Pajero reliability

Stan,

Refer him to www.pajeroclub.com.au and go to the forum.

Personally, I've owned two Pajeros. Firstly a 2001 NM V6 3.5 l Petrol Exceed. Did 120,000 km in three years. Mixture of higway, dirt and rough dirt (GRR etc) with nothing too extreme. Really, not a minutes truoble so I have to say reliability was fantastic.

Secondly, a 3.2 L NP Di-D. Went this way because I tow a Coromal 505 Seaka Pioneer Xc dirt road caravan which weighs about 1800 kg.

When towing with the petrol, my range was very restricted as the fuel consumtiopn went up. The 3.2L diesel has heaps of grunt at low revs and is great for towing (373 Nm @ 2000 rpm).
I've taken the NP to the "Tip" via the old Telegraph track and across from Weipa to Chilli Beach on Frenchmans. Had no problems at all with the rough stuff or water crossing. (left the van in PD for this part of the trip).

Good points: Value for money, comfort and car like handling on the highway and around town. Quite good off road handling especially with MATT. For the sort of use I want, the independent suspension is fine and the monoquge construction is not a limit in anyway at all. Absolutely fantastic Auto transmission. Would never consider a manual after you use this gearbox.

Bad points. Ground clearance and under body protection (in off the show room floor configuration). Posibbly wheel travel (but only if you are "rock-hopping). 90 litre tank. Noisy Di-D but I'm told later models have better noise insulation.

My NP suffered a blocked radiator and oveheating problems supposedly caused by the coolant forming a gel. Mitsubishi have not acknowledged this as a known fault but anecdotally it has happened to a number of NMs and NPs.

Hope this helps.

Reliability?

1. They don't break front diffs or suspension arms (like one popular make)
2. They don't blow deisel engines (like another popular make) ;--P

(Removes tongue from cheek)
Seriously, Pajero's are just as reliable as any other current 4WD.

IMHO they are much better value for money than a Prado (others WILL differ)

I have the petrol but if buying again would get the deisel for better touring range. The trade off is slightly less power, noisier engine, not quite as smooth to drive. I believe the petrol is a better option if most your time is spent in the city.

Off the showroom floor it actually has better clearance than the opposition, but agree it needs better bash plates than standard. Had a local sheet metal shop bend up one for mine.

Cheers, John.

the diesal seem to be the way to go and there cheap as well.
local dealer has brand new diiesal for less than $42000 drive away.

I'm an 80 owner too - I would have thought that his intended use should have been mentioned eg town vehicle only, towing, touring, hard 4WDing. Going by the current ads on TV Mitsubishi's are the best made and have the best warranty so he can't go wrong - if you believe the advert that is!

Have a 2001 NM Petrol with 110,000KM on the clock which has been great even though I give it a bit of a bashing eg. Rock hopping at Appin and Menai, Sydney.
Just recently the timing belt tensioner disintegtated and the mechanic also found a crack in the manifold. All vehicles seem to have problems of one sort or another from time to time. Now looking at replacing it and I'll look at other vehicles but the Did is tempting on price.