Last post on May 10, 2010 at 5:35 AM
You are in the Mitsubishi Outlander
What is this discussion about?
Mitsubishi Outlander, Subaru Forester, Car Comparisons, SUV
#1002 of 1581 Re: Part #s [fushigi]
Dec 23, 2009 (8:23 am)
Hyundai has made HUGE strides with their engines. Their 2005 V6 Sonata made 170hp. Today their entry-level 4 banger makes more than that.
Hyundai deserves the "Most Improved Player" award.
Ford did wonders with EcoBoost, too. Twin turbos, impressive power, and you can run regular fuel.
Who else? On paper, GM's Equinox is amazing - direct injection on both engines (i4 and V6), class leading power, class leading fuel economy. Sadly in real-world tests it hasn't been fast, and hasn't been particularly efficient, either. Still, give their engineers credit for aces on the EPA tests, at least.
GM got 264hp out of that 3.0l V6 with direct injection, so there's a benchmark if we're looking for one. And that is on Regular octane.
*** getting back to Forester and Outlander...
Both Mitsu and Subaru have their work cut out for them. What was near the head of the class a couple of years ago is merely so-so now.
Subaru ought to get the 265hp version of this engine from the WRX in the Forester XT. That would put it up with the RAV4 and Equinox near the head of the class. Torque is already there, but even though torque gets the job done, it's horsepower that sells cars. Bring back the manual trans, even if few are sold it makes for great headlines. If not at least give it the OB's auto.
The non-turbo is actually OK, the PZEV makes 175hp and that's close to the head of the class (I say drop the non-PZEV, it's not as clean and less powerful). It could use the CVT transmission from the Legacy, and if you disagree take a peek at the EPA numbers for that vehicle: 23/31.
What about the Outie? The base 4 banger makes 168hp, so it's time to give that engine a boost. Wasn't Mitsubishi a pioneer in Direct Injection? If GM can get 180hp out of theirs, Mitsu can, too. Honda and Toyota both boosted the output of their base engines.
Same for the V6. Direct Injection would boost HP and MPG at the same time. Plus DI has a cooling effect, which likely means they may be able to drop the premium fuel recommendation. It's win-win-win.
Incremental improvements are OK, but let's be honest, competitors are improving by leaps and bounds. The old Equinox V6 made just 185hp!
#1003 of 1581 Re: Part #s [fushigi]
Dec 23, 2009 (8:38 am)
On the subject of backup cams...
Toyota made it standard on the Highlander Sport. The 2011 Sienna LE also gets it. They have the right idea - and it's not bundled in expensive packages. Not sure when/if the RAV4 gets it.
I hear Nissan is coming out with a Navi for $400 that will be offered across the board, and you can add a backup cam to (aftermarket is $99, let's see what they charge). Now you're talking:
Nav systems are cash cows for the manufacturers so I'm sure Mitsubishi will keep pushing the envelope to stay ahead of these more affordable systems, especially to justify the cost.
Not sure how the market will respond. I'm sure there will be demand for both - audiophiles who want the $2000+ system that do everything, and practical folks who want the highlights only at a lower price.
#1004 of 1581 Re: Part #s [fushigi]
Dec 23, 2009 (8:48 am)
On the subject of hauling lumber...
(sorry, it was a long post that covered several subjects, so I'm responding to one topic at a time, so each subject is threaded)
If you wanna haul lumber get an AWD Sienna, because you can fit a sheet of plywood inside and still close the hatch. You can get drywall home even on a rainy day. Even a Suburban can't do that. A pickup could but it would be wet.
I guess you could load it on the roof of a any compact crossover, but as mentioned earlier the GT doesn't have roof rails, so you'll need to add accessories to do that. IMHO that makes it far from the ideal vehicle to haul lumber. An XLS V6 would be better suited.
The seat folding flat feature is nice, my Sienna has that, too. Careful not to scuff up the interior.
I can't live without a roof rack. Before I got my van I did this:
See more Car Pictures at CarSpace.com
CarSpace is having trouble showing the image, so here's a link:
#1005 of 1581 Re: Part #s [fushigi]
Dec 23, 2009 (9:28 am)
If you want a 1-person bed
Actually my Forester does this too (both my 1998 and 2009 models).
Reclining rear seats are indeed quite nice.
#1006 of 1581 Re: Chase Freedom Rewards [ateixeira]
Dec 23, 2009 (9:50 am)
>> I still don't have the issue you're talking about. The latest issue I have is January 2010. The Feb issue won't arrive for a week or more. You must be looking on-line or somewhere else?
That was s picture taken recently in bookstore by iPhone from the actual printed CR magazine.
#1007 of 1581 Re: Chase Freedom Rewards [chelentano]
Dec 23, 2009 (10:49 am)
What was on the cover? What month, I mean? I honestly didn't see that chart. I looked again at the January 2010 issue and saw something about Owner Satisfaction (Escape and Mariner Hybrids win the category).
Maybe you saw a special edition/buyer's guide?
I do have that, the "Buying Guide 2010" book and on page 172 they rate the 07 Outlander "Much Better than Average" but the 08 is merely "Average". On page 142 they split the difference, and the forecast is "Better than Average".
They don't list the Forester turbo seperately in that book.
Any how, I'm not disputing the drop in score on the 2009 turbos, but that only affected a few VINs as I listed above. The 2010s will score higher, but that will only be reflected a year from now.
Looking back at the Buying Guide 2008, the wheel bearings hurt the detailed score in that category on 2001 models (half black dot = below average), but by 2004 Subaru earned the red dot in that category (Much Better than Average). That's because they changed the design to a sealed type wheel bearing for model year 2003.
It's not uncommon to have a big gain (or drop) in reliability from one year to the next. It simply means they applied a fix, and it worked.
I'm sure Mitsubishi does the same thing. I see a few black dots that turned red.
#1008 of 1581 Re: Part #s [ateixeira]
Dec 23, 2009 (11:00 am)
On hauling lumber: Not as nice as a pickup or enclosed van but the fold down tailgate
extends the deck area on the Outlander. One reason I passed on the RAV4.
#1009 of 1581 Re: Part #s [comem47]
Dec 23, 2009 (11:02 am)
The clam shell is a neat feature, I mentioned that in my review after a test drive.
I think I'd still rather have the plywood on the roof, though. You may have scratched up the plastics on the inside of your D-pillar.
Edit: I was wondering why the RAV4 could not do that, and then I realized - the swing out door, of course! You'd need about 20 feet (*) of clearance behind you.
* - hyperbole
#1011 of 1581 Re: Part #s [ateixeira]
Dec 23, 2009 (11:27 am)
It didn't scratch it, but next time I'd put a blanket or towels over it to be safe.
The problem with the roof loading the lumber is you are lifting weight up high vs sliding the stuff in on a low tailgate.(I loaded it by myself direct off the Home Depot dolly)
If you come to an abrupt stop you better have the load very securely tied down for things on the roof!! (I had straps over the rear, but the folded seats stop any forward movement) Not having cross rails installed yet also made this the only option anyway.