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
918 messages, Last post on Dec 08, 2009 at 11:44 AM
You are in the Mitsubishi Outlander Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & tidester
|
|
|---|---|
|
Replying to: baggs32 (Nov 02, 2009 9:28 am) Who knows, may be I did, or may be I did not, I don't recall, or may be my music was not copyrighted, or may be i did not "give music free" but sold it with the car, or may be I erased it, or may be music left in a traded car in it is not considered illegal act in a court of law? Anyway please consult your legal adviser or try to issue a subpoena to find out. >> Does the RIAA know about this? Who knows what they know, try to google their 800 number to find out. All great questions! |
|
|
Replying to: chelentano (Nov 01, 2009 4:03 pm) I was just at the Apple store this weekend, and for $2700 I could buy a new iTouch, plus a Macbook Air for me, plus a Macbook Air for my wife, plus a iPod Shuffle for my kid so they can listen to their music. Forester has LEDs lighting up the inside, pretty neat. The sub in the Outlander takes up ~3 cubic feet of trunk space. A better location would be under the seat so it didn't use up that space. The 3rd row isn't safe enough for me to put my children there - the rear headrest basically touches the rear glass. There's no crumple space at all. Half the things you listed the Forester has as well. Forester can't do that. Are you sure? You also claimed it didn't have satellite radio and someone corrected you a short while ago. It sounds like you are just reading the Outlander brochure. Mitsubishi's web site isn't even updated yet. You click on Outlander and it shows you the 2009. The 2010 teaser has scarce info.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: ateixeira (Nov 03, 2009 7:43 am) Forester is quicker thanks to Mitsubishi-made turbocharger, but Subaru could not take advantage of turbo wasting quickness on mediocre handling. Slalom speed is pathetic: even lower the Toyota’s. >> The 3rd row isn't safe enough for me to put my children there - the rear headrest basically touches the rear glass. This is speculation. The car passed all safety tests and government approved. >> You also claimed it didn't have satellite radio and someone corrected you a short while ago. I already told you that Forester’s radio is $429 dealer installer accessory plus another $100 for labor: you can buy a laptop for your kid for this amount of money so you don’t have to wait 5 years for TCO saving. Outlander satellite radio is part of factory installed stereo. If we want to play accessories game that’s another story but Outlander would win again. There is multipage catalog available with all kinda of cool stuff such as multicolor custom Xenons, OLED navigation systems, stereo systems, low-mid range radar and collision systems, Bike racks, etc.
|
|
|
Replying to: chelentano (Nov 03, 2009 9:22 pm) The car passed all safety tests and government approved Well, there is no rear crash test for the 3rd row, and when that arrives I bet that 3rd row option vanishes. There is no crumple space at all. Subaru does better overall in crash tests. The Outlander actually does well until you get to the IIHS Roof Strength test, where the Forester earns a better score. Forester has the advantage in safety - it gets the top score in every single test IIHS performs. The shopper above found that the Forester came with Sirius not only pre-installed but also with a free 3 month subscription. If you choose not to believe that, I honestly don't care.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: ateixeira (Nov 04, 2009 7:48 am) That was in Canada. It's not a religion for me: no need to "believe" just check the web site.
|
|
|
Replying to: chelentano (Nov 04, 2009 9:40 pm) OK, let's... iPod and Sirius are indeed available factory installed in the USA. Here are the parts codes, from fitzmall.com: FACTORY INSTALLED OPTIONS (E9B) IPOD INTERFACE D9C and D9D are the Satellite Radio options, you can choose XM or Sirius. Verify at kbb.com. These arrive at the dealer pre-installed. They are available a-la-carte or in options packages (3 ways to get Sirius from the factory), too. The cost you quoted was list, people pay invoice prices for options. On a 3 year lease you get 62% residual, so the cost you quoted (over 400?) was a gross exaggeration. And unlike you said, there is also no labor charge to order those. Actual cost? $129. Less on your 30 month lease. About ~$107 to stay out of trouble with the RIAA. Seems worth it to me.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: ateixeira (Nov 05, 2009 3:50 am) Kbb.com does not say that satellite radio is factory installed. Subaru.com shows that it’s optional accessory. I called local Subaru dealer and out of 31 Foresters they have - none have factory installed satellite radio. Salesman says that they don’t get them factory installed, but they can install it for me for $600 with labor! Thanks much, sounds "exciting"! On my Outlander it came with my factory installed stereo and free 6-month subscription. >> On a 3 year lease you get 62% residual, so the cost you quoted (over 400?) was a gross exaggeration. And unlike you said, there is also no labor charge to order those. Actual cost? $129. Right, you would be a better salesman at that dealership 
|
|
|
Replying to: chelentano (Nov 05, 2009 12:06 pm) I doubt your Subaru local dealer took your inquiry seriously since you're not really shopping for a Forester. |
|
|
What Forester could offer instead? Larger sunroof, and that’s about it. It's well build but basic car A true manual transmission, for starters, rather than an autotragic. Mitsu backed out on offering a dual-clutch gearbox (bummer!), so it's slushbox only. How 'bout gas mileage, too. The Outlander V6 was EPA rated for 19mpg, and CR got that same 19mpg in their tests. They got 22mpg in the auto Forester and a whopping 25mpg in their manual. That's 32% better mileage, and the tank is bigger so the range advantage is even greater. The turbo Forester outruns the Outlander V6 and gets better gas mileage as well. The new 2010 230hp V6 is supposedly more efficient, but it wants premium fuel, just like the Forester turbo. Per the EPA the quicker Forester turbo will save you $23 per year on fuel compared to a 2009 Mitsu and saves you more than $100 over the 2010 model, even accounting for the higher fuel costs for premium gas. It's 16.3 barrels of oil vs. 18.0 barrels of oil for those counting. Subaru does offer both satellite radio and bluetooth. I wonder what your source is. There is a trade-off or ride vs. handling, and the Forester wins the latter. A lowered Outlander GT sort of defeats the purpose of a raised crossover in the first place, and where is the manual tranny, or at least the SST gearbox? Subaru tried that too (XT Sports model) and it failed, so I wish Mistubishi luck. I'd rather have an EVO Sportback or a WRX 5 door if that's what I was looking for. Forester has class-leading ground clearance at 8.9", and also best-in-class approach, departure, and break-over angles. Subaru has manufactured more than twice as many AWD systems as Borg Warner (who specializes in 4WD, not AWD), and as mentioned above the system you keep bragging about is in the only Jeep that isn't good enough to earn a Trail Rated badge. It's basically Chrysler Corp's weakest system. They cancelled the option for the Caliber because noone wanted it: http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/chrysler-dropping-awd-from-sebring-avenger-and-- caliber/ CR actually rates the cargo capacity of the Forester as bigger than the Outlander, so that too depends on the source and how you measure. The turning circle is also tighter for the Forester. ALG gives the Forester 5 stars for residual value, while the Outlander only earns 3. Lease residuals as quoted by car_man confirm this, just go to either Lease Questions thread and ask for quotes using the same terms. BTW the OP is shopping the Santa Fe and that earns 3 stars. Forester kills here, I've seen 3 year leases with residuals of 62%, nothing short of amazing. Visibility is better, also. So it's not just the moonroof glass. Advantages of the Forester include far more than just the huge moonroof. Not to mention, the OP was comparing it to a Santa Fe, not an Outlander.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: ateixeira (Oct 28, 2009 8:11 am)
|
|
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
