So far have done 3000 ks towing with sport exceed and found it to be a great tug ,better than our last one ML350 CDI found the best way to tow is to stay in 7 th gear and use paddles to go int 6 th gear for long hills ,on the flat no head wind 8 th gear is fine , off road its epic .
Just so people know Fortuna 0 to 100 is 10.9 , sport is 9.8 ........sport is quicker .
Hylife said
12:36 AM Apr 27, 2016
Hi Davey, don't let me give you the wrong impression about the Pajero Sport, it made my short list of two from the myriad of choices out there, even beating the capabilities of the long standing champions the Prado and Land Cruiser.
The Pajero Sport is a lovely car utilising lots of high-tech gadgetry and its interior is very nicely finished. Far more luxurious than its competition and amazingly priced, and if the Fortuner did not exist I would indeed have bought a Pajero Sport, and personally, I actually like the rear-end styling. Reminiscent of a Dodge with fancy LEDs..
But, ultimately, people buy vehicles for different reasons and that you are happy with your choice is all that really matters. Life would be really boring if we all liked the same things, don't ya think?
As lovely as the PS is, for my testing and also it appears the testing by motoring writer Chris Fincham, for a van tow vehicle, the PS wasn't our cup of tea.
For me, the Fortuner does exist, and when I compared it, against the Pajero Sport, the Fortuner (aside from being an fugly interior design), as a caravan tug is far more capable, and as a suburban road vehicle or 4x4, is much more sure footed. Three things went against the PS.
1/ Once you take into account Mitsubishi's sneaky practice of stating "pulling weight", not real world "towing weight", the Fortuner, tows more. By that I mean the Mitsi requirement of only being able to tow 3100kg if you have ZERO towball weight. If you have towball weight you must deduct up to 200% of that from tow weight. More than 200kg of ball weight and you must deduct 400kg from your towing limits, eg 2700kg max.
2/ In speed off the mark with a van in tow, the Fortuner leaves the PS for dead. Yes, yes, I know, the specs on paper say the power and torque is the same and that 0 to 100 is X seconds but it just ain't true. The PS engine struggles with weight. It is 310cc smaller and this is quite noticeable in real world testing.
3/ And lastly, the PS suspension is clearly tuned to make the PS a very capable long distance tourer but it is overly soft and lacks efficient rebound dampening. Soft suspension is not the ideal setup for zipping around the suburbs (where most vehicles will spend 90% of their time), nor when towing a weighty van, nor for moderate 4x4 tasks. Unfortunately, as Chris Fincham says, that around the block test most new buyers perform won't pick this up.
Once again though, that you love your PS and that it performs the tasks you require of it to your satisfaction is all that matters. Everyone is different. :)
davey said
11:30 AM Apr 27, 2016
as you say every one is different , as you can see its quicker with out a van , how it becomes a slug with 8 gears off the lights with a caravan i do not under stand maybe the car you drove had not gone through enough learning gear box cycles , I like the Fortuner (worked for Toyota for many years ) .
So let me get this right Hylife, your taking an unfamiliar vehicle for a test drive in built up areas and taking it over speed humps at 60-70 kph, when speed humps are only in shared zones, 10-50 kph speed limits, I find this extraordinary behavior from a grown man, in areas where there maybe pedestrians and children, not real smart nor safe.
BaupleNut
__________________
BaupleNut
Aus-Kiwi said
12:16 AM Apr 28, 2016
One of these pulled up in decent van beside us the other day.. Must say they look a good bit of kit ..
Look very high quality ..
Lockie said
05:23 PM May 6, 2016
Davey, We are thinking of purchase a Pajero sports would you be able advised what size caravan you are towing and the atm etc Thank you
davey said
08:02 PM May 6, 2016
Hi lockie, the van is 2 ton loaded ,we are happy with the PS , but there are a lot of other to try for sure , the best thing i can do is list all the things we like and all the things we would change .
Likes smooth gearbox and engine, LED h/lamps , overhead and reversing cameras , digital radio and sound system,blind spot warning ,big mirrors, elec hand brake (best thing on the car) flappy paddles .keyless entry, fit and finish.
Dislikes apple play nav system, no gas struts on bonnet , 18 inch wheels , no memory on elec seats , factory tow bar (reese bar is nicer and cheaper ) black trim only at the moment ,
Hope that helps ..on the free way not towing 100 kph in 8 th gear 1600 revs fuel 6.8 lts per 100 ks that did impress me .
Steve11 said
09:20 PM May 10, 2016
Hi, Have you got a link to that article by Chris Fincham please. I can't find it.
thanks
Steve
Hylife said
09:06 PM May 12, 2016
BaupleNut wrote:
So let me get this right Hylife, your taking an unfamiliar vehicle for a test drive in built up areas and taking it over speed humps at 60-70 kph, when speed humps are only in shared zones, 10-50 kph speed limits, I find this extraordinary behavior from a grown man, in areas where there maybe pedestrians and children, not real smart nor safe.
BaupleNut
__________________ BaupleNut
Dunno what you're smoking, but speed humps are used everywhere in Victoria including in highway speed areas, and not just in shared zones and certainly not just in 10-50kph areas, and in almost all cases they have nothing to do with pedestrians or children. Many country towns use them on their main roads to slow you from 100 to 70 or so. Many urban locations use them as a notification of an approaching intersection or corner or other change in the road. Most Vic speed humps are only 75 to 100mm high and are a pad type being 3 to 5 meters long with gentle slopes. I wasn't talking of those steel tyre killers that are used in shopping centre carparks or the mogul shaped ones often found on approach to a suburban chicane that are designed to put an end to racer boys and their lowered suspension.
Oh, and yes, it was an unfamiliar vehicle, why the h3ll else would I be taking it for a test drive. Doh! Why does any professional tester take a new vehicle for a test ride? So he/she can do a write-up on it. Do you just buy your new car because you like the colour or looks? Of course not.
And as I said, it was so bad I even went to another dealer to get another one because perhaps the first demo vehicle had been abused or had some fault.
Quote ..I was really kind by not mentioning the atrocious fuel consumption of the PS when towing that bears no correlation to the AS 81/02. ???
Towing we get 12 to 13 lts per 100 km ... and am happy with that ,
-- Edited by davey on Friday 13th of May 2016 10:48:41 AM
Excellent. Got to be happy with that from any vehicle towing a van. This is much better than I got on test doing 100kph on the open highway using only the cruise control, without towing!. Perhaps there's something in the ECU that gets tweaked to run leaner after the first or second service when the engine is more run-in.??????
davey said
08:55 AM May 16, 2016
Did it not occur to you something was wrong when you saw 14 lts per 100ks ??? was you looking at instance or average ?? or maybe you were looking at the sliding graph , i can guarantee if you do 100 kph in cruise and press the reset button on s/wheel you will see no more than 7 lts per 100ks.
Steve11 said
02:18 PM May 18, 2016
Hi Hylife, from what I can find out about the Pajero Sport, the tow ball weight and reduction in towing weight does not apply to this vehicle. It applies to the old Pajero only. I am also trying to decide between the Fortuner(ugly seats and inside) and the Pajero Sport(with many extras for less$)
Did it not occur to you something was wrong when you saw 14 lts per 100ks ??? was you looking at instance or average ?? or maybe you were looking at the sliding graph , i can guarantee if you do 100 kph in cruise and press the reset button on s/wheel you will see no more than 7 lts per 100ks.
Nah, those dash estimates are nigh on useless compared to actual. I filled the tank and test drove it for over 300km and then refilled it and did the math. Then I did another 250km around town and refilled it and did the math.
steve11 wrote:
I am also trying to decide between the Fortuner(ugly seats and inside) and the Pajero Sport(with many extras for less$)
cheers
Steve
Everyone has to be happy with "their" car for what "they" need it for. My assessments and requirements could be totally different to yours. If you like it, that is what matters, not what I think.
I really liked the Pajero Sport looks and interior and tech much better than the Fortuner, except the Fortuners handling for off road and towing was far superior, (in my opinion). Yes, I paid 7 grand more for a Fortuna Crusade that looks rather like a poor cousin next to a Pajero Sport Exceed. H3ll of a lot of car from Mitsi for $53 grand, but I had specific needs wants and expectations and after testing the Toyota was simply better for me.
After all, if you didn't need to go off-road and didn't need to tow a van, would you be buying a vehicle like this? Probably not, so why just do the old around the block and 2 minute freeway run. All I can say is try some driving on less than perfect roads, some bumps and chicanes, and require a tow test.
Call your local Mitsubishi and Toyota dealers and explain that you are a serious buyer and want to do both a tow test comparison and off-road test. Have them bring the test vehicle to your house and hook up the van, and, if off-road ability is important, find some local fire trails and go bush too.
Oh, one more thing, I had two deal-breaker accessory requirements for outback and off-road. A bullbar and a winch. The Pajero Sport Exceed cannot have either due to the forward low-speed crash mitigation system.
davey said
09:53 AM May 24, 2016
This is a Pajero exceed with a BULL BAR !! they just move the crash sensor ....its not hard , this will be my last post on the subject as its just not informative
. and there is no way the dealership i work for is going to lend a car to do 600ks and go off road .
-- Edited by davey on Tuesday 24th of May 2016 09:57:28 AM
I was looking around in April when a number of 4wd salesman told me that there was not a bullbar for their vehicle. One was the Pajero sports, from memory. Otherwise I may have got one because they had a deal going.
Instead I am getting a Fortuner next week. I won't make any great claims other than I had lined up a top model Traiblazer but got offered a deal on the Toyota Crusade. I have to remove the rear seats and back seats to make it work though.
Have yet to get a van. Am still trying to boil down my minimum requirement. Am leaning towards a used lightweight Jayco Outback with A/C, ensuite and extra water tank.
My first memory of camping was 1954 at Patonga NSW and went camping most years after that. Took a Subaru up to the Jardine in 1980 and went across the gulf to Borooloola NT. Met a guy from Newcastle (I was the first person he had seen for 2 days) who was hitting the bulldust at high speed because he was told to do this in Darwin. So his wife was vomiting and he had destroyed his car's suspension.
I was happy that I had been told to slow down and skirt around the bulldust. Maybe I was lucky.
Jack said
11:07 AM Jan 8, 2021
Davey,
I am interested in your real life experience with the PS, I am thinking of getting one to tow a 2.5t caravan. Given your experience how do you think it will handle it?
Rgds
Jack
TheHeaths said
12:10 PM Jan 8, 2021
Davey deleted himself the day of his last post Jack.
Dont expect an answer, and based on what he wrote, and the fact he worked for a dealership (was it Mitsubishi?), I doubt he was disappointed with his vehicle.
yobarr said
12:50 PM Jan 8, 2021
Jack wrote:
Davey,
I am interested in your real life experience with the PS, I am thinking of getting one to tow a 2.5t caravan. Given your experience how do you think it will handle it?
Rgds Jack
Hi Jack....this thread is over 4 years old! However,the Pajero Sport is well capable of safely towing a 2500kg ATM van,but I believe that it would be unwise to attempt to tow much more.At present,I don't have my figures on me to suggest what to watch for,but they seem to be a great little bus, although not for me! Feel free to ask any questions if you wish.Cheers
P.S OK...weak point is that the rear axle is rated at only 1600kg,so you will have to be very careful with loading,as 250kg towball,or 10%,will put over 350kg onto that rear axle.GVM is only 2710kg,so a 2700kg van would be around top weight if safety is on any concern.Cheers
-- Edited by yobarr on Friday 8th of January 2021 02:55:44 PM
The Belmont Bear said
08:20 PM Jan 8, 2021
I bought a Pajero Sport Exceed in 2016 to tow 2700kg, I reported on this forum a number of times on how it performed - without searching the archives for my previous posts here is a summary. Very comfortable, without a load it had a very good fuel economy and was a great car to drive around town. I used a HR WDH and needed to install rear air bags (lightly inflated) to remove excessive bouncing, I never filled the water tanks as I was operating too close to its maximum weight limit. I found when towing if you drove it in manual and proactively used your paddle shifts the 8 speed transmission performed pretty well. A big negative was that the smaller 2.4ltr motor had to work pretty hard on climbs, under heavy acceleration, headwinds or from standing starts, the fuel consumption ranged between 16 and 18ltrs/100kms so with the standard small fuel tank its range was pretty limited between fills. I reluctantly sold it with only 14K on the clock and bought something that was a little more suitable for towing our size van. IMHO if I had been towing something that weighed maybe 500kg less it would have been a very capable tow vehicle..
I,m not trying to influence your decision one way or the other I,m just giving you my own real life experience owning that vehicle..
BB
-- Edited by The Belmont Bear on Friday 8th of January 2021 08:21:16 PM
Ger08 said
12:08 PM Jan 12, 2021
We have a PS and absolutely love it. Whilst it is a fantastic vehicle there a couple things you should note if you plan to tow with it. First the rear suspension is very soft and along with a lot of other openers we have upgraded the rear springs and added airbags from Pedders. Secondly the tow capacity has limitations. MMA do what every other manufacturer does and gives it a fairly decent 3.1t towing capacity, but in reality its really maxed out at about 2.7t. Our tow weight is about 2.2t and it handles it perfectly, I wouldnt feel confident towing much more than 2.5-2.6t. It also has a very small fuel tank 68l, we have upgraded to 100l ARB long range tank. Its an incredibly reliable vehicle with some great FB groups for technical advice etc. Hope this helps.
Gday...
http://www.caravancampingsales.com.au/editorial/advice/2016/tow-test-mitsubishi-pajero-sport-56425?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=caravancampingsales_220416&utm_content=caravancampingsales_220416+CID_c03a18c1dcf18423c114bd87aa6be52e&utm_source=newsletter&utm_term=Tow%20Test%20Mitsubishi%20Pajero%20Sport
Cheers - John
Having just done my own testing of the Pajero Sport Vs the Toyota Fortuna, I concur.
See my post here: http://thegreynomads.activeboard.com/t61997538/mitsubishi-pajero-sport-toyota-fortuner-feedback-wanted/?page=1#comment-62010648
So far have done 3000 ks towing with sport exceed and found it to be a great tug ,better than our last one ML350 CDI found the best way to tow is to stay in 7 th gear and use paddles to go int 6 th gear for long hills ,on the flat no head wind 8 th gear is fine , off road its epic .
https://youtu.be/Qmjjpz9T6zg
Just so people know Fortuna 0 to 100 is 10.9 , sport is 9.8 ........sport is quicker .
Hi Davey, don't let me give you the wrong impression about the Pajero Sport, it made my short list of two from the myriad of choices out there, even beating the capabilities of the long standing champions the Prado and Land Cruiser.
The Pajero Sport is a lovely car utilising lots of high-tech gadgetry and its interior is very nicely finished. Far more luxurious than its competition and amazingly priced, and if the Fortuner did not exist I would indeed have bought a Pajero Sport, and personally, I actually like the rear-end styling. Reminiscent of a Dodge with fancy LEDs..
But, ultimately, people buy vehicles for different reasons and that you are happy with your choice is all that really matters. Life would be really boring if we all liked the same things, don't ya think?
As lovely as the PS is, for my testing and also it appears the testing by motoring writer Chris Fincham, for a van tow vehicle, the PS wasn't our cup of tea.
For me, the Fortuner does exist, and when I compared it, against the Pajero Sport, the Fortuner (aside from being an fugly interior design), as a caravan tug is far more capable, and as a suburban road vehicle or 4x4, is much more sure footed.
Three things went against the PS.
1/ Once you take into account Mitsubishi's sneaky practice of stating "pulling weight", not real world "towing weight", the Fortuner, tows more. By that I mean the Mitsi requirement of only being able to tow 3100kg if you have ZERO towball weight. If you have towball weight you must deduct up to 200% of that from tow weight. More than 200kg of ball weight and you must deduct 400kg from your towing limits, eg 2700kg max.
2/ In speed off the mark with a van in tow, the Fortuner leaves the PS for dead. Yes, yes, I know, the specs on paper say the power and torque is the same and that 0 to 100 is X seconds but it just ain't true. The PS engine struggles with weight. It is 310cc smaller and this is quite noticeable in real world testing.
3/ And lastly, the PS suspension is clearly tuned to make the PS a very capable long distance tourer but it is overly soft and lacks efficient rebound dampening. Soft suspension is not the ideal setup for zipping around the suburbs (where most vehicles will spend 90% of their time), nor when towing a weighty van, nor for moderate 4x4 tasks. Unfortunately, as Chris Fincham says, that around the block test most new buyers perform won't pick this up.
Once again though, that you love your PS and that it performs the tasks you require of it to your satisfaction is all that matters. Everyone is different. :)
BaupleNut
__________________
BaupleNut
Look very high quality ..
Davey, We are thinking of purchase a Pajero sports would you be able advised what size caravan you are towing and the atm etc Thank you
Likes smooth gearbox and engine, LED h/lamps , overhead and reversing cameras , digital radio and sound system,blind spot warning ,big mirrors, elec hand brake (best thing on the car) flappy paddles .keyless entry, fit and finish.
Dislikes apple play nav system, no gas struts on bonnet , 18 inch wheels , no memory on elec seats , factory tow bar (reese bar is nicer and cheaper ) black trim only at the moment ,
Hope that helps ..on the free way not towing 100 kph in 8 th gear 1600 revs fuel 6.8 lts per 100 ks that did impress me .
Hi, Have you got a link to that article by Chris Fincham please. I can't find it.
thanks
Steve
Dunno what you're smoking, but speed humps are used everywhere in Victoria including in highway speed areas, and not just in shared zones and certainly not just in 10-50kph areas, and in almost all cases they have nothing to do with pedestrians or children.
Many country towns use them on their main roads to slow you from 100 to 70 or so.
Many urban locations use them as a notification of an approaching intersection or corner or other change in the road. Most Vic speed humps are only 75 to 100mm high and are a pad type being 3 to 5 meters long with gentle slopes.
I wasn't talking of those steel tyre killers that are used in shopping centre carparks or the mogul shaped ones often found on approach to a suburban chicane that are designed to put an end to racer boys and their lowered suspension.
Oh, and yes, it was an unfamiliar vehicle, why the h3ll else would I be taking it for a test drive. Doh! Why does any professional tester take a new vehicle for a test ride? So he/she can do a write-up on it.
Do you just buy your new car because you like the colour or looks? Of course not.
And as I said, it was so bad I even went to another dealer to get another one because perhaps the first demo vehicle had been abused or had some fault.
Here's the Chris Fincham write-up.
http://www.caravancampingsales.com.au/editorial/advice/2016/tow-test-mitsubishi-pajero-sport-56425
And I was really kind by not mentioning the atrocious fuel consumption of the PS when towing that bears no correlation to the AS 81/02.
Towing we get 12 to 13 lts per 100 km ... and am happy with that ,
-- Edited by davey on Friday 13th of May 2016 10:48:41 AM
Excellent. Got to be happy with that from any vehicle towing a van. This is much better than I got on test doing 100kph on the open highway using only the cruise control, without towing!.
Perhaps there's something in the ECU that gets tweaked to run leaner after the first or second service when the engine is more run-in.??????
Hi Hylife, from what I can find out about the Pajero Sport, the tow ball weight and reduction in towing weight does not apply to this vehicle. It applies to the old Pajero only. I am also trying to decide between the Fortuner(ugly seats and inside) and the Pajero Sport(with many extras for less$)
cheers
Steve
Nah, those dash estimates are nigh on useless compared to actual.
I filled the tank and test drove it for over 300km and then refilled it and did the math. Then I did another 250km around town and refilled it and did the math.
Everyone has to be happy with "their" car for what "they" need it for. My assessments and requirements could be totally different to yours. If you like it, that is what matters, not what I think.
I really liked the Pajero Sport looks and interior and tech much better than the Fortuner, except the Fortuners handling for off road and towing was far superior, (in my opinion). Yes, I paid 7 grand more for a Fortuna Crusade that looks rather like a poor cousin next to a Pajero Sport Exceed. H3ll of a lot of car from Mitsi for $53 grand, but I had specific needs wants and expectations and after testing the Toyota was simply better for me.
After all, if you didn't need to go off-road and didn't need to tow a van, would you be buying a vehicle like this?
Probably not, so why just do the old around the block and 2 minute freeway run. All I can say is try some driving on less than perfect roads, some bumps and chicanes, and require a tow test.
Call your local Mitsubishi and Toyota dealers and explain that you are a serious buyer and want to do both a tow test comparison and off-road test.
Have them bring the test vehicle to your house and hook up the van, and, if off-road ability is important, find some local fire trails and go bush too.
Oh, one more thing, I had two deal-breaker accessory requirements for outback and off-road. A bullbar and a winch. The Pajero Sport Exceed cannot have either due to the forward low-speed crash mitigation system.
. and there is no way the dealership i work for is going to lend a car to do 600ks and go off road .
-- Edited by davey on Tuesday 24th of May 2016 09:57:28 AM
I was looking around in April when a number of 4wd salesman told me that there was not a bullbar for their vehicle. One was the Pajero sports, from memory. Otherwise I may have got one because they had a deal going.
Instead I am getting a Fortuner next week. I won't make any great claims other than I had lined up a top model Traiblazer but got offered a deal on the Toyota Crusade. I have to remove the rear seats and back seats to make it work though.
Have yet to get a van. Am still trying to boil down my minimum requirement. Am leaning towards a used lightweight Jayco Outback with A/C, ensuite and extra water tank.
My first memory of camping was 1954 at Patonga NSW and went camping most years after that. Took a Subaru up to the Jardine in 1980 and went across the gulf to Borooloola NT. Met a guy from Newcastle (I was the first person he had seen for 2 days) who was hitting the bulldust at high speed because he was told to do this in Darwin. So his wife was vomiting and he had destroyed his car's suspension.
I was happy that I had been told to slow down and skirt around the bulldust. Maybe I was lucky.
Davey,
I am interested in your real life experience with the PS, I am thinking of getting one to tow a 2.5t caravan. Given your experience how do you think it will handle it?
Rgds
Jack
Dont expect an answer, and based on what he wrote, and the fact he worked for a dealership (was it Mitsubishi?), I doubt he was disappointed with his vehicle.
Hi Jack....this thread is over 4 years old! However,the Pajero Sport is well capable of safely towing a 2500kg ATM van,but I believe that it would be unwise to attempt to tow much more.At present,I don't have my figures on me to suggest what to watch for,but they seem to be a great little bus, although not for me! Feel free to ask any questions if you wish.Cheers
P.S OK...weak point is that the rear axle is rated at only 1600kg,so you will have to be very careful with loading,as 250kg towball,or 10%,will put over 350kg onto that rear axle.GVM is only 2710kg,so a 2700kg van would be around top weight if safety is on any concern.Cheers
-- Edited by yobarr on Friday 8th of January 2021 02:55:44 PM
I bought a Pajero Sport Exceed in 2016 to tow 2700kg, I reported on this forum a number of times on how it performed - without searching the archives for my previous posts here is a summary. Very comfortable, without a load it had a very good fuel economy and was a great car to drive around town. I used a HR WDH and needed to install rear air bags (lightly inflated) to remove excessive bouncing, I never filled the water tanks as I was operating too close to its maximum weight limit. I found when towing if you drove it in manual and proactively used your paddle shifts the 8 speed transmission performed pretty well. A big negative was that the smaller 2.4ltr motor had to work pretty hard on climbs, under heavy acceleration, headwinds or from standing starts, the fuel consumption ranged between 16 and 18ltrs/100kms so with the standard small fuel tank its range was pretty limited between fills. I reluctantly sold it with only 14K on the clock and bought something that was a little more suitable for towing our size van. IMHO if I had been towing something that weighed maybe 500kg less it would have been a very capable tow vehicle..
I,m not trying to influence your decision one way or the other I,m just giving you my own real life experience owning that vehicle..
BB
-- Edited by The Belmont Bear on Friday 8th of January 2021 08:21:16 PM