Life will not be easy for the best-selling Mitsubishi Adventure. Where before it only had fellow AUVs Toyota Revo and Isuzu Highlander to contend with, now it has to face a market awash with a variety of people-carrier/multipurpose vehicles. Chevy Venture, Honda CR-V, Kia Carnival Sedona, Nissan Q-RV—more expensive, but also claiming to be 10-seater vehicles that are ideal for family use yet still desirable as a driving device. The Revo and Highlander have been working harder, too, coming out with high-end options like leather trim and VCD systems. Does the top-line Adventure—the SuperSport—still have what it takes to flourish in such a tough environment?
The previous-generation Adventure was the first AUV to have a bit of style, coming up with a face similar to that of its big brother, the ubiquitous Pajero. The latest Adventure goes several steps closer to completing the SUV look. The nose has even bigger headlamps, bigger chrome-toothed grille, and a bigger front air dam. There’s gray body cladding all around, too. The rear meanwhile seems to have been influenced by the old Honda CR-V, with its taillights mounted high on the D-pillar. Unfortunately those lights don’t look that well-integrated, as the rear glass is surrounded by metal, breaking what would have been an appealing taillight-glass-taillight band. The rain gutter is also jutting out from the body—not exactly the trait of a 21st century vehicle. Take a few steps back, though, and there’s no meaner-looking AUV around. We think that, like Tommy Lee Jones, the vehicle looks best in black.
The interior also tries for a bit of the high-end look. Awful fake wood covers the center console and nearly every switch panel and air vent surround. Besides that, there are white-faced gauges that turned bright green or blue (your choice) at night, and chrome door sills with glowing “Adventure” badging. Our SuperSport was also equipped with the optional VCD system. The mounting location is not ideal, as the monitor blocked the rear view mirror and is a distraction to the driver, particularly if Pangako Sa Yo happens to be showing.
Now you can’t go on calling something SuperSport if it doesn’t have a storming engine. Mitsu has found something from its corporate parts bin, a donor from its Galant range. The 2.0 liter sohc 16-valve gasoline powerplant generates 114 bhp and 168 Nm—not exactly encouraging on paper. It’s noisy at startup, but once it’s going, acquits itself quite well, remaining smooth and silent throughout the rev range.
It’s surprising then that the driver himself will find it difficult to be smooth and silent throughout the speed range. The accelerator pedal’s spring is as stiff as carbon fiber underwear, resisting our foot’s efforts to press it down. After a few days of getting used to the Adventure’s hard throttle, we switched back to a regular sedan and we were suddenly surging all over the place, pressing much harder than normally required.
The plot thickens with the automatic transmission, as it acts like an on-off switch, with a time delay. One moment you’re hardly making any progress and after two seconds you’re piloting a cruise missile, dodging your way through slower traffic. Shifts are perceptible, as a subtle dip at lower revs, and as a harsher tug at higher rpm. There’s a sport mode for the A/T, but it didn’t seem to make much difference in the response or shift quality. Curiously, even if you press the throttle into the carpet, the transmission shifts the engine at about 4800 rpm, way short of the 6000 rpm redline, even in sport mode. The SuperSport’s 3-2-1-ignition behavior was certainly amusing for our few days with it, but it might wear out its welcome if you have to put up with it for years of ownership.
As for cornering, the Adventure chassis is much more obedient than the drivetrain. Body roll is kept under control, and turning is quite stable. There are no wallowing movements either. However, watch out that you don’t get overconfident during long sweeping corners, such as highway entry points, as the back end can twitch if you go too fast.
The Adventure has made tremendous improvements in its ride quality. Where in the previous model you might feel you’re being Osterized at a setting of 10, now it’s down to about 6. The bounciness has been excised, and the SuperSport now feels composed. Don’t expect a magic carpet, though: the ride is still quite firm, and nowhere near the comfort of the latest sedans. Bumps and highway joints are keenly felt.
Now to the all-important question: how many can the Highlander carry? Officially, of course, it’s 10. Three in the front bench, three in the middle bench, two in each of the two side-facing jump seats. For maximum comfort, the configuration should be two in front, three in the middle, luggage in the rear. The front seats are oddly shaped, with too much support in the upper back and not enough in the lower back. Headroom in the jump seats is limited, and legroom even more so. Of course, for short jaunts or if there’s really no choice then you can pack them all in as needed.
Overall, we were pleasantly surprised to see how much progress this Mitsubishi has made in just two generations, particularly in engine capability and chassis responsiveness. Its price advantage versus the new competition will allow it to stay ahead for now. This is not the time for the company to rest on its laurels, though. It may be ahead in the AUV game, but there are plenty of other creatures competing for consumer money. It’s a highly competitive segment, and the third-generation Adventure should have a more responsive transmission, a more comfortable ride and a more original interior if it wants to keep its lead.
motioncars.com would like to thank
Mitsubishi Motors Philippines for providing us the Adventure SuperSport A/T for this road test.
By Jason Ang | Photos By Ulysses Ang and Jason Ang
Originally Published in April / May 2002 Issue
Disclaimer: The comments uploaded on this site do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of management and owner of Cebudailynews. We reserve the right to exclude comments that we deem to be inconsistent with our editorial standards.
