Toyota RAV4 Cruiser AWD diesel: 2.2-litre 4cyl turbo diesel; 110kW/340Nm; 6-sp automatic; AWD; 6.5L/100km and 172g/km CO2.
Mitsubishi Outlander Aspire diesel: 2.2-litre 4cyl turbo diesel; 110kW/360Nm; 6-sp automatic; AWD; 5.8L/100km and 153g/km CO2.
Inside
Toyota: The Toyota has a funky faux carbon-fibre effect that is at least a decade trendier than the “woodprint access veneer” used by Mitsubishi. Toyota’s sculpted dashboard has leather accented by white-top stitching along with an interesting use of contrasting materials. RAV4’s seats and driving position are better, and the tilt-and-slide moon roof gives it an extra edge over Mitsubishi.
Mitsubishi: Outlander’s outdated woodpanel doesn’t gel with the “active lifestyle” image attached to modern SUVs. The upright dash is quite stark, though the widescreen infotainment suite and punchy nine-speaker Rockford Fosgate stereo are pleasant features. Our car also had some niggling rattles.
Winner: Toyota
Under the bonnet
Toyota: The RAV4 returns 6.5L/100km fuel use in diesel automatic form, which is above average for its class. Unlike Mitsubishi, Toyota offers a manual option for its diesel SUV which returns a commendable 5.6L/100km. While it sounds dull, the engine is relatively refined for a diesel SUV and while the RAV4 lacks shift paddles, its sporty auto will “blip” down through gears to help smooth shifts.
Mitsubishi: The Outlander has 20Nm more torque and uses 11 per cent less fuel than the RAV4, which makes it a better engine on paper. In real life the difference between the two isn’t as great, mainly because the Outlander loses marks for its lack of refinement in some situations. The six-speed auto – generally a well-sorted transmission with cool column-mounted metal shift paddles – often lets the engine revs drop unnaturally low, which can send a noticeable vibration through the car.
Winner: Mitsubishi
On the road
Toyota: The RAV4 is slightly taller and wider than the Outlander, yet manages to feel more secure on the road thanks to firmer suspension that keeps the body sitting flatter. The trade-off is a firmer ride, but it’s far from bone-jarring and generally does a good job of absorbing bumps on its inch-smaller tyres. The Toyota’s heavier steering is also inviting for enthusiastic drivers.
Mitsubishi: The Outlander is lighter by 50kg and has a small torque advantage, helping it feel lighter on its feet than the RAV4. But the softer suspension is sloppier through corners and feels nose-heavy when pushed. Mitsubishi’s all-wheel-drive transmission is a reactive system – it’s predominantly front-wheel-drive until the car senses slip, so in some situations it can chirp the front wheels as it struggles for traction before the rear wheels kick in.
Winner: Toyota
Practicality
Toyota: Unlike previous models, the new RAV4 has a roof-hinged tailgate that makes for easier access to the cargo area, which is 100 litres larger than that of the Outlander. Disappointingly for a four-wheel-drive SUV, Toyota equips the car with a space-saver and charges for a full-size spare that robs more than 60 litres of storage space from the boot. The cargo blind and small item netting is handy, as is a small amount of underfloor storage. Tiny 550kg tow capacity limits usefulness; Toyota is working on increasing it.
Mitsubishi: The Mitsubishi’s trump card here is seven-seat versatility thanks to a pair of extra seats in the boot. The second and third rows fold flat to reveal a flat load area which we put to the test on a trip to buy a single mattress. Access to the load area is through a powered tailgate; a welcome feature for parents, shoppers and the vertically challenged. The cargo area is protected by a retractable blind, though the boot-mounted subwoofer can get in the way of goods. Outlander gets a more useful 2000kg tow capacity.
Winner: Mitsubishi
Verdict
Toyota: It’s not perfect but the RAV4 is a big improvement and a better car, making it the winner of this comparison, with an above-average driving experience and stylish interior.
Mitsubishi: The Outlander offers strong value and a frugal diesel engine, and its seven seats could seal the deal for prospective buyers. But it’s let down by average dynamics and an uninspiring cabin.
Winner: Toyota
