Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





2007 Mitsubishi Outlander vs. 2007 Acura RDX

johnny98johnny98 Posts: 88
edited March 6 in Acura
Did anyone consider the Acura RDX before they bought their Mitsubishi Outlander? The RDX completes (somewhat) against the top-of-the-line Outlander, though the RDX does cost about $5K more. Both have lots of high tech features (in the top-of-the-line models). The RDX, however, has all the features that Outlander owners complain are missing: sports car handling, rear-view camera, real-time traffic reports integrated into the navigation system, upscale interior, better build quality, better radio clarity, heated side mirrors, turn signals in the mirrors, dual zone climate control, better resale value, more dealers (and dealers more likely to be in business 5 years from now), etc. Pluses for the the Outlander are lower price, better looking (to most people), uses regular gas, lower greenhouse gas emissions (for Al Gore fans), and optional 3rd row seats (for kids only). Any other considerations?
«13

Comments

  • biscuit_xlsbiscuit_xls Posts: 194
    Outlander advantages:

    10 year drivetrain warranty
    5 year bumper-to-bumper
    6 Speed transmission
    6 Cylinder engine
    Better fuel economy
    More ground clearance
    Tighter turning radius
    $5-$10,000 less expensive

    I've driven the RDX with the Technology Package, it's nice but not much different than the Outlander. Tough to justify the extra cost. Out the door a fully loaded RDX is pretty close to $40k with tax and title.

    I'm not a big fan of turbo 4 cylinder engines, I'd much rather have a V6. Similar to the Mazda CX-7 turbo, RDX turbo owners are getting bad mileage in real world conditions.

    I also think the styling of the Outlander is nicer, the RDX looks kind of bloated or melting to me. Same with the CR-V.
  • dodo2dodo2 Posts: 496
    To begin with, the Outlander is an economy compact SUV while the RDX is a luxury SUV. Therefore, build quality/materials, price and to a certain extent the feature set are to be expected to be different. Now, I'm not sure if I have ever seen an owner complaining about Outlander's handling. It has the best handling in its class and every single comparison numbers, from any source (all of them biased for Toyota and Honda), show that. The Outlander is only bested in handling by the CX-7 in the economy compact SUV class, but again the CX-7 it's a sport oriented compact SUV to boot with.
    I think if you are shopping I4 turbo SUVs you should look at RDX or CX-7, if you are shopping luxury compact SUVs you have RDX, X3, LR2 or if you are looking economy compact SUVs you have RAV4, CR-V, Outlander and eventually Santa Fe and Grand Vitara. I left the domestics out of this.
    In it's class, except for the resale value, dealer network and PERCEIVED reliability, the Outlander offers the best overall package.
  • dodo2dodo2 Posts: 496
    By looks alone, I wouldn't event consider the RDX nor its poor sister by her name CRV. However, the beauty is in the eyes of the beholder, so some would find it nice. Not too many though, considering that the sales have been quite low.
  • chelentanochelentano Posts: 634
    If you're interested in a sporty luxury SUV, look at the Acura RDX. Handling and performance are better than the Outlander.

    I don't think so. RDX may be has little more horsepower but it's also heavier. Besides Outlander's V6 is smoother and runs with less effort. Also Outlander's 6-speed transmision is smoother then 5-speed on RDX. And Outlander is also known for excellent handling.

    A fully loaded RDX can be bought for under $34K, which is a little more than a loaded Outlander, but you get many more features and a much nicer interior with the RDX. You have to decide for yourself what are your values.

    Many more features? Yea, right. Fully loaded RDX invoice is $33,475, but the actual car sell for about $36K. Fully loaded Outlander sells for $28. Outlander costs 8K less, but has these advantages over Acura:
    Smoother V6, 6-speed transmission, 5/10 warranty, 5 y. roadside assistance, split lift gate, FastKey, keyless ignition, third row seat w/airbag, odor absorbing interior, aluminum roof, LED rear lights, premium 650 watt stereo, speed sensitive volume control, DVD player, skid plates, roof rails, more cargo with folded seats, gas mileage, standard gasoline.
  • chelentanochelentano Posts: 634
    The RDX, however, has all the features that Outlander owners complain are missing: sports car handling, rear-view camera, real-time traffic reports integrated into the navigation system, upscale interior, better build quality, better radio clarity, heated side mirrors, turn signals in the mirrors, dual zone climate control, better resale value, more dealers


    - Outlander does come with heated side mirrors as well.

    - Yes RDX has traffic reports integrated into nav., but Outlader has 30GB music server integrated into nav. and its navigation faster since it runs off hard drive.

    - Claim of better build quality of Acura is questinable, since the Outlander is also build 100% in Japan, so is very subjective the claim of "better radio clarity".

    - No turn signals in the mirrors? Big deal! I would trade this feature anytime for FastKey, keyless ignition, more cargo, better looks, better warranty, LED rear lights, roof rails, etc... Loaded $28K Outlander offers better package of features, gadgets, and warranty, then any SUV under $40K.

    - As for number of dealerships, here in Chicagoland area we have 11 for Mitsu and only 9 for Acura.
  • flatsflats Posts: 44
    The RDX is made in Marysville, Ohio, not Japan. The hard drive music server is nice, providing you have tons of free time. Audio cd's have to be ripped one at time. I'd rather watch the grass grow then do that again. :shades:
    I saw the Outlander at the local auto show. I was turned off by the lack of a flat cargo area and the monochromatic interior panel of the driver's door. It looked to me like the placement of the door handle was an afterthought. Is a complementary trim piece too much to ask?
  • johnny98johnny98 Posts: 88
    I don't know where you are getting your numbers from, but according to edmunds.com, a loaded Outlander has a MSRP of $30,615, quite a bit more than your claim of $28K. Also, the Outlander does not have a 30GB music server; only a small fraction of that space is usable by the music server.

    Edmunds (sponsor of this forum) gives these performance numbers
    Outlander 0-60: 8.2 sec, slalom 63.9 mph, handling good
    RDX 0-60: 6.8 sec, slalom 65.7 mph, handling excellent
    That's a very significant difference to me.

    Yes, the Outlander does have a 3rd row seat (if you know anyone that can fit in it) and theoretically more cargo space (though the non-flat folding rear seats greatly reduce the practical space). On the other hand, the ugly low-budget interior and significant road noise of the Outlander (even with the luxury package) is going to turn off most luxury car buyers.

    Regarding quality, compare the number of problems listed in the Edmunds Mitsubishi forum to the number of problems listed in the Acura forum. The only problem the Acura people are complaining about is that one sticker inside the engine compartment is peeling off.

    Maybe the Outlander is a good choice for the Midwest, and hence they are focusing their dealers there. Out here in California, there are at least 5 times as many Acura dealers.
  • chelentanochelentano Posts: 634
    The RDX is made in Marysville, Ohio, not Japan.

    Bad news!

    The hard drive music server is nice, providing you have tons of free time. Audio cd's have to be ripped one at time. I'd rather watch the grass grow then do that again.

    You ripp while you listen to it, so no extra time nesessary, of cource if you listen to music. Do you listen to music or you watch the grass grow?

    I saw the Outlander at the local auto show. I was turned off by the lack of a flat cargo area

    Otlander's cargo is flat except fot the end, where the sit is folded, which is not big deal considering Outlander has more cargo 71 cu. ft. vs. 61 cu. ft. on RDX.
    RDX is heavier car with less space: bad design.


    and the monochromatic interior panel of the driver's door. It looked to me like the placement of the door handle was an afterthought. Is a complementary trim piece too much to ask?

    Not sure what you mean, but for extra $8k you can enjoy your "trim piece". Ha-ha! I will enjoy instead my 6-speed transmission, V6, FastKey, keyless ignition, 3rd row seat, odor absorbing interior, LED rear lights, 650 watt stereo, speed sensitive volume control, roof rails, music server. For extra $8k could they add all this stuff to RDX or it's "too much to ask"???
  • chelentanochelentano Posts: 634
    .

    .

    .

    I don't know where you are getting your numbers from, but according to edmunds.com, a loaded Outlander has a MSRP of $30,615, quite a bit more than your claim of $28K.

    Man, are you serious??? Do you really buy car at MSPR? The Edmunds price does not reflect dealer incentives, which allow them to sell Outlander below invoice. I bought it with everything, except for the nav. package, for $26.5K and I read here on these boards that people had even better deals. With nav. package the car would cost me under $28K.

    Also, the Outlander does not have a 30GB music server; only a small fraction of that space is usable by the music server.

    Several gigabytes is enough for thousands of mp3 songs. Much better, then zero gigabytes on RDX which costs $8K more.


    Edmunds (sponsor of this forum) gives these performance numbers
    Outlander 0-60: 8.2 sec, slalom 63.9 mph, handling good
    RDX 0-60: 6.8 sec, slalom 65.7 mph, handling excellent
    That's a very significant difference to me.


    You call handling test difference of 1.8 mph a "very significant difference"? Please!
    This "very significant difference" results a "bumpy ride" on RDX, according to Motor Trend.
    It also results extraordinarily limited towing capacity of 1500 lbs on engine with torque specs claimed.



    Yes, the Outlander does have a 3rd row seat (if you know anyone that can fit in it)

    Kids! Could not you guess? Yes, it's a basic seat, but it has own belts and airbags. Acura has nothing!

    and theoretically more cargo space (though the non-flat folding rear seats greatly reduce the practical space).

    Not "theoretically" and not "greatly reduce", but a little bit. The Outlander's cargo of 73 cu. ft. is about 18% bigger over the RDX, while RDX is a heavier car!

    On the other hand, the ugly low-budget interior and significant road noise of the Outlander (even with the luxury package) is going to turn off most...

    "Ugly" says who? The owner of Acura? I have beautiful cream leather interior in my Outlander with cool chrome accents. Yes RDX interior is nicer, but nice interior does not compencate for the lack of major features, if they claim it as a luxury car.
    I don't observe any special noise, I think it was issue which is already fixed. Usually though road noise is common for most SUVs with larger side mirrors and roof rails. Did we mention that the roof rails are absent on "loaded" Acura?


    ...luxury car buyers.

    Ha-ha! "Luxury" car does not qualify as such, if it has missing major and minor gadgets.



    Regarding quality, compare the number of problems listed in the Edmunds Mitsubishi forum to the number of problems listed in the Acura forum.

    Yes, the RDX forum is almost dead, which is a good indication that RDX is not popular. Would you like to check out owner quality ratings? Outlander beats RDX on both major sites in user ratings:

    Edmunds
    RDX ... Outlander
    9.1 ..... 9.2

    MSN
    RDX ... Outlander
    9.0 ..... 9.5
  • johnny98johnny98 Posts: 88
    You are "lying with statistics" again. The RDX does not cost $8K more than an Outlander unless you are comparing full MSRP on the RDX vs. invoice price on the Outlander. You can buy a fully loaded RDX for around $33K. Can you really buy a fully loaded Outlander for $25K?

    And, yes the Edmunds performance data do show huge differences in all categories. If you disagree, then go ahead and buy the Outlander, but don't challenge anyone to a drag race.
  • chelentanochelentano Posts: 634
    The RDX does not cost $8K more than an Outlander unless you are comparing full MSRP on the RDX vs. invoice price on the Outlander. You can buy a fully loaded RDX for around $33K. Can you really buy a fully loaded Outlander for $25K?

    Oh, so they sell RDX below invoice? Wow! I've never heard, that luxury car sells below invoice. Well, then I guess it’s about 6K difference. Still it’s not worth it. RDX comes short on gadgets, and where is that luxury? You can get just as nice interior on Santa Fe for thousands less. All these entry level Acuras are way overpriced…

    Even if Outlander and RDX would cost the same, I would pick Outlander. RDX is a good car, but there is a lot of good cars out there, and versus competition, RDX is little too tight inside, little too heavy, little too short on features, little too expensive to purchase, lttl too expensive on fuel, lttl less competitive on warranty, lttl too plain looking.


    And, yes the Edmunds performance data do show huge differences in all categories.

    You call slalom handling test difference of 1.8 mph a "huge difference"? HUGE??? Ha-ha!!!
    .

    If you disagree, then go ahead and buy the Outlander, but don't challenge anyone to a drag race.

    Did I ask for your advice on what I should or shouldn’t do? I guess, you just have no more real arguments, so you have to start your personal attacks. Don’t forget, you were the one who came to my Lexus vs. Outlander thread, challenging me with your Acura and now you accusing me that I “challenge anyone”.
  • dodo2dodo2 Posts: 496
    Just to settle the price dispute, here they are the MSRP prices for the fully loaded vehicles:

    07 Outlander w/ Sun&Sound, Luxury and Navi - $30,615 (including $625 Dest.)
    07 Acura RDX w/ Technology - $37,165 (including $670 Dest.)
    Difference: $6,550.

    33K (33,650 to be precise) doesn't get you Navi nor Bluetooth in the RDX.
    ... and Johnny98 doesn't seem to own either one at this time.
  • blackb13blackb13 Posts: 35
    The only reason's we didn't go with the RDX:

    1.) Requires premium fuel
    2.) Acura dealers not willing to deal
    3.) $4000 price difference (only way to get nav)
    4.) MMNA had 10/100 warranty

    Let's be real here. The Outlander's interior looks "Neon like" compared to the RDX's interior. It's not even a comparison. In addition the RDX is much sportier and refined then the Outlander.
  • chelentanochelentano Posts: 634
    > Let's be real here. The Outlander's interior looks "Neon like" compared to the RDX's interior. It's not even a comparison. In addition the RDX is much sportier and refined then the Outlander.

    Santa Fe's interior just as nice as RDX but costs thousands less. Outlader's interior is sporty in style and RDX is kinda concervative old school style. RDX interior is excellent, but Outlander in cream leather looks very very decent and luxurious - I am happy and I get complements. As for interior, I really like Lincoln MKX with cream leather, maple wood trim and brushed aluminum accents... What's MMNA?
  • blackb13blackb13 Posts: 35
    "Just as nice" is a little bold, but it doesn't matter...we're not comparing the RDX to the Sante Fe. "Decent and luxurious" don't belong in the same sentence.

    MMNA = Mitsubishi Motors North America
  • dodo2dodo2 Posts: 496
    I keep asking, why one would compare, seriously and with passion, the Outlander with the RDX or LX350? Next it will be compared with BMW X3 and LR2. I hope not.
    The funny thing is that I cannot remember anyone comparing the RAV4 with RDX and LX350. Is this a sign that the Outlander is seen more upscale than the rest of the mainstream compact SUVs ? :confuse: If so, it's more like a compliment for the Outlander ....
  • dodo2dodo2 Posts: 496
    If you are looking at good handling and such, why not look at a Mazda CX-7 Grand Touring w/ Technology for $32,600 MSRP(dest. included)? It would be a much closer competitor for the RDX for significantly less money.
  • chelentanochelentano Posts: 634
    >> I keep asking, why one would compare, seriously and with passion, the Outlander with the RDX or LX350? Next it will be compared with BMW X3 and LR2. I hope not. The funny thing is that I cannot remember anyone comparing the RAV4 with RDX and LX350. Is this a sign that the Outlander is seen more upscale than the rest of the mainstream compact SUVs ? If so, it's more like a compliment for the Outlander...
    .

    I believe, Outlander is in fact more upscale vs. RAV4 and others. Outlander offers rare combination of advanced features, smart design, great value, best warranty and cool styling, which is a reason it currently outsells RAV4 in Japan 3 to 1. Outlander could be in fact compared with X3 and LR2 since both are not that well equipped. Take a look at this comparison to RX350. Half of the standard Outlander XLS features are not available on Lexus 350 even as option:

    2007 Mitsubishi Outlander XLS 2WD V6: MSRP $23,650
    Advantages:
    6 speed shiftable automatic transmission + paddle shifters, 18" tires, handling, 5/10 warranty, 5 years roadside asst., split lift gate, FastKey, keyless ignition, skid plates, third row seat w/airbags, bluetooth, odor absorbing interior, aluminum roof, LED rear lights, stereo with MP3 playback, speed sensitive volume control, roof rails, gas mileage, standard gasoline.

    2008 Lexus RX350 2WD V6: MSRP $37,400
    Advantages:
    Horsepower, ride, sound insulation, reliability record, rain-sensing wipers, power liftgate, lumbar support, homelink, wood trim, compass, electroluminescent instrumentation, auto-dimming mirrors, better interior, illuminated vanity mirrors, headlight sensor.
  • dave82dave82 Posts: 43
    Comparing car sales to Japan is meaningless. The Japanese car market is dominated by mini cars. SUV sales are a tiny fraction of the overall market.
  • dodo2dodo2 Posts: 496
    Plus, I don't know if this is still the case. The last reports I've seen were from over a year ago.
    The truth is that in NA, the RAV4 and CRV outsell the Outlander by 8-9 to 1. But I think nobody expects the Outlander to outsell those two and even Santa Fe in North America. The most Mitsu could expect is to sell in reasonable numbers. I think if they can hit some 4000 units/mo. they would be more than happy. Last month they sold about 2300 which is not that bad. If I recall correctly, the Outlander outsells the RDX though, but again, the RDX' sales are quite disappointing so far.
    The fact is that the Outlander sales are getting traction as people realize that it's a good value for the money. On the negative side, the dealer network, high depreciation and uncertainty of their presence in NA remain the problems, but this could change over time.
«13
This discussion has been closed.