Smallish Stickshift SUVs: 1996 Ford Explorer vs 1997 Toyota RAV4

Good morning! Today we’re back in the Pacific Northwest looking at a couple of manual SUVs. But before we do,  let’s see whether you like ’em plain or with everything:

Yeah, that’s what I thought. That Caddy is basically a superfund site with keyless entry. The Cavalier is nothing special, but it does the job.

Now then: Need something with a little more room, but still want a stickshift? We’ve got you covered. These two SUVs are fundamentally different: One is an old-school body-on-frame 4×4, and the other is a front-wheel-drive crossover. But either one will carry five people and a bunch of stuff. How do they compare? Let’s find out.

1996 Ford Explorer – $2,900

Engine/drivetrain: 4.0 liter overhead valve V6, five-speed manual, part-time 4WD

Location: Tillamook, OR

Odometer reading: 166,000 miles

Runs/drives? Sure does

The Ford Explorer, one of the best-selling vehicles of the 1990s, needs no introduction. But this one is a little different from the Eddie Bauer mommy-mobiles you might remember from the shopping mall parking lots. Here you won’t find any power windows, cruise control, eight-speaker audio system, leather seats, or any of that other bric-a-brac. This Explorer is a former government fleet vehicle, from Yreka, California.

As such, it has not only a manual, but also a plain-Jane interior, with vinyl and plastic as far as the eye can see. It has a basic AM/FM radio, which doesn’t work, and air conditioning that may or may not. It has shift-on-the-fly four wheel drive, and is currently equipped with studded tires. You’ve got about a week to change ’em out for regular tires, by the way.

This Explorer runs and drives well, but the seller says it just recently threw a code for a misfire. From what I remember of the Explorer my wife had for years, that’s a sign that it’s time for new plugs and wires. No maintenance records come with it, so a good thorough inspection isn’t a bad idea. The Cologne 4.0 liter V6 and Mazda-built five-speed manual used in these trucks are both stout units, but the front end ball joints will almost certainly need replacing, if they haven’t been.

Otherwise, it’s a clean truck, with just a little rust on the roof (again, typical; ours had it too) and some holes plugged from CB antennas and whatnot. Yeah, it’s refrigerator-white, but it’s a fleet vehicle, so that kind of comes with the territory.

1997 Toyota RAV4 – $3,000

Engine/drivetrain: 2.0 liter dual overhead cam inline 4, five-speed manual, FWD

Location: Seattle, WA

Odometer reading: 163,000 miles

Runs/drives? Yep!

This is it, the one that started the whole compact crossover craze: the first-generation Toyota RAV4. Built on a unibody architecture, with a front-wheel-drive drivetrain and the engine from a Camry, the RAV4 is nothing like a typical SUV of its time. But it struck a chord with buyers, Toyota sold a ton of them, and the rest is history.

The first-generation RAV4 was available in two-door or four-door models, with front- or four-wheel-drive. The two-doors rode on a much shorter wheelbase than four-doors like this, and could be had with a soft convertible top over the back half, similar to Suzuki’s Sidekick and Geo Tracker. But it was the four-door wagon model, like this one, that set the template for the compact crossover class.

This RAV4 is in good shape, and has fewer miles on it than you typically see. Most of them I see for sale hover around a quarter million miles, and more often than not are automatics. A stick with only 163,000 on it is a treat. The seller says it runs and drives well, and the timing belt is about 50,000 miles old (which means it’s due again soon). It was rear-ended by a hit-and-run driver and has a banged-up rear door; there’s no word on whether the door still opens, but the only photo of the cargo area is from the inside. Not a good sign.

It does have this fun seat fabric, though, and it’s in good condition. I like how the pattern carries over into the door panels as well. Nice touch, Toyota.

Obviously, these are different vehicles that are each good at different things, but they’re similar enough that someone looking for a smallish SUV and insisting on a stick might cross-shop them. Which one moves you?

(Image credits: Craigslist sellers)