Talk to me about the Rogue/Murano/Mitsu outlander...

[joe603]

I dropped off my G at the dealer yesterday for some warranty work, and we stopped at the Nissan dealer to look at the Murano. ...So we're looking at the front of the row with Murano's and they turned into a row of Rogue's...(thought it was a different year of Murano )

Anyway...I hadn't considered a Rogue but after seeing/driving one, it's hard to justify paying more for the Murano for a tiny bit more space compared to the Rogue. How are these things? We don't need all the nit-noid upgrades in trim that the Murano has (it's a vehicle for the wify)

Next we stopped at the Mitsu dealer to look at the outlander. They had a killer deal on a few 07's. Any dirt on these things? I can save about 6k if I do the Mitsu (partly because of owner loyalty). She really liked the outlander...the rear cargo area is much larger than the Nissan's and it has a fold down tailgate thing that she loved. It was also a V6...almost like getting a Murano for a Rogue price...

Help guys!! any info is greatly appreciated !!!!!

[paulvanharte]

I am an avid Mitsubishi fan, in fact owned a 2004 Outlander before trading up to the Rogue. I test drove a Rogue SLAWD and a similar optioned Outlander and found it comfortable, however, there appears to be more road noise( tires) than in the Rogue. Outward visibility is much better in the Outlander. Its also larger, when the seats are adjusted to its highest position in the Rogue I find a lack of headroom. Mileage ofcourse is worse than the Rogue, in fact after owning the Rogue since february of this year I am amazed about the mileage( much better than the 2.4 liter engine in the Outlander)In the end I just did not care for the cheap looking inside of the Outlander compared to the Rogue.Now having said that, I am also experiencing the famous rattle in my CVT and had I known this in advance, I may have stayed away from the Rogue

Paul

[joe603]

Thanks Paul! Yup, I'd have to agree that the Rogue interior is better...but do the rear seats on the Rogue fold down like the Outlander?

[Pescakl1]

We looked at the Outlander before buying the Rogue.

First thing why we didn't buy the Mitsu is... that the seller didn't call us back to let us testdrive it . It seems you went over this hurdle , so let see the rest.

The inside of the Rogue is better made than the Outlander which looks like average-cheap. It is a big big plus for the Rogue which is, as several professional reviewers described, between Nissan and Infiniti quality wise.

The handling of the Rogue is awesome, comparable as a car, except that you can see further ahead since you are sitting higher. Cannot talk about the Outlander as I still wait for the seller to get a 4 cylinders to testdrive .

These two above points are what sells the Rogue to my wife.

Another point is that since we wanted the 4 cylinders, I could almost stand in the outlander motor area as it has to keep some space to install the 6 cylinders for the other version. This space in the Rogue is given back to the driver as there is only one engine available (everything is custom fit).

Fuel mileage is better with the Rogue on paper which should also translate in real life (I am usually doing 28mpg and now averaging more than 31mpg on this tank of gas).

If you look at the feature in the Outlander, it seems to be made for young people (20-30 years old population) as the Rogue seems to be for more mature but still young people (30-40 years old) and seems more for the female population. At least, it is what I felt when I saw the two cars.Since I am at the end of my 30s and currently working on my feminine side , I chose the Rogue.

If you absolutely want a 6 cylinders, your choice is between the Murano and the Outlander, and it looks like the Outlander has the lead... but you won't get the fuel economy.

If you can live with a 4 cylinders (and the Rogue as way enough power for what I want to do with it (did you do a fast start during the testdrive, quite impressive), your choice is between the Rogue and the Outlander. Me, like several others people here, chose the Rogue.

On the rattle problem, if you don't need the AWD, go with the FWD, the 09 model lets you now have more options without having to get the AWD version (and it is cheaper too).

Hope this help.

[Pescakl1]

do the rear seats on the Rogue fold down like the Outlander?

In the Rogue, the rear seats fold in two parts (1/3 and 2/3). When folded, the space is not leveled, about 5-10° incline with an about 1 inch step if I remember correctly.There are some pictures of Philip's car on that if you want.

Good thing for the 09 model, the passenger seat folds down completely on every models as it was only for the premium package models on the 08 model.

[joe603]

I was told by the Mitsu salesman that the 4cyl gets worse gas mileage than the V6...seemed fishy, but he did make the point that the 4cyl is always working hard.

What about the Rogue back seats, do they recline?

[philipa_240sx]

The pic doesn't do it justice as i have a piece of carpet over it. The cargo floor with the seats folded is not flat. There is the aforementioned 'bump' and the 15 deg incline.

[philipa_240sx]

As for preference, I am a Nissan man... period.

As for year, the '09's get some nice option changes including available leather interior on FWD models:

zerothread/351228

The AWD system is very similar to the Murano and has the same electronically controlled centre diff. Think of it as a FWD version of the ATESSA-ETS. It uses YAW sensors, steering angle, accelerator, and individual wheel speeds to vary the F/R torque split. Very slick. It is biased towards FWD though... it's not an FX35 or G35x. As nice as AWD is, I opted for FWD for plain simplicity... in hindsite I think that was a good idea! I have 12,000 trouble free miles so far!

[ahhbeebee]

Before settling on the Rogue, we drove the Outlander, RAV-4, and CR-V.

Our issues with the Outlander were, (1) more prominant cabin/wind noise. In our test drive, it seemed mostly derived from the taller, more box-like and less aerodynamic front-end of the Outlander. In fact, noise was worst in class by our ears.(2) In Canada/Calgary, they only sell the V6, so price consideration was a factor. Sure more pep than the Rogue, but compared to the V6 in the RAV-4, the Outlander really didn't make the grade. So if we had chosen to spend more and get a V6, then we still wouldn't have chosen the Outlander.

Decent vehicle, but we felt the Rogue's nicer interior, better fuel mileage, and lower price were the final selling points.

Good luck!

[flying]

I am in the same boat as you! I am giving up my G35 and getting a Rogue next week. I was originally looking for a Murano, but the gas mileage is not good and it's alot more money. I also looked at the Mitsubishi but I like Nissan and thought the Rogue was really nice looking. But the Outlander gets good reviews in Consumers.I can't wait to get the Rogue. I really have not liked my G35, probably the only one on Earth who doesn't! Terrible gas mileage, have gone through about 10 brake changes.Good luck

[joe603]

I just wish they have a V6 option in the Rogue...

Still need to test drive the Honda CRV, Toyota Rav4, and maybe the volvo Xover. I looked at a Dodge Journey...which wasn't that bad, but it's still a Dodge.

[kerrton]

The reason I bought the Rogue is because it DIDN'T offer the V6 - instead Nissan put all it's efforts into designing an awesome 4 cylinder that gives you the best of all worlds. Lots of power and low end torque compared to the light weight of the vehicle, but also the best fuel efficiency of any of the competitors. With the RAV4, don't even look at the 4 cylinder because it's underpowered for such a heavy vehicle, so you have to spend the extra cash for the V6, which has way more power than I need to have fun and worse gas mileage than the Rogue. The Rogue 2.5 is right between the Toyota 4 cylinder and V6 in terms of performance and efficiency, which is exactly where it should be! The Outlander was a great vehicle and well priced, but it's a lot heavier and you need the V6 too which is quite bad on gas. The CRV only comes with the 4 cylinder but it is terrible - it has very weak performance and it gets a lot worse mileage than the Rogue. In terms of just the powertrain, it was pretty obvious to me that that Rogue wins hands down, no question.

Oh yeah, the Dodge Journey. Haven't driven it because it's a lot larger and meant for large families I think, I'd say it's in a different class with seating for 7 or 8. Also it's a first year Dodge model so who knows about quality. The Rogue's using powertrain components from the Altima that have been around for years, and its been released in Japan and Europe for some time under a different name so it's been well tested.

[ahhbeebee]

You might want to give the Subaru Forester a look over too, now that it doesn't look so weird. If you are looking V6 though, the RAV4 is rated only marginally lower in fuel consumption, in fact I think they V6 is maybe 1 mpg lower in the city than the 4-cylinder version.

[kerrton]

Yeah the Forester is a well built machine and now it has good looks too, I'd definately check that out, it wasn't available when I was shopping for the Rogue. Also, the VW Tiguan looks really nice and competes directly with the Rogue, definately check that one out too, and forget about the CRV.

This review/comparison is really good: http://www.trucktrend.com/road....html
Modified by kerrton at 10:42 AM 8/26/2008