|
|
Post by Naeos_Valkarian on Oct 18, 2016 10:21:38 GMT -5
98 4WD with the factory tire carrier. They only want $850 for it, granted it has 350K miles on it but it still runs. So tempted to drive over there and pick it up if someone else doesn't.  bham.craigslist.org/cto/5831211125.htmlIt's a 98 like mine so perhaps I could swap parts over to this beauty.  Found another one, must be "sell your 98 montero sport" season. xD bham.craigslist.org/cto/5795656363.html |
|
|
|
Post by redraif on Oct 18, 2016 10:50:53 GMT -5
Dang... thats one thing i have not seen yet at the yards... the tire carrier set up. I wish it had come on the later models
|
|
|
|
Post by ES_97Sport on Oct 18, 2016 15:28:17 GMT -5
Dang... thats one thing i have not seen yet at the yards... the tire carrier set up. I wish it had come on the later models Likewise! I don't think anyone ever found out from Mitsu why they dropped the carrier. Probably too inconvenient, increased the vehicle length and/or raised the CG or something. Edward |
|
|
|
Post by Naeos_Valkarian on Oct 18, 2016 15:46:52 GMT -5
Dang... thats one thing i have not seen yet at the yards... the tire carrier set up. I wish it had come on the later models Likewise! I don't think anyone ever found out from Mitsu why they dropped the carrier. Probably too inconvenient, increased the vehicle length and/or raised the CG or something. Edward Could also have been a lack of enough interest for it to be worth it to them to continue production. |
|
|
|
Post by dirk on Oct 18, 2016 18:58:52 GMT -5
Thinking, partially to cut down on production assemby options, the back end where that bolts would have to be a completely different to support it. To stream line things and simplicity of the line, easier to build one frame, one set of harnesses etc, then just bolt on what is called for on that one car. I work doing electronic's for a bus manufacturer (volvo) and see how hard it is to change structures etc per contract and order.
|
|
|
|
Post by pinstryper on Oct 18, 2016 20:39:40 GMT -5
lack of interest...
|
|
|
|
Post by Naeos_Valkarian on Oct 18, 2016 21:28:34 GMT -5
Don't get me wrong I'm interested, you're interested, heck I'd say just about everyone on this forum are interested. I'm just saying that even with that in mind it still may not have be enough for Mitsu. to justify the cost of production. Granted nothing is just that simple anymore It was likely a combination but perhaps one of many nails in the coffin so to speak. |
|
|
|
Post by jkdv8 on Oct 18, 2016 22:14:53 GMT -5
Yea I was gonna say lack of interest, reducing drag thus improving fuel economy, and getting it out the way for soccer moms picking up groceries. When they first came out they appealed to all types of buyers and as time went on they geared them more toward who they thought would be the most interested. Typical when a manufacturer release an all new vehicle. Since they weren't really taken seriously as an off-roader probably because of the ifs and the fact jeep has the strongest foothold in the segment they slowly started dropping all the off road options. I'm willing to bet anyways. Supply and demand.
|
|
|
|
Post by markgramlich on Jul 15, 2019 15:57:18 GMT -5
|
|
