Howdy, Stranger!

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





New Mitsubishi Outlander Owners Give us your report

1171819202123»

Comments

  • 20vcq20vcq Posts: 82
    edited March 2012
    While I am the one that started this string - In a small defence of Mitsu paint - the "new" water based paints are less resilliant and the '07 I am told was the first to use it. All new autos now receive this type of paint.
    No excuse for the lousy support from Mitsubishi Canada i.m.o.
    Mud flaps / mud guards - english term vs. N.A. term i believe - and they are available at Canadian Mitsu dealers you can find reference to them here:
    http://www.mitsubishi-motors.ca/en/vehicles/outlander/2012/accessories/

    As to buying another one? Probably not for me - they are simply to noisy on the highway compared to competitors vehicles. But mine has been trouble free. The only annoyance has been the suspension noises caused by the rubber bushings - and getting them to make the noises when at the dealer!!
    Apparently a common problem on the east coast salty roads but as I own one of only 4 '07 Outlanders sold at the then new dealership - they do not have the volume of returns some eastern dealers record. And of course Mitsu Canada will once again not acknowledge this as a problem.
  • "Flying stones are also produced by trucks and cars at high speed travelling in both directions to you. These stones can chip not only your car paint but also lacerate your wind screen. No car paint can sustain this punishment regardless of car make. "

    Perhaps you didn't read my post completely. 2 cars and 4 full winters later (the Mits didn't roll off the showroom floor until January), and no chips on either car. Same roads, same flying stones, gravel, sand, and magnesium chloride. 3 years more on one car, and 3 months more on the other. No sand blast effect, no chips. Windshields need to be replaced almost annually here in Colorado, but not paint. There is clearly a significant difference in the application and/or quality of the paint (also waterbased). Either there is more paint, more clear coat, or both are higher quality, or all of the above. The Mits would have had no paint remaining by now. There isn't a mud flap big enough. It would have had to cover the entire car. Pity is correct. As another poster said, use your common sense. Based on my direct experience that would be not buying a Mits. Sorry!
  • dkrwdkrw Posts: 3
    thank you for all your input on this. not much help from the u. s. mitsubishi motors either. please keep us aprised of any new info, an we will do the same
  • rcpaxrcpax Posts: 580
    indeed. i mean if you're worried too much about your car's paint getting damage by road debris, might as well not buy a car. i consider road debris as normal wear and tear.more in some locations than others.what can i say?people say i wont buy another mitsubishi.that's fine.that's your opinion.maybe if you had bought a toyota or a honda then your car's paint would stay chip-free and no stripping from road debris?
  • jonoxjonox Posts: 84
    2010 Outlander, black, no mudflaps, no gravel roads, no paint chips.
  • batman47batman47 Posts: 606
    I think it is a matter of perception. I will never personally buy a car based purely on whether the car’s paint fragments easily or the car’s paint hardly chips. What matters are the drivability / manoeuvrability and the sense of safety whilst driving the Outlander on hostile terrain. The difference at the end between cars is the number of paint spots covered with touch paint.
    The Mitsubishi undoubtedly will have more paint spots if I do not take care at the very beginning to protect the paint of my car. For many owners the numbers of scars are synonymous of battles performed or gained against the aggressive terrain.

    Not any comparable (BMW, Audi, etc) cars as far as the number of differentials (which are responsibly for your safety) equal the Outlander GT performance. So if I care about my safety a few more paint chips are worth having.

    If you have relatives in Australia you may request front mudflaps: These mudflaps, as I said, help to protect your Outlander’s body work from paint chips caused from stones and other obstacles that are flung out from beneath the tires.
  • toomanyfumestoomanyfumes S.E. Wisconsin Posts: 905
    My '07's been through 5 Wisconsin winters, no mud flaps. There are some chips on the rear door, nothing major. I touch them up each spring, paint and interior quality could be better on this car, mechanically it's been excellent.
  • I just traded in my 2008 that had 72k miles on it for a 2012 GT. Both are FWD V-6, and both have sunroof, navigation, leather, and Rockford Fosgate stereo.

    There's not a lot of difference between the cars, honestly. Performance is virtually identical, other than MPGs suffering right now. More than likely, that's due to the break-in period.

    Things I like:

    -Fog lights
    -Auto headlights
    -Color info center
    -Auto-sensing wipers
    -Navigation with traffic
    -Soft feel application on doors and dash, although they should have done the whole dash
    -Reverse camera
    -More aggressive styling

    Things I miss:

    -The "secret" compartment in the middle of the dash.
    -The 5 spoke 18" wheels. Much sportier than the 7 spoke
    -The 110 volt outlet in the arm rest

    Things I still dislike:

    -The Goodyear tires. Same exact ones I got 28k miles out of the first time. I'll start saving up for the Michelins now.

    Things that need work:

    -The arm rest on the driver's door needs thicker material. At 4 years, the 2008 developed a hole from my elbow.
  • rcpaxrcpax Posts: 580
    you don't wanna wait for the 2013 model in the fall? I think they will be releasing a plugin hybrid version of it as well.
  • fushigifushigi Posts: 1,251
    I'm anticipating the plugin version as well but am cautious as it might bring with it a $3-9K price premium and there's no info yet if that'll be offset by a tax break.
  • The 2013 pictures I saw weren't very attractive. I like the styling of the 2012. Apparently, a lot of people do so far. I've been getting a lot of compliments from random people. The Labrador Black seems to stand out more than the gray I had. The lines of the car really show, and are set off by the chrome accents on the windows and running boards.
  • fastgstfastgst Posts: 46
    I also decided to purchase the 2012 GT instead of the 2013 hybrid model, I know the next one is going focus more on carbon footprint, more to compete with something like a Toyota highlander hybrid.

    The current 2012 GT is perforamance oriented, the S-AWC is outstanding. (I drove all of the contenders out there but the Outlander GT AWD makes me smile when tossing it around) I also like the flip down tailgate, a nice place to stage and change my shoes for biking and hiking.
    While the design is a few years old I liked that they upgraded the intrument panel with color LCD, such a simple thing upped the class.

    I would think there won't be much discount getting the 2013 model (at least not that $1000 incentive going on now), plus you have to deal with potential first year issues.

    The black looks great on the face lift. I think it's the best color for it.. but I chose a white one with beige because I'm sensitive to heat inside the cabin.
  • fastgstfastgst Posts: 46
    People love to complain about paint quality, the truth is recent years the car paint went water based and they are really weak. Have you heard of any car owner who has a newer car (2006+) saying "I love my new car's paint, it is so durable!". I havn't find anyone..

    When I had a 95 Mitsubishi Eclipse, and the paint is thick on it, you can actually see the depth and luster of the clear coat. I almost don't notice any chips on the front bumper. Things are not the same now

    Mazda also make pretty looking cars but their paint is just as thin and received similar complaints.
    Search on some forums and you will find people with bug splatter easily chipped the paint job on the bumper.

    I also own a 2011 Volvo, a slightly more expensive brand, received a couple of bird droppings on it for a few hours the clearcoat permanently blemished and etched after cleaning it off.
  • steverstever Viva Las CrucesPosts: 41,919
    edited July 2012
    I don't agree. Even with the enviro regs, paint's a lot better than it was in the old days (old meaning 15 or 20 years ago). The fact that the carrier may be water doesn't really mean squat. Besides better techniques and nana-technology, we enjoy such innovations as Nissan's self-healing paint. That stuff has been adopted for hard use consumer goods, like iPhone cases, to make them more scratch resistant.

    Solvent based paints didn't hold up to bird droppings any better than modern clear coats do, and for every complaint about someone's car paint you can find today, you can find similar ones going back to the early days of the net. Before the mid-90s research isn't as easy as clicking around with your mouse, but I don't know anyone who wants to go back to cans of Japan Black.

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

Sign In or Register to comment.