Howdy, Stranger!

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

Howdy, Stranger!

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

Did you get a great deal? Let us know in the Values & Prices Paid section!
Meet your fellow owners in our Owners Clubs

Mitsubishi Outlander Seats

I am looking at leasing a new vehicle and after much research the Outlander is one of the ones I like. After checking it out there are a couple of areas of concern, one being the comfort of the 2nd row seating (I would not go for the 3rd row).
I have not been able to find any info in the forums. Can anyone comment on their comfort during a long drive of over 4 hours?
Thank you.


  • toomanyfumestoomanyfumes S.E. Wisconsin Posts: 1,019
    I haven't sat in mine for too long of a time, but there seems to be a lot of room back there. They adjust fore and aft, and also recline. Leg and head room is pretty good, but this is a fairly narrow vehicle, so if you carry three people back there, it could be pretty tight.
    2012 Mustang Premium, 2013 Lincoln MKX Elite, 2007 Mitsubishi Outlander.
  • Thanks for the info 'toomanyfumes', but I was more concerned about the comfort of the seat itself (is it to hard or to soft?). I find the leg and head room is very good and I know that 3 people in the back would be crowded depending on their size. My kids complain that my 4Runner's seats do not recline so they will like that in the Outlander.
  • dodo2dodo2 Posts: 496
    I haven't sat back there for long drives, but my wife did and she didn't complain. This doesn't mean much to you I guess because this is a personal thing.
    I find them firm, but comfortable. One good thing about the backrest is that it's high enough (for me at least - 5' 7") to support the back. I sat in the 2nd row in a 07 CRV and I found the backrest too low, but just enough to make them uncomfortable for me.
  • All information is good (I never gave any thought to the height difference between myself and my kids). I'll check that out.
    The other thing I was concerned about was noise from the freeway during long trips. The dealer I use is quite a distance from the freeway and I haven't driven it there. Any comments?
  • toomanyfumestoomanyfumes S.E. Wisconsin Posts: 1,019
    I haven't driven many other new crossovers but I think the Outlander is a good highway vehicle. It's not dead quiet inside, but the engine is quiet enough and makes good power, and the handling is confident. The suspension and seats are on the firm side, but I like that in a vehicle.
    2012 Mustang Premium, 2013 Lincoln MKX Elite, 2007 Mitsubishi Outlander.
  • batman47batman47 Posts: 606
    Can the rear seats in the Outlander temporarily be removed? Is it an easy job? Before I buy this car I would like to have some says of people that own one.
  • 20vcq20vcq Posts: 82
    Pretty good actually. I n=know they feel firm but with the adjustable back and slider they are conducive to long travel periods and for two adults make for easy conversations etc. The third row seat I would like to simply remove as useless weight but the remaining holes in the carpet etc look tacky. We spent a week and 4000 km on the road and found this to be a sweet ride - not up to my Audi's but for what it is and the price - really fine car / truck? :)
  • 20vcq20vcq Posts: 82
    I am never going to use my third row seat so if anyone wants it make me an offer in exchange for your floor filler pieces and carpet..? It is just more weight than I need. I don't know what to do about the seat belts though - I haven't examined the mounting etc yet.
  • dodo2dodo2 Posts: 496
    Should be some clips on each side to keep them out of the way when not in use.
  • 20vcq20vcq Posts: 82
    Yeah there are - what I meant was if someone wanted the seats I was unsure how to remove and fill the spaces left. But thanks.
  • steverstever Posts: 52,462
    I bought a 7 passenger minivan in '98 and promptly threw the 2nd row bench away - couldn't find anyone who wanted it, plus shipping would have been expensive anyway. The van rear seat slides on tracks so I do use the extra seatbelts now and then, but they usually hang down out of the way and don't rattle. I suspect you could unbolt them and plug the holes with another bolt.
  • 20vcq - while away for the week how did you find the road noise? I'm pretty much down to the Outlander and the Santa Fe. I tested the SF yesterday and found it to be very quite whereas I thought the Outlander was a bit noisier (but I have not taken either on the freeway and it is hard to tell by driving on city roads). And by road noise I mean compared to other SUV's. It seems my 2003 4Runner is comparible to the Outlander, which is acceptable but not great.
  • 20vcq20vcq Posts: 82
    Yeah - the Santa Fe was quieter than the Mitsu by a good margin. But the dynamics of the Santa fe suspension left us wanting. Heavy lean - dive on hard breaking and the seats' lack of support - neither my wife or I could get comfortable in the non adjustable passenger seat for more than 1/2 hr - after than we were shifting form cheek to cheek. In the driver seat I found myself driving with my elbow on my knee in boredom just like the Higlander and the other little one.
    We hadn't even considered a Mitsu when we started to look as we didn't even know they sold them in BC. (two years ago on Vancouver Island). I was familiar with the Evo and its rep.
    We compared the Subaru and would rate the handling of the Subaru as a little better but two things got in its way - one the lack of space dictated by the old platform and secondly I wont wear a Tilly Hat for anyone even under a giant sun roof!
    The Subaru dynamic all wheel drive like the Audi Quattro system is far superior to the Mitsui on demand sort of system if that is a major factor for you. A difference you wont notice unless you drive at nine tenths in very wet conditions or on very sandy roads.
    No the Mitsu is a great value and way better than anything Toyota can offer in the price range even with a little higher road noise. By the way as to that - I have always run 4 studded snow tires on my Audis and have a set of 16's all set for the Outlander - talk about noise test! But then maybe that is the reason for the Fosgate booming sound system!?:) For a little background - my other cars are Audi Quattros since 1984 and still keep my '90 Audi Coupe in the garage. That is my comparison baseline.
  • batman47batman47 Posts: 606
    Thank you very much mate. I think now I can proceed with my research on finding the best selling price from dealer in my area.
  • batman47batman47 Posts: 606
    How can I find out that my dealer is not offering me a 2007 Outlander instead of a 2008 Outlander? Can I identify something in the car itself that is telling me this is 2008 model? or Shall I trust in the dealer words?
  • batman47batman47 Posts: 606
    After a lot of conversation with a dealer I was given a price of $27,300 (Invoice $27,130) for a 2008 Outlander with P5 and P2 packages included. The dealer said this: “May I ask you where you coming from? So I can punch in the right sales tax % for you, and give you the total sells price” I live in Menlo Park (CA) area so why is the dealer asking me this type of question? I remember asking the dealer to confirm that it will not be any hidden costs when I will travel to the dealership to make the deal. The dealer just kept silent. Is the price reasonable or I could bargain for $500 price drop?
  • dodo2dodo2 Posts: 496
    The door panels will tell you if it's a 2007 or 2008 model. The upper door panels in the 2008 models (all trims), have the same texture/pattern as the upper dashboard where the 2007 models have plain/mate plastic upper door panels.
  • In addition to the door panels, the most obvious thing is the key fob. The 2007 key fob is shaped like a card (just flat and rectangular), while the 2008 key fob is like a candy bar (thicker and skinnier). The photo of the key fob on Mitsubishi website is from the 2007 model.

    Also FYI, I live in Sunnyvale, CA and I went to Capitol Mitsubishi in San Jose to purchase my 2008 XLS with all three packages. I paid $100 UNDER invoice. So I think you can bargain a little more.
  • I live just outside Vancouver, BC. The Subaru dealership is to far away to consider any of their vehicles as it would be to much bother for maintenance. Which year Santa Fe did you test, I ask because of your comment regarding the non adjustable passenger seat? I am looking at the 2008 Limited AWD which has 4 way power passenger seat. In my short test drive I found the drivers seat comfortable. From other forums it appears they improved in many areas with the new design in 2007.
    I am not a hard driver so I haven't noticed a lean while cornering. However, I will try to check that out as it could be a problem while travelling to go skiing.
    Also, which year Outlander do you have?
    I started out looking at the Outlander and the Santa Fe was a late contender for me. Each have their advantages over the other but I think, for my type/style of driving, that I would be happy with either one. The main reason I am leaning towards the SF is I am not that confident in the Mitsubishi dealership. Their knowledge is not the best and their place of business is quite run down so I worry that they may go out of business. If that happened it would be another long drive for maintenance.
  • 20vcq20vcq Posts: 82
    I would say that any price can be negotiated. If they want your business they will "do their best" to get it - but that is negotiating - how bad does the buyer want the product? I would recommend getting the most you can afford - if possible the full leather etc. There must be more than one dealer in your service area eh? Try them off against each other and take no b.s. Hidden charges? The closer will of course try and upsell to the extended warranty, undercoating and other useless crap and the answer is simple "no" no" No" - give me the car and let me the hell out of here" :) :P
  • 20vcq20vcq Posts: 82
    2007 Hundai and I bought the 2007 XLS Outlander.
  • 20vcq20vcq Posts: 82
    By the way bobj14 - the awd of the Santa fe is not truly an awd - it is a temporary use and only a low % backup. The salesman over here in Victoria was very new and looked up everything he could to try and get me to buy - real nice kid - but he found enough to know himself that it was not a very useful system. As I said the Subaru and Audi and one of the Acura's$$$ have true awd, but the Mitsu was the best compromise with the %dial in and lock feature. I'm not a big guy 5/8 and found the SF seats to short - if they changed that and had electric in the passengers seat the handling and awd would still have stopped me. Driving the Koke in the winter is no fun without the backup of awd at 2 am. :) and as a fanatic for the interior mountains I find myself getting Island and snow fever at the same time an do midnight runs to B White. We''l see how the Mitsu does.. that's a little more than two bits worth eh?
  • We also go to Big White (where my daughter has worked the last 2 seasons) and to Sun Peaks. I am not a real car buff so I only partially understand what you are saying. What does it mean 'it is a temporary use and only a low % backup'. What's the difference between this and 'true' AWD? This is a major concern for me and would definitely change my mind on the SF.
    What is the % dial in for the Mitsu, have you had it in any snow and, if so, how did it handle?
    Also, thanks for all the info the dealers would never tell me.
  • 20vcq20vcq Posts: 82
    The Subaru and Audis have a system where by the torque is transferred to all four wheels evenly and when needed can transfer that torque to the individual wheel that has traction you can check it out at ( and that will give you a good idea what the difference is to even the Mitsu. Mitsu only transfers torque front to rear - like having two rear differencial from your old Chevy until the 4wd lock is activated at which time the torque is locked to all 4. The Mitsu and others do not use all the torque equally only when the loss of traction occurs on the front wheels is 35% of the torque transferred to the rear. It's an adequate system but not one that one would use for a rally for instance. If you test drive it on a wet road find a hill with a stop sign - turn the knob to awd and floor the accelerator - you'll feel the initial slip of the front wheels and then all four will grab. This initial slippage is never present in the other systems. Now disengage the awd returning to 2 wd and floor it on a hill or in a corner - the torque steer is significant so be ready for it. This too never happens with the others. I must sound like I don't l;ike the Mitsu but I really do - it never gets driven in 2 wd as I hate the torque steer. And having Audi's all these years I am spoiled with knowing "how it should operate" vs. how it does. Even with those benefits I have always had 4 studded snow tires and have them for the Mitsu (TireRack $326 for the steel rims, delvered to Vic) for those roads and would recomend them to anyone who drives at night on icy roads. For the price the size and amenities the Outlander is still a good buy IMO and until I can see myself in a Tilley I will continue to drive it with a mile If you wish to chat - check out for my number - anytime
  • piastpiast Posts: 269
    "The 2008 Dakar Rally, a rigorous off-road endurance test, begins on January 5th in Lisbon, Portugal. The event will end on January 20th in Dakar, Sengal. That is a distance of 9,273 km (or 5,762 miles) full of sand dunes, rocks, mud, camel grass, etc., and an increase of more than 1,000 km (621 miles) over the 2007 race. Since 2001, Mitsubishi and its Pajero/Montero entries have dominated the automobile class of the event."
    Subaru and Audi have proven their AWD setups are better where again? I know it is diffrent in real world cars, but I think they've got the chance to learn how to build good 4X4 system by now ( beating Audi and Subaru 7 times in a row ).
  • 20vcq20vcq Posts: 82
    Absolutley correct - if that was the system that we had bought on the Outlander- If one wants that system (or at least a close approxiation) you must purchase the Endeavour. I do not suggest for one nanosecond that Mitsubishi cannot build a good AWD or 4x4 system. I am only discussing the Outlander which while adequate is not a true AWD when compared to those mentioned. I am not trying to flame here just narrow the comparison. :)
  • 20vcq20vcq Posts: 82
    Absolutley correct - if that was the system that we had bought on the Outlander- If you want that system (or at least a close approxiation) you must purchase the Endeavour. Our system never saw any dessert sand. It is not my intention to flame here just narrow the comparison.
    ".. 4 wheel drive system that allowsyou to occasionally travel on unpaved roads, to campgrounds, picnic sites, and similar locations. But it is not suitable for heavy off road use or towing in rough conditions" That's a quote from page 3-96 of the owners manual and doesn't read like a vehicle one would enter in the Dakar Rally.
  • piastpiast Posts: 269
    Yes, you are right, Outlander is not rally ready. But I don't think it is any worse with 4WD lock , than any of the other cars mentioned in everyday driving on icy or snowy roads. Advantage over Santa Fe is - you can lock 4WD for any condition and over Subaru- you can turn it off on dry roads for better fuel economy and quiet ride. But honestly, I think any of those cars would be a great choice.
  • 20vcq20vcq Posts: 82
    True enough. I would have preferred to have the same torque split system as offered by the others as I am most used to it and how it reacts in highway and normal wet weather driving. The last thing one wants to do is drive in 4 wheel lock on a twisty snow covered roads at hwy speeds.
    I am very interested to see how the low % torque transfer operates in hill climbing in heavy snow conditions without the lock - probably wont notice the dif but I am curious.
    I p.o'd a friend who owns the local Subaru dealership when I bought the Outlander instead of the Subaru - it was because of him I got to try out all the competitors at the launch of the Tribeca a few years ago at Whistler. The difference was noticeable in heavy Whistler mud and gravel but not enough to concern me obviously. The new Outlander was not available for that comparison of course and the last version sucked by design etc. so was never on my radar. The Tribeca I thought would be a fair comparison by size and amenities but the price took it to another level. The Mitsu is a great package / value!
    I am really looking forward to getting out into "it" - I bought this for long touring to the NWT and Yukon next year - I only have one road left in BC that I haven't driven in the winter The Cassiar Hwy so that is on my list and I will let ya know how it goes. :)
  • Sounds like you trying to say that Audi and Subaru have superior AWD system over the other cars. Apparently it is not superior enough to win the world toughest Dakar rally even once.
  • 20vcq20vcq Posts: 82
    Please read my post again I think you missed the point. Alow me to clarify for you - No I do not think the general statement the Audi and Subaru are better than Mitsubishi is a valid statement. But as we are dealing here only with the Outlander that does not have the same drive system as any of the Dakar Mitsubishis or any of the other Mitsu 4x4 offerings or awd offerings and the Subaru and Audi do a comment to compare these other vehicles technically superior "sold in the showroom" mechanicals is a valid one.
    If we were comparing the Evo AWD system I would say absolutley they are a mechanical equal, even the Endeavour I would accept a comparison as they use a very similar centre differential and or viscose coupling system as one or other.
    So I hope I have helped you understand my view. But if you wish to use winnings as a criteria you must than also consider Audi's 24 hr 3 Lemans wins, and the Audi European Sedan domination for over 10 years and so on. These are AWD winnings not 4x4 dirt track winnings. AWD is all I am discussing I hope you appreciate the difference.
    And a big difference is all the drive systems Audi uses in these wins are the same as the ones you buy in the Q7, A8, A6 and so on.
    I like the Mitsu. Its a cute little thing - I just will hold my final judgement on it until I have travelled and survived a couple of thousand km on snow and ice as I have the past 176,000 km of winter in my Audi CQ - as a car fan you may wish to visit - -if you don't know the car. :)
  • >> Please read my post again I think you missed the point. Alow me to clarify for you - No I do not think the general statement the Audi and Subaru are better than Mitsubishi is a valid statement.

    Well, in your post you've said "...Audi and one of the Acura's$$$ have true awd, but the Mitsu was the best compromise". So you were saying that the Audi is a “true” thing but the Mitsu is the “compromise”. I am glad though now you are offering your clarification, that you do not think that Audi is better than Mitsubishi. I surely understand: it would be hard to think so, considering that the "compromised" Mitsubishi beats the Audi Quattro to the punch in a direct competition.

    >> the Outlander that does not have the same drive system as any of the Dakar Mitsubishis …a big difference is all the drive systems Audi uses in these wins are the same as the ones you buy in the Q7, A8, A6

    I’ve never said that the Outlander uses “the same drive system”, but you are saying that the Audi you drive has the same AWD as this Lemans million dollar racing car Audi R10? You kidding, right???

    >> if you wish to use winnings as a criteria you must than also consider Audi's 24 hr 3 Lemans wins, and the Audi European Sedan domination for over 10 years and so on.

    Sure, Audi builds great cars, and it has some good race achievements within the scale of insignificant regional European races, where Japanese and American cars are rare participants, and were AWD is not banned. The FIA Super Touring bans AWD, and Formula1 bans AWD, but some Lemans race allows it.

    In 1995 Audi entered its A4 w/ AWD Quattro in Super Touring race (TOCA) for BTCC and dominated the races (as you’ve said). This raised many complaints from other teams fielding front-wheel-drive cars. All season Audi won repeatedly throughout most of the series, with rear-wheel-drive BMW finishing in a close second continuously. But the FIA realized that an AWD car in a field of Front Wheel Drive cars was an unfair advantage so they outright banned AWD. Audi responded to the ban in 1998 with a Front Wheel Drive A4 ... and it sucked compared to other FWDs pretty much proving that AWD gave them an advantage.

    Otherwise, in a fair fight the quality of AWD system is a smaller factor in a race like Lemans, since it’s going on this dedicated perfectly build racing track. The quality of AWD is a much bigger factor in a legendary 2-week Dakar rally in a desert where the "compromised" Mitsubishi dominates 7 years in a row. And, by the way, a German team did win the Dakar rally in 2001. But they did not pick one of German-build Audi/Tuareg/MB/BMWs. Germans won the Dakar rally on a "compromised" Mitsubishi!
  • 20vcq20vcq Posts: 82
    BMW was a big moaner about being whooped by Audi and as the largest team brought sway to have them ejected - even though they had a lame "x" system in their 3 series sedans at the time. It adds so much weight though it just couldn't compete.
    The compromise is only the Outlander 35% system nothing else.
    Yes the race Audi's do use precisely the same "technology" as one buys in the street cars (albeit with more exotic metals as the stresses are less in the A8 and A6's) just as some of the Mitsu products use the same "technology" as the Dakkar vehicles in other units than the Outlander, also with less exotic materials.
    The Endeavour I believe has a sequential or distributed torque system that would be close to the race units and close to those of Subaru and Audi - I cannot find any web site that outlines the Mitsubishi engineering specs, but once again this is not what is used in the Outlander and that is my point. The Outlander's awd is a compromise system as compared to a 100% electronically or mechanically distributed system that is standard in all Subaru and most Audi products. A German equivalent to the Outlander system would be the 2002 - 4 Volkswagen 4 and the early Mercedes 4 Motion.
    This is an interesting discussion of interpretive values isn't it?

    Some people still think (not suggesting you) that a 4x4 is an awd and vis versa. Even some manufacturers try to sell based on the use of both phrases bringing about more confusion in the market place - not unlike my all time favourite "All Season Tires". The same people who think of their 4x4 in 4 lock as an awd rocket also think their all season tires on their 4x4 will rewrite the laws of physics. They are usually the first in the ditch up side down ;) .

    I wonder why the Outlander team went to the low percentage split - is it for the mom shopping in the snow covered parking lot? I understand the small saving possible in fuel usage with the selector switch and that's fine but not the low % transfer even when in full lock.
    I have tried to find some technical literature on their systems but to no avail. There is nothing in the owners book either. If you have any links that you know of I would appreciate them.
    Still waiting for some snow to test.. :)
  • Here are some videos of the Outlander in the snow, showing the performance in 2WD, 4WD, 4W Lock with and without ASC on. Brush up on your Japanese!
  • 20vcq20vcq Posts: 82
    domo arigatto (pardon the spelling?!) Now I really cant wait to get on the interior back roads and try to figure out what our friend was saying. I did appear very stable and controlled with very little wheel adjustment didn't it? I wonder if I am misunderstanding the split ?
    The older Montero system was similar to this and allowed for the split to be 33% front and 67% rear so I am wondering now if those few who have written about the Outlander are not mistaken about the split being the reverse as that stated for Montero? The rate of under steer, with a 70 front 30 rear would increase and has been my underlying reason for questioning the Mitsu O awd.
  • We are pretty far from the original "2nd row seats " discussion here, so we really should continue this AWD discussion in the designed thead Mitsubishi Outlander 4WD System Explained. The original post explanes the Outlander AWD. I will post you my responce there.
  • batman47batman47 Posts: 606
    It appears that Mitsubishi has addressed the problem of the rear seats in the 2007 edition. However may I ask someone in this forum in what models (First/second row fully-flat seating function) this improvement has been made? XLS, LS, or ES?
  • 20vcq20vcq Posts: 82
    The ones I have seen have the same seat config as the '07. The only seat that is fold flat in them is the third row. I checked the web site and there the only mention to is of a third row fold flat so .. ??
  • batman47batman47 Posts: 606
    I have told by a dealer in CA that the model 2.4L CVT Outlander (model 2008) the rear seat fold flat.
  • 20vcq20vcq Posts: 82
    Maybe a specific to California as must be the CVT 2.4 as I can find no reference to that model here either - but it would definitely be a nice improvment ot have the fold flat second row as I can't get my skis in the back and have to buy the rack and load my box on the roof again .
  • The 2nd row does NOT fold flat, it tumbles forward into the foot-well area. It does this in a 60/40 split. You should be able to fit skis when one part of the 2nd row is folded forward.
    The 2.4l w/ CVT is available as of the 2008 model year.
  • batman47batman47 Posts: 606
    What is the maximum weight that the outlander can support on the roof (e.g. roof box)? I expect to visit “death horse” in Alaska and I would like to know this weight. They said that the outlander roof has been made from aluminum.
  • batman47batman47 Posts: 606
    This is a review by Edmunds in the 2008 Outlander:

    To complement last year's standard V6 engine, a new four-cylinder engine debuts for the 2008 Mitsubishi Outlander. It's offered on the base ES trim level only and comes standard with a continuously variable transmission (CVT). Other changes include the discontinuation of the sliding second-row rear seat feature on ES and LS trims (it's still on the XLS).

    Could someone elaborate further in the understanding of “Other changes include the discontinuation of the sliding second-row rear seat feature on ES and LS trims”? Will this mean that the second-row rear seats will fold flat into the vehicle floor or something else?
  • 20vcq20vcq Posts: 82
    I may be the only person on the planet that doesn't want the extra weight in the [non-permissible content removed] end of the vehicle. Has anyone removed theirs? I can'[t see any down side on a quick viewing other than having to buy the cover and filler from the dealer.
  • batman47batman47 Posts: 606
    Somebody in this Outlander forum has removed the second row seats, perhaps he could help you how to remove the third row seat.

    You may also DIY by ordering the workshop manual for the 2007 Outlander CD-ROM at a price of $180. Order on line
  • Hello,

    According to the 2008 Mitsubishi Outlander brochure, the first row seats are supposedly able to fold flat. Now, I was able to fold flat/tumble the 2nd row seats and all I can figure out with 1st row is how to recline it. 2nd row seats have straps that when you pull, the seats fold/tumble. How do you fold flat the 1st row? Is it even possible or is this a print mistake in the brochure? Any help would be greatly appreciated. This would make Outlander even more useful as it would allow me to transport very long items.
  • solowalkersolowalker Posts: 118
    I have the 2007 XLS and it would be great if the front passenger seat did fold flat.....I doubt that the 2008 seat is any different from the 2007.
  • Just to add to my question is an article that also clearly states that the 1st row passenger side seat folds flat (forward):

    So again, maybe people don't know the difference between fold flat seats and reclining a seat or maybe it's some another omitted from US market feature or maybe it's not that easy to fold it flat and actually requires some effort???
  • 20vcq20vcq Posts: 82
    That's funny - if he needs to fold the front seat forward for skis then he is not only in error in the wording but living far in the past with his skis :) :)
Sign In or Register to comment.