Ask the Car People.SM


Subaru Forester vs Mitsubishi Outlander

40 messages,  Last post on Jun 28, 2009 at 7:10 PM

You are in the Subaru Forester Forum.

What is this discussion about? Subaru Forester, Mitsubishi Outlander, Wagon, SUV

Messages Page 2 of 5

#8 of 40 Re: Subaru Forester VS Mitsubishi Outlander - Help girl out buying her 1st CAR [silver909] by ronald711

Feb 01, 2006 (9:56 pm)

Replying to: silver909 (Aug 16, 2005 10:57 am)
Hi Silver,
 
I own a 2002 Subaru Forester, I love the AWD system, and the car was flawless for the first 78,000 then it aquired a head gasket leak, known problem. May you have a same situation in yours? maybe.. service guy says its common the way the engine is designed for this to happen... but there are people that go 150K to 200K and I don't think have the issue, its hit or miss, but the car has been wonderful, fun to drive! I dont know if a Mitsubishi will be as good, subaru has proven there AWD system to be ultra reliable. would I buy a forester again? probably cause its great in the winter, or on even any condition. I like the outlander exterior, but I dont know if other companies can make a AWD that will not have problems, I think AWD is something new to Mitsubishi, Subaru has been doing it for many many years.. just my input. Ron

#9 of 40 Re: Subaru Forester VS Mitsubishi Outlander - Help girl out buying her 1st CAR [ronald711] by oldsklgto

Feb 07, 2006 (6:14 am)

Replying to: ronald711 (Feb 01, 2006 9:56 pm)
First of all AWD is defiantly not something new to Mitsubishi since they have been building them since 1934 compared to 1972 when the first AWD subaru was built. Mitsubishi has had AWD in many vehicles including the most obvious the EVO which being based on the Lancer platform shares a similar (if not the same) AWD system as the outlander (also based on the lancer platform)
 
I would go as far to say that Mitsubishi probably has the most reliable and technically advanced AWD system for passenger vehicles. Towards Mitsubishi's reliability is the fact that they have just won for the 11th time the Paris-Dakar rally which is recognized to be one of the toughest if not the toughest tests on the competing vehicles. Mitsubishi have also won the Safari Rally (known as the car breaker) at least 5 times. My Dad also owned an RVR Turbo (previous generation Airtrek which is what the outlander is called where i'm from)which he had no problems with reliability wise (as petrol increased though he had to get rid of it as it cost too much to run) and dealt with our icy conditions with ease.
 
The Subaru AWD system I have much less faith in as I have heard from some friends in Australia that they seem to go through clutches pretty quickly and the gearbox isn't the strongest. The AWD system isn't the problem if you were to go for a subaru though (not just the forester but any with the EJ- series engine)it is the engine which is very complex (quad cam and it needs two heads) meaning maintenance and repairs can be costly as it can easily take over an hour to do something as simple as replacing the spark plugs (my friend who was having trouble with his legacy wagon where he had to do this often got it down to 40mins).
 
 The reliability of the engine I don't have much faith in either because when my friend who was working as a mechanic at the subaru dealership got told by his boss that if he was to buy a subaru that he can pretty much chuck it out as it gets to 100,000km (60,000 miles) because at that stage they will most likely need a rebuild. Also from some people I know that had Subarus they didn't last very long including my Mothers boss who had an almost new Legacy RSK B4 which in the space of a year had the gearbox break, then the turbos broke and after that it blew a head gasket, over heated and did internal damage to his engine.
 
Personally I would go for an outlander but wait for the 2007 version, 2.4l 4 cylinder or 3.0L V6 depending on your needs but even though what I've heard of the V6 is tempting for a first car I could only recommend the 2.4 as it still has plenty of power (multiple times more than my 1st car)
 
I have to say though that I have limited 1st hand knowledge of subarus (driven a WRX, Justy and a Legacy) and maybe they have sorted their reliability (which may be environment related as I live in a reasonably cold part of NZ and our roads aren't the greatest) and the subaru may be what you want which is what it all comes down to. You should test drive both and see which you prefer.

#10 of 40 Well, it depends on several things... by 1racefan

Aug 16, 2005 (11:39 am)

You may want to look at the availability of dealers in your area that can service these. In my town, we have an ample number of Mitsubishi and Subaru dealers around. I have heard that in other towns (smaller), it can be difficult to find a Mitsu or a Subaru dealer within several miles.
The Forester is a better performer than the Outlander, and also holds its value better. Personally, I own an Outlander. We needed an inexpensive AWD vehicle for my wife to drive to work in bad weather (she is in the medical field and has to go to work regardless of weather), and for us to haul the canoe and dogs to the lake in. I bought it as a 1 year old vehicle with 10K miles on it, and paid right around $13,000 for it. I plan on keeping it until the wheels fall off of it, so in my opinion, it was the better deal for me.
My Outlander now has 30K miles on it, and has been trouble free. We also get 24-25mpg around town, and have gotten close to 30mpg on the highway - not bad for a full time AWD vehicle. I have also established a pretty good relationship with the service advisor at one of our local Mitsu dealers, so I am also pleased in that regard.
My advice to you would be to shop both. See which one you fit most comfortably in, and see which one fits your budget the best. If you plan on trading the car in a couple of years, I would definitely reccomend the Subaru as it will hold its value better. As I said before, the Subaru is also the better performer, so if that is your main priority, the Subaru would again be the way to go. You said you prefer the exterior of the Outlander. Remember, you have to live on the inside of the vehicle, so make sure which ever one you get you will be happy with the feel of the seats, ergonomics, etc...

#11 of 40 Welcome to the club. by haybaler

Aug 19, 2005 (6:09 pm)

Hey Silver.
 
 My husband told me about your question & it was like deja-vu because the Mitsubishi Outlander was my first car less then a year ago. I was pretty settled on a Mitsu because my dad had a Galant, about a 92 I think, & he said it was the best car he ever had. I did some checking myself & found out that the first Outlanders from 03 were a little underpowered for the USA & they put a more powerful 4 cylinder in them. My 05 cranks out about 160 hp which is good because I have a custom interior painting business & carry about 300 lbs of equipment with me most of the time. As you can guess, the back seats are down flat most of the time. Fuel mileage is great, I average about 26/28 with an auto & AWD plus the extra weight. I got it in November & have almost 35,000 on it. I know that's a lot but it is my only vehicle for business & pleasure. It has run great in fair weather or foul, plows right through the snow & muck. The only problem I had about 2 months ago was the plastic container that holds the windshield wiper fluid had a crack in it. I thought it had a radiator leak but that was all it was. The dealer put a new one right in. This car has a great warranty but I think I'll hit the 100,000 before the 10 years is up.
 
The best thing I like about it, not related to driving, is the looks. I got an all white Outlander & a friend who worked at an autobody shop put some cranberry colored stripes on it. It looks fantastic & every customer I had I think has asked me about it. A real eye catcher.
 
I don't know about any problems with Mitsubishi here in the U.S. My dealer is adding on to his shop area next month & has been doing pretty good I guess. I am real interested in the new Mitsubishi Spyder convertible & he says he will be getting them in early spring. If my business stays good I am going to be taking a good look at one of those, hopefully.
 
The only other advice I can give you is to save the copy of every bill when you have it serviced & staple them together so you can show it to the service manager whenever you take it in. I keep mine in the glove compartment.
 
Well, hope this helped you out. I don't know about Subaru but I don't think you can go wrong with a Mitsubishi. Just follow the service manual & this SUV will do the rest.
 
See ya on the road.

#12 of 40 Re: Welcome to the club. [haybaler] by randywakeman

Sep 18, 2005 (9:30 pm)

Replying to: haybaler (Aug 19, 2005 6:09 pm)
Briefly-- I test drove both, extensively.
 
The 2005 Outlander is what I just bought, so I guess that tells the tale from my viewpoint. It is far better than I imagined it would be.

#13 of 40 The 2006 Forester went through another redesign by tazereli

Sep 19, 2005 (9:31 am)

As well as a few more horses under the hood for both the turbo and N/A motor, better fuel economy, updated interior and revised trim levels. Someone could post a link to some edmunds info in it to see full details or go to Subaru's website.
 
Regards,
Kyle

#14 of 40 Forester by ateixeira

Sep 19, 2005 (10:07 am)

Just got a face-lift for '06, so a new one won't arrive until '08. They're up to 173hp now, 230hp for the turbo.
 
Compared to the Outlander, Forester has less rear seat room but more cargo room. The Mitsu has bigger rear doors for good ingress/egress.
 
I drove the old 2.0l Outlander, and found that engine noisy and a bit underpowered, but the 2.4l should be better.
 
The warranty is great but I worry about Mitsu's financial condition, if they'll even be around to honor that warranty given the red ink they're bleeding right now. Just take that into consideration.
 
-juice

#15 of 40 Re: Forester [ateixeira] by 1racefan

Sep 19, 2005 (12:29 pm)

Replying to: ateixeira (Sep 19, 2005 10:07 am)
Where did you drive a 2.0l Outlander? In the US, they have had 2.4l since their inception. 2003 was the "non MIVEC" 2.4l with 140some hp. In 2004, the 2.4l incorportated the MIVEC technology and went to 163 (I believe it is 163).

#16 of 40 Re: Forester [1racefan] by ateixeira

Sep 19, 2005 (12:54 pm)

Replying to: 1racefan (Sep 19, 2005 12:29 pm)
For some reason I thought the displacement got bigger, I guess not. My bad.
 
I drove an LS back in summer '03, pre-MIVEC updates I guess.
 
Consumer Guide says it's 160hp for the '05 model, might be more or less under the new SAE guidelines.
 
Mitsu should put the EVO powertrain in this thing for some real fun, but I doubt they will given Japan now has an EVO wagon.
 
-juice

#17 of 40 How much ... by andrelaplume

Oct 01, 2005 (9:26 pm)

was the Outlander vs the Suaru and what Subaru trim level was it comparable to. We are also considering a Forester. Everytime I see it though it just looks so small. Maybe because it sits 4" lower than all other mini-SUvs. I am driving one this week but alsolike the looks of the outlander. In fact we looked at an 05 Outlander early this summer but it did not have mist of the safety feature of the Subaru.

Messages Page 2 of 5

To POST a message, please Sign In.

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement