Thursday, Feb 04, 2010 at 13:45
Sarjane
OK I'm biased as I own a Paj, but this is what we reviewed when purchasing our Pajero in 07 for our family of 5
1) We do long trips in the bush, but unless you are doing Canning SR, Simpson crossing the 180L Prado tank is of not a huge benefit. You don't need it for Strezleki,
Oodnadatta or
Birdsville track. Yep it's handy but I'd take the fold flat seats to the extra 90L with our family
2) Prados cost a couple to several grand more for the same features
3) Prados have better resale value, but if you are planning on keeping the vehicle for a while, that becomes less important. Does that mean Pajeros are better value second hand?
4)Depreciation is the greatest single cost in owning a vehicle
5) Until the advent of the Prado D4 engine, the Pajero diesel left Prado for dead, but since the Prado D4 not a great deal of difference
7) Reliiability; after 320 000km in 2 Pajeros I can't fault ours, nor can freinds with a lot of ks on their Prados.
8) Off road ability, separate chasis Vs monocoque? Are you really going to be
rock climbing where the Prado is superior, Vs how many kms will you be spending on bitumen or dirt where the Pajero handling is superior?
9) Pajeros have more electonic traction aids if that's important (or a liability)
10) Prados are an 8 seater (bit squeezy with three in the back) Vs Pajero 7.
11) Prados have split 3rd row seating, better for hauling 6?
IF there was just the two of us, turning the vehicle over after 2 years, planning on a CSR and a Simpson Xing, a Prado D4 would have won.
But in our case we are happy with our Pajero
AnswerID:
402635
Follow Up By: sarjane - Thursday, Feb 04, 2010 at 14:00
Thursday, Feb 04, 2010 at 14:00
Hey Mark,
Thanks heaps for taking the time to reply. All the pros that you mentioned are the ones that is making me seriously think about the paj, and coming from a family of 5 it is greatly appreciated. thanks
FollowupID:
672099
Follow Up By: TerraFirma - Thursday, Feb 04, 2010 at 14:54
Thursday, Feb 04, 2010 at 14:54
The Mitsubishi warranty was initially brought about because people did not see Mistubishi and Toyota in the same light, and thats fair enough. Toyota built their reputation fair and square. I for one rate Toyota the better product in terms of build quality and reliability. It's sometimes hard to explain to people why Toyota is the better product but thats fine, we wouldn't want everyone driving a Toyota. I believe the Pajero has improved dramatically but earlier ones that I drove could not be fairly compared to a Toyota. Thats my opinion, you may not agree, but thats what makes these forums so great.
FollowupID:
672109
Follow Up By: Bob of KAOS - Thursday, Feb 04, 2010 at 22:58
Thursday, Feb 04, 2010 at 22:58
Mark
Pajero petrol 3.5 L uses 89 L to cross Simpson. Would have been a lot less if extra fuel had not been 'advised'.
Bob
FollowupID:
672223