Why a 95-97 over a 93-94 when searching for a Cruiser to purchase

[arcteryx]

I am always curious why folks search for a 95-97 over an 93-94 I have had a 91 4BT80, stock 97 and driven many other years and purposely chose a 94 (locked of course) as I truly believe the 93-94 are the best years (technically later 93s and 94s). The only big plus I see with the 95+ is OBD2. I realize the general thinking for vehicles is later years are better but I don't feel this is always the case.

I have listed below what I think are pros/cons of each and would like to hear why you did or didn't choose a particular year.

93-94 Pros

• Less electronics which IMO makes it's simpler
• no airbags
• manual seats were more common in port and cloth configurations
• less HG failures. I have stated this before about the HG but do not have any empirical data (hey maybe I should do a poll!) supporting this

93-94 Cons

• OBD1
• goes through O2 sensors faster at about $180 a pair
• A very small percentage were not ABS and had rear drums

95-97 Pros

• OBD2
• On the fence about adding this, but airbags so possibly a tiny bit safer? But airbags should be replaced every 10 years and we're now over 20. Plus you're in a 5000lb truck and it is already an extremely safe vehicle

95-97 Cons

• 97 models have year specific parts that do not interchange with 91-96 models, the antenna for example and it is an $$$ one
• more electronics/complicated
• higher HG failure (see above comment)
• OEM manual seats are extremely rare

 

[ewillis]

I am always curious why folks search for a 95-97 over an 93-94 I have had a 91 4BT80, stock 97 and driven many other years and purposely chose a 94 (locked of course) as I truly believe the 93-94 are the best years (technically later 93s and 94s). The only big plus I see with the 95+ is OBD2. I realize the general thinking for vehicles is later years are better but I don't feel this is always the case.

I have listed below what I think are pros/cons of each and would like to hear why you did or didn't choose a particular year.

93-94 Pros

• Less electronics which IMO makes it's simpler
• no airbags
• manual seats were more common in port and cloth configurations
• less HG failures. I have stated this before about the HG but do not have any empirical data (hey maybe I should do a poll!) supporting this

93-94 Cons

• OBD1
• goes through O2 sensors faster at about $180 a pair
• A very small percentage were not ABS and had rear drums

95-97 Pros

• OBD2
• On the fence about adding this, but airbags so possibly a tiny bit safer? But airbags should be replaced every 10 years and we're now over 20. Plus you're in a 5000lb truck and it is already an extremely safe vehicle

95-97 Cons

• 97 models have year specific parts that do not interchange with 91-96 models, the antenna for example and it is an $$$ one
• more electronics/complicated
• higher HG failure (see above comment)
• OEM manual seats are extremely rare

I think you forgot a442...agree on the rest

 

[LS1FJ40]

Anything after 1992 is the beginning of the Americanization of the 80 series and therefore downhill. 93-94 maintained some of that nostalgia and third world utilitarian feel to them. 95-97 became the American suburban soccer mom mobile.

 

[thatcabledude]

95+ dash sucks.

So does their oil dipstick.

 

[popstar]

What was the last year of the "big bus" transmission 94 or 95?

 

[Mandrake]

I didn't actively seek out a particular year, but knew I didn't want a 3F. I could have found an unlocked 80 for a little less, but adding them later would have pushed the cost well past what I got my '95 for.

 

[ewillis]

What was the last year of the "big bus" transmission 94 or 95?

94

 

[Travis 76]

I like my '94, no air bag, I can reset my check engine light to do an emission test. Runs great handles great.

 

[n0rth]

I dig my 1993, although the HG just went.

 

[Mandrake]

What was the last year of the "big bus" transmission 94 or 95?

Early '95 model year. Mine was built in March of '95 and has the 343, so I'm not sure when the actual cross over was.

 

[White Stripe]

I like the dash layout of the 95 and later. If you want to mess with gauges you don't have to pull a giant one piece bezel out. Obd2 is a huge plus, the air flow meter is a clunky piece of equipment in Obd1. I don't care for the headliner in 94 and older. In the end none is really better, just different and it's nice because you can pick what year works best for your personal needs. Me? I just bought whatever year I could find that had a somewhat completed LS swap. Ideally I wanted a 95 and later, but I didn't find one. Oh well.

 

[popstar]

Then my pick would be 1995
Theoretically you could get the mythical poverty pack:

Big bus tranny, cloth seats, no port installed roof rack or running boards, lockers, OBD II, and manual windows (not sure if these were ever offered in USA spec)

the only other thing that could get better would be manual tranny and diesel, but I guess at that point you're better off importing,

 

[arcteryx]

I think you forgot a442...agree on the rest

For what category?

I like the dash layout of the 95 and later. If you want to mess with gauges you don't have to pull a giant one piece bezel out. Obd2 is a huge plus, the air flow meter is a clunky piece of equipment in Obd1. I don't care for the headliner in 94 and older. In the end none is really better, just different and it's nice because you can pick what year works best for your personal needs. Me? I just bought whatever year I could find that had a somewhat completed LS swap. Ideally I wanted a 95 and later, but I didn't find one. Oh well.

Agree on the MAF.

 

[ewillis]

For what category?




Agree on the MAF.

PRO 93-94...cmon man

 

[Landseer]

93-94 also have over the frame exhaust unlike 95-97

 

[Mandrake]

93-94 also have over the frame exhaust unlike 95-97

I dunno, man. I've never had any issues with my under frame exhaust... except when I'm dragging it across everything on the trail.

 

[Andrew Bluemel]

I have a 96 and 95-97 are my favs because they have airbags..... not because I think they make the car the slightest bit safer (a tank is a tank and 21 year old airbags I don’t think are gonna help a ton) but they sold my parents on allowing me to get the car.

But.....
OBD is cool so I can obsess over my coolant temps (saved me 3 days ago when my radiator blew). I also think the dash design is way better in the 95-97 too. However I do really like Toyota spelled out on the grill and the bus tranny does sound nice. My only gripe with my cruiser is the awful leather seats. Other then that i have no preference. Honestly I love my 96 but I wouldn’t be complaining if I ended up in a 93 or 94. Not selling my 96 until the day I die though or I run out of gas money

 

[cruiserdan]

Then my pick would be 1995
Theoretically you could get the mythical poverty pack:

Theoretically the poverty pack was available throughout. Truth be told TMS USA "loaded" just about every unit allotted to maximize profits since production was very limited.

Big bus tranny, cloth seats, no port installed roof rack or running boards, lockers, OBD II, and manual windows (not sure if these were ever offered in USA spec)

The 442 was gone for 1995 due to vehicle weight issues. (EPA category assignment related). Port installed options did not vary much year-to-year. and I have NEVER seen or heard of a US market 80 that did not have power windows.

the only other thing that could get better would be manual tranny and diesel, but I guess at that point you're better off importing,

Toyota surrendered the diesel market in the US when we turned our collective noses up on them in the early 1980s. Furthermore the US market demography has demonstrated that we do not care for clutch pedals and we LOVE cupholders.

 

[cruiserdan]

Oh, full disclosure.

My 9-1992 (first production month of the LAST true solid axle Cruiser that actually had a decent engine) is the Holy Grail of US market variants....

 

[cruiserdan]

Oh, fuller disclosure.

The 95-97 dash is A LOT easier to open up to work on.