Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
I agree with the earlier posts that if my SUV rolls over and comes out like this, I'll consider myself VERY LUCKY.
Maybe, this Mitsu got beat up in a flood?
Drew
Host
Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
Think about it... who's to say that a vehicle with a high(er) center of gravity but with a sophisticated, well designed suspension that allows for minimal body lean and precise steering, coupled with, perhaps, stability control...wouldnt outhandle and be more stable than a vehicle with a lower center of gravity?
All I'm saying is that just because the new Montero may have an incrementally lower center of gravity, it does not necessarily follow that it is a more stable vehicle. Suspension design and steering are paramount, which is why the "moose" manuver IS a fair measure of stability in extreme circumstances.
As its been said before, Mercedes had a problem with their A class in the moose performed by a trade/consumer organization (which, I'm reasonably certain, did not reveal itself during internal testing, just as in the Mitsu case)and they took matters to heart. Shouldnt Mitsu do the same?
Last night with the wife in the car I unexpectedly had to make THE Avoidance Maneuver, and I didn't flip, but I was scared. I also wasn't going 40+, maybe slowing down, the operative words being slowing down, and some idiot stopped short and hard in front of me, so I made the quick Oh S#@t left then right lane change, and well I'd rather forget about it all, but we're fine and I didn't hit anything.
I don't think anything can predict the outcome of an auto mishap. As a youth, I was in a car that crested a hill at 80 mph, launched like the dukes of hazard into the air, flipped over 3 times, and spun 4 more, landing on the roof with no glass left in any windows. It was a hyundai excel, and there were 4 high school idiots in it, and all of us should be dead, and we all walked away unscathed...
I have no explanation for any of this, but I'd never drive or buy a hyundai excel just because I lived through certain death in it.
Just my 2 cents...
2001 Mitsu Montero LTD, w/ rear A/C
It's started already! 1700 miles and traded in on a Toyota!
And there are still some that defend Mitsubishi.
You must like losing money...
Not time for upper story window jumping-out yet.
The dealer might believe that someone who sees the truck at the dealership in person might be willing to pay more than people looking on eBay and that could be true, I suppose.
I'm going fly fishing, perhaps if I catch a big one I will tie it on the bottom to keep the Monte on its tires.
I discussed this issue with a few hard core 4wder's and they think the roll over issue is a joke....all SUV's built with high ground clearance can be expected to have some instability on very aggressive manuvers. I guess I just dont believe that the Monte is that unstable after seeing what they had to do to get it to touch the roll over bars. I think I could do that on the LC, JGC, Jeep, 4 Runner, RAV, etc etc etc. but what would be the point of this.....drive a car instead.....I'm keeping my SUV until the environmental nuts pass some law outlawing them.....
Gone fishing.......
with their Welcome screen with the headline of
" 6 most dangerous vehicles "
Montero tops the list.
That should get the word out.
I was thinking to change my XLS (Xtra Large Ship) to ROS or Roll Over Special when given the news. Since then, I decided to wait to see what the future brings for the vehicle.
As I have leased it at a firm price, I should come out better in the end. I hope.
My only complaints at this time is that stupid skid plate in the front that has metal mesh in the front that can be punched out with something like a corn stock. Behind that mesh are all kinds of things that are very expensive to fix. Also the paint on the plastic trim can be scratched very easy and very expensive to repaint. Lastly, those end caps on the rear bumper don't take to abuse well ($400). Did mine in when I backed (slowly) into a snow pile.
Anyway, if the roll over was due to too soft of spings and the antisway bars need to be bigger or polyurethane bushings put in that should be simple.
This SUV has independent suspension set up to be compliant in on and off road situations and you do give up on some lateral g's. Off road though you gain stability by keeping the tires on the ground vs the stiffer SUV's that can weave between cones better due to thier stiffer suspension but on an off road corner will get bounced out of a hole so hard they will slide easier.
Anyone familiar with off roading will understand this. There are always some trade offs.
The Monte has a very reasonable stance so adding stiffer spings and/or increasing the size of the roll bar is all that should be needed. Personally I will wait and see. At most, I think I might consider urethane sway bar bushings or if larger sway bars come out then these. This will maintain most of the good ride and take out the roll.
This SVU is not dangerous as these idiots are trying to make everyone believe. We even have the Toyota fans overhere taking pot shots now. Obviously many of the comments are from people who dont understand that a great off road SUV will not handle like an MDX or BMX on road.
Drew
Host
Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
Bob
http://cgi.ebay.aol.com/aol/ebaymotors/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=592699997
Anyone else trading their Monty in?
See you over at the Ford discussion boards!
http://www.msnbc.com/m/c/ctv_emailthis.asp?id=local/knsd/13crash&sk=msnbc&sl=&0mw=x93
Given the right condition, no matter what vehicle you're riding, it can roll-over. This happened in San Diego in an icy freeway. Luckily, everyone was wearing seatbelts and survived the crash.
By the way, just in case you think your new Expedition won't roll, you can check out the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety's website (www.hwysafety.org) and look up the death rates for the Expedition and other vehicles. The latest data that they have is for the 1997 model year, and, actually, the Expedition fares pretty well. But still, it has a death rate from rollovers of 16 per million vehicles, so you are not immune. The most interesting thing about the data is that when you compare the overall death rates and even the rollover death rates in larger SUVs to cars, the SUV rates look very good. Also, ken, if you make it to the IIHS website, you might want to check out what happened when they ran an F-150 through their 40 mph offset frontal barrier crash test. (Your new Expedition is based on an F-150, right ken?) The F-150 earned the worst rating ("Poor") in every category -- that's overall performance, structure/safety cage, restraints/occupant kinematics, and injury measurements. By comparison, the 2001 Monte earned the second-best overall rating ("Acceptable.") The IIHS's tests indicate that the F-150 sustained "massive occupant compartment deformation." Ouch.
When you get past CU's videotapes and attention-grabbing headlines and really do some research on the 2001 Montero (and other SUV's), its pretty interesting (and reassuring) what Montero owners will find.
I have no doubt the Montero handling suffered by soft spring, that is why the body lean so much. Mitsubishi wants the truck to do off-road well, so they tune the Montero with soft spring for long suspension travel. I have always looking for polyurethane bushings for the sway bars since I have bought the vehicles, but I can not find a set. Anyone have a lead?
I still stand by my statement that any SUV can be rolled, all under similar conditions, if you try. Whether one rolls at 37.5 or 40 or others that dont even make it back into to next cone probably has little bearing on real world conditions since most of us are driving 70-80 on the highway. Hell, I think my Acura GSR might roll at that speed especially if I get a front tire off the pavement.
Drew, I personally know of people who have walked away from roll overs in thier SUV but the physics of a head on are very concerning. It doesnt take much deceleration force to tear your aorta. Airbags hitting you in the head have been known to cause chest and head/neck problems too. Bottomline, head-ons are going to deliver a much more forceful and dangerous blow.
Anybody here able to measure and calculate the center of gravity for the new and old montero models and make a comparision?
syll, actually the X5 has almost a 50/50 weight distribution for neutral handling. But you're right, the engineers went to great lengths to balance it. FYI, for '02, it gets an optional pneumatic suspension system, similar to the Audi Allroad, that can lower or raise the vehicle just a tad more.
Drew
Host
Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
If they are as good as everyone here says they are, the opportunity to own more than one is getting pretty golden.
Regardless of what happens now, the CR article has made these vehicles very undesirable to consumers considering an SUV.
You start your post with a dig at ken131 for "giving in to the hysteria". This is a valid point, the merits of the CR test are certainly debatable.
But then you leap into hysteria yourself by applying the poor F-150 offset crash test results to the Expedition. How scientific is that?
Sure they are based on the same front end, but they also have a different cab/a-pillar. Not to mention 2WD vs 4WD variables.
For example, check the Dakota vs. the Durango offset crash results. Same front end, but very different results.
Will the Expy do better than the F-150? Who knows until it is tested. All we know now is that the Expy *does* get 5 stars in the NHSTA test.
You are not helping anyone by slamming the Expedition with your own, completely unscientific, interpretation of the F-150 test.
Just because others are getting "hysterical" about the Montero does not mean you should defensively start getting "hysterical" about other SUVs.
The bottom line is that before selling or buying a vehicle because of safety concerns, you ought to focus on the overall safety of the vehicle and collect as much data from as many sources as you can.
Hey Drew and brill, would you really rather be in a 2X roll in your 2001 Monte than in a 40 mph frontal off-set? I have never seen how a 2001 Monte performs in a roll, so I don't know whether the roof is strong enough to take a roll without substantial roof crush. I suppose it depends on how severe the roll is. From the testing that the IIHS did with instrumented dummies, though, the HIC (Head Injury Criteria) was pretty good and the neck moment and chest compression were comparable to the Mercedes M-Class. From those numbers, I don't think that you'd have to be concerned about "third collision" injuries (e.g., torn aorta) at that speed. I guess that I'd take the known quantity over the unknown.
Basically I got what looked like a cool overnighted package in the mail from Mitsubishi this week. I said, Wow, they are thinking of their customers.
WRONG...
Inside was I form letter which was Pierre's press release statement jumbled up a bit. Couldn't they have personalized it and provided a little bit more for us owners?
It also came with a video tape which had only a small segment of the 30 minute press conference we all had reference to over a week ago. What a waste!
I want to stand by this car until someone/something tells me not to, but if the car proves to be that bad then someone will get something fixed at that point.
However, Mitsubishi and its mgmt could stand to go bach to undergrad school to learn about how t run a comany , handle a crisis, and most importantly deal with important customers!
I would have expected them to provide us with everything possible in terms of eveidence, as a way to make us feel better. There seems like there is a lot of test data, research, articles etc that they might grab together to make a strong case
Sorry for the long post, but it seems to me like they feel that they have already lost the battle and/or know something that they don't want us to find out.
I am thinking of writing a letter to Pepe, maybe we all should to demand their attention to our concerns.
Cheers,
Con
conman@switchboardmail.com
http://www.autonews.com/html/main/stories0702/probe705.htm
Hey Brill, how'd you do fishing?
-PHOnos; White/Silver Limited w/Rear A/C; July 2000 build date; $34,500 + TTL in August, 2000 (no extras included); zero down, 4.8% for 48 months; Orange County, CA.; 19,000 miles, slight squeak from rear brakes when dry/hot, probably glaze on rotors/disks
By the way, my brother-in-law told me about his 3x rollover in a GJC some years back. All seven passengers walked away with minor injuries other than the one who had is hand outside (missing fingers now). They were lucky but I think it illustrates how the forces might be a little kinder.
Go read the Road Test of the 2001 Montero here on this site (Edmunds). They drove this vehicle and thought it handled quite well, not to mention all the safety features that are pointed out in the article.
Popular science was able to get the older Montero through the double lane change at 50.1 MPH and the new montero is 4inches wider and 2 inches longer.
just my .02 cents