Found a '91 Montero, 4-door with V6 and manual transmission. It looks like what I believe is called a first generation. I know very little about Monteros, but they seem similar in size and cargo capacity to the Isuzu Troopers. What changes were there between the 1st gen and 2 gen? How do these compare to the Isuzu Troopers, both 1st gen and 2nd gen? Is the V6 prone to the same valve train tick that the 3.2 SOHC Isuzu engines can have? How about high oil usage problems? Any serious engine problem areas? How durable are the diffs, transmission, and xfer box? Any problem areas to be aware of?

Thanks!

Welcome to 4x4Wire Montero Board!

The Gen I Montero does have some issues unique to the marque, as all vehicles do. My preference for the Montero is based upon other experience with Isuzu products that were good/bad.

The first Gen Montero had a few changes for the US models between 1983 to 1991. Others will elaborate on some technical issues later.

However, the Mitsu V6 has some interesting things that include lifter tick, solved by replacement normally. The V6 models have a 2-core radiator that may not cool the engine during hard use, like rock crawling or towing, but the 3-core center from a 4-cyl radiator will alleviate some concerns. 1989 models have an EGR tube that 90/91 models don't. Some of the board guys are running 34" tires and crawl with them, no body or suspension lift needed.

The Trooper has a latch to keep the rear cargo door open that is not found on the Montero.

In my worldly scheme, the monetary hierarchy for this class of Japanese SUV goes Suzuki - Isuzu/Nissan - Mitsubishi - Toyota. The Montero is affordable and durable, using several similar suppliers as Toyota...Aisin transmissions and hubs, for example.

Explore the other Boards on this page, too, as many here have both Isuzu and Mitsu products. Brendon is running Isuzu wheel center caps on his Gen II Monty.

Buy the Montero, then I can sell parts to you. <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/lol.gif" alt="" />

Russell

Who's "Brendon"? <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/lol.gif" alt="" />

The Gen II Monteros have this.

Montero = bigger better axles, T-case, Auto/Manual transmissions bomb proof (except 4 cyl 5spd), The best IFS of ANY of the SUVs on the market period. I prefer solid axles but as far as independent fronts go the Montero will laugh at things that destroy the others. Engines are OK good for 200k miles before needing any serious work but are not without little faults like pre '97 engines and lifter tick (just change your oil on time and or use synthetic) lifters updated in '97)). 94-96 have the high revving engines (3.5 DOHC) and are really quick but need to be on schedule with maintenance. 97-00 have 3.5 sohc and aren't as quick but are much more forgiving when it comes to maintenance. 94-99 high models (SR-Winter-cold climate) will have a air actuated rear locking differential. 92-93 (12v 3.0 V6) are hit and miss with any options because most are hand built optional equipment will have to be verified in person through any trim level. (12v 3.0 V6/coilsprung(Long and short wheelbase)) First generation trucks with v6's are equipped with limited slip differentials on offroad package models sometimes (look for headlamp sprayers. (4cyl/leafsprung(short wheelbase only) Carburated engines, Automatic good and 5spd bad (i don't care what anyone says they suck) Great trucks otherwise especially if you do an engine swap (2.6 turbo, 2.4 MPI, 2.0 MPI, 2.3/2.5 TDI, MItsu V6's or whatever else like 4.3 chev. Hope this helps just thought i'd rattle off some basic info.

I've got to disagree with you here, Toasty, but as you say, "I don't care what anyone says," so you can ignore it if you want. <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Here goes: The manual tranny in the 2.6s might not be the strongest in the world, and indeed are not equal to their automatic contemoraries, but they don't suck. I put 188,000 miles on my original before having it rebuilt. The rebuild is running fine now, but I don't beat hell out of it, either.

The manual tranny behind the 3.0L is better - no arguement there.

My only point is, don't be scared of the 5sp in a 2.6.

If you have to be concerned about how you drive a vehicle for fear of damaging the transmission then that's not a good transmission.

I drove the hell out of my '88 2.6l w/ 5 speed and never once had a problem. It engaged everytime quickly and never got stuck in gear. Personally, I prefer a manual tranny when off-road. More specific control for a range of situations.

-Austin

Come rock cawling with us in AZ sometime. I'll let you drive both a SWB and a Gen 2 LWB with automatics. On "moderate" trails. Then we'll see if you still prefer a clutch. Who knows, you still might, but I doubt it.

Dadrab, you just have a good transmission (I s'pose they made a few, from time to time) and good Karma.

The KM-145 manual transmission behind the 2.6l engine in a Gen 1 SWB clearly SUX as it came from the factory. My opinion, of course.

John B.

Ditto all of the above. My take on the 5spd 4cyl montero is that even with a slightly marginal tranny, it's a better truck than most anything but a locked fj80 landcruiser, or one of the diesel G wagen mercedeses. The tranny can be built quite a bit stronger, using parts from an 89 starion or monty, and is quite durable. I abused mine for years, then put a turbo motor in front of it, and REALLY abused it. Somewhere in there, during the carby days I'm pretty sure, I towed a 763 bobcat skid steer loader with it, up some hills I had to use Lorange on in first and really grunt it to get it up the grades, and it lived thru that fine. It was after about 70k behind the turbo, with a multitude of warning signs (the shifter flopped fore and aft when you got on and off the gas, and it was iffy going into 2nd and reverse for a while before it died), and it still got me home, in the only gear it had left, which was 4th, about 100mi or so, and thank Bog for the turbo torque I only had to run one red light. It hauled immense weights in the bed over long distances, usually concrete bag goods. It hauled trailers from popups to 16' flatbeds with a full size Bronco on top to 3 tons of rebar.