So, what's the deal? I've had my '92 XLT since '97. I didn't think much of it when I bought it, I bought it from the dealer that leased it to my dad, I figured I'm better off if I know the history.

Anyway, I let it lie after going back to school and not needing a high milegae car. Plus, I bought a Mercedes 300D turbo diesel. That's my mile eater. Now, I'm rehabbing the Ford. The thing is, these hard core off-roaders (which I'm not) seem to love this car. I've had people knock on my door and offer to buy it, pulling up in "lifted" Cherokees and so on. Then, after I got new tires, I'm driving down the street and some dude in a Cherokee is next to me giving me the "gangsta' 'nod". Also, at the dealer where I inquired about ball joints and part costs, the part guy was like, "you betta fix it and keep it" and so on.

I'm as serious a car enthusiast as I can afford to be. I love cars and love driving and exploring different designs and so on. I really can't figure out why people love these rigs. Here's my theory:

1.) Live rear axle and simple construction-easily modded.

2.) Pretty heavy duty construction, the whole "I-beam" USA SUV deal, engine over the beam, so on and so forth. I've crashed into two other cars and done some damage with no claims of my own, plus I've had my XLT in the air twice when I was screwing around. No major damage, so it is well built.

3.) Major cargo room. Fridges, washers and driers galore.

So-what am I missing. Please tell me why these cars are so the bomb. I love mine for my own idiosyncratric reasons-I want to know why off roaders love them.

Thanks,
-G.

I don't know either...nothing exceptional about them, other than they are a nice truck and you don't see too many modded around.

Tidbits on the first Gen 91-94:

A. Easier to modify for offroading than 95+ explorers...

B. Has a great engine....tough as nails....The tranny on the other hand :(

C. It still looks like a TRUCK.....best styling still IMO....

D. Parts are getting cheaper for it as it gets older....

its tough.... lot beefier than the b2s and better options.... i htink they look better too.... much cleaner..... tried and trued suspension.... lots liek going to a d44, but the d35 is plenty strong... trust me.. ask rick how much i beat the crap out of my truck at thaven 02

Because people always ask why would you lift an Explorer? And I say because it gets me a little closer to heaven.

I own one of each....a 91 and a 96. The 91 is lighter and gets better fuel economy, the ride is rougher because of the live rear axle and IRS on the 96. The 91 turns 2200 RPM at 70MPH, the 96 turns close to 3000 at 70, hence the poorer fuel economy. If I had my druthers, I would trade them both for a clean 94 XLT with low miles.

Looks, styling , parts are reasonably priced, fairly reliable and easily modified. They also have more interior room than jeep cherokee and drive exceptionaly well off road when slightly-heavily modified.:)

Originally posted by GTO2050
I own one of each....a 91 and a 96. The 91 is lighter and gets better fuel economy, the ride is rougher because of the live rear axle and IRS on the 96.
Both of your Xs have solid rear axles. The only difference, in that regard, is your 96 has disc brakes back there.

I had a tow guy comment on how thick the front axle was on my '93. He was having trouble getting the chains around it when I was having it towed due to starter problems.

I'd choke someone who put a chain around my axle. What was he thinking? I can't wait to put a solid axle under the front of mine. SAS, winch, and lockers and coming SOON, escpiecally after being stuck for 6 hours yesterday.

Originally posted by Robb
Both of your Xs have solid rear axles. The only difference, in that regard, is your 96 has disc brakes back there. My bad..... the springs are different though, correct? Leaf versus coil? No I beam frame?

It was a chain with a big hook on the end to get it onto the flat bed. What's wrong with putting a chain on the axle? Snapping risk?

Originally posted by GTO2050
My bad..... the springs are different though, correct? Leaf versus coil? No I beam frame?

The 96's have a frame just like the 1st gen trucks.
The 96's are the same in the rear as the 1st gen trucks;
simple leaf springs and solid axle.

The only difference is the front end...it's a lot different on your 96 and gives a much nicer ride than the 1st gen front end.

Originally posted by Glamdring
So-what am I missing. Please tell me why these cars are so the bomb. I love mine for my own idiosyncratric reasons-I want to know why off roaders love them.


The 1st gens will be collectors items for all the reasons listed in this thread, and more.

1st gen explorers helped kick off the SUV trend in the US, they look great and no aspect of styling or intutiveness is out of place on either the interior or exterior, its tough and can take a ton more than you think it can, its original, and with proper care can last a real long time...plus there are awesome sites like this you can join

I agree with everything everyone else has already said. I think the biggest/best part about the 1st gen is that it's still a truck at heart! The ranger (of similar suspension) and the explorer are very very similar. Also the TTB, is tried and true...I think I saw a F350 a year ago with the same style suspension...made me wonder if I could somehow swap them over. Real frame not that unibody crap, hella good engine, great torque curve...the manual tranny is pretty good (even though I just had to get a rebuilt put in...and now that rebuild <500 miles is leaking and at the garage, but I blame the people who worked on it not the tranny.), and it looks like a heller when lifted :) I also think that people more and more people in the offroad community have been seeing them , and their that their ablitites are really quite impressive even in their stock form. That's my opinion.

Later
CP :D

I agree with all that has been said above. Here is a good example. I was talking with a woman i met at a bar, we got to talking about cars and trucks, she knew her stuff (droool), and i said something about my truck. she asked what i had, i told her "an explorer" and she winced. she told me i had a glorified station wagon, not a truck. Then i told her it was a first gen and she changed her tune....wanted to go check it out. she was a jeeper, but even than can be forgiven sometimes.

-Matt

one of the members on here (Ryan is his real name) i think its aursol or something close has an X body on a f250 frame :)

anything after 01 except the sports and sport tracs are cars with big tires

First gens have the ttb, most modern suvs have the ifs, the ttb is tough and allows for an easy(ier) sas. Parts are getting cheap because it's old, and they are extremely popular. In addition, the engines are strong. Considering all the bad publicity explorers have had, they can be picked up for cheap. The perfect suv to thrash offroading....besides the whole transmission thing

there are only two reasons why the 1st gen is so poplular:

1) the looks are killer, especially when the vehicle is for street (Offroads ex's are cool too)

2) can beat the HELL out of isuzu rodeos, but the explorer is barely damaged:D

REAL MEN drive 1st-gens.
REAL MEN drive 1st-gens.
REAL MEN drive 1st-gens.
:p

fake men drive isuzu rodeos
(sorry guys, i had too)

My first-gen as been rock solid in terms of reliability. Aside from the transmission, we have never had any major issues with it since the day we bought it on March 1, 1993. It has never left me stranded (except when I forgot to turn off the headlights and drained the battery, that wasn't the X's fault). Sure, the engine is definitely weak in terms of power, but the engine is easy to work on, and it is bulletproof. I really like that mine doesn't have EGR and it is charged with R-12 refrigerant. I had the X in for an emissions test in Feb 03 and it did extremely well, and I don't see how EGR could really do much for emissions, it seems like it's more trouble than it's worth. Lastly, R-12 is awesome: super-cold AC.

Originally posted by Gimp
REAL MEN drive 1st-gens.
REAL MEN drive 1st-gens.
REAL MEN drive 1st-gens.
:p

Damn right! :D

Originally posted by Gimp
REAL MEN drive 1st-gens.
REAL MEN drive 1st-gens.
REAL MEN drive 1st-gens.
:p

Ok point taken...Now what do REAL WOMEN drive? :D

Originally posted by jimabena74
one of the members on here (Ryan is his real name) i think its aursol or something close has an X body on a f250 frame :)


ARSOUL.....Project EX-250:D

two words - Jurassic Park. Lots of exposure through product placement.

"....what was that? You think your wrangler's tough? Well my explorer can survive being crushed by a T-Rex - top that!" Built Ford Tough

now where can I get a paint job like that?

Originally posted by Overkil
two words - Jurassic Park. Lots of exposure through product placement.

"....what was that? You think your wrangler's tough? Well my explorer can survive being crushed by a T-Rex - top that!" Built Ford Tough

now where can I get a paint job like that?


Yea those Ex's Were KILLER :)

and looked kool, and i remember readin tis on here along time ago but il lbring it back up, anyone notice how on the ones in the movies they back windows go all the way down, unlike ours.......

Hey now, don't be dissing on us 2nd Gen owners. My truck has 121K miles on it, and is a LOT quieter and faster than any stock 1st Gen. :D

*hides*

Originally posted by SoBeLover
Ok point taken...Now what do REAL WOMEN drive? :D

Why that would have to be first gens also. I would put mine up against most other first gens out there.

i just finished putting the front-end of my 92 back together, and i guess you could say it was fairly easy other then some nuts that were rusted tight,

i'm just glad that i was a 2 piece axle so i only had to replace one side

my friend just got a new 2003 explorer sport and I swear my 94 limited is a hell of a lot better...better ride and interior

Originally posted by Metallic2001
better ride and interior

I can't agree with that statement at all, theres no way your 94 rides better than an 03.

Originally posted by Foo
I can't agree with that statement at all, theres no way your 94 rides better than an 03.

Depends on what kind of ride you like. If you like a firmer more truck-like ride, then the first gen is for you. If you like a softer smoother ride then the 03 would better suit you. I love the ride of mine compared to the newer ones because I love the stiffer truck-like ride of my 94. Its all about what you like.

No no no people want the First Gen Explorer because they are the closest thing to a Bronco that you can afford. :)

The first gen Explorer is RELIABLE, TOUGH, and EASY TO WORK ON. Plus the parts are EVERYWHERE and they are cheap...........thats all. PLus Jeeps are played out.


I think that this site is one of the MAIN reasons why they are so popular for off road, people who know prefer Fords.

Besides how COOL is it to show up Heeps on the trails in a built Explorer? I mean look around, if you want to know why they are so popular spend an hour or two looking around on this board.............the answer is here.....

I LOVE my square block of cement. LOL!

I don't know... the first gen and the new sports both have equally bad ride quality. The short wheelbase eliminated whatever refinements that were made over the first gens. :p

I can truly say that I love offroading.I think I have mud in my blood ! The 94 Xplorer I wheel with is far more stable,torquey and has much greater overall capability than the Jeep YJ I owned previous to this.I knew I had to own one when my YJ struggled constantly on a trail run I was on,and a guy with a 93 XLT with only 31's was walking through it almost effortlessly and actually pulled me through some stuff as well.One month later,I was the proud owner of an X and began the build up process( and still going).
Also,even when built up,the 1st gen X's are still daily driver friendly,and are a sweet looking truck whether they are stock or extreme.I may own other vehicles in the future,but I would never sell my baby !!!

Originally posted by GTO2050
The 91 turns 2200 RPM at 70MPH, the 96 turns close to 3000 at 70, hence the poorer fuel economy.

Agh that infuriates me about my Ex. I can't believe that the weight difference made them gear it that much differently, especially with a 5 spd auto in the 2nd gen. I should be able to go 90 and only be at 2500 rpms like my roommate's GMC Sierra (i know there's a slight torque differene there, like 100 lb feet :))