Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
SUVs Mitsubishi Outlander Mitsubishi Outlander vs. Subaru Forester
911 messages, Last post on Dec 07, 2009 at 8:47 AM
You are in the Mitsubishi Outlander Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & tidester
|
|
|---|---|
|
Replying to: comem47 (Apr 12, 2008 11:32 am) For instance 2009 Forester comes with dated 4-speed tranny, but 2009 Outlander coming with spectacular 6-speed Twin Clutch: huge technological gap. |
|
|
Replying to: chelentano (Apr 12, 2008 1:29 pm)
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: h2k2f2 (Apr 12, 2008 1:38 pm) |
|
|
Let's avoid making it personal and stick to the real issues instead. tidester, host SUVs and Smart Shopper |
|
|
Replying to: chelentano (Apr 12, 2008 1:29 pm) Not true. OK, let's ignore the fact that Subaru only really required regular fuel, and go with the recommended premium fuel. We'll accept that you pay 30 cents more per gallon. You pay about 9% more. Outlander owners are ignoring the fact that it is rated for only 17mpg city, vs. 19 mpg city for the Forester XT. It uses 12% more fuel around town. That offsets the extra you pay for premium. Plus, 0-60 in 8.1 seconds, are you sure about that? That's slow! Wow. V6 and 6 speeds, and that's all it'll do? That's competitive with the better 4 cylinder normally aspirated models, but nowhere near the Forester XT. The Forester X and LL Bean models should nearly match that level of acceleration, and they use cheap ol' regular fuel and less of it, so if you really want to save fuel that's a better choice. I bet Mitsubishi's own 2.4l with the CVT isn't much slower than 8.1 seconds. 8.1 seconds, really? That's slower than my minivan. 
|
|
|
Replying to: chelentano (Apr 11, 2008 7:26 pm) Seriously. Air bag and all? The dealer installs it, not the factory? Do you really believe that? Oh boy. Steve already pointed out you did include incentives. And again, a 2009 will be worth more than a 2008 in resale. If you want to add all other potential incentives, then add up to $2000 discount for Subaru Bucks, which you can get with a Chase credit card. The previous generation Forester that you call "obsolete" was a Car & Driver 5Best Trucks for 3 years in a row, beating the Outlander. So does that mean they think the Outlander is even less than obsolete? Perhaps so, because in their latest comparison with an Outlander, that AWD system you keep bragging about gave the Outlander the lowest score in the off road category, and prompted C&D to say the Mitsubishi even "felt fragile". Ouch. You don't even understand what I'm saying about SportShift, so I give up. Forester shoppers can sample it for themselves and they'll see what I mean.
|
|
|
Replying to: ateixeira (Apr 14, 2008 6:23 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: comem47 (Apr 14, 2008 8:25 am) Consumer Reports also got better observed MPG with their Forester vs. their Outlander, so that's been the case outside the EPA labs as well. If we are looking at fuel costs, that mileage advantage should be accounted for. Premium fuel costs more, but getting less MPG also will cost you more. If you use regular and the ECU backs off the timing on a Forester XT, it would probably still be quicker than the Outlander. The Subaru has a substantial advantage there. I hate the swing door on the RAV4 as well, so I'll agree with you on that one. We got a Sienna, so we enjoy that great engine but don't have to put up with the poor visibility and wrong-way curb blocking door on the RAV4. My beef isn't with you, it's with a certain member that keeps putting down the Forester even though he didn't even realize the 2009 Forester XT has a different AWD system than the 2008. (see the 2009 Forester threads for details) Some people just don't know what they're talking about! Not you... |
|
Remember: When arguing with a fan boy, it's hard for onlookers to tell the difference.  Suffice to say that both of these vehicles are fantastic. Incidentally, anyone shopping for a mid-size CUV should definitely test-drive both. I'm disturbed by how often prospective buyers value the written word above an actual test-drive. Simply discarding models based on half-baked tests that they read. Before I digress, it needs to be said that there is not a single publication (paper or virtual) remaining that is not biased. Hmmm... I suppose that in itself is (my) bias. 
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: ateixeira (Apr 14, 2008 6:33 am) Well, you can try to make a racing car out of CUV and you can get good acceleration out of your turbo, but you pay for this pleasure with premium fuel, low payload, and noisy hard working engine. The Outlander’s engine is much more balanced. . >> Honestly, now, do you really think that the leather-wrapped steering wheel is a dealer-installed option? Seriously. Air bag and all? The dealer installs it, not the factory? Do you really believe that? Oh boy. Oh girl, I was talking about Leather Shift Knob which is extra $189 option on Forester, but included with base Outlander XLE. . >>Steve already pointed out you did include incentives. And again, a 2009 will be worth more than a 2008 in resale. We can argue about incentives all day long, but you can’t argue that MSPR and Invoice is lower on Outlander. . >>If you want to add all other potential incentives, then add up to $2000 discount for Subaru Bucks, which you can get with a Chase credit card. Chase card? I use Chase Freedom card much smarter: it pays me cash back, so I can buy anything on cash, including any automobile. You on the other hand are stuck with your Subaru points. . >> The previous generation Forester that you call "obsolete" was a Car & Driver 5Best Trucks for 3 years in a row, beating the Outlander. So does that mean they think the Outlander is even less than obsolete? Perhaps so, because in their latest comparison with an Outlander, that AWD system you keep bragging about gave the Outlander the lowest score in the off road category, and prompted C&D to say the Mitsubishi even "felt fragile". Ouch. I have told you before that I care less about magazine reviews and “awards”. These magazines get paid by car manufacturers so they have obvious conflict of interest. I care more for ratings by real owners, who paid hard earned dollars to manufacturers (not the other way around like in case with magazines), and who drove thousands of miles on these cars. Example for 2007 cars top of the line trim: ..................MSNAutos ...Edmunds Outlander V6.....9.5 ...........9.1 Forester turbo ...9.4 ..........8.3 RAV4 V6..........9.0 ...........8.9 CR-V ...............9.3 ..........9.1 CX-7 turbo .......8.8 ...........8.7 Result? Outlander has the highest owner ratings on both sites. . >> You don't even understand what I'm saying about SportShift, so I give up. Forester shoppers can sample it for themselves and they'll see what I mean. You got no more real arguments I guess? SportShift or they call it Sportronic on Outlander was available two generations before 2009 Forester. In addition to the stick it has paddle shifter controls. |
|
You are here:
Forums
SUVs Mitsubishi Outlander Mitsubishi Outlander vs. Subaru Forester
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Mitsubishi Outlander
2010 Subaru Forester
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
