Mitsubishi Outlander test drive
Last Updated:
-HOW IT LOOKS.
I must say, I always liked the current generation Outlander design. It is a few years old, yet still modern and pretty original.
To me, it does look better than the CRV or RAV4. And much, much better than the Nissan Rogue.
And you don’t see that many of them on the road, so they kind of stand out in a crowd of Hondas and Toyotas.
-HOW IT IS INSIDE.
At first, the interior looks really nice. Again, at least to me.
I like the design of the dashboard, clean and simple. The door panels look modern. Especially in my test car’s tan and black combo, the interior looks really good.
But…
Once you sit in, and start touching things, you realize there is no soft plastic anywhere.
Sure, the Outlander isn’t the only one to use cheap hard plastic throughout the interior (The best selling CRV does too). But somehow, the materials used in the Mitsubishi feel particuliarly cheap to the touch.
It is just too bad, because if feels you’re being cheated.
The worse is when you close the doors. They feel lighter and cheaper than anything I’ve been driving in years.
The stereo sounded good, but there is no iPod plug available (That will probably be available in the revised 2010 model, as well as bluetooth).
The Keyless entry system wasn’t always working. Not sure why.
And the XM radio would cuts off once in a while.
I know there are dead spots with satellite radio, but this would sometimes happen a couple of times within a blog. Where I usually have a signal…
-HOW IT DRIVES.
-Ride.
The ride was fine. Mostly smooth and comfortable.
But the whole car doesn’t feel very heavy, or “rock solid”.
-Steering.
Steering was average.
There was just nothing wrong with it. Pretty much what you expect from a compact car based SUV.
-Engine.
The 2.4 Liter was smooth enough. Nothing spectacular.
I did average a good 20MPG in city driving alone. Better than the CRV I drove earlier.
-Transmission.
With the cheap interior materials, the transmission is the worse part of the car.
CVT’s can be great (Like the ones used in Nissan V6 models) or they suck (Like in the Nissan Rogue).
This one sucks.
It is one of the worse I’ve driven.
The engine has no pick up at all from a start. And that’s not for lack of power. The CVT just doesn’t want it to go.
Passing is scary because the CVT refuses to react to your right foot imput.
If you drive the car like if you were 90 years old, all the time, you might be happy with it.
Otherwise, it ruins the whole driving experience.
Again, I have driven some great cVTs. Like the one in the Maxima which is actually more responsive than about any automatic I have ever driven.
Not the case with the Outlander…
-SO???
There is really no reason to get the Mitsubishi outlander over the competition. And that’s too bad. It does look great.
If they used better interior material and reprogramed the CVT, it could be pretty nice.
But, on a more general note, I think Mitsubishi should be refocusing itself as a performance company.
The “brutal but fun” engine/DSG combo I drove in the Lancer Ralliart was great. And so much fun!
This is what they should put into the Outlander.
Make it the sports car of compact SUVs.
Otherwise, it just gets lost in the crowd…
Here in Europe, you can get it with a DSG box, a diesel engine and slap a Citroën face to it so it can even look funkier.
As long as you can stand the "French car dealer" experience, that is…
It may be better than a CRV in most areas; but still not up to Chevy Equinox style, quality, or fuel efficency. Not a bad buy though, if you can get one for under $25k.
Vince — Since they look similar, how would you rank this against the Forester?
Good review Vince. I too like the looks of it (this one). I thought it would be a great vehicle if they put a DI 4 cyl in it with a turbo DI 4cyl as an option or a DI 3.0l as an option. Then it would have had class leading power, torque AND fuel economy. But what the heck do I know. Instead they slap a crappy looking (EVO style) new front end on it and call it new and improved. And they wonder why they're not doing well.
Thanks for the review Vince. I've been comparing this against the Rav-4 for a new SUV to get. I like the style of the Mistu better (except for the 2010, man they pulled a Mazda on that one and did great big hole up front) but the Rav4's 4-banger seemed strong enough, no V6 needed.
As I'm rarely a passenger, hard plastics don't bother me, because I can't play with them because I'm focused on driving. So, that wouldn't be a deal killer. As long as the plastic looked ok, the feel wouldn't bother me.
I'd be more concerned about the tranny. What's it doing? Why is it making that noise? Is that noise normal? Etc…
And this one sounds like it would drive me up the wall.
Geez, Vince, you certainly are fixated on "cheap hard plastic throughout the interior ". It seems to be your mantra in every review you write. Truth be told, all cars have some 'cheap hard plastic' somewhere in their interior. But more importantly in this particular vehicle, we all know that Mitsubishis are cheap cars with doubtful reliability and horrible resale.
Vince, your review pretty much echos what I think, but I do think the CR-V uses higher quality materials than the Outlander. The Outlander just feels cheap overall.
"Anonymous said…
It may be better than a CRV in most areas; but still not up to Chevy Equinox style, quality, or fuel efficency. Not a bad buy though, if you can get one for under $25k.
October 11, 2009 7:51 PM"
This guy has a post for every comment section.
The new Equinox IS NOT THAT GREAT. I hate to break it to you.
Again, major automotive publications haven't been all that kind to it.
"Anonymous said…
Thanks for the review Vince. I've been comparing this against the Rav-4 for a new SUV to get. I like the style of the Mistu better (except for the 2010, man they pulled a Mazda on that one and did great big hole up front) but the Rav4's 4-banger seemed strong enough, no V6 needed.
October 11, 2009 8:01 PM"
The RAV4s interior quality is shockingly bad.
I had one as a loaner a couple months ago and the fit and finish was very poor. Uneven panel gaps and interior pieces that didn't fit together, not to mention EXPOSED metal on the interior that had started to show some surface rust in a one year old vehicle.
Take a look at the CR-V or an Escape before you consider the POS Outlander or a RAV4 with Toyotas slipping quality.
The CR-V is Americas best selling SUV for three years now, for a good reason.
CVT = Not 4 Me
Why would you buy this over a CR-V? Honestly???
I'd like to add that I don't own a CR-V or even a Honda for that matter but I am also one of those unfortunate souls who has rented an Outlander. The interior plastics are terrible and the V6 was one of the most unrefined engines I have encountered in a while.
My basis for comparison is my older sisters CR-V which does everything pretty well.
Why don't they do like Toyota does on the high-end Venza: soft plastic on the drivers door, hard-as-a-rock cheap plastic on the back doors where the kids sit?
The Outlander is sub-par all around.
They have to mask the vehicles shortcomings with other features such as a powerful stereo, HIDs, keyless go, just like Nissan has to with the awful Rogue.
Not a fan of the Outlander, and apparently no one else is either. I see MAYBE one a week.
Vince, have you ever seen the third row on this thing??? It is a COMPLETE joke and COMPLETELY unsafe for children.
The rear headrests are almost touching the glass, imagine being rear ended.
This vehicle is a complete failure.
Why would you buy this over a CR-V? Honestly??? Thats like asking: Why would you build a fountain in the town square instead of just dumping a ton of rancid manure? BECAUSE ONE IS UGLY and the other has some class. Even if you believe that the manure is more predictable than the fountain.
"Anonymous said…
Why would you buy this over a CR-V? Honestly??? Thats like asking: Why would you build a fountain in the town square instead of just dumping a ton of rancid manure? BECAUSE ONE IS UGLY and the other has some class. Even if you believe that the manure is more predictable than the fountain.
October 13, 2009 4:33 PM"
What???
Are you trying to say that the Outlander is manure, because it really is. I'll echo what everyone else here has said already. The Outlander is NOT a competitive vehicle in its class.
The CR-V is the best seller, and class leader. Three years in a row as America's best selling SUV, you can't argue with that. Sorry.
To: October 14, 2009 5:56 AM
ditto.
the outlander is a POS as is every other mitsubishi.
don't be pissed off because honda is obviously doing something right. the crv does win or come runner up in almost every single comparison test.
The CR-V is the best seller. AND MANURE OUTSELLS ORNATE WATER FOUNTAINS. You can keep your ugly CR-V AND your manure! (I think they compliment one another!)
"Anonymous said…
The CR-V is the best seller. AND MANURE OUTSELLS ORNATE WATER FOUNTAINS. You can keep your ugly CR-V AND your manure! (I think they compliment one another!)
October 14, 2009 8:20 PM"
Obviously this person is jealous that their favorite brand is being outsold by another brand that clearly has a superior product.
I would be bitter too if Mitsubishi outsold BMW, but that isn't ever going to happen.
Let's get real here.
I would be bitter too if Mitsubishi outsold BMW, but that isn't ever going to happen. (ahem, you know that Mitsu/Fuso is sold in more place than BMW, don't you? And that Mitsu is a MUCH BIGGER Company than BMW?)
add me to the list that would rather have the CR-V as well.
at least it is from a manufacturer that isn't going to pull out from the US anytime soon.
add me to the list that would rather have the GOOD-LOOKING Mitsubishi as well.
at least it is from a manufacturer that isn't brain-dead when it comes to style & ergonomics!
"Anonymous said…
add me to the list that would rather have the GOOD-LOOKING Mitsubishi as well.
at least it is from a manufacturer that isn't brain-dead when it comes to style & ergonomics!
October 17, 2009 2:50 PM"
Apparently you either WORK for Mitsubishi or have never driven any of their other models.
There is more to a vehicle than its looks, ask JD Power or Consumer reports. But, I am sure that you have never heard of those two sources.