Looking for a 95 and up explorer, have questions.

[Mainfraim]

This summer I'm going to be selling my '91 that is posted on here somewhere (hope to god we can get some decent money for it) and start looking for a '95 or up explorer. I'm looking for the newer body style, but I"m not sure of what models have more problems than others. My price range is probably going to be around 10,000 probably not much over (stressing that). I would prefer to spend less than that, as does everyone when they look for a car. I know you guys all have opinions and I was hoping to hear them about the years.

Thanks you guys

 

[mikefox]

Here is my opinion...

I own a 95 and while I love the rig I wish it were a newer year. First, starting in 97 they changed the ControlTrac 4wd system to include a 4hi setting (4auto/4hi/4low). 95-96 only came with 2wd/4auto(sucks for offroad)/4low. Now some with the 97+ rigs wish they had 2wd instead of 4auto.

Also in 98 they changed the way the front tosion bars mounted to the frame to be like the Ranger. Their mounts are bolted on instead of welded. Much easier to put on a lift kit if so desired.

In 97 they came out with the 4.0L SOHC engine with 205 hp as an option. 95 only has the 4.0L OHV rated at 160 hp, 96 came out with the 5.0L rated at 210 hp as an option (v-8 only comes 2wd or AWD).

I am sure others will have more to add to this with their opinions. These are just some of the factors I wish I knew before I bought mine. Good luck.

 

[espnfreak]

Well I hear that ford cut costs on the 98+ Explorers to keep the price down. My dad has a 98 explorer and the quality is just terrible. He has several major problems with it, while my 96 has hardly any problems. I would go with a 95-97 Explorer, Stay away from 97-98 sohc's. Also try and get a 96 V8 X, those seem to be very reliable and they have a strong transmission. I would not go 98+, because they are a little more than you want to spend, and the 95-97's are very affordable. I've seen some for around 6k-8k. It all depends on options, location, and mileage.

 

[Mainfraim]

What is the easiest way to tell if it's an OHV or an SOHC? Would it just say it? What is the difference between the two?

thanks

 

[Alec]

Looking at them, the OHV will have the intake tube come into it at a 90 degree angle to the radiator, and will say 4.0 EFI. The SOHC has the intake come in at more of a 45 degree angle and says 4.0 SOHC on the cover.

OHV, 160 hp, 225 tq. Powerband at lower RPMs. Tends to be a bit more reliable (lots of recalls for 97-99 SOHCs). More bolt-ons.

SOHC, 205-210 hp, 240 tq. Powerband at higher RPMs. 97, 98s can be fairly unreliable due to first years and recalls. Makes more power, but at higher RPMs. Limited in bolt-ons.

The 2 motors are fairly equal in torque, which is what matters off the line and offroad. The SOHC will probably get better hwy and overall mileage though due to the newer design and more efficiency. But, they're finicky. For reliability and cost, I'd get an OHV, even though they have less power. I suggest that because a newer SOHC is probably out of your pricerange.

That's it for now, good luck!

 

[Robert]

I have a '97 SOHC 4x4 Explorer Sport and also owned a '94 2WD OHV 4.0L Ranger so I can tell you my experiences with both. I also have the Owner's guide from my Explorer so I can tell you what the different motors were rated at. In 1997 the OHV was rated at 160 HP at 4200 RPM whereas the SOHC was rated at 205 HP at 5000 RPM. The OHV was rated at 225 ft/lbs of torque at 2800 RPM while the SOHC was rated at 250 ft/lbs at 3000 RPM. I woudn't consider a 10% increase in torque fairly equal. The only thing fairly equal is the torque peak. They are only 200 RPM apart for both engines.

What does that mean performance wise in real world driving experiences? I have ran both my Ranger and my Explorer in the 1/4 mile when they were stock. I also ran my Ranger in the 1/4 mile after adding a Pro-Flow MAF sensor, Exhaust Tech cat-back exhaust, K&N drop in filter and opened airbox. Both vehicles had the highest ratio limited slip offered (Ranger = 3.55 & 26" tires, Explorer 4.10 & 30" tires). My Ranger had a 5-speed manual, my Explorer has a 5-speed automatic. Stock for Stock, my Explorer gets to the 60' quicker than my Ranger did by .05 seconds and that is with the added weight of the 4x4 and SUV body/seats. My Explorer completes the 1/4 mile .449 seconds quicker than my Ranger did. Once I put my cat-back on my Ranger, my 60' times dropped to .117 seconds quicker than my Explorer, but my 1/4 miles time was still never closer than .183 seconds to my Explorers. My Ranger felt like it took off quicker due to the manual transmission, however my Explorer more than made up for it within 60' and pulled stronger for a longer amount of time.

Reliability wise, I only had my Ranger for about two years & 24K miles. In the two years I owned it, the only thing that went wrong with it was my O2 sensor. As a matter of fact when I picked it up from the dealer after they replaced my O2 sensor, I spotted a '95 T-bird that I wanted. A week later I made the trade. Anyway, my Explorer has 89K miles on it and has had far more problems with it. All of the problems have been fixed and everything that did have problems has had the warranty extended by Ford on them. The only things engine wise that has gone wrong with my SOHC are the throttle body sticking, lower intake manifold o-rings leaking and the camshaft tensioners rattling. Now that I have had the latest revisions of these parts installed for the last 16 months, I have not had one problem with it in the 25K miles that I have put on it since. 86K miles on it and it still pulls as strong as new and gets the same mileage (16 city, 19 highway). If you look at a SOHC, just be sure that the miles are less than 72K miles or that the latest updates have been performed and the engine shouldn't give you any troubles. There will always be some that will fail from every model, the OHV and the SOHC are no exception.

 

[ksaldibar]

Eventually, my Dad will be looking to replace our '94 with something newer. An Explorer of course! I know that the '95-'96 have the 2wd/4auto/4lo set up and the '97+ have the 4auto/4hi/4lo. My question is how well does the 4auto on the '95-'96 do in snow cause I know that is comes on when you need it but does it just stay on if you are in deep snow etc. Thanks for your help guys.

-ken

 

[Jason_25]

95-96 Models have a T-case binding problem in 4-high. It can get really weird sometimes. But the dealer can reprogram the computer to fix it but it won't be cheap.

 

[justin146]

Dont know about snow, but 4auto works great in the mud. Not as good when climbing steep hills covered in loose rocks. 4auto makes a lot of noise in deep sand.

 

[expo5.0]

this might not be a popular sentiment, but i think the "awd" in my explorer is a bunch of crap. the few times i have taken it offroad in actual snow, mud, or rocks i have gotten stuck without fail. however, its great for my street application, even with all my mods i can only spin the tires if i really try to and it allows for really quick launches and is good for stoplight to stoplight driving.

 

[03ExplorerSPT]

I have a '95 with the 4.0L OHV. Its a great engine. I love the rumble it makes at full throttle too. I think you will be happy with '95 or up.

1995ExplorerXLT

 

[mikefox]

4auto in snow opinion...

I have recently taken mine up to the snow in my area and wheeled around. I actually had to put it into 4low because the 4auto sucked so bad. It only engages the front when the rear sensor in the T/C senses slippage. Then it disengages. Going up some snow covered hills was a pain in the butt in 4auto because it was constantly shifting in and out of 4wd. Once in 4low it was not a problem.

 

[Robert]

The '95/'96 system might work differently than my '97 does. I was impressed with the way my '97 handled the snow when in Auto. I was able to go through 12" of snow with no problems in Auto. The only thing was that when taking off again from a complete stop, it would take about a half second before it would start moving while the fronts caught up. I played around putting it in High versus low and when in High, it started moving immediately but the steering was heavier. In Auto it slipped a little off the line but the steering felt lighter. The snow wasn't deep enough to prevent me from digging through to the muddy road below so that probably had something to do with it. Had the snow been deep enough or the road covered with ice, undoubtably High (or maybe even Low) would have been the better selection. When I am in deep sand, I put it in High, otherwise it feels very sluggish. The enclosed picture was taken on the trip I mentioned. The snow was about 6"-8" here.

 

[ksaldibar]

Thanks for the information guys. It was helpful.

-ken

 

[Mainfraim]

wow, so much information. thanks you guys. keep it coming if there's more.

 

[Rubyn]

I love to read every word you say Robert, you are very helpful. Keep it up.

 

[towdriverb]

fs 96 Exploreer sport

I Have a 1996 Explorer Sport 4x4 for sale
70 k miles
2 door white all the power toys( ps,pb,pl,pw,cc,tilt )

5 spd tranny sharp truck

Right at your price point of 10k

 

[01EB5.0]

If i were buying another i'd get a 97 or newer. personally i do not like the 4WD system in the 95/96. the 4WD LOW works good, but the auto is still so unrefined. In the 97 model year they introduced a smoother operating 4WD system. If you need to accelerate fast with mine in snow, the front axle will jolt every time the front axle engauges. The auto system on the 97's works smoother and I also like the 4WD High setting for when you just want full-time 4WD. If i had to do it again, though, i would definatly get the V-8. I would warn you against getting a 97-99 SOHC engine as they are known for cam tensioner problems...some of which require engine replacement if not corrected. Also the V-6 models have had some weak transmissions over the years. the 5.0L V-8 is a tried and true engine and the trans that is behind it is actally built tough to handle the extra power. The only downside of the V-8 drivetrain is the AWD, but the AWD would work good in almost all situations (snow, sand, mud, rain, etc) The AWD system is said to transfer even more torque to the wheels that grip so it might ever perform better then the V-6 4X4 system. If you got an engine with a lot more power and torque, maybe you don;t need a low range.
Well, thats my ideas. I'd buy a V-8 if I did it again...

 

[Robert]

Rubyn -- Thank You

 

[JoshC]

I love my 97, look in my sig down below and it will show you how to get rid of your AUTO in the 97+ so that you can have 2wd, works great, and i love it!

Happy trails!!