Last post on Nov 22, 2012 at 3:00 AM
You are in the Mitsubishi Montero
What is this discussion about?
Mitsubishi Montero, SUV
#790 of 2830 Why not the XLS
Jun 20, 2001 (12:33 pm)
They have to make statements like this since it wasn't tested. But it makes as much since as stating the first one tested was red, the second silver. As if color would make a difference?
What I cannot understand is how Mitsubishi would even market this vehicle in this country, knowing that CU might perform this test. Something doesn't seem right here. The test has been around for a long time, and is not expensive to set up.
The 2001 Montero design was marketed in other parts of the world as the 2000 Pajero beginning in 1999.
Are management and engineers at Mitsubishi damn stupid or just stupid?
-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.; 18,000 miles, slight squeak from rear brakes when dry/hot, probably glaze on rotors/disks.
#791 of 2830 Montero "Safety"
Jun 20, 2001 (12:48 pm)
Maybe Mitsubishi should install those safety outriggers in the CR test as standard equipment.
#792 of 2830 Consumer Reports
Jun 20, 2001 (1:12 pm)
Let's hold off on judging until we see how Mitsu responds. Our trucks are the same vehicles that they were before the article was released today, and judging from the fact that I did not see anyone post their concerns about stability before today, I think that we can continue to have just as much confidence in the trucks for the time being.
I agree with rs rogers that the way you drive your Monte (or any other SUV) is a key to how safe it is stability-wise. And these trucks have been around as the Pajero for a few years. Also, 28,000+ have been sold in the U.S. over the past year, and neither NHTSA nor Mitsu has reportedly received any complaints about roll-overs in them. I, for one, plan to slow down even more and pay more attention to my driving, but the CR article does not affect my confidence in my truck. I am, however, very concerned about resale value, or even my ability to trade the truck in if and when that time comes.
I agree, though, that Mitsu needs to do something and do it fast. Whether it is some type of "fix" to the suspension a la the Mercedes A car, proving the safety of the Monte in terms of its stability, or whatever, they can't just sit on the sidelines and criticize CR. I am afraid, though, that the damage has been done on the resale value, and that, short of a physical "fix," nothing is going to help the resale value.
#793 of 2830 Quote from Don in Vancouver, BC, RE: Consumer Reports
Jun 20, 2001 (1:16 pm)
"There's a bigger picture here.
By sensationalising the failure of a truck to handle like a car, CR is helping drive the vehicle manufacturers to produce more car-like trucks.
The biggest misconception is that of the driver who fails to recognise the inherent difference in handling between a car and a truck.
The manufacturer sells what the public wants. If that's a roll-over proof truck, then we're going to see trucks with car-like suspensions and car-like handling. That's not a truck anymore.
Maybe trucks should be like motorcycles, and require a different driver's licence rating and training.
CR is being irresponsible. But they got the press hit that they wanted.
And for the rest of us outside the law-suit crazed USA, we're stuck driving whatever survives litigation, rather than good engineering."
#794 of 2830 say what you will . . .
Jun 20, 2001 (1:23 pm)
the video of the Mitsu's performance in CR's test is NOT very pretty-- take a look.
#795 of 2830 Don from Vancouver
Jun 20, 2001 (1:36 pm)
There are two issues here:
1. SUV handle differently than cars. We all know it and accepted it as part of our decision process.
2. The Montero handles worse that its peers. This is the news and we the owners didn't know about it when we made our decision.
This is the problem and I don't think CR is being irresponsible. They are not comparing the Montero to a sedan. They are properly comparing the Montero to other trucks, all of which are more unstable than a car but also all of which passed the same tests.
#796 of 2830 Quote from rsrogers, Little Rock; RE: Consumers Report
Jun 20, 2001 (1:53 pm)
"What the report fails to mention is the speed at which the other vehicles tipped or lost control. And, if the test was so damn scientific and controlled, why did the "silver" Montero not tip until it was going over 2mph faster than the other Montero?
. . . There is an adgenda here, allright. CR does not like SUV's because they are not "politically correct" with them. They are too big, pollute, waste fuel, and destroy the off road wilderness. They would not like me. I'm a conservative, talk on my cell phone while driving and display an NRA membership sticker on my vehicles."
#797 of 2830 I bought a Betamax too
Jun 20, 2001 (2:15 pm)
after a through investigation because it was better engineered than the VHS system.
FOR SALE: 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.; 18,000 miles, slight squeak from rear brakes when dry/hot, probably glaze on rotors/disks. Willing to negotiate on price (big discount probably available).
#798 of 2830 rollovers
Jun 20, 2001 (2:24 pm)
This is a major bummer. The resale value issue is bad enough, but what about avoidance maneuvering on the highway or at speeds above 40 mph--that's what scares me. I think everyone who participates in this forum recognizes the capabilities and limitations of the Monte, and I don't think the average Montero owner is the person out there driving their suv at 100 mph, weaving in and out of traffic (although I have to admit I drive while talking on my cellphone too, phonos). What I am concerned about is the potential for roll over for someone who is driving responsibly, and makes an avoidance maneuver.
I LOVE my Montero, and am in no hurry to get rid of it. It's the same vehicle I bought in August; I have always cornered at low speeds anyway--its a common sense thing. But I wouldn't blame anyone for not purchasing it at this time--I probably wouldn't either. Hopefully Mitsu will give info that this is overblown (which unfortunately I think is doubtful) or come up with a way to reduce the risk of rollover. I noticed a post above about the Mercedes--that won't work on the Montero--there is no way that you can have ESP engineered into a vehicle AFTER production, at least to my knowledge.
Again, this is all preliminary, but it doesn't look good from my perspective. Here's hoping that it all works out in Mitsu's favor....
#799 of 2830 Phonos
Jun 20, 2001 (2:26 pm)
You might try selling your betamax instead--the way the message board is lighting up, at this point you'd probably get more for it...lol..