When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I’ve looked at several Broncos over the last few months and found one I may buy. It is a 1995 XL and advertised as having less than 50K original miles. I looked at it and drove it. Other than some fairly minor body dings and scraps it’s in pretty good shape. That mileage seems pretty low, is this a good thing? I’m certainly not questioning the integrity of the seller but could there be a problem? How realistic is a role back? I ran a Carfax and it didn’t show any discrepancies related to mileage.
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comfficeffice" /><o></o> One other issue, the truck originally had a manual trans but was changed out for a C-6 auto, good thing? It has a 6” lift and 35” tires but was not re-geared post trans swap – good/bad? I drove it on the interstate at 70 and it seemed to have plenty of “pep”. Is this something to be concerned about?
Doesn't make sense to remove and replace a transmission with less than 50K. Dig deeper. Get down and dirty. How much dirt is on or under the gas tank? There's a skid plate that covers the gas tank, look at the patina on it, there's one in my DonKo album that has 165,000 on it. Yours should be free and clear of any nicks cuts scrapes dents rust if it only has 50K.
My family use to buy big vans for their work, they would get them from auctions and would often change out manuals for automatics.. it's not that unheard of. You find the right deal on a vehicle and you don't wanna deal with a stick, then swap in an auto, and I can't think of an easier tranny than the C6.
What's he even asking for it? A 95' with 50k miles will be pretty obvious, it should look almost new inside and out.. not just good, but new. 50k miles isn't enough for mud from 150k miles worth of boot prints to pile up on the carpets and 150k miles worth of stains on the seats..
honestly, i'd about kill for a 95 with 50,000 miles, so if you're sure it's real, it just depends on if it's worth it to you.
oh and uh, these guys are a bit overreactive about gear swaps, underpowered axles, etc. For most people a Dana44s and 3.55s is plenty for big rock crawlers, 3.55s, a C6 and 35'' tires isn't exactly stressing a Bronco too much in my HUMBLE opinion. I think it's just one of those "best scenario" situations. Not bashing gear swaps, I just don't think it's end of the world running 35s or even 38s with stock axles and gearing.
I wouldn't worry about it only having 50K if the condition of the vehicle looks inline with that kind of mileage, it's probably not that uncommon for a Bronco to be a second vehicle that doesn't roll up a lot of miles. I have no idea where you are or where the truck may have been, but I'd want to make sure it hadn't spent a lot of time as a plow truck as well as get the story behind the tranny swap.
Rezvani's Latest Post-Apocalytic Monster Is a Ford F-150 Raptor Underneath
Slideshow: Called the Fortress, the 850-horsepower pickup combines Raptor underpinnings with military-inspired features, survival equipment, and a starting price of $285,000.