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

1…2627283032

Comments

  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Here's what I want:

    http://www.carspace.com/ateixeira/Albums/misc/Backup%20Cam.jpg/page/photo.html#p- ic

    Imagine a 10" screen with 3G, or tethered to your iPhone or BlackBerry... :shades:
  • fushigifushigi Member Posts: 1,459
    http://www.mitsubishicars.com/MMNA/jsp/outlander/10/index.do?loc=en-us

    Go to Gallery - Interior and look at pictures 9 & 10 to see the Outlander's backup screen. The green & red lines make lining up a snap. The green hash marks are at 1 meter intervals & the red line is about 18" from the bumper.
    2017 Infiniti QX60 (me), 2012 Hyundai Elantra (wife)
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Trajectory lines are nice - remember the Outback has those, too. At higher price levels that is to be expected.

    I won't launch another price argument, but suffice it to say that the best-selling CR-V wins the sales race by keeping a lid on prices (under $30k fully loaded).
  • fushigifushigi Member Posts: 1,459
    CR-V can maintain a lower cost due to volume production & not having the advanced equipment the Forester & Outlander have. For instance, CR-V's AWD system isn't nearly as sophisticated and is in fact 4WD not AWD. There's neither a V6 nor a Turbo option. It can't tow as much. The high-end stereo isn't nearly as nice.

    Heck, fog lights are a $327 dealer-add and not part of factory equipment. Which has me wondering ..

    Take a 4WD EX-L and make it as close to my GT as possible: Add a trailer hitch, hitch ball (sold separately), body side molding, chrome exhaust, front splash guards (I guess the rear tires never fling rain/snow/mud??), fog lights, cargo net, backup sensors (no camera apparently) and remote start. $32,726 is the price Honda's builder is quoting. That's around $2500 or so less than the sticker on my GT.

    To me, the Mitsu's better warranty, V6 power, better AWD system, better stereo, and so on are easily worth the extra cash. For that matter, the Turbo engine and other Subaru niceties would have me getting it over the CR-V as well. The CR-V does get better economy but that's the only major feather in it's cap that I can see.
    2017 Infiniti QX60 (me), 2012 Hyundai Elantra (wife)
  • authurdentauthurdent Member Posts: 82
    edited April 2010
    In a previous post, I make unfair inferences concerning Jeep owners, and for that i apologize. From here on, I promise to only (kindly) castigate Subaru owners. :blush:
  • p0926p0926 Member Posts: 4,423
    So the forum security police nabbed you too :P
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    True, CR-V uses a simple rotaty blade coupling, a part-time system meant for use on slippery surfaces only. It disengages above a certain speed, and in steady-state cruising it's basically FWD.

    Still, buyers don't seem to care much.

    I think the "Sweet Spot" for compact utility pricing is mid 20s, though. Once you cross $30k I would not be looking at compacts, and I bet a lot of other buyers think the same way.

    The Outlander streches the "compact" part, but I think it more than steps on the Endeavor's toes. Why the Endeavor doesn't have a 3rd row and the Outlander does is beyond me.

    The result is a compact with a mid-size price, and a mid-size that is lacking the 3rd row expected in that class, a double faux pas IMHO.

    You mentioned there are 440 Mitsubishi dealers, so that means each dealer sells about 2 Outlanders per month, and even fewer Endeavors. Hence the cob webs and crickets chirping at many dealers.

    The Outlander Sport can occupy the compact segment, so I say grow the next Outlander (2012 model) to be a true mid-sizer and phase out the Endeavor completely.

    Subaru needs to grow the Tribeca or phase it out as well, which is also selling at a rate that simply isn't sustainable.
  • authurdentauthurdent Member Posts: 82
    edited April 2010
    Indeed. I was pulled over. Claimed not to know the town or its ordinances, and promised to drive a little more safely. Got away with a gentle slap on the wrist. Of course the handshake and balled-up $20 didn't hurt! ;)
  • fushigifushigi Member Posts: 1,459
    I liked the Endeavor's styling when it first came out but never really got serious about as my wife didn't agree. :) That said, it's fuel economy isn't good and depending on trim the 3.8L V6 needs either regular or premium gas. When I originally looked IIRC it required premium, period. That engine is probably the Achilles heel, too, since it's still an iron block and actually has less HP (225) than the Outlander though it does have respectable torque (255 lb-ft).

    I cross-shopped the Outlander against the Santa Fe, though some would argue the Tucson is more appropriate. But when I looked at the Tucson's cargo area I dismissed it right away. Likewise, the Murano got too expensive ($41K+ with similar equipment to my GT) but the Rogue was too small (didn't look too hard since the wife really dislikes their styling). So I can see the blurred line between compact & midsize.

    Personally I think we're just going to have to wake up and accept higher prices. We've been somewhat spoiled the past 15 or so years in that car prices have not risen that much compared to other consumer goods (electronics aside). In fact, for similar or only slightly more money the cars we get today have lots more to offer than those of the mid 90s.
    2017 Infiniti QX60 (me), 2012 Hyundai Elantra (wife)
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    edited April 2010
    I actually test drove an Endeavor, way back when.

    That engine is torquey. Plus it sits very low in the engine bay, like Subaru boxers do, for a low center of gravity. Nice packaging.

    The center console, OTOH, is a train wreck. It looks like a giant Ghetto Blaster from the 1980s.

    image

    Edit: photo added, plus I actually like those contrasting seats.

    The higher prices/content may work in Mitsubishi's favor if the economy picks up and more people seek that sort of stuff.

    If we see a double-dip recession like many are predicting, they could be in trouble.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    image

    :D
  • authurdentauthurdent Member Posts: 82
    I went to school when boxes like that were HOT. Of course, sandwich bags with "oregano" were also hot.
  • authurdentauthurdent Member Posts: 82
    My wife actually likes the Murano. But where you gain (questionable) style, you really loose utility and visibility. You end up buying more car and engine than you need, to get the same passenger and cargo space.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Consumer Reports said the Murano's max cargo box is just 31.0 cubic feet.

    That's well behind even most compacts, including both the Forester (35.5) and the Outlander (33.5).

    Ridiculously small for a mid-sizer. Rogue offers a pathetic 24.5 cubes, the Infiniti EX even less at 24.0. The FX is not much better: 25.5.

    Curvy bods KILL utility.
  • fushigifushigi Member Posts: 1,459
    If you check out the Mitsu site you'll see the Endeavor console is more appealing from a color standpoint but the same basic shape & layout remains.

    And the second row doesn't fold flat, which you may recall was a deal-killer for me.
    2017 Infiniti QX60 (me), 2012 Hyundai Elantra (wife)
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I could see melons, balls and other round stuff just roll right out.

    We went to the newly inaugurated Harris Teeter grocery store last night and it got me thinking.

    Forester has standard grocery bag hooks, so I don't see how this could be a problem?

    I coach a hoops team and a flag football team, but I have a large mesh bag for all the balls and equipment, and the net can be secured to the same hooks as well.

    The Outie has the liftgate, but once you start driving the melons would be rolling around inside. I'm sure they offer accessories like nets, cargo dividers, etc. to secure them, else you may end up with a fruit salad.

    Great, now I'm hungry again. :D
  • fushigifushigi Member Posts: 1,459
    Re: bag hooks. I would have liked to see them included, but I get by with one of these; our has Velcro on the bottom so it stays put.

    Hungry too, but craving a Butterfinger Blizzard from DQ. ;)
    2017 Infiniti QX60 (me), 2012 Hyundai Elantra (wife)
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Butterfinger Blizzard from DQ

    Now that we can agree on. :shades:
  • authurdentauthurdent Member Posts: 82
    Butterfinger Blizzard from DQ

    I'd wager there are more compartments on the Outlander to hide that Butterfinder

    (aka Nobodys Gonna Lay A Finger On My BUTTERFINGER®)
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    FINALLY you guys nailed the Forester's number one weakness: square cup holders. :D

    Apparently designed by people from another planet, which uses square cups.
  • propwash49propwash49 Member Posts: 38
    Juice boxes?
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Two of them taped together. :D

    Cups actually fit, it's just a bizarre layout. A simple insert/liner would work wonders.
  • fushigifushigi Member Posts: 1,459
    Didn't get my Blizzard until Saturday. For a change of pace I opted for the Ooey Gooey Caramel Brownie Blizzard, which is apparently the Blizzard of the Month. The calories promptly decided to hide at my waistline, where there are *cough* plenty of other calories to stand behind.

    I finally crossed 3K miles yesterday. The Outlander's quite nice for highway cruising. All too easy to go way too fast if traffic allows. MPG is inching up slowly as it gets fully broken in. We should also be getting off winter blend gas, although I'm not sure exactly when that happens.

    We grilled out in front of my in-laws' place. I backed in the Outlander & used it for tailgating. Ran satellite radio for about an hour & a half before I decided to start the engine & prevent battery run-down. Afterwards, my father-in-law asked me if I wanted to start the car so it wouldn't run down; the engine is quiet at idle.

    We picked up some box furniture before heading home. One of those LCD TV stands with a post in the back for mounting the TV. It laid perfectly flat with the second row 60% seat folded . Not something I'd have wanted to do in, say, an Equinox which lacks the flat cargo area. I'd have been worried about stress on the glass shelves and/or bowing the wood pieces. Anyway, even with that in there & the other seat not folded, there was room for our suitcase & other stuff without having to stack anything or compromise visibility.
    2017 Infiniti QX60 (me), 2012 Hyundai Elantra (wife)
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    MD started using winter blend gas all year. E10 I think? Not 100% sure. But it is the same stuff year-round.

    There's less energy content so mileage inevitably drops.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Forester's cargo area may not be level, but it is flat and could easily fit a box like that:

    image

    It angles towards the back a bit, but there is no seam and it is flat.
  • fushigifushigi Member Posts: 1,459
    I doubt either of our vehicles would have a problem. The box was 53" long, BTW, so it would be hard pressed to fit in most vehicles without gaining 2rd row seat space for cargo. Certainly exceedingly few trunks would hold it, and with 3 glass shelves I wouldn't want to cant it upwards & have it resting part-way on the trunk edge. Would it survive? Probably. But there's no reason to take a chance.
    2017 Infiniti QX60 (me), 2012 Hyundai Elantra (wife)
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Let me take a peek...I have that C&D issue handy.

    The shortest in their plywood length measure is the Honda CR-V, at just 54". So that's not a very big box, yet the Honda can barely fit it. And that's at the floor, not up high.

    I doubt the CR-V could get the hatch closed if that was a tall box.

    All the others are 60" plus so they would have room to spare. The Forester is actually the longest of those 8, with a full 70" of length.
  • fushigifushigi Member Posts: 1,459
    Probably 9 or 10" tall so yeah, it would be a hard box to fit in the CR-V. Maybe on it's side diagonally across the cargo bay would work. But then it'd be awkward to place other cargo. Of course, the box was also 85 pounds and the CR-V's roof racks say 75# limit so on the roof would also be out.
    2017 Infiniti QX60 (me), 2012 Hyundai Elantra (wife)
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    You'd probably have to fold the bigger portion of the 60/40 rear seat, too.
  • authurdentauthurdent Member Posts: 82
    A good friend, and long time Forester owner happened to be by the house the other day. We decided to visit the local brewery/restaurant, and carpool in our Outlander. Our friend was eager to experience our new vehicle. Out of habit, I tend to offer guests the passenger seat, since our previous cars could be a bit cozy out back, but our Forester friend particularly wanted to try the rear seats. On a sidenote, our buddy is about 6 foot 2, and weighs some 300 lbs.

    Without solicitation, there were excited proclamations about seat space and comfort, quiet and refined ride and attractive looks inside and out. Our friend was so moved that after 3 generations of Foresters, he might convert!

    I should say, out of an obligation for full disclosure that said friend is currently driving the 2006 model, but he has extensive experience driving Foresters, often driving some 30,000 miles per year. He has also spent some saddle time in the newest iteration, whilst having his 2006 repaired.

    Nothing conclusive, just somewhat illuminating to hear what those on the other side of the tracks have to say about the lowly Outlander. ;)
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    The 2009 was upsized significantly. I think the back seat gained something like 4 inches of leg room.

    It's night and day in terms of space. I've owned old and new Foresters.

    At 6'2" I'm surprised he didn't find head room tight in your back seat. Do you have the moonroof?
  • authurdentauthurdent Member Posts: 82
    We do indeed have a moonroof, and yet our good friend (who has short legs) didn't loose his head in the experience!
  • fushigifushigi Member Posts: 1,459
    edited April 2010
    Over the weekend I had 6 in the Outlander. Besides myself, my sister rode shotgun. Her daughter/my niece was in the 2nd row with her 4 year old in a booster seat. My son-in-law was in the 3rd row with their 1 year old in a car seat. The son-in-law is maybe 5'11" and 200+ pounds yet said he was fine sitting back there. Of course, this was for a somewhat brief 12 miles each way trip.

    We were going to put the booster & the car seat in the 3rd row but the 1 year old refused to go quietly unless one of her parents was next to her.

    Due to a family health emergency I drove something over 700 miles between Thursday & last night. Predominantly highway though there was some city driving & crawling through construction zones. Best MPG: 24.1; worst over this trip: 22.1. The highway driving was usually between 75 & 85 MPH and included one burst to 97 (before my wife caught on..). Very nice, stable ride at higher speeds and the engine always seems willing to go faster.
    2017 Infiniti QX60 (me), 2012 Hyundai Elantra (wife)
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Dude, you need a minivan. ;)
  • fushigifushigi Member Posts: 1,459
    :sick:

    Nah, the few times I've used the 3rd row are isolated instances. This past weekend we could have taken two cars instead but the family hadn't seen the Outlander yet and the trip wasn't that long.

    I'm finding that the 3rd row can be handy for these short trips with lots of people, but I could still easily live without. Included in an option package I like having it but I'm doubtful I'd have specified it as a separate option.

    BTW I know minivans and vans in general are superior people-haulers. But 99+% of the time it's just me or my wife & I so even then the 2nd row isn't necessary.
    2017 Infiniti QX60 (me), 2012 Hyundai Elantra (wife)
  • authurdentauthurdent Member Posts: 82
    Dude, you need a Miata. :shades:
  • authurdentauthurdent Member Posts: 82
    Here's what I don't understand. I keep hearing the Forester is bigger than the Outlander, but the Forester is 3" less in overall length, and the engine is flat and long, which means the engine bay has got to be longer than the Outlander. So how do you get a vehicle with greater interior volume? I submit that this simply cannot be true. The laws of physics refute this claim! :P
  • fushigifushigi Member Posts: 1,459
    My Welsh ancestry eliminates convertibles from consideration. I do not tan; I burn. :cry:
    2017 Infiniti QX60 (me), 2012 Hyundai Elantra (wife)
  • fushigifushigi Member Posts: 1,459
    Juice can step in here but without looking anything up I'd guess the Subie is taller and, interior-wise, wider. Wider can be achieved via widening the vehicle as a whole or by making the sides thinner. Taller also means taller interior, not necessarily taller vehicle. There are many components to place under a vehicle and different layouts will lead to different heights.

    For instance, some manufacturers have moved the battery to the rear of the vehicle (under/around the trunk) from the engine bay. It adds flexibility for engine mounting, probably leads to less battery overheating (better air cooling and no engine heat to worry about), and may allow for a smaller/shorter front end. Of course, the eventual battery replacement will be harder but that's the owner's problem, not the manufacturer's.
    2017 Infiniti QX60 (me), 2012 Hyundai Elantra (wife)
  • authurdentauthurdent Member Posts: 82
    In older Subie models, I do remember scary-thin doors. And I absolutely didn't like the frameless windows. I think Sube has corrected these issues as of late. Although, maybe the claimed-chronic rattling might be due to funky body contortions to gain space.

    A neighbor asked for help to swap batteries in his Saturn. The battery was held down by three bolts, all in knuckle-wrapping positions, all in metric. I can actually understand metric, but most other bolts in the very same car were NOT metric! And there was simply no excuse for the poor positioning of the clamp bolts.

    I quickly went to look at our Outlander battery placement and bolts. Great position, with easy access bolts. Crisis averted!
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    edited April 2010
    Need a Miata, need a minivan. Y'all are cracking me up this morning. :shades:

    You could do like we did - got a van and threw one seat away, and now have a 5 seater with a big empty. We rarely use the 2nd row either, but it sure is a handy rig for toting stuff around.

    I do need a Miata.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    edited April 2010
    These are about the same size. We've wrestled with many of the measurements and each has its own advantages, depending on how and what you measure.

    Next time you go to an auto show try to catch a glimpse of a Subaru cut-away or chassis. The whole drivertrain sits below the top of the tires.

    Edit: found a Forester cutaway pic. The engine sits extremely low, just in front of the front axle, rather than on top of it like most engines. This allows a low hood, a low cowl, and good forward visibility. It also doesn't interfere much with the cabin:

    image

    Check out the engine block - all that weight sits ultra-low, helping keep the center of gravity nice and low.

    In Motor Trend this is why the Forester ran the quickest Figure 8 despite having the most ground clearance, a bit of a paradox.

    The Forester's roof rails are also aluminum. Less weight up high.

    Mitsu uses an aluminum roof on the GT for the same reason - to help lower the CoG.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I absolutely didn't like the frameless windows

    Yep, all gone. They helped keep pillars thin (for visibility) and reduce weight but people complained about wind noise, so window frames across the board now.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    My Miata has a whopping 5 cubic feet of storage. At least it's the same top up or down.

    The van has up to 149 cubes! I think I could park the Miata inside.

    Even with 5 seats in place, I have 95 cubic feet. Acres and acres for people and cargo.

    Overkill at times but I can lay a 4'x8' sheet of plywood flat, inside, and close the hatch. Width to spare, too.

    So the Miata is tiny and the van is huge.

    Forester is a nice "medium" size that hits the sweet spot. Fun to drive, easy to park.
  • authurdentauthurdent Member Posts: 82
    Low CoG is almost as exciting as the panoramic sunroof. Although I understand that said roof does not tilt. That's a show-stopper! :lemon:
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    If she didn't live 2,000 miles away, I think my sister would swap my Outback for her Forester.

    I sold my tablesaw the other day, so I think my plywood toting days are over. Something like the Outlander or Forester would be plenty big enough now I think. Or maybe I could get into ultralight backpacking and just get the Miata. Probably would have to walk 10 miles just to get the trailhead though.

    Peugeot announced good sales results this week. I bet plenty of execs at Mitsu wish a closer tie-up had worked out.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    For me it's fully closed or wide open. If you open the entire moonroof and the windows it very, very nearly feels like a convertible. :shades:

    Bring sunscreen.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Put a Mitsubishi logo on this. Could be the next Galant, or make it more upscale and bring back the Diamante nameplate:

    image

    It looks sweet plus they could easily fit a Mitsu "face" on it.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    edited April 2010
    The site you linked to doesn't allow hotlinking Juice. All the rest of us see is a stop sign unless we copy/paste the URL. :sick:

    Of course, I want this one.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    That's odd because I can see it.

    Here's the URL for those who can't:

    http://www.lincah.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/2010-5-by-Peugeot-Concept-Front- -Angle-View-588x441.jpg
This discussion has been closed.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles