Comments on: 2008 Mitsubishi Pajero Review

By: Jade

Jade — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 02:20:24 +0000

Hi Panayota Thomas,

4 Returns on recall, think yourself lucky. My daily driver is a VE SS commodore, been back to the dealer 16 times now and issues still haven’t been resolved, 3 computers, 2 stereos, suspension failures, etc the list goes on. All I can say is lucky for the sanity the NT Pajero provides. The Pajero’s superiority over our poorly built Australian cars is so far advanced it’s a joke.
Oh and another thing to all you prospectfull Pajero buyers, don’t listen to the rubbish about the DID being a snail and having no power, my daily drive has 270kw and 550NM and I don’t have any issues what so ever jumping in and driving the NS Paj. If you are so concerned about power and acceleration go and buy a 270kw/550nm sedan. That Paj is a 4×4 and a bloody good one at that.

By: Nico

Nico — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 11:50:23 +0000

All the people (who obviously OWNS the vehicle and did not just drive it for a few hours) saying that the Pajero is an excellent vehicle with ample power cannot ALL be wrong. Maybe it is then U who is in the dark mr. Fallah…

By: Panayota Thomas

Panayota Thomas — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 03:01:48 +0000

Mitsubishi 3 door 2007 model is bad news. I have had 4 returns on recall item and still the problem is not fixed. Motor looses power and car shudders when ignition is turned off. Of all the cars I have owned this would have to be the biggest lemon. Dealer does not care. Once the car was handed over the care factor stopped however prior to this I was getting a call twice a day to buy.
Not reliable. You can do a lot better with other makes.

The dealerships attitude (Toowong Mitsubishi)is very poor.

By: Mike Cook

Mike Cook — Mon, 14 Sep 2009 13:19:15 +0000

Interesting article. Even though the author is entitled to his opinion, obviously he has not driven any other turbo diesel 4WD and I seriously doubt he actually drove a Pajero. Patrol 3.0 litre is so under powered it is dangerous. Prado hasn’t got any grunt where you need it, Land rover, what can I say. Recovery blokes love them. Don’t even mention Ssayong, Kia and all of that other rubbish. Just did 1500klm round trip in our ‘03 DID Pajero through the high country loaded to the hilt, wife, kids, dog and gear for a week. 9 lts 100 klm, overtaking up very long hills easily at 100 km/h. When I’m working I have to put up with a 3 lt Patrol. Hence why I bought a Pajero. The 3lt Patrol is pathetic. I have actually tried everything else I consider viable including the Prado, Land Rover and unfortunately the Patrol. The Pajero eats them all for breakfast in the engine department.

I don’t honestly this guy drove a Pajero.

By: Thomas

Thomas — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 18:24:11 +0000

Highly inaccurate, misleading and probably biased article. The 3.2 DiD engine is what makes the Pajero distinctive. What do they else expect to put under the hood of the Pajero ? The article misleads since the Pajero was built for 4WD offroad driving, while still being a comfortable car onroad. Therefore it is not a typical SUV. It is also not a really hardcore 4WD vehicle, while being capable. It is fine tuned mix of both worlds, without the usual compromises. Concerning the 3.2 Diesel – it is an engine for both worlds. And if you wish, you still can buy the Pajero with the 3.8 MIVEC petrol engine. Bashing the car is unfair. I have driven both – the 3.8 MIVEC and the 3.2 DID.
Sure the 3.8 MIVEC petrol is quiet, smooth and great for highway driving. However, moving the car smoothly below anything than 17 Liters per 100km is not possible. Offroad the consumption reaches easily 20 Liters and there is not enough torque. The 3.2 DID on the other hand is frugal, reaching 9-12 Liters depending on the conditions AND fuel quality. Yes, it is below 2000rpm loud, but has nerly 400Nm torque. It is a turbo diesel. We should not forget the 3.2 (4m41) has its roots in the Mitsubishi Canter truck. In the Pajero while on the highway 170km/h is easily achievable. Summing up, I am still happy I have chosen the 3.2 DID. I like the tat-tat-tat-tat sound. It gives some distinctivness. And if I want to drive 250 km/h on the highway , I prefer the other car with a V8 I got in my garage. Please DO NOT WRITE BIASED articles – be competent and more fairness is appreciated.

By: jools

jools — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 13:27:11 +0000

i have a 2005 np did, no power probs here, they did go backwards for the ns model on torque though, i think that was to make things smoother, i sometimes get driveline shunt. the review was interesting, reason i bought my did instead of the v6 as planned was the shove in the back it gives you,it hill climbs better than my dads v6 same model. weekend on stockton my dad has to fill up on the way home, i dont, can do melb or bris on a tank.
having grown up driving toranas the engine noise is like a trip down memory lane waaaarp waaaaaaaarp
anyone who ever drove an aussie 4 speed would remember
first, first and a half, then third and fooooooorth.

By: hassan

hassan — Fri, 10 Apr 2009 08:31:07 +0000

i will by pajero 2008 soon.but i want to ask is pajero 2008 made in japan?
is it noisy and slow?

By: Seeker

Seeker — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 01:10:24 +0000

I recently took a 2008 NS Pajero Exceed (Diesel) for a half days test. It is a battle between the Prado and Pajero for me. Pajero obviously kills the Prado on price and features and has a beautiful interior. The Prado is what it is – a 7 year old interior, that frankly is looking tired. So the point is I really would like to buy the Pajero, however I too was less than impressed with the noise and its acceleration. The Prado seemed much better here.

Not wanting to write it off just yet I have arranged to take a 2009 NT VRX Pajero Diesel out for an entire weekend. 2009 apparently is quieter and quicker (~20% more power). So I will load the family up.. take it all around the countryside and report back here as to whether it has beaten the Prado for my hard earned dollars.

It does say something that the guys at Mitsubishi were eager enough to lend me the car for the weekend. The bloke at Toyota insisted on coming along on the (short) test drive and yapping in my ear the whole time.

By: John Karuri

John Karuri — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 13:16:30 +0000

Although the reviewer discusses many areas of Pajero he seems to have done a biased review.In fact his review is unprofessional for a site that gives car advice. The review is pathetic and misleading to would-be buyers of Pajero.
Being a car importer in Kenya I routinely drive the mighty pajeros 500kms from the main port city of Kenya to the capital much higher in altitude.Although Kenya is a developing country,the Msa-Nrb highway is a really good piece of infrastructure.I have personally raced both petrols and diesels.
I have also been driving other powerful 4X4s including Landcruisers and X5
The Pajeros are powerful and great in torque and acceleration. Furthermore in the last three years I have imported ten pajero exceeds from Japan and their reliability is tops.

Let any reader do a proper road test and decide for themselves!

By: AlphaG

AlphaG — Thu, 25 Dec 2008 12:26:53 +0000

maybe I have a different NS SWB DiD but I have no issue when hitting the loud pedal in overtaking, streaming past others etc and more then enough power to just keep climbing steep hills all day long.

I read the entire review as off the lights rice boy driving versus maybe what a WRX can do. A Pajero whilst used mainly on the black stuff is a very compotent off roader with standard levels of traction control and like systems that leave many competitors way behind.

By: Robbo

Robbo — Thu, 11 Dec 2008 09:58:03 +0000

How much do you reckon Toyota paid this dip stick to write that article? I have a 2004 NP GLS Manual DID. The engine is absoloutely potent for a 2 tonne wagon! On my third Pajero, and the only problem I have had was with my NJ Shorty doing a stepper motor. My grandparents have had 4 Pajeros, and same story except for a blown gearbox in their NC Shorty. The noise complaints are definitely warranted, but I love the sound! I dont know of any other Mitsubishi owners who arent happy with their cars.. They are an extremely reliable and cheap (Compared to a Toyota, Nissan or Land Rover) to run. Wouldnt swap mine for the world. Except for a new model one……

By: Pieter Rousseau

Pieter Rousseau — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 17:20:55 +0000

I’m a diesel 2008 SWB driver and I must say I totally agree with the review.

Engine has serious power in 4-wheel drive and more than capable. The quip about “just keep on going at 5km/h” is true – it just doesnt stop.

On the road is a different story. Its not quite dead but its a slug. Overtaking is a mission and you really have to be sure when attempting to overtake.

My biggest issue is fuel consumption. I’ve got 10000km on the clock and driving to work and back (all urban with an average amount of stops during the 10km drive) gives me no more than 14l/100km – REGARDLESS of how I drive. Low revs, high revs, driving Miss Daisy or gunning it – I cant seem to get it higher than that.

Long distance is a bit better – going 120km/hr gives between 12 and 11 l/100km. Anything above that and you’re back to 13 and 14 l/100km.

Would I buy it again? Not sure I would. Lack of “nippyness” that you need in town (and by no means am I expecting a supercar) is a real issue whilst fuel economy is a real pain.

Anyway – hope that helps any prospective buyers!

By: Martin Vockler

Martin Vockler — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 11:17:26 +0000

Your review on the pajero is so out of wack it’s not funny. Noisy, slow, do any of your drivers actually drive the car for more than a couple of hours and not cane the vehicle into submission????
My SWB Pajero turbo Diesel 07 model has plenty of grunt and would beat all the cars your test driver referred it to. I can get as low as 9.2L per 100 on the open road at a steady speed not exceeding 100kms per hour and its a smooth quiet ride. It’s a spacious cab and with the purchase of a Thule roof pod you can accomodate all the extra space you need that is not provided in the boot.
Yeah sure the car has some minor design faults but to compare the vehicle to kevin Dud is an offence to all the owners of this fine car. My Pajero is just on 14 months old and has 60,000 kms on the clock it has preformed well without a hitch and all services have not exceeded more than $450.00. Alborz your a wanker…

By: grae

grae — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 06:49:03 +0000

I have had 3 pajeros in the last 25 years. I currently drive a 2004 DID Pajero. We have done numerous off road trips all over Australia towing a off road caravan or a off road tralier. And had no such problems. I have never had any mechanical problems. The 2004 DID has been the best diesel engine for power torque and efficiency i have ever owned. We travel with toyota friends and they seem to have small problems all the time. In most cases the Pajero has been the most cappable and reliable performer on and off road.

By: mendo

mendo — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 10:05:19 +0000

What a clown – what idiot would drive a diesel in a pajero at 4000 rpm. Owned one 3.2 diesel since new – around 100 000k now and no issue what so ever. Most people get out of a petrol engine and drive a diesel the same way – lots of rpm / noise and poorer engine perfomance – trust me it does not work just look at the torque curves / dyno reports.
Have spent time behind the wheel of the Jackaroo, Prado, Patrol, Terrano and Pathfinder. I have found the Pajero motor to be the clear stand out of all vehicles. Also diesels take longer to ‘run in’ than petrol engines as well, – my engine was ‘tight’ for around 30 000 kms.
An example? traction control will kick in in 2WD driving up some of the steeper hills here in the blue mountains. The rear wheels were loosing traction going up hill in dry conditions. I have tried it on a number of runs, different tyres as well, and the engine just simply flies.
Economy? last trip to the snow was 810km on 71 litres of diesel – fully loaded with a pod on the roof.
Fuel filter issue? – every manufacturer will have issues with poor fuel.
Handling? simply put, the Pajero runs rings around any other 7 seater wagon with low range and lots of storage space. Less body roll, quicker turn in, and far more accurate steering. Couple this with electronic stabilisation / skid control and traction control – it is a winner.
What the clown that also failed to inform you all of is this other important fact. If you are a member of Australian farmers federation (around $80 – and no your dont have to be living on a farm) you are then entitled to full fleet discount pricing AND bonus accessories of $500. This made the difference of over $7000 between a prado to my pajero (which also had the electronic safety controls as well !!!)
Weak points – standard tyres – I got around 15 000 km until one split (they were Yokohamas). I currently run Toyos and they are heaps better than standard.
Worst fuel consumption? – 13L / 100 km towing a heavy trailer.
Best Fuel consumption? – in the 8L / 100 km.

By: dave p

dave p — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 12:29:33 +0000

I have had misubishi cars all my life and drive a pajero 21st anniversary did 3.2 diesel and cant speak highly enough of it I tow a van all over aust and it has never missed a beat 80000 ks of hard towing not even a miss beat I challenge the reverer to a drag with any one of the big three 4wd nissan patrol toyota prado and pajero petrol and my diesel leaves them for dead. pajero petrol petrol catches up after 100ks but the other deisels dont get near me there has to be something badly wrong with the test vehicle or you are very predidious against pajero

By: June

June — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 08:55:13 +0000

Hi,
I am a lady. My workplace requires me to commute around 120km a day for 5 days a week. Can anyone adv if Mitsubishi Pajero diesel a good one to drive for this pupose?

Thanks.

By: John C

John C — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 01:26:51 +0000

My 2005 NP Did GLX 5 door manual is great! Good performance and holds everything we need. Can’t see why this reporter had such an issue. Maybe he needs to use his right foot. As diesels go it is great (but I do agree that with a more modern fuel system a 3.2 L diesel should give 600 Nm & 180 kW rather than 370 / 121…look what VW & BMW do with 3L).

I average 9L/100km city & country.

We’ve done 68,000 km, incl a trip to Innamincka; and various steep trails in the Blue mtns. No problems at all. I have scraped the towbar (a H R rhs one so no real damage) but otherwise the vehicle is just fine.

Things I don’t like were

the front seats were uncomfortable so I had them reupholstered to match my saab 9000 on full lumbar ($500 to fix).
the back seat is too flat too hard and too low so it is really only for kids, but I keep a summpementary bubble custion for adults.
handling in the wet requires care even in 4wd (cooper HTs 35 psi all round btw) but it is OK if you don’t push it. (for some reason this is not an issue with the discoveries I have driven).

3rd row seat floor cover is too weak to take much load but you can put a shaped sheet of 15mm ply there on a big trip.

Good things about this car which have passed on to the NS and which this reviewer has overlooked include
the 3rd row seat is removable leaving a 75 litre space into which you can put (for example) 3 x 20 L water containers.

lots of pockets / lockers/hidyholes to put things into.

room for a 2nd battery

diesel has 3 major advantages over petrol which no amount of price relativity can overcome
longer range
far safer in jerry can refuelling as flashpoint is 80c not -30.
noone likes to smell it.

Happy driving!

By: Steveo

Steveo — Fri, 19 Sep 2008 06:17:01 +0000

The negativity of this review is surprising. I had a 2005 Pajero 3.2l DID for 2 yrs. Best vehicle I have ever owned. The Pajero is a 4WD designed for off-road use and comfortable city driving. Compromises have to be made to combine both uses. It’s never going to be the absolute best at both but it does a good job regardless. Who cares about 0-100km performance. I’m never in that much of a hurry or place my self in dangerous situations where a few seconds is going to make a whole lot of difference. I don’t need to get to the top of hills fast. All that means is danger if you are off-road, plus extra stress on your vehicle leading to more risk of accident or component failure. I leave the hill racing to the experts in their specially modified 4bys. The diesel noise? What’s the problem? I love the tat-tat-tat-tat sound. Music to my ears. It makes me feel like I’m in a ..uhmm.. well 4WD. The torque was more than adequate to take me anywhere off road I wanted to go without a problem. It simply ate up Fraser Island’s sandy tracks. Even took it swimming through deep creek crossings. The engines tat-tat-tat was actually very comforting actually as the Paj effortlessy pushed through the water Towing a load? Don’t even know your doing it. Making it work hard doesn’t even affect fuel consumption that much. The extra rear seating design is simply brilliant. It folds away nicely out of the way and can be removed for those times you need extra storage. Would I buy another one ? Sure thing. After being 4WDriveless for 18mths I’m hanging out to get another one. Im actually putting an order in for one next week.

By: Kiprutto

Kiprutto — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 17:01:55 +0000

The Paj is tried and tested… driven mine in rough roads last 84,000KM and only changed tyres besides engine oil! Come to Kenya and see it in action. Great car… reliable, proven, strong, versatile, agile, etc.