Offroad Performance: Sport vs Full Size Explorer

[Lonnie-S]

I'm a new member and actively looking for an Explorer to buy. I've been focusing on a full size, Gen I or Gen II Explorer, but see that the Sport model might satisfy my basic needs and criteria (http://www.explorerforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=365223) while allowing me to move up a few model years, maybe with significantly fewer miles on it too because they are generally cheaper. However, the actual information I have to go on such as car reviews, articles, etc., are not complimentary to the Sport.

I've found our USA motoring press to be hypercritical of domestic brands, so I'm going to ask the people in these forums who actually own and drive them. How is the Sport 4x4 as far as offroad ability and performance? I would think it is better due to a shorter wheelbase and lighter weight versus the full size Explorer.

Assuming that interior space is not an issue (neither are high-end interior furnishings) is there any reason to prefer the Explorer over the Explorer Sport? Is there a "best" model year of the Sport for offroad use?

Thanks in advance,

Lonnie

 

[Varsity]

Well unfortunately I can't comment too much on the actual off-road capability of the Sport since mine is 2WD, but 1st and 2nd gens are extremely capable off-road in general and the Sports are no different. Yeah, a shorter wheelbase is always an advantage too but I'm not so sure if there's a considerable weight difference, at least enough to make any difference.. Aside from the not so popular monoleaf rear suspension every Sport I've seen kicks butt offroad, even some 2WDs. Heck, it's fun to drive these little guys around too since they've just got a "sporty" feel too.

I'm sure you'll get plenty of responses from more knowing people but from my personal opinion and experiences, you'll be fine either way honestly but if you feel a Sport may be more your style or fit your needs better, go for it. That's all it really comes down to. Good Luck!!!

 

[Chikar]

I've got a 99 Explorer Sport with Auto 4X4, very well loaded up with options too. Bought it new and it now has 283,000 kms on it (177,000 miles). Love it, just now starting to replace things like alternator, intake manifold gaskets, rad last week, that's about it except for wear items like brakes. It's like an Energizer bunny, it just keeps on going and going.

The Sport is 400 pounds lighter and 4 inches shorter than a four-door. I find it has a MUCH tighter turning circle than other 4X4's I've driven

I've done very little four-wheeling but I bought it because I used to spend a lot of time driving through the mountains up here in Canada (read LOTS of deep snow) and it's never got stuck.

 

[AlexSport'00]

I've only had the Sport and it's 2wd, but I love it, and it's provided me with some decent offroad entertainment.

 

[Mike's brother]

The Explorers are damned good rigs, so you can't lose either way. Get the one that fits your needs. If interior space isn't a premium, the Sport might be right for you, but make sure you really don't need the space. Those back seats can be tough to squeeze into after a night sleeping on a tent floor.

I've got the 2001 4x4, which is a late 2nd Gen. It's the first year for the Sport to get the body makeover (full plastic nose, bigger fender flares) but still early enough to have a Ford 8.8 solid rear axle. Not sure what year it started, but the 01 Sport doesn't have the monoleaf, it has the standard leaf pack, so it's easy to upgrade those. Nice ride and road manners, too, for a very capable off-roader. The 4.0 V6 pulls like a champ, and I just came away with 20 mpg on a highway drive. If you keep the maintenance up, these things are studs.

I've added a few things, pretty minor, and done some trail driving and mild climbing so far, and it has never let me down. I even pulled through a few tight and steep spots in the woods this past weekend that had the Jeep guys stunned -- and some of those guys had rigs that cost 10 times what mine did.

Either way you go, there are tons of parts available at pretty good prices, lots of folks who've blazed a trail of tricks to get the most out of the rigs, and lots of fun to be had. Enjoy.

:exp:
John

 

[Lonnie-S]

Thank you all, gentlemen. As I suspected, the reviews are unnecessarily harsh and off the mark. Each of you reports very positive responses and one of the things I found most interesting about several online reviews where readers can post comments is you'd invariably see comments like, "I've put 300,000 miles on my Sport and never had a mechanical failure" and similar kinds of remarks about their driveability and durability.

I'm adding the Sport to my list of candidates!

Cheers,

 

[mr_valingo]

I've got a 95 sport and 2 toddlers. I've found its actually easier getting the kids in and out of my sport than my gf's 06 durango. I open one door, put a knee in and i've got access to both carseats. Off road this thing is a beast. My buddies and their fullsize trucks have been shown up several times. The the main drawback of the sport in my eyes is the smaller cargo area.

 

[Steeda90GT]

I'll chime in with my experience. I own a 99 Sport, 4x4 auto. It's as fully loaded as a Sport can be. That doesn't really translate into too many options, but I'm also not a fussy guy. One touch power sunroof, power everything, leather, rear air and radio, etc.

As far as off roading goes, this is by far the best stock SUV Ive owned. It literally tears through the snow (Places where my buddies 2004 Silverado 2500 turbo diesel 4x4 got stuck)

 

[masospaghetti]

I don't really have offroad experience, but I used to have a 2000 Sport and now I have a 1998 XLT 4-door, both 4.0 OHV and 5-speed manuals. The 4-door is 4WD.

The ride quality of the 4-door is better because of the longer wheelbase and multileaf pack. I added the leaf pack to my Sport which helped some, but it was still choppier on the road. The turning radius of the 2-door is somewhat better than the 4-door. The lighter weight of the 2-door/2WD combo is very noticeable when accelerating, where the 2-door felt quite spirited, and the 4-door just feels adequate.

My 2-door proved to be durable, reliable, and fuel efficient - I got it at 94,000 miles, currently has about 170,000 (my brother has it now) - nothing more than standard maintenance items. It averaged between 23-24 mpg on the freeway, and 20.5 mpg over its entire lifetime with me (I tracked every fillup for about 50,000 miles).

My 4-door is fairly new and has needed some mechanical work but its at 205,000 miles, so it's expected. IMO the transfer case is one of the most troublesome parts of the entire vehicle and thus the 2WD or AWD models are significantly more reliable. Either way, IMO, stick with the 4.0 OHV or the 5.0, avoid the 4.0 SOHC motor.

 

[FROADER]

I've owned 2 "full size" (4 door) explorers built for off-road use. I like the wheelbase of the 4dr over the sport. It depends on the type of off-road and (as mentioned above) the need for space.

 

[Lonnie-S]

SOHC V6 Concerns

. . . <snip> . . . Either way, IMO, stick with the 4.0 OHV or the 5.0, avoid the 4.0 SOHC motor.

Thanks for the information and your experiences. Again, here is an actual owner who talks about reliability being so good with the Explorer and Sport. That is very encouraging because I will most likely be getting an older vehicle with 100K+ miles on it.

Your post is the second one I've seen on this site where someone cautions about the SOHC V6. Would you care to expand on your concerns? The SOHC V6 is one of the few things the motoring press talks about positively with respect to the Sport.

The outfit that did the re-engineering to SOHC from OHV is reported to be Cosworth, the UK firm, which is renown for it's racing engines. I'd expect they'd do an excellent job. Not so?

Regards,

 

[Lonnie-S]

I'll chime in with my experience. I own a 99 Sport, 4x4 auto. It's as fully loaded as a Sport can be. That doesn't really translate into too many options, but I'm also not a fussy guy. One touch power sunroof, power everything, leather, rear air and radio, etc.

As far as off roading goes, this is by far the best stock SUV Ive owned. It literally tears through the snow (Places where my buddies 2004 Silverado 2500 turbo diesel 4x4 got stuck)

I'm not fussy either. In fact, I prefer simplicity. Surprisingly, the opening sun roof does appeal to me. I found a set of 360 degree view, Sport photos on a website (Edmunds?) and it featured photos where the roof was open. I thought it was totally cool. It seemed to be situated perfectly for the driver. Typically I like metal over my head and think the compromise of structure due to the opening is not good. But, with the Sport, I think I'd take the risk.

The snow comment is most helpful for me. Driving in winter snow is an issue for the locale where I'll be using the truck and I definitely want to use it in snow. The photos at the link below aren't mine. They're from a 4x4 Expedition website. It is the correct location outside of Idyllwild, California, however.

Cheers,

http://www.expeditionportal.com/forum/threads/57424-All-Pro-in-Idyllwild-CA-Snow-Run!

 

[bdander]

I have had the opportunity to own both thankfully. Personally I believe you can't go wrong with either one. I did not do too much off roading with my Sport b/c it was RWD, but my current 4dr. is AWD and it has done right by me. The main difference is how many passengers you plan on carrying. I know all of my friends obviously love the 4dr and hated the sport, but it really didn't bother me either way other than just making life a little easier on them. If I was to pick one it would be the 4dr mainly because it has the 5.0L v8 which I personally love and it has some extra space. The Sport ran until the motor finally gave out (the previous owner neglected it and the timing chain was slapping against the cover and by the time I got it there was not saving it). I know it doesn't help too much but I hope that helps a little.

If I can help in anyway please let me know.

-BA

 

[Varsity]

The SOHC engine and OHV engines are both good engines, but like anything else in the world, definitely have their pro's and cons.

The big problem with the SOHC is the timing chain problem. A quick search on the subject should tell you everything about that. But I don't know if its really a problem if you get to it before anything bad happens. SOHC has more horsepower and a little bit better fuel economy if I'm not mistaken.

The OHV is an incredible engine only problem is that is gets slightly worse mileage and pretty much a brick. If you have a heavy foot or are used to being the first one taking off from a light, you may not enjoy the OHV motor too much. But aside from slightly (and I mean only slightly) worse mpg and less get-up-and-go, the OHV is a pretty bulletproof engine.

The way I look at it is, if you're looking for dependability it's the OHV no question but if you plan on playing racecar driver with your Explorer, you may be better off looking into a SOHC engine, but be prepared to fix it up or repair anything before it gives you trouble. Both engines sort've pick up where the other left off if that makes any sense.

Maybe someone can shed some light on the SOHC side of things as I don't have that engine.

 

[Steeda90GT]

I'm not fussy either. In fact, I prefer simplicity. Surprisingly, the opening sun roof does appeal to me. I found a set of 360 degree view, Sport photos on a website (Edmunds?) and it featured photos where the roof was open. I thought it was totally cool. It seemed to be situated perfectly for the driver. Typically I like metal over my head and think the compromise of structure due to the opening is not good. But, with the Sport, I think I'd take the risk.

The snow comment is most helpful for me. Driving in winter snow is an issue for the locale where I'll be using the truck and I definitely want to use it in snow. The photos at the link below aren't mine. They're from a 4x4 Expedition website. It is the correct location outside of Idyllwild, California, however.

Cheers,

http://www.expeditionportal.com/forum/threads/57424-All-Pro-in-Idyllwild-CA-Snow-Run!

Let me tell you, the sunroof really is an awesome option. I love rolling down all the windows, including the small rear sport windows and driving with the sunroof open.

...and yes, I couldn't believe how awesome this little V6 truck was in the snow.

 

[masospaghetti]

Your post is the second one I've seen on this site where someone cautions about the SOHC V6. Would you care to expand on your concerns? The SOHC V6 is one of the few things the motoring press talks about positively with respect to the Sport.

The outfit that did the re-engineering to SOHC from OHV is reported to be Cosworth, the UK firm, which is renown for it's racing engines. I'd expect they'd do an excellent job. Not so?

Regards,

The following is mostly from what I've learned on this forum, so if anything is incorrect, I apologize in advance. That being said:

The rear timing chain tensioner and guide on the SOHC engine are not robust and tend to wear out. The problem is that replacement of the rear tensioner and guide require the engine to be removed from the vehicle.

The engine performs well and makes a lot of power but IMO it's poor engineering design to make a wear item (like a timing chain tensioner and guide, made of plastic no less) so difficult to replace. The tensioner design is different than the OHV engine's - The OHV has a ratcheting design that uses oil pressure but maintains position when pressure is lost. The SOHC using a leaf spring design that does not ratchet, and thus failure of the leaf spring leads to excessive timing chain slop.

In addition, because of clearance issues, the SOHC rear chain has to be deflected on both the traction and slack side, instead of just the slack side like virtually any properly designed chain would be. This subjects the chain guides to even more wear than normal.

The crux of the problem was trying to retrofit a pushrod engine into an overhead cam design at low cost. The reason the rear chain exists (as opposed to having two front chains like most overhead cam engines) was to keep the head castings the same. Also the retrofit means there's still the front chain for the jackshaft for a total of 3 chains, or even 4 with the optional balance shaft chain, instead of 2 for most overhead cam engines, and 1 for the OHV engine.

Some owners love their SOHC motors and some last a long time on the original chains and guides, but others don't.

If power isn't that important, go with the OHV and find solace that it gets better fuel economy than the SOHC, probably because it has so much less rotating mass. If you want more power, stick with the 5.0.

 

[MrQ]

I actually own a Gen 1, 4 door XLT with the OHV and a Gen 2 4 door SOHC. I also have experience with the 5.0L OHV.

When I had the OHV, the biggest issue I ran into was oil consumption. Granted the engine had over 160k miles, but I was putting in a quart every couple of months. Gas mileage was pretty bad for a v6 as well. Best I was able to get was 18 hwy, in town the thing drank gas. It also is very susceptible to blowing head gaskets and is also low powered for such a big displacement v6.

But it's doggedly reliable, low maintenance and has a nice torque curve in the low rpms.

Gen 1s had either the M5OD 5 speed manual or the weak A4LD 4 speed automatic. The transfer case was either a manually or electronically controlled 2 speed part time 4wd system. You had the choice of auto or manual locking hubs. To note, the manual versions of both the transfer case and hubs are getting rarer. Gen 1 used a Twin Traction Beam front suspension setup that has a love/hate relationship with off roaders. It is tougher to achieve a lift with it and it is a real pain to get a shop to align it properly.

Gen 2s 1995 had the 4r44e (Computer controlled and stronger version of the A4LD) 4 speed auto, 1996 the 4r55e (Stronger version of the 4r44e), and 1997 onward the 5r55e 5 speed auto. The M5OD was an option for all Gen 2 years and is more common in the Sport models.

A torsion bar setup with a lower a-arm was used in these models. Basically it is easy to achieve a quick lift by cranking on the torsion bars, but it does have limitations due to the angle range of the constant velocity joints the front axle uses.

---

The SOHC's big issue is the timing chain guides. Generally when buying an Ex and the "death rattle" is heard its a good time to walk away as you are looking at a big repair bill if you take it to a shop or a lot of time if you do it yourself. Fortunately Ford redesigned the guides so the replacements should last longer if you do fix it.

The good things about the SOHC is its power band starts at about 2500rpm and soars past 4000. Unfortunately, unless you really have the peddle to the metal, you won't be using all that power in everyday driving as the transmission keeps you in the 1k-2.5k band. It really is a smooth engine; much more powerful than the OHV and it does get better MPG.

The SOHC was only available in 1997 and up Gen 2s and came with either the 5r55e or the M5OD.

The Gen 2 v6 4x4s used an auto 4x4 transfer case called Control Trac. It would detect wheel spin and automatically engage the 4wd. It also had the option of selecting 4wd all the the time of 4wd low. Some users swap out the transfer case with the manual unit from a Gen 1 as the transmission rear bolt patterns are the same. The hubs are permanently locked on all Gen 2 4wd models, although in the the first couple of years there was a vacuum disconnect on the front axle.

---

If you want a Sport then the above options are the only ones you will get. The 5.0 v8 was only available in the 4 door versions in either AWD or 2WD, 1996 and up. To note, improved heads were added to the V8 in late 1997 improving horsepower.

The 5.0 v8 is a nice engine, has good aftermarket support, and is pretty much bullet proof. The gas mileage is comparable to the V6 OHV, surprisingly. The transmission is strong 4 speed auto unit that is used in the v8 GT Mustangs and can take a lot of abuse. Although the HP is close to the SOHC, the torque is the best of the whole lot, developing it a lot lower in the rpm band. Several users on the board use their V8 explorers for towing because of its high load capacity.

The AWD system requires no user input and is completely mechanical. Over time though, if proper tire sizes are not maintained on all 4 wheels the clutches will start slipping in the unit causing a loss of power to the wheels and eventually it will fail completely. A lot of avid 4x4 users swap in a manually controlled transfer case from a full size ford pickup and never look back.

---

As far as the difference between Sports and the 4 door versions, its pretty minimal. Like its said above, Ford used a mono leaf design in the 2nd gen sports instead of a full leaf pack. This causes rear end sag over time and a lot of people switch them out in favor of leaf packs. I have found having four doors makes getting to the back seat a lot easier. Plus the cargo space is a big plus as there is nearly 6 feet of room back there with the seats laid down.

Well that is all I can think of right now. There may be a few errors as I'm doing this from memory. Hopefully I answered your questions and didn't give you a whole bunch of useless info.

 

[mr_valingo]

My 95 has the 4r55e....again

 

[Lonnie-S]

I've looked earnestly for a 4x4 Sport in Southern California, but just haven't found one in good enough shape to interest me. There are lots of nice 2WD Sport units and tons of nice full size Explorer 4x4s.

Yesterday, I found a full size '97 4x4 in San Diego where the original owner has done a very good job of maintaining the vehicle and already done a majority of major tasks you'd expect at this age. He saved all his documentation including the original 1997 sales brochure. It was too good to pass up. We bought it and brought it home. It's a SOHC V6 with 5-speed, OD automatic and limited slip differentials (don't know if those were standard or an option).

There are a number of small repairs to make, but all the essentials appear to be in excellent working condition and he still used the car for major camping trips out of state, which tells me he has confidence in the vehicle. It's a pretty well loaded XLT that even has the old style CD player in the center console, and it still works. I'm not huge on noise, but the stereo is pretty *****in' even by today's standards.

Thanks for all the information you guys have provided. I'm still a new member, but now a new member with an Explorer, so I guess that makes me pretty "Official."

Cheers,

 

[MrQ]

Limited slips were optional in the rear only. The front differentials were only open.

Congrats on a good buy!