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

1454648505178

Comments

  • p0926p0926 Posts: 4,423
    Perhaps we can get back to discussing the actual merits of these two vehicles :)
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    they can afford giving cars away for free in N.A. just to maintain presence

    I'll take an EVO in black, please. :shades:

    it is available now, I would hope you could share it with us at list now

    I still don't have the issue you're talking about. The latest issue I have is January 2010. The Feb issue won't arrive for a week or more. You must be looking on-line or somewhere else?

    The link you refer to talks about predicted reliability. Last month's Consumer Reports put my Forester in the top 48 of all models (4th in class, as per your image) in actual measured reliability, and I was happy about that, and still am. :)
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    I made a couple of mistakes (not all that you mentioned), and I've admitted them right away

    I've got more corrections, since we're in the mood for admitting our mistakes.

    Frank: sorry, bear with me, promise these will be about the Outlander and on-topic.

    Link to chelentano's original post:

    http://townhall-talk.edmunds.com/direct/view/.f185114/805#MSG805

    Quote from it:

    •Mitsubishi, 2006, introduced S-AVC with all 4 wheel torque vectoring on 07 EVO X and now on Outlander GT.

    We now know that's not true. The Outlander GT does not have all 4 wheel torque vectoring. AFD = active front differential, which means it has front or 2 wheel torque vectoring, not all/4. It's not the same as the EVO X.

    Honest mistake, perhaps. I'll cut you some slack, we were both wrong.

    In post 814 you talk about Active Yaw Control having advantages including "provide the maximum cornering potential", and while you could say that about the slalom potential, cornering potential is more than a stretch when an Aveo does better in the same test. More on topic, so did the Forester.

    AYC helps, sure, but not in the way you described.

    If you were talking about the EVO, OK, no problem, but please specify from now on which model's AYC you are referring to, because they differ.

    Then you wrote this:

    Understeer when cornering is reduced as a Yaw moment can be set-up by torque transfer at the rear wheels.

    Again, not on the Outlander. You did not specify which model you were talking about, but a few posts above that you grouped the Outlander GT with the EVO, as if they had identical drive systems.

    Perhaps you believed that at the time, but we now know they're not the same.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    My M-Class Benz actually rated above average: better then Forester XT, which is below average

    I stand corrected.

    FWIW, the Forester XT still falls in the "Average" range.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Both of these models are guilty here, let's be honest.

    The Forester should have gotten the 5EAT from the Outback, or at least the 6 speed manual the euro diesel Forester gets. The XT could have had the higher output turbo engine from the WRX. Canada gets HIDs and USA does not. My '98 Forester had a dash-top storage bin and that's gone.

    Ironically the Outlander had it last year (perfect place for a radar detector or cell phone) and that also disappeared, at least from the GT model.

    But MMNA is being punished for their poor performance, too. No twin clutch transmission, even though they said it was coming a couple of years ago. The GT concept had sweet looking Brembo brakes, an important omission since it's not a light vehicle. No roof rails on the GT, too.

    Subaru owners write letters to SoA complaining about stuff like that, and Mitsubishi owners should, too.
  • piastpiast Posts: 269
    "For those that despise acronyms, S-AWC stands for Super All-Wheel Control. Put another way, S-AWC is the reason Evos can hang with supercars on twisting roads. This means that the Outlander GT has an active center differential that meters out torque as merited by road conditions. There's also an active front differential that can send torque left and right as needed. While not quite as highfalutin as the S-AWC found in the Evo (no Active Yaw Control here), the Outlander's version offers up shocking results. In tall, top heavy crossovers, you expect a certain amount of understeer, reluctance and general fuddy-duddiness (it's a technical term – look it up) whenever you turn the wheel in anger. Not so with the Outlander GT – it simply glides through corners. The damping and vehicle control are also quite above par, as the expected body motions and stomach turning leaning tower of truck we've come to know and dread in sporty CUVs played hooky. High center of gravity, what high center of gravity? It's not just that the Outlander's smooth in the bends, but it's quick too. Honestly shockingly so. It's now 24 hours later and we're still surprised just how fast we were able to muscle the car around corners."
    Autoblog First Drive: 2010 Mitsubishi Outlander GT
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Impressive, yes, but that's still not the "all 4 wheel torque vectoring" that chelentano clearly said it was.

    Let's see if he is willing to admit his mistakes right away, as he said he would.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Here is the full review, since you shared only the best parts:

    http://www.autoblog.com/2009/11/20/first-drive-2010-mitsubishi-outlander-gt-is-a- -cuv-we-can-live-w/

    Pretty good review overall, but they agree with a few of the things I've mentioned:

    the glove box door is still a flimsy piece of low grade plastic

    the Outlander GT could use more brakes

    borrowed-from-the-Ralliart dual-clutch transmission (TC-SST)

    even in the supposedly hardcore "Lock" setting we managed to get the Outlander GT stuck in a foot of sand

    Until we had to slam on the brakes, which, again, could use some work.


    I think it would have made more sense to give it the Brembos instead of the cosmetic upgrades, but to be honest American buyers are fickle so I can understand why tried to please dash-strokers instead of enthusiasts.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Apparently they can tow slightly more than the stated capacity:

    http://www.autoblog.com/2009/12/20/behold-the-power-of-subaru-wrx-sti-tows-semi-- - out-of-snow/#continued

    You just gotta laugh, no matter what you drive. :D

    Funny thing is I don't think the STI is even rated for towing.
  • >> not quite as highfalutin as the S-AWC found in the Evo (no Active Yaw Control here)

    Actually Mitsu site states that Outlander does have Active Yaw Control, which is essential system for effective torque vectoring.

    image
  • Stever@EdmundsStever@Edmunds YooperlandPosts: 38,914
    That's a funny video - I hope the semi was empty. Notice the wide roof racks on the WRX? Probably a crazy paddler who regularly hauls 3 tandem canoes up there (or sea kayaks...).
  • >> Mitsubishi, 2006, introduced S-AVC with all 4 wheel torque vectoring on 07 EVO X and now on Outlander GT. We now know that's not true. The Outlander GT does not have all 4 wheel torque vectoring. AFD = active front differential, which means it has front or 2 wheel torque vectoring, not all/4. It's not the same as the EVO X. Honest mistake, perhaps. I'll cut you some slack, we were both wrong.


    While I’ve never said explicitly that “Outlander has 4 wheel torque vectoring”, I did not know at that time if there is a difference, since both cars have that Super-All Wheel Control system. So yes, I made an honest assumption.

    However leaning more now, perhaps there is no mistake and there is less difference then you think. I have already written about this briefly:

    Mitsu claims that Evo can adjust torque to any wheel at any time while Evo has only one active differential (rear). Then what happens with front axle? EVO employs “Sport ABS” system also used to be called at one time Active Braking system, which is capable to transfer torque side-to-side on all 4 wheels. In a white paper Mitsubishi also calls this system Lateral Braking Control .
    Again this system functions in addition to the active rear differential.

    Unlike a passive EDL which applies brakes to the wheel where it senses slippage, this is an active yaw control based torque distribution system where braking used to send torque to the outside wheel to improve cornering. Based on one online source however, this type of torque transfer might be limited to 50%, while an active diff can do 100% side-to-side transfer.

    That would qualify for active torque transfer. That very system used by Mercedes S-Class: Torque Vectoring Brake, and by Porsche 911: Porsche Torque Vectoring. Except for these two guys that’s the only way: there is no active differential.
    Torque Vectoring Brake
    Porsche Torque Vectoring

    Like EVO, the Outlander GT also has active differential on one axle, but on front. If we browse throgh the Mitsubishi USA site, we won’t find much info what else is happening there: the description is very basic. However the Mitsubishi Australia site says that Outlander “applies braking force to that particular wheel and sends extra power and torque to other wheels”, which is in essence an Active Braking system employed by EVO.


    >> Perhaps you believed that at the time, but we now know they're not the same.

    Nothing is ever the same. But both EVO and GT have one active center diff and one active ‘axle’ diff. It seems the difference is mainly in active diff orientation: front or rear. Perhaps they did it for better weight distribution moving it to the front in order to move heavier center diff to the rear.
  • cute video in fact
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    If we browse throgh the Mitsubishi USA site, we won’t find much info what else is happening there: the description is very basic

    Agreed 100%, and by the way Subaru's web site is no different.

    Plus it doesn't help that Subaru puts the same "Symmetrical AWD" label on at least 3 distinct AWD systems.

    I can say that the system on our 09 Forester was very effective getting us around in the 20" snow/blizzard we just had. I can't tell when the traction/stability control kicks in were it not for the light on the dash telling me so. It keeps a straight course even with uneven traction (right wheels on shoulder's snow/ice to make room for oncoming trucks).

    I guess all I really need to know is this - it works.

    Once in a while we'll find a technical PDF file from the JDM cars and they're better at telling us what's actually happening than any marketing materials from SoA.

    By the way, I did some research on the con rod bearing issue - it affected production of 2009 XT models built from 8-Jan-08 to 5-Apr-08, by April 8 all dealers stopped selling them, and the issue was resolved and sales resumed before the end of the month (April 23).

    Serious problem, sure, but they handled it well, and quickly.

    "SubbieNewbie" had the problem and got a new engine overnighted, plus a loaner, plus a 100k warranty on the new engine. Within 2 days he drove off. They replaced the entire longblock, not taking any chances.

    to be continued...
  • kdshapirokdshapiro Posts: 5,751
    It's been a while and still driving 'ol Daisy, which has been serving me well. Where is the Forester STI?
  • It is widely considered in my circles that a Forester is a chick car..

    See who drives them...90% chicks. However, the Forester is a great vehicle that is reliable..
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    "Kamloops Rich" also got a full engine replacement and a 100k warranty on the new one, that was handled by Subaru of Canada in 10 days. So SoC wasn't as quick as SoA at handling his.

    VIN range for affected Foresters begins with 9*700001 and ends with 9*700139.

    Consumer Reports dinged the 2009 Foreser, rightfully so. Even though that is a very small percentage of production, it's a serious problem and so it carried a lot more weight.

    The 2010 models will show a big improvement simply because they were never affected in the first place.

    I think they handled the problem very well. Especially SoA (America).

    Would you trust MMNA do take care of you in the same manner is something happens to a Mitsubishi? That's a rhetorical question, no need to answer.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Did you sort out that whirring noise on your Outlander?

    http://townhall-talk.edmunds.com/direct/view/.f16f885/9#MSG9

    If your dealer isn't helping call 800-MITSU-2000 for MMNA. Is that covered by the powertrain warranty? I'm not sure.

    I had a wheel bearing fail on a '95 Mazda 626, and from your description I think that's very likely the cause, especially if the whirring changes frequency with speed.

    Best of luck.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    They teased us with a concept, but I think a Sports XT model is more likely.

    Hopefully they bring back a manual/turbo combo, let's see.
  • I'm pretty sure the whirring noise is from the tires..I just came back from a 4500 mile trip and the noise hasn't gotten any louder...I had a 2000 Forester for 7 years and constantly was replacing wheel bearings...Once the bearing goes bad the noise gets louder and then they just self destruct after around 4000 miles and that hasn't happened on my Outtie that has had over 15,000 miles put on the clock since the whirring started...Pretty sure it's the tires..The noise doesn't bother me.
    Even if it turns out to be someting mechanical, I still have alot of miles left on the warranty.. I would think that the wheel bearing would be covered under the drive train 10/100,000...

    So far, after 42,000 miles I have never had any problem with my Outlander. :surprise: I am quite impressed with the quality.. :)
Sign In or Register to comment.