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
#1184 of 1581 Re: Washington Post Review [kdshapiro]
Feb 16, 2010 (11:48 am)
I agree the cars are geared towards different markets, but the article's author apparently doesn't. He could have stated that the EX handled the snowy roads with aplomb without mentioning any other vehicles at all. Since he felt the need to make a comparison, why not choose a vehicle in the same market like, say, the RDX? The Outlander is simply out of scope for someone who is interested in the EX. You and I know that (along with authurdent and most of the people on Edmunds); he for some reason doesn't.
By not even attempting to do an apples-to-apples, he does his readers and Mitsubishi a disservice while at the same time exposing his own lack of knowledge of the automotive industry (or lack of journalistic integrity .. take your pick). I clicked on his name hoping for a decent bio but all I noticed was that his list of articles is limited to 2 or 3 a year with none at all in 2009. So maybe he is neither a journalist nor an expert on the industry (in which case why is the WaPo giving him a column?).
The EX should win an honest comparison given the price difference and the fact that Infiniti is a more premium brand than Mitsubishi. An honest comparison would have been against similarly equipped models, models that compete at a similar price point, or some other common guideline that people use when comparing cars. The article's author, though, was not interested in an honest comparison and simply said "I drive this and I drove that and I liked this better" without mentioning that "that" could have been made closer to "this" while remaining competitive.
Again, my beef is not that the author preferred the EX to the Outlander. Nor do I take issue with the EX's AWD being superior to that of the XLS (the EX's AWD v. the GT's S-AWC hasn't been compared). My gripe is that the author makes an inappropriate comparison that can be misleading to his audience.
#1185 of 1581 Re: Washington Post Review [fushigi]
Feb 16, 2010 (12:13 pm)
I hear you. Instead of tilting the article towards baby boomers another reviewer could review the same vehicle geared to young active couples who go and do and tow and need lots of cargo. Then the EX falls miserably short.
Who knows why those two vehicles were chosen? It could be any reason for the ridiculous to the sublime.
#1186 of 1581 Re: Washington Post Review [fushigi]
Feb 16, 2010 (12:20 pm)
No mention of the EX's worse fuel economy.
No mention if the EX's Nav system's traffic reporting is free or is an added cost.
No mention of the Outlander's added 12 cubic feet of passenger space.
No mention of the Outlander's tighter turning radius.
No mention of the Mitsu's larger head & shoulder room
There's also no mention of the Mitsu's fake leather dash
Seriously what's the point? No doubt a quick perusal of the Infiniti's specs would reveal a similar laundry list of areas where the EX beats the Outlander. The article was only comparing the relative merits of the two AWD systems (albeit subjectively).
I clicked on his name hoping for a decent bio but all I noticed was that his list of articles is limited to 2 or 3 a year with none at all in 2009. So maybe he is neither a journalist nor an expert on the industry (in which case why is the WaPo giving him a column?).
Warren Brown is the new car reviewer for the Washington Post and reviews a different car every week of the year. So while you may not agree with or like what he writes, he is indeed both a journalist and a relative expert on the industry.
#1187 of 1581 Re: Washington Post Review [p0926]
Feb 16, 2010 (2:04 pm)
The article was only comparing the relative merits of the two AWD systems (albeit subjectively).
Except it wasn't a good comparison. A valid comparison would have been to the most similarly equipped or similarly priced models. It makes a difference as the Outlander has a higher trim line - GT - that includes a different, better AWD system than the XLS that was compared. The GT trim is the closest thing in both price & features to the EX Journey AWD.
Warren Brown is the new car reviewer for the Washington Post and reviews a different car every week of the year.
Does he not have his reviews online? Because this is all I see. I don't always agree with Jim Mateja but at least the Chicago Tribune thinks his reviews are valuable enough to put online.
Sorry, but no industry expert - someone who understands the market segments as well as the vehicles themselves - would make the comparison he did. He may review cars but based on the evidence presented he is not qualified to compare them.
#1188 of 1581 Re: Washington Post Review [fushigi]
Feb 16, 2010 (2:16 pm)
Actually, it seems to me he is saying the EX beats the middle of the trim line Outlander, that may have an adequate AWD system but the EX has a better one. Now my interest is piqued, I would like to see how the top of the line system stacks up against the same EX. Or how does the Forester stack up against the same EX.
Reviewing and focusing on AWD systems is certainly valid, even if you disagree with the method.
#1189 of 1581 Re: Washington Post Review [fushigi]
Feb 16, 2010 (2:19 pm)
Even the GT vs. EX is not a logical comparison. The Outlander might better be compared to other makes... like the Forester!
#1191 of 1581 Re: Washington Post Review [kdshapiro]
Feb 16, 2010 (7:36 pm)
Specifically the high-end EX trim (Journey AWD) beats the mid-trim Outlander.
I linked to some videos on YouTube earlier in this thread that showed traditional AWD v. the GT's S-AWC. The dirt video isn't that impressive but the snow/icy road demonstrated the ability to get traction and take off nicely.
I searched around some but didn't see anything directly comparing the EX to the GT. I didn't try Forester v. EX. If you find something let us know.
#1192 of 1581 Re: Washington Post Review [p0926]
Feb 16, 2010 (11:23 pm)
>> "forgettable Lancer family sedan"
Obviously this is a biased article from a publication which sells advertising. Just another article.
#1193 of 1581 Re: Washington Post Review [fushigi]
Feb 16, 2010 (11:54 pm)
No mention of Outlander 40gb hard drive vs, EX 9.3GB with only 2GB available for music???
No mention of Outlander two active differentials with torgue vectoring.
No mention of Outlander 6-speed tranny with paddles and idle logic vs EX older 5-speed.
Also BOSE stereos usually come with weak amplifiers which is perhaps the reason Infinity offers no wattage info.