Mitsubishi Montero

phonos · April 2001

"My owners manual says to use 91 RON . . . " which probably is about the same as 87 (RON+MON)/2) octane. In California the pump octane ratings are (RON+MON)/2) on the pump. So, it probably depends on the system used in each individual state.

Here is a response I received from Edmund's when I asked about octane requirements:

"Hello,

Thank you for contacting Edmunds.com.

The question of whether or not to use a high octane gasoline becomes more significant when you are considering what price to pay at the pump. Although lower octane gasoline burns at a higher temperature and can cause your engine to knock or "ping", most late model, high compression engines have knock sensors and other high-tech devices to theoretically keep them from hurting themselves on today's low-grade gasoline.

In reality, all production gasoline vehicles can run on 87 octane gasoline. Manufacturers can sometimes recommend a type of gasoline but this is by no means a literal requirement with the possible exception of high performance vehicle's such as Ferraris and the like.

If you have any additional questions or feedback, please do not hesitate to contact me.

We would also like to know what you thought about our service. If you could please take a moment to fill out our brief survey, we would really appreciate it!

To get to the survey, click this link: http://edmunds.cogix.com/Edmunds/CSResponse.poll.html

Best Regards,

Tri L.

Consumer Information Specialist

Edmunds.com

Where Smart Car Buyers Start!"

phonos · April 2001

Over 16,000 miles and I still love it. It really does go on trails in comfort.

Only problem is annoying brake pad glaze that produces a slight squeak when rolling to the end of a stop or when backing. Only happens in warm dry conditions.

PHOnos, White/Silver 2001 Montero Ltd, rear A/C, purchased August 2000, build date July, $34,500 (no extras, darn!)+ TTL, 4.9% for 48 months, Orange County, CA.

phonos · April 2001

Glad you got to see the flowers. Word is this is the best display of any non-el nino year. The rain/snow on April 21 really prolonged the bloom. We went out again this last weekend because it was so spectacular.

That "shake it" vibration is due to a condition of the dirt roads known as "washboard" from rain/wind. The Montero actually rides on it a lot better than a solid axle vehicle does. When you encounter it, increase your speed to between 35 - 45 mph to the point that there is a canceling effect between peaks and valleys. You can still hear it and feel it, but to a much less extent. If you go too slow or too fast it gets worse.

It's nothing to worry about, sounds and feels worse than it really is -- gives the suspension a bit of a workout.

sd_monty · April 2001

I noticed that you were asking about dealers in San Diego. I live in SD and bought a Limited about six weeks ago. The dealers here in San Diego county weren't willing to budge much on price. I found the best price in Cerritos (on the LA/Orange County line). I paid $33076 for a Limited without rear air. That's $500 below invoice and $800 lower than any other offer I got.

Of course, that was six weeks ago and I suppose market conditions can change. Good luck with your purchase!

ehollis · April 2001

Changed the oil last Tuesday on my 2001 monty. Actually, it was a lot easier than on my 1985 Maxima. Here's how you do it. There is a plate below the engine held on by 4 12mm bolts. Take them off and remove plate. Then, you're looking right at the bottom of the oil filter. I have a oil filter wrench that monts on a 3/8" drive. It was as easy to remove the oil filter as it was to take off the bolts. I spent 1 hour changing the oil from start to finish, and that was allowing time to figure out how in the world to do this....(BTW, I'm not incredibly mechanical. If I can do it, I'm sure you can...) Eric

(PS Re: post 592 - 32K for a Monty w/o rear air. Ouch. Wish I'd let him buy my car for me... I paid $34881 w/rear air and running boards.

PSS Re: post 601: 2100 miles. Absolutely love it, haven't had a second thought. Would do it again, and I'm trying to talk my friends into driving Monty's. Don't know why I'm doing that. I love driving the only monty in the neighborhood.)

brillmtb · April 2001

Idle speed: no reference in the shop manual for cold idle that I found. Warm idle is supposed to be 750 -/+ 100.

Octane: sure enough page 00-33 states 87 RON. How this compares to (RON + MON)/2 I am not sure.

example is 87 RON = to 87 (RON+MON)/2 ? or would 91 be closer?

phonos · April 2001

Octane numbers can be very confusing due to several different terminology's used in discussions. I will try to clear up some common misunderstandings and define some of the various terms used when discussing octane quality.

Octane
The octane quality of a gasoline is its ability to resist detonation, a form of abnormal combustion. Detonation occurs when the air-fuel mixture reaches a temperature and/or pressure at which it can no longer keep from self igniting. Two types of abnormal combustion are common: the first is detonation as previously mentioned and the other is preignition.

Detonation occurs after the spark plug has ignited the air-fuel mixture and the flame front is moving smoothly across the combustion chamber. If, during this burning process, the unburned air-fuel mixture reaches a temperature and/or pressure at which it is no longer stable, it burns very rapidly causing a new flame front to collide with the one that originated at the spark plug. Maximum pressure in the cylinder occurs before the piston reaches top dead center (TDC) and that pressure try's to push the piston down before it is ready to go down. Piston burning and rod bearing damage are the result.

Preignition is the other bad actor and is usually started by a hot spot in the combustion chamber which causes the mixture to ignite before the plug fires. Under wide open throttle conditions, preignition will destroy pistons in seconds.

Research Octane Number (RON)
RON is determined in a single cylinder variable compression ratio engine that operates at 600 rpm with a 125 degree inlet air temperature at standard barometric pressure. Spark advance is fixed at 13 degrees btdc. In a real world engine, RON is necessary to satisfy part throttle knock problems.

A good quality racing gasoline has a RON in the range of 110 to 115. The difference in the spread of RON is not very important to racing engines.

The test and hardware were originally developed in 1931. The hardware was revised in 1946 with procedural changes made until the late 1960's.

Motor Octane Number (MON)
MON is determined in a single cylinder engine similar to the RON engine with a few changes that make operating conditions more severe and therefore the octane numbers are lower. The MON engine runs at 900 rpm with a 300 degree mixture temperature. Spark advance varies with compression ratio. In a real world engine, MON is necessary to satisfy octane demands at wide open throttle. This is a very important number for racing engines since they spend a high percentage of their lives under high speed and high load conditions. Racing engines cannot afford to be short on octane quality, since detonation or preignition will quickly reduce a racing engine to junk.

The motor octane appetite of an engine with 13:1 compression ratio and a four inch bore varies with operating conditions but is normally around 101. Good quality racing gasolines have MON in the range of 100 to 115. If your engine requires a 101 MON, it is of no value to use a gasoline that has a 115 MON. To cover yourself for extreme conditions, it is wise to have an octane cushion but there is no advantage to using a very high octane quality product if you do not need it.

The MON test was originally developed in 1932. Major hardware changes were made in 1948 with procedural changes made until the late 1960's.

(R+M)/2
This is the average of RON and MON. It is sometimes referred to as the aki or anti-knock index. By law this number must be posted on the dispensing pump at retail outlets in most states. It is the most commonly used octane reference today. It was developed about 20 years ago as a compromise between RON and MON for advertising purposes and also to keep from confusing the consumer with too many different terms. It has erroneously been referred to as road octane number.

So a gasoline with a RON of 87 will probably have an even lower MON. Therefore (R+M)/2 will be lower than 87. So it would seem that (R+M)/2 is more than sufficient for the Montero. The literature that states you should use 91 octane is probably refering to RON or Research Octane Number

If the manual is (erroneously) refering to RON as "Road Octane Number" then 87 octane is exactly the correct value, as the average of a Research Octane Number of 91 plus a Motor Octane Number of 83 -- (91+83)/2 = 87.

dski · May 2001

All the octane expainations in the world can be found here now. It's all very nice but not once have we come up with a definative answer. There is always an "if they mean this" or "it runs fine on this" but that doesn't give us the real truth.

I did an evaluation just like ocelot1 did. They called for Premium, I evaluated what the true cost difference is between it and the cheaper stuff. The real cost is really not a big deal at the end of the month or year. Default to the Premium for now. I'm sure it would do fine on lesser octane but with the high mileage I put on mine, I'm not taking chances.

Drew

phonos · May 2001

That's good. It keeps the profits and my oil company stock values going up.

Thanks, a million (or two), I really do appreciate it.

cct1 · May 2001

Well, the octane thing was just a little too far over my head, so I have given up on gasoline altogether. After several trials, I have found that filling up with soda works best. I trialed each of the major brands, and diet (but it must be diet) cherry coke seems to give the best mileage with the least amount of knocking. Hope this helps.

stephanief2 · May 2001

I wanted to ask you what the running boards are like on the Limited. Both dealerships near us do not have any running boards installed on any of the Limiteds they have. Are they the same running boards as the Sport? Or are they wider? I didn't think the running boards on the Sport looked too useful.

Thanks.

brillmtb · May 2001

Nice review and at the risk of losing my privledges here I want to ask another octane question given your response.

The manual if I read it correctly states 87 RON

Then based on your description above does this mean if correct we could in fact use US Regular with no ill effects if the rating is = or > 87?

counselor2 · May 2001

Mitsu offers 2 types of OEM sidesteps -- "running boards" and "tubular side steps." Pictures of both appear on the Mitsu website on the Montero accessories page. The running boards are flat, chrome and black metal boards with holes for water to drain. The side steps are solid black and are rounded underneath. On the advice of my dealer and one of the automotive publications (I can't remember which), I went with the side steps because snow and ice reportedly accumulate on the running boards. I have been pleased with them so far. You should also be aware that others who have posted in this forum have purchased after-market side steps, and there was an extensive discussion of the various alternatives a ways back. To directly answer your question about the side steps on the Montero Sport, I saw a Sport at the dealership where I bought my Monte with the same (or similar) tubular side steps as are offered on the Monte.

phonos · May 2001

If correct, yes

ocelot1 · May 2001

I put some of those napa wagner lighting blues in they seem a little brighter. DO the 2001 XLS still come with the rear air locker? Have you guys seen the GDI engine (Gas Direct Injection)I'm thinking its only over seas.I was talking to my mechanic and he was telling me we get the technology that is about 5years old in are trucks compared to what they sell in Japan any thoughts on this.

ehollis · May 2001

I went with the side steps, because my wife is short, and liked getting into the Monty with the running boards better. Since they were mainly for her, I let her pick...However, I saw the other day a 2001 Monty with Sudan Beige custom running boards. I almost ripped my side steps off and bought those right then and there. Bay Ridge Mitsubishi in Brooklyn has them, and I think that they are $495 installed. If I had it to do over again, I'd buy those. I don't know where they came from, I can't find them on the Internet. Maybe Bay Ridge had them made special...

stephanief2 · May 2001

Thank you both for your information about the running boards. I'm glad you said something about the mitsu web site because I've been wondering aimlessly around the Hong Kong site.

Thanks again.

brillmtb · May 2001

My apology.

The manual reads 91 RON, 87 (MON+RON)/2, now it makes sense to me. This would seem to indicate that someone is blowing smoke somewhere when they say we need to put 91 or premium fuel (In the US) in our Monteros.....shame on them.

If true this is somewhat important as many use a combination of gas mileage and grade of fuel as one factor in picking an SUV.

91 vs 87 octane in my area is around 20 cents per gallon different last time I checked and this would make the relative gas mileage be >10% more. (ie. 15 mpg at 1.60 vs 15mpg at $1.40, no change in mileage but compared to a vehicle that does require premium I now have a 13% advantage. Said another way they would have to get greater than 17mpg before they would have a cost advantage for fuel consumption.)

Thanks again, I think I will still use mid grade due to my paranoia more than anything.

brillmtb · May 2001

Hey,

Have you been over to the Sequoia site lately. I havent but maybe its time to peek.

slimed · May 2001

Hi erubright. I'm going to be moving to your area in a few months and was also interested in buying/leasing a montero. Did you ever find any luck in finding a better deal in your area?

counselor2 · May 2001

Thanks for the most recent post, brill, clarifying that 87 octane is okay per the manual. In Chicago, yesterday I paid $2.28/gal for 93 octane Mobil vs. $2.08/gal for 87 octane. I filled the tank -- for $41.85. And that's the BEST price I found. Ouch! Paying the extra for premium is especially tough to swallow since my gas mileage has been so abysmal. Even with a change to Mobil 1 oil and a filter change at 1200 miles, I'm still only getting around 11 mpg in the city. Highway mileage is better, around 18 mpg, but still not as good as I had expected. (By the way, am I crazy, or has anyone noticed that their highway gas mileage is worse when they're listening to the radio with the whip antenna up?) I only have 1800 miles on the truck, though, and am hoping to see the mpg improve. Til then, it's 87 octane for me!

cct1 · May 2001

I do periodically scan the Seq site although I no longer participate because of the irrational behavior it seems to illicit on that board....Also turned off by fact that some of the dealers appear to be actively selling on that board--thought that was an edmunds no-no. I have to laugh when Diane and Cliffy claim that they are only doing this as a public service and are getting nothing out of it...

Interestingly, Cliffy is STILL trying to explain the A-trac and 4wd...I guess its not as simple as he intitially thought. I'm not sure anyone REALLY understands how it works. It may be the mystical "black box"....

A couple of impressions--overall, it looks like the majority of people are very satisfied with the seq. Major complaints--gas mileage, vibration problem in some, oil leakage in one (this looks to be an isolated thing), wind noise, towing,price, and the interior (whoever came up with the metal accents needs a serious talking to.).

I MAY be in the market for a tree in 4 or 5 years; may need something bigger (I'm not all that excited about 'burbs and expo's) and I definitely will need more HP as I hope to be getting a large boat when our kids are a little older. Hopefully by then the Seq will have a bigger V-8, and all of the bugs will be worked out. I think the Seq has the potential to be one helluva SUV, but it's not quite there yet. If I just need a bigger engine and space not an issue, hopefully the Monte will have a V-8 by then--I really love this thing, and would chose it over the LC hands down provided the HP is there. The longer I own it, the more I am convinced that no other SUV approaches the Monte w/r to value (Friend of mine just bought a loaded Durango before riding in my Monte--for a couple grand more, could have had the Monte ltd--he's kicking himself now).

Incidentally and off the subject, I read a post in one of the other boards about how well Mitsubishi is doing--establishing personal sales records, fastest growing Japanese car manufacturer, etc. (Its on the MDX board I think)
which is reassuring considering some of the problems Mitsu. had earlier this year.

erubright · May 2001

Hi slimed. We haven't purchased yet. There is only one dealer in Spokane, WA and we'll be negotiating with them real soon. If we get no where with the local dealer then I may try the www.fightingchance.com or go over to Seattle and try there.

Out of curiosity, has anyone seen what autobytel.com price for a 2001 Montero Limited is in the Pacific Northwest area?

Also, I had heard Mitsubishi had some rebates for Montero going now. Anyone heard about this?

Thanks.

rruck1 · May 2001

Just curious, but why do you Montero owners like to lurk over in the Sequoia forum? As a Sequoia owner currently lurking in the Montero forum I'm curious as to your motivation.
I owned an 83 and an 89 Montero Sport back in the pre-kids days and loved them. The only thing that turned me off was the cost of parts as they got older ($1400 for a power steering pump on my 89). Even so, I would have considered a Montero if I didn't need the extra room.
The sales people in the Sequoia forum are generally pretty helpful - I just skip ahead when they enter sales mode. I can say that I have had none of the problems that some have had with their Sequoia's. That includes interior styling since I opted for the SR5 model which has no hammered metal' trim.
Things have been pretty boring over in the Sequoia forum, how about coming over and rattling some chains?

cct1 · May 2001

I follow the Seq board for two reasons:

1. It's a brand new SUV with alot of promise--naturally curious about it (you won't see me lurking at the Sante Fe sight, for example).

2. I may need a bigger SUV down the road. Occasionally, (and not that often anymore) I will occasionally peruse the board to see how things are going.

With regard to the sales people, I agree it is extremely helpful when the put the facts out. However, it is against the rules (and with good reason) to actively try to sell on the board--there are posts listing vehicles and price by a couple of the dealers on that board--I have a problem with that. Objective data, fine lay it on me--sales pitches need to go somewhere else. It's not fair to other dealers who observe the rules, and its even less fair to the consumer trying to make an objective decision.

I don't really want to participate on that board anymore. If I (or Brill) brought up a valid criticism or concern, the responses, rather than addressing the specific issue, tend to be along the lines of personal attacks...Several of my family members are still missing after my participation on that board....

dski · May 2001

>>Just yanking your chain Drew, please forgive me.

PHOnos

I'm a big boy, I can take it. I did have to put some thought into this subject when I saw $2.02 for premium at one station yesterday. I'm a bit dissapointed in Mitsu for not really being clear on the subject. One stupid sticker on the fuel door and look what it has caused.

drew

omega8 · May 2001

Just recently purchased a 01 XLE and noticed that the engine valves(?) rattle slightly while idling. I only use premium fuel. Is this common?

ocelot1 · May 2001

Thankyou guys/gals for clearing the octane ratings up for me I'll take back what I said about the price difference.And you know I've had a weird little hesitation on startup everytime so I ask the closest dealer to me about 150 miles away what he thought first thing out of his mouth was are you using 92 octane yes I said and he said that was it. They had many calls on this and even had some monteros in the shop for weeks trieing to figure this out finially a factory mitsubishi rep said it was the high octane I still have a full tank of 92 but I'll try the 87 and see what happins This is on a 95 SR 3.5

beazle · May 2001

Well, I hit the first 1000 miles on my '01 Montero Ltd. Gas milage has been between 14.5-17.0 mpg for the first 3 tankfuls. My first off-road sortie was a mixed experience. Drove up a washed-out dirt road to get up to a "high place" on a friend's farm. The road was more of a dry creek bed with lots of shale rubble and water-current carved zigzag ruts. The truck negotiated it in fine fashion; no bottom scrapes and plenty of torque to negotiate a steep slope where we had to stop to remove a dead fall tree. That was the only point where I decided to switch to low range.

The morning after this excursion, I found myself with a flat tire. Not unexpected considering the shale slivers in that creek bed. The down side of the flat was that I was following my manual for jack placement, etc. The directions for removing the spare tire lock were not consistent with the type of lock I had. The manual says the ignition key is used to remove the spare lock, while a more conventional wheel lock system was used. (I had forgotten that I had seen the key socket squirreled away in the storage compartment in the back.) After much self-induced frustration, I called a tow truck to take me in to a service station to fix the flat. The dealer later confirmed that ignition-key locks used to be installed but "they haven't used those for quite some time". Mitsubishi apparently doesn't update their manuals as much as they should.

The fact that I forgot about the key socket was my fault. However, as a result of this experience, I found that the hydraulic jack provided leaves a lot to be desired. Its almost impossible to operate the jack without being under the vehicle (contrary to directions). Also, the jack will not collapse to its smallest dimension under its own weight, thus after releasing the jack, it is still jammed under the vehicle suspension, and needs to be "coerced" to be removed. In hindsight, perhaps driving off the jack would have saved some additional frustration and blue language, at the risk of damage to the jack or the vehicle. I plan on buying a more usable hydraulic jack, if I can find one at a reasonable price.

cct1 · May 2001

Thanks for the post--I would've had the same problem--especially with the spare tire lock. Gonna take a look at that to make sure I can get it removed--thanks for the heads up.

If you find a better jack, please post it for us.

cct1 · May 2001

You might want to take a look at the Seq board now....

beazle · May 2001

I browsed the selection of several compact hydraulic jacks available at Pep Boys, and they all have the same problem, that is, they do not seem to collapse under their own weight. The only ones that do are the floor jack design. I'm not interested in one that big. I guess hydraulic cylinders aren't polished smooth any more. Oh, well.....

brillmtb · May 2001

cct1: Agreed, the more you drive this thing the better it looks.

Just completed a drive: down with premium and back with mid grade. Mileage essentially the same. I obtained 19mpg at 75 (cruise on) and air conditioning. I'm happy with this, I dont think any of the other SUV's I considered do much better and if you factor in the 87 octane price savings at 10% or so this translates to 21mpg compared to SUV's that require premium. Not bad.

Hey rruck, we dont go over there much because no one for the most part wants to be nice (and honest) over there. If you look at the early posts of the Montero vs Sequoia site when we all were just trying to find out the truth about these and many other SUV's people were getting real heated on the Seq site. Over here I find that saying something "bad" about the Montero is looked at a little different. We are curious over here if these SUV's are worth the price, if the features work as advertised, etc.

We welcome your posts over here. Glad to see you are still reading this site.

I too think Toyota will get the bugs worked out and the Sequoia will be an SUV to contend with much as the LC, in my mind, was my personal gold standard I used in selecting the Montero.

brillmtb · May 2001

Wow, the Seq owners were sold heated seats, the problem is the seats werent heated. Someone messed up big time.

brillmtb · May 2001

Well the reviews were right, these tires seems to check out fine on Ice, snow and water but in the mud.....oh boy can they be fun.

Went 4wd opening day fishing in OR. Hail, rain snow and limiting out on fish in 1 hour....what a day.

Through the mud I tried 4H, 4Hlock, Low range. Low range probably worked the best at the lower speeds but all settings were a thrill. I thought this poor SUV just cant handle the mud until I looked behind me and saw everyone sliding off the trails as well. I even had several people pull over to let me by. I guess I was driving faster than they felt comfortable with but I was loving every minute. Got the old mud wave over the hood shot on the way back.

Anyway, the tires stink in mud but then thats what I should have expected.

Whats interesting is that I really have not noticed any advantage between AWD (4H) and 4 Lock. Seems whether a 60/40 or 50/50 locked split in power it hasnt mattered yet on snow, ice or mud.

jhockaday · May 2001

We've had the Montero limited for almost 2 weeks now and I thought I'd throw out a few things. Taken a few trips with the family and have put over 1000 miles on the SUV.

Looks: I must admit the Montero is a little strange looking to me. But the longer I have it the better it looks. Also in my town I've only seen one other and it was a different color. Being different is nice for a change.

Power: Horse power is like money, you can never have too much. But I haven't seen any lack of power in the Montero. We drove several hundred miles on interstate roads at 70 plus with no problem. Passing is no problem either. When you get into it hard the motor does put out a good growl but doesn't complain. My wife thinks it sounds tuff.

Room: This is where the Montero shines. We drove just about every SUV on the market in the 30 thousand plus price range. Nothing else comes close to the room of the Montero. And that includes headroom. The new Ford feels tight in the drivers seat

3rd Seat: This is the reason we bought the Montero. We have 3 kids, 3, 4 & 16 years old. 95% of the time we won't need the 3rd seat. But if a family member or friend wants to come along on a trip we have room for 2 more. I love the way it completely disappears and leaves a nice flat floor. The new Ford Explorer has a 3rd seat but it doesn't completely flatten out when it is down. A few posts back questioned the strength of this seat. But it sure feels solid to me. I've had vans with removable seats that were no sturdier. This seat is only good for kids under about 12. Any older and there just wouldn't be any leg room. So if you don't have any children this option is probably meaningless.

Safety: ABS disk brakes all around. Front and side air bags. The SUV just feel very solid to me. Every seat except the 2nd row middle has a shoulder strap. Even the 3rd row seats. Some have worried about the middle seat without a shoulder strap. No doubt a shoulder strap would be nice but the middle of the SUV is the safest possible place you could sit. There is always a scenario when where you are sitting is the worst place. Being that we have small children we have a booster seat in the middle location. The lap belt goes through then there is a strap on the top of the baby seat that goes to a hook in the floor. With this setup the middle truly is the safest place.
Also, when I put the kids into the 3rd row I take this top strap from the booster seat and run it through the head rest then down to the luggage hook in the rear floor. So that the seat is held very securely in place.

The wife wanted an SUV with more luxury items but I held out for one with a 3rd seat. The compromise was the Montero. So far I have been very pleased with our decision.

rruck1 · May 2001

The heated seat issue is a real laugh riot in the Sequoia forum. This issue came to light months ago and was explained time and again as a 'typo' in the brochure. I think Toyota should have included it, but that's what disclaimers are for - right? The best part is that there are people who have been in the forum the whole time who went out and ordered their Sequoia with the package mentioned, knowing it didn't include heated seats, and now they want to be compensated. I'm sure Toyota deliberately deleted the heated seats from the package after the brochures were printed.

Since this is the Montero forum, here is a Montero question... The off road package on my 83 Monty had a 'floating' drivers seat with a shock absorber in it. Is this still an option? This was great for banging around off road, although the passengers didn't really appreciate it. It could be locked into place for on road driving - neat option.

brillmtb · May 2001

Have not seen floating seats. Are you sure those things wouldnt launch you into the roof

rruck1 · May 2001

The headroom in that thing was amazing! I'm 6'4" and the only thing I've owned that comes close is the Sequoia. The seat had springs and a shock absorber that controlled the amount and speed of the up/down movement - very fun, no head bashing. It was great for off road, but unless you locked the seat down you could get a little motion sickness on the highway.

This truck also came with a rear tire cover that read "Montero - The Urban Gorilla". I haven't seen that recently either....

erubright · May 2001

We are getting our new 2001 Limited at a AutoNation dealership. The dealership is offering an extended warranty for coverage out to 6yr/60k miles for $1200. I have never owned a Mitsubishi product, and I don't know anyone that has so I don't know how well they age over the 3yr/36k warranty. I generally say no to extended warranty type things, but I don't have enough info with this vehicle and model.

Any thoughts or info from research on whether the extended warranty is a "good deal" here given amount of repair needed.

Thanks

phonos · May 2001

You can shop around for an extended warranty.

For example, we got better financing through the dealer, but we saved about $400 on an extneded warranty over that charged by the dealer by purchasing through our credit union. In addition, it covers more stuff, has a longer term (100K miles), and lower deductables.

brillmtb · May 2001

I seem to recall that my warrenty through the dealer was for $1200 but covered everything just about other than obvious things like parts that wear out normally (tires, oil, etc). It was wrapped up in the finiancing and goes for 100K.

There are several plans the dealer can sell you.

As far as whether it is even needed I really dont know. I have never believed in them in the past. The only reason I went for it this time was that I got a good price for my Montero, it is a 4wd which means much greater oppotunity for failure and I wanted to hedge my bets in case the Montero turned out not to be reliable.

It is still a lot of money but I think I would make the same decision. The dealer went over some of the prices for repairs for things that are covered in my warrenty and just given the number of computer parts alone a couple of failures over the 100K will pay for the plan.

toyotatoys · May 2001

"I'm happy with this, I dont think any of the other SUV's I considered do much better and if you factor in the 87 octane price savings at 10% or so this translates to 21mpg compared to SUV's that require premium. Not bad."

Brill, checking the MDX forum might help you better in forming your opinion about your mileage.

Granting, your Monty does slightly better than the 17.4 mpg on my Seq (~75mph on the highway, pencil & paper calculation, regular gas).

'Good weekend.

phonos · May 2001

After I read what I posted above, I can see I didn't make the situation exactly clear.

We went with the Mitsubishi dealer financing of 4.9% for 48 month on the Montero but declined the extended warrenty.

We then purchased, later in the week, the extended warrenty through the credit union.

Haven't had one normal warrenty claim on it in 16,000 miles. Haven't had it in for anything except normal service and oil change every 3-4000 miles.

Maybe, thinking about it though, I should try and get the rear pads/rotors changed on it under warranty to eliminate the slight squeak when stopping. The dealer keeps claiming its just normal brake noise but did note that both the pads and rotors were glazed at the last service. If I get them to write it up one more time, I think that will be the 3rd or 4th time and maybe I can get a whole new Montero, with lower millage, free under the California Lemon Law. Think it's worth a shot?

The only problem is, they know I've taken it off-roading a lot from all the dirt, sand and mud on the undercarriage. I really do love it, it goes everywhere.

Word to the wise -- when driving on muddy roads, no matter how nice a day it is, keep the roof closed in case your son decides to go around you real fast during sloppy puddle crossings. (I have to admit, it was pretty funny).

PHOnos, White/Silver 2001 Montero Ltd, rear A/C, purchased August 2000, build date July, $34,500 (no extras, darn!)+ TTL, 4.9% for 48 months, Orange County, CA.

mp19fan · May 2001

My brother had a 94 Montero w/ floating seats. Very cool! It gave you just enough shock absorption (about 1-2" travel) to damp some of the harshness off-road. But no, 2001 doesn't offer it as an option. They don't even offer power passenger seats as an option. Oh well, I rarely sit there anyways!

Toyotatoys, you're getting 17.4mpg in your Seq??! Verified or just by what the computer says? From what I had been reading prior to purchasing my Montero, most Seq owners were getting 13mpg, while the computer was displaying about 16mpg. I'm geting 17mpg verified on my Montero, which is better than my 98 I-6 JGC.

2k miles on my '01 LTD, still smiling! ;-D

phonos · May 2001

Anyone in the New York area that is looking for grill guard/brush guard, nerf bars, skid plate, etc. for 2001 Montero?

This company (link below) in Brooklyn appears to have quality, well made welded tublar stuff at competative prices. However, they do not have any product on the West coast to look at. I spoke with them and I can order and have it shipped. The prices they quoted me are less than those listed on their website as "retail" by about 8-10%

If anyone does investigate further, please post your findings here or send me an e-mail -- I am really interested based on the brochure they sent me.

Thanks in advance

http://www.tal-and-hadas.com/mitsubishi.htm#1

-PHOnos

claybuster · May 2001

Has anybody tried the factory roof rack luggage carriers on the 2001 Montero Ltd.? The factory list price is about $360. and best price to date is $260. + Tax.

Last 400 mile trip the Monte averaged 19 1/4 mpg with 87-88 octane gas and it did good in one mountain area; used the 4th gear a lot in this area (only about 20% of the trip). Mostly 60 - 70 mph highway.

Has anybody checked their 2001 Montero Ltd. odometer for speed accuracy with the factory stock tires?

viet2 · May 2001

The current Montero does not need a shock absober for the seat, because of the all around independent suspension. Unlike other truck base SUV with the rear solid axel, I believe the Montero offers the best ride when the road gets rough and smooth on highway cruising. Just the other day, I was driving behind a Landcruiser and saw the axel bouncing up and down. Eventhough they control the bouncing of the axel by softening the spring and with good shock tunning, there must be some racket get to the passenger!

toyotatoys · May 2001

mp19fan,

What I meant when I said "pencil-and-paper" calculation was that I filled up my SEQ to two clicks on the gas nozzle (just to make sure the first click was not pre-mature, drove on CRUISE CONTROL at 75mph for 176 miles (exit to home) of mostly flat terrain and then re-filled the gas again to two clicks. It needed 10.1 gallons, or about 17.4 mpg.

This is actually the third time I tried to measure my mpg, but the first two were NOT on cruise. They also gave about 17.2-17.5 mpg. Surprisingly, the number of people in the vehicle (2-6 people, medium build) did not seem to matter very much on the mileage(though this part was very unscientific).

I am comfortable that these figures are correct. However, I am NOT surprised if one reports 13 mpg on STOP-and-GO situations, especially with a heavy foot. I got 15+ on about 50/50 city/highway driving.

Finally, yes the electronic calculator above the windshield is wrong (overestimated) and useless. I wish I had a way to re-set or re-calibrate it.

brillmtb · May 2001

You were BEHIND the LC! ug.....just kidding :}

Mitsubishi Montero

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles