Howdy, Stranger!

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





Mitsubishi Outlander

2456720

Comments

  • steverstever YooperlandPosts: 40,184
    First Drive: 2003 Mitsubishi Outlander



    Steve

    Host

    SUVs, Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards

    Moderator
    Need help navigating? stever@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.

  • nwngnwng Posts: 664
    I think with 140hp pushing 3klbs, the car should move fine. But it will be even better with a 5sp and price below the matrix
  • mirde98mirde98 Posts: 95
    AS A VERY SATISFIED OWNER OF A 98 MIRAGE WITH 55K ON IT I HAVE TO SAY THAT I WAS VERY IMPRESSED WHEN I SAW THE NEW OUTLANDER. IT LOOKS TIGHT AND SPORTY. AND ITS INTERIOR HAS THE USUAL MITSUBISHI LOOK. SPORTY AND HIGH QUALITY MATERIALS. A V6 SHOULD BE A OPTION. AND THE FRONT END STYLE IS ALL WRONG. BUT WHAT'S MORE IMPORTANT THESE DAYS IS RELIABILITY. AND MITSUBISHI SHINES IN THAT DEPARTMENT. I CANT WAIT FOR A TEST DRIVE! GO MITSU!!!
  • th003gth003g Posts: 149
    i saw a grey silver 2 tone top model today... and I must say it looks good... front end in person is different in a good way... overall i like it better than the forester... and they may be bringing a turbpoversionover... the airtrek turbo r has 240 hp and its currently avaliable in places the airtrek is sold it has the same negine as the lancer evo.... sweet car.
  • tomj5tomj5 Posts: 209
    I bought a 1993 EXPO new and it has turned out to be the best car We have ever owned. The car runs as good after 150k miles as it did new. Gets the same milage (30 gpm) as it ever did. Totally trouble free. Only routine maintaince (belts, brakes, and oil). I have a 1990 Mirage (130k miles) that still runs great after 10 years of work driving. I am going to trade the Mirage in for a new Outlander. My wife refues to give up the EXPO. She says she wants a rebuilt engine when the current engine wears our (if ever). The 2.4L engine is a fantastic engine. Hopfully the Outlander will be as good or better. Viva MITSY!!!! Best cars in the World.
  • Coming back to andil1's posting and my reply, there are a couple of spy pictures (heavily disguised though) on www.autoweek.com spy-section and in some current monthly publications.
  • Having owned a 93 Mitsubishi built Colt Vista (same as the Expo), with 154,000 trouble-free miles, I'm looking forward to the Outlander. I've been looking at the CR-V, but since the Outlander is just around the corner, it might be worth the wait. Still not sure about the looks - I'm hoping it's not too station-wagon looking and more small SUV. Back to my Colt, it also has the 2.4 liter engine which still runs great, smooth transmission, and the car still looks new, well almost. Best car I've ever owned by far. It proves that Honda & Toyota don't have a monopoly on quality.
  • Test drove the Outlander last week. Well placed controls but the stereo was a little high on the dash for my taste. XLS has a nice lumbar support on the front seats, comfy. Floor mats look like a must as the carpet felt only so-so quality. Upright driver postition like the SUBARU Forester with good leg & head room. I'm 6'2". The seats folded down gave an area about the size of my Dad's '96 SUBARU Outback. 60 cubic feet. Engine compartment is clean and open. Maintenance looks like it would be easy. Startup was sound and doors closed firmly without rattle. Acceleration was very nice from the red light to about 50 mph then became less noticable. 50 mph on up was ok but not brisk. 75 mph was attained during some passing but you would have to plan ahead. Slower speeds were pleasing. A "short" up-grade was attempted and no noticable down shifting was searched for by the autotrans. Occasionally some shifting was noticable when gas was pressed with authority. If you wern't paying attention you would might forget about it. Shiftronic trans in manual mode was smooth to shift as long as you had the rpm's in the correct range, should give GOOD control in bad conditions. Parking lot turning was very good. We have a double S-turn followed by a u-turn here and it handled them VERY well. No noticable body sway so you could take a tighter line in the turns compared to a taller MiniSUV like the CR-V. Braking was good and responded without lags before the nest turn came upon me. Sorry guys but did not attempt any 60-0 emergency stops with the dealer salesman with me. Overall Rating is Good. Handling = Very Good. Acceleration = While not as ballsy and blazing quick as a '02-'03 CRV I tested, the Outlander should be good for everyday folks and only ok for aggresive guys.
  • You can now download the OUTLANDER brochure from Mitsy's website:


    http://www.mitsubishicars.com/pdf/out03.pdf

  • I think the dash is ugly. It does that sideways v thing like the Ford ZX2's does.
  • Drove an AWD model today. Although I thought the car was very comfortable and looked nice, the powertrain left a lot to be desired. It was extremely noisy and actually sounded like it was weezing at times. Comon Mitsu, the car doesn't necessarily need more power but it needs to be delivered in a more refined manner.
  • steverstever YooperlandPosts: 40,184

    Moderator
    Need help navigating? stever@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.

  • I just saw an outander on the streets today .... and from certain angles it looks like an RX300 (front and rear). Mitsubishi is very unoriginal when it comes to designing cars. Galant = BMW, Diamante = BMW, Eclipse = Pontiac, Lancer = Lexus IS300, Montero = Land Rover, Outlander = RX300...
  • diploiddiploid Posts: 2,286
    Montero=Land Rover?

    image
    image
    image
  • Hubby and I fell in love with the Outlander, and purchased the AWD on Oct 21, 2002... GREAT mileage, love the feel and handling, plenty of power for normal driving, good clear views, comfortable ride and soooo sharp looking. Hubby has driven it on a 300+ trip twice, all major interstates, and it does 75mph very smoothly... love the cruise, keeps me at a set speed, since it is easy to find yourself going much faster.... nice quiet ride, unless you have the windows and moon roof open........no complaints here....
  • What kind of mileage are you getting? Professional reviews have complained about lack of passing power at highway speeds, do you find this is the case?

    How high up can you seat on the Outlander? Can you get within a few inches of the ceiling or are you sunken down, like in a Forester?

    Thanks!
  • I took one out for a test drive this past weekend. The first thing we did is take it out onto the highway. We had it bombing up to 125KM/h in no time. I am not sure what the big deal is about the engine. We had 3 adults in the car and the getup and go was just fine.

    Now, if we could only dump the POS Montana that we have. It is between the Escape and this one.
  • aklakl Posts: 1
    Power is not a problem. I can bust the CRV if they want to try. No passing power? I have no problem passing at all. 140hp with this engine is enough for us not to get in trouble. Oh.#47, the seat is real nice up and down and mitsu seat is always been good. Forester is a good car but seating, yeah the outlander. You will love it #47. Go test drive on the leather one and you will just buy it. #48....Escape have power but not the look. Your call.
  • sorry for the delay in answering.....we have been driving in town AND highway, so we are getting 22 mpg.....will be going south for the holiday and will have a straight highway run and will post then........still LOVE the vehicle, but we lost a tire after hubby went over a pothole......did not think it should have put a slow leak, but the service department claims it is not a defect.......hmmmmmmmm
  • tomj5tomj5 Posts: 209
    The 2wd Outlander is smaller than the 93 Expo(best car I ever owned). I liked the outlander panel better ie, the radio. Speedo is good but don't care for the tach. Both cars have the same engine. I get 30mpg with the Expo and would expect the same from the Outlander. Love the Outlander tranny. Smooth as butter. Why would you want a manual option? It worked ok but, why? The XLS version is a must. Although I dislike the moon roof not practical in AZ(heat and sand kills the seals). It appears that there is no choice with the XLS option. Why? The luggage rack is odd looking and not very practical. The interior colors are limited and ugly. After market dash and seat covers would help. I would consider the deluxe seat fabric. Like the seat adjustments and the front and side airbags. Nice and roomy for a heavy six footer. Has the same great cruise control as the Expo. There is a tow hitch available with a light cable, hooray!! The getup and go was good. The engine and tranny work well together, just as the Expo. Yoko tires are standard (good tires). Over all we will buy one in the spring (let the bugs out first). My wife refuses to give up the Expo. Overall the Expo is better but out of production.
  • tomj5tomj5 Posts: 209
    Sounds like you have a bent rim. You need to replace it.
  • this a real nice car got it for $21,300, only thing its missing its the leather seats, sunroof and infinity system, but it has the 6 speakers, im in puerto rico
  • tomj5tomj5 Posts: 209
    So you can get the XLS package without the Sunroof. Humm, one dealer says can't be done and another is going to check into it. Did the dealer have the car or did you have to order it? Did you get the anti skid brakes?
    Your price seems reasonable according to what I have been quoted.

    General Info:
    I just got my free gas card ($15) from Mitsy. Go to the web site and sign up for a test drive and you will get a dealer name in the mail. The dealer will give you a free music cd with the mailin gas card request.
  • Hi All,
    Took an Outlander for a test. I felt a bit cramped in the vehicle (am 6'1" tall) and the vehicle's seat bottom a bit firm. Had lots of low end torque. Moved up to 70 mph in fine fashion--kept up with the flow of freeway traffic. No jet, but moved along fine. I liked the retro-looking clock. Fit and finish seemed nice. I don't care for the front end styling (grille); much prefer the New Zealand version of "Airtrek", especially the turbo version with large round (?driving) lights mounted low in front. Like the clear taillight lenses on upscale models. I'd probably like a bit more power--eg the Escapes have 200 hp, and the Outlander is but 140 hp. I like the look of the Outlander better than most of the other small SUVs, though the grille is rather unattractive to me. Maybe a "brush guard" with some lights on it would disquise things up front some. Suspect I would wait on any purchase to see if they plan any upgrades as to power, or maybe aftermarket grilles.
  • I test drove the Forester SX and Mitsubishi Outlander LS back to back today. As well designed and solid as the Forester is... I was unfortunately disappointed. There was too much wind and road noise for me. It strained a bit under highway acceleration. It handled incredibly though crisper than the Outlander. I did not drive either one on rough or choppy roads to find out which rides better.
    The Outlander was quieter. Much less wind and road noise. BUT... the roof came too far forward into my line of vision. I tried to lower the seat to compensate, but could not. I want to see all windshield in front of me... not part of the roof. It gives me a claustrophobic feeling.
    Otherwise.. the dark and dreery interior (don't like dash) is comfortable and has many more places (some hidden) to store things than the Forester. The armrests on the doors are easy to clean vinyl unlike the ones in the Forester SX which are covered with cloth (why?). On the other hand...the center arm rest in the Outlander is cloth. Also..the cargo area in the Outlander is Vinyl on the sides. The Forester has carpet on the sides (not easy to clean bicycle chain grease off).

    Other tidbits... The Outlander's driver's door unlocks just by pulling handle (I like this feature). The Outlander has repeat signal lights on the front fenders...less chance someone else will try to move into the center lane at the same time as you!!! The Forester has neither of these features. BUT... the Forester has ABS standard with the SX having 4 wheel disks. Not the Outlander LS. The Forester has a gated typed shift console which I find irritating to use. I also did not care for the Forester's radio controls. The Outlander has a plain easier to use auto shifter (unlit though). The outlander has rear seats that recline. The Forester does not.
  • tomj5tomj5 Posts: 209
    Thanks, I was going to do the same thing. But, now I won't waste my time. I'll stick with the Outlander. I agree that the Outlander has ugly interior colors. But, seat covers and dash mat(a must in AZ) will help.
  • Yeah... the interior is nicely layed out... but the overall feeling is depressing (esp in black). It needs some more bright trim and lighter, brighter colors.

    Has anyone here who bought one gotten any mileage numbers yet? State if you have 2wd or awd.
  • steverstever YooperlandPosts: 40,184

    Moderator
    Need help navigating? stever@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.

  • This thing is clearly akin to the Matrix/Protege5/Aerio SX crowd, not the CRV/Escape/RAV4 crowd. Not that there's anything wrong with that, I prefer small wagons to small SUV's. But sticking an aggressive schnozz on a Lancer wagon and calling it an SUV is the sort of cynical, transparent marketing exercise that has Mitsubishi lagging in the auto wars. The only reason why Mitsubishi calls this thing a mini-SUV? To charge mini-SUV prices instead of mini-wagon prices. I don't see why anyone would pay more to drive this instead of the Matrix.
  • #57, the sunroof in outlander is part of sight and sound option (210W infiniti sound system and sunroof). It is not standard, so you can get the outlander w/o it. What I really like about this suv/crossover is driving characteristics...dual swaybars and low cg convert to car-like handling.
This discussion has been closed.