Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Mitsubishi Outlander vs. Subaru Forester

1121315171832

Comments

  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    We own a Sienna so I know the 2GR engine well.

    We have gone off on a tangent a bit, but that's because when you're spending $450-550 a month on a lease, that's what you would be comparing.

    Mitsu's web site compares the GT to the Forester XT and the BMW X3.

    I think it's quite flattering that Mitsubishi considers those the benchmarks. :shades:
  • fushigifushigi Member Posts: 1,459
    Leasing has never appealed to me. I don't want perpetual payments even if it does mean I get a new ride every three or so years. My '99 was paid off in '01 so I've been sans payment for over 8 years. The trade-off of driving a car with more miles on it is well worth the many thousands of dollars I've saved. Although I will admit I now drive only around 7K miles a year so I wouldn't have to live in fear of a mileage penalty on a lease.

    Hmm. When I tried the Compare link it came up with the RDX and Sante Fe in addition to the Forester. :D
    2017 Infiniti QX60 (me), 2012 Hyundai Elantra (wife)
  • suvsearcher1suvsearcher1 Member Posts: 23
    Comparing Outlander and GLK does not make much sense especially in terms of fuel economy and that was my whole point. Any luxury car will be thirsty on fuel due to more weight and an engine that is geared more towards performance than economy. Rav 4 V6 and Outlander XLS is a more appropriate comparison. And even here Rav 4 beats Outie hands down in terms of fuel economy and power.

    In V4 version too both CRV and Rav4 beats Outlander in fuel economy and power. Where Outlander shines is its smooth 6 speed tranny which none of its competitors have except for CX-7. The 6 speed in Outie is also pretty reliable too as I have not heard of any issues in this forum. I wish they would have paired that 6 speed with a bigger and refined V6.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Mitsu's site listed BMW and Subaru. Maybe I didn't scroll to the right enough? Or were you talking about Edmunds?

    Any how, Mitsu is certainly ambitious if they list BMW and Acura.

    Anyone who wants to spend $33k on a Subie can get an Outback 3.6R Limited with Navi, and that gets a backup cam with trajectory lines (does Outlander have those?), big engine power, and a huge 8" Nav screen that is eye candy. It even takes voice commands. A USB port is standard and will charge and play iPod tunes, too.

    Good luck finding one right now, though, 'cause they're on back order.

    That system will trickle down to the Forester - but I still say OEM nav is grossly overpriced and not updated often enough.

    Subaru is better than most here - the Forester's been out for just over a year and already they offer a map update. I think the Tribeca (out longer) has had 3 updates since 2006.

    Still - I live in the DC area near the ICC, and they just opened the first portion. It'll finish only in Jan 2011, opening in phases. Unless your maps are current, those routes will be ignored completely. For me that would be totally useless - even with traffic.

    I just upgraded to a new Garmin and I'm still playing with all the gadgets, but my initial impression is that this makes much more sense for about 1/10th the cost (with bluetooth, traffic, text-to-speech, etc.).

    Edit: no text-to-speech on the OB's Navi either. Portables win! :shades:
  • chelentanochelentano Member Posts: 634
    >> It previously projected a $390 million loss.

    Japan's Hottest Car Company? The staggering 699 billion yen Subaru net loss is not projected. It’s actual Fiscal Year End results of 2009. The actual Subaru drop in car sales from 616k to 555k this year vs. previous year.
    http://www.fhi.co.jp/english/ir/corporate/message.html

    >> Mori has increased Subaru's annual sales forecast by 37,000, to 548,000 vehicles

    Note, that they increased “forecast”, not sales, and even forecasted sales will be lower next year.
  • chelentanochelentano Member Posts: 634
    >> Admit it, you did not know about Subaru's diesel engine. Otherwise why did you mention it on your list of things Subaru doesn't offer that Mitsubishi does?

    I can’t admit that, because I told you about Subaru first diesel development on this very board over a year ago. This time I did not say that “Subaru doesn't offer” diesel, but I’ve said however that Subaru is “behind in key technologies: AWD, transmission, diesel, hybrid, plug-in electric”.

    >> In 2007 Forester did not have ANY navigation - Portables are better anyway

    You did not buy portable radio for you Forester : -) We all know that well integrated GPS is more then navigation. It’s touch screen control for car settings, satellite radio, music server, stereo, backup camera, phone book, phone dial pad, etc. And it does not constantly fall off your windshield. : --) But of course if you did not make enough subaru bux, you can get a cheap Nav on eBay.

    >> Your 2007 Outlander did not have heated mirrors... Subaru had that 7 years sooner.

    Nope. You making stuff up again. Outlander got heated mirrors since first generation 7 years ago:
    http://www.cars.com/go/crp/research.jsp?makeid=34&modelid=6708&year=2003&section- =reviews
    They just were not available temporarily in some markets. But why are you comparing 7 y. old cars? Isn't the 2010 Forester good enough?
  • chelentanochelentano Member Posts: 634
    >> 3 things the Outlander's expensive system does not: * frequent updates * 3 choices for traffic, including a free one with no subscription * text-to-speech

    How do you know? Did you read a user guide for the 2010 Outlander? Or you are talking again about 2007 Outlander? Once more , in 2007 Forester did not ANY navigation, while Outlander got hard-drive based with music server. Did you actually realize that you comparing Outlander electronics with aftermarket options? Is the Subaru electronics really that bad? I guess it is.

    >> All that stuff just lowers your residual and ends up increasing ownership costs disproportionately.

    You keep talking about “residuals”, but I don’t care for some “residuals”. I don’t count pennies, I just like to drive nice cars at fair price.

    >> That's BMW/Mercedes money. No wonder you defected. Actions speak louder than words.

    No defection here. This is not a religion nor political movement for me, and thanks god I am not enslaved by Subaru bux, so I can try a different car every few years. You can’t do that: you are stuck with you Subaru bux and with 4 speed tranny.
  • chelentanochelentano Member Posts: 634
    >> GLK: 3.5L, 268HP = 76.6 HP/L
    >> Outlander: 3.0L, 230HP = 76.7 HP/L

    That's right.

    Sure, GLK and GT are in different leagues, but it worth mention that the GLK has power liftgate, but GT on the other hand has unique Bluetooth streaming audio, larger 10" subwoofer (vs. 7.8"), 710 watt amplifier vs. 540, and much better handling.

    The Outlander GT beats in slalom every CUV except for $95K BMW X6 M.
    The results of the Edmunds Inside Line slalom test 6 x 100 ft (mph):

    BMW X6 M: 68.6
    2010 Outlander GT: 66.2
    Mercedes C Class: 65.8
    RDX: 65.7
    Cayenne Turbo X: 65.2
    MB ML63 AMG 64.4
    BMW X3: 64.4
    07 Outlander XLS: 63.9
    BMW X5 M 63.5
    MDX: 62.6
    LR2: 62
    Audi Q5: 61.9
    RAV4 LTD: 61.6
    MB GLK: 61.3
    Forester 2.5XT: 60.3
    Murano LE: 59.2
    MB ML350: 57.5
    Lincoln MKX: 57.3

    GLK and GT could be comparably equipped. Both have sophisticated AWD with side-to-side torque transfer, but GLK has obviously much better interior and better finish.
  • chelentanochelentano Member Posts: 634
    I decided to try leasing. I replace cars every 2-3 years anyway, so I traded loan payments for lease payments and keep 19K from sold Outlander in my bank. My mileage is also low.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Don't shoot the messenger, read the article and feel free to disagree with the editor who wrote it.

    Yes that was a forecast, but guess what? So was your number - it was a forecast too.

    I merely corrected you with updated information.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    If that's the case please explain why you think the Outlander's diesel engine is better than the Forester's diesel engine. That will keep us on topic.

    it does not constantly fall off your windshield

    Nor does my portable - I use vent mounts. They're very secure and that brings the touch screen much closer than any built-in GPS system.

    And maps were never 4 years old.

    Seriously, what good is Bluetooth if the POI database (points-of-interest for GPS newbies) is so grossly outdated? And even if an update came for 2009, when it the next one? In 2007 Mitsu gave you maps from 2005, how recent are the new maps?

    Your 2007 Outlander did not have heated mirrors

    You said "nope".

    I respond - Yep. Your 2007 Outlander did not have heated mirrors.

    You criticize me for talking about an older model right after you criticized the Forester for not having Navi on older models. Then you did it again:

    in 2007 Forester did not ANY navigation
    False - they had it in JDM models.

    You can't even play by your own rules. Why is that? :confuse:
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I am not enslaved by Subaru bux

    Neither am I.

    I don't consider getting FREE service and accessories being "enslaved".

    The fact that you do proves a bias against Subaru.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    chelentano keeps bragging about this "MP3 music server" and how it had a massive 30GB capacity, now upped to 40GB.

    Want to know the truth?

    His never really had 30GB.

    Did it have 25 Gigs? Maybe some room for overhead stuff?

    Nope.

    20 Gigs, maybe? Leaving room for the Navi maps?

    Not even close.

    15 Gigs? C'mon now, that's half of his stated capacity.

    Still no, sorry.

    10 Gigs. I mean, 1/3rd of it?

    Negative.

    7.5 Gigs. Seriously, it's gotta have 1/4 of the 30 Gigs he keeps bragging about, doesn't it?

    No. Guess how much space you actually have available?

    6. 6 out of the 30 Gigs. That's 500% overstating.

    ***

    Well, it's still an MP3 music server, though, so I'm sure it can copy MP3 files, right?

    Nope. Can't do that, either. It only rips CDA files, CD audio.

    So if you have iTunes, you have to first burn a CD with a max of 20-21 songs, then take it to the car, and let it rip each CD.

    I have not bought a CD in this century, don't know about you.

    Fact is, the system isn't nearly as good as he boasts, not even close.

    Get an Outback with an 8GB flash drive, which costs about, oh, 10 bucks, and you have more capacity.

    2010 models are not out yet, but will get 40GB capacity, but maps may be bigger with 4 years' worth of updates, but you should have somewhere between 6 and 16 Gigs.

    That's still about 20 bucks on a flash drive.
  • comem47comem47 Member Posts: 399
    Just remember guys. My pee-pee is smaller than both of yours combined, so there!!!
    (I guess I told both of you!!)

    :P
  • fushigifushigi Member Posts: 1,459
    It does get a little tiring from time to time, doesn't it?

    I'm getting to the point where I start skimming the posts if they're just going back and forth with long posts that are debating things I honestly don't care much about. For instance, I don't really care if the '07 Outlander had heated mirrors as I'm looking solely at the '10 model. My '99 Galant has them and while nice it's hardly a gotta-have-it feature to me even though I live in Chicagoland where we get plenty of snow/frost.

    ateixeira, re: 40GB HD music server. Mitsu's site says it stores 2000 songs. See Key Features at the site: http://www.mitsubishicars.com/MMNA/jsp/outlander/10/index.do?loc=en-us Given the size of MP3 files, say 5MB per, that would work out to about 10GB for music. Not sure what the rest is for; perhaps they're simply being conservative or the 2K songs is a software limitation. Or maybe 30GB HDs are simply no longer available from their OEM (although I'd think 32GB of Flash would be pretty cheap).

    Also, the Outlander's nav does now include subscription-free traffic reporting as well as lane guidane (which lots of GPS units have nowadays). Personally, I already have a Magellan portable w/traffic reporting so I don't need built-in nav. FTM my Palm Pre has SprintNav/Telenav GPS which seems to work fine as well although it sucks battery like nobody's business.
    2017 Infiniti QX60 (me), 2012 Hyundai Elantra (wife)
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    6 Gigs was 1500 songs, so if the new one can hold 2000 songs the music server capacity has been upped to ~9 Gigs.

    So let's be honest, it now has a 9 Gig music server, not 40 Gigs.

    And if it can't copy MP3s, I don't think it should be called an "MP3 Music Server".

    32GB of Flash would be pretty cheap

    Bingo. Outback even has a USB input for one.

    subscription-free traffic reporting

    That's much better. I don't want to pay another monthly bill for satellite radio (BTW I checked and Mitsu gives you 3 free months, not 6, or the same as Subaru).

    I already have a Magellan portable

    Hmm, Magellan vs. Garmin thread? Kidding, kidding! :D
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TeVp9tmsvMk&feature=player_embedded

    :shades:

    VW took 1st and 2nd in the class with a TDI Touareg, where it will compete ("cars" oddly enough), so let's see how they do. The race will be in January.
  • comem47comem47 Member Posts: 399
    "That's much better. I don't want to pay another monthly bill for satellite radio (BTW I checked and Mitsu gives you 3 free months, not 6, or the same as Subaru)."

    If this is currently true than this has changed. My 2007 Outlander came with 6 months Sirius.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I'm being asked to limit the discussion to 2010s. From Mitsu's web site:

    "Also enjoy free Sirius Satellite Radio for your first three months"
  • fushigifushigi Member Posts: 1,459
    FWIW the Outlander has USB input as well and can also accept songs streamed to it via Bluetooth.

    Unfortunately, I've not seen that the user manuals are online anywhere so I can't confirm about the copying of MP3 files.

    So far I've never been convinced to pay for satellite radio. Not saying I wouldn't enjoy it; just that it would definitely take a trial period before I'd agree to pay for it. I like very little new music and there are an adequate number of classic rock stations to keep my ears busy. Cars are expensive enough that another monthly fee isn't something I'd look forward to.

    As to Magellan v. Garmin, that was easy. I took my wife to Fry's and had her play with them. She liked the Magellen UI the best. So once she picked the make I picked the model (Maestro 4350). It was an easy way to avoid confrontation. ;)
    2017 Infiniti QX60 (me), 2012 Hyundai Elantra (wife)
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    USB input

    Cool.

    songs streamed to it via Bluetooth

    How's the quality on that? I tried a Bluetooth headset with MP3s on my phone and wasn't happy with the sound quality.

    I spoke to my old college roommate who has one, and he mentioned those limitations. He's an IT guy so he knows that stuff well.

    He also said his iPhone loses the bluetooth connection. It works but it drops when he gets in it the next day. What bugs him is that the vehicle has to be stopped to pair it up again. I guess just try your phone before you buy any Bluetooth-enabled device.

    My Garmin and my BlackBerry 8900 were paired up a few days ago and connect automatically when I get in the car. The voice dialing feature works, too, and traffic data is better than I expected (DC capital area).

    I will write up a full review for the GPS & Navigation Devices thread and link it here for reference.

    I'd rather have HD Radio than Sat Radio. XM and Sirius already had to merge, you gotta wonder if they'll even survive much longer.

    Happy wife, happy life. :shades:
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    http://www.iihs.org/news/rss/pr111809.html

    Forester makes the list for 2010.

    Outlander was dropped and is no longer a Top Safety Pick for 2010:

    For the first time, good performance in a roof strength test to measure protection in a rollover is required to win

    Small SUVs
    Honda Element
    Jeep Patriot with optional side torso airbags
    Subaru Forester
    Volkswagen Tiguan

    The overall list was pared down to just 27 choices, and notably absent is Toyota/Lexus/Scion.

    Subaru tied VW for the most wins with 4 models.
  • fushigifushigi Member Posts: 1,459
    Bluetooth
    How's the quality on that?

    Not sure. BT can be problematic sometimes. Worth trying, though, as my phone can stream Pandora pretty nicely and it'd be great to get that in the car.

    iPhones don't impress me to be honest. Too expensive, too many limitations, too much ceding control to Apple, and having to rely on AT&T's poor yet expensive network.

    I've been an IT guy for over 20 years and have watched it evolve from DP to IS to MIS to IT. While I'm knowledgeable in most areas, security is my specialty.

    Agreed on the HD v. Sat Radio.

    I've yet to call my dealer but will do so to line up a '10 Outlander test drive once they're released. Should be in the next couple of weeks. I'm on the fence about buying now. I'm (just past) due for my 150K service but if I buy now I can skip that. And if I buy in '09 the sales tax is a federal deduction. Getting AWD for winter would be nice although I've survived without it so far. Countering that, there's nothing actually wrong with my car and I've maintained it well; it would probably last a few more years. Honestly, I'm just tired of it and am ready for a change.
    2017 Infiniti QX60 (me), 2012 Hyundai Elantra (wife)
  • chelentanochelentano Member Posts: 634
    I see, $190 from Costco with popups : --)

    So now we are talking about aftermarket stuff vs. Outlander? Well, would you like perhaps to discuss aftermarket Xenons vs. Outlander Xenons since Forester does not offer any? You can get genuine Mitsubishi HID lighting in multiple colors: blue, green, yellow, etc. How about FAST Key? Any aftermarket DIY options?

    You can also get genuine Mitsubishi wood or chrome dash/door panel/shifter cover/interior accents, or cool blue LED-light “Outlander” sign on the side and bottom of the door opening, just like they offer it on Mercedes, and even LED cigarette lighter (the one which is used by your Costco GPS). EVO racing style interior accents, parking sensors, several stereo systems, bike, kid, boat, dog accessories, and more. I’ve got the Mitsubishi OEM catalog with all this stuff.
    Or, if we discuss “advanced” aftermarket navigation accessories, it’s worth to mention what other Nav you can get from Mitsubishi dealer. Unlike aftermarket units, these Mitsubishi multimedia/navigation accessories are actually compatible with Outlander information and electrical system, so you can access Outlander various car settings, audio, trip computer, etc. so you can get:

    5 Mitsubishi branded multimedia/navigation units.
    image

    2 Clarion units (US brand):

    image

    Carrozzeria unit (Pioneer)

    Eclipse (Fujistsu)
    image
    They include features such as: flash memory or HD based, text-to-speech (TTS) – you can change gender voice, many languages incl. Portuguese, traffic info, USB and SD memory, Gracenote's music database, TV tuner, DVD-Video/DVD-Audio, DIViX, Blutooth audio streaming, iTunes tagging, OEM Steering Remote Ready, motorized LCD, USB, iPod direct control, ID3-TAG display, SAT, Remote, MSN Direct, HD and Satellite radios, color switchable illumination, Mosfet amps, 24-bit DA converter, PC connection for map updates, rear view camera, and more…

    One of them even offers iPhone app-based AVIC feed: you take picture with your iPhone, and it saves your destination in your Nav unit based on Geo Tag.

    I am sorry though that you did not earn any Subaru Bux at Costco since they don't accept your Subaru credit card. Anyway, enjoy your “advanced” Costco-bought / vent-mounted / cigarette-lighter-powered GPS unit with popup advertising.
  • chelentanochelentano Member Posts: 634
    It’s ridiculous, that this thread evolved ( from being Outlander vs. Forester ) into Outlander vs. aftermarket accessories. Obviously Forester has nothing to offer : --)
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    HID lighting in multiple colors: blue, green, yellow

    Dude, are you serious?
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Safety means nothing to you now? It did a day or two ago.

    Reliability means nothing any more?

    I see, things only matter when Mitsubishi has the edge.
  • tazzitazzi Member Posts: 23
    but, in terms of driving, handling, reliability & cost to own - what are the major differences between the Outlander and the Forrester. They are both on my short list along with the Equinox.

    I'm curious about the real world driving experience, likes and dislikes for each, etc.
  • chelentanochelentano Member Posts: 634
    >>I see, things only matter when Mitsubishi has the edge.

    When you think Forester has an edge you talk about it. But when you see there no edge you talk about aftermarket accessories. There is really no edge except for large sun roof, which by the way eliminates that good roof safety test.
    .

    >> Safety means nothing to you now? It did a day or two ago.

    You r talking about that new roof strength test. Outlander’s roof test is still rated 3 on 1-4 scale: better then CRV, Escape, Tribute, etc, even though it’s made of aluminum. A softer Outlander roof actually has positive safety implications: it was purposely made of more expensive aluminum to reduce center of gravity, improve handling and prevent rollover. As result of several improvements Outlander has excellent emergency handling / lower rollover risk (see impressive slalom test): great for safety. I mean I’d prefer not to rollover at all, rather than rollover and test the strength of my roof (and my neck). Other available safety features include HID headlamps with Adaptive Front Lighting System which includes automatic leveling, superior AWD system, parking sensors, and a rear view camera.
    .

    >> Reliability means nothing any more?

    I’ve already commented on that. Forester is very reliable, but so is Outlander. Outlander was least 4 years: 2006-2009 CR at the top 4-6 most reliable in class:
    http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2006/11/crreliability2006.jpg
    http://s215240594.onlinehome.us/CR2008_smallsuv.gif
    http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/uptospeed/2009/02/consumer-report.html

    Even though this quarter Forester is higher on CR list, remember that it has older and more proven equipment, and much less features. Example: if Forester does not have FAST Key, or rain sensors, satellite radio, these will never fail. If you house does not have a dishwasher and A/C those will never brake down.

    Subaru sells basic dependable cars equipped with outdated but proven technologies. This helps them to stay on the top of reliability charts and move funds from R&D to marketing, but this strategy may eventually backfire.
  • chelentanochelentano Member Posts: 634
    >>>>HID lighting in multiple colors: blue, green, yellow

    >>Dude, are you serious?

    I am serious, Dude. Glad I could enlighten you about color HIDs:
  • chelentanochelentano Member Posts: 634
    >> but, in terms of driving, handling, reliability & cost to own - what are the major differences between the Outlander and the Forrester...

    * Driving: Forester XT will be quicker in terms of pure acceleration, since it equipped with Mitsubishi turbocharger, and don't even think about non-turbo Forester if you looking for driving fun. Forester's dated 4-speed auto tranny is jerky, while Outlander 6-speed auto is super smooth.

    * In terms of handling and overall driving experience Outlander GT wins: in spectacular slalom test Outlander GT beats every CUV except for $95K BMW X6 M: see my previus post #723. It even beats Mercedes C-Class sedan. Outlander has modern 6-speed tranny with padddle shfters, smooth V6, superior tri-mode AWD system with side-to-side torgue transfer, and superior entertainment.

    * Reliability: Otlander V6 and Forester non-turbo are most reliable and both have excellent reliability, though Outlander offers superior warranty and road side assistance.

    * TCO: Forester will cost you a couple of grands less over the 5 years, but you get what you paid for, or even less. Forester is relatively expensive for what it offers.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I did acknowledge the infotainment system, look back and you'll find it. But why did you feel the need to lie about the capacity and capabilities? 6 Gigs is not even close to 30 Gigs, nor is 9 close to 40. Why embellish?

    I wonder if even the Mitsubishi owners believe you.

    Source for the claim that the Forester IIHS crash tested did not have a moonroof, please?
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Glad I could enlighten you about color HIDs

    Add some spinners and that's a game changer. Safey it so overrated.

    That's hilarious. I thought you were kidding.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    First let me ask, what's your budget? Buy or lease? Can you drive stick? Do you want the powerful engines, or the most fuel efficient ones?

    That will help narrow it down.

    Forester has a good balance of ride and handling. It's comfortable and user friendly, has good lateral grip for its class, solid fade-free braking. The turbo has very good acceleration.

    The non-turbo automatic has average for its class acceleration, on par with the 2.4l Outlander with the CVT, CR-V, or 4 cylinder 'nox. If it's "slow" then so is everything else with the base 4 cylinder engine.

    If you want efficiency with a bit more pep, try the manual transmission Forester. CR got 25mpg and it's quicker than any of the base 4-banger automatics. It actually very nearly matches the V6 Equinox in acceleration. Try it out.

    Equinox has Direct Injection engines, very impressive on paper, though road tests have been a bit disappointing. I think it may just be too heavy, but neither engine is particularly quick. 180hp is more than either entry here offers in its base engine, though the PZEV 175hp Forester comes closer, plus the Forester is the only one that offers a manual.

    EPA numbers are better, but CR got 21mpg. Forester 2.5i and Outlander CVT got 22mpg, but the champ here is the Forester manual at 25mpg. Plus it's the quickest of all of those - if you can drive stick.

    If you want a V6 or turbo, the DI 'nox again is well ahead here, with a lot more HP (264), but again it's heavy. CR tested one (Nov 09 issue) and it wasn't as quick as expected, nor as fuel efficient. Comparing mileage, the V6 'nox got 18mpg, 19mpg for the 220hp Outlander V6 (not a 2010), and 20 mpg for the Forester turbo using premium fuel. Forester was quickest, even with the fewer gear ratios accounted for.

    Kudos to Chevy for at least putting a larger gas tank in the V6 model - a whopping 20.9 gallons. But it will have the highest fuel costs. Run Edmunds' TCO tool for an idea of total costs over 5 years, they'll account for everything.

    I have not driven the 'nox yet. I did drive its little brother, the Saturn Vue, and didn't like the electric power steering. No feel at all, reminded me of my Toyota. If you test drive one pay attention to the steering.

    Forester is the only one of the 3 to make the IIHS Top Safety Picks list for 2010. Not sure if the Equinox went through all the tests yet, to even be eligible.

    Forester 2.5i is also ranked #3 in class in terms of reliability, the only model here to make CR's top 6 in class. 'nox is too new to be rated.

    We have an 09 Forester PZEV Limited auto. Despite the haterade here, the transmission is fine. We've owned it for more than a year, not just a test drive around the block. The shifts are smooth and decisive. My Sienna has a 5 speed auto compared to the Forester it hesitates and feels indecisive. It's more than just the number of ratios, it's the feel, so drive it and evaluate this for yourself.

    We've beat 30mpg on a trip, and I've seen 33mpg for short periods. People with stick shifts have gotten tankfuls of more than 32mpg. Very pleased.

    Dislikes? Well, look closely at all of these. The headliners feel like card board with dryer lint or peach fuzz sprayed on. The dashes are not padded, and plastics are hard. Carpets are thin. I'll take a close look at the Equinox come Auto Show season, but both the Forester and Outlander have cheap materials that simply do not belong in a price class beyond $30k or so. Maybe even $25k. :sick:

    We have no regrets. If our Forester was stolen or totalled today, we would buy another Forester. Same model, even.

    Best of luck shopping, and feel free to ask specific questions about the Forester.
  • chelentanochelentano Member Posts: 634
    >> But why did you feel the need to lie about the capacity and capabilities? 6 Gigs is not even close to 30 Gigs, nor is 9 close to 40. Why embellish?

    We’ve never got into details about HD memory allocation for different functions. Please point to my post were I “lie”. “40GB HDD digital music server” or “30GB hard-drive-based music server” with several variations, that what it’s called in many online sources:
    http://www.cars.com/go/crp/research.jsp?section=optionsAndExtras&makeid=34&model- - id=6708&year=2009&myid=10689&acode=USB90MIS032C0&mode=&aff=national

    http://www.thecarconnection.com/bottomline/mitsubishi_outlander_2008

    Your Forester is using only 4.7 Gb DVD for maps. Do you really what to get into conversation about Outlander music server capabilities not knowing once again what you are talking about?



    >> Source for the claim that the Forester IIHS crash tested did not have a moonroof, please?

    The IIHS site states that tests conducted on cars with typical equipment. Large panoramic sun roof is not typical, it’s a $1000 option. Good luck rolling over on that large glass sun roof though.
  • comem47comem47 Member Posts: 399
    Yes, the newer Equinox looks interesting and MPG looks great. Back in 2007 the Equinox was a different beast altogether and was quickly ruled out. As much as I love my Outlander I have no preconceived allegiance and would have to give this a serious look if I were shopping now(my wife has a 2006 Malibu Maxx V6 that has treated her real well with great MPGs) Chevy has also caught up on the warranty thing with the Outlander for a few years now. (the 100k part, not "or 10 years part")
  • fushigifushigi Member Posts: 1,459
    Being from the manufacturer it can be considered propaganda, but I find them interesting. As I wouldn't be off-roading (intentionally), I was mostly impressed with the ice video. That is applicable to road conditions that can happen on occasion here in Chicagoland.

    Ice: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b203wKwGrYA&feature=PlayList&p=50AC73FE9DBAA271&i- ndex=1
    Offroad: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wmpT9q8puyI&feature=PlayList&p=50AC73FE9DBAA271&i- ndex=0

    As the comparison is against 4WD and not AWD this is probably more valuable for comparing the Outlander v. the RAV4 since the Foreester has an AWD system.

    I also found it interesting that the Outie they used appeared to have normal tires and not snow tires or anything specific for off-road conditions.
    2017 Infiniti QX60 (me), 2012 Hyundai Elantra (wife)
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Please point to my post were I “lie”. “40GB HDD digital music server” or “30GB hard-drive-based music server”

    Sure.

    More than once:

    http://townhall-talk.edmunds.com/direct/view/.f185114/705!keywords=allin%3Amsgte- - xt%20limit%3A.f185114%20music%20server#MSG705

    "voice activated 40GB music server"

    and here:

    http://townhall-talk.edmunds.com/direct/view/.f185114/637!keywords=allin%3Amsgte- - xt%20limit%3A.f185114%20music%20server#MSG637

    "40 GB music server"

    and here you didn't mention it can't copy MP3s:

    http://townhall-talk.edmunds.com/direct/view/.f185114/15!keywords=allin%3Amsgtex- - t%20limit%3A.f185114%20music%20server#MSG15

    "build-in MP3 music server"

    I bet you wish Edmunds let you edit those right about now. :D
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Your Forester is using only 4.7 Gb DVD for maps

    That's wrong, but I'm going to let you figure out why that's incorrect.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    The IIHS site states that tests conducted on cars with typical equipment

    The moonroof is typical equipment.

    Models without moonroof: X base.

    Models withmoonroof: X Premium, X Limited, XT, and XT Limited.

    4 out of 5 models have it, including the best-selling model.

    So if IIHS tests a typical Forester, than means they tested WITH a moonroof.

    it’s a $1000 option

    Nope, it's not an option, it's standard in all 4 of those models. In fact it is not sold seperately in any model.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    They are available on any Forester model, have been since 12/08, BTW.

    Source: cars101.com.

    Twice chelentano implied they were not, messages #741 and #746.

    Visibility is good enough that they're not necessary, IMHO.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    To clarify once again, you can get satellite radio on a Forester, It's not installed by the dealer, and there is no labor charge for any of these 4 order codes.

    For XM 2 ways to get it:

    Popular Equipment Grp 6A, #F9M order code.
    or a-la-carte, #D9D order code

    For Sirius two ways to get it:

    Popular Equipment Grp 6B, #F9N order code
    or a-la-carte, #D9C order code

    So there are plenty of ways to get satellite radio, but I'd still rather see HD Radio, because it's free!
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Interesting ice video.

    No surprise about all the wheel slip in the first one, with traction control off. Fun maybe, but not safe.

    Is the 2nd one the old AWC model, minus the S for Super? It allowed a lot of wheelslip. Is the the old 4WD lock mode? Or AWC without the "Super" part?

    S-AWC on the 2010 does it with much less drama and a lot more control. There's only slip when the driver guns it.

    Reminds me of the videos Subaru came out with in 2006, showing their cars climbing those ramps with rollers. The Subarus also demonstrated very little wheelspin. Systems from Honda, Toyota, and VW struggled.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    In terms of cost to own, Subarus are selling "well" in this current market. No one else really is, except Hyundai. Subie sales were up 41% last month. Mitsubishi sales dropped 48%.

    So the Mitsu dealer may be more willing to deal than your local Subie dealer. Especially on a Forester or an Outback, since the redesigns for those two have been a big success for Subaru. But TMV for both the Forester and the Outlander is running about $500 above invoice on a mid-level trim without options. More like $700 over for the Equinox.

    Novembers typically are lousy months for car dealers and this November is especially bad, so if you are ready to buy "today" you can probably swing a good deal anywhere.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Just watched the off road video.

    Here's one from Subaru:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7oY-sstA3Ec

    It's long so the highlights are the first 30 seconds (a summary), then at 1:48, when the Forester has one wheel in the air, a trick copied from the Jeep Grand Cherokee at auto shows. They go a step further and open and close the door to demonstrate chassis rigidity.

    They compare to Honda, Toyota, Nissan, and Hyundai.

    In this one a bunch of rally fanatics who would usually compare EVO vs. STI, but they went a little nuts and compared Outlander to the Forester.

    Check out who wins the tug-of-war at 2:36:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C11-5200ehE

    :shades:

    Time for a rematch, though. The current Forester has more low-end torque and the Outlander added S-AWC and 10 horses.
  • fushigifushigi Member Posts: 1,459
    Subaru should have split the WRX video out as a separate entry. If I was wanting to see just it I'd have been annoyed at waiting through 9 minutes of Forester coverage for that last minute of WRX footage.

    Really, not bad for offroading. But the most I would offroad would be grassy areas that a sedan could probably take and maybe onto a beach. I would have liked to see footage of the Forester handling snow conditions. I'm sure it handles the snow& ice comparably to the Outlander, but I'd like to see a standing takeoff on ice like the Outlander video had. That's a condition I'll actually face from time to time.

    And speaking of snow, that Russian comparo was hard to follow. Except for the getting stuck thing I have no idea which vehicle did better. There were no displayed track times, no side-by-sides, etc. Both vehicles seemed to do fine as near as I could tell.

    Agreed a rematch is due. But I'd hope to have more useful info to glean from it.
    2017 Infiniti QX60 (me), 2012 Hyundai Elantra (wife)
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Subaru should have split the WRX video

    Absolutely. I guess they were at the same dealer training event, but I agree 100%.

    Russian Rally Fans + lots of vodka + a couple of rivals = madness. Seemed like they had fun. :shades:

    And please, no cheesy techo music. :D
  • fushigifushigi Member Posts: 1,459
    After posting my response a question popped into my head. What powertrains do Russian Foresters & Outlanders get? I'd imagine we would not be talking the same 2.5 Turbo & 3L V6 engines we get in the US. Maybe a 2L diesel or something?

    Not that it matters when all you do is line up another row of shots. My niece is a bit too fond of Jello shots made w/Vodka. :sick:

    BTW I priced a Forester XT v. Outlander GT and made them as equal as I could. There were definite differences in equipment levels but in the end I had them within $500 of each other with the Mitsu being more expensive. But I would get a Mitsu loyalty rebate which for me would make the Outlander about $70 cheaper. So cost-wise they're a wash at the equipment levels I would choose.

    I have yet to talk to my insurance agent to see which is cheaper to insure.
    2017 Infiniti QX60 (me), 2012 Hyundai Elantra (wife)
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I think Russia gets the EJ20 2.0l turbo Forester, at least they used to.

    Not sure about the Mitsu, it was an "XL" model.

    Can you use the loyalty cash on an EVO? :shades:
This discussion has been closed.