I am looking to buy a late 80s or early 90s square SUV. I have posted in the Mitsubishi forum about gen1 Montero but didn't get many replies or much info from the actual owners. So I am moving here with another square body truck that I like. Any insights from current owners of late 80s or early 90s S10 Blazers (aka GMC Jimmy)? I am mostly interested in ones with the 4.3 engine, parts availability, reliability, etc. I know that I am getting into 30+ years old truck so my expectations are adjusted. I am just thinking that parts-wise the Chevy/GMC may be easier to source and a bit wallet friendlier than similar age Mitsubishi. The truck will be used for weekend trips, snow days, camping, fishing (read: fire roads, not real off roading). Nothing serious and no mods planned for the truck besides normal maintenance. Maybe a bike rack or roof rack. That's all.
80s/90s S10 Blazer or S15 Jimmy - the square one - worth getting into?
- Thread starter drabina
- Start date
I’ve got a 2001 blazer 4x4 with the front end taken down to the gram almost. It’s not impossible to find everything but it is hard and the vehicle itself is super hard to work on. Everything looks to be a smaller version of a k1500 under the hood. This makes thing understandable but because it’s small... it makes it hard to work on anything without major parts removal. Mine was 400$ and I drove it home so I’m happy to put up with the pains. I’m not an expert by any mean this is my first build. I’ve worked on my own full size chevys and that’s what I’m comparing it to
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
85_Ranger4x4
Well-known member
First gen (91-94) Explorers are not bad to work on and can be had pretty cheap.
My Ranger has quite a bit of Explorer stuff in it.
My Ranger has quite a bit of Explorer stuff in it.
I do like the 1st gen Explorers. My friend has one. It definitely falls into the square look group that I like. I did lookup few ads and funny how each one had mileage listed as less than 100K. For a 25+ years old truck with 5 digits odometer I doubt every single one is a low mileage survivor. Prices are indeed affordable.
85_Ranger4x4
Well-known member
They rust under the rockers under the back doors with age. If it is rusty back there it probably isn't low mile. Same goes for if the pad on the brake pedal is worn down to steel. Nobody thinks to replace that. Or if they it would be new which would also stick out. Same goes for other wear areas like seats/steering wheel etc. Past that if the body was straight and solid, it ran/drove nice and the price was right I wouldn't fuss over it too much.
My dream once upon a time was to find a old Ex, 4" lift with 33's and swap with a late model V8 powertrain, either LS or Hemi for a 4 door family offroader that I could drive coast to coast.
That was killed when I got a slide in camper, now instead of a 4dr SUV I kinda need a 4dr pickup.
Buddha.
Finally in expo white.
I’ve had a few S10’s, pickups and Blazers. They develop oil leaks with the remote oil filter and oil cooler lines, not hard too fix. Also the steering components wear out way too frequently. My biggest gripe with them is they get the same mileage as a full size truck. Cheap to buy though.
My last one was a 2001 4 door Blazer. 130k, rust free, new tires, sold for about $2,000 took weeks to sell at that price. Should have kept it.
My last one was a 2001 4 door Blazer. 130k, rust free, new tires, sold for about $2,000 took weeks to sell at that price. Should have kept it.
Thanks again guys. Between your replies and some research I did, I think I am going to pass on the S10 Blazer. I guess I am back to the 1st gen Montero or Explorer. I really dig the Montero look and Explorer is not bad neither. I think SWB Montero with its slow 4 cyl engine and manual transmission would probably be the easiest to work on. The problem may be parts availability and cost. Also, from what I read, the 1st gen Explorer is recommended with manual transmission too.
deserteagle56
Adventurer
I special ordered my 1988 S-10 Blazer right after GM started putting the 4.3 V6 in them, and drove it for 321,000 miles before I finally sold it. Great vehicle - just not one for extensive use off-highway. As with every vehicle I own, I maintained a log for the Blazer and the overall fuel mileage was 21 mpg, with highway trips getting around 23 mpg. I had to change the oil lines to the remote mounted oil filter once. Never had to mess with the front end components, re someone's complaint above. For the most part, a very dependable rig and one I really enjoyed driving. A big plus to me was that, even though mine was a two-door, the rear seat folded down flat and I could make a bed and sleep back there if necessary.
I took a photo of the odometer after it turned 300,000 miles........
I took a photo of the odometer after it turned 300,000 miles........
1stDeuce
Explorer
The S-10 platform had no real major chassis revisions between 1982 to 2004 when it more or less ended, aside from the ZR2 models. The only thing I can think of is a front brake improvement that happened in '94. I had a 1998 Sonoma ZR2 that was a great truck. Mine had the 4.3L and a 5 speed manual, and it was an awesome combination. If you want a "square" one, I'd opt for '88-93 being the prime years, and I'd still look for a manual trans unless you want an auto. Better gear selection with the 5-speed.
I would personally look for a '98-04. Price isn't likely to be that much different, but the interior is worlds better. No option for manual T-case though, got to stay '97 down for that.
As some pointed out, the S-10 Blazer/Jimmy was never terribly "offroad worthy" in stock form. This mostly because the frame hangs quite low compared to a 4-runner or Cherokee. That said, I've had several friends wheel them with decent results. A small (~1") tweak on the torsion bars and a set of shackles for the back and you're instantly 1" higher all around. Bump to a 30" tire and you're now 2" higher, and pretty decently capable for most exploring on back roads.
I did not experience constantly failing front end parts. Or any other parts for that matter. An S10 is a fairly heavy built vehicle for it's size, and I would call it a very durable truck... My Sonoma still had the stock upper and lower balljoints in it with ~130k on it when I sold it. I used it like a truck, and my friends joked that it was my 3/4 ton leaf hauler. It towed and hauled far more than an S10 had a right to and not once complained. I put brakes on it once, and replaced the idler arm once, with a HD Moog unit. I may have replaced tie rod ends, but I don't think so.
I have my suspicion that much of the issue with parts failure is that modern parts are generally JUNK, made in China by the cheapest supplier. This is even true of Moog, A/C Delco, etc.
I now assume that any replacement part is going to last 1/10 the time that the OE part lasted.
It is worth noting also that ALL S-10's have greasable upper and lower ball joints as well as tie rod ends, and the idler arm too. Any truck you find is likely to never have had these parts greased. The common "squawk" of every S10 in the trailer park is dry lower ball joints.
Personally, I'd look for a ZR2 blazer if you don't need 4 doors. Much better clearance, a rear locker, and stock 31's make it a great back road vehicle that drives really nice on the highway. I'm not sure about sleeping in the back of the later 2-doors, but the seat does fold fairly flat IIRC.
Good luck!!!
I would personally look for a '98-04. Price isn't likely to be that much different, but the interior is worlds better. No option for manual T-case though, got to stay '97 down for that.
As some pointed out, the S-10 Blazer/Jimmy was never terribly "offroad worthy" in stock form. This mostly because the frame hangs quite low compared to a 4-runner or Cherokee. That said, I've had several friends wheel them with decent results. A small (~1") tweak on the torsion bars and a set of shackles for the back and you're instantly 1" higher all around. Bump to a 30" tire and you're now 2" higher, and pretty decently capable for most exploring on back roads.
I did not experience constantly failing front end parts. Or any other parts for that matter. An S10 is a fairly heavy built vehicle for it's size, and I would call it a very durable truck... My Sonoma still had the stock upper and lower balljoints in it with ~130k on it when I sold it. I used it like a truck, and my friends joked that it was my 3/4 ton leaf hauler. It towed and hauled far more than an S10 had a right to and not once complained. I put brakes on it once, and replaced the idler arm once, with a HD Moog unit. I may have replaced tie rod ends, but I don't think so.
I have my suspicion that much of the issue with parts failure is that modern parts are generally JUNK, made in China by the cheapest supplier. This is even true of Moog, A/C Delco, etc.
I now assume that any replacement part is going to last 1/10 the time that the OE part lasted.
It is worth noting also that ALL S-10's have greasable upper and lower ball joints as well as tie rod ends, and the idler arm too. Any truck you find is likely to never have had these parts greased. The common "squawk" of every S10 in the trailer park is dry lower ball joints.
Personally, I'd look for a ZR2 blazer if you don't need 4 doors. Much better clearance, a rear locker, and stock 31's make it a great back road vehicle that drives really nice on the highway. I'm not sure about sleeping in the back of the later 2-doors, but the seat does fold fairly flat IIRC.
Good luck!!!
D
Deleted member 9101
Guest
I had a 1991 regular cab, 2wd, with the 4.3 and 5 speed back in 1996. It was a great little truck and had plenty of power. Ended up swapping in a small block a few years just because I had one laying around.
Buddha.
Finally in expo white.
I replaced Moog brand tie rods more than once on one truck but later was told that Moog is now crap.
In case anyone is still interested in modding these:
The Blazers had better brakes and sway bars so if you wanted to hot rod your pickup a trip to the junkyard could get you some good stuff.
An alternator from a full size truck with a 4.3 was physically bigger, made amps at lower rpm, but required the serpentine belt from the full size truck.
You could fit the full size truck battery in the s10 tray if you cut the rounded corner off the tray, quick mod.
In case anyone is still interested in modding these:
The Blazers had better brakes and sway bars so if you wanted to hot rod your pickup a trip to the junkyard could get you some good stuff.
An alternator from a full size truck with a 4.3 was physically bigger, made amps at lower rpm, but required the serpentine belt from the full size truck.
You could fit the full size truck battery in the s10 tray if you cut the rounded corner off the tray, quick mod.
85_Ranger4x4
Well-known member
For the Explorer the M5ODR1 is a pretty good trans, watch for it being a greaseball, there are rubber plugs in the shift rails that go bad and leak oil out. Easy fix if you catch it early, replace the rubber plugs with either new ones or metal expansion plugs. It takes ATF for fluid.
If you can a manual t-case is really nice too.
JustinGibson
New member
My first truck was a 2000 2 dr s10 blazer 2wd with a 4.3 and a 5 speed. It was peppy, the seats were comfortable, and served me well for years but it did have some suspension weaknesses, all kinds of cluster issues, weak door pins, crankshaft sensor issues, and the lower intake let go filling my crank case with coolant on the highway which resulted in lower oil pressure after I repaired it. I did try to keep up with repairs on it and I learned how to wrench on it but as others have said the engine bay is small and even just changing spark plugs on it was a pain (one in particular). I have heard before they went to OBD2 that the 4.3 was way better but I don't have any experience with it.
I now own a 1994 Mazda Navajo (1st gen ex sport) 4x4 with a 5 speed and I love it. The 4.0 is super easy to work on although not as powerful as the 4.3 it has plenty of grunt and makes its torque really low. Suspension wise the TTB on the fords is extremely robust has less failure points than an A arm setup. All explorers came with a Dana 35 in front and 8.8 rear end that can handle 35's. In stock form with no lift you can fit 31's with no issues. As mentioned the automatic isn't great and much as I love the explorer platform if I wanted an automatic I would have probably gone with something else.
To be reliable any vehicle of this era will probably need work and you will probably need to DIY or your mechanic bills will end up being 4x the cost of the vehicle that said the explorerforum is a really great resource with tons of write ups and plenty of people willing to help.
I now own a 1994 Mazda Navajo (1st gen ex sport) 4x4 with a 5 speed and I love it. The 4.0 is super easy to work on although not as powerful as the 4.3 it has plenty of grunt and makes its torque really low. Suspension wise the TTB on the fords is extremely robust has less failure points than an A arm setup. All explorers came with a Dana 35 in front and 8.8 rear end that can handle 35's. In stock form with no lift you can fit 31's with no issues. As mentioned the automatic isn't great and much as I love the explorer platform if I wanted an automatic I would have probably gone with something else.
To be reliable any vehicle of this era will probably need work and you will probably need to DIY or your mechanic bills will end up being 4x the cost of the vehicle that said the explorerforum is a really great resource with tons of write ups and plenty of people willing to help.
The 4.3 ia a vastly superior engine to the little 60-degree 2.8 V6.
The 2.8s were very fragile- people didn't change the coolant, the resulting electrolysis would eat up the intake manifold, which caused the intake gaskets to fail at the water passages, the coolant would get pumped into the crankcase, and it would wipe out the lower end almost instantly, sometimes in dramatic fashion. I used to make a pretty good living replacing blown-up 2.8s with brand new Goodwrench 2.8s back in the mid-'90s.
The 2.5 4-cylinder was a LITTLE more reliable than the 2.8, but that's all it's got going for it.
Of the 4.3 variants the Vortec had more problems than the base model 4.3. The Vortec is a slightly more complicated engine, with a balance shaft running in the valley above the cam, but the most common problem was the Vortec 4.3 "crab" injector.
The base model 4.3 was about as reliable as anything that domestic car makers were putting out at the time.
The 4.3 engine is 3/4 of the small-block Chevrolet V8 that dates back to 1955. It doesn't make much power, get very good fuel mileage, or control it's oil as well as modern engines, but it's okay...
The 2.8s were very fragile- people didn't change the coolant, the resulting electrolysis would eat up the intake manifold, which caused the intake gaskets to fail at the water passages, the coolant would get pumped into the crankcase, and it would wipe out the lower end almost instantly, sometimes in dramatic fashion. I used to make a pretty good living replacing blown-up 2.8s with brand new Goodwrench 2.8s back in the mid-'90s.
The 2.5 4-cylinder was a LITTLE more reliable than the 2.8, but that's all it's got going for it.
Of the 4.3 variants the Vortec had more problems than the base model 4.3. The Vortec is a slightly more complicated engine, with a balance shaft running in the valley above the cam, but the most common problem was the Vortec 4.3 "crab" injector.
The base model 4.3 was about as reliable as anything that domestic car makers were putting out at the time.
The 4.3 engine is 3/4 of the small-block Chevrolet V8 that dates back to 1955. It doesn't make much power, get very good fuel mileage, or control it's oil as well as modern engines, but it's okay...