Comments on: 2008 Mitsubishi Outlander

By: Infinite Wisdom

Infinite Wisdom — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 21:05:44 +0000

Really wanted an X-Trail.Test drove a top spec Diesel engine fantastic performance but noisy when idling and even slow acceleration. Then test drove the 2.5 litre petrol, smooth and quiet. Both with the CVT box. Did not like the poor seats lacking in support. Having 2 Nissan Pulsars for 10 years in the family could not live with unsupporting seats any more. Interior layout all over the place. Wing mirrors inadequate for side/rear vision. False floor may be flat but limits the load height. Have to dismantle the false floor to get at the spare wheel. Extras are way overpriced. Overall dated and very disappointing. Nissan update and lift your game.
Then drove the Mitsubishi Outlander. Great seats, driving position, front and rear visibility, engine and transmission. Quet and well built, plastic ok.
2009 Activ package included bluetooth, a necessity for mobile phones to avoid hefty fines, a very expensive addition to even an X-Trail XL-S. Also looked at Captiva, Korean build, GMH 3.2litre gas guzzler. Forester, Rav-4, Suzuki Grande Vitara, Hyundai Santa Fe.
Down side to Outlander? spacesaver spare but underneath cradle holder can be modified to take a realspare without being lower than the rear muffler.
Overall “Love that car”

By: Ross

Ross — Mon, 07 Sep 2009 13:08:31 +0000

I have had our red 2009 ls for 6 weeks and have traveled just over 3000k. We looked at and drove the 2009 forester(too small) the Rav4(chunky and rear spare mount) the X Trail(boxy) and a few others and kept coming back to the Outlander. It looks great and goes great is very quiet and not bad on fuel. The outstanding thing we found are the seats and for those that get a sore back after traveling give it a try. An hour used to be our limit,now we can travel for hours. Cant fault the auto or the 2.4lt motor. Its very easy to park and it tows the pop top van without a problem. Space saver spare is a niggle but if you get a flat the standard wheel fits underneath if you handy extension bracket. Audio inputs are included but they are at the rear of the console. Economy best has been 7.9lt to 100k but average 9.3 combined. Also tried the Captiva but the seats suck.

By: John

John — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 03:32:02 +0000

Thanks guys for the comments, just bought a used 24k 2007 Outlander LS ZG based in part on the comments and experience of others here – our first SUV. My initial view confirms what others are saying, the car does not sound as solid due perhaps to efforts to make it lighter than some other SUVs, and the plastics used/interior fittings could be better. However, it drives and handles well, love the CVT and sports mode gear shifting, reasonably equipped (though would have liked audio input for my media player) and is very stylish, quieter than I was led to believe by some reviewers and more spacious than most other comparably priced SUVs inc. the Forester that we looked seriously at. Hence, we’re pretty pleased overall (early days) and saved a few grand as well. The big test will be when we take it off the bitumen and also really assess its fuel economy.

By: Shaun

Shaun — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 11:02:15 +0000

For what its worth here’s some feedback from our 3-4 month decision on a 7 seater
I looked at several different SUV 7 seaters and in the end went with the Captiva (Diesel). The Outlander rear seats are only temporary seating at best as they have little or no padding! They are really just thin mesh cloth – pretty wierd. There was no way an adult could sit there or a kid for that matter on anything longer than a trip to get milk down the street. Options were pretty good though, not as good as the 60th Captiva though. The others we looked at were the Mitsu Grandis was a better 7 seater option but we questioned the quality of the build as the demo model had a faulty electrics which was bad for a demo. We also looked at the Toyo Avensis (low on features, not too good for fuel and underpowered), Hyundai Sante Fe (the tape player really put us off!), Kia and Honda Odessey (all good apart from Fuel eco and was also underpowered)
In the end went with a captiva as it was the best value, features and a good 7 seater.
The Outlander would make a great 5 seater, but if I was in the market for a 5 seater SUV, I couldn’t go past the new Subaru Forrester to be honest – we looked at that also, with the mind to try to compromise on a 5 seater – because it drove better than everything above, without exception.

By: Nitram Rotciv

Nitram Rotciv — Thu, 22 May 2008 14:14:03 +0000

2008 Mit. Outlander is an absolute beauty!!! The look, the feel, everything you’re looking for a medium-sized but spacious SUV. Especially the VRX series, you’ll love it! I think this is the when Mitsubishi recovers from near closure. Keep it up!

By: Mathew

Mathew — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 07:46:21 +0000

I have been comparing RAV4 Cruiser to Outlander 4Cyl XLS. Outlander wins with its Triptronic Gears, Bluetooth, sliding 2nd row & 7 Seats. No Rear Aircon, radio & clock display is hard to read with red background. Aircon controls are too low. Radio controls on steering – should change preset stations & not go into SEEK mode & should have MUTE button. Antenna should be on the body similar to RAV4. The XLS should come STD with electric seats, DUAL Climate Air & an Optional Upgrade to Leather & SATNAV.

By: Ev

Ev — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 02:18:53 +0000

I am looking to replace my 05 CRV and must admit the new Outlander looks great. I am however really unhappy with the tinny feeling especially in the doors. Plus the plastics inside is hard and ugly. Wish they would improve it. Then i would not hesitate in purchasing one……

By: BoB

BoB — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 12:29:16 +0000

Because the market will demand an Auto car… it is easier to drive, especially when they start getting big and fat. Hill starts (I live in an area which has more hills and slopes than the number of bacteria under your fingernails) are a nightmare unless it has hill ascent control… which it doesn’t!

By: jake02

jake02 — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 09:56:28 +0000

can someone tell me why the triton is a bad car? yes the aussie specs are a little shitty and u cant buy the top spec GLS in a manual but its so much better than the boxy navara and better value than the hilux. what the hell is wrong with people?

i love this upgraded outlander. i saw it on mitsubishi japan coz thy have just introduced the V6 over there so they upgraded it. i think its good that u can get leather on the XLS as some people want these features but u can only get them on VRX 7-seater so it has better value than before! the outlander has been my fave car 4 a while now after seeing the Airtrek Turbo R in malaysia! oh btw im 13 years old and i know heaps about cars! im a car nut! i cant see why mitsu thinks that we want auto’s? why? a diesel with a manual is fine! dont change it!

By: Lcat

Lcat — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 00:44:00 +0000

The Peugeot diesel is available for the Outlander in Europe only with a 6 speed manual. Maybe Mitsu Aus are waiting for a compatible auto box?

By: bubba ganush

bubba ganush — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 00:33:07 +0000

It seems the only vehicle that lets them down is the triton thats a shocker of a ute

By: BoB

BoB — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 00:33:07 +0000

Ah damnit… lost my comment.

Anyway, diesel powered variant is sourced from either Peugeot or Renault I think.. since one or both of them share the Outlander platform with one of their SUVs. 2.2L from memory.

Door trims look similar. Luxury variant is welcomed… looks great too but I think it won’t account for much sales as the doors are rather… lacking in quality. I think its time Mitsu changed the freakin’ doors on the Outlander.. I’ll gladly update mine when they do.

Seems from the website climate air con is standard together with alloy wheels. Great value I say..

By: mink

mink — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 21:18:15 +0000

No diesel powered variant yet, wonder why?

By: Nick

Nick — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 12:27:11 +0000

Oh I couldn’t agree more! Drive and especially Wheels loath mitsus for some reason! We have never ever been let down by 17 years of Mitsubishis, starting with a 1990 Nimbus to our 05 380. My next purchase will be a Lancer. They have some of the best styling and as an earlier comment said: are carved from granite. Our Colt could not be more solid…this is highlighted when I ride in its peers or even cars in higher classes!

By: Albert Knowles

Albert Knowles — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 10:08:07 +0000

Had my silver VRX Lancer auto for 3 weeks & 1800 kms. V pleased with purchase. Only criticism is that when accelerating hard from stand still the auto howls somewhat – which tends to offset the refinement that otherwise pervades the car. However careful use of the throttle can minimise this, without significantly impacting the gathering motion. The carved from granite sense that the car gives, no creaks, whistles or other noises really gives the car an upmarket feel. This is our 8th Mitsubishi – 2 x Lancers (93/07), 4 x Magna / Verada (91/94/96/02), 1 x Galant (79) & 1 x Outlander (03). Why are Mits not more popular or better regarded? Touch wood – we have never been stranded or let down in any way by any of our 8 Mits. More than I can say for some of the other marques we have owned. One more question why does DRIVE hate Mits cars? They never have a good word to say about any Mits vehicle. I have driven most of the cars that DRIVE rates above the Lancer & there’s no way I’d have bought one of these before the Lancer.

By: SPEED FREAK

SPEED FREAK — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 09:52:31 +0000

I LOOKED AT ONE TUESDAY ALONG WITH THE CAPTIVA, PATHFINDER AND A COUPLE OF OTHERS. THE OUTLANDER WINS HANDS DONE. WITH THE 7 SEATER MODEL V’S THE CAPTIVA. THE CAPTIVA HAS LITTLE OR NO ROOM BEHIND THE THIRD ROW WHERE THE PATHFINDER HAS ABOUT 15 INCHES. IAM SHOULD BE GETTING THE VRX V6 MODEL CAUSE AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE PHOTOS IT LOOKS DAMN FINE…..ENOUGH SAID………

By: Captain Mainwaring

Captain Mainwaring — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 08:11:37 +0000

Although this is a declining segment, Mitsubishi deserves the credit for having the best looking vehicle in it, and it drives nicely as well. What a shame it wasn’t 3 years earlier.