1994 Isuzu MU from Australia and New Zealand - Comments

The head gasket blew, Cooking the engine - NZ$3000 not including labour.

Turbo shredded itself.

Sump punctured twice off-road.

Engine is reliable although it guzzles the diesel something terrible.

The engine oil sump is very exposed, and has twice been punctured by logs while off-roading.

Put a sump gaurd on like me and you will have no problems and I've been off roading in my MU for 4 years.

The heads are expensive, but generally the 3.1 motor is bullet proof.

Mike.

The 3.1 aren't that great however the 2.8 are bullet proof and cheap to run.

I have a 1994 MU and I'm getting around 600-620KM/tank on a run and around 500 about town and would get in it and drive anywhere in Aus. without a worry, one of the most reliable vehicles I've owned.

Hi guys.

Looking at buying a 1992 2.8 td. but the drivers side window button has given in, is it hard to fix or costly? Am a struggling Uni. student. the previous owner has spent $4000 in the last year on brakes, injectors, alternator etc. is this the normal running costs (hope not). most of your reviews have been encouraging, but would like an affirmation on the vehicle it has done around 188k.

Cheers

Jason

P.s what about fuel consumption on average.

I have the 2.8 in mine and the best I have done is 800km on a tank on the open road. it get thrashed on the beach and I haven't had any head problems.

The Mu is a very reliable vehicle that can handle the abuse.

The 2.8L ones are a near bullet proof engine. Problems are alternator, turbos with no turbo timers do crap themselves, and the rear calipers do give problems if the person changing the rear pads does not know what they are doing.

The 3.1 Mu heads do crack, and have alternator problems.

Both also have hand brake cables that seize if they've been in water.

In saying all that, I have owned my 2.8l Mus for 8 years now, and only had to do both alternators. I refuse to sell them as they are great vehicles.