Hold on. Need to evaluate your benchmark of 5 seconds. Since no "average" or real world car is going to be capable of this especially at the elevation that your at. Even to get to 5 seconds at your elevation, your going to have a very high HP car laying down that speed. Very unrealistic.
Come to think of it, they want the max. score to be 100. They don't want any car to go faster than their benchmark or it would mess up their scoring. Also why the braking benchmark is very difficult to beat. ;)
What jedironin said. It's a benchmark - no average car is supposed to beat it. Also, as long as they use the same testing procedures for all cars, it doesn't matter. That being said, there are some cars that are even slower than this Outlander Sport - they would get 0 points in acceleration according to this method. So, maybe 25 points per test doesn't provide a large enough scale.. if they want to keep it simple, they could increase the base points per test to 50, for a total of 200.
Also, what average consumer needs a car that is near 5 seconds 0-60? Shouldn't this be about what average consumers are looking for? Acceleration is largely for entertainment value.
At elevation your not being realistic with the 5 second 0-60,very few will come close to that.100 feet to stop from 60 is also in corvette territory and not all that realistic
I'm curious how you set you bench marks, particularly the 5sec 0-60. Shouldn't you set bench marks by best in class and then adjust each class for accuracy.
Yeah the benchmarks he set make absolutely no sense. Nothing outside of sports and luxury cars do 0-60 in 5sec. Certainly nothing in the sub-$30k subcompact SUV class. Also an interior noid dB rating of 50? Again, nothing achieves anywhere close to that.
Man, so many people know nothing about data testing. The point is to set your baseline very high so lots of vehicles don't get full points. The score of each vehicle is then tested against another vehicle, not a mythical perfect 100 point vehicle.
I have this vehicle and it is amazing. Not full of the garbage options others force you to buy. A superior 4 wheel drive system. 100% Made in Japan. Zero anything after 2 years. Less plastic than the new vehicles that feed you. The best. Rugged. I love it.
I'm considering purchasing a used 2019 with 11k miles. How has yours performed the last 2 years? Do you still recommend? It would be my first SUV ever.
The individual scores are only as good as the baselines that are being established. Please explain how the baselines were created and what "examples" are the benchmarks.
So their baseline is a very high performance car? Got it. Cant wait to see a car get these numbers. 5sec at a mile above sea level is upper echelon. And 100ft 60-0 is not attainable by many either.
@Rick James5678 those two cars wouldn't score the same regardless, even if they used a different baseline. I guess it doesn't matter though as long as all cars are tested on the same scale, that is correct.
I can't believe no one said anything about how you read that tape measure. I'll just let you review the footage and see for yourself what you did wrong.
Seems no one has actually commented on the vehicle, so I'll be the first. We've got a 2015 Outlander Sport GT in our household. Basically the exact same thing as this 2019. Jus a different face. It's a great compact SUV for the money. Solidly built and very dependable. Yes CRV and RAV4 are better, but they also easily cost $6k more comparably equipped when you actually go to buy one. Also, they don't offer the 100k mile warranty. Any CRV owner with the 1.5L turbo will kick themselves for not having a better warranty.
I think the aceleration test is a little un realistic. Not every car is a 5 second car nor is designed to be. My vehicle is 7 seconds 0-60 and im perfectly happy. I think you should take 2 seconds off per second instead of per half second. Cut some slack lol
@Rick James5678 my main point is just that if they are going to test general consumer cars (such as this) in this fashion, they should select more relevant tests. Cornering distance and breaking are good selections.
@@ryanwilson1672 Do you have a suggestion for more relevant tests? They need to be objective, cheap, fast and meet their facility restrictions. That kind of takes away options like a slalom, skid pad and any subjective scoring.
@@jamesbeaman6337 cheap is tough. When I think about putting my pregnant wife in a new car, I want safety, easy to operate, and good lines of sight (among others). I think a swerve control test would be useful with all the SUV and crossovers on the market. I understand the need to make testing fast and cheap, I work for a test lab. I just thing mpg is more important than acceleration time. Overall cost could be a way to score them against each other, like initial or cost to operate.
Exactly, or get a benchmark for each class of vehicle .....and there are cars that are going to be way slower than the 2.4 L Outlander Sport...... Honda HRV, Nissan Versa, Subaru Crosstrek, Toyota CHR, just to name a few.
I don't have a problem with how you set your benchmarks - its fine to pick one, and apply it consistently to all the cars you test. My thought is whether or not you are measuring the right things. People don't buy cars like this for the 0-60 time, so it isn't a very relevant data point. What would matter to me is front hip/shoulder room, how many grocery bags I can fit in the way back, safety in an accident, and predicted reliability. Those things don't make for entertaining videos - but those things matter more than some of the things you're measuring. I enjoy the channel. Keep up the good work.
Why does a car have to be faster to 60 than 5 seconds? It only costs $25k out the door. Geez. Some of us don't care at all about it and it doesn't detract from an otherwise good vehicle. Reassess your testing values.
Not every vehicle is capable of 5 sec runs. Realistic should be 7 or 8 seconds. Also the dB should be around 65 as base Compared to your other videos that was about average. However it doesn’t matter cause you won’t read this anyway
I just got a 2019 Outlander sport with the 2.0 CVT its somehow faster than my 08 accord with the famous k24 2.4 about a 30 hp difference I dint buy this car to go fast I bought it for its looks and value and technology and its 99% japenese so you know its reliable , if I wanna go fast I use my 2012 m37s
168 hp in this size and price point is excellent. Most things in this segment and size have a 1.8 to 2.0 and less horsepower and torque. A 2.4l in a 3200lb suv is excellent in this segment
I agree with this. It should be .25. I also dont get the point of rounding up the results. The average to 60 was 10.82. So they rounded up to 11. Where is the accuracy here. You spent all that time doing 4 runs, doing the average, all to just round it up basically to the worst time. Lol 🤷♀️
Quick thoughts; Did you run like 5 cars through the test before you decided grading standards? Would have been a good idea in order to set up a good measuring system. 3 tests is kinda low. A proper experiment needs at least 20 test samples. A minimum of 5 should at least be done I think. I think recreating what road and track did in the 70s would be best. If you have time, try to search them up here on UA-cam. They have vintage road tests of muscle cars that are awesome
About that tape measure... at 7:24, you show you're measuring from the 'black' at the cone...then you switch to the 'red' when you show you reading from the other side at 7:37...I'm sure you know how to use a tape measure...I think the editing is going to make it look like you're doing it wrong. Why not just start at Zero like you show at 7:24 and end at 36'1" as the filming shows? I'm having a hard time following that one.
I'm considering purchase of a used 2019 Outlander currently. When test driving, I heard a clicking in the engine. Curious how yours has performed in the last 2 yrs. Do you still like it?
Am I one of the few people who actually like this car? I get its a little old and slower but compared to a crosstrek or hrv this thing is not bad. I've drove a few and they were comfortable and easy to drive.
My parents own a 2015 GT and a 2019 ES. I love driving them enough that I'm considering one for myself. Dealers in my area are selling the ES for $24k. You can't touch an HRV or Corolla Cross for that, but it's just as reliable and has a much better warranty. It' also has better ground clearance and a taller ride height than those competitors.
I think the points-based evaluation works pretty well with your truck testing, but I don't really like it for this sort of thing. It doesn't add anything, I'm happy for you to just give us the numbers and let us digest them in our own way. PS - Mitsubishi still exists? Had no idea.
The turning circle baseline needs to be explained. And if you are planning to do this on every car you get in your fleet, might I suggest getting a laser to measire the distance. Your test is not as subjective as someone's"doug score". Good job. If you are going to change the way you test do it now before you get a bunch of test results that get nullified. Some people are saying your elevation effects braking. I would like a reason for them saying this. New one on me.
I like this new series. You should test everything. For some consistency, this should be all Mike. Face it: Andre and Kent have the Ike, Roman and Nathan are best at No, You're Wrong, and Tommy has Cliffhanger and other off-road trails. That leaves Mike. Probably not gonna happen but just a thought
We have a 2016 Mitsubishi Outlander Sport GT AWC with the 2.4L 4 Cylinder and 168 HRSP and its about 8.7 seconds? I cant get it about 9.0 seconds? Is it maybe because the elevation of where the car is??? I believe even car and driver rated it at like under 9 seconds??? Motor Trend rates it at 8.5 seconds online? Why is this so much slower???
Interesting that a ~2017 Outlander Sport 2.4 GT did 0-60 in about 9 second flat near Fort Collins when it was still in the break in period. I'd check to see what's wrong with this vehicle. The 2.4 GT is not amazingly fast but 11 seconds 0-60 is more what I've seen from the 2.0 equipped Outlander Sport. At sea level the 2.4 GT should hit 60 in the low to mid 7 second range. This thing definitely needs more power. I think the 2.0T from the old Ralliart would work just fine.
It’s amazing how Mitsubishi is still around. You would think they would have left the U.S market by now, like Suzuki and Isuzu. The only reasons keeping them alive is their huge discounts and their merger with Nissan.
I think folks are smart enough to give a small 4-cyl cute ute some slack on the 0-60 time - it's not the Evo. It shouldn't get a bunch of participation points just for reaching 60 by the end of the straight. I do like that a car can't score unless it reaches 60 by the end of the straight. :)
The series is a good idea. Your testing methodology needs serious refinement and so do the benchmarks. Why do 4 runs to 60 when your just gonna round up or down? The result was 10.82, so you rounded up to 11. Basically backing over your tests and rounding up to the worst time. You need to do the test by the average and not round. And as others have mentioned, 5 seconds is extremely unrealistic at altitude. I understand some vehicles will surpass that, but those are few and far between. 5 seconds is no where near an average.
Many people in the comments need to understand the benchmarks need to be set high so you don't get a bunch of vehicles getting 100/100. How would that be useful in terms of comparing cars on a leaderboard.
Interesting scoring system. If the cup holder is full, is also loses 2 points. I cannot stop laughing at the dud wearing a white lab coat to hold a stopwatch. I can do this test in my local Wal-Mart parking lot just racing with everyone else for parking spot
Leave the scoring to Doug. You do much better at buddy reviews. I think its great to standardize the testing and data collection. Just keep it as a chart per category.
It's the same car I seen at NYIAS back in 2010 , When are they gonna scrap this platform ? It's being shredded to pieces , the entire Mitsubishi lineup besides the eclipse cross needs revamped.
turning radius is flawed. I own this vehicle, and can say by far has the best turning radius out of any vehicle I have owned or driven. A Yaris cant even turn this tight. Your 0-60 times should be averaged by and when you test other cars, since this is the first, it is the benchmark.
you should evaluate your numbers. try looking at average numbers across all vehicle types, your numbers were basically 0-60 for sports cars,(not including exotics) your 100 to zero, thats 100000 dollar car territory. and 60db well that's strait up Bentley territory.... maybe reduce penalty points per amount over, ive driven the outlander and i can tell you its a pretty average entry level SUV, but the way your score reads it sounds more like your saying its a huge failure.... not complaining here, but appearances of numbers like that...... think of it this way max score 100, if you got a 44/100 in any college class ... well you get the point. while this is an average low end SUV i dont find it to be a failure which a 44/100 would indicate on a psychological level
so you're at 152.2 or .2 over a half point res and you round down on stopping, but you're at 36.63 ft or .13 over on turning and you round up? wtf mang, scientific rounding, you round down from less than half, you round up from half or more, so .24 over and below you round down, .25 and over or higher and you round up. C'mon...
i've owned 3 Mitsubishi's. Their warranty might as well be written in disappearing ink. anyone considering buying a Mitsu, do yourself a favor & stay the hell away from this brand. These are cheap disposable vehicles, nothing more.
Unsubscribed. I swear EVERY episode you make, its a new content. Then a day later, it goes away and you create yet ANOTHER new content. Hopefully you guys understand that consistency is paramount in channels like yours.
Please don’t let the door hit you in the butt on the way out. BTW: We’ve been testing cars the same way on our show called Hot or Not the same way for years. The same is is true for Gold Mine Hill, Cliffhanger 2.0 and the Ike Gauntlet. We have no clue what you are taking about.
Hold on.
Need to evaluate your benchmark of 5 seconds. Since no "average" or real world car is going to be capable of this especially at the elevation that your at.
Even to get to 5 seconds at your elevation, your going to have a very high HP car laying down that speed. Very unrealistic.
The 100 ft braking benchmark is equally unrealistic.
Come to think of it, they want the max. score to be 100. They don't want any car to go faster than their benchmark or it would mess up their scoring. Also why the braking benchmark is very difficult to beat. ;)
What jedironin said. It's a benchmark - no average car is supposed to beat it. Also, as long as they use the same testing procedures for all cars, it doesn't matter.
That being said, there are some cars that are even slower than this Outlander Sport - they would get 0 points in acceleration according to this method. So, maybe 25 points per test doesn't provide a large enough scale.. if they want to keep it simple, they could increase the base points per test to 50, for a total of 200.
Also, what average consumer needs a car that is near 5 seconds 0-60? Shouldn't this be about what average consumers are looking for? Acceleration is largely for entertainment value.
Ryan Wilson 12 seconds is still super slow
At elevation your not being realistic with the 5 second 0-60,very few will come close to that.100 feet to stop from 60 is also in corvette territory and not all that realistic
AT THE END IT REALLY DOESN'T MATTER WHAT YALL HAVE TO SAY... MITSUBISHI IS CURRENTLY 3RD IN OWNER SATISFACTION
Wow. Had no idea.
@@dontelindsey5846 yes
@@ALEX-sh3tx good for them. I always cheer for the underdog. I knew sales were going up but didn't know about them being number three in satisfaction
@@dontelindsey5846 I agree 💯
I've always wondered about this...I have no first hand experience with them and don't know anyone that does other than the early 2000s eclispe
I'm curious how you set you bench marks, particularly the 5sec 0-60. Shouldn't you set bench marks by best in class and then adjust each class for accuracy.
Yeah the benchmarks he set make absolutely no sense. Nothing outside of sports and luxury cars do 0-60 in 5sec. Certainly nothing in the sub-$30k subcompact SUV class. Also an interior noid dB rating of 50? Again, nothing achieves anywhere close to that.
Man, so many people know nothing about data testing. The point is to set your baseline very high so lots of vehicles don't get full points. The score of each vehicle is then tested against another vehicle, not a mythical perfect 100 point vehicle.
I have this vehicle and it is amazing. Not full of the garbage options others force you to buy. A superior 4 wheel drive system. 100% Made in Japan. Zero anything after 2 years. Less plastic than the new vehicles that feed you. The best. Rugged. I love it.
I'm considering purchasing a used 2019 with 11k miles. How has yours performed the last 2 years? Do you still recommend? It would be my first SUV ever.
Wow, sets 5-second 0-60 "benchmark," starts out with an 11-second car. smh.
The individual scores are only as good as the baselines that are being established. Please explain how the baselines were created and what "examples" are the benchmarks.
Let's all take a shot every time he says "naturally aspirated" or "a mile above sea level".
So their baseline is a very high performance car? Got it. Cant wait to see a car get these numbers. 5sec at a mile above sea level is upper echelon. And 100ft 60-0 is not attainable by many either.
@Rick James5678 those two cars wouldn't score the same regardless, even if they used a different baseline. I guess it doesn't matter though as long as all cars are tested on the same scale, that is correct.
I can't believe no one said anything about how you read that tape measure. I'll just let you review the footage and see for yourself what you did wrong.
Chris Robinson Very typical for my/ this age group.
Correct, but as long as they are consistent the data is relevant.
Totally agree with the others...your accelleration and braking tests are way off...especially at your elevation and the test vehicle.
Thats awesome that you guys included turning radius, as it is important. I do not know of any other vehicle review channels that do this.
I’m just as enthusiastic for the road noise test.
Seems no one has actually commented on the vehicle, so I'll be the first. We've got a 2015 Outlander Sport GT in our household. Basically the exact same thing as this 2019. Jus a different face. It's a great compact SUV for the money. Solidly built and very dependable. Yes CRV and RAV4 are better, but they also easily cost $6k more comparably equipped when you actually go to buy one. Also, they don't offer the 100k mile warranty. Any CRV owner with the 1.5L turbo will kick themselves for not having a better warranty.
I got an outlander ad before the vid 😂
I think the aceleration test is a little un realistic. Not every car is a 5 second car nor is designed to be. My vehicle is 7 seconds 0-60 and im perfectly happy. I think you should take 2 seconds off per second instead of per half second. Cut some slack lol
But acceleration is only important if you are in the market for a sports car.
@Rick James5678 my main point is just that if they are going to test general consumer cars (such as this) in this fashion, they should select more relevant tests. Cornering distance and breaking are good selections.
@@ryanwilson1672 Do you have a suggestion for more relevant tests? They need to be objective, cheap, fast and meet their facility restrictions. That kind of takes away options like a slalom, skid pad and any subjective scoring.
@@jamesbeaman6337 cheap is tough. When I think about putting my pregnant wife in a new car, I want safety, easy to operate, and good lines of sight (among others). I think a swerve control test would be useful with all the SUV and crossovers on the market. I understand the need to make testing fast and cheap, I work for a test lab. I just thing mpg is more important than acceleration time. Overall cost could be a way to score them against each other, like initial or cost to operate.
*Its only slow because of the elevation. At sea level that thing would do 0-60 in 5 seconds flat.*
funny
This channel is like the old motor week, but better
i feel like price should go in the tests somewhere. Maybe set a base price of 100k, for every 5k under +1 for every 5k over -1
Doesn’t really matter what they set the benchmark to as long as they use the same data points for every car tested.
Exactly, or get a benchmark for each class of vehicle .....and there are cars that are going to be way slower than the 2.4 L Outlander Sport...... Honda HRV, Nissan Versa, Subaru Crosstrek, Toyota CHR, just to name a few.
I don't have a problem with how you set your benchmarks - its fine to pick one, and apply it consistently to all the cars you test. My thought is whether or not you are measuring the right things. People don't buy cars like this for the 0-60 time, so it isn't a very relevant data point. What would matter to me is front hip/shoulder room, how many grocery bags I can fit in the way back, safety in an accident, and predicted reliability. Those things don't make for entertaining videos - but those things matter more than some of the things you're measuring. I enjoy the channel. Keep up the good work.
Why does a car have to be faster to 60 than 5 seconds? It only costs $25k out the door. Geez.
Some of us don't care at all about it and it doesn't detract from an otherwise good vehicle.
Reassess your testing values.
This is a compact suv, not a race car. 5 seconds is ridiculous.
Not every vehicle is capable of 5 sec runs. Realistic should be 7 or 8 seconds. Also the dB should be around 65 as base Compared to your other videos that was about average. However it doesn’t matter cause you won’t read this anyway
I just got a 2019 Outlander sport with the 2.0 CVT its somehow faster than my 08 accord with the famous k24 2.4
about a 30 hp difference I dint buy this car to go fast I bought it for its looks and value and technology and its 99% japenese so you know its reliable , if I wanna go fast I use my 2012 m37s
168 hp in this size and price point is excellent. Most things in this segment and size have a 1.8 to 2.0 and less horsepower and torque. A 2.4l in a 3200lb suv is excellent in this segment
Why is the acceleration 2 point per .5 secs, not 1 point every .25? Also how did you get your braking benchmark?
I agree with this. It should be .25. I also dont get the point of rounding up the results. The average to 60 was 10.82. So they rounded up to 11. Where is the accuracy here. You spent all that time doing 4 runs, doing the average, all to just round it up basically to the worst time. Lol 🤷♀️
Quick thoughts;
Did you run like 5 cars through the test before you decided grading standards? Would have been a good idea in order to set up a good measuring system.
3 tests is kinda low. A proper experiment needs at least 20 test samples. A minimum of 5 should at least be done I think.
I think recreating what road and track did in the 70s would be best. If you have time, try to search them up here on UA-cam. They have vintage road tests of muscle cars that are awesome
BenLeBlanc1 Omg
that is not traction control button. ..it's a anti slip/skid,control if you start sliding. .the brakes will kick in and get car straight again
Running 0-60 four times in this vehicle takes a lot of patience.
About that tape measure... at 7:24, you show you're measuring from the 'black' at the cone...then you switch to the 'red' when you show you reading from the other side at 7:37...I'm sure you know how to use a tape measure...I think the editing is going to make it look like you're doing it wrong.
Why not just start at Zero like you show at 7:24 and end at 36'1" as the filming shows? I'm having a hard time following that one.
Would've been a bit cooler to see some mild off-roading considering what y'all have put the RAV4 through.
How about adding a rolling acceleration like from 10-70 mph like highway merging?
This CUV is so unsporty that I lost interest only halfway through the video.
STFUUU
THEN GET OUT OF HEAR.. MOST PEOPLE DON'T CARE WHAT YOU THINK
WRONG!!
@@toyokawashigako1643 Calm down little man!
CSUVs are not sporty no matter what it is. Not supposed to be. Buy a sportscar or sport sedan.
I love the outlander Sport
I'm considering purchase of a used 2019 Outlander currently. When test driving, I heard a clicking in the engine. Curious how yours has performed in the last 2 yrs. Do you still like it?
So it's like a Doug Score but with facts. Cool idea.
Except Doug score is a joke and waste of time. This one is bad, just not Doug bad.
This was actually a good test 👀 excpect no everyday car is going 0-60 in 5 seconds lol
Another segment? How many do you guys need? I've lost count the amount of segments you have.
Am I one of the few people who actually like this car? I get its a little old and slower but compared to a crosstrek or hrv this thing is not bad. I've drove a few and they were comfortable and easy to drive.
My parents own a 2015 GT and a 2019 ES. I love driving them enough that I'm considering one for myself. Dealers in my area are selling the ES for $24k. You can't touch an HRV or Corolla Cross for that, but it's just as reliable and has a much better warranty. It' also has better ground clearance and a taller ride height than those competitors.
I think the points-based evaluation works pretty well with your truck testing, but I don't really like it for this sort of thing. It doesn't add anything, I'm happy for you to just give us the numbers and let us digest them in our own way. PS - Mitsubishi still exists? Had no idea.
The turning circle baseline needs to be explained. And if you are planning to do this on every car you get in your fleet, might I suggest getting a laser to measire the distance. Your test is not as subjective as someone's"doug score". Good job.
If you are going to change the way you test do it now before you get a bunch of test results that get nullified. Some people are saying your elevation effects braking. I would like a reason for them saying this. New one on me.
Considering Mitsubishi has made one of the most respected 2.0l (evo) I don’t know why they don’t put it into all there other cars
I don't have enough patience. What's the 0 to 60 time on this?
I like this new series. You should test everything. For some consistency, this should be all Mike. Face it: Andre and Kent have the Ike, Roman and Nathan are best at No, You're Wrong, and Tommy has Cliffhanger and other off-road trails. That leaves Mike. Probably not gonna happen but just a thought
2.4l has no reason to make any less than 200hp smh
I'm thinking they engineer to be long lasting over maximum hp. They trying not keep people from using that 100k power train.
No wonder they have barely any subs after so many years
Is this 2.4 engine related to the FCA 2.4 and if so do these harken back to the world engines made for Mitsu, Hyundai and Chrysler?
Yes, it uses the 4B12
We have a 2016 Mitsubishi Outlander Sport GT AWC with the 2.4L 4 Cylinder and 168 HRSP and its about 8.7 seconds? I cant get it about 9.0 seconds? Is it maybe because the elevation of where the car is??? I believe even car and driver rated it at like under 9 seconds??? Motor Trend rates it at 8.5 seconds online? Why is this so much slower???
Ikr that’s like the times of the 2.0L
Interesting that a ~2017 Outlander Sport 2.4 GT did 0-60 in about 9 second flat near Fort Collins when it was still in the break in period. I'd check to see what's wrong with this vehicle. The 2.4 GT is not amazingly fast but 11 seconds 0-60 is more what I've seen from the 2.0 equipped Outlander Sport. At sea level the 2.4 GT should hit 60 in the low to mid 7 second range. This thing definitely needs more power. I think the 2.0T from the old Ralliart would work just fine.
Also missing is cornering G's and a suspension test.
It’s amazing how Mitsubishi is still around. You would think they would have left the U.S market by now, like Suzuki and Isuzu. The only reasons keeping them alive is their huge discounts and their merger with Nissan.
I think folks are smart enough to give a small 4-cyl cute ute some slack on the 0-60 time - it's not the Evo. It shouldn't get a bunch of participation points just for reaching 60 by the end of the straight. I do like that a car can't score unless it reaches 60 by the end of the straight. :)
This car is so old, a friend of mine recently bought one of this, and after 2k miles the CVT failed 😂
Was it brand new ??
The series is a good idea. Your testing methodology needs serious refinement and so do the benchmarks. Why do 4 runs to 60 when your just gonna round up or down? The result was 10.82, so you rounded up to 11. Basically backing over your tests and rounding up to the worst time. You need to do the test by the average and not round. And as others have mentioned, 5 seconds is extremely unrealistic at altitude. I understand some vehicles will surpass that, but those are few and far between. 5 seconds is no where near an average.
Next, test the big Outlander GT V6.
I am from Australia. We don’t use feet and inches so can you converted into metric.
No..there are two types of countries in the world, Those that use the Metric system an Those that went to the Moon..USA USA..
Many people in the comments need to understand the benchmarks need to be set high so you don't get a bunch of vehicles getting 100/100. How would that be useful in terms of comparing cars on a leaderboard.
Interesting scoring system. If the cup holder is full, is also loses 2 points. I cannot stop laughing at the dud wearing a white lab coat to hold a stopwatch. I can do this test in my local Wal-Mart parking lot just racing with everyone else for parking spot
The "dude" in the white coat is Andre!
@@jedironin380 I do not know who "Andre" is, but if he does not fit in the glove box, we deduct two points.
@@dwheeler016 Andre Smirnov is one of the regular presenters across the TFL channels. He's been with them for a few years. :)
Leave the scoring to Doug. You do much better at buddy reviews. I think its great to standardize the testing and data collection. Just keep it as a chart per category.
Oh pooh! I thought this was a new EVO vehicle... LOL
Id love to see towing capacity
Click baity tumbnail description. The results are not particularly slow for a cuv of its class at elevation.
The acceleration benchmark should be more around 8-10 seconds Far more cars that you've tested land around that range than land at the 5 second range.
So, a majority of the cars would attain the benchmark? That may not be a very effective way to differentiate them.
@@jamesbeaman6337 Just make the increments smaller. 2 points for every 10th or half second over.
Next time put the car in 4-wheel drive you will get better traction and a better time results
It's the same car I seen at NYIAS back in 2010 , When are they gonna scrap this platform ? It's being shredded to pieces , the entire Mitsubishi lineup besides the eclipse cross needs revamped.
But they're well-built and dependable. You really want them to scrap their whole line for some new Nissan/Renault crap? I sure don't.
I HAVE THIS CAR!!!! SAME COLOR!!!
Talking about sport, this SUV has a turning circle smaller than a the "sport" vw GTI, LOL
Turning circle test ? At least replace it with a lap time test
I can get in the 9s consistently
you need to wait 10 years to find out if your car is good or not!
Says who ??
0-60 should be 8 seconds benchmark and braking should be 125 feet. Both are very average numbers for most cars
turning radius is flawed. I own this vehicle, and can say by far has the best turning radius out of any vehicle I have owned or driven. A Yaris cant even turn this tight. Your 0-60 times should be averaged by and when you test other cars, since this is the first, it is the benchmark.
The best automotive youtube channel
Fast, fast, fast......! Brakes.....!? Handing....! Outlander Sport GT = F1 race car!
I'm guessing your doing this rather poorly just to make people upset???...ok I get it.
you should evaluate your numbers. try looking at average numbers across all vehicle types, your numbers were basically 0-60 for sports cars,(not including exotics) your 100 to zero, thats 100000 dollar car territory. and 60db well that's strait up Bentley territory.... maybe reduce penalty points per amount over, ive driven the outlander and i can tell you its a pretty average entry level SUV, but the way your score reads it sounds more like your saying its a huge failure.... not complaining here, but appearances of numbers like that...... think of it this way max score 100, if you got a 44/100 in any college class ... well you get the point. while this is an average low end SUV i dont find it to be a failure which a 44/100 would indicate on a psychological level
so you're at 152.2 or .2 over a half point res and you round down on stopping, but you're at 36.63 ft or .13 over on turning and you round up? wtf mang, scientific rounding, you round down from less than half, you round up from half or more, so .24 over and below you round down, .25 and over or higher and you round up. C'mon...
Haha this is not a raid test
i've owned 3 Mitsubishi's. Their warranty might as well be written in disappearing ink. anyone considering buying a Mitsu, do yourself a favor & stay the hell away from this brand. These are cheap disposable vehicles, nothing more.
Unsubscribed. I swear EVERY episode you make, its a new content. Then a day later, it goes away and you create yet ANOTHER new content. Hopefully you guys understand that consistency is paramount in channels like yours.
Bye
Please don’t let the door hit you in the butt on the way out. BTW: We’ve been testing cars the same way on our show called Hot or Not the same way for years. The same is is true for Gold Mine Hill, Cliffhanger 2.0 and the Ike Gauntlet. We have no clue what you are taking about.
It's an even bigger pos than I thought. When will Mitsu die already?
These tests are stupid AF for vehicle that's meant to be gas-saving and practical. This is NOT a sports car.
As Mitsubishi lover, I’m so disgusted with the direction they’ve gone.. The brand has Totally lost ANY excitement.👎🏼
That outlander is neither sport or gt lol
This suv did really bad.👎👎👎👎👎👎
Mitsubishi isn't sporty. They took a dump just like Nissan. And my wifes Mazda / Ford should be put out of its misery. I miss real Japanese cars.
Mitsubishi more like Nissan Renault
SiGHT SMaSH
The cvt transmission is a ticking time bomb.
All of the vehicles currently in Mitusbishi's lineup for 2019 are 100% Mitsubishi products. No influence from Nissan/Renault, thankfully.
Mitsubishi sucks now.
Always did
@@tonychau1983 They used to be good. They had the eclipse, lancer evolution, 3000gt, and Montero.
@@AE86FTS out of the bunch only the eclipse and evo sticks out. 3000gt was junk crank walk all day.