MN Drivers f e e d b a c k !

[quigs]

Mines Red and has the same issue!!

Quigs

[Silver Streak]

I have just been checking out the specs of the Triton Dual-Cab and the Toyota SR5 Dual-Cab, just for comparison, and the one spec that glaringly stands out is the ground clearance of the 2 vehicles. The Triton is quoted as 205mm, but the Toyota is 292mm!!! That's a huge difference and an advantage when 4WD'ing. Surely they must be measuring in a different place?? I think the Mitsy is measured from the lowest part of the rear diff, isn't it??
Please, can anybody enlighten me. I've done a few checks on the web and only come up with the 292mm+ dimension.

Cheers,

Silver Streak.

[Gfoss83]

Hey silver streak.

I too noticed that when i was comparing the two and i was pretty surprised by the difference. The hilux certainly doesnt seem that much higher when you look at them. I checked the navara aswell and its ground clearance said 217mm which isnt much more but still a long way off what toyota claim.

[Dylan 191]

I have just been checking out the specs of the Triton Dual-Cab and the Toyota SR5 Dual-Cab, just for comparison, and the one spec that glaringly stands out is the ground clearance of the 2 vehicles. The Triton is quoted as 205mm, but the Toyota is 292mm!!! That's a huge difference and an advantage when 4WD'ing. Surely they must be measuring in a different place?? I think the Mitsy is measured from the lowest part of the rear diff, isn't it??
Please, can anybody enlighten me. I've done a few checks on the web and only come up with the 292mm+ dimension.

Cheers,

Silver Streak.

The triton has much bigger wheel well,s though so can fit larger tyres without scrubbing

[sam]

Hey silver streak.

I too noticed that when i was comparing the two and i was pretty surprised by the difference. The hilux certainly doesnt seem that much higher when you look at them. I checked the navara aswell and its ground clearance said 217mm which isnt much more but still a long way off what toyota claim.

Toyota claim the Hi Lux is UNBREAKABLE as well so don't believe everything they say
Oh and there's NO way the Lux has that much clearance so maybe they're measuring it at the highest point or their website is wrong.

[quigs]

Hi Guys,

I just had the 1500k service done.

I did not ask what work was completed and maybe its just a coincidence and the fact that I am learning to drive it better but the sluggish take off seems to be sorted for me.

Twice since The service I have needed to get quickly across an intersection, granted I probably gave it a few more revs before droping the clutch, but any way she flew across the intersection both times!!

No Problems at all.

I will do some more controlled testing this weekend and see what the story is.

If they have made some adjustment thats great, if not it does seem that the problem is not all that huge once you figure it out. I have no fear of being able to hit a fast take off when necessary, heading up the high country for the weekend tonight so will try to give some performance on its offroad ability next week.

Quigs

[Silver Streak]

I'll be watching your next post with interest.

Silver Streak.

[revhead]

yep, loading it up a bit before taking off works good !!!

also noticed that having it in (AWD) actually increases its take off or so it would appear.

hooked up my boat (7 metre fibreglass) 3.2 tonne gross to see how it would tow, hardly felt it, 120 km/hour with a reading of 11l/100 (how accurate that is, is anyones guess).

Gave it a bloody good 4wd run around our property after irrigating our plant sugar cane & for cheese cutter road tyres it handled itself quite well, manged to bog its arse in 2wd, slid it into (AWD) and remained bogged but certainly increased traction, slid it to 4wd and impressivley pulled itself out, first 4wd with remote hubs, so will know next time to engage 20metres before sinkhole

I filled it up as soon as i drove it from dealers, after running it till the fuel light was on, i filled it chocka's again and worked out that it chewed 65 litres for 650 k's, so 10l/100 seems the go, obviously mine having 700k's on the clock has some running in to be done, but can only get better from here on in. also noting that the fuel light means you have about 10litres left when it lights up.

Overall, i'd rate it as the best utility vehicle i've driven. Would buy another one tomorrow if i had to.

[DECO5]

Hi Revhead

We just had one of our ML's written off thismorning and need to repalce it ASAP. We previously had the petrol v6 which was great and tow our trailer and gear. How did the MN tow your boat from a stand start and up hills???

cheers
Damon

[revhead]

Hi Revhead

We just had one of our ML's written off thismorning and need to repalce it ASAP. We previously had the petrol v6 which was great and tow our trailer and gear. How did the MN tow your boat from a stand start and up hills???

cheers
Damon

Erm, standstill uphill, L4wd only, just not enough down low, but was talking to my local service and there sure that the new fix actually illiminates this problem to the most degree.

I think naturally a turbo diesal is never going to have the low end of a larger non turbo engine.
Its either somthing you accept or you buy an F-Truck.

Towed our water tank the other for watering our cattle & its 8 tonnes whislt full, and i had to tow it abouot 15 kms along a dirt road and it handled it very well, there was no problems there apart from having to take things easier to not tear the clutch to bits.

Cheers

Mick

[tryhard]

Hi Guys,

I just had the 1500k service done.
...Twice since The service I have needed to get quickly across an intersection, granted I probably gave it a few more revs before droping the clutch, but any way she flew across the intersection both times!!

No Problems at all.

I will do some more controlled testing this weekend and see what the story is.

If they have made some adjustment thats great...

They fixed mine at 1,500 km too mate - the details of what they did are here :

viewtopic.php?f=18&t=4169

[Tony]

A bit on mine. I have a silver CLX-R manual.
The what seems to be horrible turbo lag is infact ECU fueling related for sure. I was very concerned about changing my Tyres to 32" but has had no effect on a standing start The ECU feels to me it self learns. I haven't tried this but if you had a constant load it will compensate. The engine would have enough torque to either cook the clutch or lay rubber if the ecu would let it do so. Once on song it hangs on in the hill unbelievably
As others I've spoken to the dealer to see if we can improve this part. If you want to get away quick you have to run it up to 3000RPM and dump it Can't be good for the running gear
I'm finding the front suspension is way out of tune for the weight of the 32" tyres and wallows on bad roads at high speed. Not to bad on gravel if driven sensibly and does under steer a little so very stable in the sharp bends.
I'm not convinced the multimedia system was worth it as yet The Tuner is useless out here for a start. More on that latter
The tray is bloody huge A real problem for parking and off road with all that overhang.
The front seats are a little flat but the driver side is much better with the height adjustment.
The back passenger windows are very annoying if opened over 80KMH. Hurts your ears,hope the air con never stuffs up

Over all I happy with mine so far although will have to spend a few K to make if perfect
Cheers Tony

[quigs]

hi all been busy and not posted for a while, thought i would update re my MN's performance.
I have done two trips recently, one up to the Howqua river Fly fishing, a round trip of around 500 k.
The next a 1700 k trip through Kosciusko National Park. Around 1700km round trip. Lots of off road, gravel, corrugation and river crossings, no really serious off road stuff as many of you guys might be into.

A few observations, The take off lag is still a shit!
The seats and Cab are really comfortable on a long trip.
Handles rough gravel roads really well at a handy speed.
The Mitsubushi tow bar its crap as it hangs down far to low. Even though I got it thrown in for free I wish I had not and got something lower profile. It will get hung up in only moderate conditions I think.
Fuel economy is consistently 9.0 l /100, Up hill down dale and around town, I wasnt using the in dash display to calculate this.
I put the cooper at's on and am very glad I did.

The thule roofracks are too noisy, when you take them of fuel economy drops by 1.5 l per hundred.


I have noticed something of a concern recently, when cold and warming uo If i increase the revs to about 1200 the motor really surges, is this a problem or a turbo thing? once warm it runs perfectly.

Any way its getting its 7500 service next week and then I am off to Kangaroo island will let you know what the service costs

cheers

Quigs

[sierra]

Any way its getting its 7500 service next week and then I am off to Kangaroo island will let you know what the service costs
cheersQuigs

Why the 7500km service?
Surely it's 15000km or 1 year whatever comes first and the 7500km service is the optional one they try to talk you into for their benefit because the only benefit you get is the engine oil changed, the rest is looking at your shiny new Triton at $110 per hour. Also they will almost certainly put in Castrol Magnacrap.
Why not buy some decent oil for them to put in and tell them to change the oil and filter but leave the rest until it's due under warranty at 15000km?
They can fix the surging for free at the same time they change the oil.

[Tony]

Just back after our second trip to Sydney. Did a fuel usage test this time. Combined City highway was 11.6 ltrs/ 100 and Highway was 10 ltrs/ 100. I'm running 32" tyres.

The suspension is bloody awful at speed Almost dangerous on a rough road. I'm going to have to upgrade mine for this type of use and real soon.
The display on the MMCS is stuffing up already as well Not happy with the MMCS at all. Its junk NOT WORTH THE COIN! Dare say I'll get sick of it and toss it for something better soon Pain in the arse to use at times + apparently cant do reverse camera or trip computer etc. The Sat Nav is average. The radio is useless in our area. Other wise works fine

The manual 2.5HP does OK at highway speeds but I would recommend an auto for heavy city driving to over come its lack of low end pick up, hence a lot of cog swapping. My old 4D56T MJ was more drivable in the city in this part as had a wider torque curve although was lower geared etc.

Tony.

[Steane]

Being an ML 3.2 owner it was interesting to take an MN GLX-R Auto away for a couple of days after Christmas. We headed to Dargo and then Grant to take in some steep trails.

MN is more 'car like' on the bitumen than the ML but less impressive on gravel or rough roads. Not the same degree of initial compliance that the ML had.

Longer tray does catch itself, or at least the towbar, more often than the ML, but it didn't stop us and there is heaps more room in the tray. Our group were split on the looks, 3 preferring the ML and two quite taken with the MN.

The MN's steering wheel oddly feels less impressive than the MLs. It's smaller and less chunky, and more at home in a Lancer (seems to be where it came from), but the steering wheel mounted controls (bluetooth in particular) are an improvement.

Seats were a little more comfortable, but not a massive improvement but the centre console armrest was welcomed!

The 2.5 auto was not a nice thing to drive once it was under load (ie up in the hills). It was always looking to drop down a gear (just like the highly annoying habit the Navara D40 2.5 auto has) but had this horrible pause before doing so that throws your driving rythm out on winding roads. Once in low range it was fine and performed well. Compared to the relaxed loping of the ML 3.2 auto we took away earlier in 2009, the MN was only really in its comfort zone on the highway or around town.

It's certainly a quieter engine though and was better on fuel from what I could tell, although the official figures aren't in yet.

Off-road, suspension harshness aside, it did a great job and made it down the very steep South Bassalt Tk without incident. The new metallic brown colour looks awesome as well...I never thought I'd say that about a brown car.

One of our crew has driven the MN manual 2.5HP and he reckons it is a great drive. In auto form, the consensus was that the ML is the better drive.

To me it seems that Mitsubishi has set out to further improve the on-road drivability of the Triton with the MN, and they've achieved that for sure with regard to handling and NVH.

I haven't driven an MN manual yet, hopefully later this year, but I reckon it will be the one to get, if you don't mind some old fashioned gear changing.

[myglxr]

My MN has just clocked up 1800 klms and now has a very loud and very annoying squeak in the rear suspension. Went in for free 1500klm service yesterday and the service manager picked it up as soon as he got in to move it into the workshop. He was aware of the ML developing a squeak at about 20-30K Klm but nothing yet on the MN. He said that he will report it to MMA and get back to me ASAP with a fix.

Has anyone else with an MN got the same problem yet?





Mark.

[dozerguts]

yeah mines done about the same k,s as yours mate and also has a bit of a squeak in the back shackle, spring bushes, guess there rubber, might swap them out for some nylon ones when I change the shocks as there the only thing letting the car down for me.

[ag9111]

Same K's same squeak. will talk to mitsubishi spares to see if the ML and MN springs are the same part No.

[Tony]

The suspension is rubbish in these things My mj never had a drama for over 350,000kms and did handle very well. My MN also has the squeak and bump steers worse than an old land rover My missus doesn't like it to drive after the MJ as bump steers so bad on choppy roads

[dozerguts]

yeah, i dont mind the spring rates, ie nice and soft i just think that the shocks are crap especially with the 32s on. cant provide enough damping or rebound.

[ag9111]

yeah, i dont mind the spring rates, ie nice and soft i just think that the shocks are crap especially with the 32s on. cant provide enough damping or rebound.

Spot on, rears only. Stuts are crap though

[Tony]

Think my main trouble is unsprung weight due to the 10 ply 32" tyres. More damping is required to control it. Its not to bad up to 80 kmh. OK at 100 but anything over is dangerous. We are talking rough choppy roads. Rides and handles fine on good going.

[ag9111]

Think my main trouble is unsprung weight due to the 10 ply 32" tyres. More damping is required to control it. Its not to bad up to 80 kmh. OK at 100 but anything over is dangerous. We are talking rough choppy roads. Rides and handles fine on good going.

As I said all about control. Thought about my offer?

[Tony]

Think my main trouble is unsprung weight due to the 10 ply 32" tyres. More damping is required to control it. Its not to bad up to 80 kmh. OK at 100 but anything over is dangerous. We are talking rough choppy roads. Rides and handles fine on good going.

As I said all about control. Thought about my offer?

PM sent.