Howdy, Stranger!

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





Getting a new Outlander, CR-V or RAV4

24

Comments

  • ghostdogghostdog Posts: 1
    well I was looking into the Rav4 because of the V6 rating has more power and better mileage than the Outlander.... I started by visiting the Rav4 forums and sampled what was being discussed by regular users... http://rav4world.com/forums/viewforum.php?f=23 it seems there are some problems with the latest generation of rav4... tranny slipping, noise in the front hood for v6 when turning that sound like popcorn popping and currently no fix in sight, windows cracking due to design... now I know rav4 outnumber the outlander by a lot so you will get more exposure to people's complaints as compared to a lower volume selling suv like the outlander... however the older outlander gen got really good reliability rating so I hope the newer gen is built the same way or better ... i hope... still looking to see which suv to buy... subaru, honda, toyota or mitsubishi...
  • sm685sm685 Posts: 4
    After owning my 06' Rav4 for 2 years, I can say - it's my last Toyota for a long time. I traded in an 01' Celica for the Rav with the V6 after 70,000 miles of no trouble with the Celica. With the Rav, it's been a continuous string of mysterious problems. I'm on my third stereo, second set of rear window trim, a mysterious "clunk" in the front end that has never been diagnosed and two dealerships that seemingly could care less. For the amount of money paid for this car and the "Toyota" name, I expected a lot more. Buy a Honda -
  • cbmortoncbmorton Posts: 252
    I've also had an '06 RAV4 V6 for almost two years and I've had the opposite experience. Very pleased with the overall quality of the vehicle. Fuel economy has been excellent given the big engine and I've had zero problems with it save the radio, which was replaced a year ago under a Toyota service bulletin (applicable to '06 and early '07s). Still feels as solid as new. For me this one's a keeper.
  • piastpiast Posts: 269
    Here, one more Outlander review from Cars.com:
    "..The automatic transmission is almost as smooth as the new CR-V's, while the engine provides considerably more power. The combination is far superior to the RAV4 despite the Toyota's higher horsepower figure, the Outlander is a better highway companion overall.... the Outlander handles steeply banked highway onramps with superb control and minimal body lean, giving the driver a sense of confidence not found in many SUVs — compact, car-based or otherwise.The ride was also car-like. Bumps were softly muted and road noise was minimal...Available with an optional manual four-wheel-drive system, the Outlander is one of the more affordable four-wheel-drive SUVs on the market, ...Surprisingly, the new Outlander seems to outclass its competitors on just about every front, although the RAV4 does offer more power with its optional V-6 engine (269 horsepower)."
  • piastpiast Posts: 269
    In OCT MT issue Ron Kiino wrote: "Interior quality is premium and design contemporary... 3.0 liter with MIVEC is a refined and robust unit... New Outlander has an air that's all SUV enhanced with such luxury as standard LED tail lamps, available Xenon headlamps and 18" wheels...Outlander can easily hang with the best in it's class...delivers excellent balance through high-speed maneuvers."

    Mazda CX7 and Mitsubishi Outlander, both offering better performance and premium features (Xenon headlamps, navigation, DVD, premium sound systems etc) than any other CUV in this class. Mitsubishi standard V6 uses regular, has more rear leg room (39") and cargo room (39 cu ft) better warranty and price.

    From DEC Motor Trend issue:
    " ...once you get past the stellar V6, The RAV4 is a bit ordinary and doesn't offer the same value as its competitors" (A.Harwood)

    Mitsubishi got high ratings in performance and safety with rest of them being equal to RAV4. The interior in Mitsu received four stars, RAV4 got three. Both cars can tow 3500 lbs, both using regular fuel.
    Handling:
    Outlannder......RAV4
    Braking ft........ .... 128..............130
    600ft slalom mph ... 62.7.............60.6
    Lateral acceleration g 078..............0.75
    MT figure 8 (sec) ....... 28.3.............28.6
  • figtreefigtree Posts: 7
    I looked at the Outlander and CRV and decided to go with the 2008 CRV. I have no idea about the RAV4, I haven't even considered it.
    -I hate the cramped third seat on the Outlander. Is anyone really gonna sit back there? They might as well just sit in the cargo area, they'd be more comfortable.
    -The Mitsubishi salesman put down the back tailgate, sat on it, and described that it would be a great place to sit. Is that a feature? I am not buying a $26,000+ car so I can sit on the tailgate. The CRV's cargo area is low and looks really easy to get stuff in and out of. It has a nice clean look to it without the third seat and tailgate messing it up.
    -CRV has a full spare in the back, Mitsubishi has a donut.
    -Salesman stated how good the Outlander looked compared to the CRV. It's personal opinion, but I think the CRV looks way better.
    -Mitsubishi had remote start, but call me old fashioned, I like a key. Besides, I can get remote start on the CRV if I want.
    -I like the no frills, clean look on the interior of the CRV. I also liked the exterior color choices better. Hey, color matters.
    -I don't think Mitsubishi measures up to Honda Reliability and Safety.

    This is my first SUV and my first Honda. I checked out a ton of reviews, consumer reports, forums, etc...and the CRV looks fantastic to me.

    Granted, I did like the little push out cup holder on the Outlander Driver's Side, but it still didn't convince me to buy it. ;)
  • comem47comem47 Posts: 395
    I considered the new CRV (without the spare on the back) and agree it looks nice and would give better MPG than the Outlander I ended up buying. The swinging door on the RAV gets in the way when unloading at curbs and Honda did well to get rid of it. (RAV really should for 2009)

    A requirement for me was winter towing (can tow 3500 lbs with 4WD V6 Outlander) Too bad the CRV doesn't have a little more "ooomph" on the 4 cyl engine. (if not towing this wouldn't be an obstacle, but it was for me) I also liked the greater warranty on the Outlander (Honda has a good reputation, so they and Toyota aren't competing on warranty or knocking off $$) As for safety, the Outlander gets high marks (5 rating) on everything except rollover and it gets a 4 on that). I agree that you should be happy based on Honda history.
  • figtreefigtree Posts: 7
    Yah, it pretty much is no contest if you need the vehicle for towing. I can't deny that the Outlander has a lot of other excellent features as well.

    I wish the CRV came with a better warranty also. I admit reputation has a lot to do with my purchase, but I would still love a better warranty. I don't think any company wanting to be the best should get by solely on reputation, they should offer a competitive warranty as well.
  • piastpiast Posts: 269
    -I did not see any advantage of buying CRV over Outlander. I hate how new CRV looks, and I'm not the only one. It looks like its feminine character suits well tastes of many women in the other hand.
    - Low tailgate is a great feature for loading heavy cargo, plus I sit on it when changing my ski boots for example. It is not a car; it is CUV, with "U" for utility.
    -Mitsu has a donut and 5 year road side assistance, so you would not have to worry about getting dirty changing it.
    - Mitsubishi measures up to Honda and anybody else Reliability and Safety. Period.
    We own Accord, we owned another Mitsubishi for 7 yr before. Outlander is made in Japan, and is as solid and reliable as it can be. Recent Toyota (engines) and Honda (transmissions) problems proved - it is just a reputation. We love our Accord, we love the Outlander. I think you will be happy with CRV. Point is it is not any better than Outlander. It is down to personal choice.
  • chelentanochelentano Posts: 634
    I agree, the CRV is girly looking car. It's a good vehicle, but the Outlander is just better in almost every category: styling, warranty, roadside asst, equipment, interior volume, AWD. According to Consumer Reports, the Outlander has best 2008 predicted reliability in its class, beating both RAV4 and CRV.
  • figtreefigtree Posts: 7
    Hey, I am a girl, so there! :P
  • thomasw98thomasw98 Posts: 29
    I was originally planning on a RAV4, but then I started looking at the Outlander. Just about convinced myself to go for it, but then read about some problems:

    1. My head is still spinning from reading 15 pages of complaints about a serious paint chipping problem on the Outlander. There were lots of well-documented reports in the thread, but there were also two "troll-ish" posters repeatedly jumping in to unfairly pick apart and criticize the complaints. It really gave me the impression that the problem is real (at least for some owners) and the trolls were simply Mitsubishi dealers trying to crush the idea. This is now my number one concern about the Outlander.

    2. JD Powers reliability report only gave Outlander a 4 out of 10 for reliability based on past 3-4 years of reports from consumers. Not sure why this is so different from the Consumer Reports results others have mentioned earlier in this thread.

    3. Nav system: I was going to go for it, then read about some big problems with it...bad maps, lack of street name announcement, etc. So then I figured I would just go without it, and get a third party GPS later. But it seems as if this Nav system is a very integral part of the entire car system, with many functions being controlled or adjusted on this Nav screen. So, now I am wondering what to do???
  • comem47comem47 Posts: 395
    I do not know what to say about the paint thing. I don't have the problem on my '07 LS , but that doesn't say it hasn't happened to others. As for JD powers, you really can't base the 3-4 year survey on a car that has only been out since '07 (the earlier Outlander is not the dame beast). I understand from reading from others that the package groupings are different in '08, making one package dependent on another, or so it is said( forcing you to buy maybe much more than you want). I got an LS (didn't want the paddle shifters, low profile tires or 3rd row seat of an XLS), but did get the Sun and Sound package (Power sunroof, Sirius radio, 6 CD player with Rockford Fosgate sound) and really like it . (except for the fact you can't read the LED display in sunlight). I also considered the RAV-4, but I absolutely do not like the swing door with tire on the back (try unloading at curbside with a car behind you). I went with the Outlander for the good value for the price when you consider warranty,discounts and features, etc. Actually a Hyundai Santa Fe was my #2 (it's a bit bigger and a bit less economical on fuel, but also carries a good warranty). If you don't think mudflaps will solve the paint problem then there probably is not much more to be said. (otherwise the warranty should ease fears on other things with the 5 yr bumper to bumper and 10 yr/100K drivetrain)
  • thomasw98thomasw98 Posts: 29
    Did you get get Nav system?

    If so, how is it working? Does it announce street names? (I read that the older versions do not announce the street name, i.e. they do not have "text to speech" function.)

    If not, are you still able to manage and customize the other aspects of the car without a screen? I read somewhere that there are a lot of customizations that can be done on the Nav screen to control various aspects of the car. So I am wondering what can be done if there is no Nav screen?

    Thanks!
  • biscuit_xlsbiscuit_xls Posts: 194
    I have the Nav on my 07 Outlander XLS and I like it. It announces freeway names but not individual street names. So it announces "Exit south on I-5 in 0.5 miles." If your route has an upcoming turn, the street name is highlighted in a large green box with information on how far away it is... "Turn left on Culver in 1.2 miles" etc. For me it is very easy to see and use.

    The paint thing is not a universal problem. My paint looks great after more than a year of driving, including a trip to the snow last winter. But any car can be damaged in harsh conditions, get behind a rock truck for just a few seconds and everything gets wiped out, including the windshield. If I lived in areas with salt and rocks then I would install mud flaps.

    If your'e in SoCal I'd be happy to show you my Outlander and all of its cool functions.
  • piastpiast Posts: 269
    You can easily check this yourself. Just stop at your local Mitsubishi dealer on Sunday (or any other day they are closed) and closely examine any used Outlander they may have on the lot. If you see any chips on them, that what you can expect on yours after year or two. Take a note if those affected ones, did have mud guards installed or not. Longer mud flaps stopped my problem. I ended up with few chips after very bad winter here in Chicago area. If you wish, I can post pictures of those areas on my vehicle, 07 XLS.
    To answer your second Q, I don't have Nav, just standard 6CD head unit, and I don't think I'm missing any adjustments. At least not the important ones. The only problem with it - red LED display is hard to read in the direct sunlight.
  • thomasw98thomasw98 Posts: 29
    "You can easily check this yourself. Just stop at your local Mitsubishi dealer on Sunday (or any other day they are closed) and closely examine any used Outlander they may have on the lot. If you see any chips on them, that what you can expect on yours after year or two. Take a note if those affected ones, did have mud guards installed or not. Longer mud flaps stopped my problem. "

    That's a good idea. I will definitely have a look.

    From what I read in the main Outlander thread, the cracks (oops, I mean "chips") are not completely avoided with mud flaps unless they are really large, which do not look very good in my view.

    Thanks!
  • piastpiast Posts: 269
    "From what I read in the main Outlander thread, the cracks are not completely avoided with mud flaps unless they are really large, which do not look very good in my view."

    I never heard about any cracks. What some of us experienced are tiny spots (1/32 to 1/64 in size), visible only from short distance on washed car, and only at the bottom of the rear doors, right above rocker panel. They are easily avoided with mud flaps, provided they are about 5-6" longer than standard plastic mud guards. If you don't live in the area where sand is used in winter, you will be safe even without any mud guards. I can tell how effective my extensions are every time I drive on wet or dirty roads. Horizontal dirt spray pattern from front tires to the back is completely eliminated now. Some other owners installed running boards, they will do a trick as well, but those usually cost from $400 to $500.
  • dodo2dodo2 Posts: 496
    1. If you are really interested about the car and seriously consider buying it, I think you should read the posts about the solution to the paint chipping on the bottom of the doors and rear door flares. The long and not so good looking mudflaps is not the only solution, you know. This is a real issue, but it can be resolved and some had worst experience than others. However, some posters mix up this issue with the regular paint chips caused by the road hazards. Claiming that other cars' paint doesn't chip is just foolish. I have another fairly new car (2005) form another Japanese brand and I have paint chips on the hood, fenders, roof and doors. It hurts in the beginning, but it's just a matter of life.
    You have a big advantage by reading these posts to become aware of the problem and have the chance to properly protect the car before any chip happens. Some of us learned about the problem the hard way. If I were to buy the car again, which I would BTW, I would protect it from day one and move on.
    2. The Consumer Reports rates the current Outlander model only, based on the data available for this model alone. In the end, this is the car you are buying not the previous models.
    3. I don't have it so I can't speak about it.

    If you are scared to buy the car, just don't do it. Plain and simple.
  • chelentanochelentano Posts: 634
    >> 1. My head is still spinning from reading 15 pages of complaints about a serious paint chipping problem on the Outlander. This is now my number one concern about the Outlander.

    I don't have any paint chipping issues. I think the paint issue is overblown on this board. If you check the 2007 and 2008 Outlander owner reviews/ratings on MSN Autos and on Yshoo Autos, this issue is mentioned there 0 times out of 93 owner reviews. Only Edmunds owner ratings mention it 7 times out of 143 reviews, which makes me think that some of the forum posters did the job.
    .

    >> 2. JD Powers reliability report only gave Outlander a 4 out of 10 for reliability based on past 3-4 years of reports from consumers. Not sure why this is so different from the Consumer Reports results others have mentioned earlier in this thread.

    JD Powers samples much smaller data. Also JD Powers paid by car manufactures so they have obvious conflict of interest and their "ratings" and "car of the year" awards don't mean much: they have to "manage" to please its biggest donors. On the other hand, Consumer Reports is the only major US car publication, which claims that they are not paid by manufacturers. The excellent Consumer Reports rating for the Outlander are completely consistent with Outlander owner ratings at all three major consumer rating sites. Take a look at 2007 owner ratings data:

    MSN Autos
    Outlander: 9.5, RAV4: 8.6

    Yahoo Autos
    Outlander: 4.5, RAV4: 3.5

    Edmunds.com
    Outlander: 9.2, RAV4: 9.0

    JD Power on the other hand is not consistant with real world owner ratings.
  • thomasw98thomasw98 Posts: 29
    However, some posters mix up this issue with the regular paint chips caused by the road hazards.

    Well, I don't want to get into the whole chipped paint argument on their behalf, but I think they mentioned over and over again that they understand about normal road hazards, and they specifically stated their chipping was not the same as that. They also pointed out that they owned several other cars and drove the exact same road without similar damage over many years...OK, maybe they are exaggerating since they are upset...I have no idea. But, from their words alone, they have clearly "proven" to me that there is some specific problem with the Outlander. ("proven" in quotes indicates only a theoretical state)...Anyways, got your point dodo2 and thanks for the response.

    Consumer Reports: If they rate only the current model year, then I wonder how they can actually judge the quality over time? Still, I understand and agree that they have a good reputation.

    J.D. Powers: I never knew much about the JD Powers rating system. Just know the name from their PR work which makes them seem very respected. Could be true or just good PR. ;)
  • thomasw98thomasw98 Posts: 29
    Thanks, Chelentano. that's a good, logical analysis.
  • richk6richk6 Posts: 87
    "Consumer Reports: If they rate only the current model year, then I wonder how they can actually judge the quality over time? Still, I understand and agree that they have a good reputation. "

    Consumer Reports reliability ratings reflect actual owner's data on their vehicles. They send out an annual car reliability survey to subscribers and have received responses for about 1.3 million vehicles. These published surveys in their annual auto issue cover six years and show 16 different possible trouble areas.

    IMO this data can give a prospective buyer a true picture of "quality over time".
  • steverstever Viva Las CrucesPosts: 41,940

    Moderator
    Minivan fan. Feel free to message or email me - stever@edmunds.com.

  • thomasw98thomasw98 Posts: 29
    Comments: Consumer Reports/JD Power Rankings may be of interest.

    Wow! Please send me an aspirin...that flame war gave me a headache! :D
  • steverstever Viva Las CrucesPosts: 41,940
    lol, now you see the reason behind my attempt at diverting further CR/JD Power posts in here. :)

    Moderator
    Minivan fan. Feel free to message or email me - stever@edmunds.com.

  • thomasw98thomasw98 Posts: 29
    Seems like every review on that Motherproof website is positive as well as written in a slightly annoying style. Very optimistic and motherly, but not much help in deciding which car to buy.
  • thomasw98thomasw98 Posts: 29
    What's up with these so-called "internet sales" people in car dealerships. Are they somehow not able to handle email? or just trying to cherry-pick their emails for idiots who will negotiate based on MSRP?

    Latest example (of several): Sent an email to Ventura Mitsubishi (California) asking for a quote on an Outlander. I gave clear details about the type of car I wanted.

    Someone with email name "sgiangrande" writes back and says:

    "we do have Outlanders i just need to know what model your looking for?"

    But just below that one line, unsigned answer, my original request and detailed car description is clearly copied in their email to me...OK, maybe some sort of internet snafu or maybe sgiangrande's IQ is a little low today...resent the email with the car description copied agian...wait/resend...wait/resend...wait/resend...three days go by...no answer.

    I have had similar experiences with MANY of these internet people at car dealers in California. A few exceptions, of course, but overall, I am now doubting the concept of getting multiple REASONABLE quotes via email. It seems that they so strongly prefer to play their "car dealer games" face to face that they just don't pay much attention to emails.
This discussion has been closed.