Does Anyone Here Own The 2.5L 2Wd Pajero Sport?

[thaicruze]

I was wondering if it felt underpowered?

[eaustev]

I have one and find the power more than adequate. It is no racing car but I find it has plenty of power for all driving and adequate for overtaking on the highway.

The torque curve is very flat (probably because it is limited to suit the gearbox) so you have near enough to maximum torque anywhere from 1,500 rpm to 3,500 rpm so you always have some shove to call on.

There are plenty of guys out there that have chipped the engine for more power but I don't find it necessary.

[John 1]

I have one and find the power more than adequate. It is no racing car but I find it has plenty of power for all driving and adequate for overtaking on the highway.

The torque curve is very flat (probably because it is limited to suit the gearbox) so you have near enough to maximum torque anywhere from 1,500 rpm to 3,500 rpm so you always have some shove to call on.

There are plenty of guys out there that have chipped the engine for more power but I don't find it necessary.

The OP is only trolling he has no interest's in anything other than a cruse. Look at all his other post's.

[kartman]

I have one and find the power more than adequate. It is no racing car but I find it has plenty of power for all driving and adequate for overtaking on the highway.

The torque curve is very flat (probably because it is limited to suit the gearbox) so you have near enough to maximum torque anywhere from 1,500 rpm to 3,500 rpm so you always have some shove to call on.

There are plenty of guys out there that have chipped the engine for more power but I don't find it necessary.

The OP is only trolling he has no interest's in anything other than a cruse. Look at all his other post's.

Post of the day

[transam]

I have one and find the power more than adequate. It is no racing car but I find it has plenty of power for all driving and adequate for overtaking on the highway.

The torque curve is very flat (probably because it is limited to suit the gearbox) so you have near enough to maximum torque anywhere from 1,500 rpm to 3,500 rpm so you always have some shove to call on.

There are plenty of guys out there that have chipped the engine for more power but I don't find it necessary.

The OP is only trolling he has no interest's in anything other than a cruse. Look at all his other post's.

Perhaps not , Perhaps he now thinks the best car on the plant, his Thaicuze, is not what he professed eh.

[Jitar]

Thaicruze, I have a 4WD PJS with the 2.5L VGT engine and it is not underpowered. I believe the 2WD is slightly better than the 4WD but the difference should only be small.

As Eaustev said above, most of the time you drive with the engine at its torque peak. So 178hp does not sound much for a 2 tonne vehicle but actual acceleration is a lot better than the power to weight ratio suggests. Drive a petrol and diesel version of a Fortuner or Captiva and you see what I mean.

The PJS works best for country roads and highway cruising. Overtaking and pulling up hills is good, no dragster but competitive with other heavy SUVs like diesel Fortuners etc.

If you look at older PJS, the pre 2011 2.5L engines were less powerful (~140hp) but could be chipped to similar or higher level to the VGT versions (178hp).

The only problem with the 2.5L PJS is occasional turbo lag which can be annoying when trying to do a quick lane change in city traffic or get out of an intersection quickly. The Auto is programed to prevent left foot braking so you cannot cheat by loading up the torque converter. Can be a bit noisy as well especially if you are used to a petrol engine.

Edited September 9, 2012 by Jitar

[anon210]

I was wondering if it felt underpowered?

Thaicruze, first would like to know the purpose of your question.

I have a PJS 2wd. No feeling it underpowered. It cruises fine once it gets to speed and climbs steep hills with ease (not getting over 2000 rpm).

The annoying thing is the turbo lag as everyone else.

Sent from my GT-N7000 using Thaivisa Connect App

[thailoht]

Thaicruze, I have a 4WD PJS with the 2.5L VGT engine and it is not underpowered. I believe the 2WD is slightly better than the 4WD but the difference should only be small.

As Eaustev said above, most of the time you drive with the engine at its torque peak. So 178hp does not sound much for a 2 tonne vehicle but actual acceleration is a lot better than the power to weight ratio suggests. Drive a petrol and diesel version of a Fortuner or Captiva and you see what I mean.

The PJS works best for country roads and highway cruising. Overtaking and pulling up hills is good, no dragster but competitive with other heavy SUVs like diesel Fortuners etc.

If you look at older PJS, the pre 2011 2.5L engines were less powerful (~140hp) but could be chipped to similar or higher level to the VGT versions (178hp).

The only problem with the 2.5L PJS is occasional turbo lag which can be annoying when trying to do a quick lane change in city traffic or get out of an intersection quickly. The Auto is programed to prevent left foot braking so you cannot cheat by loading up the torque converter. Can be a bit noisy as well especially if you are used to a petrol engine.

Just to be sure of the meanings:

Is 'turbo lag' the same thing as, "hitting (reaching) a 'flat spot'", when accelerating in petrol powered vehicles?

Also ....

Can this be broken down and explained on a more basic level? .... most of the time you drive with the engine at its torque peak.

[thaicruze]

We may want to go bigger in the future so I was wondering if that engine was enough to move that massive truck. They also have a 3.0L v6 so maybe that can move it better? If the 2.5 diesel is good enough then 1.2 million is a good price.

I'm used to V6 3.0L 220HP on family sedans in the US. So just curious.

I sat in a Pajero Sport and my wife and I really liked it. Maybe I'll take it for a test drive someday.

I heard from an owner the ride is much better compared to a Fortuner. he said the Fortuner is more like a pick up and the Pajero more like a car.

If we want to go bigger, now that I have a Cruze, MAYBE if I get close to 550,000-600,000 for it that can put the Pajero sport within my monthly payment budget. That's why I'm asking.

Edited September 9, 2012 by thaicruze

[funcat]

...where is that 'ignore' button...?!!

[transam]

...where is that 'ignore' button...?!!

, must agree, but l do wonder why the OP is not looking at Chevy stuff.

[Jitar]

Thaicruze, I have a 4WD PJS with the 2.5L VGT engine and it is not underpowered. I believe the 2WD is slightly better than the 4WD but the difference should only be small.

As Eaustev said above, most of the time you drive with the engine at its torque peak. So 178hp does not sound much for a 2 tonne vehicle but actual acceleration is a lot better than the power to weight ratio suggests. Drive a petrol and diesel version of a Fortuner or Captiva and you see what I mean.

The PJS works best for country roads and highway cruising. Overtaking and pulling up hills is good, no dragster but competitive with other heavy SUVs like diesel Fortuners etc.

If you look at older PJS, the pre 2011 2.5L engines were less powerful (~140hp) but could be chipped to similar or higher level to the VGT versions (178hp).

The only problem with the 2.5L PJS is occasional turbo lag which can be annoying when trying to do a quick lane change in city traffic or get out of an intersection quickly. The Auto is programed to prevent left foot braking so you cannot cheat by loading up the torque converter. Can be a bit noisy as well especially if you are used to a petrol engine.

Just to be sure of the meanings:

Is 'turbo lag' the same thing as, "hitting (reaching) a 'flat spot'", when accelerating in petrol powered vehicles?

Also ....

Can this be broken down and explained on a more basic level? .... most of the time you drive with the engine at its torque peak.

Turbo lag is different to a flat spot. Turbo lag is the delay between pressing the accelerator and the engine responding with more torque. The delay is caused by the time taken for the turbo speed and boost to increase. Turbo lag is usually most noticeable when quickly changing from light load or trailing throttle to higher load. Small variable geometry Turbos are supposed to reduce lag but it is still noticeable in the Mitsubishi 2.5L VGT engine.

I probably should have said: most of the time you drive with the engine revs within range of max torque.

Like many common rail diesels, the PJS has a wide power band starting from low revs. The engine can produce max torque of 350Nm from 1,800 to 3,500 rpm (limited for the Auto trans). It has reasonable torque available from 1,500rpm. In normal driving with an auto the engine will be at 1,500 rpm or more apart from when the right foot of lifted. This means the driver can access up to max torque by opening the throttle (subject to a bit of lag) in most typical diving conditions.

The V6 PJS in comparison has a lower max torque (280Nm) at higher revs (4,000rpm). I have not seen a torque chart but torque falls off either side of the peak for most petrol engines. So I would expect the V6 to accelerate better if the throttle is down hard and the engine keeps plenty of revs. But when cruising along at 100 km/h at ~2,000 rpm, it would probably feel less responsive because it will be well below the revs for max torque and would need to shift down a gear or two to accelerate. The bigger petrol engine will not have turbo lag so it might be better in city driving but the fuel consumption will probably be bad.

I have not driven the V6 PJS so I'm guessing this, but I did drive a Toyota Highlander recently with 3.5L 200kW V6 and it was exactly as above. So if Thaicruze could use his Cruze around town and wants a big car for longer trips, the 2.5L Diesel PJS would be fine. I would not overlook the Fortuner and Trailblazer though. The Fortuner does ride a bit rougher but has a

smoother, quieter engine, less lag and some nicer equipment details. I don't know the Trailblazer well but we all know what the OP thinks of Chev.

[anon210]

We may want to go bigger in the future so I was wondering if that engine was enough to move that massive truck. They also have a 3.0L v6 so maybe that can move it better? If the 2.5 diesel is good enough then 1.2 million is a good price.

I'm used to V6 3.0L 220HP on family sedans in the US. So just curious.

I sat in a Pajero Sport and my wife and I really liked it. Maybe I'll take it for a test drive someday.

I heard from an owner the ride is much better compared to a Fortuner. he said the Fortuner is more like a pick up and the Pajero more like a car.

If we want to go bigger, now that I have a Cruze, MAYBE if I get close to 550,000-600,000 for it that can put the Pajero sport within my monthly payment budget. That's why I'm asking.

Well, you could not do a better choice, in terms of car. Look at the thread by MRO

The Pajero looks massive, but actually, once you get accustomed to its proportions, you realize it manoeuvers very easily... I get through the small sois that looked so daunting. Regarding the "turbo lag", it means that the burst of power happens only beyond a given threshold. Regarding acceleration, if you want to be economical on gas, it is preferable to depress gradually the accelerator, rather than putting the pedal down at once.

Beyond it, it is an excellent tourer and is also nimble and quick in city (although not the most recommended car for this use). Visibility is excellent, and the motor is excellent to carry people and luggage around (a real workhorse).

Consumption varies according to driving style (and in general some open road driving increases sensibly the mileage).

Furthermore, it will stay an excellent car as long as you do not ask a SUV to drive itself as a formula 1. If you manage your expectations accordingly, then I believe you will be very happy with it.

Please be aware however that by 2015, it will probably cost more as the new Pajero Sport will be out. Different car, so many of your questions should be saved for then. Not sure your resale plans with Chevy will work out as planned... Especially as you should expect a facelift or a minor modification to take place (which will further drive down value, all other things being equal).

[kartman]

We may want to go bigger in the future so I was wondering if that engine was enough to move that massive truck. They also have a 3.0L v6 so maybe that can move it better? If the 2.5 diesel is good enough then 1.2 million is a good price.

I'm used to V6 3.0L 220HP on family sedans in the US. So just curious.

I sat in a Pajero Sport and my wife and I really liked it. Maybe I'll take it for a test drive someday.

I heard from an owner the ride is much better compared to a Fortuner. he said the Fortuner is more like a pick up and the Pajero more like a car.

If we want to go bigger, now that I have a Cruze, MAYBE if I get close to 550,000-600,000 for it that can put the Pajero sport within my monthly payment budget. That's why I'm asking.

Now can we all guess what it will be worth in 2019 here or will you be starting another thread for that ?.

[thailoht]

Thaicruze, I have a 4WD PJS with the 2.5L VGT engine and it is not underpowered. I believe the 2WD is slightly better than the 4WD but the difference should only be small.

As Eaustev said above, most of the time you drive with the engine at its torque peak. So 178hp does not sound much for a 2 tonne vehicle but actual acceleration is a lot better than the power to weight ratio suggests. Drive a petrol and diesel version of a Fortuner or Captiva and you see what I mean.

The PJS works best for country roads and highway cruising. Overtaking and pulling up hills is good, no dragster but competitive with other heavy SUVs like diesel Fortuners etc.

If you look at older PJS, the pre 2011 2.5L engines were less powerful (~140hp) but could be chipped to similar or higher level to the VGT versions (178hp).

The only problem with the 2.5L PJS is occasional turbo lag which can be annoying when trying to do a quick lane change in city traffic or get out of an intersection quickly. The Auto is programed to prevent left foot braking so you cannot cheat by loading up the torque converter. Can be a bit noisy as well especially if you are used to a petrol engine.

Just to be sure of the meanings:

Is 'turbo lag' the same thing as, "hitting (reaching) a 'flat spot'", when accelerating in petrol powered vehicles?

Also ....

Can this be broken down and explained on a more basic level? .... most of the time you drive with the engine at its torque peak.

Turbo lag is different to a flat spot. Turbo lag is the delay between pressing the accelerator and the engine responding with more torque. The delay is caused by the time taken for the turbo speed and boost to increase. Turbo lag is usually most noticeable when quickly changing from light load or trailing throttle to higher load. Small variable geometry Turbos are supposed to reduce lag but it is still noticeable in the Mitsubishi 2.5L VGT engine.

I probably should have said: most of the time you drive with the engine revs within range of max torque.

Like many common rail diesels, the PJS has a wide power band starting from low revs. The engine can produce max torque of 350Nm from 1,800 to 3,500 rpm (limited for the Auto trans). It has reasonable torque available from 1,500rpm. In normal driving with an auto the engine will be at 1,500 rpm or more apart from when the right foot of lifted. This means the driver can access up to max torque by opening the throttle (subject to a bit of lag) in most typical diving conditions.

The V6 PJS in comparison has a lower max torque (280Nm) at higher revs (4,000rpm). I have not seen a torque chart but torque falls off either side of the peak for most petrol engines. So I would expect the V6 to accelerate better if the throttle is down hard and the engine keeps plenty of revs. But when cruising along at 100 km/h at ~2,000 rpm, it would probably feel less responsive because it will be well below the revs for max torque and would need to shift down a gear or two to accelerate. The bigger petrol engine will not have turbo lag so it might be better in city driving but the fuel consumption will probably be bad.

I have not driven the V6 PJS so I'm guessing this, but I did drive a Toyota Highlander recently with 3.5L 200kW V6 and it was exactly as above. So if Thaicruze could use his Cruze around town and wants a big car for longer trips, the 2.5L Diesel PJS would be fine. I would not overlook the Fortuner and Trailblazer though. The Fortuner does ride a bit rougher but has a

smoother, quieter engine, less lag and some nicer equipment details. I don't know the Trailblazer well but we all know what the OP thinks of Chev.

Got it! .... Thanks for that!!

[inapeartree]

A friend I was chatting online with recently said he thinks he saw a commercial for a V6 Pajero Sport, if so then that could tempt me as none of the other manufacturers offer similar so an import would be the only option which obviously means lots of tax! Can anyone confirm this?

[anon210]

A friend I was chatting online with recently said he thinks he saw a commercial for a V6 Pajero Sport, if so then that could tempt me as none of the other manufacturers offer similar so an import would be the only option which obviously means lots of tax! Can anyone confirm this?

There is indeed a Pajero Sport V6 available in Thailand.

Sent from my GT-N7000 using Thaivisa Connect App

[thaicruze]

A friend I was chatting online with recently said he thinks he saw a commercial for a V6 Pajero Sport, if so then that could tempt me as none of the other manufacturers offer similar so an import would be the only option which obviously means lots of tax! Can anyone confirm this?

The Mitsubishi thailand website can confirm it. Just have a look in there.

[hansje1980]

Testdriven my pjs 2wd 2.5L 2011 at racing circuit behind seacon in bkk.

After driving for an hour I had to replace my breaks which was not cheap, but it sure was a fun thing to do :-)

Vid @