I know the Mitsubishi literature from the time says that the 3rd gen Montero has dramatically increased torsional rigidity, in the order of 300% as I recall, compared to the outgoing 2nd gen Montero.

I'm wondering if that extra rigidity is in the body shell itself --- so the entire truck in the case of the 3rd gen, but only the body (removed from the frame) in the case of the 2nd gen...?

In other words, is that 300% increase in body rigidity just a clever marketing play on words? Meanwhile, the 2nd gen while still attached to its frame is the more rigid vehicle?

From what I can tell, the world's current heavy duty off-road trucks still are built on a frame, so that seems to be the superior construction method for off-road capability.

What are your thoughts?

Monocoque/unibody is inherently stiffer, maybe not the best for off road IMHO.

Owning both, the gen3 is incredibly stiff compared on the gen 2.5. Not that the gen2.5 isn't but there is a difference.

Gen 3 is noisy as, & as stiff as & rough off road. Give me Gen 2 anyime!