Mitsubishi Montero

intmed99 · March 2003

Link:

http://www.edmunds.com/used/2001/mitsubishi/montero/100001534/roa- - - dtestarticle.html?articleId=44319&editorialpage=page003

0-60 = 11.6 seconds.

Car & Driver "Designer Utes" Comparo also got above 11 seconds.

All off-roading magazines has it around 11.5 to 12 seconds.

MotorTrend has the fastest time i have seen so far at 10.3 seconds.

yumf · March 2003

What do you guys think is a good price for a new 2002 Montero Limited with the premium package? Dealers here in South FL seem eager to make a deal to get rid of them. Would you go after a great deal on a 2002, or wait a little and go after a good deal on a 2003?

dmetzger · March 2003

I would wait for the 2003. The larger engine and some other engine upgrades do help performance and mileage. I think you would be happier. That is what I am waiting for, and to see if Mitsu might offer a larger motor.

dski · March 2003

Well, it's about time to look into replacing my 2001. UGH.. I'm getting killed on depriciation. Oh well, it's the price you pay for being over average mileage. Mine was new in July of 2000 and now has 73,000 mile on it.

Edmunds values as much as 16/17K but Kelly puts it more around 15K. Mine is in GREAT condition but I'm not sure how much thats gonna help. If the dealer doesn't figure out what all the strange noises from the engine compartment are, I'll never move it.

Drew

brillmtb · April 2003

Not that 1 second either way is important. My real point was to show just how "slow" the some of the other "top" SUV are.

The Montero for 02 comes in closer to 9.5-10 and the 03 should be in the 9.5 or a little less given more power.

intmed99 · April 2003

Really, all reviews of Montero (before '03) has them AT LEAST 10.5-12 seconds (exception: MotorTrend at 10.3)! Not even close to 9.5 seconds. On average, i think it is around 11.3 seconds. The "top SUVs" are no slower than 10 seconds. The G500 is a lot faster than what you posted...around 7.5-8.5 seconds.

Can you please show me a roadtest by a reputable magazine that has the '02 Montero at 9.5 seconds 0-60??? Thanks.

dmetzger · April 2003

Curious,

How did your rear end, er, suspension hold up. Did it start to sag? Alignment still ok? Tires wear evenly?

Just wanted to know your feelings on the independent rear suspension.

Thanks!

brillmtb · April 2003

The fastest I have seen is 9.5 the slowest I think was 11. Take your pick, I really dont care. I have personally clocked mine between 9.5-10 just for kicks. The G500 number I quoted came from a review but if it goes 0-60 in 7.5 that is a HUGE reporting difference. I doubt very strongly that it is that quick. My GSR Integra can just do that and I know very few SUV's that can keep up with it.

I am still wondering why 0-60 is that important in an SUV? It is not a marker of a better SUV, just a faster one. It could even be a marker of a less reliable one due to the higher performance of the engine and the additional torque stresses on the tranny, rear end, etc.

brillmtb · April 2003

I guess my last post did not take but I think your numbers are a little low if you look at Edmunds. For 76K miles on the montero I got 17K for trade in, 19K for private party. For comparison so you feel better the Sequoia would be 22 and 24K respectively. The resale % would be 54% Montero and 57% Sequoia. Not bad given Toyota sets a great resale standard most of the time.

What killed both resales is the "excess miles" for the year of the SUV but then again look at all the fun you had.

intmed99 · April 2003

My 4Runner is no track star either. However, your numbers are significantly wrong as compared to the mass media. 0-60 times has NOTHING TO DO WITH RELIABILITY if the powertrain is designed properly (no supercharger or turbochargers). So, you're saying that Yugo is more reliable than a Camry just because the Yugo takes an infinity to get to 60 mph?? So, i guess your Montero is more reliable than my 3rd gen 4Runner because mine is faster??

BTW, EDMUNDS has your Montero at 11.6 seconds! CLEAR EVIDENCE.

The G500 is pretty darn fast from most reviews.

But, i do agree with you that SUVs are not meant to be sports cars. 0-60 does not mean much for true SUVs.

brillmtb · April 2003

Actually, that is not what I am saying. What I am saying is that 0-60 times really dont mean much unless you are racing for pink slips. Reliability is dependent on many more factors than engine power as we all know but we also know that as performance goes up, even on quality built vehicles, there is more potential for early failure. There is a trade off. I dont know about Yugos at all but I have heard the rumors. I do know that the Korean vehicles are now being rated as good as Hondas which is remarkable and that the Montero seems to be built very well. I do wish it had a little more power, or torque but after obtaining 21 mpg on my trip home from CA last weekend, spending most of the time at 70-75mph I realize that gas mileage may go down if my wish were granted.

I am not saying that your 3rd generation Toyota is any better or worse because it is faster/slower. Toyotas have had very good reliability and customer satisfaction scores across the board from thier cars to trucks. I think you probably went the right way with the 4runner, look at the LC aand Sequoia getting 12 mpg. Unless you are rich and need the extra room the extra cost doesnt justify the difference, especially now with the new 4 runner which looks like an even better option (if you can get by with the smaller size)

dski · April 2003

Been away all week.. so I'll respond to the things directed to me all in one here:

The Suspension, Rear End,Alingnment etc.. all seeming to hold up "okay" for the mileage. My worries are with some engine compartment noises that the dealer cant seem to fix (sounds like Belt problems but belts are all new) and another strange noise is a "Whining" I fear is Transmission related.

Oh, One last concern is that the Wheels are having a very odd problem. They have what appears to be pin points of rust they look like the beginnings of actual "pitting". I have mine professionally Detailed (4 to 5 times a year). The detailer just did the whole truck.. the wheels cleaned up but the next day.. the Rust or whatever it is started to come back.

Resale around 15 to 17K? Umm Sorry, I realize where Edmunds rates it but the Real World is much different. Also, Kelly appraises it MUCH lower. I haven't found a dealer who would go over 11K for Trade I'll probably settle for $15K

Lastly.. Sorry.. but the Montero is just plain slow! I've been driving everything in the price range and they ALL accelerate much quicker and more smoothly. Why does it Matter? Because most of us use these trucks for everyday driving and acceleration is an issue. Keep in mind mine is the first year with slightly fewer horses. I've not driven the newer ones.

FWIW.. I already purchased the replacement. Yes... It is VERY conservative and Boring.. LOL a Honda Pilot. It suits my needs for family and business Much better. It's equipped much better, including DVD, leather, etc for less money. I found a dealer who would discount fairly well. The ride, acceleration and handling are far superior with the Honda (240 hp.). The Montero KILLS the Pilot off the road but I really don't need that or want that at this point. True.. the Pilot does not excite me too much but hopefully Honda's superior engineering and build quality will keep me happy.

Drew

gunn4 · April 2003

I am looking to trade my 1997 Montero for a new model. There are alot of 2002's available. What is the best price for a 2002 Limited vs. 2003 Limited. Dealer claims financing deals only on 2003. Also what are the differences in 2002 vs. 2003. Thanks.

wilkich · April 2003

I took my '01 Montero to the dealer today to get an oil change and to look at the brakes which have been making some weird noises. The dealer of course volunteered to do the 15k mile service for $300. When I buy a car I generally think that all you need to do is change the oil and tune it at 30k or so. Do I really need to pay this much to have someone check belts and rotate the tires?

As to leftovers, it can be a way to get a good deal. Back in Jan 2002, we paid $32,700 for an '01 Limited leftover. They intially told us the 0% financing was not available because we were getting the truck for about invoice. We walked out and they called us two weeks later to offer the financing.

stever · April 2003

The Edmunds Maintenance Guide has service interval info and suggested costs to get it done.

Steve, Host

brillmtb · April 2003

Sounds like you matched your new vehicle to your needs thats all that really counts.

By the way, KBB rates all vehicles a lot lower. I noticed this pricing my Acura GSR. As far as the real world I think it is harder to sell just about all the used vehicles these days. Seems people can find a reasonable new vehicle or they are not in the market due to the drop in the economy.

brillmtb · April 2003

There are some style changes. One thing I like is it appears the rear mud flap is higher up. This has been a potential source of pain for off roading. The side rails are intergrated well.

The increased power is supposed to help but I suspect it will take 250-280hp before the 0-60 times drop much.

The anti Yaw control is on the 03. This is similar to the systems seen on the 4 Runner and Sequoia but I have not seen a lot about how Mistu has done thiers to see how it works in detail, whether it can be turned off, etc. I suspect if you are getting this for more serious off roading the 02 setup would be better but most are not buying a 34K SUV to off road in too seriously (they buy inexpensive hummers right?

)

phonos · April 2003

Hello to everyone.

Haven't been around in a while, to busy. See some of the original 3rd generation Monte (2001) buyers are still here.

Finally had to replace the OEM Yokohama GO-39's after 48,000+ miles on the '01 Limited.

Got 4 BFG All Terrain TA KO's yesterday in 265-75x16, load range "D" size to replace the 265-70x16's, load range "C"s. They fit fine even though 1-inch larger diameter.

Took a long ride down the freeway to San Diego with my wife driving. She said she couldn't tell much difference in handling, road noise, or ride running at 45psig. They seemed a little nosier to me at low speed at first than the OEMs but after a few miles I couldn't tell much difference either. (The Yok's didn't have much tread left, so the TAs would be expected to have a little noise with the more aggressive tread design).

Also, with the more aggresive tread I doubt that I'll get more than 30,000 miles, if that, out of them. However, for the 3-ply sidewall security in the rocks that's OK. Can't wait to try them on a trail with the added 0.5 inch clearance.

Kept the best original tire for spare so the tire cover still would fit. One inch diameter won't matter much if I take it easy just to get in to fix a flat.

No other problems with the Monte. I still love it.

By the way, the California golden poppy fields west of Lancaster, CA just off the 14 freeway are spectacular this year. If you're in SoCal a visit in the next week would be well worth while. Take the trails into the valley in the hills northwest of the state reserve fence to avoid the crowds of tourists on busses. You can drive up to where they just spent an hour or so walking on the other side of the fence and see more of a variety of wildflowers in greater abundance.

ARB OME shocks and springs next for 2.5 inch lift.

-PHOnos

hemsley1 · April 2003

I just purchased a 96 Montero SR. I love it! It has 125000 miles on it and it runs great. I just wanted to know what I should watch out for...mechanically speaking. I want to get 50000 miles more out of it. Someone said that the seals go bad at around 125000 miles. Any kind of advice on how to keep this thing running well would be appreciated, and definately anything to watch for in the future. Thanks

gunn4 · April 2003

The oldsmobile dealer here just bought the Mitsubishi franchise and is offering deals on 2002 Montero limited with premium package and running boards that they list for $38,585 discounted to $28,682. A 2003 limited with package is listed for $38,412 and they are only offering $2,500 rebate which seems high or .09% (which I thought was 0% for 60 months). They are really pushing the 2002's which they got at a discount with the franchise purchase but since we are this far along in the year the 2004's will be out in by end of summer so I am hesitant to buy the 2002 which will suffer a hit with depreciation/value...Any thoughts out there...Does anyone have a 20th anniversary model and what kind of price did you get. Gunn4

dski · April 2003

I'm not sure if your concern should be with Depreciation on the 2002. It's heavily discounted with will off set depriciation. The depriciation and what you'd sell for in a few years is rated on the original sticker not what you paid new.

The WORST thing you can do is what I did: Purchased a 2001 Model in July of 2000. The truck is now almost 3 years old with 73,000 miles on it but since it was designated as a 2001 in the year 2000, everyone thinks it's only a 2 year old car.

I think the best idea is to purchase mid to late in a given years run or after, NEVER prior to it. I'd be comfortable with the 2002 your looking at. In fact, if I would have found that kind of deal prior to replacing mine with a boring Pilot, I would have done it.

Good Luck
Drew

kbmorton · April 2003

gunn4, I own a 2001 Montero LTD and the onlu differences between a 2001 and 2002 Limited is that the second seat has three vs. two headrests and the bezels, front grill and side mirrors are painted to match the body color. Also the three diamond log is silver instead of red. Other than that, there is no difference between the 2001 and 2002.

In my humble option unless the cost is an issue (a $10,000 discount of of sticker isn't bad), I would go with a 2003. Not only is the engine displacement increased from 3.5 to 3.8, it has more horsepower and more torgue. And electronic anti-skid system has been added (not doubt to deal with the Consumer Report rollover report on the 2001 models)as well.

The 2003 also has a new front grill, need side cladding, new 16" wheels (which in my option look fantasic, new rear lamp design. Also tne radio now puts out 315 watts. If you get the premium package on the 2003, you also get a dual power seats.

Plus, I would not buy a 2002 in a 2003 model year.

dski · April 2003

All your points about the improvements are valid. However, the thought to avoid buying an '02 in '03 makes no sense. That fact alone should be of no concern.

IMO, the decision should be based on Price, the improvements and new features. Are they worth $10K? Maybe but I'd work for a heavier discount on the '03 than what they've been willing.

In a situation where there are no changes, buying a left over previous model year makes a lot of sense financially. It would be the smart way to go. Much cheaper purchase price and you in effect get a free years worth of mileage in the depreication value when it's time to sell. For someone like me who drive as much as 30K per year, that's HUGE! The mental thing about owning the latest model year isn't worth much in the end.

Drew

brillmtb · April 2003

I am going with the Bridgestone Revo A/T in the "C" load which is 6-ply. You made reference to going to "D" which should be 8-ply. The stock tire is SL or 4-ply so you made two jumps up. Some told me that the 8 ply might be too stiff. What did you find?

I have the ARB OME springs and shocks. They offer a 1 and 2 step up in springs. I went one step up. The front lift ends up being 1-2 inches after breakin and the rear 2.5 or so but I will measure again. I love the springs but I think this SUV deserves a good adjustable shock/strut. I just find that I would like to make the shock a little firmer. This, with stiffer tires, should get rid of any concerns about stability and ride quality.

If you ever hear about adjustable shocks/struts please let us know.

brillmtb · April 2003

The 02 Limited at 28K with options would be a great deal but it is not 10K off. Most of us here probably got the fully loaded LTD in the range of 32-34K but everyone can throw out thier deal later. Having said that you are just not going to find anything out there that can even touch the Montero at 28K. Your resale automatically looks better from that standpoint as well.

Sure the 03 has a few cosmetic things and it is nice that it has a passenger power seat but unless you dont know how to drive well in snow/ice/sand/mud the traction control is just not worth paying that much for.

dski · April 2003

Wish my Mitsu dealer would have offered around 32/33 for a New Limited. He cost himself a sale if it's true that he could have discounted to that.

Oh well. The Honda is boring but I think it'll hold up a little better and I'm trying to be happy. LOL

Drew

brillmtb · April 2003

I am speaking about my 01 not an 03 Drew. I paid 33 and some change plus a grand for exended warrenty which I have yet used and is probably a waste of money. This was before the consumer gig if I rememeber, too bad, I could have taken advantage of that gift and pressured them down even more.

phonos · April 2003

Correct Brill, "D" rated LT tires are what used to be called 8-ply rating. However, my understanding is that an letter rating on a truck tire may or may not have the actual number of plys of cord/rubber. It means it will pass a test for that ply rating when the test was developed. I think the ply rating system was developed when almost all tires were made with Rayon cord and were bias ply, not radial.

With the newer fabric(e.g. Kevlar)/rubber/belts combinations available these days, the number of actual plys is irrelevant. It is the load rating that is important. A "D" rated tire will have a higher load rating than a "C" rated tire.

The ride may be a little stiffer with the pressure at 45 psig, but as long as my wife can't notice it, no problem. At the maximum inflation pressure of 65 psig for these tires, the ride would be somewhat stiffer. However, at that pressure, without a full rated load(weight)to increase shoulder road contact, the tire will wear excessively in the center of the tread.

gunn4 · April 2003

So is there any way to find out when the 2004's will be available and more importantly if there will be any major design changes...

phonos · April 2003

Where did you buy the springs and shocks? I thought Overlander in Huntington Beach, CA was a supplier, but their website is no more and no phone number is listed anymore.

brillmtb · April 2003

We agree again. As I researched for my new tires I found that going to C or D rated tires resulted in increased load capacity but not necessarily increased numbers of plys on the sidewall. I was reassured however that the C and D's will have tougher or thicker sidewalls even if they are only 2-ply thick as in standard 4-ply tires.

Did you notice that the stiffer tire improved handling. I am hearing this from other Montero owners who are now beginning on thier second set of tires and many JGC owners (those suspensions are even softer).

brillmtb · April 2003

I went through ARB in Seattle WA. Here is an interesting site of ARB in AU and below is the email for Seattle. I am sorry but I cant find the web address for Seattle but I sent them an email to see if they have one.

Be sure to ask about the different levels of springs that OME offers for the Montero. I got the first size up.

http://www.overlander.com.au/vehicle.cfm

sales@arbusa.com

brillmtb · April 2003

OK, here is the best article I have seen on the 03 Montero. It comes from Australia where they really like the Montero. It even beat the LC not too long ago.

Notice that the electronic control system is on the 03 but they have in fact modified to work better than systems like the Toyota if you believe what is written. Specifically it seems to be taylored to various conditions, low range, hi range 4wd, you can turn it off at lower speeds where you might need to in off road conditons, etc. See the article for details

Notice how the hill decent brake now works. In the AU versions of the LC or Prado the reviewers did not really like the hill decent and hill holding set ups. The decent mech. would let the vehicle to too fast and the hill holding feature is a debatable option with an automatic (no clutch to worry about). Of note, I would like to see if Mitsu's descent mech works any better.

I have not been a fan of electronic control to date unless you can turn it off under certain circumstances. Seems the New Montero type system may be getting closer to something I might consider.

Also note that they are happy with the safety of the Pajero/Montero.

Enjoy!

http://www.overlander.com.au/vehicletest.cfm?uuid=78ED6EE7-ACDB-4- - AB4-AFB08AC8CE7F7AD6&currentmodel=true

intmed99 · April 2003

With my '02 4Runner, i can shut OFF stability system (and DE-THROTTLING function) in both HIGH and LOW ranges by locking the center differential. 4-wheel traction control is always ON. By locking the center diff, i can spin my tires in mud. BTW, Traction control intervention also varies by what mode my 4Runner is in (2wd vs. 4wd, LOW vs HIGH range, etc.).

Can you show me an article by an INDEPENDENT reviewer from a respectable magazine that shows Montero beating the Land Cruiser???????

Of course, i don't need to go into the other MANY weaknesses of the Montero...you should know that already.

brillmtb · April 2003

Read the post I submitted. I believe they illustrate the advancements in the traction control, stability control, brake holding and descent control better than I can re type. I have spoken with the Toyota rep and although close it does not seem to quite match the new Montero. The proof will be when 4wd Mag or someone does an off road test. Only then will we be able to see if the article is correct and translates into something measurable. For now you can either believe or not.

The LC vs Montero was in AU, it was on a web site not in an article. I found it last year so I dont know if I will be able to find it again. I think it was with a LC without the new electronic control systems if I recall. The Montero was picked as 4wd of the year (newer model) if I recall.

Personally, the Montero is very very close to the LC. I would have purchaced the LC if I had noticed any significant differences but the reliabilty that Toyota generated in the 70-80's was not enough for me to pay some 20-30K more. Just a personal financial choice. I am glad I didnt with each day now. Nothing against the LC/Lexus but they are way overpriced. Have you seen the prices on the new 4 Runner, in the 40+ range now, WOW, seems too much there as well. Good SUV but at that price I am not sure the value is there any longer

intmed99 · April 2003

I just read the article very closely...do NOT see anything special.

Where does the Toyota system fail to match Montero??? SHOW ME!

US off-roading magazines HAVE ALREADY made the comparo between '03 Montero vs. 4Runner vs. GX470. IT LOST. It got no better than 4th place! BTW, GX470 won, with 4Runner 2-3rd place. If you don't believe these magazines, then why do you believe an Australian website with dubious reputation??????????

When does a Toyota rep know anything about off-roading??!! I hate that about Toyota!

I know something about my 4runner...ask me!

Very close to TLC?? Ok, in what way?? TLC can climb 45-degree (100%) grade and can travel on a 45-degree side slop (again, 100%). It can ford 27" of water (yes, 27"!). It's ground clearance is 9.8" (LOWEST POINT)...the Montero's ground clearance is NOT static and those control arms?! Let's not forget about the engine torque and LOW-RANGE ratio, again far superior to your Montero. Please don't kid yourself about Montero vs. TLC. Your Montero has next to nothing wheel articulation. PLASTIC skidplates. VERY POOR departure angle. OH yeah, my grandmother can run faster than your Montero! (Sarcasm) Should i go on???

brillmtb · April 2003

They responded and I guess I could have figured this out with some time. The ARB US web site address is

http://www.arbusa.com/

They can help you with the OME suspension upgrades, good luck. I just love the increase in ground clearence especially since the departure angle was not as good as I would of liked AND I added a hitch which lowered it a little.

brillmtb · April 2003

For all practical purposes the TLC and Montero capabilities are identical. The TLC is approx 0.5 seconds faster to 60mph which doesnt mean anything. It still cant tow any respectable sized trailer or do anything in the real world due to the increased power. You have to jump up to an American sized V8 to see a real world difference.

The stock montero is 9.5 inches clearence and I dont think 0.5 inches is again going to translate into getting stuck or not. My Montero with a simple couple hundred dollar upgrade puts it at 11 inches now with better handling.

Plastic can take the place of metal in many applications and can be superior in that it will not bend. I agree that the skid plates should be upgraded for serious off roading but again this is simple to do.

The 470 was compared to the MB500 which blew its doors off. If the Montero does even 90% of what these MUCH higher priced SUV's do, and it easily does, then it would be a better value. Having said that if you want capability beyond value/initial price then get the Hummer or MB500.

Capability does not separate many of the SUV's much anymore when you look at the MB500, LC, Volvo, Montero, 4 Runner, etc. but price does for the person looking for value. Reliability might but this is more illusive to objectively judge and was my only initial concern with the Montero. With more experience and speaking with folks in places such as Austrailia and Europe, where there are far more Monteros/Pajeros I have become more comfortable that I will be unlikely to need the extended warrenty I purchaced.

I dont think the Montero walks on water and I have a few ideas of where I would improve it but it was just so much value for the money I couldnt resist. I hope when I am in the marker for another SUV that things will only be better.

I am happy you like your Toyota and I think as a group you are part of a large group of satisfied owners but I dont think you are being fair to the Montero.

brillmtb · April 2003

Just to support what I have stated here is the comment made by the reviewer in a real world test of the new toyota down hill assist system.

"Not so impressive, at least on very steep descents, is the Downhill Assist Control. Like other similar systems offered by rival manufacturers, it often allows the vehicle to gain too much speed to comfortably negotiate very rough downhill sections. And as the system automatically modulates brake pressure, its difficult for the driver to override this brake control when the system is activated."

brillmtb · April 2003

Compared to the Prado which I think is the new Toyota line with all the new bells and whistles.

"The Prado quickly knocked the Pajero off as the top-selling mid-sized 4WD but now has to contend with an all-new Pajero, a vehicle that many see as the blueprint of future 4WD design."

"Similar capacity engines power all three although the claimed power outputs vary from 132kW for the slightly smaller capacity Toyota up to 158kW for the Jackaroo, with the Mitsubishi sitting midway at 140kW. On-road performance reflects these figures with the Jackaroo offering the best full-throttle acceleration from 80km/h (typical overtaking speed) while the Toyota is the slowest"

"The first thing you notice with the Pajero is that its monocoque construction doesn't isolate the cabin and its occupants from road harshness as well as the body-on-chassis construction of the other two. The Pajero also rides more firmly than the other two thanks to spring rates probably better suited to carrying heavier loads, although this firmer ride is more noticeable at lower speeds and on smaller bumps than at higher speeds on the highway and back roads.

The flip side to all this is the Pajero's vastly superior stability at speed on rough roads. Both the rear live axle vehicles suffer from bump steer on potholes and corrugations and neither offer the high-speed poise or balance of the Pajero whose high-speed stability is akin to that of a good car than a traditional 4WD."

It seems that not everyone agrees with consumer reports on the handling issue.

intmed99 · April 2003

- First, we're talking STOCK VS. STOCK. Toyota SUVs can be modified too.

- Ground clearance: 8.6 or something, isn't it?? Last time i checked, the Montero had LESS than 9 inches. Don't forget about the clearance NOT BEING STATIC...it changes with terrain, UNLIKE solid axle. Do NOT forget about it's STAMPED steel control arms hanging down! You should look at a 4Runner's or TLC's control arms...FULLY-boxed arms for strength, not stamped steel.

- How is being higher off ground (due ARB) help with handling??? If anything, handling at limits will suffer! Laws of physics...you cannot deny it.

- Remember, a few hundred dollars (like what you spent on your Montero), and i can have the TLC or my 4runner higher than you!

- Plastics don't bend??!! That's a first! No comment if you believe that! Which planet is the Montero's plastic made??

- MB500?? You mean ML500, right?? It blew the LX470 door's off?? In what comparo or planet are you talking about?? Last time i checked, the LX470 took first place over the ML500 in Car & Driver comparo. BACK UP YOUR STATEMENT.

- If you mean the G500, then when did that happen?? READ Edmunds recent comparo:

http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/comparison/articles/96312/article.- - - - html?tid=edmunds.h..reviews..4.*

I think it is fair to say that the LX470 BLEW the G500 away! Sorry.

- I will admit that the G500 has more off-road capability than LX/TLC due to it's solid axles and lockers...but not by much. Montero is not even near these SUVs in capability! Saying that you can hang with G500 off-road is a joke!

- Montero is NOT the G500. Let's get that clear! BTW, if i really want a heavy-duty off-roader, i would get the Jeep Wrangler Rubicon, which will be far more capable than anything on this continent (ONLY Defender is better).

- "...Like other similar systems offered by rival manufacturers..." Thus, DAC from Toyota is no more superior to any other system...and neither is it inferior. What is your point?? All of a sudden, you claim that Montero is better??? That makes sense to you??? The article you linked to does NOT make a direct comparison...so, where did you get your conclusion??

- If downhill control system is a problem, SHUT IT OFF. Dumb comment by the reviewer.

- That last post by you is from where?? Also, it just proves that the Montero is a CAR (a good car!), not the traditional SUV. You shot yourself in your foot there! Too funny! It IS a car...thanks for proving that for me!

- Reminder: Consumer Reports = UNACCEPTABLE. Roll-over! Yeah, handling is awesome! (sarcasm)

- What is the payload of the Montero?? Please!

- Forget the TLC, it's too good for you. Let's compare my 2002 4Runner to your Montero. Similar class. Similar price range. I have 10" of ground clearance WITHOUT spending a dime! My approach angle is nearly as good as yours (36 vs. 42 degrees). My breakover and departure is far superior (breakover=29 degrees; departure=29 degrees). I am able to ford 27" of water too. My 4runner can climb 42 degree grade and cross 41 degree side slope...BTW, superior to both Merc. G500 and Hummer H2!

- In the US, the GX470 and 4Runner have the 4.7L V8, which makes it go from 0-60 mph in 8 seconds. Montero is that fast???? TLC can do it in about 9.5 seconds (on average); LX470 in about 10 seconds. Your '01 Montero will be very lucky to get under 11 seconds!

Brill, next time, don't COMPARE with Toyota SUVs when you say things...you will never win. I just know too much about the Montero.

In the end, it is flattering that you make Toyota SUVs the center of your comparisons.

Thanks.

intmed99 · April 2003

The ground clearance is 8.6".

Approach angle is 39 degrees...so not significantly better than my 4runner.

Departure angle is 18 degrees...sorry, but that is REALLY bad design! Who cares about approach angle when the departure angle is so bad! What were they thinking??!!

Bottom line, you get what you paid for. There is a reason that the Montero is cheaper than even my 4Runner (despite being much bigger). Forget comparing it to TLC or Range Rover. You're out of your league.

wonb · April 2003

On getting stuck with electronic traction control devices.....and how to disable this feature for improved driving

"OK. After some snooping around and many inquires with Toyota, what I thought is true.
While trying to get closer to my hunting spot earlier this winter, I eventually got hung up on a steep logging trail covered in about 1' of snow. I discovered (like many of you) that I could NOT disable the Active TRAC system (traction control) on my '01 4Runner SR5 4x4, which actually killed my forward momentum causing me to get stuck. (Really ticked me off.)
So, while changing the oil one night, I snooped around a bit. I located a small relay box (fuse type box) over the passenger side wheel well. The cover markings notes a "TRC MTR" relay, which I thought might be the wheel spin monitor for the Active TRAC system.
Before pulling the relay, I contacted my local Toy dealer to find out if any other 'critical' services passed through that same relay. Turns out their techs had the same misconception most do. They said that 'locking the center diff. (VSC OFF) would disable both the Virtual Skid Control AND the Active TRAC system'. Strike one. The two are completely independent. But they did mention that it didn't appear as if any other 'critical' services passed through that relay.
So, I emailed Toy's customer support directly in hopes of getting some accurate info. Sadly enough, they too responded saying that 'locking the center diff. would turn off the Active TRAC and VSC system'. Strike two.
Long story short is, I pulled the relay and tried it. With the "TRC MTR" relay removed, I clawed through 16" of snow with the 4x4 engaged and snow flying passed the windows. Life was once again good.
The relay is a 12v, 4 post, relay. One leg is hot (red), one ground (white), and the other two (pink w/ black strip and yellow w/ black strip) probably run over to the ABS system and wheel spin solenoids. I hope to put a switch on the dash disable the Active TRAC so I don't have to remove the "TRC MTR" relay every time. Question is, which of the 4 legs do I connect the switch or I may even have to short two of the legs to get it to work??
The manual states the 4x2 models have a "TRAC OFF" switch on the dash to disable traction control. The manual also states my 4x4 has a "TRAC OFF" LED on the dash that will light up only if the Active TRAC automatically disables due to overheating from excessive use. It will automatically re-engage once an acceptable temp has been reached. This exactly why I want to be able to manually disable the Active TRAC, so that I DO NOT damage the ABS/brake systems when I know some amount of wheel spin is needed/unpreventable.
Ideally, I'd like to mount the "TRAC OFF" switch from the 4x2 models, on my 4x4 that will disable the Active TRAC system and turns on the "TRAC OFF" LED on the dash (next to the VSC OFF) so it'll remind that the Active TRAC is off.
Anyone have any thoughts on how to do this?? Better yet, anyone have a Electrical Service Manual for a '01 4Runner SR5 4x4 so that I might be able to get a little more info about the wire schematic related to the "TRC MTR" relay and how its wired/works??
I'm willing to bet this also applies to the Sequoia 4x4 as well. I took a quick peek at my father-in-law's '01 Sequoia SR5 4x4 while I was in last weekend, but wasn't able to locate the "TRC MTR" relay, but I understand they share similar 4x4 functions.
Thanks. Any help would be greatly appreciated."

intmed99 · April 2003

And if you see my posts regarding this matter. His 4runner got stuck likely because of lack of traction (TIRES)! As stated many times, i am able to spin my tires and NOT lose momentum in mud, AS LONG AS I LOCK MY CENTER DIFFERENTIAL. In ALL electronic-based traction control systems, if you're able to turn OFF stability control (which i can do by locking center diff), you can spin your tires to get out of trouble.

dski · April 2003

LOL.. why is this arguement such a big deal? They're both fine Off-Road vehicles. The only obvious winner is when you factor in Price.

I love my new Pilot for over the road driving. I can beat both in that comparison by a long shot.. but.. who cares really?

Good luck guys.. just enjoy.
Drew

intmed99 · April 2003

Road noise?? Handling?? Braking?? TLC/LX470 is the quietest SUV on the road. According to test numbers, the TLC can do 0.72g, which is not far behind the Pilot/MDX (around 0.74g). TLC has better braking distance than Pilot...which is pretty sad. Really, the Pilot can't beat the TLC in none of these. The ONLY thing the Pilot is better is acceleration.

viet2 · April 2003

"Don't forget about the clearance NOT BEING STATIC...it changes with terrain, UNLIKE solid axle. Do NOT forget about it's STAMPED steel control arms hanging down! You should look at a 4Runner's or TLC's control arms...FULLY-boxed arms for strength, not stamped steel."

This is false, the control arms on the Montero are all boxed or solid metal, all 10 of it. When I bought my 01 Montero, we did a comparison in the parking lot, and everyone agreed that the Montero supension is much more substaintial then the 4Runner. The last generation 4Runner is base on a compact truck platform (forgot the name). You can make your case on all the subjective categories like how you like the 4Runner. It is clearly that the last generation 4Runner is a cheaper/smaller built vehicle interm of built structure and suspension that is as ancient as a Ford model A. By the way, one can jack the 4runner up to the sky, the 4Runner is still dragging its axel on the ground.

intmed99 · April 2003

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.

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

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.

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.

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!

Another thing, with independent suspension, it is NOT a wise idea to do a lift (even OME lift). Over time, you WILL destroy your CV joints...and possibly your halfshafts...and may leave you stranded. Be careful! Thus, i have no plans on lifting my 4Runner because of IFS.

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

dski · April 2003

Your too funny. My comments comparing a Pilot to a Montero or LC were more in humor. Who would really compare such different vehicles? I was more laughing at myself. But.. you still felt compelled to try and Prove your LC is superior to a different class of vehicle.

The Pilot is a VERY different vehicle. As you know, the Pilot is a Car based SUV not a Truck based SUV so it will naturally be more like a car than a Truck. Your LC does a fine job on the road but when the road surface gets a bit rough, it's naturally going to feel more truck like than the Pilot will. This also holds true for handling and Gas Mileage.

This is NOT a criticism. It just is what it is. I'm curious why your so complelled to argue the superiority of your LC over everything on the road. We know the LC is a great Truck but this forum is about the Montero. Some of us here may sound like Mitsu Sales people to you.. But.. What kinda salesman do you suppose you look like to everyone else? Your in our Showroom. LOL

Drew
PS. I can Still Say "our" showroom because I do still have my Montero.

kbmorton · April 2003

intmed99 why do you bother to post on this board. You should be on the Toyota message board for the 4Runner or LC. While I think Toyota does make fine SUV's (I really like the Sequoia) , I read this board for discussions on the Montero and not to listen to you rant and rave as to why Toyota's are better than our Montero's. WE LIKE OUR MONTERO'S. WE DON"T NEED, WANT OR CARE WHY YOU DON'T LIKE THE MONTERO AND LOVE YOUR 4RUNNER!!!!!

Enough said on Mr. 4Runner a.k.a. intmed99, has anyone traded their 01 or 02 Montero on a 03. I would be interested in your thoughts concerning the differences between model years.

Mitsubishi Montero

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles