Ace of Base: 1994 Chevrolet Blazer

by Matthew Guy

Published: June 27th, 2018

GM churned out examples of the full-size, two-door Blazer well into the ‘90s, before relegating the nameplate to its littler brother. Traditionalists frothed at the time, just as we are now after viewing the 2019 Blazer. And the circle continues.

For ’94, Chevy offered the Blazer in a couple of different flavors. You know my pick, of course – base 5.7-liter V8 engine, 4WD, and a big ol’ baseball bat of a manual shifter sticking out of the floor.

Insofar as I can tell with the myriad of imperfect records I found (I’m pretty sure the images here are of ’92 or ’93 models; the ’94 grille was slightly more pronounced), the 1994 Blazer was offered in three styles: Base, Silverado, and a Sport model that added color-keyed trim and a very ‘90s red-outline bowtie. GROUND EFFECTS (remember them?) were often a dealer installed accessory around these parts.

Standard under the hood of all Blazers for 1994 was a 5.7L V8 with electronic fuel injection, back when EFI was still worth bragging about and advertised in billboard-sized letters on its tailgate. Total output was a whopping 200 horsepower and 310 lb-ft of torque. Consider for a minute that the Focus RS makes 350/350 out of just a 2.3L displacement. Yes, because turbocharger, but still.

A five-speed stick protruded through the Blazer’s floorboards and shifted with all the precision of closet door with one hinge. Magazines at the time said the 4,600 lb SUV could haul its way to 60 mph in about ten seconds. Fuel mileage? None to speak of.

Inside, the Blazer soldiered on with the C/K pickup’s interior. You’ll remember that as the one designed with a T-square, including a pod-style radio that put a knee squarely in the groin of aftermarket audio shops across the land. That is, until all hands figured out that a single-DIN head unit would fit very neatly into a storage slot located dead-centre of the plastic dashboard. GM itself would occasionally put a tape player and graphic equalizer in that same spot, but only rarely. I have seen two in my lifetime.

All-terrain rubber sized 225/75/16 might not sound like much today, but was plenty big twenty years ago. Anti-lock brakes were standard; it should be noted that, for years, the brake pedal of Chevy trucks had the words “Disc Brakes” molded into the rubber pad. The Blazer could tow 7,000 lbs.

Sure, the new Blazer is nothing like the old ones … and I would definitely be lying if I said my eye didn’t twitch when looking at its crossover styling cues, especially at the rear. However, like it or not, those are the machines that sell. GM is not in the business of losing money, or indeed catering to a small cadre of misty-eyed nostalgic gearheads who probably wouldn’t buy a new Blazer anyways (do the words “I’ll wait until they show up at auction!” sound familiar?)

But in 1994, Pulp Fiction was in theatres, R.E.M was on the radio asking Kenneth for the frequency, and the Blazer was a full-size SUV with a stickshift. Sounds pretty good to me.

Not every base model has aced it. The ones which have? They help make the automotive landscape a lot better. Any others you can think of, B&B? Let us know in the comments and feel free to eviscerate our selections.

[Image: automobile-catalog.com]

#AceOfBase #Blazer #Chevrolet #ChevroletBlazer #Chevy

Matthew Guy

Matthew buys, sells, fixes, & races cars. As a human index of auto & auction knowledge, he is fond of making money and offering loud opinions.

More by Matthew Guy

Comments

Join the conversation

2 of 27 comments

Mopar4wd on Jun 27, 2018

On the stereo oddly most of the early GMT 400 trucks I have been in had the cassette deck. I know the silverado that GM donated to our school autoshop had the equalizer too. At an old job we had a 94 suburban as a shop truck and it had a CD player mounted in the cassette area factory. I can only find one picture online and it's of one not installed. http://www.gmt400.com/data/attachments/177/177185-27c88e0f8e20afd13362935182219a27.jpg

Like Reply
Syncro87 on Jun 27, 2018

I think the 88-98 GM trucks were some of the cleanest designs ever in the pickup truck world. Very classy design that has aged well. The pre '96 TBI versions, though, were pretty weak engine-wise, and the later Vortec equipped models from around '96 and up were a lot better. I'm probably in the minority that prefer the early GMT400 dash, i.e. the one with the digital radio and climate control pod lower dash line, no passenger airbag, versus the later, "better" more conventional unit. My perfect GM truck of the era would be an early dash model, early quad small sealed beams (late 80's I think), later Vortec engine.

Like Reply

Recent Comments

FreedMike Not surprisingly, I have some ideas. What Cadillac needs, I think, is a statement. They don’t really have an identity. They’re trying a statement car with the Celestiq, and while that’s the right idea, it has the wrong styling and a really wrong price tag. So, here’s a first step: instead of a sedan, do a huge, fast, capable and ridiculously smooth and quiet electric touring coupe. If you want an example of what I’m thinking of, check out the magnificent Rolls-Royce Spectre. But this Cadillac coupe would be uniquely American, it’d be named “Eldorado,” and it’d be a lot cheaper than the $450,000 Spectre – call it a buck twenty-five, with a range of bespoke options for prospective buyers that would make each one somewhat unique. Make it 220 inches long, on the same platform as the Celestiq, give it retro ‘60s styling (or you could do a ‘50s or ‘70s throwback, I suppose), and at least 700 horsepower, standard. Why electric? It’s the ultimate throwback to ‘60s powertrains: effortlessly fast, smooth, and quiet, but with a ton more horsepower. It’s the perfect drivetrain for a dignified touring coupe. In fact, I’d skip any mention of environmental responsibility in this car’s marketing – sell it on how it drives, period.  How many would they sell? Not many. But the point of the exercise is to do something that will turn heads and show people what this brand can do.  Second step: give the lineup a mix of electric and gas models, and make Cadillac gas engines bespoke to the brand. If they need to use generic GM engine designs, fine – take those engines and massage them thoroughly into something special to Cadillac, with specific tuning and output. No Cadillac should leave the factory with an engine straight out of a Malibu or a four-banger Silverado. Third step: a complete line-wide interior redo. Stop the cheapness that’s all over the current sedans and crossovers. Just stop it. Use the Lyriq as a blueprint – it’s a big improvement over the current crop and a good first step. I’d also say Cadillac has a good blend of screen-controlled and switch-controlled user interfaces; don’t give into the haptic-touch and wall-to-wall screen thing. (On the subject of Caddy interiors – as much as I bag on the Celestiq, check out the interior on that thing. Wow.)Fourth step: Blackwing All The Things – some gas, others electric. And keep the electric/gas mix so buyers have a choice.Fifth step: be patient. That’s not easy, but if they’re doing a brand reset, it’ll take time. 
NJRide So if GM was serious about selling this why no updates for so long? Or make something truly unique instead of something that looked like a downmarket Altima?
Kmars2009 I rented one last fall while visiting Ohio. Not a bad car...but not a great car either. I think it needs a new version. But CUVs are King... unfortunately!
Ajla Remember when Cadillac introduced an entirely new V8 and proceeded to install it in only 800 cars before cancelling everything?
Bouzouki Cadillac (aka GM!!) made so many mistakes over the past 40 years, right up to today, one could make a MBA course of it. Others have alluded to them, there is not enough room for me to recite them in a flowing, cohesive manner.Cadillac today is literally a tarted-up Chevrolet. They are nice cars, and the "aura" of the Cadillac name still works on several (mostly female) consumers who are not car enthusiasts.The CT4 and CT5 offer superlative ride and handling, and even performance--but, it is wrapped in sheet metal that (at least I think) looks awful, with (still) sub-par interiors. They are niche cars. They are the last gasp of the Alpha platform--which I have been told by people close to it, was meant to be a Pontiac "BMW 3-series". The bankruptcy killed Pontiac, but the Alpha had been mostly engineered, so it was "Cadillac-ized" with the new "edgy" CTS styling.Most Cadillacs sold are crossovers. The most profitable "Cadillac" is the Escalade (note that GM never jack up the name on THAT!).The question posed here is rather irrelevant. NO ONE has "a blank check", because GM (any company or corporation) does not have bottomless resources.Better styling, and superlative "performance" (by that, I mean being among the best in noise, harshness, handling, performance, reliablity, quality) would cost a lot of money.Post-bankruptcy GM actually tried. No one here mentioned GM's effort to do just that: the "Omega" platform, aka CT6.The (horribly misnamed) CT6 was actually a credible Mercedes/Lexus competitor. I'm sure it cost GM a fortune to develop (the platform was unique, not shared with any other car. The top-of-the-line ORIGINAL Blackwing V8 was also unique, expensive, and ultimately...very few were sold. All of this is a LOT of money).I used to know the sales numbers, and my sense was the CT6 sold about HALF the units GM projected. More importantly, it sold about half to two thirds the volume of the S-Class (which cost a lot more in 201x)Many of your fixed cost are predicated on volume. One way to improve your business case (if the right people want to get the Green Light) is to inflate your projected volumes. This lowers the unit cost for seats, mufflers, control arms, etc, and makes the vehicle more profitable--on paper.Suppliers tool up to make the number of parts the carmaker projects. However, if the volume is less than expected, the automaker has to make up the difference.So, unfortunately, not only was the CT6 an expensive car to build, but Cadillac's weak "brand equity" limited how much GM could charge (and these were still pricey cars in 2016-18, a "base" car was ).Other than the name, the "Omega" could have marked the starting point for Cadillac to once again be the standard of the world. Other than the awful name (Fleetwood, Elegante, Paramount, even ParAMOUR would be better), and offering the basest car with a FOUR cylinder turbo on the base car (incredibly moronic!), it was very good car and a CREDIBLE Mercedes S-Class/Lexus LS400 alternative. While I cannot know if the novel aluminum body was worth the cost (very expensive and complex to build), the bragging rights were legit--a LARGE car that was lighter, but had good body rigidity. No surprise, the interior was not the best, but the gap with the big boys was as close as GM has done in the luxury sphere.Mary Barra decided that profits today and tomorrow were more important than gambling on profits in 2025 and later. Having sunk a TON of money, and even done a mid-cycle enhancement, complete with the new Blackwing engine (which copied BMW with the twin turbos nestled in the "V"!), in fall 2018 GM announced it was discontinuing the car, and closing the assembly plant it was built in. (And so you know, building different platforms on the same line is very challenging and considerably less efficient in terms of capital and labor costs than the same platform, or better yet, the same model).So now, GM is anticipating that, as the car market "goes electric" (if you can call it that--more like the Federal Government and EU and even China PUSHING electric cars), they can make electric Cadillacs that are "prestige". The Cadillac Celestique is the opening salvo--$340,000. We will see how it works out.