mitsubishi outlander

[aquariuscsm]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm
I couldn't imagine towing with a so-called "suv". They're not heavy duty workhorses,they're only made to carry rugrats and soccer balls.


I assume you mean compact SUV's?


Yeah the ones pictured in the article. I couldn't imagine pulling a cattle trailer or pulling a large boat up a marina ramp with one of those.

 

[JTK]

The whole product line is a pretty rare sighting for me, but the ones I've seen look decent. Not a lot of dealers either. I've got two unless I want to drive more than 50 miles. Fairly aggressive discounting on them based on conversations I've had with those who shopped them.

 

[oil_film_movies]

Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm
I couldn't imagine pulling a cattle trailer or pulling a large boat up a marina ramp with one of those.
The Cherokee is rated for 4500 lbs towing! Thats a small vehicle towing something that weighs more than it. Thats got to be fun on mountain curves.

Example: The Cherokee can tow this 22 foot, 3700 lb (no cargo) weight, leaving room to put 700 lbs of cargo back there. Wow. They actually say this is OK?

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm
I couldn't imagine towing with a so-called "suv". They're not heavy duty workhorses,they're only made to carry rugrats and soccer balls.


I assume you mean compact SUV's?


Yeah the ones pictured in the article. I couldn't imagine pulling a cattle trailer or pulling a large boat up a marina ramp with one of those.


Yeah, I couldn't either

 

[oil_film_movies]

Equinox comes with Sway Control and Hill Start Assist with the 2.0L turbo engine. Up to 3500 lbs total too.
Anybody know how Sway Control is implemented? Is there a sensor on the hitch that interacts with the usual Stabilitrak (stability anti-skid control)?

 

[IndyIan]

Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm
I couldn't imagine towing with a so-called "suv". They're not heavy duty workhorses,they're only made to carry rugrats and soccer balls.


I assume you mean compact SUV's?


Yeah the ones pictured in the article. I couldn't imagine pulling a cattle trailer or pulling a large boat up a marina ramp with one of those.

They pull their rating, plus a bit more in some cases... You can probably legally tow 2-3k lbs behind your 300zx and it would do it well enough if driven with common sense. Everywhere else in the world a 4 cyl outlander with a CVT can tow 3-3.5k lbs. Could you break it doing that stupidly? Sure, but somehow all the manufacturers deal with that.

 

[IndyIan]

Originally Posted By: oil_film_movies
Equinox comes with Sway Control and Hill Start Assist with the 2.0L turbo engine. Up to 3500 lbs total too.
Anybody know how Sway Control is implemented? Is there a sensor on the hitch that interacts with the usual Stabilitrak (stability anti-skid control)?

They just add some programming to the stability control to recognize when the vehicle is getting pushed around by the trailer and pulse a front brake a couple times.
You sure wouldn't want to rely on it anyways, if it kicks in its time to pull off and figure out what's wrong with your setup.

 

[oil_film_movies]

Originally Posted By: IndyIan
They just add some programming to the stability control to recognize when the vehicle is getting pushed around by the trailer and pulse a front brake a couple times. You sure wouldn't want to rely on it anyways, if it kicks in its time to pull off and figure out what's wrong with your setup.
One problem with the setup might be using a small-ish Cherokee to pull 4,000+ lbs! hee-hee... I'd want to go with minimum tongue weight on a big trailer, maybe 220 lbs would suffice(??), or the headlights will be pointed at the clouds on that SUV. Seems like you'd need pneumatic load leveling (like I had years ago on a Pontiac Montana mini-van).

I can see how normal Stabilitrak or other brand name for stability control could just address the side-to-side problems when they happen. As a control systems engineer myself, I'd want the gain (agressiveness) of the control turned up in proportion to trailer weight. Maybe the driver needs to tell the computer something big is attached to the tail to up the gains, kind of a "trailering mode".

Trailering like this could introduce PIO (pilot induced oscillation) if turning on twisty roads or avoiding hazards. Driving style needs to recognize it.

 

[IndyIan]

Originally Posted By: oil_film_movies
Originally Posted By: IndyIan
They just add some programming to the stability control to recognize when the vehicle is getting pushed around by the trailer and pulse a front brake a couple times. You sure wouldn't want to rely on it anyways, if it kicks in its time to pull off and figure out what's wrong with your setup.
One problem with the setup might be using a small-ish Cherokee to pull 4,000+ lbs! hee-hee... I'd want to go with minimum tongue weight on a big trailer, maybe 220 lbs would suffice(??), or the headlights will be pointed at the clouds on that SUV. Seems like you'd need pneumatic load leveling (like I had years ago on a Pontiac Montana mini-van).

I can see how normal Stabilitrak or other brand name for stability control could just address the side-to-side problems when they happen. As a control systems engineer myself, I'd want the gain (agressiveness) of the control turned up in proportion to trailer weight. Maybe the driver needs to tell the computer something big is attached to the tail to up the gains, kind of a "trailering mode".

Trailering like this could introduce PIO (pilot induced oscillation) if turning on twisty roads or avoiding hazards. Driving style needs to recognize it.

Personally, I would never run such little tongue weight on a trailer nearly as heavy as the tow vehicle. I'd rather moderately overload the vehicles load capacity with a weight distribution hitch and deal with those consequences than deal with trailer instability at 60mph. I don't know what the engineered safety factor is for a whole vehicle but I suspect for simple load capacity you could run quite heavy, like 2 or 3 times for a very long time before the weakest link starts to show its self. IMO Cars aren't really that delicate so running a bit more weight on the vehicle for stability is far safer than trying to perfectly balance tongue weight on the edge of instability, especially in some thing like a RV trailer where significant weight can be moved, gained or lost depending on which tanks where, are full or empty.
I've towed pretty heavy, but legally somewhere under 2990lbs unbraked, with my 03 Tracker (3200 lbs) and always made sure tongue weight was "sufficient" for stability. I kept my speeds reasonable and never had even a worry about trailer sway. Emergency stopping was more of a concern so I left lots of space and followed the speed limits.
With a weight distribution hitch and trailer brakes I'd tow 80-90% of almost any vehicles weight without a worry as long as it had enough tongue weight to be stable. Around 5% is too close for comfort IMO.

 

[oil_film_movies]

Indylan, towing 3k lbs with a Tracker does sound similar to doing 4k on a Cherokee or similar vehicle in this class.
The problem with low tongue weights is that the trailer can heave (rock) up and down, sometimes lifting the rear of the car. Sounds fun, right?!
There is a recommended tongue weight for sure, and going too much over it would point the headlights to the sky, and too little creates way too much excitement.

 

[hpb]

We've had our Outlander for just over 2 years, it's about to hit 34,000km, has had 2 services in that time, nothing else needed. It's a reliable, safe, practical, pleasant to drive appliance. I often drive the equivalent Toyota Rav4 at work, in both petrol and diesel forms, and I admit, the Rav is overall a nicer driving vehicle. However, the price difference (here at least) between the Toyota and the Mitsubishi is significant, plus the longer warranty, longer service intervals, and more standard equipment in the Outlander made it a no-brainer for us. Plus, we needed 7 seats, and the Rav isn't available with a third row here.

There's a lot of hate for Mitsubishi on BITOG for some reason, and I get that there aren't a lot of dealers in some parts of the US, but elsewhere in the world, they're extremely popular, and considered a very reliable brand. Year to date in Oz, Mitsubishi are outselling Ford, VW, Subaru, Nissan, Honda...

 

[IndyIan]

Originally Posted By: oil_film_movies
Indylan, towing 3k lbs with a Tracker does sound similar to doing 4k on a Cherokee or similar vehicle in this class.
The problem with low tongue weights is that the trailer can heave (rock) up and down, sometimes lifting the rear of the car. Sounds fun, right?!
There is a recommended tongue weight for sure, and going too much over it would point the headlights to the sky, and too little creates way too much excitement.

There was no lifting in the rear ever, and not much porpoising either. The headlights were pointing up a bit but if your not driving at night its not a big deal.
I think the Tracker towed well because of the solid rear axle and short rear overhang. We also drove 1200 miles each way to Winnipeg and back with U-haul 5x8 box trailer loaded right up, and once your up to speed you can feel the weight back there but it doesn't feel unstable at all. We tried some practice zig-zags on empty stretches of the interstate and it wasn't an issue.
Anyways, my point is that you don't need a 1 ton dually to tow something safely, if you keep your speeds reasonable, and load the trailer so it tows stably.

 

[HoosierJeeper]

Their AWD systems are top notch, up there with Jeep and Subaru.

Interesting point about them being a top seller down under and in most of the world...I believe it! I think in the US they got tainted when they pulled of the market for a few years here.

 

[Silk]

Just saw an Outlander this morning towing a tandem trailer with a small digger on the back, not outside their capability at all.

Mitsubishi are number 3 in vehicle sales in NZ, the Triton ute, Outlander, ASX and Mirage are all in the top 3 of their segment for sales.

 

[ernied]

does the 2.4 in the outlander have a timming chain or a belt

 

[Kuato]

Originally Posted By: oil_film_movies
Originally Posted By: PimTac
I would take those rankings with a 5 pound bag of salt.
They have driven them all. You haven't. They are experts. You aren't.


I agree with the salt...the Forester should be ranked much higher than second-to-last.

 

[fdcg27]

Experts?
LOL!
The only experts currently publishing anything about stock vehicle dynamics are to be found at CR.
The popular buff books have people better termed as posers, although getting paid to abuse cars and then write a bit about it would be a sweet gig.
Pretty sad when the buff books once had real racers and C&D even had a guy who qualified at Indy with whom they later parted ways after one of their changes in management.
To the OP, the Outlander can be bought at unbelievably low prices, so that alone makes it a compelling deal.
We bought another one of those junky Foresters instead, but my wife could be driving the Mitsu for maybe eight grand less.
For the bucks, the Outlander looks pretty darn good.

 

[Silk]

Originally Posted By: ernied
does the 2.4 in the outlander have a timming chain or a belt


Chain. The only one I've seen give engine trouble had 3 oil changes in 170,000km...it wasn't covered by warranty.