTICLE RETRIEVED 06/10/2020 : HTTPS://WWW.EDMUNDS.COM/CAR-NEWS/2008-13-MITSUBISHI-LANCER-EVOLUTION-RECALLED-BECAUSE-CLUTCH-MASTER-CYLINDER-CAN-FAIL.HTML, WRITTEN BY [XXX] 10/28/2013 INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR
- Reported
- Jun 2020
- Incident date
- Jun 2020
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Unknown Or OtherSep 2019 · ODI 11257261Details +Close −
VEHICLE HAS OVERHEATED ON THE HIGHWAY,. ONCE IT DID TURN OFF WHILE DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY WHILE I WAS DRIVING MY CHILDREN TO SCHOOL. I HAVE HAD TO REPLACE THE BATTERY MORE OFTEN, EVEN THOUGH THE BATTERIES WERE STILL GOOD. THERE IS AN ISSUE WITH DIAGNOSTIC CODE P0420, IT SEEMS TO BE THE CATALYST CONVERTER AND 02 SENSORS IN TAKE AND OUT TAKE. WHEN THE AIR CONDITIONER IS ON THE VEHICLE MAKES A LOUD CLICKING NOISE AND SOMETIMES THE VEHICLE TURNS OFF. WHEN I REVERSE, THE VEHICLE ALSO TURNS OFF.
- Reported
- Sep 2019
- Incident date
- Sep 2019
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Power TrainJul 2019 · ODI 11232148Details +Close −
WHEN TAKING OFF FROM A STOP CAR HAS SEVERE HESITATION WHEN ACCELERATING AND SHIFTING. ITS EVEN WORSE WHEN THE A/C IS RUNNING. I HAVE TAKEN IT TO THE DEALERSHIP MULTIPLE TIMES TO BE TOLD ITS THE TYPE OF TRANSMISSION IT IS (CVT). I KNOW THIS IS NOT THE CASE WHEN A PERSON ON A BICYCLE CAN TAKE OFF AT A RED LIGHT FASTER THEN MY CAR I KNOW THERE ID A PROBLEM. I KNOW THEY RECALLED THE TRANSMISSION ON YEARS PRIOR UP TO 2012 LANCERS BUT THE 2013 HAS THE SAME TRANSMISSION
- Reported
- Jul 2019
- Incident date
- May 2019
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Air BagsApr 2019 · ODI 11194771Details +Close −
TAKATA RECALL- ABS LIGHT IS ON PER RECALL IT HAS TO DO WITH AIR BAG INFLATOR IN OTHER MITSUBISHI CARS. ALSO THE STALLS AND SHUTS DOWN AND OVER HEATS. THIS HAS BEEN NOTICED. THIS IS THE TIME IT HAPPENED.
- Reported
- Apr 2019
- Incident date
- Mar 2019
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Power TrainSep 2018 · ODI 11130276Details +Close −
ABOUT A MONTH AGO SERVICE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT HAS BEEN COMING ON AND THROWS CODE P1875(DAMPER SPEED SENSOR) . I'VE BEEN TOLD BY MITSUBISHI THERE IS NO FIX FOR THIS OTHER THAN PURCHASING A NEW $15,000 SST TRANSMISSION FROM THEM. THE CAR IS NOT EVEN WORTH THAT MUCH BY NOW. HOW IS IT THAT MITSUBISHI DOES NOT HAVE A FIX FOR THIS ISSUE?
- Reported
- Sep 2018
- Incident date
- Aug 2018
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Unknown Or OtherMay 2018 · ODI 11097089Details +Close −
3RD TIME MY SERPENTINE BELT SLIPS OFF WHILE DRIVING LOSE POWER TO EVERYTHING, POWER STEERING BATTERY,EVERYTHING STOPS WORKING.
- Reported
- May 2018
- Incident date
- May 2018
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Power TrainAug 2017 · ODI 11016098Details +Close −
ACD PUMP FAIL PUMP FAILURE DUE TO KNOWN DESIGN FLAW. MANUFACTURER FAILS TO REPLACE OR RECTIFY THE DESIGN EVEN WITH MULTIPLE CASES OF PUMP FAILURE
- Reported
- Aug 2017
- Incident date
- Aug 2017
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
EngineMar 2016 · ODI 10851443 · fireDetails +Close −
TL* THE CONTACT OWNED A 2013 MITSUBISHI LANCER EVOLUTION. WHILE DRIVING 65 MPH, THE RPMS INCREASED AND METAL FRAGMENTS WERE FOUND UNDER THE VEHICLE. THE ENGINE CAUGHT FIRE. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED AND THERE WERE NO INJURIES. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED NOR REPAIRED. THE VEHICLE WAS DESTROYED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 49,900.
- Reported
- Mar 2016
- Incident date
- Sep 2014
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- Fire
Power TrainNov 2014 · ODI 10651868Details +Close −
THE AYC PUMP FAILED. *TR
- Reported
- Nov 2014
- Incident date
- Oct 2014
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Recalls
No recalls are listed for this model year as of Jul 2026. Recall records can change when NHTSA publishes new information.
A campaign can apply to this model year without being incomplete on a specific vehicle. Check the VIN with NHTSA or a dealer to confirm whether a particular car needs repair.
Investigations
1 NHTSA investigation on record
Investigations are agency reviews, not findings that a vehicle is defective.
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened this investigation to determine if the failure of airbags to deploy during severe crashes, in certain vehicles, was the result of a safety related defect. During the investigation a complex failure was studied that can result in non-deployment of subject vehicle air bags and other restraint system devices in severe crash events. The subject vehicles may be equipped with an airbag control unit (ACU) for the supplemental restraint system (SRS) Electronic Control Unit (ECU) manufactured by ZF-TRW. The ECU receives signals from crash sensors mounted in the vehicle and deploys the vehicle air bags and seat belt pretensioners in accordance with manufacturer design specifications. The ECU in the subject vehicles contains a model DS84 application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC) which controls the communication of the crash sensor signal, firing commands (i.e., when to deploy the airbag(s) and/or pretensioners), and fault information (e.g., diagnostic trouble codes). In September 2016, FCA announced recall 16V-668 for certain model year (MY) 2010 to 2014 Chrysler, Dodge and Jeep products manufactured with the subject ZF-TRW ACU. In this recall, FCA discussed an EOS condition that resulted in a failure of the subject DS84 ASIC, which caused air bag non-deployment. FCA noted that the defect condition had only been observed in vehicles equipped with sensor harnessing routed across the front of the vehicle. Other FCA vehicles that also used the subject ACU, but were not equipped with cross-car harnessing, had not experienced EOS failures, despite similar time in service. During the course of this investigation, ODI sent two separate Information Request (IR) letters to six vehicle manufactures (including FCA, Hyundai, Honda, Kia, Mitsubishi, and Toyota) and one IR letter to ZF-TRW. These IR letters resulted in ODI receiving comprehensive data from these manufacturers and suppliers. Studies of this data found that the DS84 ASIC does not have sufficient protection against negative electrical transients or electrical overstress (“EOS”) that can be generated in certain severe crashes. An electrical transient occurs when the electrical power supplied to a circuit changes momentarily over a short duration of time. In these severe crash cases, the crash sensors and other powered wiring can be damaged and short circuited so as to create a negative electrical transient of sufficient intensity and duration (that are outside the vehicle manufacturer's specification) to damage the ASIC before the restraint device deployment signal is received by the SRS ECU. This damaged signal can lead to incomplete or nondeployment of the air bags and/or pretensioners. Airbag non-deployment and/or lack of pretensioner operation can increase the risk or severity of injury in a crash.A total of 8 fatalities and 14 injuries were associated with known EOS events. The common element in all investigated manufacturers vehicles is the SRS ECU containing a DS84 ASIC manufactured by ZF-TRW. The risk associated with the ASIC is equally shared among all OEMS involved in the investigation. The actual real-world risk can be mitigated by other factors which were assessed by ODI during this investigation. The first mitigating factor involves protections built into the ACU design which protect the DS84 ASIC from damage. There are multiple strategies and levels of protection employed by different OEMs that provide effective EOS mitigation. The two most common strategies at the ACU level are circuit protection diodes on the remote senor signal lines, and current limiting resistors that protect critical components. The second mitigating factor is found at the vehicle level and involves the location and routing of the wires leading from the crash sensors to the SRS ECU. If the wires are well protected in a crash and are not routed with other power wires carrying large currents, the risk for an EOS event is significantly reduced or eliminated. These design specific factors combine to produce a spectrum of risk for the vehicles equipped with ACUs using the DS84 ASIC. Given the many of years of field exposure, it is possible to divide the subject population into two groups; vehicles which have experienced EOS events, and vehicles which have not experienced EOS field events. Four of the six OEMs involved in this investigation have experienced EOS field events on at least one of their models equipped with a DS84 ASIC. All vehicle models (including the Toyota models identified in the Failure Report Summary of the opening resume for this investigation) with field events have been recalled. In an abundance of caution, ODI kept this investigation open five years to monitor field performance and did not identify any field events on vehicles not included in existing safety recalls. Given the spectrum of risk identified in this investigation and that all vehicles with a demonstrated unreasonable risk have been recalled, ODI is closing this investigation. ODI is closing this investigation with the following manufacturer safety recalls: 16V-668, 18E-043, 18V-137, 18V-363, and 20V-024. With the recall actions taken by the subject vehicle and equipment manufacturers, this investigation is closed. The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exists on other model or model year vehicles outside of the recall scopes. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.
Crash-test ratings
2013 Mitsubishi Lancer 4 DR AWD NHTSA source
- Overall
- Frontal
- Side
- Rollover
2013 Mitsubishi Lancer 4 DR FWD NHTSA source
- Overall
- Frontal
- Side
- Rollover
Fuel economy by trim
| Trim | Engine | Drivetrain | Transmission | City | Hwy | Combined |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lancer | 2.0L 4-cyl | Front-Wheel Drive | Manual 5-spd | 24 | 33 | 28 |
| Lancer | 2.0L 4-cyl | Front-Wheel Drive | Automatic (AV-S6) | 25 | 33 | 28 |
| Lancer | 2.4L 4-cyl | Front-Wheel Drive | Automatic (AV-S6) | 23 | 30 | 26 |
| Lancer | 2.4L 4-cyl | Front-Wheel Drive | Manual 5-spd | 22 | 30 | 25 |
| Lancer | 2.0L 4-cyl | All-Wheel Drive | Automatic (AM6) | 18 | 25 | 20 |
EPA laboratory estimates by trim and engine. Actual mileage varies with driving, weather, load, and maintenance. EPA source.
Before you buy
Useful next checks
Federal records tell you about patterns. These checks can tell you more about the specific car in front of you.
These are affiliate links. TireKick may earn a fee if you use one.
Compare the year-by-year record
Open another year for its own evidence-gated decision. TireKick does not crown a best year from raw complaint totals.
2013 Mitsubishi Lancer: frequently asked
What does the complaint record show for the 2013 Mitsubishi Lancer?
Owners filed 12 NHTSA complaints about the 2013 Mitsubishi Lancer. This is raw owner-reported complaint volume with no production or exposure normalization, so it is not a reliability score or a best/worst-year ranking.
What are the most common problems on the 2013 Mitsubishi Lancer?
The most-reported problem areas are Power Train (42% of complaints) and unknown or other (33%).
How many recalls does the 2013 Mitsubishi Lancer have?
No safety recalls are on record for the 2013 Mitsubishi Lancer as of Jul 2026.
What gas mileage does the 2013 Mitsubishi Lancer get?
The EPA rates the 2013 Mitsubishi Lancer between 20 and 28 mpg combined, depending on trim and drivetrain.