2011 Mitsubishi Outlander gets two-wheel drive variant

Article
Gallery

By Brett Davis | September 24th, 2010

Mitsubishi has just announced the launch of the Mitsubishi Outlander LS 2WD, which coincides with the release of the new 2011 Outlander range.

The new range gets a bunch of additional features over the existing lineup. Automatic one-touch electric driver’s window, enhanced brake assist and a full-sized spare wheel. The most notable headline in relation to the new range though is the option of two-wheel drive.

Much of the technical specifications on the 2WD LS are carried over from the usual all-wheel drive LS and XLS, so it retains the 2.4-litre 125kW four cylinder engine and five-speed manual or continuously variable automatic transmissions, so everything in the package is still there.

But using a two-wheel drive setup means the 2WD LS uses less petrol, as it doesn’t have to turn as many wheels, but it also means Mitsubishi can offer you a comprehensive wagon with the high-ride seating position of a soft-road vehicle, at a cheaper price.

Mitsubishi’s President and CEO, Masahiko Takahashi, said in a recent report,

“Within this segment there is fast growing demand for two-wheel drive variants, which have a lower entry price. Releasing an economical two-wheel drive variant ensures Outlander will appeal to a much wider range of wagon buyers.”

All Mitsubishi Outlanders will be backed by the five year/130,000km vehicle warranty and ten year/160,000km powertrain warranty.

Savings include;

2011 Outlander LS 2WD 2.4 Petrol
- 2.4 5 seat manual $28990
- 2.4 5 Seat CVT $31490

2011 Outlander LS 4WD 2.4 Petrol
- 2.4 5 seat manual $33240
- 2.4 5 Seat CVT $35740

As well as the fuel consumption figure differences;

2011 Outlander LS 2WD 2.4 Petrol
- 2.4 5 seat manual Combined 9.2L/100km, 220gm of CO2/km
- 2.4 5 Seat CVT Combined 9.0L/100km, 212gm of CO2/km

2011 Outlander LS 4WD 2.4 Petrol
- 2.4 5 seat manual Combined 9.5L/100km and 227gm of CO2/km
- 2.4 5 Seat CVT Combined 9.3L/100km, 222gm of CO2/km

Shak

I think offering the 2WD and the Lancer face was the bet thing Mitsu could have done with this Softroader.
m2m

It’l sell like mad if it comes in under $30k! I’d rather a CX-7 classic but dollars talk!

Ricky

Why do you say that? The previous generation Outlander (which was 4WD) was $29,990 for the automatic and it never sold in huge numbers. This new 2WD model is $31,490 for the auto ($28,990 manual).

f1worldchamp

Maybe cause the old model wasn’t near as attractive as the new one?

Ricky

The old model was better in many ways – sportier, lower centre of gravity, lighter, smaller. Similar in many ways to the current ASX.

Karl

You want sportier, lower centre of gravity, lighter, smaller? A wagon is a much better option.

Kenny

Compared to the old model the new shape Outlander looks lot nicer. The new model has better features & interior space. The CVT transmission is lot better than the 4 speed Auto transmission of the old model, it is quite noticeable when driving up a hill at 100+ kmph. I think with the Outlander Mitsu got a lot of things right. Only ppl who buy the RAV4 is just for the Toyota badge.

m2m

Mitsubishi’s stellar warranty, more economical than the 4WD and competitive equipment to the Rav4 CV 2WD. I may have exaggerated the ‘mad’ part. But it’l no doubt increase its appeal. Sales of the CX-7 skyrocketed once they brought in the FWD variant at a lower entry point. Mazda sell twice as many as they do 6′s, clear indication of what people want.

Ricky

Twice as many CX-7s?!? Hardly. 6342 CX-7s versus 5360 Mazda6s so far this year. That’s 1.18 to 1.

Igomi Watabi

a sad statistic, nonetheless

Ricky

It’s nothing new. Even the old Mazda Tribute outsold the 626 in 2001 and 2002.

TomJ

wow a worse version of a bland car.
http://caradvice OSU811

what a waste of time imo. Defeats the whole purpose of buying an suv as u cant use it for camping or on beach! You would be better of buying a better handling. Safer normal station wagon!

Cupid Stunt

Kind of agree but saying you can’t use for camping is plain stupid. Get sensible.

Pete

Modern wagons like the Commodore have become too close to the ground making day-to-day driving more stressful than it needs to, having to worry about kerbs, gutters, parking stops etc. As well the low ride height makes it harder to get in and out. If ‘normal’ cars returned to the ride height they had in the 80s and 90s then sales of SUVs would not be so high. Until then, people at Holden will continue to scratch their head about why everyone wants these softroaders…
Gav

Wasn’t that half the point of releasing the ASX?! to cover that middle gap between their small sedan and 4wd?

Granted the Outlander is a big bigger but really this is only going to appeal to a very small portion of the ‘softroader’ market

Ricky

People may find the 2.0L ASX too underpowered. Mitsubishi may have made a mistake, I admit, because now the Outlander looks like the more attractive option.

Kenny

ASX is catered for the younger demographic like couple, who would buy the likes of a Lancer hatch. Outlander is for families with children who require more space. The 2WD variant is suited for ppl who won’t go off road, most of the 4WD SUVs on the road will never go off road.

nickdl

Does it still only have two airbags?

A case for the ASX would be the extra equipment and it would probably be better to drive.
dirty harry

I am about to get a 2011 LS auto as a new work lease vehicle. I wanted a wagon instead of a sedan and AWD. It has much more room in the back than commodore and falcon don’t make a wagon anymore. My previous car was an FG XR6. The outlander now has standard side and full length cutain airbags and is 5 star ANCAP rated. It also has one of the roomiest back seats in its class. It was much better IMO than the Rav 4 and Craptiva competitors I looked at.

Richo

the Rav4 is a peice of rubbish, anyone who bought one either didn’t look at anything else or just defaulted to the Toyota brand, pretty much any other soft roader out there is a better car then the Rav4, and significantly so…

Richo

Fact is, most people who buy a soft roader will never go off the tarmac, we all know this, so clearly offering a 2WD variant just makes sense.

The regular 4WD Outlander is switchable between 2WD and AWD and I can tell you that 90% of the owners never touch the little dial to switch it out of 2WD…

Cupid Stunt

“I can tell you that 90% of the owners never touch the little dial to switch it out of 2WD…”

amazing how do you know that, have you been in 100% of these and made notes. I’m impressed.

Richo

By the way I have a VR V6 Outlander and I can tell you with the V6 you NEED the AWD however as the front wheels will slip very easily indeed even in the dry
nick

Where’s the diesel?
Last Word

I have just bought a 2wd ls outlander.

We had a Falcon Station Wagon years ago but they don’t make them anymore. This size vehicle (SUV) fits two kids plus a dog comfortably.
Look at other SUVs and came down to Escape or Outlander, most of the others were over priced or just plain ordinary (Xtrail)!!
Outlander came in at a slightly cheaper price for a more up to date vehicle (still liked the escape drive).
Dirty Harry

I too have just received delivery of a new Outlander. Mine is an LS auto 4WD. I am extremely happy with it even though I have had it less than a week! It drives very well. It has heaps of room and drives/handles very well.The rear seat room suits my 6Ft1 14 yr old son very nicely!
I have even surprised a few cars at the lights using the tiptronic gear shift.
Fuel economy on a mix of urban and counrty driving is 9.7 litres per 100.
Price was also very good for me. It was under $35000 with some options and all on road costs. The only thing I have noticed is the rear door requires a fair bit of oomph to shut it properly.
Brijesh

I am thinking to buy Outlander 2wd or 4wd. which will resale at good price in 3 years? I looked at Kia Sportage (new) Captiva, CRV, RAV4 but I think look wise and brand wise Outlander is the best. I liked Sportage as well but I think Kia doesn’t have good resale. Whats ur opinion fox
Peter A

I just thought I’d buy in to the discussion. I agree with ‘Pete’. I’ve bought Mitsubishis for nearly 30 years now, including for our kids. They are reliable and not overpriced. Correction – We had an ’85 Tarago people mover for five years as the kids were growing up. Shocker with the rear wheels losing traction. We drove around for five years with two concrete blocks behind the third row of seats.

Anyway, I traded in my ’90 Lancer hatch in 2001(175K)on a Lancer wagon. The hatch was very low and hard on the knees to get in. It was just getting old but still worked well. The Wagon had 119k and was still great when we traded it in November, but low and scrumphed parking barriers and dipped driveways underneath at the front.

When the ASX came out I was very interested and made the mistake of going to a dealer with my wife so she could see as well. (Abandon hope all ye who enter there.) Anyway the ASX was a bit ‘tight’ inside and the rear vision to back side was very poor with those funny little windows. The 2WD Outlander WAS THE SAME PRICE and offered more space and comfort and better visibity but less a few bells and whistles. The wife, having to reverse down a congested street on the test drive, was thrilled with the demo’s CVT auto. (We previously had manuals.) Anyway we fell for the ‘What do we have to do to get your business routine and got the CVT auto for a tad under $30K drive away and got good money for our trade.(Much haggling.) We added about 2K in extras.

We are very happy with the vehicle. Why did I buy it? 1.Satisfaction with the brand from past experience. (Total of 6 different Mitsubishi vehicles including Kids’)
2. The existing wagon was getting a bit old though I had intended to keep it a year or two longer.
3. Good road clearance for parking stops, dipped entries etc.
4. Good high driving height and ease of entry. (I am 68 and my wife is 65 so we don’t bend like we used to.)
5. The Lancer no longer has a wagon and I was eyeing off 2WD vehicles like this because from experience, driving on roads and like an old fart, I would never likely need 4WD. Then the ASX came along and looked good on paper. The Outlander was better for us.
6. Bit of a wank driving something looking like a 4WD.
Keidub

First car was a Magna and that did really well for many years. The LS 2WD is the best deal out there, Mitsubishi’s a good badge with good cars, considering what it offers I don’t there’s anything close unless u go for a Kia or Great Wall.

I too was swaying between the ASX and the Outlander but the ASX just didn’t have enough room in any respect. I would even prefer the Lancer Sportswagon as it has a deeper boot and costs less.

As a lot of ppl have said here, if you’re gonna take it off road then get something else, like a Pajero. This is a AWD not a 4WD anyway.
bob

Re: the Outlander LS – Hwy driving
I took one for a test drive and noticed at hyw speeds that it felt a bit “tippy” and seemed not to track straight…requireing a lot of small steeering corrections? did anyone else notice that?