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

1616264666778

Comments

  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Quoting them:

    Consumer Reports has named Honda and Subaru as class leaders for building the best all-around vehicles.

    That previews their April issue.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    (I changed the subject to start a new thread for the MT comparo only)

    I will focus on the objective results/specs from their tests. The Forester ranked:

    #1 power-to-weight
    #2 in torque
    #1 in ground clearance
    #1 in turning circle
    #1 for lightest weight
    #1 for best weight distribution
    #1 for most towing
    #1 for best passing (tie)
    #1 for best brakes
    #1 for most grip (keep in mind the ground clearance)
    #1 for best overall performance (figure 8)
    #1 for best fuel economy

    Best fuel economy is "not that great"? Hello? McFly? I guess the others were really bad, then?

    They say "softly sprung" as if that's a bad thing, yet it also managed the most grip. I see that as great ride and handling, quite a feat.

    Did you also notice it has the lowest price? $9,876 less than the GMC Terrain. You call that fair? That is TEN GRAND less. :mad:

    They could easily have tested the turbo XT model and the price still would not have been the highest.

    More to the point, be honest now, do you really think a 2.4l CVT Outlander would have placed higher? With 168hp?

    We can compare the results from the GT:

    0-60 7.4
    60-0 136 ft
    Gs 0.76
    MT figure eight: 28.4s @ 0.58g

    Forester accelerated in 9.3s, slower as you would expect when you compare a V6 to a base 4 banger. Remember the XT turbo took 6.6 seconds.

    But let's give the Outlander the V6 edge, for fun. 1-0 Mitsubishi.

    Braking was 114 feet, nothing short of amazing. Best in test, and 22 feet shorter than the Outlander GT. That's well over one car length. In an emergency stop, if the Forester had a near miss stopping at a red light, the Outlander would get in a pretty serious accident.

    1-1 tie.

    Lateral grip. Surprise, the "softly sprung" Forester holds at 0.81g. Fasten your seat belts. The GT managed only 0.76g on that same exact skid pad. Not even close.

    Forester 2-1.

    So it comes down to their signature test - the figure 8. This combines acceleration, braking, handling, transitions, and gives one all-around result. Guess what? Exactly tied. 28.4 seconds, 0.58g average. Both figures tied.

    Overall: Forester 2-1 plus a couple of ties.

    So as you can see, when you look at the subjective scores and measures, the Forester more than holds it own, even in an unfair fight.
  • Thank you for the insight. :)
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Was I thorough enough for ya? :D
  • imaginaryimaginary Posts: 58
    edited February 2010
    Yes, very thorough. I was not aware that the Subaru Forester had the best turning circle (out of the entire CUV segment?) :)
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Not sure but it's a very tight radius. Great for U-turns.

    In the new C&D David E. Davis reveals he bought a Forester for personal use. Can't get a better endoresement from a long-time motor scribe than spending his own hard earned money on one.

    Hasn't he always liked Mercedes and Subarus? :confuse:
  • comem47comem47 Posts: 389
    The Forester beats the Outlander by 4" in turning radius(34'4" vs 34''8"). Either way they are pretty tight. (My previous vehicles felt like I was turning around an aircraft carrier by comparison, having to make a 3 point turn or also being a pain when lining up for tight parking spaces.) Sometime ago I made a U-turn in the road and had to wait for my wife following me to make a 3 point turn in her Malibu with a circle about 3' wider. (she keeps telling me I'm not going to make it when riding with me when I've done U-turns) ;)
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Agreed, both are quite good.

    My old Forester (1998) had a very wide turning radius - a lot of times I could not squeeze in a U-turn. The neat thing is that the new one manages a tighter radius despite a longer wheelbase.

    Good packaging. :shades:
  • comem47comem47 Posts: 389
    edited February 2010
    Oops, make that turning circle diameter, not radius at 34 feet and inches :blush:
  • piastpiast Posts: 269
    Here are results of Motor Trend test of my 2007 Mitsubishi Outlander, XLS 4WD
    Engine 3.0L/220-hp/204-lb-ft SOHC 24-valve V-6
    Transmission 6-speed automatic
    Wheelbase 105.1 in Length x width x height 182.7 x 70.9 x 66.1 in
    Max Cargo Capacity 72.6 cu ft
    Max Towing Capacity 3500 lb
    0-60 mph 8.1 sec Quarter mile 16.4 sec @ 86.2 mph
    Braking, 60-0 mph 128 ft
    Lateral acceleration 0.78 g (avg)
    600-foot slalom 62.7 mph (avg)
    MT figure eight 28.3 sec @ 0.59 g (avg)
    EPA city/hwy fuel economy 19-20/26-27 mpg (old standard)

    + Excellent warranty, excellent safety ratings, great fit and finish, great standard futures, great styling in and out, great previous Mitsu experience.
    All that for 22.5K (+tax) and 1.9% financing. Good enough for me.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    That's a great price, too.

    I don't think Mitsu is discounting like that any more. batman paid $31.2k for his GT/leather, and that's only because he got a $500 loyalty incentive. So nearly $32k without that for the average Joe (plus tax).

    I think that's the real reason sales aren't up - dealers (and Mitsu) are holding the line on prices. Someone like you walks in and finds the new GT is nearly 10 grand more than your last Outlander, and they experience sticker shock.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Just got the auto issue of Consumer Reports, and it's a Subaru love fest. :shades:

    Forester indeed is a Top Pick. Subaru and Honda tie for the overall brand score, though Subaru's average test score beat Honda 81 to 77. Actually, Subaru beat all other brands listed (page 15).

    They also report on objective measures like ownership cost and owner satisfaction, areas where the Forester really shines.

    Outlander is listed among the "most overlooked" models, and also squeezes in to 3rd in class since they bumped the RAV4 for now. They also show it on the front page of the recommended used cars.
  • piastpiast Posts: 269
    Sticker on mine was 26K+ (with appearance pkg.). It took a lot of research and negotiating to get that price. It depends on the local market as well. I think I would be able to repeat that strategy in Chicagoland again if needed.
  • imaginaryimaginary Posts: 58
    edited February 2010
    "Someone like you walks in and finds the new GT is nearly 10 grand more than your last Outlander, and they experience sticker shock."

    Scenario #1
    Dealer: SOMEONE CALL 911! THIS GUY AIN'T BREATHING!
    Innocent Bystander: What's wrong?!
    Dealer: This guy is having a sticker shock!
    Innocent Bystander: OMG!!!!!!!111oneon HOLD ON!

    Lol, sticker shock.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    How long do you plan to keep it?

    We buy and hold. I had my last Forester for 9 years, a Legacy for 7. I don't think I've ever sold a car that was less than 7 years old.

    That's good for long-term costs, we've been able to spend our funds in other areas.

    Right now our oldest car is a 2007 model and I don't plan to trade it in for at least another 3-5 years.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    edited February 2010
    :D

    As piast implied the XLS V6 model is still available for less.

    Funny post, though. :shades:
  • Does the 2010 Subaru Outback 3.6R Limited use the same AWD system as the 2010 Subaru Forester XT? Or are there some differences i.e. transfer clutch?
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    No, it uses the more sophisticated VTD system, which defaults to a 45/55 split.
  • piastpiast Posts: 269
    Same here. Considering not so good resale value, I think it is wise to hold them at least 7 years, or as long as power-train warranty is (10 years in Mitsubishi case).
    I hope my next car would be able to get 30 mpg combined, without the extra cost of hybrid set-up, and not at the expense of space or AWD capability. Small / medium sized diesel pick-up truck could make my short list as well. Neither would be available in the next few years, so Outlander will stay with me for a while. So far it was a happy marriage.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    I think there is *plenty* of room for improvement in fuel efficiency in this class.

    The base Legacy CVT 2.5i can manage 31 mpg highway, and it's heavier than the Forester. At 80mph they're taching under 2000rpm! The Terrain/Equinox can hit 30 (though those may be FWD) via DI and tall gearing.

    Combine those tricks - a tall CVT and Direct Injection, and there's no reason a Forester shouldn't beat that Legacy.

    I believe both Outlander and Forester are sold in Europe with diesels, though I doubt either meets CARB emissions. Sigh.
Sign In or Register to comment.