Hi, my little old thirsty v6 Suzi finally rusted to the point of no WOF anymore.
im looking at a SWB Pajero V6 manual with 180k on clock.
Ive never owned a Misti but i did tow a couple out of the sand tho !
Hints or things to be aware of would be appreciated.
Thanks
andy61,
Jan 14, 10:05pm
180kms is when Mitsi V6s start blowing blue smoke and drinking heaps of oil and if you thort the Suzuki drank plenty of petrol the Mitsi will drink even more petrol. Better cars out there.
inkapuka,
Jan 14, 10:45pm
Avoid gdi they full of problems try a parado or terrano/regulus
intrade,
Jan 14, 10:51pm
96 mitsi 4x4 you have got to be kidding , these are worth scrap metal money as thats what they are .
mrfxit,
Jan 15, 12:02am
ANY petrol 4x4 will be thirsty & being a V6 will just make it worse, but you already know that from the Suzuki.
That generation of Mitsi v6 were very reliable apart from valve stem seals leaking causing them to smoke from around the 160K mark if badly neglected to about 250K if treated ok. Unless it is the GDI which suffered badly from clogged inlet manifolds due to the EGR systems they used plus our lower grade of fuel in NZ. Both Toyota & Mitsi both suffer the same fate as many other v6 4x4's with cracked heads from neglected cooling systems.
caleb.b,
Jan 15, 2:11am
I have a SWB 91 3.0 v6 pajero. Normal v6, not GDI and I love it. mine was just a cheap truck for towing the odd trailer and doing a bit of 4wding, Its great at both. can hardly feel a trailer on the back and good amount of grunt plus its surprising how hard it is to get stuck if you are paying attention when off roading, keeps up with all my buddies. I have done a couple of things though and the winch is a good "get out of jail free card". Mine has done 220ks and doesnt blow blue smoke. if I leave it idling for 20 mins and then jump it in and drive off it will blow blue smoke for about 2 secs but then comes right. It is very thirsty on fuel, and this is coming from someone who drives a 3.0R legacy as an everyday car so you better hope fuel stays down. If its a cheap hack then go for it but I wouldn't drive mine everyday just because of fuel usage
bwg11,
Jan 15, 2:38am
Nothing wrong with the pre-GDI Mitsi V6's. The SWB is not a bad chassis either. Don't listen to the Google-knocker's who will find faults with everything. Talk to owners like caleb.b.
phillip.weston,
Jan 15, 6:14am
a 96 might be the 3.5 DOHC engine which is the best of the bunch - more power and torque (delivered lower in the RPM range too) than a 3.8 Commodore.
The 3.0 is a basic SOHC 12V engine and a little underpowered for its capacity. The 3.5 DOHC doesn't consume much more fuel than the 3.0 SOHC.
I would agree at 180-200k kms is when they start to get smokey but at that age, it's either been fixed or it hasn't yet started smoking.
chutneyman,
Jan 15, 5:29pm
Thanks. Im not too concerned re the fuel consumption, as it will be my fishing wagon. Thats why Im only spending up too $5k
As long as I can safely get up and down the coast to go Surfcasting and Kite fishing Im a happy man.
I know this time to get it rust protected BEFORE I start my trips to the beach !
chutneyman,
Jan 15, 5:46pm
Heres the vehicle 832843462
monaro17,
Jan 15, 5:57pm
Now that's splitting hairs lol . -3.5 Pajero 153kw @ 5000rpm and 300Nm @ 3000rpm -3.8 Commodore (pre ecotec) 147kw @ 5200rpm and 304Nm @ 3200rpm -3.8 Commodore (ecotec) 152kw @ 5200rpm and 305Nm @3200rpm
7of9,
Jan 15, 6:58pm
Theres far more to it then just factory figures. Whats more important is HOW that power is delivered & at what revs plus the overall body weight.
Our 2000 2.5ltr v6 Galant is far more nimble/ faster response with gears/ steering & braking overall, then my son's 2003 3,8 v6 commodore AND the Galant is far more economical.
This is not a "sensation" thing, the Galant is simply far easier to drive then the bigger Commodore
elect70,
Jan 15, 7:06pm
Gonna sell the suzi , im after a replacement for my old suzi sj413 beach wagon as its just about fallen apart ?
monaro17,
Jan 15, 7:30pm
Without straying tooooo far away from the thread I find myself having to respond to this.
It is very common knowledge (well as far as I'm aware) that the old Buick derived 3.8V6 used in Commodores of years gone by is one of the most god damn lazy and easy engines around. Sure it is no rocket but it produces a very flat torque curve from near idle. It gets quite rough up the top of the rev range but nobody cared because it rarely needed to be revved above 3000rpm. Now I have never driven a Galant V6 but I have been a passenger in one and I can remember it being comparatively 'revvy' (which is understandable). Of course it will be more nimble- it is a far smaller car that weighs a lot less. As for being easier to drive, that is a personal choice, the old 3.8 can be driven all day without going over 2000rpm.
There endith the lesson. :)
phillip.weston,
Jan 16, 7:51am
yes the smaller capacity Mitsu V6s are revvy, and they made them as small as 1600cc! I've had the 1.6, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0 and 3.5 in multiple vehicles over the years and the larger 3.0 and 3.5 from the Cyclone V6 family have a far broader torque curve than the smaller 1.6-2.5 engines.
phillip.weston,
Jan 16, 8:01am
Unsure where you are getting your figures from but the 3.5 DOHC Pajero has 169kW and 324Nm. Even the SOHC 3.5 makes 160-180kW and 306-333Nm depending what it's in. Then there's the MIVEC 3.5 which is 206kW and 348Nm - even with the VTEC like cam switch the peak power isn't shifted too much higher to 6500rpms while peak torque remains at 3000rpms. Keep in mind it spins right up to 7500rpms.
franc123,
Jan 16, 1:53pm
Who cares, Falcon 4.0 trumps all of them anyway as a lazy torque delivery engine, and that's before we get into DOHC and/or turbo versions, and will last twice as long as either of those engines too. NOW we endeth the lesson lol.
monaro17,
Jan 16, 4:10pm
the figures I stated were for a 1996 model like mentioned in the post.You are quoting figures for the much later early to mid 2000 models
monaro17,
Jan 16, 4:12pm
lol well actually at home we have a bf2 falcon and a vx2 commodore. And the old commy is far lazier and needs less revs than the Ford does
gmphil,
Jan 18, 8:34pm
my mate off 30 years all he ever drove falcons has shed full .me holdens . we argue bout all sort should see us on Bathurst day lol one thing he will admit to it will take him $25 buks gas to go where it only takes me $20
Since the public registrations are closed, you must have an invite from a current member to be able to register and post in this thread.
Have an account? Login here.