Picture of police NP with ARB bar & winch wanted

[mal&glo]

Hi

Has anyone got a picture of a police or any other government department (emergency services etc) NP pajero with ARB bar and winch - if so, can you please let me know either on forum or PM me so that I can get a copy of it.

Thanks
Mal

[albatrossnp]

I have some pictures of X police NP with that Bar and winch

[mal&glo]

Hi albatrossnp
I have PMed you with email address to send photos to
Thanks
Mal

[Adza]

I've got a pic of an NP NSW Police vehicle, but alas it does not have a bullbar. I have seen another with ARB bar and winch but no photo.

My mate has an ACT Emergency Services Authority NP with ARB bar and winch, but I don't think I have a photo of it... could probably get one though.

[Adza]

Actually, I have one bad photo of the ESA vehicle... unfortunately it's obscured by people...

[Monterorider]

I've got one pick. Is it what you are looking for;

[mal&glo]

Thanks Monterorider
Just what I was looking for - also thanks to the other people that have replied.

If people are wandering why I am looking for the pictures, it's for a bit of backup that NP Pajero's were supplied to government departments that were unroadworthy and that they are now going out into the general public as they are sold off. The police vehicle pictured above is probably around 50kg over max. front axle permitted for an NP before anyone gets into it - just bar & winch - according to my owners manual, 1200kg max. Please spend $5 -$10 at your local weighbridge and check for yourselves.

My NP GLX weighed 1195kg with ARB winch bar and little else in the way of accessories with no-one in it. I am trying to get the mass specs revised so that I and many other owners can operate legally and without insurance risk.

If you are interested in helping to put a bit more pressure on Mitsubishi Motors, please ring Customer Relations on 1300131211 or 1300130099 (local call charge I assume) and ask to speak to xxxx who is handling my case No., expressing your concern at this situation.

See this thread - http://www2.pajeroclub.com.au/forum/...read.php?t=149 for more info.

Regardless of some of the opinions expressed in that thread if you are over max. mass spec.s you are operating an unroadworthy vehicle and risking that your insurance company will and can refuse a claim based on you driving your vehicle while unroadworthy - have a look at your policy doc.s

Regards Mal
Mal

[Pickle]

If you are interested in helping to put a bit more pressure on Mitsubishi Motors, please ring Customer Relations on 1300131211 or 1300130099 (local call charge I assume) and ask to speak to xxxx who is handling my case No., expressing your concern at this situation.

Mal

Well being the inquisitive bugger I am I rang Mitsubishi this morning. Angie will not discuss individual cases with other people over your concerns. So I didn't even get to talk to her!
Now your concerns over the axle weight has got be a little over the top. For the amount of Pajero's imported here and o/seas I have never heard of any of them suffering any form of failure due to overloading. Typically earlier model Pajero (NL) did not even have weight specification for axles on Brochures handed out to the general public. You might be worried about running around in a vehicle that is unroadworthy but it looks like at least 50% of all Pajeros would be in the same boat. On the insurance side of it ....well getting an insurance company to say you were fifty kilos over your max front weight and that caused an accident is very unlikely. I would say they would be blaming your crap driving before checking weights on the front.

I don't know exactly what you wan't Mitsubishi to do. Upgrading the axle limit to 1300 kg or more would more than likely have to have an engineer involved and if indeed it was upgraded I would imagine all NP models would have to be called in to Mitsubishi service departments to get a sticker put on them for the new weight. Just like they did when they upgraded the towbar limits.
As Mitsubishi will not talk to anybody else about it ....well it looks like your on your own. Good luck with it.
Dave

[Eastie]

Mal,
I'm not sure where you got your figures from, but the MM tech/workshop manual (http://nla.gov.au/anbd.bib-an000041203500) clearly states the maximum axle front rating as follows:
SWB deisel/petrol = 1250kg NS
LWB petrol = 1300kg NS
LWB diesel = 1330kg NS
It's in the "technical specification manual" under "major specifications".

OOOP's - didn't read that you're looking at the NP.... It's also available: http://nla.gov.au/anbd.bib-an000040024221

[mal&glo]

Hi
Mass spec page from NP owners manual
Mal

[mal&glo]

Howdy Pickle,

"all NP models would have to be called in to Mitsubishi service departments to get a sticker put on them for the new weight. Just like they did when they upgraded the towbar limits."

Exactly what I believe they must do.

Mal

[Hoyks]

From what I have read, the main limiting factor for a modern 4x4 wagons carring capacity is the tyres that are fitted from the factory.

The construction is light as they can get away with so the vehicles handle well on the road and are as efficient on fuel as they reasonably can be, but the rubber just isn't up to the loads that can be fitted into the back, or in this case front, of a vehicle.

A case in point is the Patrol Wagon/Ute. A Patrol ute at 2120kg only weighs about 300kg less than the wagon (2436kg) but can carry around 600kg more, well 300 when everything else is taken into consideration (570kg v 1300kg). About the only difference is the tyre construction,.... oh and the wagon bit of course.

Have a look at the sidewall of the factory tyres and it will have a Max Load printed onto it or a code letter that will indicate what it is, double that and add on a bit for the load shift when braking, and I think that will be very close to the limit stated in the manual.

Maybe a better avenue would to fit more robust tyres with a LT construction and get an automotive engineer to approve the increase in axle loading.

[jm2004]

Paj engineering spec

Hi, I found this chain of discussion interesting as I found problems in getting a formal statement from Mitsu (Australia) on the tow hooks (eyelets) in front, whether they are for tie-down only, or are "rated" for recovery as well. They refused point blank to make any statement beyond what the manual states, which basically means those front hooks are for towing only (the rear ones are definitely for towing only).

I understand where they come from as litigation risk is never to be taken lightly especially these days, but a "real" 4WD would need provision for recovery. To date I heard all those news of MMAL doing recovery testing to prove that the hooks are strong but legally they still never want to acknowledge. I still believe in the hook strength for recoveries but if something goes wrong (the welding cracks for example), I know full well I'm on my own.

The "theme" to me seems similar on the max weight limit on the axles especially front. This rules me out so far from putting the bullbar.

I'd dearly love to learn more (and be proven to have underestimated this vehicle) as we are committed to this vehicle. We are in the middle of spending a couple of thousands of dollars preparing it for where we believe it will shine very brightly - being a light-medium 4WD Touring vehicle, and not a hardcore offroad or heavy-duty workhorse.


Happy 4WDing,

Jonathan

[pjchris]

From what I have read, the main limiting factor for a modern 4x4 wagons carring capacity is the tyres that are fitted from the factory.

The construction is light as they can get away with so the vehicles handle well on the road and are as efficient on fuel as they reasonably can be, but the rubber just isn't up to the loads that can be fitted into the back, or in this case front, of a vehicle.
...snip...
Have a look at the sidewall of the factory tyres and it will have a Max Load printed onto it or a code letter that will indicate what it is, double that and add on a bit for the load shift when braking, and I think that will be very close to the limit stated in the manual.

Sorry but it's not even close... The minimum load rating for the tyres on the NM Paj is 112. This equates to a load of 1120kg per tyre, or 2240 kg on the front or rear of the vehicle.

This is way above the 'axle rating' (87% higher) even adding on for weight shift when braking...

Peter

[Eastie]

It's a real pity MMC/MMA have taken the typical lawyer line of not stating anything that is not already in print. Given the investment by consumers and clubs (e.g. the Pajero Challenge) I find it pathetic.

It's about time MM stood behind their products 4wd ability and actually back it as a real 4wd (e.g. capable of mounting a winch on or perhaps doing a snatch recovery). Alternatively they should go down the rut that their legal team is obviously caught in and advertise the pajero as a either a Toorak tractor or soft roader (which it is out of the factory given the lack of documented rated recovery points, underbody protection including the sumps pathetic plastic guard , the flimsy sheet metal intercooler and transmission guards and the vulnerable wires hanging off the transfer case just waiting to hang up on a stick. wtf?????).