It’s not uncommon for automakers to fill the gaps in their lineups by selling cars from other manufacturers. In the case of Isuzu in the 1990s and 2000s, it was pretty much required, since its lineup consisted of nothing but gaps. The Japanese automaker had stopped producing passenger cars in the early ’90s, and after that subsisted on nothing but trucks, SUVs, and minivans, and only built about half of them. Today we’re going to look at two vehicles that ended up with Isuzu badges, even though they were both built by other companies.
Yesterday we looked at a couple of yawn-inducing old-man sedans, one from the ’80s and one from the turn of the century. I expected the more modern and refined Hyundai Sonata to win, but the old Pontiac 6000 put up a good fight, despite being powered (just barely) by your least-favorite GM engine.
Me, I’m taking the Pontiac, not despite the Iron Duke engine, but because of it. It’s not going to be any slower to accelerate than my V6-powered full-size Chevy truck, and that doesn’t scare me on on-ramps. It’ll be fine. And it’s dead-simple to work on, which can’t be said of the Sonata. If I’m going to suffer with the maintenance on a transverse four-cam V6, it’s going to be in a Ford Taurus SHO with a stick, not some damned Hyundai.
Isuzu made some cool cars once upon a time, and its SUV game was on-point in the 1980s and ’90s. The Impulse sport coupe, both the old RWD Giugiaro design and the later FWD one, were delightful. The original Trooper was a poor man’s Range Rover. And who wouldn’t want an Amigo, a little soft-top off-roader that’s as friendly as its name? But the minivan and SUV we’re going to look at today are Isuzus in name only. Does that make them any less interesting? Read on and decide for yourself.
1999 Isuzu Oasis – $3,200
Engine/drivetrain: 2.3-liter OHC inline 4, four-speed automatic, FWD
Location: Modesto, CA
Odometer reading: 205,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well
The Isuzu Oasis was built by two brothers from London with a reputation for hard partying – wait, that’s not right. It was built by Honda. (I always get that mixed up.) This is the same thing as a first-generation Honda Odyssey, which is a bit of an odd duck in the minivan world. Instead of a sliding door on the passenger’s side like most vans, or a sliding door on both sides like Chrysler vans had starting in 1996, the Oasis and Odyssey have conventional rear doors on both sides. Did this hurt it in the market? Hard to say, but the second-generation Odyssey switched to sliding rear doors.
This van was also uncommon for its time for not offering a V6 engine. Instead, it uses the 2.3-liter four-cylinder and four-speed automatic combination commonly found in Honda Accords of the same era. It’s a good engine, but definitely down on power compared to its six-cylinder competitors. This one runs and drives well, the seller says, despite having more than 200,000 miles on it.
The Oasis has a ton of room inside, as a good minivan should, and a nice flat floor owing to its FWD configuration. Note the column shifter and floor-mounted handbrake lever; I can’t think of too many cars that have that combination of controls. Not that it matters in the slightest, but it’s a neat little detail. It’s really clean inside, especially for a used minivan, which sometimes lead hard lives. The third row of seats is folded down, so I can’t tell you what shape that’s in, but for all I know, it may have been folded down since 2001.
Outside, it has a couple of scuffs on the bumpers, but that’s about it as far as damage goes. It’s a California car, which accounts for the lack of rust, as well as the deeply tinted windows. All that sunshine is great, except when the car has been parked in it all day.
2006 Isuzu Ascender S – $3,999
Engine/drivetrain: 4.2-liter DOHC inline-6, four-speed automatic, RWD
Location: Vancouver, WA
Odometer reading: 147,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well
I believe the old General Motors T platform holds the record for the biggest number of different models based on it (including several Isuzus), but the GMT360 truck platform definitely got around, too. This Isuzu Ascender is essentially the same thing as a Chevy Trailblazer, GMC Envoy, Buick Rainier, Oldsmobile Bravada, and – of all things – a Saab 9-7x. The Ascender was the replacement in Isuzu’s lineup for its own Rodeo and Trooper models, meaning it had some mighty big shoes to fill. How well it filled those shoes depends on what you think of the GMT360.
GM’s Atlas inline six provides the power for this Ascender, along with a 4T60-E automatic transmission. Don’t go looking to ascend anything more gnarly than a parking garage ramp in this one, though; it’s only two-wheel-drive. It doesn’t have too many miles on it, and the dealership selling it says it runs and drives well, but the check engine light is on. Come to think of it, though, I’m not sure I’ve seen a GMT360 in recent years that didn’t have its check engine light on. Bring a scanner, read the codes, and then decide how big of a deal it is.
The interior looks pretty nice. It looks like Isuzu got one of the better interior packages for these, on par with the GMC version: a little nicer than the Chevy, not as fancy as the Buick and Saab. The dashboard toupee is always a slight concern; is it there to hide sun damage, or prevent it? Everything else is in good shape, so I’m inclined to give it the benefit of the doubt, but I’d look under it also.
It’s really clean outside, and thanks to the Pacific Northwest’s lack of road salt, rust-free. I took that fact for granted when I lived there; it has taken some adjustment seeing twenty-year-old cars (or newer, sometimes) absolutely eaten up by rust. The path forward, therefore, is clear: Don’t buy cars here in Michigan. Buy them elsewhere, and plan for a road trip home.
The fact that these are Isuzus in name only is probably an advantage when it comes to parts and service availability; neither Honda nor GM is going anywhere anytime soon. So you get the cool factor of a defunct brand without the headaches of finding parts. So what’ll it be: the Honda van, or the Chevy SUV?
Minivan vs. SUV? Thats a no-brainer.
The Ascender design has aged better then the trailblazer or most of the sister cars. I just don’t want to take the front end off of a vehicle for every little thing.
Not thrilled about that gen of Odyssey but they seem to do ok. Has to be more of a rarity so oasis.
I was going to make the joke that I would go for the Oasis and slap an ‘Anyway, here’s wonderwall’ sticker on the back, but I see someone beat me to it. So instead I’ll just mention that yesterday I saw someone with a 9-7x version of the Trailblazer in nearly full rock crawler kit, and it was hilarious seeing the Saab grille above a massive steel bumper and winch.
As a former long-time GMT360 owner, I’m throwing my hat in the ring for the Ascender. It isn’t a great vehicle, but it doesn’t aspire to be either. Haters of the GMT360 forget just how much of an improvement it was over the ancient GMT330 platform that came before it. Aside from some quirks, notably the axle-through-the-oil-pan issue the 4WD/AWD models had and general cheapness of early 2000s GM, the GMT360s are pretty easy to work on and relatively cheap to keep running (as long as that Atlas engine doesn’t blow). I also owned an Odyssey for a long time, but without the sliding doors this one doesn’t hold much appeal to me.
I think calling Noel and Liam brothers from London would get you chinned spectacularly quickly.
But to the cars, the Ascender wins for me
Top use of ‘chinned’ there.
It’s getting clubbed, but I’d take the unfortunately named SUV. Not because it’s a better vehicle to be sure…a RWD SUV here in PA is pretty useless, and the Honda is going to provide a lot better ownership, but it does one thing that the Honda really can’t do – towing (5,800 lb. capacity). My boat isn’t very big or heavy, but I’d prefer to tow it with something relatively disposable like this rather than doing it with my wife’s grand cherokee.
I very much dislike that Trailblazer. Slightly better interior or not. The one my wife’s family had was an unrepentant piece of shit. Drove terribly too.
The Oasis seems like a genuinely useful treat of a car, while being a bit of an oddity. It’s totally in my Q-Zone.
I’ll take the HondaSuzu over the Ass Ender any day.
Not even a competition… as much as I’m a GM fanboy all my life there’s no way I would pick that Trailblazer, seeing how many of them are in junkyards.
Honda>GM.
The Oasis looks cherry, bumper scuffs notwithstanding. I’d feel more confident in a 27-year-old misbranded Honda than a 20-year-old misbranded Chevy.
It’s essentially an extra-tall, extra-long Accord and the drivetrain enjoys a reputation of exceptional reliability, if otherwise uninspired performance. Well, hell, it’s a minivan. I’m not looking for inspiration, I just want me and all my stuff and people to get there. The Oasis will do that; the other thing might not.
Old Honda vs old GM… No contest really.
I picked the Oasis, even if I change the station every time Wonderwall comes on. That Honda 4 cylinder and auto transmission should be pretty bulletproof, and if I don’t want anyone to know it’s an Iauzu, a quick debadge turns it into an ordinary Odyssey.