Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
1) '99 MB ML320
2) '00 MB ML430
3) '00 BMW X5 4.4
4) '01 Lexus RX300
5) '99 Lexus RX300
6) '01 Acura MDX
7) '97 Isuzu Trooper
8) '97 Acura SLX
9) '96 Ford Explorer Limited
10) ''98 Ford Explorer Limited
11) '01 Infiniti QX4
12) '97 Nissan Pathfinder
13) '97 Toyota 4Runner
14) '01 Mazda Tribute
15) '01 Ford Escape
16) '01 Hyundai Santa Fe
17) '01 Toyota RAV4
18) '97 Honda CR-V
19)' '97 Toyota RAV4
20) '99 Honda CR-V
21) '01 Toyota RAV4
22) '00 Subaru Forester
23) '98 Subaru Forester
24) '01 Mitsubishi Montero
25) '00 Land Rover Discovery II
26) '96 Land Rover Discovery
27) '98 Toyota Land Cruiser
28) '95 Toyota Land Cruiser
29) '01 Toyota Land Cruiser (with VSC)
30) '99 Dodge Durango
31) '95 Jeep Grand Cherokee Limited
32) '98 Jeep Grand Cherokee Laredo
33) '99 Jeep Grand Cherokee
Also tested (can't remember the model years) would be the Chevy Tahoe, Ford Expedition, Suzuki Sidekick, Suzuki Grand Vitara, Geo Tracker. Going further back, the Suzuki Samurai, the Ford Bronco, the Dodge Ramcharger...
In any case, I think I've made my point...considering that C.R also tests small/large pickups, small/medium/large sedans, minivans, wagons, this is not a small feat! In all of the years that they have been testing SUVs, they have only given the unacceptable rating to 3 vehicles. The Isuzu Trooper/Acura SLX, the Suzuki Samurai, and the '01 Mitsubishi Montero.
Drew
Host
Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
Did they do roll over testing of all of these or just test drives.
Detroit News' take on CR
Steve
Host
Vans, SUVs and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards
www.tiredefects.com/mitsubishi.htm
It looks like the vehicle rolled first onto its driver's side, and then over again. There is the most deformation on the driver's side. Severe injuries would probably include serious spinal, head and neck injuries (common in rollovers, and could result in paralysis), as the roof makes contact with the head. That's why race cars have such strong roll cages. The Subaru WRX World Rally Championship car's can bear 20 times the weight of the car on its roof!
Drew
Host
Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
Any insight would be appreciated.
Thanks,
Veronica
I believe CR always tests the emergency handling. It's part of the vehicle rating in their tests.
I believe that statement is incorrect. They will do an evaluation of a particular SUV and report on it. This does not always include a roll over test.
I believe they only set up the roll over tests for particular dates and the SUV's that are currently being evaluated get tested. I'm sure they set the schedule to coincide with times they have a sufficient supply of SUV's but the point is, they don't do the test for every SUV they happen to have at any given time.
Montero was being evaluated and getting high marks for ride and handling characteristics but by dumb luck CU had their Roll Over test scheduled while the vehicle was in their possession. Well maybe not dumb luck. I'm sure they saw the opportunity to schedule testing when they had a new model to test. Makes sense but still doesn't make the test valid IMO. In fact, it also makes sense to skew things a bit for publicity. Evadence from the Gov't and Manufacture would seem to indicate that this could very well be the case.
Drew
It would have been interesting if they had asked R. Wade Allen, their independent expert, to come to the track and have him "blind "test the SUVs they were testing that session. Without a "briefing", maybe he could have rolled all of them!
Steve
Host
Vans, SUVs and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards
They've run the short course test (which is where they failed the Montero) for over 13 years now, on many SUV's. The result of the avoidance tests go into the score for emergency handling. My only point was that CR has tested a LOT of SUV's.
As Steve pointed out, one potential failing of CR's test is that it can be varied by the driver. E.g. the driver can try to more aggressively turn one vehicle vs. the other.
The question that it comes down to is who do you trust? Do you trust Consumer Reports, which many have accused of having an anti-SUV bias, and whose previous rollover conclusions on a different vehicle was rejected by NHTSA. Or do you trust Mitsubishi, which illegally hid safety defects for decades (through the year 2000), all the way up to the executive level, and has a huge liability and $'s motive to deny the results of the test?
Or does a potential buyer play it safe and just avoid the Montero entirely, missing out on a vehicle that has many positive attributes (thus playing into the hands of CR, even if the buyer doesn't trust CR)?
~alpha
FWIW, the Cougar has a 2.5L V6 :-)
Safe driving,
Drew
Host
Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
I had some time to look at the Cougar while waiting for the tow truck, could've swore it said V8. If not, I chock that up to trying to hold it together after the hit. Thanks for the info. The very cute 16 year old had no passengers in the car,due to California state law but she was immediatly surrounded with 7 or 8 boys of like age giving her advice and hugs.Couldn't get near to ask about her well being.I could however, hear her dad yell at her over her cell phone. When he got there I was glad I was 43 and not at fault.
I told my husband about a Monty I saw on E-bay with low miles for a good price. It's also local. He listened and told me we have to wait to see if the truck is totaled. All that cole-slaw sitting in 100 degree heat over the long weekend in the tow yard...
If too much roll is causing a problem then Mitsu will figure this out and fix it but until there is a proven problem I dont think you can go on the CU report alone. Too many other reports have really driven the Montero under various circumstances without any reported concerns. So who do you believe, this one report?
I do think that there should be a look into their claim however.
Again, I dont think the roll center is probably much different than any of the other 9inch clearence SUV's so perhaps if there is anything going on it would be corrected with simple spring rates, larger sway bars stiffer shocks, that sort of thing.
Lastly, let us not forget the vehicles that are even more concerning to run through this kind of test that people drive everyday.
1. Semi's
2. Any vehicle towing a trailer
3. Any lifed vehicle
4. Any truck with an insert camper shell
5. Motorhomes
6. etc, etc
Do we feel these vehicles should be recalled as CU wants the Montero to be....of course not.
Has anyone got a good reason why the design problem Mitsubishi fixed is only a problem for some Monteros and not others? Or are some of us just too deaf to hear the problem? Does the problem only occur after extended running?
Anyone else have this problem so soon. And yes the gas cap is on
It is based on man. dates. I put the date several posts back. If your Montero was made before that you shouldnt have any problems updating.
Im not sure I should since I dont hear a whining even after 9 hours hot drives.
1) chrome grille is now body color
2)mitsubishi symbols are chrome
3)chrome backing on side view mirrors are now body color
4)Chrome taillight is now body color.
Some colors looked better in the 2002 style and some looked better in the 2001 style.
Consumer Review ranked the Montero in the top ten of SUV's.
Aside from the Consumer Reports fiasco, and the supposed trade-in value degradation, how is the truck? Have many of you done much offroading? Any repairs?
thanks
Boy this thing is smooth on fire roads or any road for that matter.
No breakdowns or repairs. Tranny is the best tranny I have ever driven. Air conditioning works very well, 100+ degrees and the thing stays very cold. Seats are very comfortable on long trips (that was going to be my concern given my aging back). Headroom and space overall is fantastic, everyone is comfortable front and rear.
If you want any other specifics let us know.
As far as the CU, for that one report I have a dozen that would disagree so I dont know who I should be believing at this point. My personal experience is if you want better road handling then add a stiffer sway bar, even better handling new spings and shocks. The problem is as you go in this direction you will likely compromise the supple off road handling to some degree.
They offer upgrades to the sway bar in Austrialia that might be interesting. They claim roll taken out without undue harshness.
Anyway, even though I've always thought the Monty had a better ride than my Trooper, I just installed rancho 9000 adjustable gas shocks on my Troop, and it has greatly improved the ride...so now I'm not so sure I would go to the Monty, unless I got a great deal!...:) Mebbe I'll just have to get one of each..:)
$22500 and people still defend Mitsubishi..!
I am not a spokesperson for Mitsu but I am a happy owner. I still do not know of an SUV in this class that is any better. In fact, you could go a little to either side of this class an not find something better.
So you sour grapes guys always looking for fault, I dont know what your driving but why all the effort to put down other SUV's? I just dont understand this. Do you guys always believe one report and go off the deep end.
The Montero may have too soft a suspension for aggressive road manuevers but you could easily change this with shocks, springs and such if that is what your looking for.
So chill sergio.
by the way, did you read my post 1071. Dont you honestly think there are many other less stable vehicles to be picking on if you want to focus on aggressive lane change manuevers.
My main problem is with the COMPANY and it's lack of response to a real problem that goes beyond the relevance of CU's report:
THE FALL IN THE VALUE OF OUR INVESTMENT.
A car is not only a tool but also an investment.
Clearly mega-corporation Mitsubishi has not done an inch to protect the value of our investment when it has all the power and resources to do so.
It basically has thrown this problem (the loss in value) onto our shoulders.
This is not how a customer should be treated and I feel personally betrayed by the company.
I would recommend potential buyers and or investors in the company to avoid it altogether since this is A COMPANY THAT DOES NOT VALUE ITS CUSTOMERS.
.
.
$22,500 and going down...
Mitsubishi has taken issue with CR's tests, as has NHTSA. They have a reasonable argument. If overwhelming, undeniable evidence that there is a serious problem occurs, then Mitsu will be forced to respond. The data, to date, is not "cut and dried."
Could Mitsu be more proactive? You betcha. But they aren't obligated to protect the perceived value of the vehicle, although admittedly it would be in their best interests to do so. They feel their testing has showed conclusively that the vehicle is safe, and don't feel the need to make any changes or intervention. If the company feels the problem is more with the CR test (and there is data to support this claim, like it or not), than the vehicle, then they are not going to do anything.
The depreciation is unfortunate, but there is absolutely nothing Mitsu could do, short of sueing CR (and winning) that will change the devaluation. Even post production modification (which Mitsu does not feel is necessary) is not going to completely change this; the damage is already done.
I love my Montero, and will keep it at least 4 more years (I've owned it for year now.). Depreciation is now a known problem with the Montero (although this can potentially happen with anything you buy. Life's not always fair.), and if this is a major consideration, I wouldn't buy one today. But if you already bought one, your just gonna have to learn to live with it...
I plan to keep mine till it rolls over or otherwise dies big time and will never buy another Mitsubishi or recommend it to a friend.
Disgusted with Mitsubishi!
I almost bought a Black Beauty off E-bay.Very nice people offered it to me for 30999.Before the wreck, I had made the decision to wait a year and paid for a vacation in Mexico for 2 people. In order to buy a car and have reasonable payments,I would have to wait, and I didn't want them to put off prospective buyers any longer.Someone is going to get a incredible car. Joel said he paid 42000- extra tires came with it, deflectors, rear air,registration till April. Eat my heart out!!! Husband told me to get my head out of the clouds-yeah, so...I got a 100% loan with a new bank preapproved at 6.95- for a used car not too bad.Then I got uncertain about my condition when Dr said he might have to take me off work. I can tell This Monty is not meant to be mine. Some day, I will be able to purchase the license plate frames that say: C.U.,Kiss my pituti; and, upside down : If you can read this, flip me over!
Bye for now - Tourist Girl-
you either had a whopping down payment or you left off the "2" before the "8"
THE FALL IN THE VALUE OF OUR INVESTMENT.
A car is not only a tool but also an investment.<<
Well let me ask you this: How would you respond if someone were to level an Incorrect accusation against YOU?
ie. Well your honor, I didn't rob that Bank but I will pesonally make sure they are repaid every penny that was lost. That could very well be what your asking Mitsu to do.
In addition, Your believe that a Car/ Truck is an investment is way off. Now if you were buying something that was going to "Show" at Pebble Beach, Maybe - but even then you'd have about a 60% or more chance of losing money.
Cars are NOT an investment. Those who believe they are get into big trouble. They often justify a purchase based on the belief of "Investment" and end up doing something they can't afford. Mercedes? Sure, It'll last forever and cost me less money in the long term. WRONG! Upside down and bankrupt because they wanted to "Justify" and satisfy an emotion.
I'm upset that my resale value is likely going to sufffer. I'm just more open to who is actually at fault for it. I've not decided who is to blame yet but I do think the Mitsu response was the most rational explaination so far.
Drew
I do agree with you to a point. I too wish Mitsu handled the issue better and I think it is this that will hurt them more than the true safety issue with the Montero.
I have friends just waiting to try to find a 2001 Montero at the deepest discount possible and hoping all of this focus on Mitsu really does drop the prices. Many are knowledgeable 4wders who believe like I do that many SUV's can be made to roll the way that driver did for CU.
As far as investment I have stated in the past and agree with cct1 that NO vehicle is and investment. The way I see it if you want to resell frequently so that you can be in a new vehicle all the time then leasing is the way to go. If you by and hold for say 7 years then counting on slower depreciation really wont help you much. I think even the best vehicles lose too much over that time period for me to even be concerned.
I try to hold for longer periods, my GSR is on year 7 and running strong, paid off and now if at anytime it is "paying itself off".
I realize some may buy then sell before 7 or so years and thats a tough situation if you are planning for resell. I just hope those of you doing that are richer than I.
I looked up the 2001 montero and Toyota FR, Land cruiser and sequoia resale not yet rated although those are more expensive. Anyway, with 10K miles, excellent condition and equiped the same the Montero went from purchace of about 36900 dealer price to 29035 tradein. The toyota went from more than the montero to a resale of 28,450. So it seems at least for now that the toyota dropped faster that the montero.
Oh, and I should add that neither drop to me seems to be too bad and different than I would expect although we would all like these things to hold thier value but this is not realistic.
And, I do like toyota products so I am not trying to pick on them I just think that this is a good vehicle to compare to because they are goo.
For those worried about resale we will have to wait a few more months and recheck.
In the Isuzu, when you engage TOD (can be engaged going as fast as 60mph, and driven up to 90, personal experience), anyway when you engage this mode, the engine shifts 13% power to the front wheels, and depending on driving conditions, acceleration, slip etc it "varies" the amount of power sent to the front wheels, up to 66%.
I test drove a Monty this weekend and the sales guys said that in the Monty, when you put it in the AWD mode it puts something like 33% power to the front wheels..but they never said anything about it being variable. Does anyone know if it varies the amount of power to the front wheels like the Isuzu Trooper does? thanks
Now, it also seems that used 2001 Ltd's are averaging around 28-29k, whereas used XLS's are going from around 21-23. This makes no sense to me? Why are the LTd's holding much more of their value?..
Anyway, thought this would be good news to some of you. I would like to buy a 2001 Ltd with low miles for about 27k..so thats what I'm holding out for...:) If anyone knows of one..drop me a line in this forum!
We loaded it up with LOADS of camping gear and 4 persons and it performed very nicely. Our new Monty got a bunch of head turning looks from many other SUV owners too, including Toyota Land Cruiser owners.
This new Monty is a smooth, quiet, solid driving highway vehicle - and a very capable off road vehicle too. We took it over several backcounty 4x4 roads and high mountain passes in Colorado and New Mexico and had plenty of power. It handled the rough and very narrow switchbacks on 12,600' Cinnamon Pass on the Alpine Loop with ease and very much comfort. The 4 wheel independent suspension makes for a very nice ride over rough terrain. It's turning radius is very impressive and much tighter than our Trooper.
I can think of several improvements for off-road use, however. The first being better all terrain tires. The stock Yoko's did an adequate job, but I will have BF Goodrich A/T's on there for better traction when these Yoko's wear out. The second "improvement" is not really that, rather some advice for demanding, high altitude 4x4 driving. It is that 4x4 low range driving should be done only with the "Sport Tronic" shifting instead of the automatic. On one tight switchback with the vehicle in "auto", I did notice a short lag time for it to shift into a lower gear. Although it did not present a real problem, I had to give it more gas and it eventually reved up and downshifted for more power. The slight delay did cause me a bit of brief anxiety though, considering that there was only a few feet of room on the narrow shelf road - little room for error.
Also, the side view mirrors in my opinion might be just a little too large. The seem to act as large bug shields and probaby add a bit more drag to the truck than necessary.
On fuel ecomony... For highway driving at an average of 72 MPH we got anywhere from over 19 to nearly 22 MPG with a fresh change of Amsoil 5-30 synthetic oil.
I don't know what is going on with the fuel tank for this truck, though. It seems to take different amounts of fuel to fill it at different times. Could the fuel tank be some sort of plastic or rubber that expands and contracts some due to temp or pressure? Anyone else notice this, or know what the deal is?
On a final note, although we really put this truck through the paces and got it really dirty, but it looks just as good as new now after being washed and cleaned out.
All of this, and we did not roll it even once.
Was worth a look for me!
http://www.overlander.com/pages_misc/contents_fr.tpl?cart=30806172901393645
Have fun.