Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Mitsubishi Montero



  • intmed99intmed99 Posts: 485
    If only Brill would stop mentioning how the Montero is better than Toyota SUVs...i have no interest in Monteros. If you NOTICE, i responded after Brill comments above (POST 2152).
  • tidestertidester Posts: 10,059
    ...i have no interest in Monteros.

    Please forgive me for asking the obvious but if you have no interest in Monteros then why are you reading the "Mitsubishi Montero" topics? Just curious.

    tidester, host
  • k2rmk2rm Posts: 205
    Having a Toyota owner tell you how much superior their truck is over yours :)
  • intmed99intmed99 Posts: 485
    I thought i answered your "curious" question ALREADY...quite obvious i think...please read my POST 2170. Just curious why you missed that. Being a HOST, you should know that i surf many forums on the Edmunds board. I am curious you do know that. Full of curiosities between you and me. Any more "curious" or "obvious" questions from you or other HOSTS???
  • brillmtbbrillmtb Posts: 543
    I think you forget that you are not really arguing with me. I am cutting and pasting results from other sites, reviews, etc. Just saying I dont know what I am talking about wont change the truth or findings of these various sources.

    Why dont we just agree that you dont like the Montero, you think it is weak, not capable, not of value, etc, etc, etc

    I am putting you in for Toyota's Salesperson of the year for the relentless pursuit of selling Toyotas fine line of products. I hope you win a new LC.
  • brillmtbbrillmtb Posts: 543
    The Range Rover was the prefered SUV in this review, note the Lexus. Not the mention on the MB G500 system.

    "The G500 has four-wheel-traction control like the others for highway use, and a lockable center differential, but goes two steps further with a locking differential front and rear for trail use (traction control is no substitute for locking diffs). Low-range is dash-switched at any speed below 15 mph, and the ratio of 2.16:1 compares to others 2.5:1 because of the overdrive high-range (0.87:1).

    Final Score
    Buyers in this market tend to be demanding, and all these vehicles should meet realistic expectations in every aspect of ownership. The new Range Rover is a high-tech piece worthy of Windows masters, delightful on the road, and sold in low volumes. The LX 470 remains faithful to those qualities Lexus buyers prefer: conservative, reliable, capable, luxurious, and utterly quiet. The Navigator gets our vote for most improved, and the people responsible should get a gold star. It's a versatile, roomy, comfortable bus with great road manners and a decent buy at $10/pound. And the exclusive G500 goes well, laughs at rocky roads, yet has all the features anticipated by the most demanding technophiles. A hard look at your own needs and requirements will ultimately make the choice, but for our money, the new Range Rover sets the pace."
  • brillmtbbrillmtb Posts: 543
    No, not the LC but the Volvo. I knew this one was set up better if you like electronics

    Heres the link, dont take my word for it.
  • brillmtbbrillmtb Posts: 543
    The Lexus apparently can only do .66 and 4 runner .68 on the skid pad. Almost every other tested vehicle in this review out performed them on the skid pad. This was a 2003 test.

    I dont really care as that is what Acura NSX's are for but you seemed to believe those numbers were important in SUV and quoted higher values.

    Performance DATA
      0-60 mph, sec Quarter mile, sec @ mph Braking, 60-0 mph, ft 200-ft skidpad, g 600-ft slalom, mph
    Ford Expedition 10.3 17.2 @ 81.1 144 0.70 55.7
    Honda Element 10.8 17.6 @ 78.8 139 0.75 59.4
    Honda Pilot 8.2 16.1 @ 85.8 137 0.72 57.8
    Hummer H2 10.2 17.3 @ 80.0 151 0.64 52.2
    Isuzu Ascender 9.0 16.5 @ 84.6 143 0.67 55.7
    Kia Sorento 10.1 17.3 @ 79.3 152* 0.70 58.9
    Lexus GX 470 8.3 16.2 @ 84.4 134 0.66 58.8
    Lincoln Aviator 8.1 16.0 @ 88.9 139 0.71 59.2
    Lincoln Navigator 10.0 17.1 @ 82.7 139 0.71 59.4
    Mitsubishi Outlander 12.3 18.5 @ 73.0 142* 0.79 61.7
    Subaru Baja 9.6 17.0 @ 80.7 133 0.75 59.9
    Subaru Forester 8.6 16.2 @ 84.4 135 0.69 59.3
    Toyota 4Runner 7.8 15.9 @ 85.6 135 0.68 57.1
    Volvo XC90 T6 8.9 16.4 @ 86.7 128 0.74 60.2
    * Not equipped with optional ABS
  • brillmtbbrillmtb Posts: 543
    OK, explain to my why you say your 4 runner has "nearly as good" approach angle 36 vs 42 (a 6 degree difference in the Monteros favor) and then go on to say a "far superior" departure angle 29 vs 24 degrees (a 5 degree difference in your favor). Seems like "far superior" is a bit biased or did you mean to say the Montero has a far superior approach angle since it is even greater a difference than the departure angle.

    You are right that that 03 Montero has a lower ground clearence but my 01 was at 9-9.5 before springs and now 11 inches after with better handling. Yes, better spring rates and shocks improve handling even with the extra lift and No there is not going to be significant increase in wear.

    It seems that the new 4 runner also dropped considerably in ground clearence, down to 9.1 inches from past 4 runners as high as 11 inches and that is with 17 inch tires. Put those on the 03 Montero and you would be even in clearence.

    I still like the 5 speed over the 4 runners 4 speed tranny, the larger interior spaces, 300lb greater load carring capacity, 7 passenger vs 5 in the toyota, excellent sitting position and view out of the massive windows, better stereo, but I grant you none of this may be important in your buying decision.
  • brillmtbbrillmtb Posts: 543
    Edmunds consumer rating of the 03 Montero and 03 4 runner is 9.2 for both so it seems both camps are very happy. I guess us Montero owners are just delusional.
  • dskidski Posts: 414
    Opps...I thought intmed drove a Land Cruiser. Sorry, change the references in my earlier post to 4Runner. Everything else still applies. They're both nice. The new 4Runner is pretty cool. The old one I didn't care much for.

  • tidestertidester Posts: 10,059
    please read my POST 2170.

    Actually, I was responding to your post (2170). Obviously, you DO have an interest in Montero despite your proclamation to the contrary.

    I think we've sated our respective curiosities and we can all safely return to the regularly scheduled topic, which, of course, is the Mitshubishi Montero! :-)

    tidester, host
  • viet2viet2 Posts: 66
    [4Runner cheaply build?? Maybe you should look under your Montero first before proclaiming this. You don't even have a skidplate for your transfer case! I have looked underneath the Montero...flimsy plastic skidplates. Control arms are NOT boxed...they are (upside down) U-shaped stamped steel control arms. Look at the lower control arms in front or rear (i forgot) and you will see what i mean.]

    All the lower control arms closer to the ground are boxed. It is not up-sidedown u-shape stamped steel.
    I am amazed that you picked the $50 skid plate and overlook the rest of the vehicle. The 4Runner did not have the unibody, 5 speeds, the independent suspension, the foldown seats... Those things cost way, way more than $50 skid plates. Mitsubishi put a lot of components into the Montero. And it is not cheap stub, all are quality piece that you can tell. Toyota mean while gives you a body on frame with a solid axel (ok and a skid plate) and you are jumping for joy? Are you in South California, I would be happy to meet with you so you can convince me that the 4Runner is a better engineering piece. I doubt it, because I was about to buy the 4Runner before the Mitsubishi came out.

    [Who is "everyone"?? You mean, the Mitsu salesman?? Too funny!]

    No, they are my co-worker, some of them are 4Runner owner.

    How is the Montero suspension "more substantial" than 4Runner (3rd gen)??? Tell me the details please. Last time i checked a solid axle is universally regarded as stronger than independent. In fact, i dare you to name ONE weakness of the 4Runner's suspension component. Just one.

    More substaintial means bigger. The 4Runner is based on a compact truck platform, so everything is "small" accordingly. Does not mean bad, just smaller and cheaper to make. Weakness of the suspension? it is the solid axel, bouncing and pushing around. Very rough ride! Even dangerous in snow or even rain if not in all wheel drive mode.

    [ONLY the front nose and hood are shared with the Toyota Tacoma...everything else is unique to the 4Runner. 4Runners have FULLY-boxed frame and fully-boxed crossmembers (yes, even the crossmembers!); Tacoma does not have this. Our front and rear suspension are very different. We do share engines. Sorry, YOU need to read up on the 4Runner before talking. Thanks.]

    LOL, ok so it is shared with the Tacoma, and I am very impress with the boxed cross member. The boxed frame is a very advance feature of the 4Runner.

    Bottom line, explain to me one thing: why is your departure angle and approach angle sooooo different??? Pretty bad when the Ford Explorer has as much ground clearance as you. WITHOUT mods, my 4Runner is OVER an inch higher in ground clearance!

    Did you jacked up your 4Runner or hack-sawed the axel pumkin?

    [Why do you think the 4Runner cost more than Montero?? Quality costs money, Viet]

    4Runner costs more because people will buy it based on the name alone. As for the quality of the Montero, it is a quality vehicle just like the Toyota.
    I appreciate good engineering very much and Over-all the Montero is a vehicle that has better engineering even just from the stanpoint of configuration and drive train. The 3rd generation 4Runner is a good truck, but compare to the Montero it is more expensive while offers less equipment and with dated technology.
  • intmed99intmed99 Posts: 485
    Post 2175: I have no idea what is your point. I ALREADY admitted that the G500 is a more capable off-roader due to it's locking diffs. What is your point??? Please RE-read my earlier post.

    Post 2176: Ok, so what?? Motortrend picked Acura MDX the year before?? Does that mean it is better than everything else?? So, are you saying the new Volvo is better than Range Rover?? Interestingly, it should be better than Montero, too?? Again, what is your point??

    Post 2177: Where's the Montero on those numbers?? I assumed these numbers are from ONE source, right?? Where's the Montero?? Please do NOT compare different sources! Different driving conditions will give different results. Car & Driver tested the LX back in 2000 and i think it got 0.70-0.72g. Again, again, what is your point?? Where's the Montero??

    Post 2178: According to Mitsubishi website, the '03 Montero has a 39 degree approach angle, NOT 42 degrees. Ground clearance is 8.6". Sorry.

    Unfortunately, for you to maintain the same handling AFTER a lift, your springs and shocks must be STIFF. This means that your wheel travel will be LESS, which means you have compromised your off-roading!

    Brill, you better check again. LIFTING will increease your chance of breaking your CV joint!! Your CV angle is NOT at optimal angle (as specified my Mitsu engineers). Overtime, you will wear it out. In addition, if you off-road on rocks and at extreme steering, you can tear your CV boots. Seriously, i am not trying to mess with you. I love OME lift, but i am scared of this happening on my 4Runner (due to IFS).

    17" wheels are the same size as before. 265/70/16 is EQUAL to 265/65/17. Therefore, there is no increase in height with 17" tires. Therefore, your Montero with these tires will NOT be higher.

    WE're talking about CAPABILITY, not interior space, right??? Like i said earlier, your Montero is a lot bigger, but cost LESS. BTW, your Infiniti stereo on '01 models was not impressive when i heard it. My 4runner stereo is not bad at all...don't go by the name alone, it means nothing.

    YOUR departure angle is 18 degrees (19 degrees in '01)!!!! That is FAR inferior to my 4Runner. FAR.

    Post 2179: Ok, Edmunds consumer ratings???!!

    Post 2182: Tidester...nevermind. Curiousity does not equal understanding apparently.

    Post 2183: Please, if you do not know anything about off-roading capability, then do not comment!

    UNIBODY is NOT something to be proud of when looking at an off-roader! DESPITE being a unibody, crash testing results are no better than my "old" 4runner! BTW, unibodies are SUPPOSED to be better in crash testing.

    SOLID AXLE is the key to off-roading. Wheel travel in a solid axle is ALWAYS superior to any independent suspension. Solid axle is STRONGER. Less components hanging down...thus, less things to break.

    You know those things you like so much in your Montero CAN ALSO BE FOUND IN A MINIVAN! Maybe you should get a Dodge Caravan as your next car.

    Did you know that my 4Runner's IFS (front suspension) and rear axle are the SAME as those found on the Toyota Tundra AND Sequoia?????? Think about that for a moment. Don't believe me?? Go to your local Toyota dealership and have a look for yourself. I insist! It is called, over-engineering! My suspension components are no smaller than an AMERICAN 1/2 ton truck. Again, i insist you take a look.

    Explain to me why my rear axle is dangerous in snow???

    My 4runner (2002) has 11" of ground clearance...STOCK. Enough said.

    Are you saying consumers are that stupid?? Spend their hard-earned $$$ just for name?? For a SUV that is smaller??? Ok...i guess you're the only smart consumer out there. Remmeber, this is TOYOTA not name is not the reason people spend $$$ on a Toyota. Sorry.

    Dated technology?? 4Runners have had BRAKE ASSIST and stability control since 2001. Montero only started with stability control in 2003. No brake assist anywhere on the Montero.

    Viet, a MINIVAN has those features you love so much. Again, the Dodge Caravan is a good choice!

  • dskidski Posts: 414
    >>Are you saying consumers are that stupid?? Spend their hard-earned $$$ just for name??<<

    Of course! Consumers do this ALL the time! What's your profession? From your screen name here, I'm guessing medicine.

    I'm in marketing. Trust me.. consumers purchase "name" on a regular basis. I spend a great deal of my time working on Brand Recognition issues. Now... having said that it's only fair to point out that the "name" is quite often very well earned by the manufacturer.

    Toyota earned it's name without a doubt as did Honda. Honda's level of loyalty is so strong in fact that I think it has caused them to be lazy in the styling department. I know several people who will ONLY buy Honda's. Mitus on the other hand has to be more cutting edge in the stylying department to attract more interest. I could write pages about that subject but suffice it to say.. YES consumers do make purchasing decisions based on Name Recognition.

  • intmed99intmed99 Posts: 485
    However, name recognition only goes so far. A lot of us say that BMW cars are over-priced BECAUSE of the name. Well, recently i took note of this and explored the 3-series. Yes, the engine is "underpowered" compared to Infiniti/Acura. Yes, it is smaller than most of it's competitors. yes, you cannot get a CD changer. Sure, it's longterm reliability is suspect. Etc.

    However, it's suspension components are top's shocks are high quality. It's engine is extremely smooth and rev-free, YET has decent torque at low RPMs. Interior quality is top-notch. Soft surfaces everywhere you touch. Dang, even the cupholders are fancy.

    Most important of all, BMW and Mercedes safety features are unbeatable. Over and over again, BMW & Merc are the safest cars around.

    So, is it overpriced?? Is it only a name?? No. Toyota/Honda/Nissan owners would love to say that BMW is just a name. Well, has anyone really beaten BMW at it's game?? Has anyone beaten Mercedes in the safety field?? No. No.

    Remember, i am a Toyota SUV fan, not a German fan. But, i will admit that Germans do make good performance & safe cars...well worth their price. I do not feel they are overpriced.

    Now, Toyota 4Runners. Is it overpriced?? Well, for a 1996 design, it did extremely well in crash testing (compare that to other 1996 designs!). In fact, it ranks right up there with 2003 designs too! Interior may be cramped, but it is put together with extreme precision and care. I have no rattles at all over 16,000 miles. Interior materials are high-grade. Even the hard plastics are thick. Look at the structure of the 4Runner...fully boxed frame and crossmembers...all high-strength steel. The front suspension is made of boxed control arms. Solid axle in the rear. Anti-roll bar linkage is no smaller than 1/2 ton truck.

    Is it overpriced?? I don't think so. I think that i am an intelligent consumer.
  • mkayemkaye Posts: 184
    Well, even though the topic seems to be "my daddy can beat up your daddy," at least there is some good activity in the forum over the last few days.
  • tidestertidester Posts: 10,059
    i have no interest in Monteros.

    Clearly stated and unambiguous!

    Curiousity [sic] does not equal understanding apparently.


    Just to be clear, the topic is (once again) Mitsubishi Montero and while some comparison is to be expected be aware that the topic is NOT Toyota 4Runner.

    tidester, host
  • wonbwonb Posts: 8
    You seem to jump from year to year depending on what suits your interest. You will use the newer 4 runner one time then realize that the gound clearence is only 9.1 inches and then jump back to use your 02 at 11 inches. It really is not fair to do this.

    Most of what you say is 1/2 truths constructed to put down the Montero rather than appretiate its true strengths

    Why do you spend so much time here anyway. Is your Toyota in the shop?

    Most of the higher tech SUV are or will be independent suspension and unibody with much more strenght than current body on rails like the toyota. Not everything about this newer design is better but enough is to make it superior. Toyota will go to this, it is jst a matter of time.

    Mitsubishi motors has developed and patent many designs that are technologically superior. Just spend some time on the corp sites and you will see this is a company looking at the future in many things it makes, it is a huge company.
  • intmed99intmed99 Posts: 485
    Toyota in the shop?? Are you kidding?? You know the saying: "people in glass houses should not throw rocks." From the look of things, Mitsu are not known for superb quality & reliability.

    Also, remind me when did i mention the '03 4Runner?? Very few times i think (if at all).

    BTW, in general, unibody is cheaper to make than body-on-frame.

    More strength?? Crash test does not prove this (look at Montero's scores). And i am sure the new 4runner/GX470 will get top grades in crash testing DESPITE being body-on-frame. Unibodies bend and twist (they have to) over rough terrains, no matter how much "strengthening" they have.

    The ONLY unibody that i respect is the new Range Rover...but look, it weighs AS MUCH as a body-on-frame (actually it is a bit HEAVIER). Do you know why?? Because they have to strengthened it sooooo much to prevent twisting. So, really what is the point of unibody???

    What is superior about Montero's unibody & independent suspension?? Sure, it provides better ride (but rolls over!). Sure you have room for a tiny 3rd row seating...for this, i buy a MINIVAN. For crash protection?? Well, from the looks of things, Montero is no better than my old body-on-frame 4runner.

    So, what's the advantage??? Where's the magnificent engineering you guys have talked about??

    If you notice, Toyota makes the Highlander (camry based). YET, with the new 4Runner, they went with body-on-frame, DESPITE most other soccer mom SUVs being unibody.

    And Toyota is a BIG company...and i am sure they do plenty of research.
  • phonosphonos Posts: 206
    "a solid axle is universally regarded as stronger than independent."

    Personal experience -- my son managed to break the (solid) front axle where it enters the pumpkin on my 3/4 ton 1986 4x4 Suburban (Dana, I think) while offroading.

    If solid axles are so strong, why do they need aftermarket axle trusses?
  • phonosphonos Posts: 206
    You asked,"Did you notice that the stiffer tire improved handling."

    The steering seems to be more responsive now with the "D" range, Tri-Guard sidewall BFGs, which, I think, was a complaint in some of the road tests on the 2001.

  • intmed99intmed99 Posts: 485
    You think IFS can handle off-roading better????!! Solid axles are not indestructible. But they are a lot stronger than IFS.

    Anyone can break anything, Phonos. I am sure i can find a way to break a Dana 60 or 80. However, it will be A LOT harder to break it than IFS. There was no point to your story.
  • intmed99intmed99 Posts: 485
    Axle Truss is to provide additional armor to the differential. All suspensions have differentials. In independent suspension, the diff is tucked up into the body (thus, independent suspension vehicles SHOULD have higher ground clearance). My 4runner's IFS has a skidplate underneath the front differential to protect it.

    In solid axle, the diff (aka "pumpkin") is lower. The truss is like a skidplate for the diff (just like what my 4runner has in front). It DOES NOTHING TO IMPROVE THE STRENGTH OF AXLE. Therefore, it would not have helped your son's problem.

    The "pumpkin" is still a lot stronger (harder to break) than the control arms on an independent suspension. Also, the halfshafts on the independent suspension is vulnerable. Just ask your son.

    What is your point again about axle trusses??
  • phonosphonos Posts: 206
    True, some axle trusses have skid plates to add abrasion protection, but I suggest you look up the engineering definition of "truss".
  • phonosphonos Posts: 206
    The latest weight saving materials now in use in aerospace industry are beginning to find their way into other industries .

    Engineering composites, and other "plastics" are being used in such things as jet engine nacelles, wing skins, helicopter rotors, space station trusses, radomes, missile fins, jet engine guide vanes, etc. Pretty harsh environments, yes?

    Only thing probably better would be a titainium alloy, but cost prohibitive.
  • intmed99intmed99 Posts: 485
    Montero costs around $32K. It is not the space shuttle or cruiser missles. How about if i cut the "plastic" skidplates and examine you think i will find aerospace materials or pure plastic found at your local hardware store????

    Come on, let's not go too far. If you say that then i can claim the metal skidplates on my brother's Wrangler Rubicon as being from the space shuttle itself! Is that going too far??

    You still have not answered my question: do you think IFS is stronger than a solid axle in off-roading??
  • dskidski Posts: 414
    >>Most important of all, BMW and Mercedes safety features are unbeatable. Over and over again, BMW & Merc are the safest cars around.<<

    How'd we gravitate to this? Anyway.. those are safe designs but they are not only beatable, they are surpassed in some cases. Lets go to their own continent: The EuroNcap (People who wrote the book on thourough crash testing) Rates the 9-5 as the "safest sedan they've ever tested".

    Doesn't really matter but people fall into those traps sometimes. There are Plenty of cars out there that are every bit as crashworthy and more so in some cases as a BMW or Merc. Plenty of domestic, Asian and European designs.

  • wonbwonb Posts: 8
    Independent suspension is on some of the finest on and off road vehicles as well as luxury autos.

    Solid axles dont handle as well and in rough corners you can loose directional stability.

    Independent suspension is superior. You really need to read a little more or at least intertain the real reason Toyota still uses save money.

    Intmed: Once again you show that your bias for what ever Toyota makes to cloud your judgement.
  • wonbwonb Posts: 8
    I can give you at least a dozen people in the off road buisness who will attest to the Montero's reliability and quality build. Can you tell me where you are getting your data saying the Montero is not built well?
Sign In or Register to comment.