The Prado may be jittery but beats Pajero where it matters

A Prado.

What you need to know:

  • I have covered the cross-over utility debate so many times that you might have noticed that I tend to ignore them nowadays.
  • By cross-overs I mean the X-Trail/RAV4/Forester/Outlander/Vitara/ iO/CRV and other what’s-its-face vehicles in this class.
  • If you own a cross-over and need spares for it, buy the ones meant for the saloon car on which it is based, do not ask for the part directly.

Hi Baraza,

Thanks for your insightful opinions to all motorists and future motorists.

I own a Nissan X-Trail and would like a change.

The said car is comfy and handles okay for a mid-size SUV.

I would like a comparison, especially with a Honda CRV and Mitsubishi Outlander.

Another car that appeals to me is the Mitsubishi Pajero Shogun.

How does this compare with the Prado in terms of performance, durability, and off-road capability?

And can I get a diesel engine for the Shogun?

Colin

I have covered the cross-over utility debate so many times that you might have noticed that I tend to ignore them nowadays.

By cross-overs I mean the X-Trail/RAV4/Forester/Outlander/Vitara/ iO/CRV and other what’s-its-face vehicles in this class.

And they are all copies of each other anyway: Not as joyous to drive as the saloon cars they are based on, nor as efficient, less capable off-road than the SUVs they are trying to be, driven by new mothers with “unsafe-for-airbag-deployment” type of children in the front seat trying to lick the windscreen, and having spare parts that cost more than they really should (here is a tip: If you own a cross-over and need spares for it, buy the ones meant for the saloon car on which it is based, do not ask for the part directly).

The CRV is the best in its 2013 guise because it has seven seats.

Otherwise, do not even bother comparing them.

So, Pajero vs. Prado:

Performance: Depends on the engine, but pound-for-pound, the Pajero edges ahead slightly.

This is mostly because of its monocoque chassis, which greatly improves handling and road-holding.

The Prado feels like a boat in a mildly tempestuous sea.

Durability: The Prado, no doubt. The car can take a lot of abuse without breaking.

The Pajero will break, literally.

I have had a word with several drivers, all of whom deride the Pajero’s fragility.

One is the chauffeur of a permanent secretary, and he says he has been through more than three Pajeros in the recent past.

For some reason, the body splits along the B pillar after some months of hard usage, and if you insist on flogging it, you might end up with the car in two pieces.

Monocoques, eh?

Off-road capability: Again the Prado has the Pajero socked right in the jaw.

The monocoque chassis of the Pajero places it at a slight disadvantage when it comes to ground clearance, and if you opt for the models with a tow-bar, you will not like it off road.

Besides the lower clearance, the rear overhang is quite long, so off-roading it is like off-roading a school bus.

The back end will always scrape the ground the moment you try cresting a steep slope from level ground.

Finally, yes, diesel-powered Shoguns are available.

Hi,

I am in the process of purchasing a Mercedes W124 and I have found out that it comes in more than one version.

I have come across the 102 and the 111 engines.

Can you please elaborate on these engines and if there are other versions, please bring me up to speed.

I need to know about their performance, reliability, and maintenance cost, and which version is best.

Kip.

There were many more engines that were used in the W124 besides the M102 and M111.

And to complicate matters further, there are also numerous “sub-versions” of both the M102 and M111.

I cannot start explaining all these engine types and their differences because I would end up writing a whole book for hardcore Mercedes W124 engine fanatics.

They happen to be a bit similar, though, in that both are over-square engines (Bore>Stroke).

However, the M111 took off from where the M102 left off, so the assumption would be that this is the superior version (the M111), in particular the M111.940.

However, this M111 engine found its way into later models of the E-Class (W210) and C-Class, so if you get one in the W124, it could have been an early example, and early examples of mechanical bits tend to serve a quietly unacknowledged prototypical role in any model line-up.

The final days before a major change is made usually concurs with the best form of whatever is being changed.

So my suggestion would be to go for an early ’90s W124 with an M102 under the hood (twilight for the M102), rather than a mid-’90s W124 with an M111 (dawn of the M111).

But then again, the W124 came from an era when Mercedes built virtually unbreakable vehicles, so I guess any engine will do.

Hi Baraza,

I have a Pajero Sport and a Subaru Outback and I have been planning to get either a used Range Rover Sport or a Nissan Murano.

Please talk about maintenance costs, fuel usage, and speed.

I also mind about the interior, and can you touch a little on the BMW X6?

Doux.

Range Rover Sport vs Nissan Murano, you say. Well, here goes:

1. Maintenance cost: The RR Sport will sink you into bankruptcy if you do not have an annual net income equal to the car’s original cost price (buying a car second-hand does not make its parts or service any cheaper.

It is still a Range Rover, you know).

The other one is a Nissan. Need I say more?

2. Fuel usage: This is where it gets interesting.

If you get a diesel-powered RR Sport, then the Murano starts to look like a camel with water-retention issues.

However, a petrol-powered Sport brings the equation back to normal, and it reminds you that you are, indeed, driving a very expensive, huge, heavy SUV with a massive V8 engine.

If you get the supercharged one, then your birthday will be made a national holiday in the Middle East.

3. Speed: A very expensive, huge, heavy SUV with a massive V8 engine has to justify why it is expensive and has a massive engine, so it follows that the RR Sport is ridiculously fast.

Of course, the supercharged one is powered by a Roman candle rather than an engine, so that is fairly obvious.

The diesel version will also top the Murano’s figures.

Just remember that you are driving a very expensive, huge, heavy SUV with a massive V8 engine, so stopping suddenly will be erm... something to remember.

4. Interior: The RR Sport is a very expensive, huge, heavy SUV with a massive V8 engine (or otherwise), so the “huge”, “heavy” and “expensive” qualifiers have to be convincing, and the interior is one of them.

It is far better equipped than a Murano, way more comfortable, and better designed overall.

I especially dislike the Murano’s cramped (and fairly ugly) instrument cluster, which they thought pilfering from the 350Z coupe would be a good idea. It was not.

Enter the X6:

1. This is an in-between car. It will not cost as much as the RR Sport to maintain (unless you dunk it into a river or ram a wall and try to do the repairs yourself), but then again, this is a German car.

It cannot be as “cheap” (the term is used very loosely here) as the Nissan to repair and service.

2. In diesel form, the X6 is even more economical than the already economical RR Sport TDV6.

But it gets unrealistic if you cane it, more unrealistic than the Sport.

So do not cane it.

Petrol versions are so-so, better than both the Nissan and the Rangie, until you get to something called the X6M.

This is where madness ensues.

A heavily tuned, 4.4-litre, twin-scroll, twin-turbo V8 petrol engine that was designed to 1) use as much fuel as possible and 2) make quite a racket while using the fuel.

In the course of achieving those two, the engineers discovered that, incidentally, it developed 550hp also, at 6,000rpm.

Buy this one and the supercharged Sport, and not only will you have your own national holiday in the Middle East, they will also build you a monument.

That monument will be shaped like a barrel of oil.

3. The X6M is fast.

550hp is not just two fives and a zero written on a piece of paper; when channelled through four rubber doughnuts, the results are scary.

Easily the fastest of the lot.

Lesser X6s will be outgunned by the Range Rover, but not the Nissan.

4. Another dead-centre result.

A very good interior the X6 has, but not as good as the Range Rover Sport’s belly.

This is very subjective by the way; I know of several BMW lovers who would love to point a Walther PPK at my head for daring to say such a thing.

Hi Baraza,

I am looking forward to buying a car for daily use in Nairobi and on weekends out on long road trips.

I am an off-road lover, a first-time car owner, and looking at the Nissan X-Trail Classic and the Toyota Hilux SSR, both manual.

Just a hint: I would like to travel the whole north-eastern part of Kenya and probably do a road trip to South Africa in April next year.

Which is best in terms of reliability, fuel consumption, stability, and general low maintenance cost?

Which will take a beating and still run?

Joshua

If you want to drive all over north-eastern and then head down to Mzanzi, just get the Surf and forget the X-Trail.

I assume by Hilux SSR you meant the Hilux Surf, or Surf, as it later came to be known.

Or 4Runner, as it is known in some markets. But since you asked for specifics, here goes:

Reliability: Ever heard of a Toyota? Know what Toyotas are famous for?

Fuel consumption: The X-Trail is more economical, both the petrol and diesel versions.

Stability: The X-Trail is based on a saloon car, so it does have some car-like driving characteristics.

The Surf is a tall, high-riding SUV. Handling is sure to be compromised.

General low maintenance cost: Generally, the X-Trail would cost less to keep in shape with good care, but if you plan to do what you say you want to do, then get the Hilux.

The little Nissan might not make it out of the Northern Frontier District (what you call north-eastern).

Hi Baraza,

I have been seeing this car around but never gave it much thought until I noticed it in a music video — the Mini Cooper.

I noticed that it has a nice interior and a fancy panel upfront.

Is there more to this car than just being a mere collectible/trophy (excuse my straightforwardness)?

Stevo Cheqx.

Yes, there is more to this little car than just being a collectible.

There is handling.

It handles like magic and goes like a bat out of hell, especially the supercharged Cooper S.

But again, there is less to this car.

It is not so little, at least not as little as the original Issigonis Cube, and the nippiness (and name) of the Mini comes from its size.

The latest version was unveiled last week at the LA Auto Show and, would you believe it, it has got even bigger!

The biggest downside is that the exterior dimensions grew but the interior dimensions shrank.

While the current Mini is bigger outside than the original, it is smaller and more cramped inside than the original.

Poor packaging. And that gigantic central speedometer is just stupid retro-throwback nonsense.

You will love driving it, though.

Having car problems? Send your questions to [email protected] for absolutely free expert advice.