I have just replaced my Jeep compass 2.2crd limited with an outlander 2.3 DiD Gx4.
It's 100kg heavier than the jeep and only 17bhp more but has a lot more torque. Not towed my van yet with the outlander. My van is being repaired right now by the dealer.
So far I find the outlander is quieter and more luxurious than the jeep but handles like a barge and believe it or not the jeeps merc engine had far better power delivery and was much more fun to drive.
I am so far absolutely dismayed by the outlander fuel economy.
I am getting 35mpg on a motorway run ( without the caravan ) and can get 40 round town if there are no hold ups. My jeep would deliver 45mpg on the motorway and 40 round town. Towing my bailey ranger 550/6 it would return 28mpg.
I changed to the mitsubishi though because after 3 years the jeep started falling apart. The jeep towed my caravan without any problems cruising at 60 in 6th gear even on gradients. I found it handled great if I put awning and food drink beer etc in the car to weight it down. Without it was a bit twitchy.
I am asking this on here because I can't find any uk forum for the outlander only usa forums with petrol engined outlanders and miles per us gallons.
The question is does anyone else with an outlander get better fuel figures? Does your outlander only deliver torque below 2k RPM then run out of puff? The jeep revved like a petrol engine as did my previous Chrysler.
35 on a run but 40 around town? Seems a bit backwards.
What i find with some modern cars is the gearing is too high. Although it will pull 50mph in top gear, you maybe using more fuel than a lower gear.
eg.. 40mph in 4th gear uses less fuel than 40mph in 5th gear. Tested on the same stretch of road multiple times with a code reader plugged in and monitoring the fuelling also.
Basically 4th gear at 40mph uses 9% throttle where changing upto 5th requires 18% throttle to maintain the speed.
I have a 2.3DiD 4wd auto ASX, which is essentially the same car as the Outlander, same running gear, engine, wheelbase etc. We actually have 2 ASX now, one a 1.8 MIVEC, both 147bhp.
I am surprised it handles like a barge, both or ours handle well in town, on country roads and on the motorway. They are little affected by strong crosswinds.
Both our ASX will return 42-46 without any problem round town, and 50 on a long run at a steady 70ish.
Towing we get 30-35, and on a 1000 mile journey down across the Alps we achieved 37mpg.
Most of the torque is above about 1700rpm when the turbo kicks in.
Sounds like something is wrong with yours. Both of ours are very free revving.
However, both cars are quite different gear wise, the 1.8 MIVEC revs up to 4500rpm and will tow up and down dale in 6th gear, only changing down to 5th below 50.
The auto does not have MIVEC (variable valve timing) and revs up to 4000rpm. This car drops down to 5th gear more readily on hills. It also seems to prefer a higher cruise speed for the best efficiency on motorways.
Both cars tow the Bailey Pursuit beautifully at the stated 58kg noseweight, I've not had any problems with twitchiness.
i was just remarking on how good the jeep was at towing.
the dealers who i bought the outlander from, livery dole exeter, have offered to look at it but since they are more than 100 miles from where i live thats not so easy. but this is why i was asking for real world figures rather than the flights of fancy the dealers tell you before you buy the car. if there is not really a problem and they are thirsty beasts then a day off work and £60 of fuel would be a wasted effort.
the ASX may have a different engine to my manual. i believe the outlander Auto has a ford engine with a cam belt that is actually 2168cc and has less BHP but you may prove me wrong on that.(i believe mine, a manual has a VW engine with a chain)
when i say handles like a barge its because the outlander is longer and heavier than the jeep by 100kg and 250mm. the jeep was great but the space for the rear passengers was small and the boot tiny. as i also mentioned it started falling apart.
one reason for the disappointment with the mpg is that for work i drive a nissan navarra with a 190bhp 2.5L engine. this returns 37mpg on a long trip so thats better than my outlender. i was considering a nissan pathfinder but thought the outlander would use less fuel....but so far i am wrong
grampian i understand your points about gear changes and that was true in my last car, 6th at 75mph on the motorway was not necessarily the best gear.
my outlender has a gear change indicator so i have been following that. although with such a narrow torque band it is rarely in the correct gear.
may be my outlander has a problem, it still only has 17k miles on it and its a 61 plate.
Sounds similar to a problem we had with a Peugeot 206 years ago....
We had a black one from new, but after a few years, while the trade in price for it was still good, we traded it in for one exactly the same except the colour which was blue (learned black shows up every scratch, chip and the dirt).
It was her car, and she started saying how it drove differently (feel / steering / suspension / noise etc), and we got roughly a 100 miles less to a tank of fuel.
Had it back to the garage many times and they kept saying the computer says everything's fine.
Got rid as soon as we could, and not had a Peugeot since.
Maybe you could do the same, have it checked over??
Quote: Originally posted by Baileyjake on 07/1/2015
the ASX may have a different engine to my manual. i believe the outlander Auto has a ford engine with a cam belt that is actually 2168cc and has less BHP but you may prove me wrong on that.(i believe mine, a manual has a VW engine with a chain)
No. If yours is a 61 plate, I suspect yours is the same engine as mine, a Mitsubishi 4N14. This has a 2268cc and 147 BHP. They introduced this on the Outlander in 2010, and on the ASX in 2013/4. It can come with both a manual or an auto gearbox.
It really does sound as though there is something wrong or you are very heavy footed. The gear indicator usually expects a change up a bit low, but not by much. 2-300 rpm at the most.
Not sure where I read that the auto and manual had different engines. Your Asx is 147 BHP but my outlander is supposed to be 173bhp. That could of course be down to tuning. I have 2 different motorbikes with the same rotax engine and 1 makes 120bhp and the other 96bhp.
I definitely think something is amiss. if could get 45mpg out of my jeep then why not the outlander. My driving style has not changed. And I manage 37mpg in a nissan Navara.
Anyone here got an outlander? What MPG do you see on the trip?
Oh dear! I am on the verge of considering a Mitsubishi Outlander GX3 automatic to replace my nearly-6-years-old VW Touran. My Touran is a 1.9 TDI 5-seater with full sized spare wheel. VW have ceased to supply this configuration (previously by special order), and also reduced the engine to 1.6 litres - although claiming same power output as the 1.9 litre.
Since my Touran has done only 38,000 miles, I think I'll stay with it and sit on the fence for a while.
Regarding mpg via the MFD display, my previous Touran (7-seater but otherwise same spec)gave an indicated 8-10 mpg better return.
Might continue saving and wait for a VW T5 Kombi - hitherto considered outside my spending range.
Bertie.
Quote: Originally posted by Baileyjake on 07/1/2015Not sure where I read that the auto and manual had different engines. Your Asx is 147 BHP but my outlander is supposed to be 173bhp. That could of course be down to tuning. I have 2 different motorbikes with the same rotax engine and 1 makes 120bhp and the other 96bhp.
I definitely think something is amiss. if could get 45mpg out of my jeep then why not the outlander. My driving style has not changed. And I manage 37mpg in a nissan Navara.
Anyone here got an outlander? What MPG do you see on the trip?
Do you want help or not?
The current Outlander and the ASX have the same engine with 147BHP. You only need to lift the bonnet and check the plate on the bodywork to know if its a 4N14 engine. Auto and manual are the same engine. Just Google the Mitsubishi website to confirm it. Mitsubishi have altered the tuning of their engines in recent years, however it makes only a little difference to consumption.
If so, and to re-assure 2 Tops, it should achieve a very similar figures to those I get with my ASX auto, a manual box will get slightly more.
The figures I gave for consumption are based on tank to tank refuelling not the onboard display. Its pretty easy 45.4mpg is 10 miles per litre.
freeatlast, I did originally suspect differing accuracy of the MFD display when I got my second Touran. But tank-to-tank filling showed these displays to be reasonably accurate, based on 300 mile trips to Cornwall (towing), and most of the difference is vehicle characteristic based. I did have to wait until the 20,000 mile figure had passed to allow for new engine tightness. My first Touran now lives in France (still in the family) and its MFD still shows it to out-perform my current Touran in terms of mpg. Allowing, of course, a little leeway for different drivers and UK v. French road conditions.
Bertie.
Interestingly the Outlander is powered by two completely different diesel engines. The maunal comes with a 2,268cc chain cam Mitsubishi engine developing 177PS at 3,500 rpm; 380Nm torque at 2,000rpm. The SST rwin clutch automatic, on the other hand, sticks to the Ford/PSA 2,178cc belt cammer developing 156PS at 4,000 rpm and the same 380Nm torque at 2,000rpm.
this is where i got the idea the outlander had 2 different engines for auto and manual.
my 2011 (remember mine is a series 2)outlander is definitely 173bhp....at least i hope it is...if it isnt then for a 1710kg car it would be under powered especially compared to my 1610kg jeep with 160bhp.
2 tops...if you need 7 seats forget the outlander....the 3 rd row is like a deckchair or the seats from a 2CV.
i think if you need to tow a caravan and need 7 propper seats the Santafe' would be better.
or the Nissan pathfinder? lovely car and not so expensive but the newest ones are £280/year to tax.
my wife has a zafira and the 3rd row seats are propper seats also. its not much lighter than my jeep was so could even be a tow car if you have a small van. my wifes zafira is only a 104 bhp 1.6 petrol though so i would not want to tow my van with it but there must be a 2.0L diesel version.
before you buy though take the Outlander on an extended test drive to see if you like it. i think my mistake was that i didnt test drive it for long enough. dont get me wrong, at the GX4 spec its really nice on a comfort level
its just the power band of the engine and the fuel economy i have problems with.....and that may only be my particular Outlander.
If yours is a manual, then its the same Mitsubishi 4N14 engine. As I said check the label under the bonnet, it will say clearly. Mitsu probably kept that engine/auto combination for a short time until their own auto box was ready.
They did reduce the power of the engines down.
Nevertheless, I would suggest there is a real problem with your car if there is no power above 2000rpm. Turbo fault? Could be something as simple as a hose coming off or splitting.
My auto ASX has only 4500 miles on the clock so far from run in yet.
Well I do think that my outlander has a serious problem.
On my last refuel I replaced 48L filling to the brim. On that 48L my car travelled just 236 miles. That works out to 20.67gal so the car actually achieved 22mpg.
I have approached livery dole about it and they agree something is not right but will only look at it in Exeter rather than through the dealer network. I think this is very poor service, I experienced better from Chrysler Jeep who repaired my car in any dealer. Unfortunately I don't live near Exeter. I assumed I would get a similar service. In hindsight I would have bought a car more locally or another car.
I think the pathfinder or XC90 would have been better value for money and probably use less fuel. Obviously I have to get my outlander repaired. That is if the mechanics can diagnose the fault.
Freeatlast, I saw the 4N14 sticker under the bonnet. I think though that the ASX is going to do better on fuel as the ASX is about 200kg lighter than the outlander and has smaller proportions so is more aerodynamic .
I think if you check the specs, you will find the Outlander has exactly the same fuel consumption as the ASX if you compare like for like (e.g. engine, 4wd and gearbox type), which is a bit surprising.
Ring Mitsu, they are usually quite helpful, though I suspect your is out of warranty and is therefore down to the selling garage to sort out. Usually Mitsu dealers are pretty good. I was in Southampton when my car developed a fault the local dealer there was excellent and sorted the car out very quickly under warranty.
I have a 2011 Mitsubishi outlander 2.2 and its 174bhp with engine number starting with 4n14
Had it since last march.
I've towed with it to York. Durham the lakes and peaks and its been fine, get around 25mpg, I'm happy with that.
My car is going back to the dealers to be looked at next week.
It does now rev past 2000 rpm. I tightened a jubilee clip on the intercooler hose. But the economy is still bad. Drove on motorway today. Early morning to airport. Cruise control set to 70. Average mpg was 34mpg. On the flat the instantaneous was 32mpg. Downhill between 45mpg and infinity. Any gradient down to low 20s. Also had problems getting it into second gear recently. I am coming to the conclusion that any car under 40k new and over 3 years old is going to have problems. In hindsight my jeep wasn't a bad car.
Amazing family weekend with old steam engines, classic car displays, market stalls, and full catering and bar. And camping on site - Save £25 by booking in advance.
Topic: Outlander MPG
