Last post on Nov 22, 2012 at 3:00 AM
You are in the Mitsubishi Montero
What is this discussion about?
Mitsubishi Montero, SUV
#2197 of 2830 My response....
Apr 19, 2003 (5:26 am)
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 $$$ just for name?? For a SUV that is smaller??? Ok...i guess you're the only smart consumer out there. Remmeber, this is TOYOTA not Lexus...so name is not the reason people spend $$$ 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!
Apr 19, 2003 (5:46 am)
>>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.
#2199 of 2830 Dski...i agree...
Apr 19, 2003 (9:06 am)
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 quality...it'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.
#2200 of 2830 Activity
Apr 19, 2003 (10:42 am)
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.
Apr 19, 2003 (11:33 am)
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.
#2202 of 2830 intmed
Apr 19, 2003 (6:33 pm)
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.
Apr 20, 2003 (6:03 am)
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.
#2205 of 2830 Question for intmed99
Apr 20, 2003 (9:10 am)
"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?
#2206 of 2830 Brill RE:Tires
Apr 20, 2003 (9:21 am)
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.