Pajero vs Discovery

Submitted: Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 02:26
ThreadID: 19106 Views:12387 Replies:13 FollowUps:73
This Thread has been Archived
I would like to hear some thought on choosing between a 2004/2005 Discovery or Pajero GLX.

The Discovery TD5 GS
The Pajero 3.2 DiD

Discovery with solid axles all round
Pajero with independant suspension all round

Are there owners of both vehicles here?
Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: Johnno1 - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 07:02

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 07:02
Even though the brand name Mitsubishi is in some trouble there is nothing wrong with their Pajero. You don' mention what type of work the vehicle will be used for ?

regardless of that I would scrub the Discovery straight off the shopping list as it just can't compete with the Japanese built vehicles for build quality.

Check this link and see what vehicles are at the bottom of the class and which ones are at the top.

http://www.detnews.com/2004/autosinsider/0411/09/b01-328882.htm
AnswerID: 91531

Follow Up By: Johnno1 - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 07:10

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 07:10
Here are some recent reviews for you .

http://auto.consumerguide.com/auto/used/reviews/full/index.cfm/id/2458

http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/reviews.aspx?modelid=11086&src=VipRel

FOR: Smooth, economical turbo diesel. Excellent ride comfort. Great off-road ability, good on-road handling. Well equipped at the price. Comprehensive active and passive safety features.

AGAINST: Quality was, and still is, an issue, especially with new model's complex technology. Tight interior space. Larger capacity diesels more suitable for towing. Expensive options.

VERDICT: Better on road and off ... but Land Rover's claims about improved quality are still to be proved.

We know it's an issue, said Rover project director Nick Fell at the launch of the new Land Rover Discovery. He was referring to quality, specifically his English co-workers' inability to screw the company's products together properly.

0
FollowupID: 350097

Follow Up By: dfe - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 07:11

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 07:11
Hi will be using for normal communiting and 4x4 trips. 4x4 ability is very important though, if it was'nt I would have bought a BMW saloon.

I know that the Pajero's used to be very able (I currently own 96 model), but since they have done away with the chassis and moved to independant suspension allround I am not so sure anymore.
0
FollowupID: 350098

Follow Up By: Johnno1 - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 07:15

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 07:15
There are others here more able to answer that question. I do however think you are comparing the Pajero with the wrong car.

Your three on the shopping list should be

Pajero t/d
Prado t/d
Patrol T/d

Stick to Japanese built and you are on the right foot from the off.
0
FollowupID: 350099

Reply By: dfe - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 07:23

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 07:23
Problem is cost, I am comparing the GLX version of the Pajero to the Discovery GS, same price range, the Prado and Patrol is 20-40% more expensive so out of the question.
AnswerID: 91533

Follow Up By: Johnno1 - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 07:25

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 07:25
You can buy a Prado GXL t/d for 51,000k drive away all day long . What price are the others at ?
0
FollowupID: 350101

Follow Up By: Johnno1 - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 07:28

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 07:28
http://www.discountnewcars.com.au/Toyota/Toyota-Prado-GXL-Turbo-Diesel.cfm

And they can go to 51,000 d/away on the auto. My brother in law just bought one.
0
FollowupID: 350102

Follow Up By: dfe - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 07:28

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 07:28
I want to remain with new vehicles to have the full warranty and maintenance plans, had my fair share of used vehicles and maintenance costs, like it big black hole!

0
FollowupID: 350103

Follow Up By: Johnno1 - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 07:32

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 07:32
and ?

I am talking about new Vehicles. You can get a brand new Prado GXL T/d Auto for 51k drive away !!!
0
FollowupID: 350105

Follow Up By: Johnno1 - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 07:33

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 07:33
It is not a joke mate and is not a demo etc either. Ring some Toyota dealers and tell them you have been quoted 51k and see if they will match it. EASY !!!
0
FollowupID: 350106

Reply By: dfe - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 07:26

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 07:26
Just for the record the GLX version has just been released in SA:

Selling at about 20% cheaper than the GLS
No traction control
Cloth interior only
No runner boards
Rear difflock
DiD Diesel version only
etc etc

Hence the saving

[ View Image]

[ View Image]
AnswerID: 91534

Follow Up By: Johnno1 - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 07:31

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 07:31
http://www.discountnewcars.com.au/Mitsubishi/Mitsubishi-Pajero-NP-3-2-GLX-Turbo-Diesel.cfm

Sound the same spec as a Prado GX t/d so is in affect the poverty pack. The Prado is cheaper and a better vehicle IMO.

http://www.discountnewcars.com.au/Toyota/Toyota-Prado-GX-Turbo-Diesel.cfm

0
FollowupID: 350104

Follow Up By: pjchris - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 10:38

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 10:38
I think you will find that all Diesel engined Pajeros come standard with traction control and stability control.

Comparing those vehicles.
Things the Paj has that the Prado Doesn't:
ABS, Air Conditioning, Alloy Wheels, Cruise Control and Traction control

Things the Prado has that the has the the Paj doesn't:
live rear axle. A Toyota badge ;-)

By the time you upspec the Prado with Air and ABS it still about $2.5 to $3k cheaper but you can't get the traction control (Nor a decent modern Diesel engine).

Also from a personal point of view, I believe that the Autos work much better with the Turbo diesel engines than the manuals as they mask the turbo lag.

Peter
0
FollowupID: 350148

Follow Up By: pjchris - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 10:44

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 10:44
Oops..Wrong spec model...

Compared the Prado GX...

The Prado GXL has ABS and Aircondtioning...Still appears to not have the traction control and is $3000 more expensive.

So if the Live axle matters then the Prado would be the go.
If you're not planning on rock crawling and can make do with independent suspension and traction control, then along with a much better engine choose the Paj.

Of course a lot will come down to personal choice.
Do I like the ride? Do I like the look? Do I like the performance? etc..

Peter
0
FollowupID: 350151

Follow Up By: Johnno1 - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 11:26

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 11:26
Do you really need traction control ?

0
FollowupID: 350172

Follow Up By: pjchris - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 11:34

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 11:34
Traction control improves the ability of the vehicle tremendously. even Toyota fit it to the top line models..

It overcomes the restriction of wheel travel. When a wheel loses traction instead of spinning madly and soaking up all of the torque the wheel is braked and transfers power to the wheels that still have grip.

From what I hear the traction controlled Paj will go nearly everywhere that the live axle vehicles will go..(Diff locked vehicles excepted).

The main problem with traction control is that being electronically controlled and powered they will give up after a certain amount of time...

Peter
0
FollowupID: 350176

Follow Up By: Rosco - Bris. - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 12:34

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 12:34
Peter

TC is usually an integral part of the ABS system, so it should have an indefinite lifespan. It certainly makes a significant difference, though as you say, not as much as lockers ... but then again you're not as likely to break axles or diffs.

Cheers
0
FollowupID: 350200

Follow Up By: Johnno1 - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 12:54

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 12:54
My point was do you really need traction control ?

What about on soft sand. How do you go then ?

Prado is the only vehicle to offer traction control in reverse as well . Many other vehicles can get into trouble by not offering this as well and need to be towed out as a result.
0
FollowupID: 350206

Follow Up By: Rosco - Bris. - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 13:51

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 13:51
Personally, I wouldn't be without it, notwithstanding the fact I have a far greater chance of keeping all wheels on the ground than IS vehs.

I have read elsewhere that some ppls have found it a problem in soft sand, however I can't say I've experienced any probs myself, and I have been in some very heavy going in soft stuff with the CT in tow.

Don't know whether it works in reverse or not ... not really an issue as I only use that gear in shopping centre carparks........ ;-))
0
FollowupID: 350224

Follow Up By: pjchris - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 13:57

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 13:57
Traction control in soft sand can be a problem. That's why the Paj has a button to turn it off.
And yes I wish I had waited 2 months longer and bought a Paj with traction control.

Peter
0
FollowupID: 350225

Follow Up By: pjchris - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 14:02

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 14:02
Rossco,
The early Prado traction control gives up after about 30-60 seconds in really slippery conditions.
Why?
Although, as you say, the traction control is an integral part of the ABS it applies the brakes to spinning wheels where the ABS let's the brakes off.
To do this they need a source of hydraulic pressure to apply the brakes. This is generated with a smallish hydraulic pump and when these pumps get warm (There is a sensor) the traction control shuts off to avoid damage to the pump.
I have heard of this happening half way up a hill.

They are much better now but even so on the Pajero Club forum there are stories still of the traction control system warning light coming on. I think most of these were when on sand where you really should turn it off anyway. Unfortunately the Paj's system automatically switches back on again over a certain speed (I think?) or am I thinking of the stability control....

Peter
0
FollowupID: 350228

Follow Up By: Rosco - Bris. - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 14:12

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 14:12
A button to turn it off ... now that's a bloody good idea. Beats pullin' the fuse ...;-) As I said, I've not personally experienced the prob, but it'd be good to have the option.

The pump explains how it works ... perhaps they've made them a tad more robust in the later models. I find it usually only works in mine for quite a short while in very greasy or slippery conditions, haven't noticed it giving up the ghost ... yet.

Cheers
0
FollowupID: 350230

Follow Up By: Member - Jeff M (WA) - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 17:52

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 17:52
Yes Auto's should be better with TDs, however the patrol 3.0TD auto still has an awful turbo lag.

pjchris, What the hell is wrong with the EFI diesel in the Prado. Sure it's not DID but it's EFI and intercooled and it's got one thing over these new "flash" diesels, it's tried an proven and is not very far behind these others in perfermance/economy.
It's not like it's a mechancially injected dinasour!

0
FollowupID: 350335

Follow Up By: Member - Jeff M (WA) - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 17:57

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 17:57
Oh yeah and at least the 1kz-te TD is a nice quiet unit, these DID diesels sound like someone droped a handful of pennies in the top of the motor! :-P
0
FollowupID: 350339

Follow Up By: zac_sprint - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 19:38

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 19:38
In fact a Mechanically Indirectly Injected Dinosaur Jeff or (MIID)-Add that one to the Toyota glossary of abbreviations. I stand by my words and here are the stats to prove it:

1) Pajero
Fuel System: Turbo Diesel
Engine Block: 3.2 Litre DI-D DOHC Intercooled Turbo Diesel
Maximum Power: 121kW@3800rpm
Max Torque: 373Nm@2000rpm
Cylinders: 4

2) Prado
Fuel System: T/Diesel
Engine Block: 3.0 Litre, 4 cylinders, in-line, SOHC.
Maximum Power: 96kW@3600rpm
Max Torque: 343Nm@2000rpm
Cylinders: 4

And by the way you mentioned Intercooled Turbo Diesel or (ITD-where's that on the Toyo booklet?) on the Prado. Doesn't look like it.

Disappointing that Toyo hasn't brought their Di-D engine from Europe here to Aus. (See Peter's) follow up below.

But don't forget the servicing differential between Direct and Indirect Injected Diesels- see follow ups below, (now 2.5k service on the Prado you can only get with dinosaur technology).

Remember the latest technology that was yesterday's or yesteryear's is old technology.
0
FollowupID: 350362

Follow Up By: Member - Jeff M (WA) - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 19:49

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 19:49
Zac, are you trying to say that the Prado does not have an intercooler?

And considering the engine is a smaller unit than the Mitsi I don't think it is that far behind (as I previously stated).
At least it has a 21:1 compression ratio, not like these new toy diesels with 17:1 etc.

Extract from www.toyota.com.au:
ENGINE - TOYOTA LANDCRUISER PRADO GRANDE TURBO DIESEL 4D Wagon - 4 auto
Engine Code/Name 1KZ-TE
Engine capacity (cc) 2982
Engine type Diesel
Forced induction system Turbo
Engine description 4cyl/SOHC/2V
Maximum Power 96kW @ 3600rpm
Maximum Torque 343Nm @ 2000rpm
(Note: Power and Torque test standards differ. Ensure comparisons use same test standard.)
Number of cylinders 4cyl
Configuration In-line
Valvetrain SOHC
Number of valves per cylinder 2v
Fuel system EFI
- Fuel type Diesel

**** Intercooler Air to air ****

Bore x Stroke 96.0x103.0mm
Compression Ratio 21.0:1
0
FollowupID: 350365

Follow Up By: pjchris - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 20:04

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 20:04
Two and a bit years ago when one of the major 4WD mags compared the then new Paj DiD with the Prado Diesel (Stillusing the same engine only now even heavier) and the Paj 3.5 they came to the conclusion that in perfomance terms you could measure the difference between the two Pajero's with a stopwatch but that Prado Diesel owners should go out and buy a calendar.

Simply the Prado diesel is low tech (Can be good for reliability), underpowered and under torqeued (New word..). And we seem to be the only country in the world still getting it. Europe went to the 'new' D4D in 2001.
Did Toyota have a warehouse full of the old engines that they decided to use up in OZ?
Are we the only country still silly enough to hand over good money for an engine that no other country wants?

I know Toyota say that it's because our diesel isn't up to scratch, but BMW, Mercedes, Mitsubishi, Audi, Volkswagon, Jeep etc. said the same thing and they decided TWO YEARS ago that our diesel had been improved enough.
Dammit, even Hyundai have a common rail diesel now and they only use other companies cast off technologies.

Toyota so dominate the market here that they don't appear to care at all about what the market actually wants and continues to ignore newer/better technology because they make more profit from landing us with cheap old tech engines (Diesel anyway) than they could by actually supplying us with current tech.

I'm not asking for 'state of the art'. Just 'up to date' would do. After all 'up to date' has been tested and found reliable. It's 'state of the art' or 'bleeding edge' tech that needs to be avoided in the outback until it's proven.

Anyway thats my rant..... Now where did I put those pills again....

Peter
0
FollowupID: 350369

Follow Up By: zac_sprint - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 20:17

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 20:17
No pills needed Peter- I couldn't have put it better myself.

0
FollowupID: 350375

Follow Up By: Johnno1 - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 21:42

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 21:42
Great post pilchris .

Totally agree with all that you say there.

0
FollowupID: 350409

Follow Up By: pjchris - Friday, Jan 07, 2005 at 10:37

Friday, Jan 07, 2005 at 10:37
See the Toyota UK site

It has been in Europe for 3 years...

Peter

ps. This was posted earlier but was deleted as it made the page too wide...
0
FollowupID: 350536

Reply By: Member - Ross P (NSW) - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 09:01

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 09:01
G'day dfe,

I have an NP 2004 3.2 L Di-D. Had an NM 3.5 L petrol for three years before that. Both fantastioc vehicles on road with the monoquoce construction and independent suspension. Car like performance. Test drove a used NL before I bought the NM. No comparison on the highway as far as ride and handling.
I use the Paj for day to day work but also do a lot of long trips which involve off-road work. I also tow a dirt road caravan. See profile pics.
I went diesel because of fuel consumption while towing. Not so much for cost but for range with a standard 90 litre tank - I didn't want to fit a long range tank.
The last trip involved central Qld, back to the coast and up to the tip of cape york via the Old Telegraph Track. Also did Frenchmans Track to and from Chille Beach. (left the van at Port Douglas for the trip up the cape). Came back to PD, picked up the van and headed out to the Gulf Country. Did Cobald Gorge, Karumba, Burketown, King Fisher Camp, Lawn Hill NP etc.
The NP with MAT was nothing less than fanatastic. Only criticism is ground clearance on the real rough stuff and lack of atriculation but only when on the rough stuff and traction control looked after this anyway.
I have to disagree with the suggestion that the current Prado TD is a better vehicle than the NP Pajero.
The 3.0 L engine in the current Prado is quite old technology and does not match the performance of the Mitso 3.2 L Di-D (for towing which is important for me - 373 Nm is important).
DAT is only available in the Grande where MAT is available across the range (although you suggest there is now a base model Paj wihout MAT)
The ground clearance of both vehicles is almost the same with the Paj actually having a little more, I think.
The Prado has 180 Litre fuel capacity while the Paj has only 90 L (dam it)
I seriuosly looked at the Prado 4.2 L petrol. Very smooth and a delight to drive. In the end went NP Pajero because of MAT and all the creature comforts of the Exceed. Couldn't afford the Prado
I keep my vehicles 3 to 4 years so I don't believe there is anything in the arguement about better fuel consumption - it's about the same cost when everything is considered. If you don't tow and need the extra low revs torque don't rule out the petrol versions of both vehicles. While the 3.2 L Di-D is just as quick if not a little better than the 3.2 L petrol it's definitely not as quiet.
If you want more infromation from Pajero devotees check out :-
www.pajeroclub.com.au and click the link to the forum.
Good luck with your analysis.
Regards,
AnswerID: 91540

Follow Up By: Rosco - Bris. - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 09:27

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 09:27
Ross

An excellent unbiased critique. Obviously you have no need for blinkers.

Cheers cob
0
FollowupID: 350127

Follow Up By: Member - Ross P (NSW) - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 09:31

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 09:31
Correction to some typos!
Toyota Prado petrol IS 4.0 Litre as johno points out
Pajero Petrol is 3.8 Litre not 3.2 as in my reply
0
FollowupID: 350129

Follow Up By: Member - Ross P (NSW) - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 10:26

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 10:26
Guys,

If you look closely at No. 8 pic in my profile you will notice that the front driver's side wheel is about an inch off the ground. This demonstrates how much or how litle articulation is available with the Pajero IFS. I think the Landy with live front axle would be better here but I suppose it depends on what you intend doing with your new car.
Now you can start a real arguement!!! Toyota Cruisers and Cruiser Prados both have IFS but the new Nissan Patrol retains the front live axle!!!!
0
FollowupID: 350142

Follow Up By: Rosco - Bris. - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 10:45

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 10:45
Rosscoe

Getting back to the original thread (without all the hijacking crap) there is no doubt in my mind the Disco is the more competent of the two off-road, it depends entirely on usage requirements.

As for reliability issues, one only has to check out this forum to see that all models of all makes have their share of issues. LR certainly had more than their share in the past, no argument about that, but I don't believe the current mods are any more sus than their Jap counterparts.

Cheers
0
FollowupID: 350153

Follow Up By: pjchris - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 14:04

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 14:04
Not sure which is better off road now as although the new Disco 3 has a seperate chassis it is also independent suspension all-round.

Peter
0
FollowupID: 350229

Follow Up By: Rosco - Bris. - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 14:17

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 14:17
Quite true Pete, I guess we'll have to wait and see on that issue. However the original thread seemed to relate to current, rather than about to be released models.

TD5 in current, TD6 in about to be released.

Cheers
0
FollowupID: 350232

Follow Up By: pjchris - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 14:38

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 14:38
Given that theseries 3 is supposed to come with significantly better build quality, and give Ford/BMW had a lot of input in the design process of the Series 3 I would expect the new Discovery to be better put together and much more reliable.

I would wait and buy a Series 3 if I chose the Disco, or buy a Paj now if that was my choice. Personally, I think the Series 3 disco looks awful, so it would need to be really good (and maybe it is) to entice me that way.

Drive both, Compare prices and options, Decide the looks/ride/performance etc that you prefer and then make a decision.

The Paj does have a known history (Reasonably good) for Reliability/resale etc. The Series 3 Disco is an unknown in this area so far. The Series 2 has a reliability/resale history (Admittedly fairly ordinary).

Peter
0
FollowupID: 350236

Follow Up By: pjchris - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 14:51

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 14:51
Also given the TD6 engine is 140kw/445nm (Curb weight approx 2600kg) engine over the TD5 101kw/340nm (curb weight approx 2100kg) the performance should be better, on a par or slightly better than the Paj (120kw/373nm and 2100kg curb weight) the newer vehicle might be the way to go.

Peter
0
FollowupID: 350243

Follow Up By: dfe - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 19:03

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 19:03
Thnks for this informative reply, problem is though that my post was "hijacked" a bit earlier, a Prado is too expensive, I actually asked about a Discovery TD5 vs the scaled down Pajero (Pajero without traction control etc etc).
0
FollowupID: 350354

Follow Up By: dfe - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 19:59

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 19:59
Again, remember I am comparing

NEW

Pajero GLX 3.2 DiD (without traction control etc)
with
Discovery TD5

0
FollowupID: 350368

Follow Up By: pjchris - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 20:10

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 20:10
dfe,

ALL Pajeros have traction control and Stability control. It is part of the MATT (Mitsubishi All Terrain Technology) and is standard on all NP05 models Petrol and Diesel.

They don't make a Pja anymore without Traction/Stability controls.

See http://www.mitsubishi-motors.com.au/mitssite/jsp/pages/vehicles/vehicles.jsp?groupId=20

The Mitsu website no longer lists the Diesel GLX as an available model so someone must have old 2004 model stock. You would want to get a really,really good discount to be buying that now...And the Petrol GLX has MATT.

Peter
0
FollowupID: 350370

Follow Up By: Rosco - Bris. - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 22:12

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 22:12
dfe

Ignoring the immediately preceding little missive ......
At the end of the day, they are both damn fine vehicles .... as has been said before "ad infinitum", ultimately it's your choice ... and I've no doubt that after making that choice you'll be "as happy as Larry".

Good luck cob .. and cheers
0
FollowupID: 350439

Reply By: zac_sprint - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 09:47

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 09:47
Mitsubishi Pajeros Di-D are now with a 5 year/130,000 km manufacturers warranty!! Also there is a 10 Years/160000km warranty on power train(non transferable)- Wow!!!

The problem with the Prados is their engine is so out of date, (Where's my G'dads tractor/Cough!/Cough!)- and the front suspension is sus (Check it out- yuk!)+only 3 year manufacturers warranty. Prado service intervals is only 5k, with 2.5k if you drive it on the rough stuff! Pajero is a 10,000 km service interval.

Problem with the Pajeros is the internal noise on rough roads, courtesy the chassis, one fuel tank only, internal fit and finish looks cheap like a Ford or Holden (very poor effort here), the second battery is hard to place-(do you really need one?) but the warranty-I like that.

Remember common rail/electronic injection diesel engines are the way to go especially for the future as diesel fuel is going to change considerably in the next few years with regard to emission standards- this affects engine design.

So Toyota will have to come out with a Di-D type engine for their next model Prado whether they like it or not.

If you want a Discovery you'd be better off coming over and buying my Ford EF- it will give you an idea of the problems you will face if you buy a Disco.

My point- it pays to be patient.
AnswerID: 91548

Follow Up By: Member - Ross P (NSW) - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 10:15

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 10:15
zac-print,

Fitting a second battery in the NP Di-D is straight forward. In Japan they come standard with one. The mounting points are all there and TJM, Piranha, and ARB all have battery trays. There is also one 4WD shop in Sydney who stocks the OE Japanese battery tray.
In the petrol version it is much more difficult mainly because of the charcoal fuel canister.

I agree with your comparison and would dearly like to see Toyota come out with a new state of the art diesel motor. Rumours suggest it's on the way.
Re the interior. I went Exceed with all that leather etc and find the finish to be excellent. Easy to clean and doesn't seem to be too much of a problem when I leave the car parked in the sun.
Lots of people don't like the RV display but I find it quite usefull.
Regards,
0
FollowupID: 350139

Follow Up By: Johnno1 - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 10:35

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 10:35
Prado servicing is 10,000km in T/D with 5,000 if arduous work.

Pajeros are noisy that is true.
0
FollowupID: 350146

Follow Up By: pjchris - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 10:48

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 10:48
Pajero sevice interval for the Diesel is 15,000km with optional oil changes at 7,500km.

Peter
0
FollowupID: 350154

Follow Up By: zac_sprint - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 10:59

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 10:59
Sorry Johnno but you're wrong on this one-
See The Toyota Website
1) http://www.partsservice.toyota.com.au/psa/articles/0,2481,subId%253D1404%2526sectionId%253D710,00.html
2) I have the Toyota Prado 2004 model book from one of the dealers and it also says 5k servicing for 2004 model T/D Prado and 2.5k for off the beaten track use
3) The Toyota people will tell you exactly the same-I should know because I asked

This all makes sense because the Prado engine is 20th Century technology- the only way Toyota can increase their service intervals and compete with Mitsu's 10,000km intervals is by going direct injection with their diesel engines as well.

0
FollowupID: 350159

Follow Up By: zac_sprint - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 11:04

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 11:04
Peter,
You are correct- thanks for that.
0
FollowupID: 350164

Follow Up By: Johnno1 - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 11:07

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 11:07
Sorry zac sprint you are wrong.

Toyota already have much better motors overseas for the record.
0
FollowupID: 350165

Follow Up By: zac_sprint - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 11:19

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 11:19
Johnno,
We are talking about the Prados here in Australia? If Toyota has a better engine overseas than the current Prado indirect fueled dinosaur here in Oz- Great!! They should bring it Down Under- then I'll go buy it.
0
FollowupID: 350168

Follow Up By: dfe - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 20:22

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 20:22
The Pajero I am talking about has just been released in South Africa, it is the GLX version, diesel only.

The full GLS version sells here for about R450,000, where the GLX sells for R360,000 (ZAR), huge difference.

It is available in the LWB version only.

In the GLX version they removed the traction AND stability control, removed the sidesteps, alloy rims, leather interior and a few other things.

They replaced traction control with a rear difflock, cloth only seats, ugly steel rims etc (see the pic posted near the top).
0
FollowupID: 350376

Reply By: drivesafe - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 10:14

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 10:14
Hi dfe, you don’t say how long you intend to keep the vehicle.

Land Rover has a 48% retention rate or to put it another way, even though they HAVE had major problems in the past with deferent models, 48% of all Land Rovers ever made are still running and that is more than double the next 4x4s retention rate.

Also, since Ford took over, there have been dramatic improvements in both reliability and support.
Being a Landy owner, I,m one eyed but the Pajero is a good vehicle for price. The best thing you could do is just keep on test driving both vehicle when ever you can and then make a decision on what you personally find and like.

Cheers.
AnswerID: 91555

Follow Up By: dfe - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 19:09

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 19:09
I intend keeping it for a min of 3-5 years. So far I want to DiD motor in the Pajero but the offroad performance of the Discovery. After all I am buying an offroad vehicle and not a day to day car (although this vehicle must also serve for day to day purposes.
0
FollowupID: 350356

Reply By: Bob of KAOS - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 17:40

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 17:40
dfe,
I have had two Pajeros and two Discoverys. The current Disco was new in Nov 2003. The Pajeros were extremely reliable and I took them both all over the country without a single glitch.
The first Disco had to have the immobiliser/alarm unit and radio replaced. The second one had a noisy fuel pump replaced. Both have been all over the country.

I wouldn't touch a Prado with a barge pole as they have a dog of an engine, look like a juke box, and a pitched at Mr Average (or more accurately - Mrs Average). I was following one in the wet two days ago and the driver braked on a slight bend approaching a roundabout, skidded sideways into the next lane of traffic hitting several cars. Excellent stability control system!

My experience with the current model Paj is a short drive only - very impressive all round.

You obviously have excellent taste and very fine judgement and I don't think you can go wrong with either truck. On the other hand if you feel the need to follow the flock maybe the Prado is worth another look ;-)
AnswerID: 91630

Follow Up By: Johnno1 - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 21:47

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 21:47
Stability is only on the Grande for your info.

Can't replace skill behind the wheel now can you.

http://www.australiasbestcars.com.au/2004/fourwheel.htm

2 years running !!! ;)
0
FollowupID: 350415

Follow Up By: Johnno1 - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 21:48

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 21:48
he reason the flock are following the Prado is because guess what ??

It is the best 4wd in the country !!!!

Simple really isn't it ?
0
FollowupID: 350417

Follow Up By: Bob of KAOS - Friday, Jan 07, 2005 at 07:19

Friday, Jan 07, 2005 at 07:19
Johnno,
I am impressed you can type with one hand :-)
Your logic would explain why the Honda CRV outsells the Prado, and why the Hyundai Xcel outsells the BMW 3 series I guess.
Baaah.
0
FollowupID: 350476

Follow Up By: Johnno1 - Friday, Jan 07, 2005 at 08:20

Friday, Jan 07, 2005 at 08:20
No not at all . Crv is an Awd , completely different vehicle. They have no low range you see and are also sold in another segment . Lets try and compare apples and apples Bob.
0
FollowupID: 350482

Reply By: ianmc - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 20:07

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 20:07
Come safety I think the Paj could be well ahead of the others. Apart from its good handling etc the heavy monocoque body should provide a safer shunt or roll over environment than a separate chassis.
Just have a look at how the others look after a fairly minor shunt. The chassis is bent beyond repair as most are not that stiff & become a write-off.
A mono body is usually only damaged near point of impact & section can be cut & replaced as in the average sedan.
Mono body must be stronger all round as there is extra meat is the whole structure & its not concentrated in a hidden ladder frame with a flimsy body on top.
Thats my observation but lets have a tradey comment?
AnswerID: 91645

Reply By: pjchris - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 20:43

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 20:43
dfe,

Sorry for contributing to the hijacking of your thread...

To discuss your original question..the features listed below are from discountnewcars.com.au
TD5
ABS Brakes
Adjustable tilt steering column
Alloy Wheels
CD Player
Climate Control Air Conditioning
Cruise Control
Dual Air Bags
Fog Driving Lights
Lumbar support-Drivers seat
Manual
Power side Mirrors-heated
Power Steering
Power Windows
Remote Central Locking
Traction Control
Vehicle Immobiliser

Paj
ABS Brakes
Adjustable Tilt steering column
Air Conditioning
Alloy Wheels
AM/FM Stereo radio
Cruise Control
Drivers Air Bag
Electrically Adjustable Side Mirrors
Power Steering
Power Windows
Remote Central Locking
Single CD Player
Traction Control
Vehicle Immobiliser

SO the Disco has Climate control, they both have ABS, Traction control and immobilisers. The Disco has a 4 speed auto (5 speed on the Paj) and an older tech engine with 20% less power than the Paj while weighing about the same.

The Paj has a much better reliability record than the Disco, better fuel economy, better touring range, better performance, better handling, 7 seats (5 in the Disco the extra two cost $7000 and come only with the Auto as an option) and a five year 130.000km (!0 year 160,000km drivetrain original owner) warranty versus a 3 year 100,000km warranty on the Disco. The Disco does come with 3 year 100,000km roadside assist.

Both have at times suffered from a poor/indifferent build quality.

The Disco has two live axles so if you are going to lift it and modify it for better wheel articulation then it is the better choice. If not then the suspension becomes a non issue.

The Disco is also rated to tow 3500kg, 1000kg more than the Paj (Although with the lower power towing 3500kg would be an exercise in extreme patience).

Oh, and the Disco is $3000 more (rrp).

Since you reckon the Paj you are looking at does not have Traction control (MATT/ATC/ASC) (Which I find hard to believe as I thoght that it became standard across the Diesel range in 2004) then it must be very old stock or second hand (2002/2003 model).

Hope this helps.

Peter
AnswerID: 91652

Follow Up By: dfe - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 20:55

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 20:55
Thnks, it is good to get such good feedback!

To answer a few questions:

The Pajero GLX spec here is 10% more expensive than the Discovery, partly because of the discovery 3 they are giving huge discounts, and partly because the GLX is a lower spec Pajero.

It definitely does NOT have traction control, but they factory fit a rear difflock. (Also no leather, no colour coded bumpers, no runner boards, no bull/nudge bar etc etc).

So for now the Pajero is about R350,000 vs the Discovery R322,000 (both in ZAR, about $1 to R6)
0
FollowupID: 350383

Follow Up By: Johnno1 - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 21:52

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 21:52
why do you keep harping on about SA ?

Who really cares ?
0
FollowupID: 350423

Follow Up By: dfe - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 22:01

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 22:01
Because that is where I live.........................
0
FollowupID: 350433

Follow Up By: Johnno1 - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 22:07

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 22:07
Prado is expensive in SA as well I know.

Very desirable vehicle there as well..

What is it with the Prado ??

Just so popular everywhere and winning awards all over the planet.

Must all be wrong surely ? ;)
0
FollowupID: 350437

Follow Up By: dfe - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 22:17

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 22:17
in the first period of 2004 (cannot remember exact dates) they sold more than double the no of prado's in south africa vs pajeros. It does say something.
0
FollowupID: 350440

Follow Up By: Johnno1 - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 22:26

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 22:26
Not only there .

In Oz Prado averages 1300 a month and Pajero is around 700.

http://www.google.com.au/search?q=cache:bl1jq6gmgagJ:www.automotivepersonnel.com.au/news/112004v/112004v.pdf+vfacts+sales+2004+prado+pajero&hl=en
0
FollowupID: 350443

Follow Up By: pjchris - Friday, Jan 07, 2005 at 10:13

Friday, Jan 07, 2005 at 10:13
dfe,

Sorry I didn't realise that you were in South Africa...

Given that the Disco is cheaper than the Paj and has traction control and live axles...

And given your stated need for good offroad ability and as long as the build quality is OK then I would probably choose the Disco.

A live axle vehicle with traction control (Either electronic or mechanical) will go much further off road than an independent suspension vehicle with only rear and center diff locks. When you add the ability to increase wheel articulation further than the independent set up it looks a winner.

Also tune-up devices for the Disco's are available from

http://ww.tunit.com.au
Land Rover Discovery TD5 Output Before - 101kw @ 4200rpm/300NM @ 1950rpm Output With Tunit V-PD - 129kw @ 4200rpm/362NM @ 1950rpm

and from http://www.dieselchiptuning.com

I have no affilliation with either source.

They can dramatically improve the output of the Disco...I would probably go with the Australian tunit device over the European PSI box as they are developed in a hot environment similar to yours unlike the generally cooler European climate. In either case fittin an EGT (Exhaust Gas Temperature) guage would be a good idea to limit the possibility of over stressing your engine.

Peter
0
FollowupID: 350528

Follow Up By: Member - Ross P (NSW) - Friday, Jan 07, 2005 at 12:15

Friday, Jan 07, 2005 at 12:15
dfe,

Sorry, I thought when you said SA, you meant South Australia not South Africa.
As Peter says, depending on your needs the Landy with front and rear live axles and therfore better articulation will be better off-road than the Paj without MATT. The Paj, as I've said, also has limited ground clearance and can't be lifted any more than about 50 mm because of its independent suspension
The Paj with Monoquocque body and inderpendent suspension is a better highway/town choice, IMHO. You may also want to reassure yourself of any quality doubts that may linger with the Landy. I've never had anything do with Landys so it's all just hear-say for me.
I also have to say that the Paj can be quite "boomy" on corrugated roads.
In Oz, at least in NSW, the price of diesel is higher than ULP and seems to be getting worse. In OZ, it was and still can be in remote indigenous communities, difficult to get ULP, so diesels were popular for that reason.
There was also a school of thought that figured that any bush mechanic could fix a diesel. I think, with so many variations of in modern diosel design, this is not so relevant anymore
As I said in my earlier response, I went diesel for two main reasons. Range with a 90 Litre tank and torque because I tow.
So, as always, it comes down to a compromise; your specific needs, cost, and emotion will influence your decision.
Hope it works out for you.
0
FollowupID: 350560

Follow Up By: pjchris - Friday, Jan 07, 2005 at 14:19

Friday, Jan 07, 2005 at 14:19
Hi Ross_P,

I too found the Paj quite 'boomy' on corrugations until I replaced the original yres with Bridgesrtone D694's. It is much quieter now.

It is the mono chassis transmits noise to the cabin more than if it were a separate chassis so the stiffer/shorter/thinner(?) the sidewalls on the tyres the amount of noise in the cabin will change.

Separate chassis are better for NVH due to the rubber mounting isolation between chassis (and therefor suspension) and body.

The problem with many separate chassis vehicles is that the strength is all in the chassis and the body has little or no structural strength. Also the chassis has little torsional stiffness which leads to handling problems. I suspectthe reason people point to overloaded mono vehicles used for towing that have bent the roof is that the chassis flex has forced the roof to buckle where a separate chassis would still flex but the mounting system would stop the flex being transmitted to the body.

I saw a photo of a Nissan patrol that had run head on in to a tree at high speed and the chassis was more or less intact on the ground but the body had seperated from the chassi at the rear and wrapped itself around the tree. All of the occupants died, I believe. Had the chassis been a mono the occupants would probably still be here...

Peter
0
FollowupID: 350578

Reply By: Fordskin - Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 23:08

Thursday, Jan 06, 2005 at 23:08
I have a NP O4. You can turn off the stability control but not the traction control. When driving on sand you turn off the stability control to stop the car from trying to correct itself {braking when you need momentum]. The traction control is in my opinion made for the sand. Someone said that the monocoque chassis is not as strong as the Prado. What a load of garbage.Get your facts right. I have never seen the Prado win multiple Dakars. The bottom line is how often do you go 4 wheel driving ?. Are you a driver or a loafer?If you like to drive then the PJ out handles any other 4x4 because it has independant suspension. Although the Prado is slightly quieter on road it drives like a 4x4 and leans around corners. The 3.2 deisel is a class leader. I have the 3.8 petrol because i dont like the DID noise. Although it sucks a bit of fuel it is very refined. For me the crap road handling of the Prado turned me to the PJ and i have been very happy with it. The Prado will go further off road but not by much. The PJ s on road handling was for me the big carrot.
AnswerID: 91693

Reply By: wombat1 - Friday, Jan 07, 2005 at 14:10

Friday, Jan 07, 2005 at 14:10
I bought a new TD5 country classic in July. Now 14500 kl and loving it. No warranty issues. 1 recall, fixed and returned washed on the day. Great service.

My wife uses as daily car, We both go 4 wheeling and we tow a 17'6" tandem.

Tows well (Hayman Reece hitch) No SLS
Daily comutes well
4 WD's well.

It is proving to be be very economical and getting better all the time, Awsome forward vision. Torque is all in the right places for towing (I even bought an auto which I never thought I would) Off road it just keeps going

GO FOR A TEST DRIVE! I have to say I have yet to have reason to question quality
AnswerID: 91775

Reply By: marcus - Friday, Jan 07, 2005 at 22:15

Friday, Jan 07, 2005 at 22:15
Hi dfe,
I believe since the td5 the disco is more reliable than earlier models which may have tarnished its reputation somewhat.I bought my disco second hand three years ago and love it for these reasons:
Very well eqipped with Luxury features
Very comfortable to drive on road and off especially touring.
Best driving position of any 4x4.
Very economical.
Excellent ability off road.
Brilliant towing ability.
A friend has re-chipped the td5 computer around (A$900) and it absolutely flies along now similar performance to pajero DID3.2.
I drove a mates new pajero v6 it was nice,very smooth and car like but a bit bland not like a disco to drive.
Have a good drive of bothto make up your mind but i believe both to be reliable.
cheers mark
AnswerID: 91862

Sponsored Links

Popular Products (14)