Last post on May 10, 2010 at 6:35 AM
You are in the Mitsubishi Outlander
What is this discussion about?
Mitsubishi Outlander, Subaru Forester, Car Comparisons, SUV
#1380 of 1581 Re: The Worst Small SUV Money Pits [ateixeira]
Mar 24, 2010 (8:56 pm)
>> The F-XT has Active AWD, too, in fact that's what they call it in a brochure. You'd still have to score 1 instead of 0.
You kidding right? Subaru “Active AWD” is just a marketing label. We don’t give score for a label. The Forester XT does not have active differential. It does not even have a basic LS differential since 2009 Forester was downgraded.
>> HIDs are new, and you should have known about it because I mentioned it before and you even responded.
Don’t recall the conversation, but if you go to Subaru site and do “build your Forester”, the HIDs are not available. Perhaps it is a new accessory from catalog for extra bux. The GT has it as standard equipment.
>> Who wants to pay for Sat Radio? BMW makes HD Radio standard and there's no monthly fee to pay. The chart should give more points to HD Radio.
I pay for Sat radio. It is commercial free with excellent programming. HD radio offers the same channels as FM radio full of commercial garbage. The sound quality is not much different from FM. I have HD radio in my home receiver and I don’t care for it. Still the HD radio is in on the chart already, you missed it.
>> You gave 0 points even though the Forester's rear seat reclines. That would have been 1/2 point. Then add the lumbar and telescoping steering wheel, +2 for Forester.
½ point is not an option, lumbar is not available (per Edmunds comparator) but telescoping steering wheel +1 is added to the chart for Forester.
>> batman47 paid $31,200 and only because he got $500 owner loyalty, so that would have been $31,700. Street price for an F-XT Navi is about $28.6k. Different price class.
We can argue all day long who paid what, so I will update all 4 cars to an Edmunds TMV price. This would be fair.
#1381 of 1581 Re: The Worst Small SUV Money Pits [suvsearcher1]
Mar 24, 2010 (9:02 pm)
>> Fuel economy difference is significant. I think you are comparing a 2009 Santa Fe with a 2010 Outie GT. Not a valid comparison. 2010 Santa Fe has a 3.5 L 275 HP engine giving 20/26 in AWD configuration better than Outie which gives 18/24 that too on premium and only produces 230 HP.
Car and Driver is quoting 8.2 sec for 2010 Santa Fe 0-60 acceleration test. Motor Trend estimates it at 8.2-8.6 sec.
According to Car and Driver the Outlander GT’s number is 7.1 sec. Motor Trend: 7.4 sec.
So the Outlander GT is still much faster even though 2010 SF has more horses. Outlander slalom number is even more impressive: it beats any crossover at any price but X6. So for extra 2 mpg + premium gas (not required) you get sportier crossover with real deal AWD: full time, 2 active differentials, side-to-side torque vectoring. In comparison SF is equipped with grandmas awd.
#1382 of 1581 Re: The Worst Small SUV Money Pits [chelentano]
Mar 25, 2010 (6:40 am)
Subaru “Active AWD” is just a marketing label
If the Outlander's AWD system is so much better, why did Autoblog get stuck in the sand? Isn't that the ultimate failure? Given Mitsubishi's Dakar heritage that's embarassing.
Plus there was Warren Brown's near death experience in an XLS. So autoblog wasn't the only bad experience.
Why does the base 170hp Forester run through the figure 8 just as fast at the Outlander GT, despite a 60hp deficit?
Why is the new 180hp Honda CR-V quicker than the GT in the slalom by 1.6mph?
Sounds to me like "Super-All Wheel Control" is just a marketing label, too.
lumbar is not available
My Forester has power lumbar and it's a lower-end model. Edmunds (and your chart) is plain wrong.
The chart's also missing the dual mufflers, 4-setting heated seats, not to mention important items like residuals and safety scores.
#1383 of 1581 TCO, similar models, no options
Mar 25, 2010 (6:58 am)
Forester X vs. Outlander ES 4WD
$36,344 to $39,880
Forester X Premium vs. Outlander SE 4WD
$37,377 to $39,806
Forester XT Premium vs. Outlander XLS 4WD
$41,593 vs. $43,355
This is from autos.yahoo.com.
As you can see you'll save a couple of grand with a Forester. And remember a 7 year bumper-to-bumper warranty costs $715 so you save enough to buy 2 or 3 of those.
Looking at the Outlander on its own, the SE model appears to be the best value, as it is cheaper to own than the ES.
Premium package Foresters are arguably the best value in that lineup, because you get heated power seats and a moonroof.
#1384 of 1581 Power Lumbar adjustment
Mar 25, 2010 (7:00 am)
On all Premium (note the cloth seats) and Limiteds:
Should remove all doubt.
#1385 of 1581 Re: The Worst Small SUV Money Pits [chelentano]
Mar 25, 2010 (7:37 am)
Remind me again why you're comparing a Mercedes and a BMW to a Mitsubishi and a Subaru
Yes all four are considered small CUVs but the first two and second two are in different classes. You can build all the flawed comparison charts you want to but the truth is that luxury European makes and non-luxury Japanese makes are rarely cross-shopped.
#1386 of 1581 Re: The Worst Small SUV Money Pits [chelentano]
Mar 25, 2010 (7:56 am)
I will still take the Santa Fe's 2 mpg savings in gas with a quieter smoother ride and way better interior rather than race to the next stop light in 7.1 seconds with the Outie. And for the AWD system in GT I heard similar claims about XLS too few years back in the same board. I have yet to read any professional review from any magazine that rates XLS AWD system better than Forrester.
Infact I remember seeing a video comparison of XLS AWD and GT some time back on youtube and XLS system just sucked.
#1387 of 1581 Re: The Worst Small SUV Money Pits [fushigi]
Mar 25, 2010 (8:21 am)
Read your review...
FWIW the Forester has a sunglasses holder and hooks for grocery bags in the cargo area (plus roof rails), three items from your wish list.
My 1998 Forester had TWO spots for sunglasses, so bring that back Subaru!
#1388 of 1581 Re: The Worst Small SUV Money Pits [ateixeira]
Mar 25, 2010 (9:37 am)
"The chart's also missing the dual mufflers, 4-setting heated seats, not to mention important items like residuals and safety scores."
OK I see Bele and Lokai are back at it again but something in that sentence I can't let go.Dual mufflers a benefit? We're not talking sports cars folks, it's CUVs!! And while I don't know for sure I'm guessing each muffler does not have a separate pipe running the length of the car, but is "Y'd off" somewhere along the line. 2 mufflers is twice the maintenance costs in the practical CUV world and some of these mufflers can be very expensive. The heated seats is one thing I think is not fluff, unlike something like chrome toothbrush holders
#1389 of 1581 Re: The Worst Small SUV Money Pits [comem47]
Mar 25, 2010 (10:11 am)
It was chrome door handles, actually.
I like symmetry and the exhaust certainly makes it look better, if nothing else.
Then there are little things that don't appear on spec sheets, like LED interior lighting that fades in and out slowly, sound that also fades in and out slowly when you hit mute, struts that lift the hood when you pop it open, and yellow lids on all the fluids under the hood to make routing fluid level checks a no-brainer.
Lemme predict the response:
1. Anything the Forester does better is not important or will not be acknowledged until proven in a court of law.
2. Everything the Outlander does better is vital, even if that only applies to models that are beyond the prices/TCO of the Forester.
It's so predictable.