They will eat you alive if you are unable to perform them yourself.

 

I've given much thought to this issue of value vs reliability...and I've come to no conclusion that could convince others of my opinion. If these Explorers were truly reliable, then I suppose this forum would be much smaller, with very little participation with the registered members. However, with most things in life, everything is a compromise, or comes with a trade-off. Put simply, I like to tinker with things. I like to work on cars (if they're my own). I love my Explorer. It does the job I ask it to. I also spend much time working on it (mostly preventative maintenance stuff). I suppose that's why I like owning it...you become somewhat attached to something you spend time with. That's the trade-off. If you just put gas in and drive, then it won't last long.

I own a 1st gen Explorer. If you have any mechanical ability (and more importantly, a desire to maintain it), then I believe careful shopping will bring you a great vehicle for a low price.

 

In any forum like this, the complaints/problems will always far outweigh the compliments. Considering the number of Explorers sold every year (400,000?), customer satisfaction is probably higher than what you see here. Any vehicle can have problems; it's how the manufacturer handles those problems that determines whether or not buyers will return.

Steve

 

Krochus,

I have to disagree with you. I worked as a mechanic during college, so I am familiar with cars and do my own maintenance and repairs. I have owned a 93, 97 and now a 05 Explorer with minimal to no problems. In the 93 and 97, I replaced the Firestones with less than 30k milage on them due to the tires sidewall cracking, and no this was not due to low air pressure. Regardless of what Ford said I have always ran 32 PSI on all my tires (for the 93 & 97) with no problems (rule of thumb, run your tire PSI 3-4 psi below max tire pressure rating on tire = better wear and milage). The stock Firestone was a crappy tire. It was not the only cause of the rollover though, see the Car and Driver article that tested the tire blow out theory. They proved the Explorer was stable during a blow out. Most surveys state that tire pressure was the least likely checked item on a car and most people polled had under inflated tires (early tire failure due to increased wear).
Most people do not know how to drive a truck. The Toyota 4Runners and the rest of the same vintage rolled just as easy if you look at the insurance testing reports. You can not take a vehicle with a high center of gravity and take a high speed turn. End result is you role over. It is not a Honda Civic! If you look at the statistics Ford Explorers outsold the next best seller (Jeep) by almost 2 to 1. If one looks at scale, the other trucks have similiar if not higher rollovers, especially Jeep, due to its higher performance image. And yes the Twin I-Beam set up was archaic, but it is used in Fords full size vans with no problems, if it had a fault is it raised the motor higher in the vehicle due to the space it consumed and raised the vehicles center of gravity up.

If you buy a truck, any truck you have to accept that you have to drive it like one. It is not a car. The newer SUVs come close, and have a higher limit, but they are still a truck. I have seen enough people driving SUVs (all types) do a high speed (65-75 mph) sudden lane change and end up rolling over into the ditch.

Regarding poor gas milage, this is a truck, you can buy it with a range of axle ratios, depending on this and how you drive you could get poor milage. My 93 had 3.55 axles and I did an average of 24 mpg highway (doing 60-65 mph), the 97 with 3.55 axles also has averaged about the same, exceeding 26 mpg once when I was doing 55-60 mph. The 05 has averaged about 21 mpg highway with 3.73 axles. So as far as the gas milage goes the Exploreres are above average. My Dad had the same 97 Explorer as I did and he average 24-25mpg on a 300 mile trip from Long Island, NY to souther Mass, so the gas milage is not a fluke. A friend had a 95 with 4.10 axles and never exceeded 16 mpg. Knowlege is power. Know the facts before you buy a new vehicle, especially if you are keeping it for the long term.

And last but not least, reliability. Both the 93 & 97 had over 140,000 on them when I sold them, and had been extremly reliable (93 4.0 OHV) and very reliable (97 4.0 SOHC, yes the timing chain issue is reason for lower rating). As I do a lot of long distance highway, I usually buy a new vehicle when I am around 150,000. I agree with the others on the extended warrenty. It proved valuble for the 97 wit hthe timing chain issue and the transfer case shift motor.

 

VERY well said!

 

Right on, brother! Case in point is my '85 Toyota Camry (please forgive the use of the T-word on this forum) . I bought this car for $100 from a friend at work about two years ago. It had been his kid's car, and it had been abused and poorly maintained. I tuned it up, replaced the halfshafts, rebuilt the front suspension, replaced all four struts, replaced all the brakes, had the A/C recharged, the exhaust completely replaced, etc., etc., to the tune of $1,300.

Well, that little car has been my daily driver for almost 2 years. I've driven it to LA and back, in all kinds of weather, all kinds of traffic conditions, and it just keeps on ticking. It always fires right up, consistently returns 25 mpg, and has given me virtually no problems since I got it roadworthy. The A/C blows super cold, even on days when temps exceed 90 degrees. It's an automatic with the original trans, and drops into gear almost instantaneously when I shift into D or R. The only thing I haven't been able to solve is a leaky trunk. But not a problem since it hardly ever rains in Portland.

Much as I love driving my Explorer, I love to drive the Camry because I nursed it back to health. It's not much to look at...no rust or major body damage, but the paint's faded and stained. Nevertheless, I am really attached to that car, for just the reasons you mentioned. My wife thinks I'm nuts, but that's not exactly a news flash around here!

So was it worth putting $1,300 into a 20-year-old, $100 car? If you consult the Kelley Blue Book, then of course it wasn't. And had I not been able to do most of the work myself, it wouldn't have been worth buying. But here's a car that was on its way to the junkyard, and is now perfectly serviceable and reliable. Just the satisfaction I get driving this car makes it worth every penny.

 

I've had my 1994 Exploder 4x4 for six years now with just basic maintenance and I have 173,000 miles on it. No problems with tranny or engine. Just recently had to replace the MAF for about $85, but the truck has been very reliable. For someone my size (6'3"), you can't beat the leg and headroom, either.

I'd buy another one.

 

I too would buy another one. My 92 had 185k on it when I sold it last year and with nothing more than basic maintenace. I now have a 2000 with 175k on it and it is running great again with nothing more than basic maintenance. Beat on it and nothing will last but drive normally and it should go 200k+ easy. low resale on them is kinda like the low resale on the Ford Taurus's a couple of years ago, there are so many of them on the road they are easy to come by so the low resale value.
And as stated in an earlier post, many come to the forum to get answers when they have problems, not to say how great its running! I think if everybody on the forum posted about how good their Explorer runs every day the running good posts would far outweigh the problems.

 

My experience with my 2000 4.0 SOHC after 110,000....only problems were the door latches and rear wiper. Engine? Starts and runs like the day I bought it. No repairs needed except I replaced the belt. Still has the original Motorcraft battery! I'd say the resale issue is very disappointing, but if you keep it "forever" you'll get your money's worth.

 

I remember that 60 minutes show, they tried many times to roll the Explorer,,had some special valve to let the air out of the tires,,like a blowout,,there conclusion was, "Nothing wrong with the Explorers",,it did'nt go out of control,,,If you just rode it out slowing down,,pulling over, no real troubles,,,Sure I bet it's scary as hell doing 70 mph,,no matter what ya gotta stay in control.

On the resale part,,,I went to Walmart the other day,,I think I counted like 8 Explorer's on the road,,it's only a 20 mile round trip! So there definetly many out there,,My Bro-in-law has a 97' Ex. got like 250 k miles on it, only real problem it needed a transfere case re-built,,other then brakes and oil changes,,Thats a pretty good vehicle ! I hope my 04' is as good!

 

I even bought the extended warranty figuring the a/c compressor would go out before 100K. Nope, hasn't even needed a recharge!
By the way GEICO sells extended warranties cheap...I paid $80/year.

 

It wasn't "60 Min.." that did that piece. It was an article in Car and Driver magazine. Ford got reprints of the article and sent it to Exploder owners.

Most of the roll overs are driver error, compounded by all the evils of SUV's with respect to COG, tire/wheel/suspension strength etc that conspire to cause roll overs when the vehicle is "tripped" once it's out of control. Anyway, I don't think that is driving low resale as much as an abundent supply, rebates on new ones, $3.00 gas, (oh, excuse me, $3.15 gas...wait, 3.20...) and maybe the big one that makes it tough on Ford and others:

Hit or miss reliability.

We have lots of 150k mile plus testimonials here, and we also have post after post about trans, diff, cam chain etc issues. Some good, some not so good does not cause market share to improve.

And yea, tell me again how I'm supposed to service it at 3 times the factory recommended rate, and take my trans and diff apart on the kitchen table every couple of years or I'm "neglecting and abusing" my rig.

 

If I tried to repair a transmission on the kitchen table my wife would take ME apart!