Mitsubishi Pajero Review from Japan

1996 Mitsubishi Pajero Fieldmaster 2.8 turbo

Model year1996
Year of manufacture1996
First year of ownership2009
Most recent year of ownership2010
Engine and transmission 2.8 turbo Automatic
Performance marks 10 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 10 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 5 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.8 / 10
Distance when acquired56000 miles
Most recent distance75000 miles
Previous carMitsubishi Pajero




Nothing has gone wrong with either pajero I have owned.

General Comments:

What can I say, having owned two Pajeros, these cars are built to last. Provided they are serviced regularly, these engines will go on forever.

I do a lot of motorway driving, and you never see a Pajero or Shogun broken down.

The paintwork, even on the Pajeros over twenty years old, is rust free.

I congratulate Mitsubishi Motors for making what I would say is the perfect car.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 30th August, 2010

30th Aug 2010, 13:07

I agree with the durability of that engine, I own a 98 Sport and nothing major has gone wrong so far, however I am concerned about how the V6 Mitsubishi engine burns oil. I have observed this in all such engines. This drastically lowers its resale value, and talked to a dealer who pretended he has never noticed it, and wanted to charge me all sorts of fees to investigate the issue. They should have had a recall. This is my last Mitsubishi truck or car for that matter. The paint still looks new and the reliability is good, but burns through too much oil, and quite honestly I am fed up with it.

Average review marks: 8.8 / 10, based on 1 review