Mitsubishi Montero

drew_ · July 2001

Just a small correction. Mercedes-Benz had an issue with the A-class small car (not sold in N.America), never with their M-class or G-class SUVs.

Drew
Host
Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards

touristgirl · July 2001

I just heard yesterday that there will be no lawsuit.Even though I have it on good authority, the grapevine doesn't always ring true. So please don't be surprised when you hear that Mitsubishi dropped all charges about C.U.'s test.
I compare my car hunting experience with going to a party where I danced all night with a wonderful,kind,mature man.By the end of the night I was sure I wanted to have his baby! Then,I find out he's engaged to my best friend!!! First off, he says that he'll still have an affair with me, my friend never needs to find out. I think that even if I possess this man, I could never trust him knowing that he was capable of so much hurt.
I think of the Monty with the same tainted love. What SUV even comes close???Anybody have an answer for this heartbroken touristgirl???

alpha01 · July 2001

"all SUVs roll at highway speeds!" This is a very good point.... but the Montero reportedly rolled at 37-39 MPH... I don't know where you call home, but in New Jersey we dont have highways with so called speed limits under 55.
~alpha

brillmtb · July 2001

If you mean that practically speaking most of us are diving well above the speed that any of the SUV's were capabable of handling than your right.

Most highways here are >45, freeways 70 and thats just the signs. Most are driving well over 50 and 75 repectively in my area.

What SUV passed the 75mph test?

Also, what happened to the critics for the SUV's that didnt make it back into the lane. They ended up with head ons.

I think people are getting to nit picky here but we will see. I am keeping my ears open. I am even thinking about adding stiffer roll bars if they are available but I am not over concerned about this CU report.

m6che · July 2001

You would think that after what happened to Suzuki and Isuzu, and more recently with Firestone, that auto makers would know that SUV owners aren't all idiots. Mitsubishi could've handled this so differently, made a lot of good PR by working with CU to come up with changes to the suspension, and sold a lot more Monteros. Well, guess what...

We're owners of an '89 Montero LS 4-door, very satisfied with it, but it's definitely time to replace it. The new Montero was on our list of possible SUVs (like those looks), but it's scratched off our list. I'm sure many potential Montero buyers have moved on.. so as I said, Goodbye Montero. Mitsubishi will make the suspension changes eventually, but it will always be tainted. Of course, they might get away with it, just like the makers of this year's best-selling Suzuki Samuri and Isuzu Trooper. You sure see lots of them, hmm?

Too bad.
Mitch

toyotatoys · July 2001

I was just reading the Automobile Magazine today (I don't know if it was the latest issue)and my attention was caught by a very small item about the Mazda RX 7. Apparently, when Mazda tested the RX7 it could get some horsepower rating I forgot the exact numver). However, when something was installed in its exhaust system to comply with the US emission requirement, the actual horsepower was slightly lower, about 20-30 horsepower if I remember it right. Unfortunately, the manuals were already printed, reflecting the slightly higher horsepower.

Instead of making a disclaimer or printing a new set of owners manual, Mazda decided to BUY BACK their vehicles if the owners preferred to do so, or give them $500 plus some long term maintenance coverage. One of every five owners sold their vehicle back, while the others kept theirs.
Of course, there are less RX7 than Monteros.

My point here is that Mitsubishi mishandled this situation very badly. (Just like Toyota with regards to the apparent "ticking" problem of the Sequoia, though mine is not a ticker.) Between losing a few thousand dollars per vehicle and adding $500 in additional safety features (or improvements), I would have thought of this to be a no-brainer. Of course in the business and legal world, things can potentially get messy and costly.

My gut feeling is that the Montero is still safer than what the CU test shows, or compared to many other vehicles. In real life most of the "avoidance maneuvers" will most likely be at much higher speed than 40mph, where every SUV is really vulnerable to rollover.

Mistubishi should have thought about customer safety in their response.

alpha01 · July 2001

i believe it was the 2001 miata that you are talking about, and a similar situation also occured recently with ford's mustang cobra. both reacted similarly. (surprise surprise, seeing how ford owns a chunk of mazda.. you can read about the ford issue in a recent issu.. i think within the last 3 months.. of Car and Driver). they handled their PR issues very effectively, a lesson to be learned by other auto manufacturers, i feel.

brillmtb-i agree with you and understand your points completely. but i made no claims as to ANY vehicle, car or truck, being able to handle the moose at highway speeds... just stated that i didnt know of any highways where people drove 39mph.

in any case, i'd rather have a vehicle that skids outside the cones (at higher speeds)with possibility for a head-on, because the opposing driver can try to react (brake, swerve, etc.) giving you time to regain control, or at least attempt to. try stopping a vehicle in mid-rollover. dont think so.

just my thoughts.

~alpha01

sergio6 · July 2001

Only that can explain your staunch, blind defense of the company that has DONE NOTHING about the loss of value of our vehicles. And that is a FACT:
We have lost money and they don't care.
Also, your productive posting could only be attributed to someone who dedicates fulltime to defending this corporation.

cct1 · July 2001

It is my understanding of the governments accident data that you have a much higher chance of being involved in a collision than a rollover, and subsequently more people are injured and killed in collisions than rollovers. I would prefer a vehicle that is safe in a collision (the Montero is) and is stable with no chance of rollover--but if you have to chose between the risk of rollover or collision, I'd take the higher risk of rollover, as the chances of it happening are much less than a collision.

dski · July 2001

I've been away for awhile but in catching up on the 100+ posts I've missed, posts jumped out at me.

One guy was concerned about driving a "Safe" vehicle and traded for an Expedition and a woman with a new baby is concerned about the safey of her Monty.

What the hell is wrong with people?!! If these people are soo concerned about driving the safest vehicle, what the hell are they doing buying any SUV in the first place?! Don't get me wrong. I love my Monty and not an anti SUV guy. But, way too many people buy these things ignoring that they are TRUCKS and will handle like TRUCKS not cars.

If a family wants to buy the safest handeling vehicle, why are they buying SUV's of any kind? Way too many people who shouldn't be driving SUV's - are. Soccer moms - go back to the minivans and leave the SUV's for those of us who will use them as intended. I love SUV's but they are NOT for everyone. In fact, they are not for MOST people IMO.

Drew

alpha01 · July 2001

Indeed, one has a higher chance of being in a collision than a rollover, but collision is a very vauge term that encompasses everything from fender benders at 5mph to a full head on crash, at hwy speeds. If you take another look at the data, you find that a higher proportion of rollovers are fatal than are collisions. The chance of a rollover may be less likely, but the chances increase with the purchase of any SUV, apparently the Montero more so than others.

Perhaps I'm just not a fan of SUVs. Someone remind me again why people buy them instead of pickups or minivans?

-alpha

oac3 · July 2001

your argument smacks like one belonging to "I don't Like SUV...." stuff. people buy whatever they like these days and who is anyone to tell them what they should/should not own. if you own a Ferrari, but you live in a city where the highest speed is 35mph, then what do you do ? trade it in and get a cavalier ? puleeze... and the reference to soccer-moms driving minivans and stuff is just adhering to perceptions. i see more men driving minivans, and more women driving suv's. go figure ! what does that make the guys driving minivans - soccer-dads ? car manufacturers these days make vehicles to meet different market demands, and gone are the days when cars are made for singular purposes, like suv's for towing, or off-roading or whatever...

get with the trends....

times are when people buy what they NEED, today, people buy what they WANT. there is a big difference. and just fyi, suv's are generally deemed safer than cars. want to try frontal, off-set or rear-ending between a small car and a truck-based SUV ? wanna bet who comes out tops ? yes, i know there are many other factors that could play into such a scenario, but the guy in the truck often 'wins' such situations !

i bought my suv with safety at the top of the list. you cannot tell me i am wrong in this instance, since it will simply be your opinion against mine.

enjoy your monty, but don't cast aspersions on those who chose to drive monty's but have NO intention to off-road or tow with it. it's their money afterall...

brillmtb · July 2001

No sorry, I'm not a dealer. I just dont think many of the concern is well thought out. There are other factors not being considered, other vehicles that have never been tested, so on and so on.

It is a shame that some people dont fully understand suspension design, strenghts and weaknesses with the various options, handling limits of SUV's and then go and site one article as if it is the final answer....then...act like they thought all SUV's should handle like race cars.

On the otherhand there are some, even toyota owners (just a Sequoia joke there dont get upset

) who understand that this report is not a blanket condemnation of the Monteros safety, realize that it will unfortunately affect sales in the furture and resale value but that many SUV's can be rolled over in real world situations quite easily and this is par with the course and has been for years.

brillmtb · July 2001

Time for a New Montero site, "Montero, Full Sized minus any discussion about rollovers" so we can get back to what we all love.

brillmtb · July 2001

Oh ya, by the way. I never buy an auto with the intention of reselling it because it has the best resale value.

No auto is an investment. I drive them till they fall apart so the resale is academic.

Otherwise, I would lease which in this case would work out well I believe but I'm not a lease expert.

claybuster · July 2001

Sales must really be down with full size Montero Ltd for 1.9% for 60 months or 0.0% for 36 months.
Mine was 4.9% for 36 months in Feb.. Too bad Mitsubishi will not let existing Monte buyers refinance to compensate for the loss in resale. As well as attempt to help resolve the roll over issue by modifying the suspension system.

I called tonight and the dealer response was "CU was just out to get Mitsubishi" and Montero has no roll over problems by their tests! They do not know of a single roll over of the Montero. Stone walling the problem and hoping it will blow over. Guess they will wait for the somebody to get killed and sue them.

claybuster · July 2001

If the Montero owners don't get this issue resolved to our satisfaction, I think some free advertising may be in order (I don't believe in class action lawsuits, only the lawyers[both sides] come out ahead). Perhaps a big decal in the rear Monte window of a Big Lemon tipped on two wheels with the wording "Don't follow too close" "I Roll Over Easy" or other such "Owner Satisfaction?" advertising! What ever it takes, I am up for it! Frustrated, because I feel lied to (it's a cover up - that's my perception True or Not) and there is a lot more is known behind the Mitsubishi closed doors that we will never hear! They hope!

toyotatoys · July 2001

IMO, fixing the problem makes much more sense. The owners will be happy, people will be safe on the road, positive experience will likely regain business confidence. Compensation (and I mean monetary) may make some owners temporarily happy but will not make the vehicle safer, IF indeed, there is a safety problem.

Unfortunately, either option will be a bitter pill that Mitsubishi has to swallow. Fixing a "problem" or monetarily compensating for a "problem" implies prior recognition that there is a safety problem. This can open a lot of potential lawsuits, yes, even if there are no accidents.

Is there a real SAFETY problem here? I don't know for sure. Is there a problem here? Definitely YES! For people who are leasing or are driving their vehicles to the ground (like myself), the monetary impact is probably minimal. But for those who hold their vehicles only for a few years and periodically trade them in, the PERCEIVED safety problem will hurt in the pockets. Also, if they get into an accident (roll over, just a joke brill) and their vehicle is totaled, the "prevailing market" value might be less than desirable. Similarly, a perceived safety problem can have real negative psychological effect on the owner or driver, that is, lack of confidence (nervousness) in their vehicle.

On a personal note, I am obviously a Toyota owner but the reason why I am interested in this forum is because I was just about to help my sister buy a Monty around that time when the CU result aired out. She is crazy about the "curves" of that beige Monty LTD. I don't really know all the details and objectivity of the CU test, but we had to get out before we got wet. Eventually we had to go with her husband's choice (and I'm not telling).

dski · July 2001

>>your argument smacks like one belonging to "I don't Like SUV...." stuff. people buy whatever they like these days and who is anyone to tell them what they should/should not own.<<

The Montero is my THIRD SUV so NO - if you read my post more carefully you'd know I'm not an Anti-SUV guy! I also recommend them for lots of people.

I have no arguement with you that it's not anyones place to tell someone what they should or should not drive. I'm also a Big Free Market Guy.

My only point is that People who are concerned about the safety of their families Probably should not be buying SUV's. It's not that I don't think they are not "Safe" - just that I don't think the average driver understands they are not meant to be driven like traditional cars and so many owners do just that. They are TRUCKS and most owners don't seem to get it. Just pay attention to how many ingore the fact that it takes longer to stop one. I see people tailgating all the time.

Also - I've never come here and "cast aspersions" on Monty owners as you claimed. I am a Monty owner from very early on. Mine has over 30K on it now and I've been happy. I've also defended Mistu for the most part during this controversy. So far from what I can see they have gotten a raw deal here and we have to.

Drew

cct1 · July 2001

I am not talking about fender benders, I am talking about fatal collisions. And while you are correct that a higher percentage of rollovers result in serious injury and fatalities, the NUMBER of fatalities from rollovers is much much less than from collisions, because it happens with much less frequency. Despite the fact that the Monte may have a relatively higher risk of rollover, it will not come close to approaching the risk of dying from a head on collision because of the relative frequency of the two events. For example, if you have a one in ten thousand chance of rolling over, but a fifty percent chance of dying from a rollover, versus a one in one hundred chance of a head on collision with a twenty percent chance of death, odds are much greater that you would die in a collision, even though the percentage of deaths in collisions is much lower than rollovers. That is why there is and always will be a greater chance of dying in a collision than a rollover.

The Monte does great on the crash tests. Statistically, you would be safer than if it did poorly in the crash tests and great in the rollover tests, so exchanging the Monte for another vehicle on the basis of the CR testing may actually increase your risk of a fatal accident. Of course, it would be ideal to have the best of both worlds--but you are going to have to go to a car based SUV to approach that. And that is fine, but if this is a concern NOW, it should have been a concern in the first place...(I agree with Drew on this one 100%)

With regard to the earlier post about "perceptions," if the "perception" is incorrect, I do not think its Mitsu's responsibiltiy to take drastic action--by that logic, anytime anyone made an accusation, the accused party would have to make amends--wether guilty or innocent...I don't think this is over by any means, and yes, Mitsu could have handled this better, but there is still question with regard to CU's test and its validity. Until its proven beyond a reasonable doubt, and at this point, I think there is reasonable doubt, I don't expect Mitsu do go into panic mode.

For those of you who swear by the CR tests, maybe you should have WAITED for them to be performed before purchasing. The Monte had already passed the govts tests; the NHTSA is not a fan of CR's testing procedures, and like it or not, Mitsu is/was/always will be under no obligation to pass any test CR performs.

regala · July 2001

I noticed while I was changing oil today that my tires had an uneven treadwear. It seems like that the tread wears more in the inside on all 4 wheels. Tires have been rotated religously every 5,000. I am at 28,000 now. Anybody have a clue what could have caused it?

oac3 · July 2001

Now I see what you meant. I plead guilty for misreading your post...Right on with all of your points, I am often accused by my wife of being a leadfoot, I drive fast irrespective of whether it is a truck or a sedan. I should know better. And thanks for the heads-up....

cct1 · July 2001

The Monte did number one in its class in the crash test, which is not necessarily the highest possible rating. So if you want to compare it to ALL vehicles, then yes, you can do better...But I think it is more relevant to compare it to its class.

madpapo2002 · July 2001

I recently went on IIHS.com, and found out that the monte is the best in its class. there are are no injuries, nothing, it has good structure case, and everithing.

Me, i'm a proud Mitsubishi Montero owner.
I have a 2001 montero and i heard that they wanted to attack my baby, so i'm cool, it's okay but when i'm inside of my baby, i'm driving it, there are no rollover problems, it's quiet, nice, luxury, and it's NIPPON.

Even if people don't like mitsu in the US, me i love it because i know how to drive SUV's and i never had problems with them.

What if you guys had a mercedes benz class G would it be great? you guys don't see how this car is offroad? how this car ROLLOVER?
Exactly! it's offroad, so, it rollover.

How about Isuzu Trooper? Benz ML320?

Tell me something!!???

_PaT_

a proud MITSUBISHI owner.

Peace

cct1 · July 2001

In the link I saw, all the vehicles received the same rating, but the Monte did the best of the group receiving that rating. Admittedly, as the members of that group received the same rating, there is probably not a huge difference among the group all receiving the same rating from top to bottom, but the Monte was the best of the group....I will try to find the link again--I should have saved it.

regala · July 2001

This board has been inflamed for the past 3 weeks with a lot of criticism from Montero owners and Non-Montero owners and I think enough has been heard already. Some have already traded theirs, and some have kept them because they beleive that it is a nice vehicle with a minor design flaw. Knowing that the light is not at the end of the tunnel yet from Mitsubishi, anybody here already given a thought on how to correct this mechanical problem. Can you all use your wits on the brighter side instead of commenting on something that we already know. What needs to be changed? Are there available aftermarket parts or OEM parts for replacement? If you already traded yours because of this bad publicity... good, i'm happy for you, but not every people in the world who loved their Montero have the luxury of doing that. Just my .02 cents..

stever · July 2001

This article discusses some of the changes Isuzu made after Consumers Union singled out the 1995-96 Troopers.

Steve
Host
Vans, SUVs and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards

drew_ · July 2001

I see that there seems to be some confusion about this. Perhaps you are referring to the latest round of SUV tests that the IIHS conducted? You should know that the IIHS basically tests them when they can get a hold of the vehicles, as they are bought off dealers lots. They're not necessarily meant to reflect a specific group within a group. That's what the different sections of the IIHS website is divided into, by vehice class (ex. small car, luxury car, small SUV, midsize SUV, etc.) and also by weight. The latest vehicle results are added to their specific sections.

The Montero was tested with the BMW X5, the Isuzu Trooper, and the Nissan Xterra. Out of the tested vehicles in this round, the BMW X5 was the only one that received a good rating. You can read the Dateline MSNBC/IIHS transcript of the tests + watch the video footage of the test via the following link. The relevant text on the Montero is right after the X5.
http://www.msnbc.com/news/489360.asp

Hope this helps!

Drew
Host
Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards

cct1 · July 2001

No, thats not it. It the link was e-mailed to me a couple of months ago by a family member, and I deleted the email already...I will ask her if she remembers the link. The SUV's were grouped differently (BMW, Lexus, ML were in a seperate group; Montero was in a group with pathfinder, 4runner, Explorer).

99trooper · July 2001

Hey all...just went to Ebay and saw about 12 2001 Montero XLS's being auctioned, and you could buy them outright for $22900. Also over at kbb.com there are about 8 or 9 or the same things being sold by a dealer...seems like the rental car companies may be dumping a bunch of Monty's on the market? If only I could get my hands on a Ltd for about $25...:)

dski · July 2001

>>This board has been inflamed for the past 3 weeks with a lot of criticism from Montero owners and Non-Montero owners and I think enough has been heard already. Some have already traded theirs, and some have kept them because they beleive that it is a nice vehicle with a minor design flaw.<<

Tony... You left out a 3rd and more reasonable group of us:

Those of us who Know it's a nice vehicle WITHOUT a Design Flaw. Those of us who beleive the CU report is flawed. Those of us who know we are going to get screwed because of CU when we go to sell our Montero's.

Has anyone received Mitsu's letter to Montero owners yet? I found it very well written and informative. Unfortunately, although it makes us feel better and confident it won't help resale.

I'm telling you, this is my 3rd SUV and after 33K it is not any less stable than the Jeep or the Durango. Haven't owned any others.

Drew/ not the host

brillmtb · July 2001

Agree with dski

Regala,

I'm not so sure we should take one bad report over the many that compliment the Montero's handling and assume the truth has been found. I am looking forward to some confirmation.

As far as a "fix". If the roll center is too high there might be a problem. If it is just the stiffness of the swaybar that will be very easy. Also, changing shocks or spings would be easy and not to costly either (not sure if the company would pay though unless Montero proven to be unsafe).

regala · July 2001

I agree with both of you. I am also one of the happy and satisfied owner of a 2001 Montero with 28K miles on it but I was a little bit disappointed because there will never be a confirmation to this bad publicity. Let's get over with it and continue to admire the nice truck that we bought. I am not in for the resale market either and will ride it too 'till it falls apart.

brillmtb · July 2001

Took my Monte though Northern Ca to Tahoe for the Markleeville Death Ride (fantastic bike ride for anyone who is interested).

While up there spoke to a friend who works for the Fire department and told him about the question about rollovers.

He stated that there have been no fatalities that he is aware of in rollovers but the T-bone and headons have been very concerning (many deaths).

Apparently the rollovers disapate enough kinetic energy to reduce mobidity and mortality.

He has not heard or seen any Monte rollovers either, whether this years or previous models.

On a funny note he mentioned that a friend in a body shop did report that a guy got mad at his wife and drove their 2001 Montero through the Rubicon Trail, only body damage.

For those that dont know this trail it is something that only Jeeps and highly modified SUV should even attempt. Fantastic that the stock Montero could make it (although there seems to have been body damage on the exterior).

benn1bob · July 2001

Anyone out there having problems with the compass display on 2001 LTD? We just bought one and it always points a little West of North. The service folks said it was an ongoing issue w/Mitsu. I thought I'd check in with those who might be in the know.

thx.

bob

jmt0214 · July 2001

How does the A/I work, is the rear A/I option needed? I believe it is only available on the limited. Does anyone know for sure? XLS owners, anyone live in a hot state such as Arizona, with a family? Does the A/I work well, or would the rear air help in back? Just would like to know to narrow my choices.

jmt0214 · July 2001

IT WAS THE A/C I WAS ASKING ABOUT.

cct1 · July 2001

Rear A/C is bundled with autoclimate, I believe, in the preferred package on the ltd. I don't think you can get it on the XLS; you may want to check and see if this will change for the next model year, but I seriously doubt it will.

With the limited, you will also get a more "adjustable" drivers seat, as well as heated front seats and mirrors (which you probably don't need in Arizona), and a better 4wd system (which you may or may not need.

If you go with the limited, the rear A/C/ autoclimate in the preferred package is well worth it--if you go back about one million posts, you will see several posts by people who bought limiteds, didn't get the option, and wish they had...just my two cents worth.

brillmtb · July 2001

I have it but will be the first to admit I would not miss it too much. I would get it again however.

I used it for the rear passengers on a very hot day.

Whats nice is that you dont have ice cold air coming out on the front passengers in order to cool the rear. You can have comfortable temps all the way back.

Whats also nice is the rear passengers can make the air hotter or colder than the front.

brillmtb · July 2001

Dont know if this was stated back a ways but here it is. The power steering can be updated in Monteros with a build date before 1/01. The whine that some were hearing was fixed by using a larger inlet or something like that to improve flow and reduce air intake.

I am considering having mine done but it doesnt whine so Im not sure that I should. Dont know if there is any risk to the steering if I dont.

Anyone have any ideas.

brillmtb · July 2001

I know there wont be a steering problem (oh God dont let there be another round of Montero bashing based on a steering box whine).

I meant to say I didnt know if the problem would result in premature wear of the power steering.

brillmtb · July 2001

It has been ages since I visited the Sequoia site. Some of you who like me were debating various models before we picked the Montero may remember those days of getting verbally beat if anything negative was brought up. Well, they are still at it. Even Sequoia owners reporting problems dont feel they can speak freely.

Interesting, they now have a Sequoia problem and solution site. WOW! I wonder how those toyota dealers like that. Real Sequoia owners sharing thier problems like we do here finally.

I am impressed at the lack of problems the Montero has vs the competition. Yes, the rollover issue in the single report by CU (as non scientific as it was) will remain as a black eye and may prove to be something to be aware of but other than that really nothing to complain about.

Anyway, just goes to show that all the car companies have issues with thier new vehicles but the Montero is holding its own real well.

Hey with all the good things to say I better go find a problem or someone is going to think Mitsu is paying me.

magilla · July 2001

I've got a '98 Monte and live in the AZ desert. My rearest passengers have absolutely never complained about not getting enough cool air and we do NOT have rear air. Don't worry about it. If you can have that kind of result here, it's got to be fine. And btw, on a return trip from San Diego averaging about 75mph, our mpg was 19.6 with the A/C on!!! How do ya like that? Rollover? Bah!!! And my compass freaks out all the time too.

phonos · July 2001

The front A/C works very well. Driving around in the Coachella Valley of California in the summer -- the rear air makes it even more comfortable in the front seat.

You have to consider the total load on the A/C. Human bodies put out a lot of heat.

Just my opinion.

counselor2 · July 2001

Don't forget that the rear climate package also controls hot air going to the rear, which is an issue here in Chicago. Plus, that big sunroof lets in a ton of sunlight. I suppose that you could get by without the package if you are in a moderate climate, but we hit 100 here in the summer and below zero in the winter and definitely need that rear climate package. Besides, with inventories mounting (my dealer had 35 2001 Limiteds in stock last weekend -- I counted), you should be able to get a great deal.

My compass also goes haywire from time-to-time, and I just follow the computer's directions to "drive in circles in an open area" until it recalibrates itself. Funny, but that seems to happen when I drive by certain places. Maybe there are some electromagnetic fields that affect it?

Brill, since you seem to be searching for problems, here are the ones that I have had fixed (all under warranty) in the first 4500 miles: (1) front grill came loose in one corner and had to be re-anchored; (2) switch for rear tailgate-activated light shorted out and was replaced; and (3) the plastic cover on the rear 12-volt power outlet broke off and had to be replaced so that my kids wouldn't cram stuff into the outlet. As for that last item, Mitsu, in a stroke of bizarro engineering, designed the part so that you have to replace the entire rear 12-volt outlet instead of just the plastic cover. That requires the removal of all the plastic panels in the rear passenger side of the truck to get to the outlet. Stupid, stupid, stupid.

My power steering is fine so far (truck built 12/00), but if I get close to the end of the warranty period I might just have the work done regardless.

Gee, I guess that I wouldn't make a good Sequoia owner, would I?

blazer610 · July 2001

Has anyone tried to sell their Montero? I recently replaced mine because I need more power and stability for towing. I deceided to sell mine 2 days before the CU test hit the news. I have tried since to sell the Montero without one single call from a potential buyer. I have offered it for $27,000 or best offer. It is a Limited with 9,300 miles, factory trailer hitch and wiring harness, sun roof air deflector, rear air deflector, and cargo mat. I can't believe that not one single person will even make an offer. Anybody else had this problem?

dmac8 · July 2001

Resale is going to be rediculous. Whatever the merits of the CR article, you can bet the results are lodged in the minds of the prospects for this type of truck.

Mitsu needs to conduct very extensive and transparent tests for all the mags that cover these vehicles, then make changes, if required, or stand vindicated.

I'm not bashing the Monte, it's a nice truck. I own an SUV and happen to believ you can roll any of them and even the very best, will roll at limits far short of a car.

Monte owners need to consolidate their efforts and get Mitsu to demonstrate the Monte doesen't enhance the risk for rollover because of design or component deficiencies.

Lastly, they need to help offset any assault on present and resale values.

ken131 · July 2001

I decided to get rid of my 2001 Montero, Ltd., 8000 miles, as quickly as possible once the CR report came out. (I guess I am just one of those people who cannot take a chance with such a serious safety issue). In any event, I went to numerous dealerships to discuss trade in. The best trade in figure I could get for my Montero was $26,000. Some dealers refused to offer me anything, stating that it would be too difficult for even them to resell the vehicle.

Hope this info helps.

brillmtb · July 2001

Agree with you that Mistu should get thier act together and address the claim, there is only one, in an attempt to clarify the issue and prevent future sales loss, address our questions.

As far as future value I am not really concerned as I have no plans of selling. This is an excellent SUV.

Went 4wding again. Part of is was sideways on a slope. My nerves stopped me long before any rollover. This thing climbs like a mountian goat and boy does it absorb the rough stuff at speed.

brillmtb · July 2001

Does anyone have the list of SUV's CU tested. I have heard that they really havent tested many. If thats true I would like to know why they have not tested across all makes and models. What are they trying to do make just one or a few SUVs appear unsafe?

Mitsubishi Montero

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles