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
#1405 of 1581 Re: The Worst Small SUV Money Pits [authurdent]
Mar 25, 2010 (4:29 pm)
What drew me to Mitsubushi from the start was that there were so few on the road
The original Forester was like that. Everyone was buying the 120hp CR-V and wimpy 2.0l RAV4, and Subaru came out with a 2.5l 165hp model that didn't fit the mold at all. It just never sold well. Sales took off when they introduced the 2009 model, so America simply loves it.
lack of seat adjustment
That was passenger seat height only I was referring too. The driver's seat has tons of adjustment, in fact in the highest position it's too high for my liking. Plus it towers over the passenger seat.
My wife likes that, I'm taller but if she's driving she can get up to my eye level.
#1406 of 1581 Re: The Worst Small SUV Money Pits [ateixeira]
Mar 25, 2010 (8:03 pm)
It does appear that Subaru is learning. From what I see the Outback has grown in size from the time of my searching in 2007and the 6 runs on regular. Previously what got me most on Subies was their smaller size. Having been the full size SUV route, that is clearly out too (too big and thirsty) but the CUV market is more reasonable and I'm glad Subie has up-sized from their older self. Also at the time of my search they were clearly a more expensive vehicle while being smaller. But hey, I see GM is learning lessons too with their completely different Equinox (in 2007 I ran away from what was wrong there). Who knows what the CUV market will be like in 2017 when I might be looking again, if the comet or depression don't get us first.
#1407 of 1581 Re: The Worst Small SUV Money Pits [comem47]
Mar 26, 2010 (3:19 am)
The EZ30 was like the current 230hp Outlander - premium recommended, but not required. You lost several horsepower, of course, but Subaru said 87 octane was OK.
The EZ36 (used currently) only added 6hp, but has a lot more torque, plus it's tuned for 87 octane, so they dropped the premium recommendation. It's a much better engine now.
Outback sales are up more than 100% from the year prior for 3 months in a row. SIA is running triple shifts, 24 hours a day, and they still cannot keep up with demand. It's a certified hit.
Right now SIA is using their 2nd line to build Camrys. I would not be surprised if they bump Toyota and use both to build Legacys and Outbacks, to help them meet demand.
That 2nd line was originally intended for the Tribeca, but a tiny 3rd row that's not protected by airbags, a premium fuel recommendation, and upscale prices that didn't mesh with the brand limited sales.
Unfortunately, Mitsu may have repeated the same mistake.
#1408 of 1581 Re: The Worst Small SUV Money Pits [authurdent]
Mar 26, 2010 (5:02 am)
"Mitsubishi owners are SPECIAL, and our membership is EXCLUSIVE! "
You are actually right on this one. Driving Outlander feels like wearing Bulova watch, when everybody else has Citizens (CRV), Seikos (RAV4), or Casio (Santa Fe).
#1409 of 1581 Re: The Worst Small SUV Money Pits [ateixeira]
Mar 26, 2010 (5:15 am)
"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. "
No, and no. It is not the AWD system, but crappy stock all season street GoodYear Eagle rubber to blame. Many owners dump them just past 20K miles. I was driving on those tires last 3 Chicago area winters without any drama, but their wet and snow ratings at Tirerack are pretty low. So if not for excellent AWD system in XLS, I would probably had my car repaired by now. I'm planing to replace them by next winter with highly rated set for winter driving. As you know FWD car with winter tires can perform better in snow that most AWD cars with all season sets.
#1410 of 1581 Re: Little things [fushigi]
Mar 26, 2010 (5:15 am)
For me it was unique rear door (excellent for loading or putting your ski gear on), keyless entry and start, V6 / 6 speed combination, Bluetooth, and 10 year powertrain warranty.
Forester wasn't even a competition back in 2007. It is much better now, but still on the plain Jane side IMO.
#1411 of 1581 Re: The Worst Small SUV Money Pits [ateixeira]
Mar 26, 2010 (5:45 am)
I notice some new posts for the 2010 Forester. Same complaints about rattles. When will Subaru get the message and fix this problem? I like the Forester but would be reluctant to buy when so many reviews mention this issur
#1412 of 1581 Re: Little things [piast]
Mar 26, 2010 (6:05 am)
It's raining so last night I remembered another little thing - when you have the rear wiper in intermittent mode and put it in reverse, the wiper speeds up. All vehicles should have that feature.
#1413 of 1581 Re: The Worst Small SUV Money Pits [DON__FLORIDA]
Mar 26, 2010 (6:34 am)
I'm not sure about the integrity of that information when the reviewer gives the interior a 3 out of 10. Looks suspicious to say the least.
Note also the names of the 3 worst scores - none of those have posted in the Forester threads even once. Hit and run from non-active members. I wonder if they even own a 2010 Forester.
In comparison I recognize your name right away.
#1414 of 1581 Re: The Worst Small SUV Money Pits [piast]
Mar 26, 2010 (6:34 am)
I had Eagle LS tires on my old Galant and yeah, they really aren't any good in inclement weather. The odds of spinning while taking off from a light are too high even under just moderate acceleration.
I dumped them for TripleTred Assurance (also from GoodYear) and had noticeably better wet and snow traction. The TripleTred do have slightly more road noise but the added traction more than makes up for it.