zukrider
Explorer
the red high light is not correct. i have a 94 SR. it has the 3.5 and associated trans, the plastic flares. thats it. no leather, no sun roof, no 3 way shocks, no locker.
Tell me more about these Monteros
- Thread starter Soviet Joy
- Start date
the red high light is not correct. i have a 94 SR. it has the 3.5 and associated trans, the plastic flares. thats it. no leather, no sun roof, no 3 way shocks, no locker.
I was thinking the same after looking at a 94 before my 95. It was an "SR" with flares but 3.0, no leather or sunroof, no lockers, no adjustable suspension.... 
BIGdaddy
Expedition Leader
Just checked out a 99 with the winter option pkg with 116k on the clock. Very not bad.
Not sure I like the 2.5 more than the 2nd gen's, though. I'm trying to get Mrs. Bigdaddy over to see one, as we've already test driven a 2nd gen and really like them.
I do like the extra width, but it adds quite a bit of $$ to the price for a few years difference.
Not sure I like the 2.5 more than the 2nd gen's, though. I'm trying to get Mrs. Bigdaddy over to see one, as we've already test driven a 2nd gen and really like them.
I do like the extra width, but it adds quite a bit of $$ to the price for a few years difference.
4D55 Performance
Explorer
It's all personal preference. The two vehicles are very similar. I don't think you can go wrong with either model. I have noticed that I see a lot of Gen II Monteros doing 65mph in the slow lane on the freeway. I zip past them in my gen II.5 doing 80mph with out any issues. This may have something to do with the higher gearing in the Gen II.5. This is just an observation I have made over the past few months.
off-roader
Expedition Leader
Im usually doing 70-75 on the highway but 85+ isn't a problem even with 35's and the added weight of all the mods ive made to my rig. Perhaps those you passed are just conservative drivers or grandparents or better yet soccer moms (perfect non abused gen II when they buy a new car...:smiley_drive:
Yeah, I've never had a problem with the speed of my Montero. But I do try to drive conservatively. Of course the Montero feels like a Ferrari compared to my previous vehicles, an 87 4runner and 88 FJ62 Land Cruiser...:smiley_drive:
off-roader
Expedition Leader
Yeah with greater experience comes an acute awareness of what a speeding ticket will do long term. LOL...
My speed more specifically is typically what the other vehicles around me are doing. My speedy run was done during optimum conditions (non-existent traffic and no CHP for miles).
Always liked the earlier SFA 4runners and the FJ62 was the best bodied FJ IMHO but IIRC its engine was pretty anemic at least from what I was hearing. Was originally looking for one and having a difficult time finding one at a decent price when I decided the Troopers looked nice. While looking for a trooper, I found my first Montero on a dealer lot which I thought was a trooper from afar. Since that time, I've only owned Montero as far as 4x4's are concerned unless you count my S4 as a 4x4.:sombrero:
Last edited:
The 3FE is a decent, reliable engine... its the crappy automatic transmission they paired with it that royally sucks.
My FJ62 came back up on the market... I'm thinking about buying it back.... but the asking price is 3x the price of what I paid for it.
BIGdaddy
Expedition Leader
So both engines have issues with valve guide seals, right?
And the 3.5l speciifically doesn't have issues with butterfly valves because it physically doesn't have them, correct?
Do both of them have timing belts rather than chains, and if they do, are either of them non-interference engines so as to avoid valve damage in the case of belt failure?
Thanks in advance for correcting my assumption and filling in the gaps of my knowledge.
And the 3.5l speciifically doesn't have issues with butterfly valves because it physically doesn't have them, correct?
Do both of them have timing belts rather than chains, and if they do, are either of them non-interference engines so as to avoid valve damage in the case of belt failure?
Thanks in advance for correcting my assumption and filling in the gaps of my knowledge.
4D55 Performance
Explorer
IMO the SOHC is much less likely to have have leaking valve guide seals. I have seen a few that have complained of leaking on their SOHC, but they have well over 150K miles on the engine. I think the leaking VGS on the SOHC is due to improper maintenance rather than a design flaw. The SOHC engines can be found on the 1997 Gen II Montero, 1998-2000 Gen II.5 Montero and the 2001-2002 Gen III Montero.
off-roader
Expedition Leader
Grasscats gen 2.5 3.5sohc engine had leaking vgs'. Not sure what the mileage is. Maybe he'll see this post and chime in.
off-roader
Expedition Leader
Clem,
The 3.5L DOHC engines are NOT interference engines. I would suspect that neither are the 3.5L SOHC engines but can't confirm that right now.
scrubber3
Not really here
Hmm, so what about the 3.0L?