Cas
Better than my Paj??
Now this palooka pal of mine,who's 4x4 knowledge is as pathetic as mine :shock: (i'm still a noob) say's that I should have looked at a Patrol or LC (not that i trust TSA) before getting my Paj.

The question now is,why are those better?? He's only noticed that those are bigger,which fair enough,is,but is it more capable than the Paj?

The Paj is great,no grand,and I forsee it being with me for a looong time :mrgreen:

Just to pick some brains here,what's the difference between the abovementioned vehicles??

tx
cas
Re: Better than my Paj??
Beter for what?

They are vehicles in different classes.
It is like comparing the Pajero with a Terios / RAV etc.
They don't really compete for the same market sector.

The LC and Patrols are great vehicles, very capable, very reliable, but very thirsty and not as comfortable as a Pajero.
Gerhard Fourie
If you want to shoot somebody, make sure you aim at his head, not your own foot.
Me
Image
tonton
Re: Better than my Paj??
People's perception of brands has a major impact on their subjective views. Your friend is probably more used to the other brands, and assumes that the broader visibility is because they are better.

The Pajero is great. They didn't win the Dakar so many times for nothing - they are strong, capable and reliable.

The other brands are great as well, but Pajero gives you great comfort, good 4X4 capability, great and reliable technology for a low price and at a very fair running cost. To my mind those are the most important elements to judge the value / quality of the car, and Pajero is right up there.

Sometimes we show our ignorance by stating our minds...

Anton
User avatar
Site Admin
Re: Better than my Paj??
What 4e says... the vehicles are not in the same class.

The Patrol and Cruiser ARE more capable, mainly because of the double live axle configuration.

Not only are the vehicles bigger, more heavy and thirstier, for the same age and condition a Pajero is better value for money.

Just as an aside... I did a trail this weekend where the two Patrols were a liability. The trail went through a pine forest and the Patrols were too wide to manoeuvre between the trees.
Simon Bloomer
Re: Better than my Paj??
I have owned petrol powered Gen 2 Pajeros and currently own a Gen 3 DiD as well as a 4.5 petrol Patrol, so here are some thoughts:

Yes, I agree that the full size Land Cruiser and Patrol are designed for a different application than that of the Pajero or Prado.

I love the Pajeros and have a lot of respect for their engineering, but it is abundantly clear to me that the Patrol was designed for a duty cycle that is a notch more severe than the one that the Paj designers had in mind. Whether one actually needs more durability than the Paj offers is another question, though...

The Patrol is wide and has a long wheelbase and this means that it is significantly less maneuverable than a Paj or Prado, but if you have the space or can afford to make multi-point turns, this handicap is not so serious.

If the going gets rough underfoot, the Patrol is super capable. It will comfortably eclipse the Pajero due to its superior articulation. The beam axles front and rear help here, but actually the Patrol or Cruiser do not flex brilliantly at the front due to the leading arm suspension employed. Their rear axle flex is quite impressive, though, due to the multi link rear axle suspension (unlike the Gen 2, which uses radius arms at the rear or the Gen 3 with its rear independent setup). The beam axles all around are good for ground clearance, though. Once again, one needs to determine whether you need more mobility than the Paj offers. For 99% of normal overlanding, you probably do not.

The Patrol is a little heavier than a Paj, but the difference is not really huge.

In terms of fuel thirst, my 3.5 V6 Auto Paj used to do around 5.5 km/l in town and 7 km/l on the open road if I recall correctly (running on 31" Goodyear MTRs). My manual Patrol does 4.5 km/l in town and 6 km/l on the open road (running on 33" BFG Mud Terrains and with a roof rack)

The 3.0 TD Patrol would probably have similar fuel consumption as the DiD, but would not habe the same get-up-and-go... And then there is the "hand grenade" thing... The turbo diesel 4.2 Cruisers are also not that heavy on juice: they should at least equal the performance of a 2.8 TD Paj.

Patrols are also good value for money. I bought my '99 model with 215,000 km on the clock for R95,000 about a year and a half ago. I reckon a good Gen 2 Paj of similar age and condition would not have been much cheaper (if at all) at the time. I could have gotten a very well kitted Trooper for R70,000 though (they are also great value for money). Cruisers are a different story.

In my experience, the Mitsu agents support the Paj well and at relatively reasonable prices. Nissan are not quite as good in supporting the Patrol and their pricing is also rather more expensive.

On the tar or in the parking lot, cars like the Paj, Prado or Trooper are significantly more comfortable and practical than the Patrol or Cruiser.
Gerrit Loubser Image

2003 Toyota Land Cruiser 100 VX TD

2003 Mitsubishi Pajero 3.2 DiD LWB A/T Gone & missed :-(

1999 Nissan Patrol 4.5E GRX M/T: Gone & missed :-(

1996 Toyota Land Cruiser 80 VX 4.5 EFI A/T: SOLD
User avatar
Site Admin
Re: Better than my Paj??
And as usual, Gerrit gives a balanced view.

I have a friend who owns a Gen4 Pajero and a 100 Series GX. The Paj is his overlanding vehicle, the Cruiser is his weekend toy. I think one can draw several conclusions from that.

I do like the Patrol... I think it a great vehicle and if money was no object... sigh... sadly that is not the case.
Simon Bloomer
RoelfleRoux
Re: Better than my Paj??
Here is the short version of what I would have liked to write.

Take a tape measure to the vehicles and you will be surprised at how close they are in terms of occupying real estate. The only difference is the extra few square meters of sheet metal that the Cruiser and Patrol require in the bonnet dept to cover those ridiculously large straight six motors.

What is the big deal about a solid axle? They are ancient in design and the power and speed of the modern 4x4 SUV makes it a dangerous prospect (ask the guys who insist on driving one of these brands, but cannot afford the real one). Of the three brands in question, only the Cruiser is still sticking to solid axles. The latest Nissan Patrol is now also independently sprung.

I think that the few years between 2004 and 2007, when the GLS Pajero didn’t have a rear diff lock, may have done a bit of damage in the minds of some 4x4 “experts”. I personally prefer having the traction and stability control, but have to agree that added to that should be the diff lock option as well (as is the case with the Gen4 GLS).

If I won a competition and had to choose between a brand new Cruiser or Pajero, I’d take the Cruiser – sell it – buy a Pajero and give the change to charity (my kids).
tonton
Re: Better than my Paj??
Gerrit Loubser wrote:...Patrols are also good value for money. I bought my '99 model with 215,000 km on the clock for R95,000 about a year and a half ago. I reckon a good Gen 2 Paj of similar age and condition would not have been much cheaper (if at all) at the time.
and
Gerrit Loubser wrote:...In my experience, the Mitsu agents support the Paj well and at relatively reasonable prices. Nissan are not quite as good in supporting the Patrol and their pricing is also rather more expensive.
You were lucky. When I was buying, I couldn't find one near this price. I would recon Pajero's generally go for at least R20000 less than Patrols.

The Patrols are great cars. I am, however biased in favour of Pajero. And I agree about their service. Nissan's service is not consistently good. They seem to have "spots" of excellent service in a pool of poor service.
Gerrit Loubser wrote:...Cruisers are a different story.
Absolutely. You would easily pay R140000 for one with 300000 km on!
Gerrit Loubser wrote:...On the tar or in the parking lot, cars like the Paj, Prado or Trooper are significantly more comfortable and practical than the Patrol or Cruiser.
I tend to agree, but would include everywhere else! :lol:

Anton
Cas
Re: Better than my Paj??
Thanks for the replies.

In his mind,the Paj is not as capable a 4x4 as the others,although my Paj is more than suited for my needs.

The only limiting factor in my mind would be the driver ;)
Re: Better than my Paj??
RoelfleRoux wrote:Take a tape measure to the vehicles and you will be surprised at how close they are in terms of occupying real estate. The only difference is the extra few square meters of sheet metal that the Cruiser and Patrol require in the bonnet dept to cover those ridiculously large straight six motors.
Here is a brief dimensional comparison between the Gen 3 Paj and Patrol:

Overall dimensions:
Gen 3 LWB is 4830mm long, 1895mm wide, 1885mm high
Patrol LWB is 4960mm long, 1930mm wide, 1855mm high

Wheelbase and track width:
Gen 3 LWB: Wheelbase 2780mm, Front track width 1560mm, Rear Track Width 1560mm
Patrol LWB: Wheelbase 2960mm, Front track width 1605mm, Rear Track Width 1625mm

Mass:
Gen 3 LWB kerb mass: around 2130kg
Patrol LWB kerb mass: around 2374kg

The differences are not huge in every case, but the little bits add up to make the Patrol a lot less maneuverable than the Paj and as I said, there is a significant difference in wheelbase between the two. The Patrol has a much larger turning circle than the Paj.

The short nose on the Paj (made possible by the short 4 cylinder diesel or V6 petrol motor choice) is great for visibility from the driver's seat. This is more of a challenge on the Patrol and Cruiser.

Many people are under the impression that the Gen 3 Paj is smaller on the inside than something like a Land Cruiser 100 Series. This is not the case in my opinion. Although the cabin is a little narrower in the Paj, it is taller and the monocoque construction makes excellent space utilisation possible.


RoelfleRoux wrote:What is the big deal about a solid axle?

Solid axles have two plus points in the rough:
1) They help to keep the wheels on the ground in axle twisters, because they work a bit like a see-saw beam: As one wheel is lifted up by the obtacle, it pushes the other wheel down into the hole on the other side. This effectively means that the system helps to even out the ground pressure under each of the four wheels under such conditions. It is true that an axle differential lock can keep a vehicle going in an axle twister when it lifts wheels, but as the conditions get more challenging (e.g. axle twister up a steep hill with loose underfoot conditions), a point is reached where a vehicle with more equal ground pressure under all wheels and a locked axle diff lock will keep going while one that lifts wheels will be unable to progress, despite a locked axle diff.
2) On rough bumpy roads, the ground clearance under the diff does not reduce, regardless of suspension or body movement as the vehicle rides over the bumps. This helps to prevent the vehicle from dragging on the "middelmannetjie".

It is possible to get an independent suspension to perform similarly to a beam axle suspension in axle twisters, but this invariable requires additional complexity as some form of cross-linking (either via air suspension, hydraulics or some clever linkage) is required. The air suspensions in the Land Rover Disco 3/4 and the KDSS system used in the Land Cruiser 200 Series and Prado 150 Series are examples of such systems.


RoelfleRoux wrote:They are ancient in design and the power and speed of the modern 4x4 SUV makes it a dangerous prospect
The design has been around for longer than independant suspensions, but that does not mean that it has been eclipsed in all applications. My Patrol is not as refined as the Paj, but I would not call it dangerous at all at legal speeds.


RoelfleRoux wrote:(ask the guys who insist on driving one of these brands, but cannot afford the real one).

Please explain, Roelf.


RoelfleRoux wrote:Of the three brands in question, only the Cruiser is still sticking to solid axles. The latest Nissan Patrol is now also independently sprung.
The Land Cruiser brand has more models than just about anyone else. Some have independent front suspension and others have beam axles allround.

The Land Cruiser that is most comparable to something like the Patrol would be the 200 Series, which has an independent front suspension and a solid rear axle. Its predecessor was the 100 Series, which was launched in 1998 and was available with both independant front suspension (model code 100, marketed here as the 100VX) and with a solid front axle (model code 105, marketed here as the 100GX).

The Land Cruiser 70 Series wagon (model code 76) is more closely related to the Land Cruiser pick-up (model code 79). Both these have solid axles front and rear. The Land Cruiser 76 is probably intended to compete with the Land Rover Defender and possibly the Mercedes Gelaendewagen, two more vehicles with front and rear beam axles.

The Land Cruiser Prado is probably the model most directly competing with the Paj. This has independent front suspension and a rear beam axle.

The Nissan Patrol pick-up will most likely retain its solid front and rear axles as well. In terms of the Patrol wagon, the model currently sold in SA (model code Y61) has solid axles front and rear. The new model (model code P61C, I think) has independent front and rear suspension, lke the Pajero Gen 3, but Nissan have stated that the old Y61 model will remain in production for the foreseeable future and will be offered in certain markets rather thant he new model.


RoelfleRoux wrote:I personally prefer having the traction and stability control, but have to agree that added to that should be the diff lock option as well (as is the case with the Gen4 GLS).
It is actually the Gen 4 GLX that has the diff lock (or at least some have it; the early ones did not always have a rear diff lock). I agree that traction control plus a diff lock is an impressive combination. I would have preferred it if they could both be active at the same time on the Gen 4, like on the Disco 3, though.
Gerrit Loubser Image

2003 Toyota Land Cruiser 100 VX TD

2003 Mitsubishi Pajero 3.2 DiD LWB A/T Gone & missed :-(

1999 Nissan Patrol 4.5E GRX M/T: Gone & missed :-(

1996 Toyota Land Cruiser 80 VX 4.5 EFI A/T: SOLD
Post Reply