Hi all

I am wanting to buy a 2001-2003 area Pajero Exceed and currently in the research stage. I have driven a petrol model quite a lot but what I'm wondering is should I go petrol or Diesel?
I'm looking at doing 50/50 city / off road use.

Two factors mainly:
Which is better value for money on fuel usage?
Are there any reliability comparisons I should factor in?

From memory. The diesel (DID) model in the NM series came out in the '02 model. Anything prior to that in the NM shape was petrol. My family has a 2001 exceed and it's too bad on fuel. It gets about 550-600k's from a full tank with mixed driving conditions. I drive ours to Queensland from Sydney and got about 800k's out of a tank.

Friend if mine has a '07 NP VRX (the last of that shape) in the diesel and I've got to admit. I was impressed. It kept up with our petrol one off the lights, I actualy had to drive it myself to believe it of course. I cannot recall how many k's the diesel gets to a tank but from memory my mate said about 900-1000k's on the freeway.

If it was upto me I'd get the late '02-03 NP model. It's got the round foglights, better grill chrome headlights better tail lights and rear bar design intergrated illuminated sidesteps and the door moulds look a lot more neater then the NM models.

Good luck!!

From memory. The diesel (DID) model in the NM series came out in the '02 model. Anything prior to that in the NM shape was petrol. My family has a 2001 exceed and it's too bad on fuel. It gets about 550-600k's from a full tank with mixed driving conditions. I drive ours to Queensland from Sydney and got about 800k's out of a tank.

Friend if mine has a '07 NP VRX (the last of that shape) in the diesel and I've got to admit. I was impressed. It kept up with our petrol one off the lights, I actualy had to drive it myself to believe it of course. I cannot recall how many k's the diesel gets to a tank but from memory my mate said about 900-1000k's on the freeway.

If it was upto me I'd get the late '02-03 NP model. It's got the round foglights, better grill chrome headlights better tail lights and rear bar design intergrated illuminated sidesteps and the door moulds look a lot more neater then the NM models.

Good luck!!

Cheers. Yeah I've driven a petrol model a few times on large trips and found it to be fairly thirsty. I think the best tankful my parents have had in it would be 600km mostly highway, all city would be flat out getting 400-450km a tankful.
I agree the 2003 model has a much nicer look, I especially like the grill. It all comes down to finances. I have a 2007 VE commodore to sell first and all funds from that will go into a Pajero. About $13k I'm guessing it what I'll have to spend. After trawling Carsales there are a few decent NM's for that price with just under 200,000km, haven't looked into the NPs yet.
But that's interesting that the diesel can keep up with the petrol off the line (not that I'm looking for something to flog around). I won't be doing any towing or extreme 4WD'ing but I like the size and ride of the Pajeros.

I just borrowed my families one this afternoon. I now want one for myself lol

I've to a 2002 exceed petrol. Would never swap it for a desiel ever. Goes real well and tows 2.5tonnes likes its 500kg. Only negative it's it heavy on fuel. There is nothing else I can complain about with this cars in 2.5years. Best car I've owned.

Forget the Desiel in that model, head and valve recess issue just for starters.

I have the NM, was looking for hte NP but this one came up and was showroom condition, will be doing the 3.8 conversion later this year just for the sake of it.

Spent the weekend towing around a 2.5 tonne excavator and although could feel it behind me of course, even the 3.5 did well.

They are heavy on fuel but that can be expected as any car of this size will use fuel.

I remember reading a 4wd magazine a few months back- 4x4 australia. It compared petrol to diesel both in terms of cost but also maintainence. What they discovered is that diesel is cheaper to run in the short term, but with the added servicing costs of diesel compared to petrol they came out very similar and the report made the comment that when deciding what fuel to get, think about where it will be used? Remote country or suburbia and consider the availabilty of fuel

My dad owns a 96 NJ DOHC 6g74 and that uses 15L per 100km towing or not. We tow our camper trailer and it does it effortlessly.

We used to do alot of trips when I was younger and friends took a 4.2L petrol patrol with a camper. Used nearly double the fuel the pajero did. Sitting over 100km/h is what kills the fuel economy in our model. Not sure about the newer ones...

Have deleted the useless crap from this thread, thread is about which model to get ie petrol or deisel, if a member has an educated opinion or fact please feel free to post, if not then dont bother please.

In latest NW Pajero petrol has been dropped apart from the Exceed as uptake was only 5%and 15% in Exceed . So if you are buying new diesel is a better option for resale and economy.
Second hand - well that is a bit different as long term reliability and cost of repairs come into play. Fuel cost is just one part of running costs.
I am also on the lookout for a clean older Pajero and am leaning towards petrol as diesels are too expensive for the mileage and condition. As a side comment on towing - i towed a 3 ton trailer from Melb to Wallget NSW with Navara 550 effortlessly and at high average speed - fuel consumption was 17.5 l/100 - ute normally returns under 9per 100. So any car(truck) will use extra fuel with heavy towing especially if you dont drive for economy.

Diesel is the only option IMO - petrol is just too damn thirsty in a vehicle this heavy. The low RPM torque from a good diesel is also desirable - particularly when towing.

Some very interesting opinions, thank you all guys.

I might see if I can take a diesel for a test drive (not that there are many available for sale though).
I am leaning towards petrol at this stage, as I am already familiar with the petrol model and know what I can expect from it in regards to performance and exceptional reliability.
I am also familiar with the 6G74 engine in terms of maintenance so this makes sense IMHO too.

But it never hurts to be open-minded and do some research and get some ideas from others!
Thanks again all

There is no doubt about it - the diesel is a far better engine. If you do a lot of straight highway running, a petrol engine on LPG still works out cheaper that a diesel. The petrol engine is thirsty as hell. I have just return home from Sydny, and my NL (petrol on LPG) gave me 16L/100 km. The equivalent diesel consumption would have been 10L/100. However, depending on where you fill your tank, LPG ranges from 60c/L in Sydney, 74c/L in Canberra to over 90 c/L in Cooma (only 110 km from Canberra). to travel 100 km will cost about $10 based on Sydney prices to about $15 for Cooma prices. Diesel is about $1.50/L, and it doesn't vary very much (it is about $1.59 in Cooma. To travel 100 km in a diesel will cost you about $15 to $16. Using petrol would cost you $21 to $23 per 100 km, depending on where you fill.

The early NM models used the old 2.8 diesel, but for the NP, they brought out the 3.2DID. This pulls like a steam engine, is economical, apparently reliable but damned noisy. The exceed model you are looking for should have a fair bit of soundproofing, and the only time you will notice the rattle is at idle in a confined area eg traffic lights or in a garage.

One often overlooked downer for a diesel is the cost of maintenance. DIesels MUST have oil & filter changes every 5000 km. That can be expensive. Petrol engines go to 15000 km betwen changes, although I personally don't go anywhere near that distance. I don't know how much oil the 3.2 DID takes, but it will almost certainly be a lot more than the petrol. Example - the Toyota Prado petrol engine uses about 5L of oil, the Prade diesel uses 11L.

DIesels will last longer than petrol engines, given the correct maintenance, but with petrol engines going well over 400000 km, this isn't really an issue. When you have to overhaul a diesel, it costs heaps more than a petrol engine. ALso, beware of getting crappy fuel - if you stuff your injector pump you are looking at big money - up to $5000 for a new injection system. Turbos can be expensive too, but overall they are mostly reliable. Do not under any circumstances look at a 3L Nissan Patrol - they have a fearsome reputation - they may not deserve it but it is there. Something about the electronically controlled variable vanes on the turbo. I have never heard anything about Mitsubishis giving trouble with their turbos.

Another annoying issue with diesels is filling them up. If you get one miniscule drop of diesel on your hands, you STINK.

Otherwise, in my book, diesel is best. It is just that I have a gas vehicle and right now, I wouldn't think of changing it. The choice is yours to quote a famous running shoe ad - Just do it!

I bought my 05 NP in late Feb, it's a petrol 3.8l and manual. It took some getting use to it(going from my 07 diesel Santa Fe auto) and this effected the fuel economy. When I got it, she would use about 16l/100 80% hwy, once I got use to it and changed the fuel to PULP along with resetting the ECU. It has made a good amount of difference, we recently did a return trip of about 450klms through some hilly parts of central/west Vic, 2 adults, 4 kids and all our stuff. I was happily surprised, it returned a usage of about 13l which for the size of it and combined weight I am happy with. I am toying with putting it on gas, but I need to have the cracked exhaust manifold replaced first(this is a common fault with these, something to do with the casting in the factory). And it is cheaper to replace them with extractors, so get that looked at ;)

One often overlooked downer for a diesel is the cost of maintenance. DIesels MUST have oil & filter changes every 5000 km. That can be expensive. Petrol engines go to 15000 km betwen changes, although I personally don't go anywhere near that distance. I don't know how much oil the 3.2 DID takes, but it will almost certainly be a lot more than the petrol. Example - the Toyota Prado petrol engine uses about 5L of oil, the Prade diesel uses 11L.


My D4D Hilux was 7L of engine oil to fill - Prado should be the same. Pajero DID is around 9.5 from memory. So , yes there is a price to pay for that down low torque :-)

I'm borrowing my dads NM Pajero exceed this week. Put $70 bucks in it Sunday night, gauge went between half and 3/4. Done 100k's it's just below half now......

Thinking of filling it up and seeing how many k's it does to a tank.

Around town mine does about 700 is also nm exceed

does it have dual or long-range tanks?

Standard NM/NP tank is 90Litres

Standard NM/NP tank is 90Litres
You can also get an extra tank to fit in the rear where the seats fold under the floor. Believe it's an extra 60 or 70l

Around town mine does about 700 is also nm exceed

That is pretty impressive out of 90l tank Mal , from what i can gather from people who own them earlier 3.5 (NM) seems to be a bit more economical then later 3.8 .

FWIW I hired a rental Pajero Diesel in Kununurra last August-September, for a trip out to the Bungle Bungles and El Questro. Average fuel consumption for the 944km round-trip was spot on 10.0km/l (it ran out at 901km - I had a 10l fuel can).

The new diesel is definitely not a smooth engine. It is significantly noisier and harsher than most other 4wd diesels on the market today.

Having said that, it has a great reputation, pulls well, sips the fuel and will improve your resale value, and I'd buy it over the 6g without hesitation.

SA has a Mitsubishi 4wd club, so other states probably do too. Maybe consider getting in contact with one of them and head along to a meeting so you can get talking to owners on their thoughts. You might even be able to head along to a 4wd day and compare the off road abilities of the two.

When I lived in NW WA in the Kimberley, pretty much every car was a diesel 4wd. The one issue that did come up was that the 3.2 seemed particularly sensitive to bad fuel. On one trip, a group of 4wd filled up at a remote community. A week later, the Pajero was dead. The engine was replaced and Mitsubishi Australia confirmed that last tankful of bad fuel had destroyed the fuel system, and in turn the engine - and that it wasn't the first time they'd seen it.

Interestingly, the more crude diesels (like earlier model hilux and land cruisers, and a diesel Patrol) ran a bit crappy for a few days (faltering/hesitating during initial accelerations) but no damage was done. The 3.2 diesel needs good fuel and I would be really careful about what you put in there. It's worth remebering that diesel is more susceptible to contamination.

But I'd definitely buy the diesel :)

I have a NW Pajero diesel (manual transmission), and it is fantastic! Bear in mind that this is the Common Rail Diesel, not the original diesel you would get in the NM. It is as noisy as hell, but it PULLS and is very economical. 1100 km from the 88 L tank is possible. I have only done 1050 from a tank, but it wasn't empty. When I say it is noisy, it is at low revs and idle, but at 100 km/h (which is what it is mostly doing to get the 1100 km range), it is very quiet.

I find the engine is not particularly flexible. This surprises me, because every other diesel I have driven has been smooth over the whole rev range. I find that I have to drop back to 4th when I come to a town, or it shudders and complains badly. Once you get above 1400 R/min, it smooths out and runs fine. There is a noticeable turbo lag from low revs.

From what I have read, the 3.2L engine is reliable, but (particularly the common rail diesel) susceptible to bad fuel. Note that the early NM models had the 2.8L diesel. It was only after late 2001 that the 3.2 came into the fleet. From what I have learnt, the 2.8 engines had occasional head problems. I haven't heard anything about the 3.2 with head issues.

For what it is worth, I had a NL Pajero before, running on gas. It was still cheaper than the new NW to run, but I think that LPG prices are set to continue rising relative to petrol and diesel, so overall the diesel should hopefull come out in front. If you could get a NM on gas, it would probably be the cheapest to run.