Last post on Nov 22, 2012 at 3:00 AM
You are in the Mitsubishi Montero
What is this discussion about?
Mitsubishi Montero, SUV
#854 of 2830 Mitsubishi Montero's are safe until you are a conscient SUV person
Jun 21, 2001 (9:01 pm)
The monteros are BIG, it has 7passager capabilities, it is off road captain.
When you're behind the wheel of this truck, you need to drive differently from the way you would drive in a sedan. Do not make sharp turn cause, you can't do anything about it, it's a suv.
I have a 2001 Montero Limited silver.
When i'm driving this car, i'm conscient, i know that i wont drive it like my 1999 Honda civic, i't not the same thing.
America shoud know that, SUV are safe but, there are limits. Even if you make sharp turns in a Montero, your need to have your feet on the brake and you must not turn the wheel completely. it's simple.
Even in my cousin's 1999 volkswagen passat wagon i won't make sharp turns. Why sharp turns?
Even if you have a sedan, a minivan, there are some limits.
I think that actualy, Montero's are the best SUV Sold Here in the united States, But american driver's need to be more responsible when they are driving SUV's. You NEEd to know that, if you want to race buy a CORVETTE, a BMW M3, M5, a Mitsu Lancer EVOLUTION VII, a FErrari,
Why race in a MOntero? Because of it's aggressive lines, it's 120Mph top speed?
Montero's owner's shoud be relax because they have no rollover problems with theyr cars, and they have a nice, strong, and fabulous car in their hands.
#855 of 2830 Top 11 less than 40.000$ off road capable SUV's
Jun 21, 2001 (9:14 pm)
1- Land Rover Discovery
2- Mitsubishi MOntero
3- Mitsubishi Montero Sport
4- Toyota 4runner
5- isuzu Axiom 2001
6- Isuzu Trooper
7- Jeep Gran Cheerockee
8- Acura MDx
9- Nissan Pathfinder
11-Ford Explorer 2001 2002
All those SUV's, at 40.0MPh, they roll over if you make sharp turns. It's simple. They for the dirt, the snow and even the road, but not for the race.
America needs to see things differently cause the name SUV can mean: Safe Utility Vehicle until your know how to do your thing.
Don't be afraid to byu all those Suv's Ya'll gonna like them.
The AXIOM is fun go try it today.
You'll also love the Montero sport sexy style.
Go try one of these!!!
Jun 21, 2001 (9:20 pm)
FWIW, the Lexus RX300 ran Consumer Reports' slalom course at 50.5mph, albeit it with a lot of body lean; this is the same speed at which the wagons could complete the runs without hitting the cones. C.R mentioned that the stability control system helped to keep it on course.. The Acura MDX ran the same course at a lower 47.0mph. C.R gave it a fair or below average for handling because its tail end had a tendency to break lose quite early. C&D and MotorWeek reported the same things. Both of these vehicles are not designed for anything more than light off-roading due to their car-based/minivan-based underpinnings.
Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
#857 of 2830 The point being missed...
Jun 22, 2001 (5:24 am)
There is a point here that is being missed. We keep reading posts from SUV/Montero owners saying "everyone knows SUVs tip" and "you have to drive them differently than cars".
BUT..., as posted by our host, these vehicles are marketed and sold as family transportation vehicles. The Mitsubishi Montero can even transport 7 people. It is also a given that MOST SUV drivers in the U.S. NEVER GO OFF ROAD. In other words, these vehicles have replaced the minivan and station-wagons in many American homes. The point being missed here is this: Whether you're driving a Honda Civic or a Mitsubishi Montero, when a child runs in front of your vehicle chasing a ball... and you are driving 40mph... you WILL cut the wheel to avoid the accident... and in the Montero, you have a much higher chance of flipping over than in the civic. The point of the CU test is that OTHER vehicles like the Nissan Pathfinder, the Ford Explorer, etc. DIDN'T behave this way in the same emergency situation. This indicates that there is SOME kind of flaw with the Mitsubishi causing it to be so prone to tipping over.
The posts here stating "it's an SUV... you have to drive it differently" does not apply here. Mitsubishi promotes this vehicle as being able to transport your whole family in comfort... it is tauted as a "luxury vehicle" on their website. Therefore, the people buying a 7-passenger vehicle like this transport kids, spouses, the soccer team, etc. Hell, the TV commercial for the Montero shows two parents giving the keys to their TEENAGER to go pick up his sister and her 5 friends from soccer practice. What happens to them when he tries to avoid a cat in the road? Tell me how avoiding a deer in your path is handled differently in a Montero than in any other 4-wheeled vehicle? Should you turn "differently"? No. You just TURN. Enough of the "it's an SUV, deal with it". I don't OWN an SUV and I'm upset over this because I could be the guy in the OTHER LANE minding my own business when a mother loses control of her Montero in order to avoid hitting a squirl. THAT'S the point here. It performs DIFFERENTLY than other similar SUVs... and it SHOULDN'T
#858 of 2830 jmatero - Point missed?
Jun 22, 2001 (5:41 am)
How about ambulances, school bus, full size delivery vans, and commercial trucks? Does that mean they are unsafe to other drivers too?
#859 of 2830 Quote from DougM, Idaho
Jun 22, 2001 (5:57 am)
I'd not be surprised to find all models of the current Montero similarly predisposed to this behavior, but it's standard practice to only identify the actual model used if there are slight differences as I believe is the case here. This accounts for the possibility that the different trim levels not tested have slightly different curb weight, tires or shock valving that may have a significant impact. Not acccounting for this would be irresponsible.
That "left, right, left" scenario is a variation of the standard emergency evasive maneuver used by virtually any manufacturer to test their vehicle stability around the world. It is called various names, but my favorite is "The Moose Avoidance Maneuver" from a Scandanavian country. Obviously it is not standardized as to speed, spacing, etc but this is exactly the maneuver I live most in fear of as it mimics avoiding a deer on my rural roads. The only bummer is I'd be performing it at more like 65-75mph rather than the much tamer speeds they used (35ish?). I've done it once in the Cruiser and it wasn't pretty, which is why I put fresh factory shocks on it a few weeks ago.
So, while it seems strange to some, this is a classic formula for generating rollover behavior (SUVs), or a spin out (sedans, coupes and extremely stable SUVs that did not succumb to a roll) and it happens perhaps thousands of times a day to ordinary motorists across the US in the wrong spot at the right time. I know it's hard to imagine a motorist spinning a thousand seperate times in a single day (honey, let me tell you, I've had a rough day out there - that car's possessed!...) Heh. Anyhow, it's a relevant test.
Interestingly, the titan of automotive safety - Mercedes - recently produced a car that failed a simple avoidance test very similar to this. And it was a very small coupe called the A class not sold in the US where everyone was stunned it did not slid due to its small, low weight. A couple years ago during the car's introduction some Swedish (I think?) journalists rolled one on flat pavement right in front of hundreds of automotive journalists from around the world. Mercedes immediately stopped production, delayed the launch, modified every single one produced and changed the parts for those built thereafter. It probably cost them $100 million. So, yes this is an extremely relevant test and a maneuver none of you should try at home without the soon-to-be-mandatory SUV outriggers. I expect as soon as Congress gets finished with the knotty question of how best to destroy our country's power generating industry, they'll get right to work on outrigger legislation.
Jun 22, 2001 (6:02 am)
drew (host of forum)....in post 814 (and others) you are quoting vehicle speeds from CR testing, which is valid. However, it is important to note that there are 2 emergency avoidance courses which CR uses to judge the emergency handling of SUVs, Pickups, and Minivans... a "short course" and a "long course". The Montero tipped up on the more difficult "short course", and the speeds listed in the the ratings column of the magazine for all new cars tested, no matter what style.. are the results of the "long course". Just something to keep in mind with all this talk of handling ability. I urge anyone to read the full report on the testing on the CR website, as well as view the press conference.. then decide for yourself.
#861 of 2830 "avoiding a deer in your path "
Jun 22, 2001 (6:06 am)
Quote from CerOf, Texas:
I feel sorry for the deer that jumps in front of me!
Mmmm...can we say, Venecin (sp?) Sausage?
That's what ARB Bull Bars are for! They don't call 'em Bull Bars for nothin'!
Seriously, I only swerve if it is safe to swerve, otherwise, I take the hit!
I'd rather hurt myself than someone else by swerving.
I only swerve for babies and old ladies in the road!
Otherwise...Hmm...where did that string of posts go about "Roadkill" and your list?
Add another squirrell and a cat to mine.
Jun 22, 2001 (7:40 am)
I think to test cars in the same section such as SUV, there should be a criteria. I'm not sure how the criteria should be defined. Maybe it is defined as much as we can from practical application like at what turning speed a car can still hold itself. I think based on the same criteria, whichever car can't hold itself is not safe enough, compared to the similar cars in the same section. I don't think we can just simply slow down until it's safe (slow down to 5MPH when turning?), because it'll make comparison even more difficult, and it'll be not so practical in a typical driving. Of cause if the criteria is defined tighter, then more cars will be unsafe. So it's relative but useful comparison.
Jun 22, 2001 (8:14 am)
The flap over the Montero/CR issue just about buries the new rollover controversy regarding GM's full size vans. I read last week that there have been DOCUMENTED proof that GM's line of full-size vans were prone to rollovers during low-speed emergency lane change maneuvers. There have been real fatalities on real roads, not just a slight tip on a closed test course!
To add insult to injury, there have been no warnings from NHTSA or the Insurance Institute/Dateline guys (forgot what they were called). They're waiting for more data (fatalities) before issuing a warning or recall. Because it hasn't been documented on Consumer Reports, I bet resale values on GM full-size vans aren't plummeting like the Montero. Yet.