Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Mitsubishi Pajero Junior - 600cc and 1.1 petrol

Options
  • 11-08-2009 12:16am
    #1
    Loobz
    Registered Users Posts: 1,700 ✭✭✭


    Hi all, first time posting in 4x4.

    Basically can anyone share their experience with this jeep? Was looking at the 90's models. Whats the fuel consumption like? Are the 0.6 cc and 1.1 petrol models both 4wd? Seems like little power in a 4wd? I was looking to get an economical little 'runabout' to have along with the family car lets say. All info welcome.


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    dlofnep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,759 ✭✭✭✭dlofnep


    They seem to be fun, but bumpy and not good on long trips. For a runabout though, alot of people seem to like them. Was looking into getting one myself.


  • Options
    #3
    Loobz
    Registered Users Posts: 1,700 ✭✭✭Loobz


    Thanks Dlofnep, would not plan on doing serious driving in it, just local trips. Any idea on fuel consumption/reliability? There are a good few available with low mileage for their age.


  • Options
    #4
    condra
    Registered Users Posts: 3,849 ✭✭✭condra


    I test drove a 96 Pajero Junior 1.1 a couple of days ago and it struggled to accelerate with 2 passengers.


  • Options
    #5
    Loobz
    Registered Users Posts: 1,700 ✭✭✭Loobz


    womoma wrote: »
    I test drove a 96 Pajero Junior 1.1 a couple of days ago and it struggled to accelerate with 2 passengers.

    How do you mean, just wasnt so quick to take off? It is just 1.1 petrol afer all. Any other feedback? Thanks


  • Options
    #6
    DanFindy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 244 ✭✭DanFindy


    In my opinion they are a silly little thing, if u need a 4 wheel drive buy a proper pajero or a landcruiser or an L200 or something, if u dont need a 4wd they are incredibly pointless, small, bouncy, not that easy on fuel really and there are more things to go wrong in a 4wd set up even if your not using it ie more bushings and links......If u want a 'runabout' but a fiesta or micra or something more economical and less hassle and probably cheaper too....


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    condra
    Registered Users Posts: 3,849 ✭✭✭condra


    Loobz wrote: »
    How do you mean, just wasnt so quick to take off? It is just 1.1 petrol afer all. Any other feedback? Thanks

    I always thought they looked cool and fun. They still look cool (IMO) but they aren't fun to drive by any stretch of the imagination. Slow to take off, and pretty boxy inside.


  • Options
    #8
    MrFoxman360
    Registered Users Posts: 576 ✭✭✭MrFoxman360


    I agree with the above comments so I wont re state them, :rolleyes: but I am always of the opnion that a car with a small engine is not always going to be economical. Something that is under powered, such as the pajero jnr, will make its engine work hard to achieve a reasonable level of speed and accelleration. From what I can see, in nearly every machine that has an engine, is that a bigger engine running under small load is more efficent than a small one running under big load.

    I have a LWB pajero with a 2.5L TD, which I feel is underpowered for the weight. I get in or around the same MPG as a friend of mine, who has a Lancruiser Amazon, which has a 4.2L TD :eek:

    There are more economical run abouts than the Pajero jnr,


  • Options
    #9
    thethedev
    Closed Accounts Posts: 300 ✭✭thethedev


    DanFindy wrote: »
    In my opinion they are a silly little thing, if u need a 4 wheel drive buy a proper pajero or a landcruiser or an L200 or something
    They're actually quite good offroad to be fair


  • Options
    #10
    WestWicklow1
    Registered Users Posts: 1,190 ✭✭✭WestWicklow1


    thethedev wrote: »
    They're actually quite good offroad to be fair

    Yep, agree with that. My daughter has one and got rid of it after 6 months because it was so heavy on petrol. That was her only complaint.


  • Options
    #11
    coolbeans
    Registered Users Posts: 3,036 ✭✭✭coolbeans


    I don't know much about them to be honest but usually if you consider physics (heavy for what it is thus requiring more effort to move), aerodynamics (brick like) and the size of the engine (underpowered) you'll find an answer to your questions re fuel consumption. I'd be surprised if it did any better than mid thirties MPG-wise. Just get a normal supermini unless you REALLY need the off road ability.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    Kildareeman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4 ✭Kildareeman


    Hi.I got a new junior a couple of months ago.Its the 1.1 petrol jap import.Its the limited edition "lynx edition".It looks cool I like the height for driving cheap insurance and tax.The only downer is that its a little hard on petrol but thats life.8 out of ten.
    Loobz wrote: »
    Hi all, first time posting in 4x4.

    Basically can anyone share their experience with this jeep? Was looking at the 90's models. Whats the fuel consumption like? Are the 0.6 cc and 1.1 petrol models both 4wd? Seems like little power in a 4wd? I was looking to get an economical little 'runabout' to have along with the family car lets say. All info welcome.


  • Options
    #13
    CJhaughey
    Registered Users Posts: 14,906 ✭✭✭✭CJhaughey


    The Suzuki Jimney would be a better 4x4 in that size range with a long history of offroad usage.


  • Options
    #14
    54kroc
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,376 ✭✭✭54kroc


    Loobz wrote: »
    How do you mean, just wasnt so quick to take off? It is just 1.1 petrol afer all. Any other feedback? Thanks

    I had a drive in a 1.1 for a day and to say it was a piece of shi*e is an understatement.
    It was the slowest most under powered car i've driven and as a result of having the foot down constantly to get anywhere it drank petrol.


  • Options
    #15
    mossfort
    Registered Users Posts: 609 ✭✭✭mossfort


    MrFoxman360 wrote: »
    I agree with the above comments so I wont re state them, :rolleyes: but I am always of the opnion that a car with a small engine is not always going to be economical. Something that is under powered, such as the pajero jnr, will make its engine work hard to achieve a reasonable level of speed and accelleration. From what I can see, in nearly every machine that has an engine, is that a bigger engine running under small load is more efficent than a small one running under big load.

    I have a LWB pajero with a 2.5L TD, which I feel is underpowered for the weight. I get in or around the same MPG as a friend of mine, who has a Lancruiser Amazon, which has a 4.2L TD :eek:

    There are more economical run abouts than the Pajero jnr,
    ther must be something seriously wrong with your pajero if its as thirsty as a 4.2l amazon


  • Options
    #16
    Cementmixer
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3 ✭Cementmixer


    Loobz wrote: »
    Hi all, first time posting in 4x4.

    Basically can anyone share their experience with this jeep? Was looking at the 90's models. Whats the fuel consumption like? Are the 0.6 cc and 1.1 petrol models both 4wd? Seems like little power in a 4wd? I was looking to get an economical little 'runabout' to have along with the family car lets say. All info welcome.

    great little 4x4. the wife has one. i have the 2.5 turbo diesel model.

    if its a runaround your looking for i'd recommend it


  • Options
    #17
    ltdslipdiff
    Registered Users Posts: 758 ✭✭✭ltdslipdiff


    MrFoxman360 wrote: »
    I agree with the above comments so I wont re state them, :rolleyes: but I am always of the opnion that a car with a small engine is not always going to be economical. Something that is under powered, such as the pajero jnr, will make its engine work hard to achieve a reasonable level of speed and accelleration. From what I can see, in nearly every machine that has an engine, is that a bigger engine running under small load is more efficent than a small one running under big load.

    I have a LWB pajero with a 2.5L TD, which I feel is underpowered for the weight. I get in or around the same MPG as a friend of mine, who has a Lancruiser Amazon, which has a 4.2L TD :eek:

    There are more economical run abouts than the Pajero jnr,

    Hey Mr Foxman, is the Pajero a Jap import?


  • Options
    #18
    MrFoxman360
    Registered Users Posts: 576 ✭✭✭MrFoxman360


    ltdslipdiff wrote: »
    Hey Mr Foxman, is the Pajero a Jap import?

    Yep, brought over in 2002 I think


  • Options
    #19
    ltdslipdiff
    Registered Users Posts: 758 ✭✭✭ltdslipdiff


    I was looking at buying one and had heard some horrendous stories about the Jap Imports drinking diesel ! Turns out that the Jappo ones are ran rich for the higher elevation of the mountains in Japan and can be easily re-calibrated on the injector pump apparently.... (source : pok.co.uk)


  • Options
    #20
    colm_mcm
    Registered Users Posts: 73,382 ✭✭✭✭colm_mcm


    mossfort wrote: »
    ther must be something seriously wrong with your pajero if its as thirsty as a 4.2l amazon

    Amazons aren't that hard on fuel. 25mpg on a Paj 2.5 is good going


  • Options
    #21
    MrFoxman360
    Registered Users Posts: 576 ✭✭✭MrFoxman360


    colm_mcm wrote: »
    Amazons aren't that hard on fuel. 25mpg on a Paj 2.5 is good going

    Eaxctly, like I said in my original post, fuel consumption is not all about engine size, Much more to it than that.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    colm_mcm
    Registered Users Posts: 73,382 ✭✭✭✭colm_mcm


    You're absolutely right.
    The main thing is, Pajero Jr and Pajero Mini are an absolute waste of time for 99% of the population. If you could get one for the same money of a similarly yeared Micra or Polo maybe they'd be an interesting alternative. they're like a crappier Jimny without the off road ability.


Advertisement