By on March 9, 2018

Image: 1998 Acura SLXThe Buy/Drive/Burn series has been stuck in a time warp lately. After tackling domestic minivans from 1994 with luxury appointments, we moved on to 1997 and some nontraditional imported minivans.

Once again, we’re going to keep it in the ’90s and determine which of three imported, alternative semi-luxury SUVs should burn at the stake. Are you ready for gold badges and two-tone? Rhetorical question.

Acura SLX

Image: 1998 Acura SLXThe imported minivans article linked above discussed the Honda Odyssey, which was also sold as the Isuzu Oasis in its first generation. Here we have an Isuzu sold by the luxury arm of Honda. The SLX was on offer at Acura dealers between 1996 and 1999. The 1998 model year saw a visual refresh with larger grille and headlamps, and a change from 3.2 to 3.5 liters for the Isuzu V6 engine. All SLX models were loaded, and featured ruched leather on all five seats, wood, and a huge sunroof. The SLX was a stop-gap measure at a time when Honda wasn’t too keen on SUVs (remember the Passport?). There was no SLX replacement from Acura until 2001, when the MDX was finally readied for sale. Buyers should look out for that GM 4L30-E transmission, though — it doesn’t like motivating the heft of the SLX.

Land Rover Discovery I

Image: 1998 Land Rover Discovery LSEThe Land Rover is perhaps the most prestigious of our oddball luxury collection. It’s the reason 1998 is our selected year, because 1999 would see the dawn of the Discovery II. All three of our rides today were roughly at the end of their lives in 1998. Like above, Honda also rebadged a Discovery and called it the Crossroad for the Japanese market. On sale in the US since the 1994 model year, the Discovery gained luxury appointments throughout its development. All 1996 to 1998 Discovery models had the 4.0-liter Rover V8 under the hood. For our purposes, today’s Discovery is the top trim LSE. It features five regular leather-clad seats, and two jump seats in the back for people you dislike. Buyers should keep an eye on those Lucas electrics.

Mitsubishi Montero 

Image: 1998 Mitsubishi MonteroThe second generation Montero arrived in North America for the 1994 model year, replacing the very boxy and much less refined first-generation model. For 1998 the Montero got a slight visual update (revised cladding) and a simplification in trims (one model). Standard features include seven real seats and a split third row which folded up and to the side. Ours will be fully-loaded, with wood trim, leather seats, and an even larger sunroof than the SLX. The Montero has the added benefit of having a better ride quality than most vehicles in its class. All 1998 Monteros were powered by the 3.5-liter V6, making 200 horsepower. Honda did not rebadge the Montero, and buyers might watch out for oil leaks in various places under the hood.

Which of these two semi-forgotten import SUVs do you take home or borrow, and which one magically bursts into flames?

[Images: Acura, Land Rover, Mitsubishi]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

68 Comments on “Buy/Drive/Burn: Oddball Semi-premium SUVs From 1998...”


  • avatar
    IBx1

    Buy the Acura, no reason
    Burn the Mitsubishi because it’s a Mitsubishi
    The Land Rover will catch fire on its own

  • avatar
    87 Morgan

    Oh boy.

    Having owned cars with engines from two of these manufacturers…

    Burn: The Isuzu, wait, Honda. I had an Isuzu pick up. Total pile of trash.

    Drive: Shockingly, I think the Mitsu will give the best old car experience.

    Buy the Land Rover: Immediately complete a LS swap; a junk yard 5.3 from a Silverado will bolt right in along with the 4L60E. The Rover 4.0 liter is a really a small Buick V8, aluminum block, leaks like a sieve, over heats like crazy and does not make the much power. Just a terrible engine.

    • 0 avatar
      SSJeep

      Totally agreed on all counts.

      Buy the Land Rover – drive occasionally, once the engine starts to go replace with a 5.3 GM engine.

      Drive the Mitsubishi – The Montero/Pajero is a capable line and drove well for its time.

      Burn the Honda. Its essentially an Isuzu / GM Frankenstein and should have bee put out of its misery before it ever hit the production line.

  • avatar
    jh26036

    Burn the LR

    Drive the Montero (as long as it has the rear diff lock)

    Buy the Acura then immediately sell on BAT as those people just paid $8,500 for a POS stock Trooper with 120k miles

    • 0 avatar
      30-mile fetch

      “Those people” is a great description of BAT bidders–that place is something else. There is apparently a lot of money out there just waiting to get thrown at nearly any vehicle you can think of. 1994 Bronco with *273,000 miles*? $8700. Automatic Toyota Supra? $53K. Low mile 1994 Taurus SHO? Well, that one wasn’t going anywhere so the seller started vigorously outbidding everyone else to buy his own car back in the last hour of the auction.

      • 0 avatar
        Ryoku75

        Wasn’t BaT about cheap project cars originally?

        I recall a Volvo 240 on there once, bypassed heater core, no AC, broken odometer, many other shady repairs yet it still got around $5k or so.

  • avatar
    Middle-Aged Miata Man

    Buy the Acusuzu: Transmission excepted, Troopers tend to be pretty durable and the added Honda bling makes it something of a rarity. Also arguably the best-looking of the three.

    Drive the Mitsu: My family briefly had a ’92 Montero, the first year of this body style, and apart from the underpowered 3.0 V6 (somewhat remedied by 1998, although 200 hp still wasn’t much) it was a hoot to drive on and off road.

    Burn the Land Rover: As IBx1 already noted, you probably won’t even need a match.

  • avatar
    BoogerROTN

    Buy: Acura, because the moms in the pickup lane at the local elementary school wouldn’t know it was an Isuzu. Also, it would complement my Integra GS-R. Much like that weird family that only owns old Volvos, we’d be that weird family that only owns old Acuras.

    Drive: Land Rover, so I can stylishly cruise through Chelsea in my Fila jumper while grooving to “I Could Never Be Your Woman” by White Town.

    Burn: The Mitsubishi. Once upon a time I had a drinking problem. At the same time I lived in Germany. What did I drive? An ’89 Mirage. No more Underberg, no more Mitsubishis.

  • avatar
    30-mile fetch

    Oooh, the glory days when your choice of offroadable family SUV wasn’t limited to 4Runner, 4Runner, or 4Runner. And when 200hp 12-sec 0-60 powertrain performance netted 19mpg highway.

    Buy: Montero. This is pending entirely on whether it has better long term reliability than the Acura Trooper. Both of these are going to be slow archaic throwbacks, so the durable one wins.

    Drive: Land Rover. Very cool, very iconic, very risky.

    Burn: Probably the Acura. I don’t like transmission problems.

    • 0 avatar
      Dave M.

      Hehe. The GM 4L30-E sucks. My Trooper at 250k is on it’s 3rd edition. Fragile little French thing.

      After the Great Deer Strike of 2014 rebuild I put the SLX grille on it – rather classy looking without the necessary two-tone cladding on the SLX.

      I’d love for a modern (less-fragile transmission) Trooper to be on the market – the sight lines, cargo capacity and driver comfort on mine remains astounding, 18 years later.

  • avatar
    Car Ramrod

    Buy the SLX- its sort of of nice inside and out by modern standards and will be a slow durability crapshoot just like the Montero.

    Drive the Disco- I don’t think I could buy this thing, even with a Doug DeMuro/Carmax warranty, and those skylights are cool when they aren’t leaking.

    Burn the Montero- Old Mitsubishis scare me a bit more than old Isuzus. At least with the SLX I can find a replacement transmission.

    • 0 avatar
      gtem

      I’d argue it’s easier to find parts for something with a super-generic V6 Mitsu motor than an Isuzu truck. Isuzu/Acura’s 4L30E will burn up long before the Aisin in the Mitsu shows any signs of slowing down.

  • avatar
    sportyaccordy

    No QX4?

    Also just realizing the precedent set for Infiniti’s current alphabet goop.

  • avatar
    FreedMike

    Buy: SLX. I always had a soft spot for the Trooper.
    Drive: Montero
    Burn: Land Rover, accompanied by a choral rendition of “God Save The Queen.”

  • avatar
    PrincipalDan

    Buy Acura as a monument to Honda’s hubris/stupidity.

    Drive the Mitsubishi and remember when they actually made interesting vehicles.

    The Land Rover is self-immolating.

  • avatar
    Sub-600

    I think Mitsubishi used the Montero chassis for the second gen Eclipse, I used to watch people attempt u-turns in those cars to no avail, not unless they were turning onto a pasture. Burn the Mitsu. Y’know what? Burn the Mitsu and then use the Acura to push the Discovery into the conflagration. Report all three stolen, take the money and go buy a nice Hyundai Kona or something. Don’t lease the Kona though.

  • avatar
    jmo

    When I was in high school we had a Disco. It went 10 years and 150k miles before it was traded in and the only problem it ever had was a rear door rattle that was fixed under warranty. I know plural, data… yadda yadda. But I’ll offer that as one data point.

  • avatar
    JohnTaurus

    Tough choice between the Mitsubishi and the Isuzu Acura. I had a first gen Trooper and I loved it. Of course it was a two door with a manual.

    I’ll say, buy the Mitsubishi, drive the Acura to dinner with my bf, and crack a Michelob Cactus and watch as the Land Rover burns itself. The Disco was probably the most competent off-road, but be damned if I’d wait for a tow truck every time I took it out. Not because it’s stuck, because something else failed.

  • avatar
    SuperCarEnthusiast

    https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2018/03/buy-drive-burn-oddball-semi-premium-suvs-from-1998/

    This is a fantastic looking Acura! Today’s Acura crossovers looks so feminine and odd looking!

  • avatar
    dukeisduke

    Didn’t the Trooper II (and the SLX) have a reputation for being rollover prone?

    • 0 avatar
      Sub-600

      Weren’t some Consumer Reports guys injured during testing of a Trooper? If I’m not mistaken that vehicle got a “do not purchase” tag from CR. I know the Bronco II was a death trap, very short wheelbase and high center of gravity. Willie Shoemaker rolled his and was really messed up.

      • 0 avatar

        I believe all this is correct.

      • 0 avatar
        jh26036

        When did CR’s “do not purchase” ever stop a car enthusiast from buying? If anything, it probably has an opposite effect.

        • 0 avatar
          Sub-600

          CR used to “not recommend” certain models which didn’t stop people from buying, but that was based on reliability. In the case of the Trooper they essentially stated that the vehicle had a propensity for tipping over in turns at normal speed, it was a safety warning and not a reliability opinion.

          • 0 avatar
            Dave M.

            Correct. With the ’98 model year refurb Isuzu widened the track 2″ and that seemed to be a settling factor. ’98 – ’02 Troopers are the ones with the wheel opening flares to adjust for the 2″.

            My first experience with a Trooper was a test drive of an ’88 Trooper II – coming from a Celica I thought it would tip every time I turned the wheel.

  • avatar
    rpn453

    Buy: Montero. Looks capable. Should be reliable enough.
    Drive: Land Rover. It’s cool but I don’t want to depend on it.
    Burn: SLX. If the transmission isn’t durable, it’ll die soon enough anyway.

  • avatar
    dal20402

    Buy: SLX. Nothing wrong with a Trooper and the extra frippery is a bonus.
    Drive: Montero, so you can watch the horizon gauge bob around over a bumpy two-track.
    Burn: Discovery. My ex-stepmother owned one of the first Euro-spec ’90 models off the line, complete with carbureted 3.5 V8 and 5-speed. It was terrible both when it was working and when it wasn’t, which was most of the time. I’d personally set that very car on fire today if I could

  • avatar
    Big Al from Oz

    I’d pick the Pajero, or the Montero.

    I do think the engine was reliable, a bit like the 3.8 GM V6 in character with not much low down torque for off roading.

    It would have to be the most reliable of the three and not leave you stuck in the middle of the bush on some track.

    The downside to the 3.5 Mitsubishi V6 is it’s a real thirsty engine.

    The Izuzu come Honda is the roll over Queen of midsize 4×4 SUVs. Dangerous.

    The Land Rover, well it’s a Land Rover of vintage and this means to much British engineering, not German like the latest ones.

  • avatar
    gtem

    I’m a day late again!

    I can’t help but laugh at the ignorant bringing up questions of reliability for the Montero, I think that is befitting of Jalopnik commentariat quite frankly.

    The Mitsu would hands down be my ‘buy.’ To me they might just be the ultimate utilitarian SUV ever made by anyone. Close to the Land Cruiser 80 in durability and reliability and size, but lighter, more fuel efficient and with a smoother riding (but still very durable) independent front end. Simple mechanical layout with an Aisin 4spd auto, part/fulltime “Super-Select’ 4wd, and a classic solid rear axle with 5-link rear. Very beefy underpinnings in terms of the axle ring gear and such. Motors are a mix of classic Mitsu V6s. Minor issues with oil leaks and valve stem seals, but long lived workhorses with ample part supply. A few early years even had 5spds but were stuck with the somewhat wheezy SOHC 3.0L (177hp). I’d pick a ’95-’96 “SR” trim with the locking rear diff and “hot” 215hp DOHC 3.5L motor, inclinometer and “bouncy” driver’s seat. Runner up would be a ’98-’00 “winter package” truck that likewise had the locking rear diff but now had a simpler SOHC 3.5L V6.

    If the choice was a 5spd Isuzu Trooper, that would be my “drive.” As it is, I think curiosity would get the best of me and I’d want to see what the fuss was all about with the Disco. Unfortunately this would leave the SLX to burn. The Troopers are very sturdy rigs as well, with VERY big and overbuilt axles, brakes, etc. I think most American consumers never really appreciated that about them. Sadly they were saddled with wholly inadequate 4L30E transmissions, when GM themselves saw fit to equip similar sized/powered S10 Blazers with 4L60Es. Sad!

    • 0 avatar
      ernest

      We had the franchise back in the 80’s-90’s. Couldn’t get a Montero motor past 100K miles, unless you didn’t mind a trail of blue smoke following you everywhere. We moved them to a different facility so we could physically separate them from our Jeep line. Drop-kicked the franchise in the late 90’s. (you can tell not a lot of love here)

      • 0 avatar
        gtem

        That was the valve stem seals I mentioned. Certainly not a good look, but not a hard or expensive job to fix. Aside that and valve cover gasket leaks, they are rock solid motors. I would take a Mitsu V6 over a Jeep I6, to say nothing of a Montero vs a Cherokee/Grand Cherokee taken as an entire vehicle.

        • 0 avatar
          Scott

          So your saying the 2003 Montero with 83,000 km (about 50,000 miles) no visage rust and looks clean overall for $5000 Canadian is a good deal then? I just looked for curiosity sake, now I wonder… (don’t really have the money though so will probably pass, though a rugged 4X4 could be fun :) )

          • 0 avatar
            gtem

            ’03 Montero (mid/fullsize with 3 rows) is a very different beast than the gen II, or if it is a Montero Sport, likewise a different platform.

            If it is the fullsize Montero (Limited or XLS), they went to reinforced unibody and independent rear suspension and a Mitsu 5spd automatic that is very picky with fluid, and a fully electronically controlled transfer case that likes to get sticky solenoids (aside from early XLS rigs that used the II’s 4spd Aisin and simple manual t-case). They’re heavy trucks and most used ones need control arm bushings/balljoints in the front and/or rear by now. Factory arms are pricey, aftermarket is limited, individual bushings are hard ti find and a pain to do anyways in terms of labor. They are however really nice to drive on the road, but overall more nuanced in terms of maintenance and frankly not quite as robust and bulletproof as the BOF gens 2s.

            If it’s a Montero Sport, they’re a bit closer to the gen 2s in terms of being body on frame, solid rear axle, torsion bar front. But many of them to got the finicky 5spd auto towards the end of the production run, and are just not quite as overbuilt or nicely made as the fullsize Montys IMO.

    • 0 avatar
      Big Al from Oz

      gtem,
      I’ve owned those engines.

      I will say that the 4 litre Jeep engine is the best out of the two for off roading and general driving.

      The 3.5 is very peaky in power delievery and thirstier than the 4 litre Jeep.

      Technologically, the 3.5 is the winner. This engine is better suited for a Mitsubishi Magna, a car.

      As I said the 3.5 reminded me of a 3.8 GM V6 and the Jeep reminded me of an inline Ford Falcon 4 litre six.

      • 0 avatar
        gtem

        FWIW I have a coworker with one of the dreaded “0331” head castings, cracked by 110k miles, needs a total rebuild by now I figure since it’s been driven since. The rest of the rig isn’t particularly impressive in terms of build quality or just the size and durability of various components, axles, steering linkage, the longevity of various ancillary components, the sheetmetal (rockers especially).

        I’d agree though that the Japanese gas V6s tended to be smaller, smoother revving mills that were overmatched in an SUV application, which resulted in mediocre performance and poor MPG to boot. I assume there must have been some sort of tax brackets at 3.0L and 3.5L of displacement since most settled on that. Having said that the 3.4L in my 4Runner is very torque-biased, developed by Hino for Toyota dontcha know. Not as much as an American OHV 4.0L rig but definitely not a “peaky” unit (peak torque by 3600 rpm).

        • 0 avatar
          gtem

          First part of my comment is in reference to a ’00 XJ Cherokee btw

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al from Oz

            gtem,
            I bought a new 95 XJ 4dr Sport. From what I can remember they still had cast iron pistons! From 97(?) on the 4 litre changed to cast aluminium pistons which gave it a drop of around 5hp, but an increase of about 15ftlb or torque.

            I agree the NJ Pajero was more a “poor man’s” Landcruiser. I never like the short wheelbase Pajero’s.

            The NJ Pajero would of been fantastic if it had a live axle on the front. It would of made it a cult off roader.

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al from Oz

            7lbs of torque.

  • avatar
    gtem

    I forgot to mention earlier. About 4 years ago, a buddy of mine bought a cheap beater 2nd gen Montero LS for I think all of $1200 when he moved out West. No maintenance history, 212k miles, sun burned paint, torn up interior, but seemed to run and drive well enough, 4wd worked. Well, he’s been beating on it out in the desert for the past 4 years and then used it to move back to the East coast last year. Total investment in maintenance I think has been a few oil changes and a set of all terrain tires. The damn thing just eats it all up. I cringe at the mechanical neglect and DGAF attitude directed at this truck, but it seems un-phased. A Trooper/SLX would most definitely have burned up its transmission, a Disco would no-doubt have popped a headgasket in the desert conditions combined with zero cooling system maintenance.

    • 0 avatar
      JohnTaurus

      +5
      Gtem, I acquired a vehicle last night. Uncle gave me my grandfather’s 1972 F-100 2wd 390/3spd. I’m in another state working at the moment, but I’m thrilled. I’ve wanted that truck since my pre-teen years, it was the last truck my grandfather ever bought. He passed away when I was about 2 in 1984. Needless to say, its sentimental value is off the scale.

      I’m also looking at a 1999 Oldsmobile Aurora. It looks decent, just a couple of blemishes on the exterior and the interior looks good. I KNOW the Northstar has its issues, but I don’t think my Olds collection would be complete with out an Aurora. It was their last flagship, and I love the first gen over the second. 1999 had all the improvements made to the first gen.

      I drove one when working at a GM dealer in the early 00s, the power was terrific, the styling looked like a UFO (which matches its quickness), and the interior is comfortable. Ad says it runs and drives well, they only want $1500. I think it’s worth a look if its its still there when I get paid next Friday.

      • 0 avatar
        gtem

        Congrats on the family heirloom! Is it in good running order?

        I’d be quite weary of the Aurora, unless it had a really clean bill of health and service history. The luxed-up domestics are basically on par with older Germans (and frankly, some old Japanese) luxury sedans in that there are just a ton of gizmos that were never engineered to last past 10-15 years of use. They are good looking cars and I see the appeal. I’d prioritize funds towards fixing up the old Ford truck, lord knows it’s easier and cheaper to wrench on.

        Speaking of Ford trucks, I scooped up a decent little ’94 Ranger last weekend after selling my Pilot for a tidy profit. Same basic RWD/5spd/Lima 2.3 in XLT trim as my last one, but this one has a long bed and is painted a deep purple (Medium Aubergine Metallic) that is really growing on me. Body is more dinged up and scratched than my ’97, especially around the bed, but rust is spectacularly minimal (just some surface rust on the frame) in contrast to that rot box ’97 that fooled me with minimal visible/cosmetic rust on the sheetmetal. 106k miles, rides and drives much better than my ’97 (which was also a low 128k mile unit), overall just feels less worn out. The ’94s have the old style dash without airbags and thankfully non-vacuum controlled HVAC, just regular mechanical sliders. Fewer odds and ends wrong with it (hand brake works, windshield isn’t cracked, exhaust isn’t loud, suspension isn’t worn out), but the biggest thing is the lack of any significant rust. My ’97 had rotted at the radiator support body mounts so the front clip was just bouncing around on the frame. I’ve got a few minor things that need attention like the windshield washers not spraying, temp gauge staying low despite the truck warming up normally, and one of the rear tires is critically worn. But I’m starting with a very solid base and I’ll put it to good use this gardening/DIY season, and intend to keep it for a while yet.

        • 0 avatar
          JohnTaurus

          Thanks! I’m very excited about it.

          Congrats on the Ranger. Sounds like a good truck. You’ll also be thankful for the old style dash if the heater core fails. Its like a 20 minute job, behind the glovebox.

          I know Uncle has spent money on the truck, but I haven’t seen it in years. I think it runs/drives. I am thinking of putting a 4 speed in it, the low gear combined with the torque from that big V-8 should pull a house off its foundation lol.

          It was repainted, poorly, about 15 years ago. It was also converted to a step side, it was a short wheel base fleet side originally. The bed is from an early 80s truck with the tall F O R D letters.

          The later versions had the split grille, which I like with a Ford oval on the lower driver side. I guess I could do that with this one with its stock grille, I much prefer the oval to the letters on the hood.

          I was also thinking of some bucket seats inside, sourced from a newer Ford truck of some kind. I don’t know if a console from a Super Duty would fit, but I’ll measure my dad’s 1999 F-250 to see.

          I know the Aurora won’t make an Accord envious with its reliability, but its such a special car, I am really wanting it. Since the Taurus isn’t going away, and I still plan on a 4wd SUV as well (likely an OHV Explorer, or maybe a Trooper or Montero), I certainly won’t need to depend on the Aurora as a daily driver.

          I also want a mid 80s Cutlass Supreme, an early 80s Ninety-Eight coupe, and possibly something from the 60s (would love a Starfire). Then maybe a Quad 4/5MT N body.

          This job is supposed to last about 50 some odd more days, and I’m working 7 days a week, so when it’s over, I should have some time (and money for a change!!) to fix up my vehicles. I plan to order some parts and have them sent to my parent’s house for the Taurus. Crystaline headlamps for sure, a header panel to mount them in as well. Probably a double DIN touch screen and new speakers as well.

        • 0 avatar
          JohnTaurus

          Found these, I think they’d look great on the truck.

          https://pensacola.craigslist.org/wto/d/dodge-ram-17-wheels-and-tires/6518639417.html

          From my understanding, the truck hasn’t been started in 3-4 years. My cousin is good with a carburetor, so he’ll help me get it goin.

          • 0 avatar
            gtem

            That’s a good deal on those steelies+tires for sure. I need to figure something out for my Ranger, just one of the rear tires is worn almost clean flat in the middle, the rest are actually quite serviceable. I’m usually quite a stickler for having quality matched tires on anything I own, but it’s different when it’s just a cheap beater truck. Firestone has their budget whitewall “Primewell” on sale for $65 a pop, might go that route, or else buy a single used rim+tire at the junkyard.

            Carbs can definitely be finicky, but with a good cleaning can generally be brought to life for minimal cost (aside from time). Too many people just seem to simply slap on a new one when they run into issues, that’s a pricey (and lazy) solution IMO.

          • 0 avatar
            bumpy ii

            I did have a go at rebuilding the carb on my GMC. Problem was, I never found anything showing exactly how to assemble the linkage for the float, so it flooded every time I tried. Finally, I gave up and put on a new (and bigger) carb.

          • 0 avatar
            JohnTaurus

            I will rely on his opinion for it. I would love to go with EFI instead, but if it was a version of something that later used multi-port, I’d try to retrofit something on there. As it is, I’d probably have to go with throttle body fuel injection (one single injector).

            I’d try to find a set of alloys from an Explorer or something that would look sharp in the Ranger. You got a lot of options with that lug pattern.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            I’ve had a few different guys tell me that one way to clean out a carb is find a very large old pot and fill it full of water and get it to boil and put the carb in it. You have to let it boil for hours on end. It has to be done outside so use a propane or gas camp stove. The one fellow who told me this was a heavy duty mechanic so I trust the source.
            I’ve seen advertisements on line for EFI units for older engines. I’m not sure the cost. 1972 might be the start of the “smog” era but shouldn’t be too hard to bypass.
            I got a soft spot for the Fe series Ford engines. They held up well and I don’t recall too many major problems with them.

          • 0 avatar
            JohnTaurus

            Thanks Lou, I will check into that.

            As far as I’ve been told, the engine is original, unrebuilt and ran strong the last I heard it.

            The only thing I don’t like is the column shift manual. I’m sure I’ll get the hang of it, but I’ll keep my eye out for a 4 speed.

          • 0 avatar
            gtem

            As far as soaking for cleaning carbs, I’ve had good luck with Pinesol, it does not negatively affect seals/rubber, although depending on the metal and concentration of your Pinesol mix, it can etch the carb body. Ultimately, you really need to go through each and every passage/orifice/jet and blow it out with compressed air and maybe some carb cleaner and make sure it isn’t constricted.

            Your carb will come out smelling nice and clean! :p

            In the era of internet forums and such I’m sure there is a documented DIY for a Motorcraft carb rebuild(or whatever is on there).

            Keep us in the loop!

            As far as my Ranger, I realized the worn tire was actually the spare at some point (mounted on one of the regular XLT alloys) judging by the minor marks on the sidewall. It’s also an older Firestone vs the Firestone Destination LE on the other side (and Uniroyal Tiger Paws on the front). So now I feel even better about just grabbing another Ranger alloy+used tire from the junkyard and throwing it on the back, and returning this worn one under the truck as the spare. Already putting it to good use, hauled 2 loads of 40cu-ft of bagged mulch from Menards, the Ranger handled it like a champ; 65mph highway driving loaded up was nice and smooth, adequate power from the little Lima.

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al from Oz

            Lou,
            We used a carbolene bath, but for a very short period or the carby would dissolve.

            Another way is to use an ultrasonic bath.

          • 0 avatar
            JohnTaurus

            I sure will keep y’all updated. But, still got over 50 days on this job, so it’ll be a while before I’ll be able to get the truck and give it a decent evaluation.

            I contacted the guy about the steelies, I plan to get them this coming weekend. Later, when the truck is redone, I’ll put something more stylish on it, but I honestly love the utilitarian look of those silver steelies.

            I’ll finally get paid this Friday, it can’t come soon enough lol. Going to have my bf come down for the weekend, really looking forward to that. I got a great crew I’m working with, couldn’t ask for any better. So happy to be working again, making decent money at a job I can do even with my physical issues.

  • avatar
    2000ChevyImpalaLS

    Another round of congrats on the Ford, John. I know that has to be special to you.

    To answer the question, I’d buy the Montero. My previous employer had one that we all kind of used as a runabout. I’m not a Mitsubishi fan, but the one we had was dead-solid reliable and fairly comfortable to drive.

    Borrow the Discovery. I’ve never driven one, but I’ve heard bad things about their reliability. But it’d be interesting to try one for a while.

    Burn the Isuzu in an Acura costume. I’ve never liked the Trooper.

  • avatar
    asterix

    Owned the 1998 Disco so will still “take home” again.
    Wouldn’t mind “borrowing” the Montero.
    The Acura (Trooper) can burn.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • Garak: I swapped the winter tires on yesterday, and after half a mile heard telltale clunking from the rear. Forgot...
  • mcs: Nissan Leaf is 28 inches: https://youtube.com/watch?v=Y9 plRzRZ_PY
  • mcs: You can also pick up a level 2 charge at campgrounds that have sites equipped with NEMA 14-50 power.
  • mcs: “but can’t blow smoke through the stacks.” 1,000 horsepower gives you other options for smoke...
  • Lou_BC: I don’t like the fording depth of 24 inches. It doesn’t need an air intake like an ICE engine so...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Matthew Guy
  • Timothy Cain
  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Chris Tonn
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber