Recalls, owner-reported complaints, investigations and safety data
Data refreshed
Our database contains 7 NHTSA owner-reported complaints for the 2003 Mitsubishi Spyder, most frequently naming the visibility, electrical and engine categories. 23 manufacturer communications are on file.
Complaints are reports submitted by owners and drivers to NHTSA. They are not verified and do not establish that a defect exists.
When owners filed reports about this model year
| Month | Complaints filed | Cumulative |
|---|---|---|
| Dec 2002 | 1 | 1 |
| Feb 2004 | 1 | 2 |
| Jun 2004 | 1 | 3 |
| Jul 2004 | 1 | 4 |
| Sep 2004 | 1 | 5 |
| Apr 2005 | 1 | 6 |
| Jan 2006 | 1 | 7 |
Complaints grouped by the component NHTSA recorded
Percentages are of component mentions. A single complaint can name more than one component, so these do not sum to the total complaint count.
No recalls in our database for this model year
That does not guarantee a specific vehicle is unaffected — recalls are issued against VINs, and new campaigns are announced regularly. Check a VIN on NHTSA.gov.
Reports submitted to NHTSA, shown in the owner's own words
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED THE DRIVER'S SEAT BELT WILL NOT RETRACT OR RELEASE. THE SEAT BELT WAS REPLACED BY THE LOCAL DEALERSHIP LAST YEAR. HOWEVER, THE REPLACEMENT SEAT BELT IS HAVING THE SAME PROBLEM.
CONSUMER LETTER COMPLAINT REGARDING THE WARRANTY ON 2003 MITSUBISHI SPYDER. VEHICLE EXPERIENCING PROBLEMS WITH THE BRAKES, HEADLIGHT EQUIPMENT, SPEAKERS, TURN SIGNALS AND A TICKING NOISE COMING FROM THE ENGINE.*MR CONSUMER FEELS THAT THEY WERE TREATED UNFAIR WITH THIS DEAL AND WANT THEIR MONEY BACK FOR THIS VEHICLE, DUE TO NUMBER OF PROBLEM THEY HAVE HAD. *BF *NM
CONSUMER NOTICED THAT BOTH FALKEN TIRES, SIZE 225/40CR-18 WERE SPLITTING ON THE SIDEWALL. VEHICLE HAD ONLY 7,000 MILES ON THEM. THE DEALERSHIP HAD NOT YET NOTIFIED. *AK
VEHICLE HAS A BLIND SPOT BETWEEN THE MIRROR AND THE BACK WINDOW. AS A RESULT VEHICLE WAS INVOLVED IN A COLLISION. *AK THE OFFICE THAT FILED THE REPORT SUGGESTED THAT THE CONSUMER GET A SMALL MIRROR AND ATTACH IT TO THE EXTERIOR REARVIEW MIRROR. THE OFFICER INDICATED THAT A LOT OF TRUCK DRIVER'S USE THEM TO SEE AROUND THEIR TRUCKS. THE CONSUMER FEEL THAT THESE SMALL MIRRORS SHOULD BE STANDARD EQUIPMENT. *NM
WHILE SHIFTING INTO REVERSE THE CLUTCH FAILED. THIS CAUSED THE VEHICLE TO STALL. CONSUMER RESTARTED THE VEHICLE, AND DROVE IT TO THE DEALER FOR INSPECTION, AND MECHANIC DETERMINED THAT CLUTCH NEEDED TO BE REPLACED AND REPLACED IT. HOWEVER, THE PROBLEM RECURRED AFTER HAVING THREE CLUTCHES REPLACED. *AK
CONSUMER COULD NOT ROLL THE ELECTRICAL WINDOWS UP OR DOWN. CONSUMER INSISTED THAT THE WINDOWS WERE A DESIGN FLAW. TOOK VEHICLE TO THE DEALER FOR ANALYSIS, AND MECHANIC NOTICED THAT A WORN PART IN THE REMOTE NEEDED TO BE REPLACED.*AK *MR
THE PAINT ON MY NEW VEHICLE BEGAN PEELING OFF THE HOOD IN QUARTER-SIZED CHUNKS AS I WAS WASHING IT BY HAND. ALTHOUGH THE DEALER INITIALLY ATTEMPTED TO DENY RESPONSIBILITY, THEY RELUCTANTLY AGREED TO REPAINT HOOD, ACKNOWLEDGING THAT THERE WAS AN "ADHERENCE ISSUE." I DISCOVERED THROUGH A SOURCE IN THE MITSUBISHI FACTORY THAT THERE WAS A "LOT" OF CARS THAT THEY FAILED TO PLACE AN E-SEAL ON PRIOR PAINTING. WHEN MY VIN WAS CHECKED, MY SOURCE DISCOVERED THAT IT WAS ONE OF THE VEHICLES IN THAT "LOT." I WAS TOLD TO EXPECT FURTHER PAINT ISSUES WITH THE DOORS IN THE NEAR FUTURE BY THIS SOURCE. THIS INFORMATION WAS NOT DISCLOSED TO ME PRIOR TO PURCHASE OR WHEN I TOOK THE VEHICLE IN FOR REPAIR. IN FACT, IT WAS ONLY MY PERSISTENCE THAT RESULTED IN MY VEHICLE'S HOOD BEING REPAINTED. THE VEHICLES IN THE LOT SHOULD BE RECALLED ! I PAID OVER $31,000.00 FOR THIS VEHICLE, AND I SHOULD NOT HAVE TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT DEFECTIVE AND/OR SHODDY PAINTING AT THE FACTORY. PLEASE HELP ME FIND THIS INTERNAL MEMORANDA THAT GOVERNS MY VEHICLE SO I CAN FURTHER PURSUE THIS ISSUE WITH THE MANUFACTURER. OR, IF YOU CAN BE OF ASSISTANCE IN RECTIFYING THIS COVER-UP., I WOULD BE VERY GRATEFUL. MY DREAM CAR HAS TURNED OUT TO BE A REAL DISAPPOINTMENT. DIMSII IVOQ ENTRY POSTED AFTER 12/12/02 CUT-OVER TO ARTEMIS--------770771. *AK *NLM
A bulletin sent by a manufacturer to its dealers. Not a recall, and repairs are not necessarily free.
EQUIPMENT:OTHER:OWNERS/SERVICE/OTHER MANUAL
This is a Dealer Letter sent to dealers informing that Mitsubishi Technical Training has launched the 3rd quarterly technician quiz for 2023.
EQUIPMENT:OTHER:OWNERS/SERVICE/OTHER MANUAL
This Technical Service Bulletin reviews the regulations that require a label showing the reduction in load carrying capacity be affixed to vehicles when the total net weight of accessories is more than 1.5 percent of the vehicle's gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) or 100 lbs.
STRUCTURE
This Technical Service Bulletin provides instructions and material safety data sheets for removal of rap-film adhesive residue.
EQUIPMENT:OTHER:OWNERS/SERVICE/OTHER MANUAL
This is a Dealer Letter sent to dealers informing that Mitsubishi Technical Training has launched the 2nd quarterly technician quiz for 2023.
EXTERIOR LIGHTING
This Technical Service Bulletin was sent to dealers to explain the difference between normal dew condensation, which is a natural phenomenon, and water penetration caused by improper sealing or a defective/broken part.
EQUIPMENT
This is a service newsletter (Tech Talk) that was sent out to dealers.
Manufacturers file copies of the bulletins they send to dealers with NHTSA. These often describe diagnostic or repair procedures for a known condition. They are not recalls: repairs described in a bulletin are usually only free if the vehicle is still under warranty or the manufacturer has extended coverage.
Complaint and recall counts across every year of this model
Higher-selling and older vehicles accumulate more reports. Counts are not failure rates and are not directly comparable between vehicles that sold in very different numbers. Older model years have had longer for reports to accumulate.