[RoelfleRoux]

MacJ,

"I think it's the IRS in certain situations that give greater traction"

- 4ePikanini is referring to the Independent Rear Suspension. That is the single feature that puts your Pajero separate from every other car in your company that day.

It is supposed to be a BIG NO-NO as far as all the experts are concerned because it offers less articulation than the old fashioned solid axle.

I have two things to say to this:
1) EVERY top 4x4 SUV (except Toyota Land Cruiser) now feature independent suspension - so it can't be all bad. It is obviously more safe and more comfortable
2) I absolutely believe that the IRS offers better traction under many off road conditions. The fact that the one wheel can go into a dip or over a rock without affecting that wheel's camber or any other wheel's camber either, must offer better traction.
Well, I actually have three things to say re. IRS so...
3)I am such a pro IRS chappie, that I have no option but to buy Pajero. I seriously and honestly do not trust the Grand Cherokee or the Discovery to offer the same bullet proof reliability as the Pajero and of course Toyota hasn't figured out the independent suspension trick yet.

[macjohnw]

I attended a local 4x4 day on Tuesday with about 7 other vehicles including a 3.0D Fortuner, 3.0D Hi-Lux, 2.5TD Ranger, 2.4D & 2.8TD Toyota, Mahindra, 1 x 2.8TD Pajero.

The Paj would possibly have a little better traction on loose terrain than the unladen bakkies (due to better mass distribution), but I can't really see why it would have an advantage over the Fortuner or older Pajero.

The ease with which my 3.2DiD Gen 3 went up the hills and obstacles compared to the other 4x4's, as remarked by the other drivers, were noticable. I used lot less momentum and speed to climb up steep hills with less wheel spin. I do not consider myself an experienced 4x4 driver, less than those who arranged the day in any case.

You might just be selling your skill and savvy short. After all, you had the sense to buy a Paj and a Gen 3 at that. . Seriously, though, the skill differences between drivers tend to be much greater than the mobility differences between vehicles IMHO.

The Toyotas also had aftermarket suspensions and mine is standard.

Aftermarket suspension does not always enhance the vehicle's ability to conform to undulating terrain, in fact it might actually reduce flex.

AFAIK the Gen 3 has a locker, not a limited slip diff - or am I confused, or just plain deurmekaar?

Your Gen 3 GLX has the following:
* Super Select 2, so that you can run in 4H on tar if you wish.
* Lockable planetary viscous limited slip center diff (when center diff is not locked) that distributes torque in the ratio of 67% to the rear axle and 33% to the front axle if both axles have equal grip.
* Lockable Torsen limited slip rear diff

I run on BFG AT, as did the Hi-Lux and Fortuner.

What about tyre pressures? That is another possible key ingredient.

*The 2.8 Gen 2 did not have rear diff lock and struggled up some slopes due to wheel spin. I think the Toyat drivers had the "momentum & speed" concept in mind, while I tried to take it slow to see where the Gen3's lower limit of capability is.
* I agree, experience or feel for driving plays a large determining factor. We see it everytime we fly paragliders. Some okes have the natural feel for it and others just don't.
* Yes, come to think of it. The Fortuner and Toyota had their back wheel up the highest on the one obstacle - which was good for spectator value, but they where dissapointed with the Gen 3, which bearly lifted it's back wheel.
*We all ran on 1.6bar pressure.

[macjohnw]

MacJ,

"I think it's the IRS in certain situations that give greater traction"

- 4ePikanini is referring to the Independent Rear Suspension. That is the single feature that puts your Pajero separate from every other car in your company that day.

It is supposed to be a BIG NO-NO as far as all the experts are concerned because it offers less articulation than the old fashioned solid axle.

I have two things to say to this:
1) EVERY top 4x4 SUV (except Toyota Land Cruiser) now feature independent suspension - so it can't be all bad. It is obviously more safe and more comfortable
2) I absolutely believe that the IRS offers better traction under many off road conditions. The fact that the one wheel can go into a dip or over a rock without affecting that wheel's camber or any other wheel's camber either, must offer better traction.
Well, I actually have three things to say re. IRS so...
3)I am such a pro IRS chappie, that I have no option but to buy Pajero. I seriously and honestly do not trust the Grand Cherokee or the Discovery to offer the same bullet proof reliability as the Pajero and of course Toyota hasn't figured out the independent suspension trick yet.

Roelf, I was under the impression that the Fortuners also have fully independant suspensions? Or maybe just not as refined as the Pajeros at the moment?

[Gerrit Loubser]

Roelf, I was under the impression that the Fortuners also have fully independant suspensions? Or maybe just not as refined as the Pajeros at the moment?

The Fortuner has independent front suspension, but a beam axle at the rear. The suspension system on the Fortuner is very similar to that on the Daihatsu Terios .

[RoelfleRoux]

Mac,

The Fortuner has a solid back axle - not independent. Only difference between the Hilux and the Fortuner is the blades on the Hilux made way for coils on the Fortuner.

Did I read you correctly?
The Pajero had better articulation then the Hilux or the Fortuner

The Fortuner and Toyota had their back wheel up the highest on the one obstacle - which was good for spectator value, but they where dissapointed with the Gen 3, which bearly lifted it's back wheel.

.

Why this is important is because the generally accepted wisdom amongst the 4x4 experts is that solid axles offer the best articulation (also referred to as flex on some forums), but your observation flies in the face of that "wisdom".

[macjohnw]

Mac,

The Fortuner has a solid back axle - not independent. Only difference between the Hilux and the Fortuner is the blades on the Hilux made way for coils on the Fortuner.

Did I read you correctly?
The Pajero had better articulation then the Hilux or the Fortuner

The Fortuner and Toyota had their back wheel up the highest on the one obstacle - which was good for spectator value, but they where dissapointed with the Gen 3, which bearly lifted it's back wheel.

.

Why this is important is because the generally accepted wisdom amongst the 4x4 experts is that solid axles offer the best articulation (also referred to as flex on some forums), but your observation flies in the face of that "wisdom".

Roelf, both the FT and Hi-Lux had aftermarket suspensions that stiffened it up, so they did not flex as much as the Gen 3 did (which is what Gerrit said) - my wheels were on the ground more than theirs. They tended to pick up their wheels higher and easier of the ground when going over obstacles than me.

[RoelfleRoux]

Question: Why did Macjohn's Pajero out perform the rest:

Answer: His standard independent suspension offers better articulation than the rest.