In 1992 when the new body style came out w the mod motor everything was done to make it cheaper to make. Engine wise the mod motor cost less to make, the swb was eliminated, The dash in the newer van sure seemed simple to me, none of the wood trim or style of the 1990 square dash.

 

Thanks for the detailed info on the changes through the 75-91 Number. I didn’t actually realize that for a few years at least, the 302 wasn’t available. Thanks Warren I’m with you on the fuel injection & classic van look.

Thanks everyone for providing your input & opinions. Really appreciate them all! I think we’re starting to target what we might like the most, now it’ll just be a case of having patience through the winter to find the right van, & plan for a trip if needed.

Wow Box, you have 2 awesome looking vans! I didn’t actually realize they kept making the shorty van until 91, I figured that went away with the 70s. Nice! & I also thought the chinook campers went away with the 70s as well, but yours looks awesome! Yeah 2 very different vans indeed. I’m actually surprised how many have more than one van on here to meet different needs as well I’d think of a van as being versatile in & of itself.

 

I’ve heard a couple of comments now on the cheapening of the van with the 1992 design. Interesting as the 90s, perhaps moreso for Ford than others, seemed to be a time of cost cutting & cheapening of designs.

I think I’m leaning much more towards say an 88-91 now vs. the 92+, even if I wouldn’t say no to the right ‘newer’ van. So it might just be a case of having enough patience to keep searching for the right ‘classic’ van. Thanks again everybody!

 

I don't know, I haven't found a lot of quality differences between generations. I do still and always will prefer the look of the 88-91 you're considering. Aside from the look, I always liked how the steering wheel of those vans tilted way up and it could feel like driving a bus if you wanted that, which I did. But I personally also love my 96. I don't think you'll go wrong either way.

 

Hmm, maybe a quality difference is more of a perception than anything that was actually taken away. Someone mentioned the wood grain dash taken away, which is something I love, but items like that were probably lost in as much a ‘modernization’ era of cars as anything else. I can see you didn’t go wrong at all with your 96, if that’s the one in your avatar! Beautiful looking van. I wish I could have more than one LOL . But for now we’ll start with one & see how it goes.

 

https://kansascity.craigslist.org/ct...385671038.html
Came across the following listing browsing in areas where we know friends who could help with procuring the right van. There are a few differences though with this one that led to a few more discussion points & questions.

1. The tape graphics have been stripped away. Whether that was a desire to respray at some point (hopefully not due to accident or hail or something), or the previous owners thought they were peeling, or just didn’t like them, who’s to say. But that certainly takes away from the period look of the van, surprisingly. Has anyone redone the graphics on their vans? Or gone with something original & new? If so, what kind of successes/experiences did you have? They should be easy to recreate something original or new nowadays with everybody doing vehicle wraps. & a white box could be a blank canvas.

2. Along with the graphics above, anything like running boards & such that were common are also stripped away. Has anyone bought accessories/pieces like running boards that fit the 75-91 vans? I’d think such things are no longer available, but would be easy to find for the 92+ vans which had the same body style until the transit.

3. With the missing graphics, so too is gone any mention of who / which company, the converter was. Since that information is usually displayed as part of the graphics. Which led to a thought. Does I️t matter who did the van conversion when you’re looking for one? Or were they all likely about the same quality/standards? They all appear very similar, as long as you could do upholstery/furniture, & wall panneling, cut some windows in, I️t may not matter much which company did the conversion after so many years. Or does it?

4. Last but not least, and finally unrelated to the look of the van, has anyone had one with a sliding door? I thought those disappeared with the 70s. All I remember about them was they were big & heavy to try to close on the boogie van we had when I was a kid. But hey I was 5, so take that for what you will. Every other listing I’ve seen has the dual side doors on I️t. Are there advantages/disadvantages people have found to having the side opening doors vs. the slider?

Thanks again all for great discussion!

 

Regarding the van you linked- that is an inordinate amount of asking price, even if it is mint.

I had a sliding door on my 79 and I loved it. Nothing more than personal preference; in conversion trim I find no real difference in convenience between them. I've just always loved the big slider.

Thanks for the words about my 96. It was a great deal since the Chevy loving fellow I got it from was forced to take it (for free) as a package when he bought the camper it used to tow, and he was all too happy to just be rid of it. The original owner was a retiree who bought and used it only to tow a camper on vacations to Canada annually. He passed and his family wanted nothing to do with it. It was garaged and had just over 100k on it when I got it. Been a great van in the last 5 years or so I've owned it.

It's far from perfect, and I know I got a good deal, but $2300 is all I gave for it. I'm quite sure you can score a 90 in great shape for far less than that ad.

I agree that the wood trim was likely deleted as a modernization thing rather than a drop in quality. You can probably get a faux wood decal set for the dash. I did that on my 98 Durango.

 

Slider is nice but if you play with your tires by changing to a wider set you will find their limits, I want to have my sliding door hinged up to a gull wing, the track is in poor shape, will jump track when not shut a certain way, it is picky.

 

$7,500 is allot for a 1990. Some people think they are collectors, but not yet!

Things I have learned from my 85 with 140k and my 88 with 105k

While it looks great from the pictures and would be well worth looking at:
Also people do lie! no tsyaing they are,, but the #rd gen van odometers only went to 99,999 miles and rollover to 0. Mine had 5k showing on it but after ding a compression check I believe it to be 105k
The1990 not is not new.. The engine, transmission, drive train, front suspension, AC, ect have nearly 90k. That said, I have heard of people getting 150 to 200k without problems. Any original rubber parts are getting old and some may need replaced (if they haven’t already been) like door and window seals, vacuum hoses, heater and radiator hoses, ect. Those are all small items that are easy to do. At 89k you may need to think about a timing chain in the next 25 to 35k miles. Not always as the 5.8 is a great little engine but again its not a new van... There is a simple way to check the slack though an give you an idea of how the timing chain is faring..

I have been going through my van doing those things depending on what I was working on at the time. When i tuned mine up last I changed the fuel pressure regulator just because it was original and has a rubber diaphragm in it. when I replaced the coil springs and shocks I decided to change all the bushings on the front suspension just because they were old and didn’t want to have to deal with them for another 100k. So there are age related parts that will need to be replaced but most at our leasure..
Baring being totaled in an accident I want my 88 to be the last van I buy so I have been a little over board perhaps on replacing parts. Perhaps one might say I am refurbishing it..

There are some that debate old verses newer cars and their reliability. Personally I believe the 3rd gen vans are less complicated and if you slowly refurbish one as you go, you will have years of trouble free happy driving. With a good set of manuals and hel[p from all the great folks here at FTE, you will soon find yourself a understand your van and being quite confidant to do most any repairs or upgrades yourself.

On my 85 when I first got it I had my son to help me do the work. It needed new brakes so I replaced the drums, rotors, bearings, wheel cylinders, calipers. rubber hoses, and master cylinder, all for around $250 and now have a new brake system that shouldn’t need servicing for years to come. Things like that reduce the chances of having troubles down the road and was cheaper then if i had taken it to a shop just to have the front brakes done!!

Even a newer van will need many of these things done to it as it ages...

If this add is true,, 7k could get could something like this 98 with 43,000 miles..
https://atlanta.craigslist.org/nat/c...384952470.html

 

Thanks Warren, Maple, & Anna for continuing the discussion. It’s definitely helping me focus on what’s important & what we’re looking for in a van.

https://www.kijiji.ca/v-travel-trail...teLocale=en_CA
https://www.kijiji.ca/v-view-details...equestSource=b

Yes, the linked one is expensive. Our top 3 listings, at least from browsing ads, are all eye-wateringly expensive. Probably looking for something mint as we can get, which people who would have such a van might be those who think they’re collectors! But Anna is right, not yet. She does make a great point that no matter what year van or how well it’s kept, it’ll need some refurbishment.

So given the prices people are asking for what I might be interested in, I’m willing to sit them out. Serviceable examples are available for $5k around here, so it’s certainly hard to pay $10k. We shall see.

Thanks again all! Happy to have any & all opinions as we’re going along the search. I’m really hoping to get I️t down to ‘the one’ keeper at the start without needing to purchase another one in the future. Find something that’s good enough to put refurbishment into like Anna’s 88.

 

Not surprisingly both those listings are still active. But Annaleigh’s comment about being able to purchase a newer van (newer being relative) if you were willing to spend that kind of budget brought forth another example.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/1999-Ford-E...haMDgO&vxp=mtr

1 owner, 67k, seems pretty good. The newer style ‘oval’ dash puts a double din opening front & center for nav/camera duties. But no mention of Powertrain at all. I wonder... They do provide the VIN, and this site has a VIN decoder...

Well the van apparently,, according to the VIN decoder, has a 4.2L V6? I wasn’t even thinking something as high end as a conversion would use the base V6 engine! Would that really be enough to power a brick this size?

Opinions seem mixed at best on a V6, and there’s lots of threads about it on this site, usually in the trucks. It seems you might be alright if you avoid 97/98, but that it still might not be enough power for a van. That seems to echo the earlier comments in my own thread here about the 351 being preferable over the 302. Any thoughts? Would a V6 in a van be a complete deal breaker?

 

The body was updated on these vans in '92 but the modular motors didn't appear until '97 so you could still get the 5.0 and 5.8 until '96. The transmissions in these mid '90s trucks were much better than the older versions too so that is something to consider, the AOD found in late '80s trucks is clunky and not terribly robust compared to the 4R70w which just works, and the Ford had sorted our the bugs that plagued the early E4OD as well.
The smaller V8 only gets better milage in the city, out on the highway the extra grunt of the 5.8 climbs hills better and gets better milage overall.

 

Thanks for the tips on transmission Conan! Appreciate the help. I actually hadn’t considered transmission at all, assuming one 4sp auto was the same as the next for as old as we are looking, and not really understanding the differences from one design to hte next. I’ll take your hint for what it’s worth too, another vote for the 5.8. I guess it’s just as true now, searching for these vehicles used, as when they were new, the whole ‘no replacement for displacement’ argument.

 

The older vans look better but thats it. Get a 5.8 with an od tranny. Also the older vans had kingpins which can be a pain in the ***** .

 

There is more then just looks.

And the king pins can be a pain to replace but so can the ball joints. The benefit to the king pins is, once they have been replaced, they will outlast the ball joints if they are kept greased.