As a professional (depending on who you ask) automotive journalist and an amateur skeptic, I should be less susceptible to conventional wisdom about cars than the average person. I know better. Do I, though? No one is more susceptible to groupthink than someone in the group, right?
When I got a 2026 Mitsubishi Outlander SEL in my press car rotation, it wasn’t something I was super enthused about, having the typical car writer’s belief that it’s the thing you’re fine getting at the rental counter and nothing more.
That’s the line on Mitsubishi. It’s a company with a mix of ancient pre-Stellantis Franco-German-Japanese platforms and newer, pre-Nissan Renault divorce mediocre Franco-Japanese ones. Don’t buy’em, just rent’em, unless you’re desperately low on funds and the Mitsubishi dealer is the only one that’ll give you credit.
The story is a hard one to argue with, as that’s what Mitsubishi is on paper. It’s been ages since I’ve driven a Mitsubishi and that was the viewpoint that I took with me into driving this one. A viewpoint supported by my peers.
I now believe that view isn’t quite right. This latest Outlander is not the fastest, the best-handling, the most luxurious, or the most efficient three-row SUV on the market. It is the cheapest, though, while also being comfortable and efficient. I also think it’s one of the more interesting-looking SUVs for sale now.
The Basics
Engine: Turbocharged 1.5-liter inline-four w/48-volt mild-hybrid system
Transmission: CVT
Drive: all-wheel drive
Output: 174 horsepower, 206 lb-ft of torque
Fuel Economy: 30 mpg hwy, 26 mpg city, 27 mpg combined
Base Price: $29,995 FWD/$40,845 AWD SEL
Price As-Tested: $47,235 (including $1,745 destination charge)
Why Does This Exist?
It’s easy being cynical. There are entire automotive news websites that seem to now be built on a youthful delusion that says assuming the worst in everything, and everyone is somehow edgier and more valuable than actual insight. If that’s your perspective, then you’ll only see the third row in the otherwise compact crossover-sized Outlander as a cheap marketing ploy.
I’d argue that the third row in about half of the three-row crossovers on the market is also a cheap marketing ploy. Here’s the reality: Most of them are bad! I don’t want to sit in the back row of a Mazda CX-90 or Hyundai Santa Fe. They are, at best, for children or adults you hate.
Is it not more honest, even altruistic, to make a smaller and more affordable vehicle that can have a third row in those rare times when you need a third row? Few of the families I know with three-row crossovers are using that third row all the time and, like normal people, often fold it down to make room for stuff.
Seen that way, the very base model of this, starting at a little over $30,000 delivered, is a great value and a wise use of money. Even my fully featured Outlander SEL with all the options isn’t that bad of a deal. The fact that this now comes with Mitsubishi’s 48-volt mild hybrid system means it’s also remarkably efficient for a cheap car.
How Does It Look?
Mitsubishi is a smaller automaker than it used to be in the United States (though still a force in other markets), and the not-too-big crossover is a strange holdover from when Nissan, Renault, and Mitsubishi were all uncomfortably the same company. This makes the Outlander, basically, a Nissan Rogue.
I have little in the way of feelings about the appearance of the new Nissan Rogue, which is mildly attractive in a forgettable sort of way. The Outlander, at least with the two-tone White Diamond body and black roof, stands out in a positive way to me. What can I say? White Diamond cars have always brought me luck.
Maybe it’s the giant white grille and chrome trim? If the French ever made their own version of one of the angels from Neon Genesis Evangelion, it might look like the nose of this car, but not in a bad way. The blacked-out A-pillar also gives the Outlander a kind of cool-guy wrap-around sunglasses look.
It’s not pretty, per se, though not everything has to be pretty. It’s interesting. The way that the black A-pillar flows into the roof and above the D-pillar is also a clever way to add dimensionality to the profile. In solid colors, it does look a bit more Rogue-like. The 20-inch, two-tone, food-processor blade wheels are also fun.
This used to be the least-interesting class in cars, and it’s now becoming the most-interesting, aesthetically.
What’s It Like On The Inside?
While the exterior is trying to do a lot with a little, the interior is sort of doing the opposite. It’s just a sensibly attractive car that isn’t overwhelmed by too many shapes or textures. While the quilted leather isn’t exactly made with soft bull hides like on a Rolls-Royce, the seats are big and soft.
Yeah, it’s a Rogue underneath, and it has its share of meh plastics, but there isn’t too much piano black, and everything just sort of works. As always, real dials and buttons are appreciated. The steering wheel is comfortable and, on a cold day, heated up nicely. As did the seats. The infotainment is basically indecipherable from the comparable era Nissan infotainment system, which is also fine by me. It’s not something worth reinventing.
As Thomas pointed out when he drove a similar vehicle last year, the Yamaha sound system is something Mitsubishi is proud of showing off. I mostly listen to podcasts, so it didn’t overwhelm me with sonic clarity. When I did listen to music, it seemed clear enough.
There’s a little more luxury in a Telluride, better ergonomics in a Grand Highlander, and more style in a Santa Fe. Whether or not that’s enough to justify the price increase is a personal question.
Ok, But Is The Third-Row Good?
The Outlander’s greatest trick is that it is something that’s sized more like my CR-V yet offers a third row. This is an emergency third-row. As much as I like the car, I don’t want to give you the false notion that you should sit back there. Whereas the front seats are big and plush, the rear seats feel like they get thinner and smaller with each row.
How much legroom is there? If you push the second row forward, you can squeeze the calves of an undersized 1st grader through there. Getting my adult frame into the rear involved embracing everything I learned from yoga, and it was still like stuffing an entire tuna into a single Bumblebee can.
The seats themselves have an odd design, with these super narrow and tall headrests that make it look like you’re about to sit in the lap of one of the Separatist Droid Army robot soldiers from the Star Wars: Attack of The Clones prequel. It’s functional, mostly.
When writing about an older version of the Outlander, my old pal Ezra Dyer made a great point:
They’re a marvel of engineering, the Outlander’s third-row seats. Looking at the rear cargo area, you wouldn’t expect to find seats nestled under the floor. It seems like there’s no room. But Mitsubishi must employ engineers from the former East German resistance, people who once stuffed defectors into the false fender wall of a Trabant for a trip across the border. Because there is a two-up seat under there, complete with headrests that look like Star Wars clones and padding that is somehow an improvement over the lightly reinforced cardboard chairs of my 2007.
Damn, he had the same Star Wars reference in mind, but he incorrectly identified them as clone soldiers. I’m not sure if it’s more or less embarrassing to get that wrong. The point is well-taken, however, that anyone who owns an Outlander gets a giant storage area most of the time, and these neat little quasi-useful seats some of the time.
It snowed enough to go sledding when I had the Outlander, and I managed to fit all our sleds and tubes (inflated!) with plenty of room to spare for fellow children.
How Does It Drive?
The biggest news for the new Outlander is that the old 2.5-liter four-banger has been tossed for a newer, smaller, turbocharged 1.5-liter mill tied to a mild hybrid system. The engine itself is derived from the same 4B40 engine found in the Eclipse Cross, called the 4B40 Version 2 in this application. What’s strange is that there are almost no engine photos or cutaways of this new version online or in Mitsubishi’s materials.
Here’s the best I can do:
This engine doesn’t provide more power, but the addition of the mild hybrid system is a great upgrade. Basically, a 48-volt lithium-ion battery pack now sits under the rear cargo area and powers the belt-starter generator (BSG), which replaces a conventional alternator. This isn’t a full-hybrid system, but it does have a few advantages. The starter motor is still there for initial startup, but the annoyance of using it for start/stop is now replaced by the BSG. The BSG can also provide limited power during initial acceleration and while at highway speeds. Mitsubishi says this should reduce consumption and add longevity.
In practice, I barely noticed anything was happening other than an initial adjustment period to the unexpectedly abrupt engine-off period when slowing down. This is something that I hope Mitsubishi can dial in a little better over time, but for now, it’s worth it for the increased fuel economy. This is also mated to a CVT, which should complicate matters, but the CVT here is tuned fairly well.
I had the AWD version with Mitsubishi’s Super All Wheel Control (S-AWC), which performed well in low-grip situations. Because it was a press car and I’m an autojournalist, I immediately sought out as many piles of ice and snow as I could find. There was minimal slip, even on the Nexen all-season tires.
Does It Fulfill Its Purpose?
This is still a big, heavy crossover that can hold a theoretical seven humans for something like $31,000 when sparsely equipped. For that amount of change, you get a car that’ll get 30 mpg on the highway and 27 mpg combined. Even the fanciest, highest trim version of this is under the $50,000 average transaction price barrier, and my sense is that there are deals to be had. The sweet spot is probably the LE 1.5T S-AWC, which has most of the stuff you want on the model I had, minus the two-tone roof, for about $35k.
By comparison, a gas-powered two-row Honda CR-V in FWD trim is $34K out the door if you’re lucky. The cheapest Grand Highlander, which does have a useful third row, is about $44k if you can get someone to sell you a base Grand Highlander. A FWD Santa Fe is, maybe, $35K and gets 29 mpg on the highway and a comparatively bad 24 mpg combined.
There isn’t anything that offers three rows this cheaply, which is a big deal for some people. I don’t think any other compact crossover’s entry-level non-hybrid motor offers close to the same efficiency. Because of where the Outlander is positioned, you can basically get three rows, AWD, and decent fuel economy for the price of a two-row, FWD midsize crossover from a different Japanese or South Korean automaker.
That’s the purpose of this car. To exist in a space where no one has wanted to go, probably because no other brand would want to cannibalize its own sales. Mitsubishi doesn’t have a super popular two-row to compete with and, arguably, doesn’t have a lot of popular cars in general. It’s a brand that barely exists, but that doesn’t make it bad. It isn’t bad. It’s probably better than you thought. It’s certainly better than I thought.
Plus, with the seats down, it’ll transport approximately 384,000 calories worth of Girl Scout Cookies.
All photos Matt Hardigree unless otherwise noted.
I was interested in one of these a few years back. It is not a well represented brand where I live. I work from home so I was able to drop by the dealership on like a Tuesday afternoon. Place was a ghost town, not a single customer. I saw one salesperson, asleep at his desk. Craziest thing I have ever seen. Could have been lunch time rotation or something, but I strolled on down to the Honda dealership.
That is one issue that some have mentioned but do you really want to see a dealership busy, especially the service department? Go into any Hyundai/Kia or GM dealership and see how busy they are? It isn’t always because they are selling but are just replacing… engines and transmissions, etc.
that is a great point I wanted a genesis bad, but no separate dealership means a big no thank you to the fiasco that is the Hyundai service dept in Austin.
Although most Genesis’s (Genisi?) are out of my price range, I’m sure it would be difficult to drop serious coin in the same building that offers the Elantra.
“ It’s easy being cynical. There are entire […] websites that seem to now be built on a youthful delusion that says assuming the worst in everything, and everyone is somehow edgier and more valuable than actual insight.”
oh hi it’s defector dot com
I’ve had my 2019 Outlander PHEV since new and it’s required oil changes & the rear brakes done once. Looks aren’t great but it’s reliable. Unstoppable in snow or other bad weather. With those electric drive motors, actually quite fun to 4-wheel drift around the neighbourhood before the plows come through. About 90% fewer recalls than our Pacifica PHEV. Main problem is that the engine is old/inefficient and it direct-connects to the wheels above 70 kph, which really is inefficient in gas-mode at elevated highway speeds. You can’t afford to speed. But in the city, just use mostly electrons and no ICE can touch the smoothness of the EV ride. And what’s with complaining about reliability? No one touches the Mitsu warranty.
Was going to trade it in last year, but the latest iteration took a step backwards. Old one was ugly – Mitsubishi: “Hold my beer!” Adding the non-optional 3rd row – dumb. It’s too small for even kids and just wastes space. And the 2nd row seats got smaller as well! While the battery got bigger (not really needed) the onboard charger didn’t so it now takes longer to charge even if you’ve got a heavy duty home charger. (Forget the level 3 charger – just use gas.) I almost traded in on a newer used one.
If you’re going to get one, get the Nissan Rogue, which may just have a different badge, but the black-out treatment of that ghastly chrome free-for-all at the front is a huge improvement. If Nissan just sprung a bit to design 5-passenger versions with a larger rear seat, I don’t think anyone would buy the Mitsu version.
(Also. Way too many beeps that took quite a while to find and turn off.)
Nissan and their 3-pot engine has entered the chat.
In my city, the Mitsubishi Outlander and RVR (our version of the Outlander Sport) are often bought by people who have decent credit, and want something affordable, reliable enough that they don’t have to worry about it too much, and a crossover with all wheel drive because they’re very nervous when driving in snow. Or in heavy traffic. And aren’t very good at knowing when their turn is coming up. Or don’t particularly know where they’re going.
Basically, it’s become a Good Car that’s driven by some of the worst drivers. It’s the sort of person who doesn’t really like driving, but our city has pretty poor public transportation so they need a car to get where they’re going. :\
I know this is a decent enough little crossover, but it still makes me sad. Maybe thats where some of the modern Autojourno snark comes from. Mitsubishi used to do crazy shit. Shit like: HEY YOU WANT A SPLITTER FROM AN 18 WHEELER IN YOUR COLT? and HOW ABOUT A TWIN TURBO AWD FOUR WHEEL STEERING ROCKETSHIP?
Oh well.
A long time ago, Jack Baruth mentioned something he called “the wobble,” which is the dance that snarky auto pundits perform in order to be seen as balanced. They have to have cars on which they are willing to heap effusive praise and also cars they are willing to absolutely vilify. The problem is, there aren’t really any objectively bad modern cars, so the modern auto expert has to find a punching bag. But it can’t be just any car. It’s got to be a car that’s not best-in-class and maybe has contrived styling or a customer-image problem. If it’s from a struggling automaker, so much the better. In his example, it was the 2011 Chrysler 200, which was a massive improvement over the former Sebring, but still had the hard points of that car (which were, ironically, those of a Mitsubishi platform).
Today, it’s a product like the Mitsubishi Outlander.
The other problem is that now you have TikTokers, FB commenters and especially Redditors who throw this kind of snark in the mix. “The Outlander’s a piece of sh*t. It won’t last the warranty period. Hur hur hur.” It’s unfunny, it’s unoriginal, and–most importantly–it’s extremely unhelpful to people who don’t know better and often who genuinely are asking for sound advice about a car purchase. They never say why they think the Outlander is a bad car, or why someone should pay 25% to 40% more for a competing Honda, Toyota, Subaru or Mazda, with a worse warranty.
And, as your review indicates, there’s not really any merit to it. It’s a nice crossover. Seriously.
The other thing, and I think you point this out well, too, is that it’s a 5+2. It’s sitting on the exact same footprint as many “compact” 5-seat crossovers, and that means the backseat is really for emergencies only. And it’s the last remaining of a niche series of products in that class that had (very tight) third rows at one point or another in our market (RAV4, Tiguan, XL-7). I’m not sure Mitsubishi would have bothered with a third row in our market if it didn’t just happen to be the largest thing they sell. Nevertheless, trying to compare its third-row accommodations to those of a Palisade or even a modern Highlander is disingenuous and goofy. Not to mention that most third rows suck, in anything that’s not a minivan or a full-size BOF SUV with independent rear suspension.
I looked up Scott Burgess, who quit his job at the Detroit paper when they edited his review excoriating the Chrysler 200 (the low side of his ‘wobble’), and boy is his job history on LinkedIn ever a ride. Quit your job in a huff, bounce around as a freelancer for a while… end up living in Kazakhstan as a university lecturer? I’ll bet that story would be interesting told over a beer.
Kazakhstan? Wow.
I remember reading Burgess’s work. I don’t think he deserved a column. He was one of those writers for whom I’d start furrowing my brow partway through an article and wonder who the heck was writing this garbage, then I’d scroll up and see the name and say “Oh. Yeah, that guy”.
Mitsubishis are good. There, I said it. Not “enthusiast” good, but nobody listens to weirdos who hardly buy new cars anyway.
Their entire lineup is full of value.
My In Laws had a 2018 Outlander . For the price, the cub was decked out, returned decent fuel economy and was a perfect size for two seniors and their stuff. Mitsubishi suffers from having decent but not class leading cars in the segment. Pounce on them or Nissan for that matter? But for customers looking for a lower cost value proposition, they are fine.
As an enthusiast, I know the Mitsubishi of old will probably never come back but I still root for them.
“Their entire lineup is full of value”
Their entire lineup here is 3 models. Two of them are so similar in size and format they barely count as separate.
“but nobody listens to weirdos who hardly buy new cars anyway”
Normal car buyers aren’t buying Mitsubishis either.
I think it’s awesome that Autopians are very excited to defend an underdog, but Mitsubishi is a peculiar one to stand up for. Their offerings here are underperforming and dull by even appliance car standards.
They’re not setting sales records, no. Dealers aren’t great and are spaced far apart. The lineup is small, as you note, and pretty old, overall. They’re definitely not flashy.
But – they’re priced well. That old stuff is proven; or at least you can find out what the common trouble spots are. They’re cheap to run and maintain. And they’re a new car with an long warranty for many people who need that kind of safety net vs. a used-car crapshoot.
The curling headlight treatment always reminded me of Rollie Fingers’ mustache.
It really needs moar ersatz plastic and fake chrome on the front.
“The biggest news for the new Outlander is that the old 2.5-liter four-banger has been tossed”
Okay… who tossed this 4 cylinder engine and left it on my front lawn???
That was me.
https://media.tenor.com/w3STEKUIBPkAAAAM/curse-on-you-golden-girls.gif
One of the main reasons we bought our two Outties was the fact it has a non-turbo engine especially after our oil-burning Hyundais… never again Korea, ain’t going back Gangnam Style.
It has both Star Wars and Battlestar Galactica? No Trek though?
Hahahaha. BSG. I get it!
:-/
These have been on my radar because MotorWeek has had one in their long-term test fleet twice now, and can’t say enough good things about them. Their Outlanders have been the full-tilt PHEV ones – so maybe a bit better than the ‘normal’ Outlander.
MotorWeek has a positivity problem, that is, they have a hard time saying something truly bad about anything they test – even less for a long-termer. So take their opinion with a grain of salt.
I had an Outlander as a rental in northern Indiana for a week in the snow season. It was a fine car, but not stand-out in any way, shape, or form. It reinforced what I already thought of Mitsubishi in my mind:
“Why do they still sell cars here?”
And unfortunately due to tariffs and the “chicken-tax” and the fact that the USA isn’t the world’s largest automotive market anymore, we don’t get the Triton, the Destinator or current X-Trail among others… maybe the Pajero will change that.
“like stuffing an entire tuna into a single Bumblebee can”
Love Outlander-made Mitsubishi!
Man, that is terrifying.
The Outlander used to be truly awful, so you can be forgiven for your skepticism. I rented one in 2019 to drive back to the North Bay from Santa Barbara after my flight was canceled, and it was terrible in every possible way.
It was slow, the engine was buzzy, the ride was too harsh while also being too wallowy, the handling was truly abysmal, the interior materials were garbage, and the infotainment system on what appeared to be a fully-equipped model was years behind the times. I couldn’t even connect my phone to it.
It had no redeeming qualities besides being better than waiting 10 hours for the next flight out, and it remains one of the worst modern cars I have ever driven.
Agreed for the 2022s. Although I think you can connect to that one, if you can see to find the buttons.
That’s true…although I thought all the same of a mid-spec non-hybrid RAV4 XLE I was once given as a rental car. I really do think people’s standards are lowered when a car is purported to be class-leading, even if it objectively sort of sucks.
Looks like a mid-trim example with AWD (FWD examples of crossovers basically don’t exist in the Northeast) goes for about 34k. I mean… I guess if I’m going to spend that sort of money on a compact-mid crossover… seems like I’d just be better off buying one from a brand with real dealers. If I have a shitty time with the “local” dealer (35 miles away) I’m basically screwed. The next nearest one is a whopping 125 miles away, lol.
Also, I get nervous to hear this shares ANYTHING with the Eclipse Cross. That thing is the shittiest car I’ve had the pleasure of driving since recession era GM.
Unglamorous but satisfactory. It sounds like a good deal on the lower optioned end, though as someone who likes to drive the wheels off his cars I would worry about how well the small turbo 4 and mild hybrid set up will hold up moving that much vehicle.
It
is
FUGLY
Yeah, it’s one of those park-it-nose-to-the-wall kinds of cars so you don’t approach it towards the front. Looks fine from every other angle.
Either that or get a bra for the front end, i.e. put a bag over its head before you get familiar with it.
And the Uno-Reverse happened where the Nissan Rogue is, basically, a Mitsubishi Outlander.
I liked it since it came out. Tried to buy one a few times but the dealers are just so terrible I gave up. Maybe I will try again at some point. Might be getting a bit stale in the market. But I like the design they always felt decent quality. The back seat is a bit of a joke but in a vehicle that size it’s going to be. You could put some kids back there and they would be fine. I see them driving around from time to time the Nissian part of the drive train did scare me. But Mitsubishi programs their cvts differently so they appear to hold up better. Dumping the 2.5 is probably a good idea they used their 2.4 in the phev. Not sure about a mild hybrid but I guess I would take it stock over a Nissian 2.5 and cvt.
A Mitsubishi dealer opened up in an old Subaru dealership that moved to a different part of town. The Mitsubishi dealer only stayed open for about a year. Not a good sign. Now there is no Mitsubishi within 120mi radius
“Have I Been Gaslit Into Thinking The Mitsubishi Outlander Is Bad?”
I thought the 1.5 turbo was the variable compression grenade from Nissan (the Outlander’s prior 2.5 was a Nissan) and was going to answer “No, you haven’t been gaslit”, but then I saw it was a Mitsubishi motor. So there’s some hope.
Looks like a solid utilitarian deal and I don’t mind an old platform if it works well enough. It’s not like the Honda 1.5 + CVT is anything worth bragging about. Good looking interior, too, just enough mix of decent materials and oddball crosshatch quilting. The Jatco CVT is a wildcard
Jatco CVT!
Jatco CVT!
JATCO CVT!
Will he appear?
Everything about this car is Outlandish.
My household has had an Outlander PHEV for ~7 years and 70k miles. It has performed as advertised with no complaints.
It’s not fancy, it is slow, but it is comfortable, holds a lot of stuff (but last gen is only a 5 seater) and has only taken oil, gas and electrons, plus 1 set of brake pads and 1 set of tires.
When you consider how cheap it was for a PHEV, it still feels like a deal.
I wonder if Mitsubishi gets extra loathing because it fell from such heights and therefore people are extra disappointed in it.
If not, it should.
I kinda like these things as cheap cars. I wonder how reliability is?