We’re going to start off the week with two examples of the vehicles that took over the roads in the 1990s: SUVs. We have the best-selling SUV, and what I suspect is probably the worst. One is incredibly useful, and the other, well, isn’t. Which one is the better deal all these years later is up to you.
On Friday, we stepped up in price a bit to look at a couple of sporty liftback coupes. I expected the Celica to run away with it; RWD plus a bulletproof engine seemed like a winning formula. But the vote ended up being extremely close, and as of this writing, the VW Scirocco is actually eleven votes ahead.
You know it has to be the Scirocco for me. I greatly prefer the Mk1 bodystyle, but the Mk2 drives pretty much the same, and it’s still a good-looking car. Is this example worth the asking price? I can’t be sure without seeing it in person, but I don’t think it’s too far off. I wish a good Scirocco wasn’t a $7,500 car these days, but alas.
The 1990s saw the rise of two things that pretty well changed the landscape of the entire US: the internet, and SUVs. (Some of us were hopeful for a while that the Spin Doctors would be the third thing that changed everything, but it didn’t pan out.) SUVs were around as early as the 1960s, but around 1989-1990 they really hit their stride as family vehicles, when nearly every manufacturer started offering a four-door model at the same time – except Jeep, which had already been doing it for years. Four-door SUVs took over minivan and wagon duties, while smaller two-door SUVs were seen as the fun choice. Today, we’re going to look back at both ends of the spectrum: a nice practical four-door, and a truly frivolous two-door. Here they are.
1992 Ford Explorer Eddie Bauer – $6,000
Engine/drivetrain: 4.0-liter OHV V6, five-speed manual, 4WD
Location: San Rafael, CA
Odometer reading: 177,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well
Ford has a long history of partnering with designer brands to create special editions of its cars. Back in the 1970s, a whole line of Lincoln Continental Mark IVs were offered, with trim and paint chosen by various fashion designers. Ford teamed up with tennis outfitter FILA for a special-edition Thunderbird in 1984. And starting in the mid-’80s, the top-of-the-line Ford trucks came with branding from upscale outdoor clothier Eddie Bauer. And just to make sure everyone knew you splashed out for the expensive version, all the Eddie Bauer Fords were two-tone, with beige along the bottom.
Eddie Bauer Explorers weren’t all that uncommon, and for the first few years quite a few Explorers came with manual transmissions, but the combination of the Eddie Bauer trim and a manual is pretty rare. Not many high-end buyers wanted to shift their own gears. Like all first-generation Explorers, the engine in front of it is a 4.0-liter Cologne V6, a stout but thirsty engine that no one would accuse of being overpowered, but it gets the job done. The seller says this one runs “amazing,” and that with the addition of new tires and some suspension bushings, it drives well, too.
Leather seats and power everything were hallmarks of the Eddie Bauer trucks, and this Explorer is no exception. We don’t get a great look at the interior, but what we can see looks good. Explorers tended to hold up a bit better inside than their Chevy Blazer counterparts; seeing one that’s truly trashed inside is rare. The seller proudly proclaims that everything works in this one, but I’d still test it all out before handing over your money.
It has been a Western car all its life, spending time in Washington and Idaho before coming to California, so it has been spared the horrors of road salt. Midwestern Explorers all had rust holes just above those fancy fiberglass running boards after ten years or so. The paint looks nice and shiny, in a very ’90s teal that goes well with the beige.
1996 Suzuki X-90 – $5,900
Engine/drivetrain: 1.6-liter OHC inline 4, five-speed manual, 4WD
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Odometer reading: 100,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well
I would like to have been in the room for the pitch meeting when this car was created. “You know that Vitara SUV we sell? What if we turned it into a sports car? We’ll put a stubby little trunk lid on it, add T-tops, and make it a two-seater! You know, like a Miata, but off-road capable! It’ll sell like crazy! We can’t miss!” Only, you know, in Japanese. (Spoiler alert: It didn’t sell like crazy.)
The X-90 was only available for three model years, and Suzuki only managed to move about seven thousand of them here in the US. All were powered by the same engine, a 1.6-liter four-cylinder backed by either a five-speed manual or a four-speed automatic. This one has the manual, along with an old-school 4WD system with a dual-range transfer case. It runs and drives well, the seller says, and breezed through Pennsylvania inspections last year. (It now wears classic plates, so it wasn’t inspected this year.)
Like any good cheap-and-cheerful ’90s car, it has wild seat fabric, carrying over into the door panels. It’s a little worn, and there’s a small cut in the driver’s seat. The driver’s door panel is delaminating, but that’s not uncommon for cars this age. The seller says the T-top seals are leak-free, which is a nice bonus.
It’s kind of a mixed bag outside. Most of the paint is decent, but the bumpers have been painted black, as well as the grille and part of the hood. I have no idea why. It also has some pretty serious dents in the right front fender. But as rare as these are, if you really want one and aren’t willing to pay auction-site prices, you may have to put up with a little scruffiness.
Both of these could be fun to drive, in their own way, but one of them is a whole lot more practical than the other. But then again, T-tops. I guess it all depends what you’re looking for. So what do you think: will it be the best-seller with the rare stickshift, or the funny little failed experiment?
Rust belt 2 seater SUV, or Desert family hauler…. Reluctant win for the EBE, that one looks really clean, its a unique spec, and they are genuinely good vehicles. Sorry yinzer, you are going to need more than some black paint on the bumpers to hide rust.
Manual Explorer???
Still close the Suzuki.
Ive been in the woods late at night off-roading with two vehicles, and one was a dudes Dad’s Explorer. Held up pretty good, but I definitely recall it bottoming out on a big rock leaving a nice dent which we all had to help get it off of.
I don’t really trust the X-90 but I want it more, and that’s what this is all about so Suzuki it is.
Why did I vote for the X-90?
I’ve had to pull cylinder heads off a ’91 4.0L Exploder because the goddam plugs rust and seize into the heads, then break off when you try to remove them. Allegedly, this is a common problem. So, with that memory alone, I condemn this one today.
Wow, I forgot about that. Yes, this was absolutely a thing.
The manual makes the EBE pretty damn rare, and a friend of mine put 300k+ miles on his base-model manual 1st-gen Explorer. But the quirky-but-capable X-90 would be more fun off-road. If the prices were more reasonable, I’d go for both. But I have to go with the EBE in this case.
The X-90 is in my area… Betting the black paint is hiding rust and poor rust repair attempts.
That was part of its appeal for me. That Explorer is too nice to bring to the mid-Atlantic just to drive on salted roads. I assumed that, being from western PA, the Suzuki is already a little (or perhaps a lot) crusty.
This is more of a “foolish or foolish in a different way” question. So it boils down which one would make feel more stupid driving it, which leaves me with the Suzuki.
The Exploder would be great, but I already have an Excursion.
I’d rather a 4-seater Tracker/Waverunner/Vitara, but I’ll accept the oddball X-90
I prefer the Suzuki but as a family man now I can’t justify 2 2 seaters in the fleet, haha, so would have to be the Exploader.
Both are crackhead priced, but the Suzuki is clearly the better car here. It’s cooler, much better made, and has T-TOPS!!!!!!!!! 😀
Take the cool truck over the Firestone tire shit LOL
Hell yeah! The X-90 is just such a FUN vehicle…and the colors/designs are gorgeous
Now pimping ain’t easy but it’s necessary
So I’m chasing bitches like Tom chasing Jerry.
I’ll put the (clutch) pedal to the floor
In my two-tone Ford Explorer.
Explorer by default.
Even though the X-90 shares its guts with the Samurai/Sidekick/Tracker/etc, which I adore, I hated that body style in the 90s and I still hate it now. What a dumb, awkward-looking little thing. There’s a reason why they didn’t sell.
I was ready to land solidly on the Suzuki, but the Explorer fixes the one bugbear that has plagued every Ford that I have personally had to deal with: it eliminates the automatic transmission. I don’t know if it’s Ford or me but for some reason the Blue Oval’s automatics do not fare well once they enter my sphere of influence. And it’s not like I’m hard on them, I don’t drive fast or even tow very much. They just fail.
But shifting for myself? Not a problem. Ford manuals are nothing to sing praises about but they don’t statistically leap out as a problem child. We get along okay. So for a hundred bucks more I get extra seats and cargo space? Easy choice.
Ford today.
I’m definitely in camp Suzuki. I don’t want an Exploder, no matter how west coast survivor that one is. It represents SUVs supplanting Minivans, (which are awesome) and having grown up in a minivan family I have no attachment to the Explorer as a nostalgic vehicle. If forced to get it, I’d possibly deliberately expose it to salt.
The X-90 is small, weird, Japanese, and fun, it’d fit in the spare space in my driveway, and it’s more me.
Eh, the Explorer is tried and true but boring and absurdly overpriced IMO. The Suzuki also seems questionable price wise but at least I’ll feel alive driving it. We need screwball cars on our roads.
Price is a tad high on each, I think, but not overly outrages. Honestly, if you are looking for one of these cars, both are pretty great examples. I went with the X-90 because my heart swelled when I saw the seats. It’s probably the wrong choice, but the heart wants what the heart wants. Maybe I’d get an RV so I could flat tow the X-90.
I initially sprinted to type SUZUKI but this one was a little closer in my mind than anticipated. That Explorer is just delightfully 90s and if you were a 90s kid like myself you undoubtedly spent a ton of time in Explorers. They were omnipresent, and the higher trims were quite nice by the standards of the day.
In fact my first car was a 96 Explorer that our family friends kept in absolutely pristine condition. It didn’t even last a year under my stewardship before it dropped the transmission and got cash for clunkers’d…which was on me, I was driving it like one might drive a cup series Miata.
That car meant everything to me at the time though. I installed an XM radio, the dudes and I smoked Djarums in it during our free periods, the backseat played host to assorted canoodling with girls that I had heard put out from reliable sources, etc. God bless that car.
…with that out of the way it’s still the Suzuki for me. The interior looks like a Y2K era Taco Bell. I love everything about it.
I’m going with the stick shift Eddie Bauer Exploder here. I had a second generation Explorer that while a thirsty beast was very reliable and gave me several trouble free years of use. Only sold it when I inherited my grandmother’s Crown Victoria.
Wow, bad to worse…
Worse how? The Crown Vic was comfortable and reliable and rode far better. The Explorer had more cargo space (especially when the rear seats were folded down), but that full size sedan was plenty roomy for myself and partner.
I disagree that the Crown Vic was at all comfortable or rode well. I also inherited my grandmother’s CV. A ’99 LX. Not impressed. That’s a car that doesn’t live up to its hype
We will have to agree to disagree on that then. I owned a 95 CV and then a 98 Mercury Grand Marquis, found them both to be comfortable cruisers that had reasonable gas mileage on the highway.
I liked the decisive 4 speed auto and surprisingly decent highway mileage, too.
Wished the 4.6 was more of a loafer vs revver.
Car’s still around; my brother and nephew use it. I think they’re fond of it. So I’m the problem, as usual
X-90 was ugly as hell, and the explorer is a much better time capsule.
That Explorer is a time capsule. I haven’t seen a ’92 looking that sharp since ’94. And I like that it’s got the manual.
But Cologne V6. Ew.
And its novelty is that these largely disintegrated, were flogged to death by families, barrel rolled down embankments, or whatever. So you never see one like this anymore.
The X90 was invisible even when it was on sale. And it’s just Tracker/Jimny/Vitara parts. A little DIY bodywork and you’re better educated on the other side. Dig it.
Sorry, but no matter how quirky-cool a Suzuki X-90 may be, if I see “Explorer,” “Eddie Bauer,” “rust free,” “90s teal with beige leather interior,” and “manual transmission” all in the same listing, this ain’t even a Showdown.
I have to go with the boring choice today, can’t fit more than half of the family in the X-90, and if I’m making that sacrifice it better be a lot more fun than a weird Jeep I can’t use. Don’t @me, I don’t live near any trails, this is going to be wasted on commuter car duties, and not fast enough for weekend highway cruises.
I love the X90. They can be made pretty capable off road too with the right tires and lift, which is the first thing I’d do to this one.
I’ll take the Explorer, but I might have to change those tires out for some good Firestones…
Ah, yes, the good ol’ Ford Exploder.
Manual Exploder is kind of interesting as I have ever seen one with an auto. But it is still a boring Brick with lots of miles. the X90 is pretty fuggly, but the miles are good and it also has a manual. I imagine it was flat towed behind and RV most of it’s life, but even so. I would buy it over the Ford. Sadly.