Which Rare Stickshift Would You Stick With? 1987 GMC Safari vs 1992 Ford Explorer

Back in the days when a manual transmission was referred to as a “standard transmission,” it really did come standard in a lot of cars. But in a lot of cases, the manual version only really existed in brochures; hardly anyone actually bought a car so equipped. They were rare enough in the wild when they were new, but seeing one now is like catching a prehistoric fish.

Yesterday’s cars are pretty rare these days as well. I confess that the final tally surprised me; I would never have guessed that a glacially-slow Volkswagen could beat a 20R-equipped Toyota. I suspect that if the Corona had been a manual, it would have easily beaten the little diesel Rabbit. Of course, if the Corona were a manual, it would have been turned into a crappy half-assed “drift car” ten years ago.

I’m on Team Rabbit with the majority of you. I cut my teeth on Volkswagens of this era, and I still really like them. Such a slow 0-60 time would require some careful planning ahead, but it’s really not all that much slower than my Chevy pickup, and I get around fine in that. This Rabbit uses about a fourth as much fuel doing it, too.

I’m not one of those people who think every car can be improved by a manual transmission. I see photos of manual-swapped Crown Vics and think, “Why?” But I do enjoy seeing rare manual-equipped versions of common cars. And I can definitely see the appeal of them, especially if the automatic transmission offered in them has a bad reputation. Let’s take a look at two such rarities for sale today.

1987 GMC Safari – $2,000

Engine/drivetrain: 4.3-liter OHV V6, five-speed manual, RWD

Location: Lowell, MI

Odometer reading: 146,000 miles

Operational status: Runs and drives well

Yes, that’s right – for the first few years, you could get a Chevy Astro or GMC Safari van with a stickshift. I remember seeing exactly one in my time working at the garage in St. Paul, owned by a courier service. I had to (or got to, depending on your perspective) drive it a couple of times. I actually kind of liked the novelty of it, but the Astro/Safari’s notoriously tight footwell gets even more crowded with a clutch pedal, and the shifter is awkward to reach. I can understand why they didn’t sell well.

You could also get one with an Iron Duke four-cylinder, but I’ve never seen one of those. The 4.3-liter V6 was the de facto standard engine in these vans, even before it became the actual standard engine in 1990. It’s a good engine that punches well above its weight, though it is a little thirsty. This one runs and drives well, according to the seller, but they don’t give many details beyond that.

This van is also rare in that it lacks windows in the rearmost positions. It is a passenger van, though, not a cargo model. Someone added wood paneling to the rear walls, ceiling, and floor, which if nothing else probably makes it feel less tin-canny than a cargo van. All the seats are in good condition except for the driver’s seat, which is badly worn. It looks like this seven-passenger van spent a lot of time with only one passenger. The seller says neither the air conditioning nor the radio work at the moment, so you’ve got a little work to do.

It’s pretty clean outside, especially for a Michigan van. I see a few minor rust spots, but nothing serious. The paint isn’t in bad shape, and the Oldsmobile hubcaps actually look pretty good on it.

1992 Ford Explorer Sport – $4,999

Engine/drivetrain: 4.0-liter OHV V6, five-speed manual, RWD

Location: El Paso, TX

Odometer reading: 70,000 miles

Operational status: Runs and drives well

Overnight successes are rare, especially in the car world, but I think the Ford Explorer qualifies. The Explorer’s predecessor, the Bronco II, sold pretty well, but its appeal was limited by the fact that it only had two doors. The four-door version of the Explorer sold like hotcakes from day one, but for those who missed the old Bronco II, Ford also offered a two-door Explorer, called the Explorer Sport.

Regardless of door count, Ford only offered the Explorer with one engine: a 4.0-liter version of the Cologne V6. A five-speed manual was standard, but rare; you see more two-door Explorers with manuals than four-doors, but still not many. Most Explorers were also four-wheel-drive, but not this one. I wasn’t sure at first, until I saw the dashboard: it’s missing the push-button controls for the transfer case above the radio.

The seller says this car only has 70,000 miles on it, but if so, it was a hard 70,000. There’s a lot of wear on the armrest and steering wheel, and the driver’s seat looks pretty mashed-down. It’s also missing the pull handle on the passenger door, and that’s just what I can see in this one photo. It’s not in bad shape; it just doesn’t look as low-mileage as they claim. I’d run a Carfax report on this one if I were you.

Outside, it looks pretty good at first glance, but there’s a little wrinkle below the left taillight, and the paint is pretty faded. But there’s no rust on it, at least.

I’m not sure having a manual transmission improves the driving experience of either of these, but it definitely improves their durability. GM’s TH700R4 automatic is more durable than Ford’s 4R55E, but you can expect to rebuild either one at least once during the life of a vehicle. The manual gearboxes in these should outlast the rest of the trucks with nothing more than an occasional fluid change and maybe a new clutch. As long as you’re willing to shift gears for yourself, you should be able to keep doing so indefinitely. Which one would you pick?