Some would say it isn’t worth spending any money on a 1999 Taurus wagon either. Just saying.
1992 4WD Ford Explorer XLT head gaskets replacement
- Thread starter jurko
- Start date
It's facebook. If not an outright scam, you'll probably be bonked over the head, put in a burlap sack, and wake up missing your kidneys. That's unless it's a flood vehicle or other something severely wrong. Those do not sell for $1800 in this market, more like $3K if the description is accurate and only that low because Las Vegas and an A/C problem.
Someone stated $2500 for the head gaskets? Heck no. For less than $2K you could get junkyard pulled heads, machine true and pay someone else for the labor. It was a much simpler design and associated labor.
It may not be worth putting money into a Taurus wagon. Full framed SUVs are making a comeback while old domestic unibodies, not so much. Then again, Tx car with low rust, the beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Meh, no. I have a 2nd gen with a redone suspension/upgrades and it not only does not have car-like handling, rather is the 2nd worse handling *passenger* vehicle I've ever owned, with the worst being an earlier era GM SUV... but it still runs on the cheap and is a useful mule for hauling compared to a car.
Front torsion bars and rear leaf springs on something that narrow, short wheelbase versus high center of gravity, is not at all car-like. This is why ford went independent rear suspension too, as well as wider on subsequent generations. Even then put it in context, per the release date, car handling got better too.
They have a lot of inexpensive utility benefits but car like handling is not one of them. Since I don't rock crawl, if my 2nd gen didn't have the IFS I'd have already gotten rid of it and still think about doing do. But. It. Just. Won't. Die. !!.
Something is wrong with your car, it's supposed to drive like a Taurus. My 1997 drives great. My 1994 kind of drives like my stupid green Ranger but better.Meh, no. I have a 2nd gen with a redone suspension/upgrades and it not only does not have car-like handling, rather is the 2nd worse handling *passenger* vehicle I've ever owned, with the worst being an earlier era GM SUV... but it still runs on the cheap and is a useful mule for hauling compared to a car.
Front torsion bars and rear leaf springs on something that narrow, short wheelbase versus high center of gravity, is not at all car-like. This is why ford went independent rear suspension too, as well as wider on subsequent generations. Even then put it in context, per the release date, car handling got better too.
They have a lot of inexpensive utility benefits but car like handling is not one of them. Since I don't rock crawl, if my 2nd gen didn't have the IFS I'd have already gotten rid of it and still think about doing do. But. It. Just. Won't. Die. !!.
Seller asking 1500 because dealer only offered 1000 in trade which is all a 200K 25 year old suv is worth. If you think it's worth $3k, I got some prime ocean front property in Las Vegas I can sell you.
Well not on topic but the thread's already in the weeds: the thing I find amusing is that the only reason I might not fix the vehicle is because of the TTB LOL
TTB was such an engineering embarrassment. It's literally what you'd get if you showed an 8 year old a solid axle and asked him to design IFS. Squint real hard, cock your head, stick your tongue out a little and after several minutes of mental gears grinding and figurative smoke coming from the young designer's ears he triumphantly decides to "just cut that solid axle in half and hinge it." (It may be no coincidence that during said brainstorming session he was staring pensively at an area of the room where there were door hinges!!!!!). Such is the way I'm sure Ford decided upon TTB for the 1980 MY -- no other explanation makes sense.
Let's see, just a few pieces of engineering brilliance:
1) due to assorted design constraints they couldn't make the left and right sides equal length so you've got one side moving in a different arc from the other. Fun, eh?
2) now take #1 above and consider that camber changes WILDLY as the suspension compresses or unweights (or as the pull of the moon affects it, or a light breeze, or bird poop on the hood etc etc) and you see that as you're driving one side exhibits different characteristics than the other.
3) now take #1 and #2 above and consider that toe also changes wildly as the suspension moves because they also had to "hinge" the tie rods and given the location of the steering box the tie rods are REALLY unequal in length from left to right.
4) you also get a fun THIRD u-joint next to the diff because, hinge. Bonus!!
Now, all that said if the OP just uses the truck to bounce around the NV desert and explore, I'd still fix it. TTB's worst characteristics are evident on pavement (which also happens to be where tire wear occurs due to camber and toe which essentially evades all attempts at alignment).
Yes, yes, yes, desert racers love TTB but the big dog setups are 1) primarily driven on dirt and 2) heavily modified with equal length beams and cut and turned beams to avoid any drop brackets and 3) used with little concern for even tire wear, esp on blacktop
Ooooh look at that variable camber and toe! It was actually advanced engineering like variable valve timing or variable vane turbos and water pumps!!
TTB was such an engineering embarrassment. It's literally what you'd get if you showed an 8 year old a solid axle and asked him to design IFS. Squint real hard, cock your head, stick your tongue out a little and after several minutes of mental gears grinding and figurative smoke coming from the young designer's ears he triumphantly decides to "just cut that solid axle in half and hinge it." (It may be no coincidence that during said brainstorming session he was staring pensively at an area of the room where there were door hinges!!!!!). Such is the way I'm sure Ford decided upon TTB for the 1980 MY -- no other explanation makes sense.
Let's see, just a few pieces of engineering brilliance:
1) due to assorted design constraints they couldn't make the left and right sides equal length so you've got one side moving in a different arc from the other. Fun, eh?
2) now take #1 above and consider that camber changes WILDLY as the suspension compresses or unweights (or as the pull of the moon affects it, or a light breeze, or bird poop on the hood etc etc) and you see that as you're driving one side exhibits different characteristics than the other.
3) now take #1 and #2 above and consider that toe also changes wildly as the suspension moves because they also had to "hinge" the tie rods and given the location of the steering box the tie rods are REALLY unequal in length from left to right.
4) you also get a fun THIRD u-joint next to the diff because, hinge. Bonus!!
Now, all that said if the OP just uses the truck to bounce around the NV desert and explore, I'd still fix it. TTB's worst characteristics are evident on pavement (which also happens to be where tire wear occurs due to camber and toe which essentially evades all attempts at alignment).
Yes, yes, yes, desert racers love TTB but the big dog setups are 1) primarily driven on dirt and 2) heavily modified with equal length beams and cut and turned beams to avoid any drop brackets and 3) used with little concern for even tire wear, esp on blacktop
Ooooh look at that variable camber and toe! It was actually advanced engineering like variable valve timing or variable vane turbos and water pumps!!
It's worth what the market will pay. Here's one with 145K that sold for $5,750:
https://carsandbids.com/auctions/KVp6D7bk/1991-ford-explorer-xlt-4x4
Full framed SUVs are doing very well in this market, many have appreciated in value over the last few years. Here's another example, '95 Cherokee for $4K8:
https://carsandbids.com/auctions/rjqlyO7o/1995-jeep-cherokee-sport-4x4
Nothing is wrong with it, after suspension upgrades it handles better than new.
It is not at all like a Taurus. It's a truck platform with a big cabin bolted on. It does not have a unibody and coilover struts with control arms on all 4 corners like a Taurus, instead torsion bar front suspension, solid axle rear with leaf springs, and a high center of gravity. The two only share they they're made by Ford. Maybe they also have the same steering column multi-function switch or something, lol.
If you feel a '97 drives great, it is doubtful you have driven any SUV sold in the US for well over 15 years. I mean with their suspensions in good condition, not ragged out by now. Granted many today are arguably no longer true SUVs but in that, they are designed more like the Taurus and drive more like one... except still the higher center of gravity and greater suspension travel.
Last edited:
You're comparing a Facebook beater ad to a boutique auction sale of a mint condition example? OK. If the FB truck looked like the C&B truck, he too could ask $6000. If the C&B trucked looked like the FB truck, they wouldn't accept it for auction.
^ There's a wide gulf between a vehicle with one foot in the grave, and a mint condition example, which is why there are prices ranging in between yet you don't seem to accept that.
The FB ad vehicle did not look that bad, like it needs detail work, except who knows what condition it's really in. If the V8 and 4R70W tranny are in good shape, it could easily go another 100K mi.
That FB vehicle with the V8/4R70W combo could sell for more than $1K5 if the A/C was working. In this market, even a beater car with a few things wrong, that isn't expected to last another 30K mi, is still worth $1K if driveable. Picking the worse of the worst at auction houses is not representative of real world value, more representative of people who gamble because they have a process set up for repairing things themselves or at least in-house.
The FB ad vehicle did not look that bad, like it needs detail work, except who knows what condition it's really in. If the V8 and 4R70W tranny are in good shape, it could easily go another 100K mi.
That FB vehicle with the V8/4R70W combo could sell for more than $1K5 if the A/C was working. In this market, even a beater car with a few things wrong, that isn't expected to last another 30K mi, is still worth $1K if driveable. Picking the worse of the worst at auction houses is not representative of real world value, more representative of people who gamble because they have a process set up for repairing things themselves or at least in-house.
It's back home. Both heads resurfaced, new head gaskets, coolant flushed/replaced whatever was left in it and also AT fluid and filter replaced. Total cost $1,196. Took it for 64 miles round trip to Reno and back home. Runs great and no leaks anywhere.
When I'll see my son I'll ask him to take a pic and post it. It looks remarkably well for it's age. I don't own smart phone just a VOIP from Spectrum.
Edit: I supplied AT fluid, filter, coolant and distilled water.
Last edited:
Which is amusing 'cause XJ's are unibody.
I've only had the pleasure of a couple XJ's on my lift and honestly I don't know how they hold together...some --- er I mean many -- of the welds are atrocious, I mean like a first semester welding student would do WAY better. Drunk. With eyes closed.
That said, there's a zillion of the things still running around here, so they do somehow hold up
The joke in the XJ community for aftermarket stuff is "spread the load" if you're trying to weld, well, ANYTHING to the body! If you make your addition big enough and long enough to tack weld in a thousand places, it oughtta work
For $1200 you've probably added a lot of life and I'd say you got a great deal! Far better than looking for something else used which is likely to be a basket case
I mean that is exactly what OP said it was for. They have another vehicle they use as a daily, like I do, even though in my case it's another Explorer.Now, all that said if the OP just uses the truck to bounce around the NV desert and explore, I'd still fix it. TTB's worst characteristics are evident on pavement (which also happens to be where tire wear occurs due to camber and toe which essentially evades all attempts at alignment).
Yes, yes, yes, desert racers love TTB but the big dog setups are 1) primarily driven on dirt and 2) heavily modified with equal length beams and cut and turned beams to avoid any drop brackets and 3) used with little concern for even tire wear, esp on blacktop
Ooooh look at that variable camber and toe! It was actually advanced engineering like variable valve timing or variable vane turbos and water pumps!!
TTB might not be an engineering achievement, but what can I say, it has mostly served me well over the years. The two TTB Explorers I've owned really haven't had alignment or tire wear issues at all. The Ranger did, but it was a mess in general. I like this generation of Explorer enough to bid $4700 on the one that was most recently on C&B, and still lost by a lot, so there's a few people out there that will throw even more money into these things than I will.
And yes, I still stand by my 1997 having car like handling. The suspension on mine is in better than new condition as well, but it really is an effortless vehicle to drive. I do not understand how people were flipping these things over.
Other beliefs I hold...
- The A4LD is a good transmission. The 4R and 5R series are okay, but I really prefer the A4LD.
- The SOHC 4.0 isn't that bad, though I prefer the OHV.
- Auto hubs are good. (not the vacuum ones on 98-99 Ranger)
- Push button 4wd is good.
- Tapes sound really good on my 1994's JBL.
Last edited:
By someone I know 30+ years. I've done few things for him cheap like software for shop in MS Access DB and other computer related stuff.
It's a 3 men shop and what's amazing they are still together after 30 years. They were all teenager's working in the same company I worked for. Around 1990 they quit and started that shop and still going strong. They are from Mexico and came to US when they were around 12.
Similar threads
