Mitsubishi Pajero fuel consumption comes under scrutiny

2016 Mitsubishi Pajero
2016 Mitsubishi Pajero

Mitsubishi have fallen into even more trouble in Japan, after an undisclosed source has reported that the Japanese carmaker has fudged fuel economy figures on eight more models, including the soon-to-be-redundant Pajero 4X4. This is on top of the four Kei cars already found to have dodgy fuel consumption figures.

We picked this story up via Reuters, who quote the Japanese newspaper Nikkei with breaking the story. They are also saying that Mitsubishi will likely withdraw models from their lineup while they sort out the problems, and could look towards compensating affected owners for being out of pocket.

Back in March, Mitsubishi Motors admitted to falsifying fuel consumption figures on four small cars. Now in deep financial trouble, Mitsubishi has sold a 1/3 share of the company to Nissan for $2.2 billion.

In testing, Mitsubishi’s vehicles have been up to 8.8% out of whack, and averaging 4.4% overall. The 4WD RVR, sold in Australia as the ASX, was the highest recorded difference, using 6.8 litres per 100 kilometres.

2016 Mitsubishi Pajero Fuel Consumption comes under scrutiny
2016 Mitsubishi Pajero Fuel Consumption comes under scrutiny

An internal report has cited “poor communication, slack governance and pressure on resource-starved engineers at the root of Mitsubishi’s problems”.

The big question is whether this affects models sold in Australia. The Pajero is nearing the death knell in Australia, without a direct replacement within the foreseeable future.

We spoke with Mitsubishi Motors Australia about this, and were told that all of these problems are only applicable to the Japanese domestic market. Each model goes through it’s own fuel economy testing specifically for the region it is being sold in, which means Australian-stated fuel economy figures aren’t under scrutiny.

Which other models are affected by this is still a mystery, we aren’t sure if the new Mivec 2.4 litre diesel under the bonnet of the Triton and Pajero Sport will come under scrutiny in Japan.


Click here to post a comment

  • Sorry Lauren

    I just note that your Pajero is petrol version. I also have a 2000 NM exceed which runs very good on LPG since 2012. I got fitted JTG Liquid LPG kit with a 50 liter LPG tank. It gives 230km per tank in the town and 275km per tank on the highway. The power boost due to liquid LPG is very good.

    I have now put this car on sales on gumtree and car sales and there is a Dyno graph in the pictures attached.

    If you want to get good millage get a JTG system filled in the car and you will never feel a pinch on your pocket.

  • Lauren

    I have also purchased a 2008 NM Exceed DID with 182k Odometer reading. Mine is also giving low fuel economy. I was getting 6.5km per liter combined average. I recently got the air filter cleaned air sensor cleaned, changed a new fuel filter and also added an injector cleaner bottle into the half filled fuel tank (approx 40 liter fuel.) I still got 7 km per liter combined and 9.2km on a highway drive.

    It is still low as it should be 9km/liter combined and 10.5km /liter on highway.

    May be air flow at low speeds is insufficient to burn all the fuel as it gives black smoke too when I accelerate. Or the injectors may need actual cleaning.

    I will keep working on it and let you know if a better result is achieved.

  • I purchased a Mitsubishi Pajero exceed 2009 petrol vehicle almost 12 months ago and have noticed shocking fuel consumption results, which I have asked Mitsubishi dealers about.
    Computer wise the car is mechanically sound and ticks all the boxes however after doing manual calculations I am only getting on average 410kms each time I fill a tank- 75 litres. My only response from the Mitsubishi dealership was “maybe it’s the way you are driving it? Or maybe it has something to do with where you buy your fuel?”
    I should be getting 600kms per tank of fuel and I’m getting almost 200kms less each time.
    I’m extremely disappointed as I purchased the car to cater for my growing family and now I can’t afford to drive it anywhere.
    This article has caught my attention and I’m interested to hear if anyone else is experiencing the same issues.
    I have contact Mitsubishi Australia head office and I’m awaiting a response from them

  • I think it is a bit obvious who Pat Callinan is beholden to for sponsorship, he has always bagged the Mitsi’s. I have a Triton for me, and a Lancer for the missus. That Lancer with it’s CV transmission can get close to 1000 km on a tank for highway driving. The Triton, has always been close to what i expect on fuel consumption, either towing or empty. No complaints at all, except for the dealer service, so I changed dealers. If the the Triton s so bad, why are there so many of them on the road, apart from they are 10 grand cheaper then the nearest competitor. (Great Wall and that Indian one don’t count)

  • just got my 2016 triton 2.4 diesel could not be more impressed with it coming from a beefed up TD42 GQ patrol.
    I tow a trailer and machine every day and just did a trip from QLD to sydney and got 8.0ltrs/100ks very happy.

  • I have a 2012 Mitsubishi Challenger, automatic which never runs under 14.5l per 100 km. The vehicle has always been serviced by Mitsubishi and even after spending thousands servicing it and looking at the problem, it’s only getting worse. Thankfully the lease expires next May

  • Complaining about a factual report in a free 4WD magazine, about a 4WD that is a popular model sold in this country, is laughable.
    It’s nice to have a mix of features and info. Most other mags are either dry and nerdy, or sensationalist and for the lowest common denominator.
    Given that the report expanded the story to describe how the whole company is in great trouble, and has recently sold off a large share of itself to Nissan, I think that the article was interesting and informing.
    The objectors to the article I’d hazard a guess at, at Pajero owners themselves, defending their own marque. Thank goodness that this magazine has no “untouchable’ brands that I have yet spotted, and speak openly and fairly as they see.
    I’m a Nissan Patrol 3.0l driver, and have spent the last 10yrs being told by some magazines how rubbish it is, so chill out a bit.
    the reporter’s mother

  • My 2011 Challenger wasn’t too bad usually, but turned into a glutton when towing and then the engine or transmission would just go into limp mode whenever it felt like it. Mits Aust response, an extra page to glue into the owners manual. Thanks. Nothing wrong here. Best day ever – 36 times we had to stop.


  • All vehicle speedometers read fast. If they read slow, you can sue the manufacturer every time you were caught speeding. My Ranger Speedo reads 6-7 km/h fast, a borrowed D Max Speedo is reading 6km/h fast, my Outlander reads 4km/h fast.
    I currently have a 2011 Outlander & still have a 1999 NL Pajero V6 in my shed. These cars are faultless & I will buy Mitsubishi again. Fuel economy in the Outlander became worse after I replaced the factory fitted Yokohama tyres with much heavier Toto tyres.

  • I have a Triton 2015 MQ model. The best I can do is between 8.5 – 9l per 100km,unloaden.
    I have complain to my dealership on numerous occasions. My great wall x200 auto gave me better fuel consumption. Mitsubishi advertise between 7.0/7.7 lts per 100km

  • Got an MQ Triton. Have clocked up 60,000 kms already. Has never got the fuel figures quoted. All my driving is Highway and best to expect is around 9-10 ltrs per per 100k. Got told its the ARB bullbar for the high consumption. WTF??? Speedo is now closer with bigger 265/65/17s. Speedo is now showing 102kmh when doing 100kmh.
    Is a great car though. No where it won’t go! Would but another one.

  • have a 2012 challenger and yes ,the speedo is out by 7 @ 110 kph , still, getting mid 8s at speed limit plus 7, not too shabby . towing full size 17 ft caravan averages about 14.5 L/100 , which I am happy with. Just arrived home in Taree after 22,000 trip around our great country and it did not miss a beat ,just replaced tyres at 78,000 . The service is a joke , tooooo bloody dear $485 for minor service at Broome. [what a rip off place] but is near the same at all the thieving dealers.

  • replying to Andrew
    I know a man who had to pay $2300 for a fixed price service on his TRITON ute at 100,000
    He will never buy another Mitsi. neither will I after a Magna.

  • Martin, this does apply to Australia, Mitsa Aust are just ignoring there customers.
    i had a 2012 ASX 1.8L, this was the worst bucket of junk we owned, as most people have stated there speedo is under by 8-10% in our case 9kph @100kmh. the trip computer was optimistic at best showing 800odd km just after filling the tank. we only would average 550km-600km per tank mixed urban driving. This is the same fuel consumption as the Subaru liberty 2004 2.5i petrol we owned directly before the ASX. The car is awful to drive talk steers in the dry, wheel spins in the wet, yes even with the traction control that never worked. Fuel consumption went through the roof when it got recalled due to soot building up under the oil rings apparently a engine remap would fix the soot problem. The ASX cant have the camber adjusted so you just put up with replacing front tyres every 35,000ks and we weren’t using who flung dung tyres. we were using Continental contact 2.
    and as for there fixed price servicing at $490ish per service for oil, oil filter, fuel filter you have to be kidding.
    am i surprised there going broke, not at all.
    This is a warning to those car manufactures who neglect there customers im talking to you Toyota who puts a auto gearbox in a unbreakable Hilux 2012 4×4 that over heats when towing, i just purchased my first non Toyota work ute in over 20+ years. lets see how the BT50 goes

  • I see a few comments here that you’ll never get the fuel consumption that the manufacturer states, this may be true in most cases but I have a Ford Fiesta Econetic (diesel) which was stated to get 3.7lit/100km, I have actually run this car at 2.9-3.4lit/100km combined on fuel saver tyres, now running “normal” tyres and get at best 4.5lit/100km so I would say it has alot to do with what tyre you run on.

  • If this does not apply why run a damaging story? Who gets the kick back from kicking Pajeros? I have 3Pajeros 995, 2005 & 2015 models. My newest gets better than 9 l per 100k on the road and 11 pulling a van. I am impressed. This just seems like a story to sell advertising. Wake up and give us the good oil not sensationalism.

  • You should all check Australian vehicle design requirements. EVERY vehicle sold in Australia since mid 90’s ( don’t know exactly ) is required to have the speedo read between 4-85 high. My GM dealer says I can order a police acurracey speedo before delivery. Seems to be too hard, I drive with speedo reading 7% high and have been checked for license and RBT and never questioned about speed. I am also told you get a 3kmph leeway, but I am cautious of that.

  • I have found that the fuel figures for my MN Triton are also bullshit, 9.4l/100k, what a joke, 13.5 is more like it, worse when I tow, was looking forward to going on many trips in the new car, but have had to reduce holidays because of fuel costs, and don’t get me started on after sales service, I don’t think that is in Mitsubishi’s training regime, absolutely disgusting…

  • Yes Paul most speedo’s are out. I own an NW and at 100kmhr i’ actually doing 95 so i set cruise at 105 and for 110 at 116, been radar gunned and never been booked.
    As far as fuel economy, i am impressed with 7 to 8 litres per 100 km’s on the open road and 10 litres plus around town.
    For a rather heavy 4×4 this is very impressive from a 3.2 litre turbo diesel.


  • I always thought Mitsubishi fudged the speedometers on Pajero’s to make it look like you were getting better economy. I owned an NT Pajero and at 110 on speedo it was actually doing 102 so had to do 118 on speedo to compensate. This also meant my odometer was clicking over faster than it should so the services came up quicker as I was doing 45K a year. I now own an NW Pajero and its got the same problem. A mate owns an NS Pajero and his speedo is short, another mate also owns an NW and his is also out by 7-8km/h at 110. Seems to be a widespread problem, think you’re doing 110 but actually doing 102 and getting better economy.

  • I should say to you all that fuel figures from car companys are all done before the engines are fitted to cars .

    The fuel tests are all done inside on a engine stand and not in the vehicles running around the streets and highways.
    If you look at fuel figures and think you are ever going to get that then you are crazy because it will never happen.

  • I have a 3.2 5 speed auto diesel Pajero and feel that the consumption figures are getting worse .
    Initially I was getting 7.9 on the highway and now around 8.9 doing the same trip four years later ( with speed varying between 100 and 110ks) the vehicle having done 45000ks.
    I have been careful to have the vehicle serviced and air cleaner changes and am aware that tyre pressures need to be kept up.
    I dont expect to get factory figures because I have a bull bar and probably carry another 100kgs of load most of the time.
    I find keeping around 100 kph is much more beneficial to consumption than traveling at 110ks
    I also find my speedo reads about 7ks faster than my satnav at 100ks – does anybody else find this problem — I also have new tyres so thought this issue would go away to some extent!

  • Have owned three Pagero. The last one a deisel used 20 plus ltr per 100 km towing our caravan which loaded is about 2.6 tonnes. Purchased a Ford Everest 9 months ago, it is doing 14 to 15 ltr per 100 km towing, a major improvement over the Pajero.

  • anyone that takes notice of manufactures fuel claims should spend a little bit more time researching the prospective purchase. I mean, how accurate are those figures anyway.

  • See the second last paragraph of the report.
    If this problem is not related to Australian models, why run the story. Looks like another sensationalised attention grabbing article to put advertising in our faces. All this does is damage Mr Callinan’s credibility.

  • I get 7.9l/100 km on the highway, loaded. Not sure what it is supposed to be but I’m happy with it.
    I too have a missing compass. I rang Mitsubishi and got ignored.

  • Mitsubishi have also been fudging the inclusions in Pajeros for years. When asked, they stuck their head in the sand. Anyone else missing their digital compass in an Exceed? Apparently they are removed if you have the MMCS GPS fitted. However, advertising up until 6 months ago listed the digital compass as standard regardless of trim or options.

Get the latest 4X4 updates

Download Our Apps