Howdy, Stranger!

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





Mitsubishi Outlander vs. Subaru Forester

1242527293052

Comments

  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Yeah, they may already have cut supply. If so, you won't find that sort of bargain.

    It's a gamble. You may get lucky and get the deal of the century. Or they may sell the last one before you get to it. Or the incentives may not match what they were last year.

    The worst, though, would be to buy the vehicle, then the incentives go up, after you buy. In that case not only did you pay more, but also it could affect resale values in the short-term.

    That should not matter to you, given you have a 14 year old Galant, and seem likely to keep this for a long time.

    I got screwed like that. In January Mazda had a loyalty incentive of $500 on the Miata. I waited. In March they had a rebate of $2500, so I bought the car.

    Then, in April, the rebate went up to $5000. :cry:

    I wrote Mazda a letter to complain, and in fairness they did feel sympathetic, and sent me gift cards for Mazda accessories.

    I guess my timing was better than people who bought in January, but not as good as those who waited until April.

    Forester never got a cash incentive for model year 2009, and very likely will not for 2010 either. So the bad news is the price should not go down, but I guess the good news is prices have been consistent since the launch, so you won't buy one and then see someone pay $2500 less than you did the following month. :sick:
  • fushigifushigi Posts: 1,234
    Well for the Outlander the '10 is what I want. I might settle for an '09 but again it would take a really good deal. Probably better than they're willing to offer at this point. Although who knows; there have been some comments about Black Friday being a good day to buy a car.

    My Galant will turn a tender 11 in February. It was the first year of the redesign for 99-03/04 and I bought it in Feb of 99.

    Oh, I've pretty much eliminated the Edge from consideration. After building one on Ford's not-so-great site it did have a lower MSRP than the Outlander & Outback but I don't think I can get past it having the worst fuel economy of the three. MPG isn't my highest priority but it's up there.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Edge is just heavy. One of our Managers drives one of those nuclear orange ones.
  • >> I don't quite get it - didn't the old Navi system have avoidances? If so, you should have been able to choose to avoid (or not avoid) HOV lanes. My Garmin does this.
    I guess I don't see how it's an industry first, or what's unique about it. Am I missing something?

    Perhaps they are talking about automotive industry and car nav systems, not handhelds. BTW this feature is not new on 2010 outlander, it was offered on 2009 or 08 outlander.
  • >> It's not only missing major new roads like the ICC highway here in MD, but also the POI database - every business that is new or has closed in the past 2 years would be listed incorrectly or missing. Imagine running on fumes and then having it take you to a gas station that closed.

    2 years is about a standard time for most nav systems, not much you can do and least today. I use Yelp App on my iPhone. Not only it is updated daily, it also has user rating for all the POI. Also there is an app which shows me gas station with the cheapest gas in area. There is an app for anything. A year and half ago I predicted on this boards that cars will play streaming music: they do that now. In a couple of years I predict that car Nav-Media systems will have 3G-4G connection and music, POI and maps (eventually) will be streamed wirelessly. Mitsubishi probably will be one of the first.


    >> What do you know, is World Peace next? It's Thanksgiving week so Iets be thankful for the choices we have, even if we don't agree on which is best for each of us. At least we have those choices to make.

    World peace, right, happy thanksgiving.
  • p0926p0926 Posts: 4,423
    Being someone who currently owns a Forester XT and who just bought a GLK350, I can assure you that very few people are going to cross-shop the GLK with the Outlander (or Forester for that matter). They're in two totally different classes. If I were looking for basic cargo hauling and practical utility I “might“consider an Outlander (although I think the gaping maw in the front looks ridiculous). But there's no way anyone is going to confuse it with a luxury vehicle.

    Sure the Outlander and Forester have more cargo volume and get better mpg and had those been high priorities for me I wouldn't have gotten a GLK. In my case, I was looking for something that was solidly built, extremely safe, powerful engine, competent handling, and had luxurious appointments while still offering the advantages of full-time AWD, higher seating position and also had the ability to haul cargo when needed. Which is why I went with the GLK

    -Frank

    P.S. Actually, the GLK's second row seats do fold flat :P
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    I think any mainstream brand has to be careful going upscale, because trying to compete with names like BMW and Mercedes may be futile even when the product is fantastic.

    Look at the VW Phaeton. There was nothing at all wrong with the vehicle, but it failed miserably. VW lost so much money , and the Golf V was delayed for years here in the USA, so it hurt their mainstream fleet.

    Let's just say it's a huge risk.

    I believe BMW now has iPod integration standard, and HD Radio as well (please correct me if I'm wrong), and that's on a no-options base model. On top of that you get 4 years of service for free, so the dealership rolls out the red carpet for customers that expect to be pampered.
  • 20vcq20vcq Posts: 82
    fushigi is correct - comparing BMW's Mercedes and that ilk to Outlander is unfair. They are in a different market segment. Do they all hall people with awd - yep other than that - not comparable.
    As for the Subi - I've had several - they are fine. I actually prefer the Subi awd system to the Outlander - no annoying delay in uptake of slippage. I hate that about my Outlander. BUT and this for many is a big but - you can't haul a dinky toy with a Subi. The outlander AWD has a 3500lb tow capacity and that speaks volumes about structure and engineering layout. And I can attest to how well it handles that weight load.
    Al these vehicles have a saw off - the Subi handling is closer to BMW the Outlander feels like it has a single fixed axle in front scrubbing off forward motion rather than a well engineered front geometry (can be a real pain). Considering they build EVO this Outlander has a very poor suspension.
    I will hold on to my '07 as I chose it for utility not sports driving.
    I have kept my Audi CQ for real driving though. And don't anyone try to compare Mitsu Outlander or Subi to ANY Audi - there is simply no comparison on any scale - short of towing. IMO
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Only the V6 AWD Outlander is rated to tow 3500 lbs, FWIW.

    The FWD V6 is rated to tow 2000 lbs, and the 4 cylinder models are only rated for 1400 lbs. So only 1 out of the 4 drivetrains available tow more than a Forester, 3 tow less.

    So that doesn't really jive with the structure and engineering layout claims - those models have the same unibody.

    Crash tests are a better test of those and I don't have to repeat that the Forester did a little better in that regard (IIHS).

    Plus, this is really just a limit dictated by the lawyers. In the UK, the Forester has been rated to tow 1800kg or more since it came out in 1998, never less. That's 3960 lbs. I bet the base 2.4l CVT Outlander can tow a lot more than 1400 lbs there as well. Does anyone know?

    Why? The USA is more litigious. Subaru gives a much more conservative rating of 2400 lbs in the USA for all models (more than the V6 FWD and more than both 4 cylinder models) simply because their lawyers are being overly cautious.

    Are the UK models beefed up? No, in fact they get smaller engines. :(

    Let's acknowledge, though - the 3500 lbs tow rating in the USA (V6, AWD model only) is impressive for this class and shows that MMNA had the confidence to rate that model to tow it.

    Interesting comments about the AWD system, thanks for sharing.
  • >> Being from the manufacturer it can be considered propaganda, but I find them interesting. As I wouldn't be off-roading (intentionally), I was mostly impressed with the ice video. That is applicable to road conditions that can happen on occasion here in Chicagoland. Ice:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b203wKwGrYA&feature=PlayList&p=50AC73FE9DBAA271&i- - - ndex=1

    I am also from Chicago so I hear you talking about road condition. My Outlander was always very confident in heavy snow.

    The ice video is amazing. You can tell that S-AVC torque vectoring capability is a whole another level of handling and safety. That Outlander is basically driving on two left wheels!

    There are only few manufacturers building modern AWD systems based on torque vectoring:

    Mitsubishi in 1997 introduced the AYC system with 2 rear wheel side-to-side torque control: 97 EVO4, Galant VR4. In 2002 it was improved with S-AYC on EVO 8.
    Honda/Borg Warner, 2004, SH-AWD, 2 rear wheels, introduced on 05 Acura RL.
    Mitsubishi, 2006, introduced S-AVC with all 4 wheel torque vectoring on 07 EVO X and now on Outlander GT.
    Ricardo (UK), 2007, 2 rear wheel torque vectoring: Audi B8 S4.
    ZF (Germany) / GKN Driveline (UK), 2008, offers both 2 and 4 wheel vectoring systems, for BMWs, Benz, Audi, VW, Porsche.
    Haldex, 2008, 2 rear wheels, Opel Insignia, Cadillac SRX, Saab 9-4x, though some argue that Haldex system is not true a torque vectoring system.
    .
  • >> In my case, I was looking for something that was solidly built … competent handling. Which is why I went with the GLK

    GLK is nice little SUV, I drove it for a couple of days and currently drive ML350 myself. The Mercedes “build” quality could be better: the reliability is average. After your warranty expires, repairs will be very costly that’s part of the reason why I lease it. As for GLK “competent handling”, it’s average. GLK slalom results are far behind both Outlander XLS, and especially GT which beats in slalom every SUV from Mercedes, Acura, LR and Audi.
    .

    >> P.S. Actually, the GLK's second row seats do fold flat.

    Sounds cool, Frank, but why only the “second row”? According to Mitsu site Outlander has “fully-flat seating function (first and second row)”.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    What I want to know, though, is how power is transfered side-to-side.

    Are they merely applying the brakes to one side, letting all the power go to the other? That would mean open differentials, with the ABS doing all the work. Or is it a mechanical differential, like Audi uses (Torsen style).

    I'm sure the system on the EVO is far more sophisticated than other Mitsus.

    There are plenty of videos on the 'net that show the Tribeca and Legacy GT climbing that ramp with rollers when just a single wheel has traction, and they manage. So Subaru has systems that can do it.

    And while the Forester doesn't get that more expensive AWD system, I don't think any system on a vehicle priced below $30 grand can. The GT is in Outback price territory, so at the same price level, both are capable of having one wheel move the vehicle forward, at least in theory.

    To be honest I'd like to see more vehicles be tested on that ramp. I've only seen BMW, Mercedes, and Subaru accomplish that. I'm sure there are others, but let's see 'em try. :shades:
  • >> the Subi handling is closer to BMW the Outlander feels like it has a single fixed axle in front scrubbing off forward motion rather than a well engineered front geometry (can be a real pain). Considering they build EVO this Outlander has a very poor suspension.

    That’s an odd and subjective statement. The objective facts are that Outlander XLS beats BMW X5 M, Acura Q5, MDX, LR2 in the recent Edmunds slalom handling test. In addition to the above cars the Outlander GT beats in slalom BMW X3, Benz AMG, RDX, and Cayenne Turbo. That’s speaking of “poor suspension”.
    .

    >> I have kept my Audi CQ for real driving though.

    That CQ from eighties? 0-60 in 9 seconds you call “real driving”?
    .

    >> And don't anyone try to compare Mitsu Outlander or Subi to ANY Audi - there is simply no comparison on any scale - short of towing.

    “Any scale”? On handling / slalom “scale” Outlander compares very well: it beats any Audi SUV. Outlander GT also has comparable Torque Vectoring AWD system which is developed in-house, while Audi system is purchased from ZF. Entertainment system is also very comparable, while Outlander reliability and warranty are much better.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Audi has been using Torsens for decades, and they're very much capable of transfering torque side-to-side. Well before traction control was even a household name.

    I remember at one point some Audis had 3 Torsens (center, front diff, rear diff). They were capable of side to side torque transfer in the 80s.

    That Mitsu video was nice, as were the videos Subaru put out in 2005 when the Tribeca came out, but remember the Audi climbing that ski jump ramp?

    1986!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHH-726_8lA

    Let's show some respect for the AWD pioneers.
  • p0926p0926 Posts: 4,423
    Oh whoopee, the Outlander does well in one salolm test. Does it also have best in class braking? Acceleration? etc? I thought not :P

    Outlander has “fully-flat seating function (first and second row)”

    Why do I care if the driver's seat folds flat? :confuse:

    -Frank
  • >> What I want to know, though, is how power is transfered side-to-side. Are they merely applying the brakes to one side, letting all the power go to the other? That would mean open differentials, with the ABS doing all the work. Or is it a mechanical differential, like Audi uses (Torsen style).

    Actually, the Audi Quattro generation 4 is primarily utilizing brakes to transfer torque.

    The new generatioIn addition to open dif they use primarily active differential and electronic sensing for torque transfer.
  • >> Was the Endeavor discontinued? I test drove one a while back. That 3.8l was really torquey. They also set the engine nice and low in the engine bay. What happened to it?

    http://www.mitsubishicars.com/MMNA/jsp/endeavor/10/index.do?loc=en-us
  • >> Audi has been using Torsens for decades, and they're very much capable of transfering torque side-to-side...

    Torsen could only transfer torque to a side passively through an open differential, but not actively from wheel to wheel.

    ‘Open’ type differentials will transfer torque to the wheel offering least resistance. You can see the effect when one wheel of axle fitted with an ‘open’ diff is in mud and the other wheel is on tarmac. The wheel in the mud (low grip, least resistance) will just spin away while the one on the tarmac (high grip, high resistance) does nothing! You can also often see this process happening on track, especially on the front axle of normal road going FWD cars. When entering a corner the outside wheel becomes heavily loaded due to weight transfer while the wheel on the inside of the corner becomes unloaded. With an ‘open’ diff the inside wheel can spin as torque is transferred to the wheel offering the least resistance, which is the inside wheel. To stop this torque loss a Limited Slip Differential is often used. Standard LSD’s can only provide torque transfer in one direction proportional to the amount the ‘unloaded’ wheel is spinning.

    Mitsubishi’s Active Yaw Control system (part of S-AWC) builds on this principle. It adds electronic control of the torque transfer, and utilizes a type of active differential that helps to provide maximum traction to individual wheels according to sensed forces on the car (longitudinal and lateral g forces, steering, brakes and throttle position ) and the drivers input and it has several advantages:

    * It can help equalize the loading of all four tires and therefore provide the maximum cornering potential.
    * Understeer when cornering is reduced as a Yaw moment can be set-up by torque transfer at the rear wheels.
    * Sharp corners can be taken with smaller steering angles than normal due to a Yaw moment set-up by torque transfer at the rear wheels.
    * When driving or pulling away with the left and right wheels on surfaces with different friction levels the AYC can transfer torque to the wheel with the most grip.

    >> That Mitsu video was nice, as were the videos Subaru put out in 2005 when the Tribeca came out, but remember the Audi climbing that ski jump ramp? Let's show some respect for the AWD pioneers...

    The video is not relevant to the torque vectoring discussion and you taking that commercial too seriously. Climbing like that in snow is against all laws of nature. It’s a Hollywood setup with winter tires, snow spikes, robes and who knows what CGI.

    This video is a real thing, with climbing is in the end:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gTs0MCQHrzE
  • >> I think any mainstream brand has to be careful going upscale, because trying to compete with names like BMW and Mercedes may be futile even when the product is fantastic. Look at the VW Phaeton. There was nothing at all wrong with the vehicle, but it failed miserably. VW lost so much money , and the Golf V was delayed for years here in the USA, so it hurt their mainstream fleet.

    True, but at $70-110k they price "luxury" VW as Benz. In this case the upscale GT priced as Mitsubishi.
  • comem47comem47 Posts: 390
    ", but remember the Audi climbing that ski jump ramp? Let's show some respect for the AWD pioneers...

    The video is not relevant to the torque vectoring discussion and you taking that commercial too seriously. Climbing like that in snow is against all laws of nature. It’s a Hollywood setup with winter tires, snow spikes, robes and who knows what CGI. "

    The Audi ski ramp stunt did have a wire attached under the front (viewable around the 45 second mark and the very beginning head shot) They claim it was only there to prevent the car from falling backwards once stopped at the top, but who knows!!! ;)
  • >> Oh whoopee, the Outlander does well in one salolm test. Does it also have best in class braking? Acceleration? etc? I thought not...

    But you “thought” yes, that GLK has “competent handling”: but Oh whoopee, that’s not the case: it’s beaten in slalom by x3, x5, x6, lr2, mdx, rdx, q5, outlander, and even by Toyota! Shame. For $45K I’d expect a better performance.

    I’ve never “thought” or said that Outlander GT has the “best in class braking or acceleration”, but Outlander has good braking and acceleration for the money. In fact it’s good enough to beat Rover LR2, Acura MDX, and Mercedes ML350 in 0-60 acceleration test.


    >>>> Outlander has “fully-flat seating function (first and second row)”
    >> Why do I care if the driver's seat folds flat?

    You tell me, you started the "flatseat" topic. But you seem to “care” that the Outlander front passenger seat folds flat, and in addition Outlander 2nd row seat reclines and slides back. Ooh whoopee, the GLK does not do any of that...
  • >>The Audi ski ramp stunt did have a wire attached under the front.

    Wire? Wow.

    Epic music, Audi logo close up, Quattro logo close up, the man in black wool coat gets in the car, and a wire.

    The other real life video gives better idea what happens with no wire and spikes.
  • comem47comem47 Posts: 390
    Here is the making of the 25th anniv ski jump video FYI:

    It's not quite what they lead you to believe

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ObdPVYAGCXo
  • comem47comem47 Posts: 390
    And lets admit it. Neither a Forester, not Outlander , nor Quattro is gonna do this

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtWSXhWJt2I

    (and I don't really care because I will never attempt that)

    Are we done? :P
  • p0926p0926 Posts: 4,423
    Well I guess the Outlander is the greatest thing since the invention of sliced bread, At least that's what chelentano would like us to think ;)

    I think I'll pass on drinking the Kool-Aid.
  • p0926p0926 Posts: 4,423
    Seriously though, let me get this right, you're comparing the Outlander to the MB GLK350 and actually arguing that the Outlander is better?!?!?!?!?

    -Frank
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    I realize that a Torsen acts like an open diff when there is zero traction on one side. My Miata has a Torsen rear diff with no traction control, so in the snow it stays parked at home.

    On dry pavement (such as on a track) it can sense torque (TorSen stands for Torque Sensing) and send more power to one side, equal to what's called the bias ratio. It doesn't wait to react to slip, so I'd consider that proactive.

    Audi's center Torsen has a bias ratio of 2 to 1, so it can actively send double the power to the axle with greater traction (as long as both axles have some grip). Works great on the track.

    Not so great on ice, plus the 3 Torsens were extremely expensive, so Audi kept just the center Torsen and now uses traction control. Better or worse? That's open for debate. Better on ice, yes.

    What you describe sounds like what Honda used in the Prelude SH back in 1997, they called it ATTS, but it basically did the same thing (with FWD).

    What year did Mitsu start using it?
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    What that ski jump ramp ascent shows is the directional control when climbing offered, including side-to-side management. It goes up perfectly straight, no drama.

    It was impressive 25 years ago and remains impressive today.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Went to check out a Honda Crosstour in Rockville yesterday. 1500 lbs towing, $35 grand for AWD with leather and no Navi, ouch. Bad blind spots, styling only a mother could love, and a mere 31" between the cargo wheel wells.

    That's nearly a full size car, and the compact Forester offers 42.2" between the wheel wells (Outlander falls between the two).

    Decided not to bother test driving it.

    I bet it sells like hotcakes, though. They were out of brochures. Honda could sell a rock if they put an "H" on it.

    Next, I went next door to Rockville Mitsubishi - heads up fushigi, they have a GT in stock, though it's not available for test drive. They did let me get in and check it out, though. If you're in the Mid Atlantic region, I bet it's still there, if you wanted to see it.

    I prefer the styling with the roof rails, it looks sort of "naked" without them (I feel the same way about the base Forester 2.5X, which also lacks those). It just looks less SUV, more station wagon.

    They added chrome trim around the windows, also. I don't like chrome, but that's personal taste, my wife likes it.

    The mirrors are unique and have integrated turn signals. The wipers are also upgraded to the same kind my 09 Forester has, those one-piece blade-style. Nice. Wheels were still covered in plastic so I didn't get a look at those.

    DOH - just realized I forgot to pop the gas cap and check if it said anything about fuel requirements. My bad. It looked pre-production anyway.

    Seats were wrapped in plastic but I think they're the same as the XLS'.

    The leather dash is a nice upgrade, and it runs across the dash an into the tops of the door panels. The arm rests are still vinyl, which is odd because the dash gets real leather that contrasts with it - and what I don't get is why? They're on the same door panel, why not do them both in leather? Maybe it will still make production.

    They didn't seem to do anything else, which is disappointing. The headliner still feels like cardboard with dryer lint glued on. The other plastics were not upgraded. IIRC you lose the dash-top storage bin.

    Like the Forester, the seats, steering wheel, and shift knob are all wrapped in real leather, so the stuff you touch does feel nice.

    The moonroof is small - the visible part of the glass is only 11.5" long. The good news is it was listed as standard, the leather and Navi were the options (price was $33k).

    Keep in mind this was pre-production, but still no struts to raise the hood, no door sill protectors. Plastic sun visor is sadly class-standard. Under the hood, the fluid caps are all different colors (Subaru uses yellow for everything so it's easier to find). The cargo area carpet looks unfinished and was secured in place by velcro? Again, could just be pre-production.

    Check it out, fushigi, if you're in the Mid-Atlantic area.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    FWIW, that's not the video I was referring to. My link was to the video from 1986.
This discussion has been closed.