Talk:Mitsubishi Pajero Sport

Wrong name
This article's name is incorrect. The convention is to pick one name (perhaps Mitsubishi Pajero Sport) and then redirect the others to this article. This title is too long and unlikely to ever be typed. I will handle the rename unless anyone disagrees. --SFoskett 00:45, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC)


 * Mmm... no, don't see a problem. The same can be done for Mitsubishi Pajero/Montero/Shogun. Wanna do that also, or can I? And I didn't expect people to type this when I've changed things to this page, I expected them to type one of the Pajero's names, and it would redirect here (a sort of politically correct compromise). Pajero Sport is the name more used worldwide, but Challenger was used on the home market. --Pc13 07:42, 2005 Jun 6 (UTC)


 * Done. --SFoskett 15:27, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC)

The outlander will also be built in bangladesh
Can anyone add more info about the seccond generation outlander? Because Mitsubishi has said that production of the pajero sport has already started.

http://asiancorrespondent.com/62307/mitsubishi-starts-production-sales-of-pajero-suvs-in-bangladesh/

http://paultan.org/2011/08/09/mitsubishi-pajero-sport-production-begins-in-bangladesh/ 180.149.7.150 (talk) 10:45, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Outlander is not successor
The Outlander is not the successor to the Challenger because the Challenger is STILL in production! It is still being built & sold as of 2006, and no official announcement has been made regarding its discontinuation. Besides, they are two completely different types of vehicles. I'm going to remove references to the Outlander. Davez621 14:12, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
 * The Challenger is still in production, but it's no longer sold in Japan. In fact, the Airtrek/Outlander debuted in Japan after the Challenger left the market. A similar situation happened in the US, where the Montero Sport left the market after being concurrent for a year. The Pajero Sport will be gone from Europe by the end of the year. Adding to that, the second-gen Outlander will have the same size as the Challenger/Pajero Sport, but will offer more comfort and more modern engines. The Challenger will remain only in markets such as South America and Southeast Asia, where novelty isn't an issue and affordable price (as well as some actual offroad abilities) are necessary. But the Endeavor is definitely not the Challenger's successor. It's marketed above the Pajero/Montero, while the Challenger was below. --Pc13 16:59, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
 * It is still built in Japan though. The fact that it isn't sold there is irrelevant.  Many models are built in Japan but are exclusively exported to other countries.  The Challenger continues to be sold here in Australia, and New Zealand.  The Challenger is priced from A$39,990, while the Outlander is A$29,990.  I cannot see how the Outlander could be any kind of successor Davez621 11:50, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Not the first one, the second one. The first one didn't have a V6 engine or a Diesel. --Pc13 21:21, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
 * The second generation will still have a 4 cylinder engine on the base model. Also, the diesel is not offered in all countries, both in the Outlander and Challenger.  For example here in Australia, there has never been a diesel Challenger, and the new Outlander is not expected to be offered with diesel, at least not initially. Davez621 15:04, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Let me try and get more technical: Mitsubishi Challenger, wheelbase 272.5 cm, length 460 cm, width 177.5 cm, height 173 cm. Mitsubishi Outlander, wheelbase 267 cm, length 464 cm, width 180 cm, height 168 cm. See? Similar sizes. And what does size tells about segment placement? Besides, it doesn't say anywhere in the article that the Outlander replaces the Challenger in Australia, or in South America (in fact, I doubt the Outlander will be sold in South America). However, you can bet that if the Australian Outlander Mk.II keeps the same V6 as the American Outlander Mk. II, the Challenger is out of the market and left for developing nations only. --Pc13 22:56, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
 * You can quote figures all you like, but size alone does not determine what segment a vehicle is in. According to your logic, the new Outlander is in the same segment as a BMW X5 since they are almost the same dimensions!! (X5: 4660mm long, 1840mm wide).  As I have already mentioned, price is probably equally as important as size in determining what class a vehicle is in, and the Outlander is significantly cheaper than the Challenger.  There is still a large demand for serious off-road 4WDs here in Australia, which the Outlander clearly is not.  The Challenger suits that role much better, since it is a real 'truck'. Davez621 10:46, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Ah, but the X5 has V8 engines, which the Outlander doesn't. And the Outlander Mk.II has a V6, just like the Challenger. The fact that the Outlander is based on the Lancer's chassis doesn't matter (the Toyota Highlander is car-based and is the replacement of the 1990s Toyota 4-Runner/HiLux Surf, which was truck-based - even though there is a current larger V8-powered 4-Runner/HiLux Surf). Neither does the fact there is a demand for truck-based SUVs in Australia based on price point alone. FWIW, the Pajero Mk.II is still sold in Spain, France and Germany. Does that mean the Pajero Mk.III wasn't its replacement? In the end, I ask you this. If the Challenger/Pajero Sport stopped being sold in Japan in 2003, in the USA in 2004, and in Europe in 2006, what is its replacement in these markets? --Pc13 11:19, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Engines don't determine vehicle classes either. Both the Toyota Yaris and Mercedes E-Class come with 4-cylinder engines - does that mean they're in the same class?  And you are wrong again - the Highlander (Kluger here in Australia) is a new vehicle - it is Toyotas 2nd 'crossover' wagon sitting above the RAV4.  It did not replace anything.  In the US, the 4Runner continues to be sold and has a 4.0L V6 standard.  Here in Australia (and the rest of the world, basically), the Toyota LandCruiser Prado is its equivalent, and arguably the successor to the old 4Runner.  I am curious as to what country you are in.  To answer your last question, we may see the real successor to the Challenger in the form of a short-wheelbase Pajero due out later in the year.  Meanwhile, a long(er?)-wheelbase Pajero will continue on. Davez621 14:27, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
 * What on Earth are you talking about? Both the Pajero Sport and the Outlander MKII have a 3.0L V6, didn't you know? Do you even read any sort of international motoring news? I know full well what a Kluger/Highlander is. I can tell you that the RAV4 sits on the place of the Blizzard, the Kluger (Highlander) and Harrier (Lexus RX) both replace the old HiLux Surf (4Runner). The 4Runner name was even dropped for a few years, and only returned in the current incarnation. The car is now in the same market segment as the Land Cruiser KZJ120 (Prado to you), as they share the chassis, entire engine range, and transmissions. And here in Europe we never stopped having SWB Pajeros, even when we had the Pajero Sport and now the Outlander. It is not and has never been a cheap version of the LWB Pajero, and has always been an important part of the lineup. You can't use the Australian auto market (a very idiosincratic market, from my observation) as standard for the rest of the world (and I follow what goes on in Europe, North America, Japan and South Korea, Australia and Brazil). If the Pajero Sport is not available in most of the industrialized world, and if the Outlander has the same dimensions and the same engine displacement, than the Outlander replaces the Pajero Sport in the Mitsubishi lineup. It's that simple. --Pc13 15:17, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
 * No its not that simple! The Highlander did not replace the 4Runner, period.  The Prado replaced the 4Runner in 1996, as it filled the gap of being the smaller 4WD that sat below the Land Cruiser in the line-up.  In North America, it was never replaced, as they still have a 4Runner.  So the Highlander did not replace anything.  (There is also a model called the Toyota Fortuner sold in some Asian countries and South Africa, which is really the *true* 4Runner successor, as it shares the most in common with the HiLux pickup).  You are just speculating about the Outlander.  The Challenger is a mid-size, while the Outlander is a compact SUV. Dont' bring size or engine power into it.  The Challenger is old and often a new 'lower' model will be the same size as an older outgoing model in a higher class/segment.  The Challenger competes with vehicles like the Toyota Prado and Nissan Pathfinder.  The Outlander does not, and will not.  It competes with vehicles like the Toyota RAV4 and Honda CRV.  Completely different segments.  And until the Challenger ceases production you can't say that it is replaced by anything.  Like I said, just speculation.  Even supposing they stopped selling the Challenger, how do you know that Mitsubishi won't replace it eventually?  You're jumping to conclusions.  Just wait and see what happens to the Challenger before making claims like that.  Davez621 16:13, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
 * There you are, applying Australian market specificities to the rest of the world again. The Prado didn't replace the 4Runner. The Prado replaced the Land Cruiser KDJ90. The 4Runner was always smaller than any version of the Land Cruiser. And the Toyota Fortuner was made specifically for developing nations. It isn't available in Japan, Europe or North America. In Europe, the 4Runner's place was taken by the RAV4. When the Mitsubishi Challenger was introduced, there were very few car-based SUVs. So it was not yet normal for a "civilized" SUV to have a single-frame chassis. The truth is, in most markets, the end of the Challenger/Pajero Sport left a vacuum, which is being filled by another "civilized" SUV, the Outlander, which just happens to have a single-frame chassis, instead of a ladder chassis, a configuration now increasingly reserved for cars that need actual offroad abilities. By your reasoning, the Ford Mondeo wasn't a replacement for the Sierra, because it was FWD instead of RWD. And whether it remains available in some markets is besides the point. Many cars have stayed in developing countries years after being gone from their own markets, such as the VW Beetle (gone from Europe in 1981, built in Mexico until 2005), Renault 5 (replaced by a new model in 1984, still built in Iran), Fiat Uno (gone in 1991, they still have it in South America), VW Santana (replaced by the first Passat-named sedan in Europe in 1987, still available in Brazil and China) or Peugeot 504 (finally written off in 1983, but produced for years in Argentina until 1999, and still available in Africa). What's more, the Challenger was never the Land Cruiser's competitor. That has always been the Pajero. The Pajero MKI was about the same size, and with similar engine choices as the Land Cruiser 70. When the Land Cruiser 90 grew in size, so did the Pajero MKII. --Pc13 22:10, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
 * The Prado filled the gap left by the 4Runner, which is exactly the same argument you are using for the Outlander. But lets leave Toyota out of this.  I might be slightly biased towards the Australian market but as I am in Australia I have to be (We don't have Ford Sierras here either so I don't get the Mondeo analogy).  You on the other hand are clearly biased towards the European market, when in fact SUVs do not sell in huge numbers in Europe, making it somewhat of an unimportant market.  Like I said, the Challenger competed (and still competes) against mid-sized 6-cylinder SUVs.  Therefore, any 'successor' to the Challenger must fill the gap left by it and compete in the same segment.  The successor can't be in the class below it, as is the case with the Outlander.  The successor needs to be alot bigger than the Challenger was/is, not the same size.  Everything else has moved up in size - the new Pathfinder for instance is huge.  Are you suggesting the Outlander competes with it in any way??  Davez621 11:56, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
 * See what happens when you don't do research? Otherwise you would know that 4x4 vehicles are now 7.5% of the European market, with nearly 14.5 million vehicles sold in Europe in 2005, and salves have consistently risen since 1998. Your lack of knowledge on the variety of certain automotive lineups only betrays the limited availability of automobiles in Australia. Otherwise you would know the Land Cruiser Prado SWB is the replacement of the Land Cruiser 90 SWB, which is the replacement of the Land Cruiser 70 SWB. And that the Toyota 4Runner was always beneath it in the market segment, both in Europe and Japan. And you would know that the current Pathfinder has moved into a market segment that was solely the domain of the Patrol GR (a car that is getting old, and that Nissan is making no move whatsoever to replace), putting it in between the Pajero Sport and Pajero (the base model Pajero Sport is 8,000€ cheaper than the base model Pathfinder - that's a difference of 13,500 A$ - and the deluxe Pathfinder is only 5,000€ - 8,500 A$ - away from the deluxe Pajero). And you would have noticed that the Outlander MKII is getting a 162 kW 3.0L V6 engine, which is more powerful than the Challenger's 136 kW 3.0L V6, that the Outlander MKII has a third row of seats, which is missing from the Challenger. You would know all this, if you actually bothered to read any automotive news from other countries other than Australia. The increasigly old Challenger/Pajero Sport has already left two of the three most important world automotive markets (Japan and North America), and is getting ready to leave Europe, remaining available only in countries where the price difference between the more luxurious Outlander and the outdated Challenger/Pajero Sport tips the balance in favour of practicality, affordability and offroad ability, instead of comfort and modularity, which is what these three markets want, but they can get it from the Outlander, and not the Challenger. --Pc13 14:50, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Interesting file - did someone forget to tell Spain about SUVs? So I take it you're in Belgium?  I suggest you look up the definition of the word 'succeed'.  The one we're looking for is this - "To come after someone/something, to follow in time".  Therefore, the successor to the Challenger must come *after* it.  This is the point I've been trying to stress.  The Outlander was already introduced 3 years ago.  Outlander mk2 will replace Outlander mk1.  Regarding your comment above about the Endeavor, I thought I should point out that it *is* marketed below the Montero.  It sells for US$26k, while the Montero is US$36k!  You are misinformed. Davez621 09:28, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
 * No, I'm in Portugal. SUVs don't sell well here (unless they're deluxe SUVs), but pickup trucks do. The message I'm trying to pass across here is this: The Mitsubishi Challenger/Pajero Sport won't exist in the three largest markets anymore. Starting from 2007, there will be no car in Japan or Europe between the Outlander and the Pajero, and no car in North America between the Outlander and the Endeavor. The Outlander is getting an upgrade in cabin space, equipment and engine size, to cover the space left by the Challenger's disappearance. It will be "Montero iO --> Outlander --> Pajero" in Europe and Japan, and "Outlander --> Endeavor" in North America. The Mitsubishi Challenger/Pajero Sport remains only in countries that need cheap all-terrain vehicles, like Australia, Southeast Asia or South America. Just because a model remains in some markets alongside its replacement (or even without the replacement), doesn't mean it wasn't effectively replaced in the rest of the world. --Pc13 11:20, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Months after this discussion, I'd like to chime in and support User:Davez621. The infobox is a very limited way of conveying information, and I don't think it's encyclopedic to say in black and white that the Outlander replaced the Challenger. It may have filled a gap in the price lists in certain markets when the Challenger was discontinued (e.g. North America), but to state it's a replacement is just inaccurate. The Focus "replaced" the Escort, i.e. production of one was halted, and production of the other began. I can think of four reasons the Outlander wasn't a like-for-like replacement:
 * 1) The Outlander isn't the same kind of vehicle (a car-based compact crossover SUV as opposed to a mid-size SUV with a ladder frame chassis). Especially in places like Australia where they actually care about off-road performance, the Outlander can't replace the Challenger.
 * 2) There's such an extended overlap, with the Challenger still available in many countries, the Outlander available in others, and both vehicles available in yet more markets (e.g. right here in the UK).
 * 3) The "replacement" Outlander was only available with a 2.4L I4, while the outgoing Challenger was a 3.0 V6 or a TD.
 * 4) They seem to be miles apart on the US price lists. According to Auto.consumerguide, a 2004 Montero Sport was $24-28k, while a 2005 Outlander was $18-25k. Same in the UK - a new Outlander is £17-19k, a Shogun Sport is £18-24k.

I'm going to delete the successor data from the infobox (and the Outlander page's infobox) unless someone comes up with a compelling reason to keep them. All external sources seem to show that one did not "replace" the other. --DeLarge 09:08, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Thank you so much for supporting my argument. Since this debate took place, a few things have changed and some have come to light.  The Challenger was in fact discontinued in Australia at the end of 2006.  However, Mitsubishi have indicated that a new, Triton-based ladder-frame SUV will come onto the market in the middle of 2009, which will be the TRUE Challenger successor.  It will be priced in between the Outlander and Pajero, and will (presumably) include both V6 and diesel powerplants.Davez621 (talk) 23:19, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Fairly late to state, but in south America (as i know of Brasil and Argentina etc its the Pajero Sport and not Montero as mentioned in the article)Kongkit (talk) 07:44, 4 February 2011 (UTC)KongkitKongkit (talk) 07:44, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

More Montero Sport Info
While introduced in 1997, it replaced the low-end Montero LS trim, and while introduced in North America, it was designed to compete with the Toyota 4Runner. That would be blamed, since Mitsubishi never had a RAV4 rival up until 2003, since the Outlander's introduction. Montero Sport was 181.1 (about similar to the current Toyota RAV4), Outlander was 179. The 4Runner would mostly compete with a Montero also. By the time the Highlander arrived for 2001, it would challenge the Montero Sport. Just to know this, Outlander replaces Montero Sport with 2003-04 overlapping, and Endeavor replaces Montero with 2004-06 overlapping. -- Bull-Doser 01:45, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Second Generation
Mitsubishi press didn't say the new Challenger is based on Triton platform. Only the blogger self assume. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.51.102.121 (talk) 03:26, 4 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Mitsubishi said it's based on a ladder-frame chassis, like the Triton. The previous Challenger shared its chassis with the Triton. Mitsubishi may not have explicitly said it's based on the Triton, but they didn't say it isn't either. Have you any reason to doubt that it's the same platform? Paultan.org is sufficiently established to be a reasonably reliable source. The article not only mentions that it's the same chassis, the actual title was "New Mitsubishi Pajero Sport based on Triton platform". Given that we can source the claim to a verifiable reliable source, can you provide any evidence to dispute it?


 * Before replying, consider this. You think he assumed it. Can you demonstrate that he did not, in fact, ask a question to a Mitsubishi employee? --DeLarge (talk) 09:27, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Did Mitsubishi said ladder-frame chassis of Mitsubishi Triton? no, they just said on ladder-frame. The car is not officially launch by Mitsubishi yet, how he could ask and get so many detail more than what Mitsubishi press could give?

Only because the facial look is same doesn't mean the chassis would be the same. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.54.24.134 (talk) 20:56, 4 August 2008 (UTC)


 * No-one is here to convince you if you don't believe they're the same platform; you're entitled to your opinion. However, you are not allowed to remove cited sources unless you can provide any evidence that they are inaccurate. Until you do that there is nothing to argue. --DeLarge (talk) 23:21, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

ok Delarge, you keep repeating revise to Paultan version. Are you linked to him? Anyway i found a new article from Mitsubishi his own and claimed its based on 'a new ladder frame' and never said Triton. So could you agree now? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.51.60.238 (talk) 21:51, 4 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Because Paultan source is currently reliable unless you can prove that it's not which you haven't. Please stop your disruption and prove that the source is not reliable and why the source your adding is reliable. Bidgee (talk) 02:59, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Again...my source is based on autoblog(the biggest automotive blog in the world) and bkkauto blog(also a automobile magazine in Thailand). Isn't it better than paultan who are a personal blogger who are bias comment toward some manufacture in his blog and that copy paste from other website and blog? Do you really read all the things what had i edit and where are the source from?

And i do some update about the first generation of the car as well. The production cease in Thai together with Strada, again with source!

Isn't it now enough to convict you my source and information is more reliable? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.51.56.123 (talk) 03:13, 5 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Neither of the blogs you refer to contradict PaulTan.org. PaulTan merely gives more information about the chassis. Further, I find it rather eye-opening that you'd dispute the legitimacy of a webiste (paultan.org) with an Alexa ranking of c.15,000 in favour of bkkautos, which has a ranking of 288,000.
 * More to the point, your reversions restored bad English, erroneous grammar, and out-of-date information. Please stop using the revert button so indiscriminately. Please also note that you are edit warring without consensus with two editors. Further disruption can lead to the article being semi-protected. --DeLarge (talk) 13:50, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

what a lame excuse, so you count the magazine website is less reliable huh? so count that mitsubishi press website also have less visitor! how about autoblog? point it here that it have less visitor than paultan. Could you?

how about the information that i added that the first generation is stopped being production? and i edit it with the source with those reliable website, did you really take a look? and you claim it an outdated information?

wikipedia is becoming more like rubbish with people like you who simply think your own idea is always better without checking the source and find out the real news and information.

so what if my english have problem, your american or british english is so different than my origin thailand english. what is the fuss? if you think my english is not up to standard you can edit it.

wikipedia is not yours, even this page is created by you so what? this page still doesn't have a ownership. our contributions is to share the truth and real information to all and together, not the false information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.48.104.87 (talk) 23:43, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Mitsubishi Challenger. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110819211538/http://www.mitsubishi-motors.ru:80/auto/pajero-sport-new/specifications/ to http://www.mitsubishi-motors.ru/auto/pajero-sport-new/specifications/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 04:00, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Mitsubishi Challenger. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061022130131/http://www.mitsubishi-motors.com/corporate/ir/share/pdf/e/fact0009.pdf to http://www.mitsubishi-motors.com/corporate/ir/share/pdf/e/fact0009.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070305232559/http://www.mitsubishi-motors.com/corporate/ir/share/pdf/e/fact2005.pdf to http://www.mitsubishi-motors.com/corporate/ir/share/pdf/e/fact2005.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090320113933/http://www.mitsubishi-motors.com/corporate/ir/share/pdf/e/fact_2008.pdf to http://www.mitsubishi-motors.com/corporate/ir/share/pdf/e/fact_2008.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120616111827/http://www.mitsubishi-motors.com/corporate/ir/share/pdf/e/fact_2010.pdf to http://www.mitsubishi-motors.com/corporate/ir/share/pdf/e/fact_2010.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 16:17, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Mitsubishi Challenger. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120614094326/http://www.mitsubishi-motors.com/corporate/ir/share/pdf/e/fact0109.pdf to http://www.mitsubishi-motors.com/corporate/ir/share/pdf/e/fact0109.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130220045119/http://www.bsec.gov.bd/html/pil.php to http://www.bsec.gov.bd/html/pil.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 21:33, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Rename?
As the "Challenger" name is no longer used, I suggest the page to be renamed to "Mitsubishi Pajero Sport", as it's the most used name today.114.5.146.135 (talk) 10:40, 30 July 2018 (UTC)