Weekend in an Outlander
05-23-2004, 09:42 PM
#1
I miss my 03 CL-S :(
Thread Starter
Weekend in an Outlander
I spent a weekend and over 150 miles in a 2004 Mitsubishi Outlander so I figured I might as well post something since I remember at least one thread asking about small SUVs...
We rented it on Friday night in Boston and drove down to Cape Cod. This was the LS AWD trim.
First impressions:
I thought it was bigger when we asked for it. Three of us had our carry-on bags in the back and they fit perfectly in the rear. If there had been a fourth bag, we would have been out of luck though. In the end we were all happy about the size - for our purposes it was perfect.
Interiors
The interiors are horrible. Here's a pic from edmunds:
The ergonomics are just wrong, the radio is hard to get to from the driver's position, the plastics seemed better than what I expected in the car, but the layout and appearance is just... crappy!
The seats were nothing special... they weren't great but they weren't bad. I had no trouble adjusting the seats and steering wheel to a comfortable position.
Getting the side mirrors adjusted is another story. The power mirror switch is about at knee level on the driver's side in the dash. It's hard to get to, and the mirrors wouldn't adjust out all the way, bouncing back into an awkward angle. Even set as far out as possible, about 1/8 of the mirror was still reflecting the side of the vehicle. This made me second guess every lane change, especially around the Boston traffic.
The gauges are easy to read. And night-time illumination inside is adequate, but the dome lights are missing from the center of the vehicle, the rear dome light is above the back of the rear seats. So if you want to see something under the armrest, good luck. Speaking of armrest, it's narrow but adequate. Beverages in the cup holders don't interfere with the opening/closing of it. It's 2 levels, like our CL, except the top level is absurdly shallow, pretty useless except for things like coins or paper. There's no light on the bottom (deep) section of the armrest.
There's only one DC adapter, in the dash, which is odd considering cars like the Vibe and others have multiple places to plug in your toys.
The rear was comfortable and the seats reclined a bit.
Exterior
I don't like the new mitsu grills. The rest of the exteriors looked ok. Alloy wheels were a nice touch. The headlights look OK from the outside but they are crap as far as illuminating the road. Maybe I'm just used to HIDs
Performance
The 2.4L i4 was pretty peppy and had no trouble hauling the three of us + our baggage along. Acceleration was pretty responsive. Transmission shifts were smooth! It has a tiptronic type tranmission, and you get to control the 1->2 gear change. Current gear when in the tiptronic mode is displayed in the bottom right of the tach, kind of hard to see.
Braking was mushy with no feedback at all. It was scary how much the car swooped forward when braking hard.
Steering was too smooth for my taste, it felt too detached from the road at all speeds.
Suspension was actually pretty soft. Still, lane changes at 75mph felt safe.
Misc
The AWD was only useful once when coming out of a parking lot to merge onto a 2 lane road with sand along the sides - I could feel the rear wheels pushing us when the front were slipping in the sand. The radio was not bad at all. The cruise control controls were (to my surprise) exactly the same as my old 1992 Camry. It's intuitive and easy to use.
It's a cheap SUV, but it sucks gas like a Yukon. Keeping in mind the A/C was on all the time:
From Boston to Cape Cod is less than 70 miles (hwy), that took 1/2 tank. Driving around Cape Cod half a day (city) and we were down to 1/4 tank. It filled up with $25.
Edmunds recommends the Escape, Tribute, CR-V or Forester as alternatives. I would say that if you need AWD, the Forester is probably a better choice.
Hope that helps someone!
We rented it on Friday night in Boston and drove down to Cape Cod. This was the LS AWD trim.
First impressions:
I thought it was bigger when we asked for it. Three of us had our carry-on bags in the back and they fit perfectly in the rear. If there had been a fourth bag, we would have been out of luck though. In the end we were all happy about the size - for our purposes it was perfect.
Interiors
The interiors are horrible. Here's a pic from edmunds:
The ergonomics are just wrong, the radio is hard to get to from the driver's position, the plastics seemed better than what I expected in the car, but the layout and appearance is just... crappy!
The seats were nothing special... they weren't great but they weren't bad. I had no trouble adjusting the seats and steering wheel to a comfortable position.
Getting the side mirrors adjusted is another story. The power mirror switch is about at knee level on the driver's side in the dash. It's hard to get to, and the mirrors wouldn't adjust out all the way, bouncing back into an awkward angle. Even set as far out as possible, about 1/8 of the mirror was still reflecting the side of the vehicle. This made me second guess every lane change, especially around the Boston traffic.
The gauges are easy to read. And night-time illumination inside is adequate, but the dome lights are missing from the center of the vehicle, the rear dome light is above the back of the rear seats. So if you want to see something under the armrest, good luck. Speaking of armrest, it's narrow but adequate. Beverages in the cup holders don't interfere with the opening/closing of it. It's 2 levels, like our CL, except the top level is absurdly shallow, pretty useless except for things like coins or paper. There's no light on the bottom (deep) section of the armrest.
There's only one DC adapter, in the dash, which is odd considering cars like the Vibe and others have multiple places to plug in your toys.
The rear was comfortable and the seats reclined a bit.
Exterior
I don't like the new mitsu grills. The rest of the exteriors looked ok. Alloy wheels were a nice touch. The headlights look OK from the outside but they are crap as far as illuminating the road. Maybe I'm just used to HIDs
Performance
The 2.4L i4 was pretty peppy and had no trouble hauling the three of us + our baggage along. Acceleration was pretty responsive. Transmission shifts were smooth! It has a tiptronic type tranmission, and you get to control the 1->2 gear change. Current gear when in the tiptronic mode is displayed in the bottom right of the tach, kind of hard to see.
Braking was mushy with no feedback at all. It was scary how much the car swooped forward when braking hard.
Steering was too smooth for my taste, it felt too detached from the road at all speeds.
Suspension was actually pretty soft. Still, lane changes at 75mph felt safe.
Misc
The AWD was only useful once when coming out of a parking lot to merge onto a 2 lane road with sand along the sides - I could feel the rear wheels pushing us when the front were slipping in the sand. The radio was not bad at all. The cruise control controls were (to my surprise) exactly the same as my old 1992 Camry. It's intuitive and easy to use.
It's a cheap SUV, but it sucks gas like a Yukon. Keeping in mind the A/C was on all the time:
From Boston to Cape Cod is less than 70 miles (hwy), that took 1/2 tank. Driving around Cape Cod half a day (city) and we were down to 1/4 tank. It filled up with $25.
Edmunds recommends the Escape, Tribute, CR-V or Forester as alternatives. I would say that if you need AWD, the Forester is probably a better choice.
Hope that helps someone!
05-23-2004, 09:58 PM
#2
Where is my super sauce?
We test drove it when we were searching for a mini-SUV (where we ended up with the Subaru Forester XT). It wasn't even in the running when it came crunch time to buy. I still think the leaders of this group are the Toyota RAV-4, the Honda CR-V, and the Subaru Forester. The next tier is the Mitsubishi Outlander, the Ford Escape, and the Jeep Liberty.
Of course with Mitsu's 10 year warranty and recent financing deals, they might be selling more.
On that note, I must say that Subaru was quite easy to deal with (and across the country they seem to have that reputation). Honda, on the other hand, has their head up their ass and won't deal. I think they think the CR-V is made of gold. Toyota was somewhere in between.
Didn't like the Outlander for some of the same reasons you mentioned -- interior, exterior front. Once we drove the Forester XT, power didn't even compare.
Of course with Mitsu's 10 year warranty and recent financing deals, they might be selling more.
On that note, I must say that Subaru was quite easy to deal with (and across the country they seem to have that reputation). Honda, on the other hand, has their head up their ass and won't deal. I think they think the CR-V is made of gold. Toyota was somewhere in between.
Didn't like the Outlander for some of the same reasons you mentioned -- interior, exterior front. Once we drove the Forester XT, power didn't even compare.
05-23-2004, 11:28 PM
#4
Got da Internet Goin Nutz
Had one for a rental in Vegas and it suited those purposes just fine. I kinda like it. But it was really my first time having a "suv" as a rental car.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post