Build quality of the 95's... | Ford Explorer - Ford Ranger Forums - Serious Explorations

  • Register Today It's free! Once registered you can join the Elite Explorers to eliminate ads from the website.

Build quality of the 95's...

spotdog14

Well-Known Member
Joined
December 10, 2002
Messages
344
Reaction score
1
City, State
East Lansing, MI
Year, Model & Trim Level
'02 XLT
Alright I have this theory, first off usually you do not purchase the first run of any new model (or model change in our case) because it usually has issues. But from my experience my 95 as well as my fathers 95 have been much more reliable than many of my family members Explorers (97, 98, 01).

Myself personally have had very little problems with my Explorer, the only major repair we have had to do is rebuild the tranny, other than that I have done brakes ball joints shocks, etc and it has 182,000 on it. My dads Explorer before his former girlfriend ran it into a snow plow had 170,000 on it and basically did nothing to it except oil changes.

Now my family's vehicles have gone through major electrical problems, drive train issues and some serious issues.

Do you think Ford did it right in 95?
 



Join the Elite Explorers $20 each year.
Elite Explorer members see no advertisements, no banner ads, no double underlined links.
Add an avatar, upload photo attachments, and more!
.



96eb96

Explorer Addict
Joined
October 20, 2004
Messages
3,483
Reaction score
273
City, State
Albany, NY
Year, Model & Trim Level
96 EB V6 OHV 4WD
Alright I have this theory, first off usually you do not purchase the first run of any new model (or model change in our case) because it usually has issues. But from my experience my 95 as well as my fathers 95 have been much more reliable than many of my family members Explorers (97, 98, 01).

Myself personally have had very little problems with my Explorer, the only major repair we have had to do is rebuild the tranny, other than that I have done brakes ball joints shocks, etc and it has 182,000 on it. My dads Explorer before his former girlfriend ran it into a snow plow had 170,000 on it and basically did nothing to it except oil changes.

Now my family's vehicles have gone through major electrical problems, drive train issues and some serious issues.

Do you think Ford did it right in 95?

I think so too. Informally I've seen lots of 200K + stock engine and trans 95-96 OHV explorers. I replaced alternator, thermostat, waterpump, and a leaky radiator. Well the blend door, fan speed control and a bad evaporator too. I have around 140K. I would be pissed though if I had to pay for these repairs, I can do most on my own.

Everything else is maintenance (brakes, fluids etc). Unbelievably the Ball joints are still solid.

My biggest issue seems to be with severe corrosion though..here is a failure checklist for people who live in salt areas....

swiss cheese shackles(gave up on the bushing bolt and paid $75 to pound out bolts - a spring pro shop took an hour, said its one of the worst he has seen, and that was with work I did before)

failure of the idler or tensioner pulley (change ASAP- they are an issue with the mid 90s exes), they spin the bearing and you can overheat cause the belt pops off.

leaking and deteriorating brake lines (all removed)

e-brake seizing

exhaust had severe corrosion,

leaky rusty PS tubes that are on the rack (loose all power steering)

corroded (and sudden failure) starter brush feed

I doubt this would happen in arizona though.

Next thing I'm probably going to replace are my lower rear shock/spring perch and other power steering hoses. They look very eaten away.


The 5R55E and SOHC definitely introduced some powertrain reliability issues.
 






410Fortune

Truck Season!!
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
August 3, 2000
Messages
28,249
Reaction score
4,183
City, State
NORTH IDAHO, 7B
Year, Model & Trim Level
B2 "Slightly" Modified
Callsign
FOURTEN
95's I dont like
Sorry but I dont, of course that may be because I am the explorer guy and people bring them to me with problems LOL

I do agree that 95-97 are the best years of the Gen II truck, my 96 is like a tank

The only thing I dont ike about 95 is the damn half OBD-I half OBD-II and the weak auto transmission
96 with the 5.0L now thats the year to have, they are tough as nails! after 96 they start to fall apart LOL

Dont get me wrong, I am an Explorer nut for a reason, they are all VERY GOOD TRUCKS, just the 95 is like the 91-92, a good truck but 93-94, 96 are better LOL

Just IMO
 






96eb96

Explorer Addict
Joined
October 20, 2004
Messages
3,483
Reaction score
273
City, State
Albany, NY
Year, Model & Trim Level
96 EB V6 OHV 4WD
95's I dont like
Sorry but I dont, of course that may be because I am the explorer guy and people bring them to me with problems LOL

I do agree that 95-97 are the best years of the Gen II truck, my 96 is like a tank

The only thing I dont ike about 95 is the damn half OBD-I half OBD-II and the weak auto transmission
96 with the 5.0L now thats the year to have, they are tough as nails! after 96 they start to fall apart LOL

Dont get me wrong, I am an Explorer nut for a reason, they are all VERY GOOD TRUCKS, just the 95 is like the 91-92, a good truck but 93-94, 96 are better LOL

Just IMO

Fords biggest mistake was not to put 4R70Ws on the V6. Even V6 Tbirds and Mustangs had them. They are very very durable units. The 55 /A4LD is total crap. It is actually a variant of the Pinto Transmission from what I heard. I think older units(and newer) are a timebomb for about 5 diffferent known failures. One is sudden breakage of the intermediate band, and 2nd gear is pretty much gone. I do believe the 4R55Es(95-96) are better/more reliable than the 5R55Es. A shop told me the 5 (created) gears utilizes the parts of the trans at double the rate of the 4R unit. mechanically they are very similar though.

The V8 is in a class by itself, I was talking about the 6 in my last post. That powertrain is bulletproof. In 2002 they switched the trans to a (enhanced) V6 type and it tops out the list of complaints on many sites.
 






410Fortune

Truck Season!!
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
August 3, 2000
Messages
28,249
Reaction score
4,183
City, State
NORTH IDAHO, 7B
Year, Model & Trim Level
B2 "Slightly" Modified
Callsign
FOURTEN
the A4LD is derived fromteh old C3 auto that was used int he PInto, later turned into the C5 auto that was used behind the 2.8L V6 along with the early C4. Ford added an aluminum overdrive drum and called it the A4LD

A4LD is OKAY but its no Gem thats for sure... tricky to rebuild so they require attention and when they are rebuilt is usually when the nightmare begins
 






96eb96

Explorer Addict
Joined
October 20, 2004
Messages
3,483
Reaction score
273
City, State
Albany, NY
Year, Model & Trim Level
96 EB V6 OHV 4WD
the A4LD is derived fromteh old C3 auto that was used int he PInto, later turned into the C5 auto that was used behind the 2.8L V6 along with the early C4. Ford added an aluminum overdrive drum and called it the A4LD

A4LD is OKAY but its no Gem thats for sure... tricky to rebuild so they require attention and when they are rebuilt is usually when the nightmare begins

Not a trans for a 2ton truck though with a big V6. And what about all the issues with the 5R55E?
 






410Fortune

Truck Season!!
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
August 3, 2000
Messages
28,249
Reaction score
4,183
City, State
NORTH IDAHO, 7B
Year, Model & Trim Level
B2 "Slightly" Modified
Callsign
FOURTEN
dude that transmission should not have been used in a 2wd Ranger let alone a 4 door 4x4 Explorer.......the 2.8L and 2.9L never should have found their way intoa truck either..... but this thread is about the build quality of the 95

overall its a good truck, its just not a good as the 96 or the 93-94 IMO
 






spotdog14

Well-Known Member
Joined
December 10, 2002
Messages
344
Reaction score
1
City, State
East Lansing, MI
Year, Model & Trim Level
'02 XLT
95's I dont like
Sorry but I dont, of course that may be because I am the explorer guy and people bring them to me with problems LOL

I do agree that 95-97 are the best years of the Gen II truck, my 96 is like a tank

The only thing I dont ike about 95 is the damn half OBD-I half OBD-II and the weak auto transmission
96 with the 5.0L now thats the year to have, they are tough as nails! after 96 they start to fall apart LOL

Dont get me wrong, I am an Explorer nut for a reason, they are all VERY GOOD TRUCKS, just the 95 is like the 91-92, a good truck but 93-94, 96 are better LOL

Just IMO

I agree on the half OBD-1 and OBD-2 computers, that was just retarded. Also what about the 95's use of the vacuum disconnect for 4wd? I have never had a problem with it, but my '01 Ranger I had had content 4wd issues.
 






marragtop

Explorer Addict
Joined
April 14, 2001
Messages
2,075
Reaction score
0
City, State
balt, md
Year, Model & Trim Level
91, 92, 95, and 2000 xlts
I've never seen a 95 where the OBDII port actually worked. I assume it's a dummy port and always go for the EECIV under the hood.
 






410Fortune

Truck Season!!
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
August 3, 2000
Messages
28,249
Reaction score
4,183
City, State
NORTH IDAHO, 7B
Year, Model & Trim Level
B2 "Slightly" Modified
Callsign
FOURTEN
it works! It just doesnt work with an OBD II scanner, LOL it works with a paper clip like the under hood port (same wires)
 






KPT

Explorer Addict
Joined
February 5, 2003
Messages
1,551
Reaction score
1
City, State
NC
Year, Model & Trim Level
'95 XL 4x4
The only thing I dont ike about 95 is the damn half OBD-I half OBD-II

I prefer it over OBD II. I don't need a code reader to retrieve codes and I've found OBD I troubleshoots better than OBD II in some cases.

I was working on a 2000 5.0L with a insufficient EGR flow code. I put that DPFE on my 4.0 and drove maybe five minutes. MIL wasn't on but the computer had already stored a DPFE is/was out of range code.
 






killswitchfan134

Well-Known Member
Joined
December 4, 2006
Messages
145
Reaction score
1
City, State
Brick NJ
Year, Model & Trim Level
95 sport
i have a 95 sport with 153k on it and the motor runs great had a couple problems with the trans recently but im buying a 96 with 12k on a new trans for 400 soon so im just gunna swap out the transmissions and i'll be good to go as far as i know
 






spotdog14

Well-Known Member
Joined
December 10, 2002
Messages
344
Reaction score
1
City, State
East Lansing, MI
Year, Model & Trim Level
'02 XLT
Is the OHV or the SOHC engine better?
 






Hitchhikingmike

Explorer Addict
Joined
January 21, 2008
Messages
1,491
Reaction score
18
City, State
Dallas, Texas
Year, Model & Trim Level
'02 XLS
Is the OHV or the SOHC engine better?

From what I have understood on this forum, the OHV has its torque power band in the lower RPMs than the SOHC. For some reason some people like this better. Since the OHV uses pushrods, its is not subject to timing chain tensioner wear such as the SOHC is.

However the SOHC does have more horsepower and torque and will easily run till about 170k before needing a timing chain tensioner repair. After that these engines will most likely last another 100k if taken care of.

Like I said he OHV never suffered from timing chain tensioner wear and the engine has proven to last just as long. However it is not uncommon for the OHV to have gasket failure, such as on the manifolds. These engines can also begin to ping or tick once they reach the high miles when put under a load.
 






Top