I can’t explain it, but there are some cars that just make me get a bit weird. Manual Ford Aerostars and Chevy Astros will do it, manual Saturn Vues will do it, manual Ford Fusions will even do it. There’s just something great about a manual version of a car that you wouldn’t expect to have a stick — especially if that manual makes the car extremely reliable over the automatic. That’s why I cant stop drooling over this 1993 Ford Explorer and 2008 Mazda Tribute (basically a Ford Escape). So let’s decide which of these is the better buy.
Typically “Shitbox Showdown” runs from Monday through Friday, and is penned by our talented contributor Mark Tucker. But I felt compelled to write a bonus Shitbox Showdown as a way to thank you for helping our site reach 1 Million pageviews this month, and also because I can’t stop staring at these two manual Ford SUVs and sharing them with Jason Torchinsky. Jason shares my appreciation for these two vehicles, but I can only send him these two links so many times before even he tires of agreeing with me that these are cool. (Actually, in truth, I don’t think he ever tires of it; but I worry that he might after the 1000th time I show him these links, so let me cut him a break and start bothering you). We’ll start with the Tribute.
2008 Mazda Tribute: $6,500
I know, I know. Some of you are thinking: “Hey, this is supposed to be Shitbox Showdown, and you’re showing us a $6,500 car?” And that’s fair; this thing ain’t cheap, and it’s really not a shitbox, per se. But it’s cool, though maybe in the same way that music aficionados like bad music and cheese connoisseurs enjoy dairy that smells like feet.
But whatever. So what if I’m in so deep that I’m now drooling over mundane crossovers? I’m not ashamed. Look at this thing! You can’t tell me that the second-gen Mazda Tribute’s styling hasn’t aged well. It’s upright, has tough fender flares, the face looks confident, and overall the design is just clean.
But here’s the thing: It’s not just the crisp exterior styling that has me so interested in this Tribute — it’s the interior. Not only is it equipped with a stickshift and clutch pedal, but it’s absolutely beautiful for a cheap 14 year-old crossover cabin. Check it out:
Am I wrong on this? Why do I find this 14 year-old Ford Escape cabin to look absolutely lovely. The tan and black is just so perfectly blended, the four-spoke steering wheel looks great, and the liberal use of tan on pretty much all door trim and on the headliner — it just makes the interior feel airy and pleasant.
But it’s not just the elegant interior and exterior styling that has me feeling some type of way about this Tribute, it’s the hardware underneath it all. The engine is Mazda’s 2.3-liter “MZR” engine, called the Duratec 23 in Ford applications. It is a legitimately good engine that tends to last forever, and it’s hooked to a Ford G5M-R five-speed manual which should last well beyond 200,000 miles if taken good care of (though its internal slave cylinder has me concerned, as to fix it would require one to remove the transmission; external slave cylinder designs don’t have that problem).
I guess what makes this car so appealing is that it’s a modern car with decent crash test scores, it scores 28 MPG highway, its interior looks fantastic, the exterior looks like a nice blend of elegancy and toughness, and with only 95,000 miles on the clock, I bet that Mazda MZR motor and G5M-R transmission will last until the end of time.
This seems like a stout, modern, comfortable, somewhat efficient little manual transmission machine that’s in incredible shape.
1993 Ford Explorer: $3,800
The other manual FoMoCo SUV I’ve been drooling for is a 188,000 mile 1993 first-generation Ford Explorer. It’s a body-on-frame, squared-off, old-school machine that really doesn’t get the love it deserves from car enthusiasts. Though I guess I understand why; the vehicle is a bit watered down. It’s not as purposeful as its Jeep Cherokee competitor; the geometry and the independent front suspension setup pretty much preclude the car from being a real off-road beast straight out of the dealership; it guzzles gas; it looks like many other Fords of the era (and shares many mechanical attributes)’ and it never really became a cult classic despite being featured in films like Jurassic Park (where it wasn’t really the star). It’s just a 1990s-era Ford SUV.
But I dig it.
The squared-off styling just works, and overall, I think this body-on-frame, 4×4 machine would make a pretty good camping rig. The 4.0-liter V6 underhood is basically unkillable from what I’ve been told, and though the Mazda M5OD five-speed isn’t exactly known for being the most robust manual transmission, if used mostly on the street and not in hard-core off-road environments it should hold up just fine.
The dash is a bit boring, but the Explorer’s seats are just fantastic with those striped shades of gray.
The two-tone exterior paint is lovely, and between it, the fun seats, the car’s squared-off shape, the reliable V6 engine, the 4×4 capability, and the five-speed manual, there’s just a lot of ’90s Americana to love, here.
The question is: Does the lower-mileage, more expensive front-wheel drive 2008 Mazda Tribute offer even more to love? It’s newer, safer, has a nicer and brighter interior, has a similarly stout engine and drivetrain, can go farther on a gallon of gas, and is safer. But it’s also a two-wheel drive crossover that looks like an Escape. Hmm.
Let’s have a poll:
As a matter of fact I owned each of these — sort of. Around 2000 I bought a ’96 Explorer Sport (the 2-door version of the Explorer not Sport Trac) with the 4.0-liter V6 and 5-speed manual. I traded it for a 2001 Escape base model with the 2.0-liter and 5-speed manual. Both had 4WD/AWD. The Explorer was genuinely fun to drive in good weather but scary on slippery conditions in the winter due to its short wheelbase and high center of gravity. Driving the Escape, on the other hand, was a chore. The 2.0-liter was buzzy, course and slow. Painfully slow. (I understand the later 2.3-liter solved some of that.) Being a base model it lacked a center arm rest and the short shift lever was a long reach down so there was nothing sporty about rowing through the gears.
My pick is the Explorer. I think the gen 1’s will start going up in value.
By the way, is the TTB in the front an independent suspension?
Technically the two sides of the axle are independent from each other but I think it has more in common with a solid front axle than a Macpherson-strut.
The Mazda is priced more reasonably for what it offers. If it’s nearly as solid as it looks, it’s a great daily driver. Truth is, very few SUVs actually need to be 4X4.
If I wanted a chonky half-assed Jeep wannabe, I’d buy the Explorer. This one seems a little too old to be a daily driver, so not nearly as good a deal, but it’ll probably sell for near the asking price in the current market to a Ford Stan.
“Truth is, very few SUVs actually need to be 4X4.”
Yeah you NEVER need 4wd…..until you do.
OK, I’m seriously looking at that Explorer. Every car I’ve ever owned has been older than the one before and this would be the perfect next step between my 96 Cherokee and the Model A that I want to get in a few years.
Happy to see that others have already referenced Tenacious D so I don’t have to.
Here’s a question: Why? What would either of these offer that your existing vehicles don’t? I mean, they’re both nice, but neither one is especially interesting other than having 3 pedals. And unless I’m mistaken, you already have a nice rare manual SUV in similar condition.
I guess if you’re going to go for it, the Tribute is the better vehicle. It would be a good, respectable, reliable daily driver. But I bet driving it is slightly less interesting than doing laundry.
Learned to drive a stick shift in my dad’s first gen 2-door (!) Explorer. It was great. That’s what you should find – the first gen 2-door manual Explorer. Lovely machine.
I’m shocked no mention of the rubber shift boot!
I do love the Explorer’s classic accordion-style shift boot.
Not to mention metal bumpers and color-trim keyed floor mats that coordinate with the seats!
(Singing) “This isn’t the greatest Shitbox Showdown in the woooorld, no no no, this Is. A. Tribuuuute!!”
I think the Tribute has aged very well. No slam on the Explorer but the Tribute is much better looking to my eyes. I once rented an Escape of the same vintage and enjoyed it a lot, though I found the front suspension too harsh. Finally occurred to me to check the air pressures. Both front tires had 45 lbs!
I chose the Explorer. You can put all the aftermarket Ranger stuff on it to build it up nicely while the Tribute seems to have a dash molded from the same plastic my 2004 Dodge 2500 had.
I own an escape of that era, although mine has the 2.3’s slightly larger cousin, the 2.5. They are pretty solid rigs. Maybe a few annoying things here and there, but nothing major. Only problem with the manual equipped versions of that generation, is I believe they are front wheel drive only. I can tell that the one listed in this article at least is. Ford was nice enough to leave a big gaping hole where the differential would mount on the AWD models.
Ope, I missed that DT mentioned the FWD only in the article.
I’d say the Mazda is the better buy and probably gonna have less hassles with it… but I’d buy the Explorer.
Mazda all the way. I used to own a Hybrid Tribute 4×4 and when I sold it after five years, it looked and drove exactly like the first day. The hard plastics inside are so hard that you can literally scrape your knee when getting into the driver seat in shorts (talking from experience). And that is the way a car like this should be!
MIATA (Mazda Is Always The Answer…even if it’s a Ford) is the only correct answer here.
Obligatory “this post is a tribute to a Tribute.”
TU for the Tenacious D reference. So hilarious to younger me. But wow has their work not aged well…
Wait, really? Maybe I’m just stuck in childhood, but I watched all of Tenacious D during the pandemic and good lord does it hold up better than most other comedies of the time. Like, I think “Strangers With Candy” is a much better and funnier show, but Christ it’s a hard one to revisit.
Tenacious D succeeds probably because the broad humor of simulating jizz using what is obviously a large tube of lotion squirted from a man’s crotch is funny for everyone.
Full disclosure: I own the official Tenacious D cum rag, and perhaps am not the most impartial judge here.
I didn’t appreciate Strangers with Candy when I was a kid. That intro lives in my head along with many other obscure pieces of media.
I vote for the Explorer. The angular, boxy styling of the first generation Explorer has held up well over the years. I might need an eye exam, but I can see (or at least hallucinate) vague similarities to the 70s/80s Range Rovers. I think the Explorer looks good now and will still look good in 15 years.
The Mazda is almost certainly the better vehicle, but I see it as a generic, interchangeable transportation appliance. I don’t see the Mazda being interesting enough to warrant inclusion in a shitbox showdown in 2037, when it is the same age the Explorer is today.
I owned a 98 Ranger that I acquired at about 120K miles. The heads had cracked, rendering the motor junk. I got a lower (30k) motor from an, ironically, manual trans explorer, and we drove it for another 80k or so. It did want new $10/ea spark plugs every 20-30k miles
I owned a 98 Ranger that I acquired at about 120K miles. The heads had cracked, rendering the motor junk. I got a lower (30k) motor from an, ironically, manual trans explorer, and we drove it for another 80k or so. It did want new $10/ea spark plugs every 20-30k miles. This damn thing still won’t let me post in one shot.
I’d say the Ford is more “you”, but the Mazda looks so nice. I’m going Mazda
A heavily biased vote for the Explorer from me. Many learning to drive and other high school memories in a first gen, and had three second gens after it. Only major issues we ever had with them were the automatic transmissions, so this was an easy choice for me.
If the Mazda was 4wd and manual (which I know, was never an option), I might have voted that way.
Holy crap. The Mazda is 2wd? Why on earth would you make a 2wd SUV?
That would have definitely altered my vote…..
Hey I see 2wd 4Runners all the time. I don’t get it.
I’d actually accept a 2wd crossover before a 2wd BOF SUV. I mean, you’re putting up with absolutely terrible driving dynamics, fuel mileage and so on…for what? So you can get stuck on a muddy driveway that a FWD crossover would scamper up no problem?
It allowed Ford to sell the same vehicle to people walking into the dealer who were going to ‘outdoorsy’ cosplay or came in asking for a wagon. “You really own a kayak? Well, this has AWD and big butch wheels and fenders.” or “Here’s our basic FWD wagon now. It’s a bit higher than you expected, but it’s all we got.”
I seem to recall the platform for this generation was even built on something mundane like the Tempo. Same formula as Civic/CRV and Corolla/RAV4 of the day.
Based on the Tempo? The Tempo had been out of production for like 6 or 7 years when the Escape entered the scene. It was based on a Mazda.
Were there really a lot of people clamoring for wagons at Ford or Mazda dealers then? Or did they just want the look of an SUV without the need for extra traction?
It was a totally new platform, right? One of Ford’s first of the era IIRC.
I liked the first gen Escape, but in retrospect, what I really liked was the Bronco Sport but it hadn’t been invented yet.
I voted Explorer before I realized they didn’t list a price. I’m like 99.99999% sure they’ll want something insane for it so if that’s true, I’ll take the Mazda.
I’ve never driven an Escape so I don’t have anything to compare to but I drove a bunch of Tributes when I worked at a Mazda dealer and always thought they felt like they’d be a good, solid, reasonable daily driver. I never ran across a manual Tribute but I did see a manual CX-5 there that took me by surprise.
Sorry about that. They want $3800. Just added that to the body.
I test drove a 6 speed CX-5 one time. It really drove nice. But it was going to be the ex wife’s car, and she wasn’t keen on learning to work 3 pedals.
Need price for the Explorer.
The picture of the Explorer at the top of the page says $3,800.
The top pictures don’t always seem to show up for some reason on my Mac – sometimes if I refresh a few times they show up, sometimes not. It finally showed up here after going to the front page and coming back. It’s odd because all other pictures show up just fine, but on most every page, the top photo rarely will show for me.
My Mac does the same thing. Every article I click on has to be refreshed to show the top pictures. Just a quirk.
The Ford, it has an honesty of design intent that the other lacks, also it has a better glass/ metal ratio, this is a particular bugbear of mine. I will forgo quite alot of passive safety in order to be able to actively see out of a vehicle.
The Mazda looks a bit like the Ford might if it were cake left out in the rain.
And they’ll never have that recipe again. Oh, noooooo!
I went contrarian here and voted Explorer.
More of an actual truck feel, those 4.0 V6s are indeed very durable and have a good amount of low-end grunt (esp. with no automatic of the era to sap it), parts are easy enough to source, and Explorers of that era seem positively svelte compared to anything from the 2000s on up.
I once dated a woman from Pasadena who had a two-door 1st gen Explorer 4×4 with a 5-speed.
Neat little truck.
I loved those two-door Sports. They were always noticeable for how rare they were, and the whole package was like a truck version of a sport coupe (the rear seats were esp. coupe-like in their difficulty to access).
For those old enough, it seemed like the successor to the Bronco II, which was a fun little guy.
Indeed, just with a wider track for more stability (at the expense of some off-road ability, undoubtedly Ford saw how people actually used their Bronco II and designed the Sport accordingly).
Never seen the interior of a Tribute before but you’re right DT, it has a nice sweet harmony to it. Whole package inside and out just works. Have to with the Tribute, having ridden in way to many Explorers of this vintage to ever has a desire for one.
A weekend article. Whoo!
Mazda. Mazda. Mazda. It’s a proper daily driver. What’s the use case for the Explorer? Maybe moderate weight tow vehicle or something to take to your hunting cabin a few times a year.
Hard to compare without a price on the Explorer.
Really just have to read $3800