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

1323335373852

Comments

  • fushigifushigi Posts: 1,234
    Sorry to hear it. For me, I drive by 2 Mitsu dealers on my commute to the office; one is less than 10 minutes from our house. These are standalone dealers, too, not part of multi-brand megadealerships.

    You, of course, don't need to go to the dealer for service. If the inconvenience was that large I'd probably just go for warranty/recall work and leave the scheduled stuff to a trusted local shop. My local Meineke, for instance, can do timing belts and just about anything else. And as long as you do the maintenance, by federal law you cannot be denied warranty coverage if you don't use a dealer for the work. Just keep your receipts.

    I was just clearing out the file on my Galant this morning so I can sell it. I removed the non-service info (sales contract, insurance, emissions tests, credit card stubs) so I can provide a detailed service history to go with the car & show how well it's been maintained. I know my annual mileage was down a lot, but I've only gone about 5K miles since March.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Securing cargo is vital, no matter the location, inside or outside of the vehicle.

    Any loose items in the car could become dangerous projectiles. :sick:
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    BUMMER, the link is down, but the next funniest load I've ever seen was Gator Greg's CR-V loaded up with sod. It was hysterical.

    Here's a link, but it looks like the site where the images were hosted isn't working any more:

    http://204.16.221.2/direct/view/.ee94ff9/8131#MSG8131

    He had sod up to the roof. The rear suspension was sagging it was so much.

    CR-V is now the #1 seller. Coincidence? :D
  • fushigifushigi Posts: 1,234
    Speaking of hauling loads, if I weigh down the rear of my Outlander with a lot of cargo, it does have load-leveling headlights.
  • comem47comem47 Posts: 390
    Can't speak for the '10 but in earlier Outlanders I believe load leveling was part of the HID package (which is/was exclusive of fog lights). My '07 initially had neither, but I added the factory fog kit later myself.
  • fushigifushigi Posts: 1,234
    I have fog lights & load-leveling HIDs on my GT. No idea of the fogs move but probably not. The HIDs throw light pretty good, including close to the car where fogs are beneficial, so I don't know if I'll be using the fogs very much.
  • comem47comem47 Posts: 390
    I just reread what you said. I was half asleep when I replied. I see that you were stating that you have load leveling, not asking (what I misinterpreted at that hour). Interesting you also have fogs, so maybe things have changed from what I understood the packages were in earlier years (or the GT is special). Good stuff as that's the way it should be. :shades:
  • p0926p0926 Posts: 4,423
    Mitsubishi sales are off a staggering 46% over the year

    Even worse, their sales volume has dropped over 80% from the 1999 level:

    Decade's Winners & Losers

    -Frank
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    JD powers is saying December will be a good month, forecasts are more than 10% higher than last year. Let's see if the 2010 model helped at all. If nothing else it was good timing, as the new model arrived just as sales surged.

    Edit: whoa, just noticed Subaru did pass VW to make the top 10. :shades:
  • fushigifushigi Posts: 1,234
    My wife & I stopped at Best Buy yesterday (got a gift card for xmas) and happened to buy Up on Bluray along with a couple of other things. The Up release is a 4-disc set that includes the BD version as well as regular DVD and other stuff. Hard to beat for the $18 sale price this week. After-wards we went to our favorite small coffee shop but the seating area was full. So we went back to the Outlander with our beverages and watched the first 20 or so minutes of Up on DVD on the MMCS. Good sound, of course, but this isn't really a title that lets me judge stereo separation. Decently sharp picture. The joystick worked fine for navigating the menu and track controls work as chapter forward/rewind..

    You can watch DVDs while in Park. If you shift out of Park you can continue to listen to the DVD's audio track but the video is replaced by a message saying it won't display video while the vehicle is in motion.

    So, something that I frankly considered to be a novelty feature we've now used & enjoyed. I can't say it'd be something we'd do every week, but having having the option means added flexibility not only to the coffee shop but on trips. Stopping for a break from driving can also mean watching some video.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    I bet there's a hack if you or someone else can figure it out. Your wife could watch while you drove, just avoid the temptation to watch.

    I put a 12" aftermarket DVD player in my van, and the kids love it. They have headphones, but if I pick a musical of some sort I'll actually listen in on the audio. Pretty neat.
  • fushigifushigi Posts: 1,234
    If there's a hack I don't want it. I would rather not have yet another temptation to resist. Cell phones with games, texting & email are already enough of a potential distraction.

    Of course there is the option of the rear-seat entertainment but I don't see much value in that for us. And it's expensive.

    We have a portable DVD player that I use on our exercise bike and naturally our laptops can play DVDs - my wife's can do Bluray even. So she has video options if we think ahead & put the player in the car. But IMHO anything that isn't bolted down creates a theft target (I do IT security for a living and I do reports about laptops getting stolen from cars far too often). The MMCS has everything built-in. Nothing extra to pack, no wires or cords, and it's integrated into the dash.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    the option of the rear-seat entertainment

    Check out aftermarket, you can get a built-in one cheap, with a much bigger screen.

    We paid $900 (installed) for a 12" one. The screen is HUGE. We chose it because we wanted people in the 3rd row to be able to watch the movies, too. A 4 hour drive becomes a Double Feature. :shades:

    At the time a normal sized screen was $600 installed. I bet they're even cheaper now.

    Toyota came out with a whopper of a 16" widescreen in the 2011 Sienna. It can play widescreen format, or two movies side-by-side, if your kids cannot agree on what to watch.

    To be honest I think the rear-seat entertainment systems are cash cows for the manufacturers, with big profit margins.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Here's our gift from Santa:

    image

    Link in case CarSpace is acting up:

    http://www.carspace.com/ateixeira/Albums/misc/AirHockey%26Pool.jpg/page/photo.ht- - - ml#pic

    Note the table is 39.75" wide, and instructions specifically tell you not to sit the table on its side.

    That means our Forester can move this table face down (that is how it is assembled in fact), with the hatch open.

    The Outlander could not, unless you disassembled the legs. Bring a ratchet set, adjustable wrench, and a hex key set. You'll need another adult to help and probably about 20-30 minutes to disassemble (another 20-30 to put it back together).

    It's also way, waaaaay too heavy to go on either roof.

    Rudolph must have really broken a sweat! :shades:
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Check out the cheesy commercial (in Portuguese):

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Vl-AqrU2g4

    I'm from Brazil so I can translate:

    Mitsubishi Outlander GT Race
    A track with various terrains
    Two drivers
    The new Mitsubishi Outlander GT
    And you will decide the winner
    [text: Vote at http://www.outlandergt.com.br]
    The new Mitsubishi Outlander GT
    The sport luxury 4x4 from Mitsubishi
    [text: if you drink, don't drive]


    The front wheel burnout is hilarious. Shouldn't they be trying to show the opposite? :D

    My brother sent me the link. He just bought a Forester and wants another, different compact crossover.
  • piastpiast Posts: 269
    Stowage--------------------------------------Mitsubishi Outlander.....Subaru Forester
    Cargo behind f / r seats in cubic feet---------73 / 36 ...................63 / 31
    Beer cases seats up / folded--------------------19 / 39 ..................18 / 38
    Length of pipe-----------------------------------------130.5".......................126.5
    Sheet of plywood---------------------------------68.3 x 40.5................70.0 x 42.3

    Source: Car & Driver
    Now, can we put our "my is bigger than yours" discussion to rest?
  • fushigifushigi Posts: 1,234
    Saturday night I was part of a group of three couples that were going out to dinner. Given the road conditions I popped up the 3rd row seats and my wife (who is short) crawled back there. So 6 adults rode in 1 vehicle to the restaurant. With the second row seats slid back there's precious little 3rd row leg room but for short trips like this it was good and saved us from otherwise having to take a second vehicle. A second vehicle that wouldn't drive well in the snow.

    One of the couples had driven over from out of state in a borrowed pickup truck. Though they were experienced pickup drivers they really didn't like the lack of traction and fishtailing they had to deal with on the drive over. I showed them that in snow/thick slush you just hit the gas & go. No loss of traction. No sliding sideways. No drama.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Those numbers are incomplete, even misleading (not your fault, let's blame C&D for that).

    They're comparing an Outlander with no moonroof and no subwooder to a Forester with the moonroof.

    They put 73 for the Outie, 72.6 is actually the maximum (no moonroof, no subwoofer). The sub alone pushes that number down to 69.8. We don't know what the moonroof takes away because it's in a package, so the EPA doesn't list that capacity. Per Mitsu, the moonroof eats up 2.3 inches of headroom, so surely at least some cargo space is lost.

    The Forester actually has a max of 68.3 cubic feet. That 63 number is with the panoramic moonroof. So they compared Mitsu's maximum with Subaru's minimum, hardly fair. Not to mention the moonroof takes up space near the ceiling, where you least often use it. Look at the sheet of plywood to see how big the cargo floor is - something you use all the time.

    I'll add one more source we've used a lot: Consumer Reports.

    In their cargo volume test:

    Outlander LS: 33.5 cubic feet
    Outlander XLS: 33.5 cubic feet (sub is tucked away, no effect in their test)
    Forester 2.5X: 35.5 cubic feet
    Forester XT Ltd: 35.0 cubic feet (because of the moonroof)

    Also, I don't see how you can fit a 40.5" width of plywood when dodo2 measured the width between the wheel wells at 37", so something's up there. Maybe C&D put the plywood on top of the shock towers?

    And while the Outlander has more EPA cargo space, the Forester has more EPA passenger space.

    Combine both and the maximum total interior volume for the Forester is 141.1 cubic feet, while the maximum for the Outie is 139.4 cubic feet. Surprise.

    So, which is bigger? Depends on how you measure, really.

    Call this one a draw.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    dodo2 measured the width between the wheel wells at 37".

    I looked back, because I also measured that when I test drove it. I was actually more generous and called it 38".

    I don't see how C&D got 40.5". I thought they had to lay the plywood flat on the floor, and unless they changed the rear suspension there's no way you have 40.5" there.

    Again, not criticizing piast here, but rather C&D, for not doing their homework properly.
  • I agree , this conversation is getting very annoying . Arguing over a few inches like it really matters. Didn't you use to post about Isuzu Troopers?? I am on my third one a 02 .
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    The differences are small, and it doesn't really matter.

    That was my point.
  • fushigifushigi Posts: 1,234
    I just took a tape measure to my garage & measured my Outlander. It's 37" at the bottom & almost 41" at the top of the wheel wells. I guess C&D is measuring the max distance which I find pretty useless as if you were going to set something up off the floor you could go on top of the wheel wells and go even wider.

    Regarding the earlier volume measurements, I just don't see how the sub-woofer could be eating up 3 cubic feet. Take the 10" diameter, add a little added housing all around - no more than 2-3 inches in any given direction - and account for it being maybe 6-8" deep total and you have a box approximately 14 x 16 x 8 inches. 1 cubic foot = 12in x 12in x 12in = 1728 cubic inches and the dimensions I'm roughing are 14 x 16 x 8 = 1792 cubic inches so the sub-woofer is right around one cubic foot +/- 4%.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    I used cargo volume numbers from the Mitsubishi brochure for the 2008 Outlander, listed as 36.2-39 cu ft. Maybe I'm interpreting it incorrectly, but what else would account for the difference?

    Maybe it's less with models with the 3rd row, and it's not the sub after all? :confuse:

    If that's the case, I say ditch the tiny 3rd row and save the unneeded weight and cost. There are no airbags to protect passengers there, nor is there much crumple space. I realize the Outlander gets around with no drama, but what if you're rear ended by an overconfident teenager in a pickup or SUV?

    I ruled out the Subaru Tribeca for similar reasons - 3rd row too small, no airbags there, tiny cargo volume when the 3rd row it in use. For my needs a van was simply better. You do compromise on the drive, but it rides great and offers acres of space.
  • fushigifushigi Posts: 1,234
    Agreed. If I were to have consistent need to haul 6 or 7 people around a minivan would be much better from a safety and comfort standpoint. There are still full seatbelts & headrests for whiplash protection but as you noted no airbags. There is some space for crumpling from the rear since the seat, when deployed, swings forward a little from the stow area.

    It's possible that the 3rd row seat is what's accounting for the volume difference. I think (but am not positive) without it there's a cargo area that's covered to maintain the flat seat.

    Anyway, it's come in handy once so far. It may again but I'm sure it won't be often. I don't mind the cost but do wish the seat was removable to add a little hidden cargo area & save a few pounds.
  • comem47comem47 Posts: 390
    Yes, In my 2007 LS there is a shallow storage area in lieu of the seat. Besides not wanting to spend the additional $ for an XLS at the time I had no desire for the 3rd row seat. The storage isn't all that much (maybe 5-6" inches deep at tops, but I got more out of it by removing the foam organizer tray...it's just a carpeted area now that's left under the cover) I put my towing related stuff in there and a few tools.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Well that explains the 2 different numbers.

    What surprises me is that the EPA would allow that. Or maybe those are just numbers from Mitsubishi?

    Foresters have similar storage under the cargo floor. The cargo cover has a custom-sized spot, or you can remove the foam tray entirely and fit a flat tire in the spot where the spare resides.

    We keep a spare winter jacket there and a long golf umbrella.
  • dodo2dodo2 Posts: 496
    I haven't checked this forum for more than a year I think and I could not believe that the Outlander vs Forester "war" went on for so long.

    "I used cargo volume numbers from the Mitsubishi brochure for the 2008 Outlander, listed as 36.2-39 cu ft. Maybe I'm interpreting it incorrectly, but what else would account for the difference? "

    The difference accounts for the min/max cargo space due to the sliding/reclining rear seats.

    FWIW, my Outlander is still going strong after almost 3 years with no problems other than regular maintenance.

    Mitsu is doing rather well in Canada, opening up more stores and selling pretty decent numbers - Outlander and Lancer that is; the Galant and Endeavor have been dead for a long time in Canada and the Eclipse is not far behind.
    Both the Outlander and the Lancers are now pretty common sights in Toronto area.
    In Canada, Subaru and Mitsu sales are very close, especially if you compare Impreza/Forester vs Lancer/Outlander. With the addition of the new Legacy and Outback, Subaru will probably take the lead overall.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    sliding/reclining rear seats

    That could explain the difference as well.
  • fushigifushigi Posts: 1,234
    Mitsubishi Motors Ends The Year With Positive Sales Momentum

    From the article:

    * Every Mitsubishi model showed an increase in sales compared to the prior month (November 2009).
    * Lancer sales were up 13.9 percent compared to the prior month and up 16.9 percent compare to December 2008.
    * Outlander sales were up 81 percent compared to last month. (emphasis mine) It was Outlander’s third highest monthly sales total in 2009, and sales were up 11.4 percent compared to December 2008.
    * December was Galant’s second best sales month of 2009, up 162 percent compared to last month and up 32 percent compared to December of 2008.
    * Endeavor sales were up 15.9 percent compared to the prior month.
    * Lancer Sportback sales were up 5.8 percent compared to the prior month.


    My guess that Outlander sales might have been depressed based on people waiting for the new model may just be accurate based on an 81% jump in sales. Although to be honest I'm not sure what drove the Galant sales boost.
This discussion has been closed.