Bronco Forum - Full Size Ford Bronco Forum banner

1 - 20 of 31 Posts

Registered
Joined
82 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
When buying a 93-96 Bronco do you take into consideration the high mileage...Like whats an acceptable range...on average the mileage would be around 15K a year and with a 96 thats like 285K!
 

Premium 4 Lyfe - Way Back Staff
'95 XLT: 5.8, MAF, E4OD, 4.56's, 6" on 33's
Joined
36,660 Posts
Generally speaking... I prefer to stay under 150k when looking for a new2me rig. :shrug
Just a number though. It all depends on the over-all condition of the rig and care/maintenance given.
Since dealing with strangers is almost always a crap-shoot... I stick with under 150k.
 

Registered
Joined
82 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Mine just hit 203,000 but I have $11k in receipts. So it's really all about the condition and maintenance. If its high mileage, ask for receipts or maintenance records. If not, stay as close to, or under 100,000 miles.
100K in mileage...Is that like finding a two-nicorn? The lowest Ive seen out here is 150K
 

Registered
Joined
309 Posts
For a 93-96 I'd expect mileage to be over 150k just due to use, with 200k about the norm. For older vehicles like these I'd go more with maintenance receipts and a very thorough inspection. If it is really a concern, like a daily driver with your family in it, you can always have a repair shop or inspection station give it of detailed look.

1000 miles on the open highway is far different from 1000 miles of no roads. Consider that when thinking about a vehicle that has low mileage and was "used only on the weekends."
 

Registered
Joined
82 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
For a 93-96 I'd expect mileage to be over 150k just due to use, with 200k about the norm. For older vehicles like these I'd go more with maintenance receipts and a very thorough inspection. If it is really a concern, like a daily driver with your family in it, you can always have a repair shop or inspection station give it of detailed look.

1000 miles on the open highway is far different from 1000 miles of no roads. Consider that when thinking about a vehicle that has low mileage and was "used only on the weekends."
Ahhh...used only on the weekends....yea off-roading on the weekends...! yes I plan to take to Pep Boys and give it an inspection...Thanks for your input
 

Registered
Joined
9,829 Posts
100K in mileage...Is that like finding a two-nicorn? The lowest Ive seen out here is 150K
Pretty much, They pop up very rarely.
The newest bronco is 19 years old. No Bronco has been in cryogenic hibernation for the last 19 years. (Or has there?). If a Bronco has high miles it means it's been driven regularly, if it has low miles it sat alot. Sitting is worse for a vehicle than being driven. My truck has just under 200k miles and has been driven regularly. It's on the original stock engine and a trans rebuilt at 129k. The engine is in great shape and only burns a tiny bit of oil between changes. Angelo's truck has 80k and until recently smoked like a freight train.
The only benefit a low mileage Bronco has is less interior and paint (if it was garaged) wear. Higher miles with proper care is the way to go IMHO. Plus then your not paying a premium for a vehicle that still needs every bit of rubber replaced.
 

Registered
Joined
468 Posts
There are three in my area right now- 2 of them have under 110,000 Mi....Good lookin trucks. The temptation is killing me.
 

Registered
Joined
829 Posts
I got my '93 last summer and it had ~140,000 on it. If you search farms like I did, some farmers keep Broncos around to haul crap around in the fields or get to their equipment out there that requires 4WD. They get driven but not very much hence low miles. They often have other issues though, my interior was pretty trashed from just being a 'farm truck'. Works great though.
 

Registered
Joined
90 Posts
I don't know why but I always like to look at the oil and check the compression on the motor. I've had really good luck doing that. As far as checking the tranny, I have no idea.
 

Registered
Joined
363 Posts
My bronco has 144xxx miles on it and after I've done a tuneup and replaced some stuff (brakes, rotors, a hub on one side, rear main seal, water pump) she pretty much runs like a scalded dog except for a strange intermittent miss I've been fighting in cylinder 7.

I'm 99% sure though that's due to the crappy crappy autozone generic spark wires on it. I've got new ford racing wires coming my way and I've already done the cap and rotor and ignition coil, and the plugs are all new.


Anyways, long story is that 10k miles driven like F1 racers is worse for a car than 150k miles driven like a grandma on Sunday.

A vehicle that has had one owner for a long time (or low owners like maybe 2-3) is more likely to be adequately maintained over time and more likely to have receipts to prove it. A vehicle that has switched hands 6, 7, 10, 12, whatever numbers of times over the years usually has been handed off from person to person due to problems.

That isn't always the case, but it's common when you see a 20 year old truck that has had 12 owners that it has some problems that owners don't want to deal with or it has been dogged out for a short time by each individual owner.

I'm personally the second owner of my truck.


I asked this very same question a ways back when I was worried about the high mileage on some trucks (and those sub 100k trucks seem to pull a crazy premium if they're in good shape body wise, like near 20k prices for some of them which is insane to me) and the consensus was that it wasn't the number of miles but how those miles were driven.

Whatever you decide to possibly buy look at it in depth and drive it and if you can't do that (like it's way out of state or something) then get a reputable dealership to inspect it for you. And even with an inspection you should still expect to find things wrong with it when you get it, because there's no amount of 1-2 hour inspections that can reveal the problems driving a truck for a month will.
 

Registered
Joined
89 Posts
Im looking hard for one and most have 125-200,000 on them.

I got an 89 in 99 and it had 140 on it then. It was strong as an ox. All i ever did to it was radiator, heater core and front main seal. Wish i still had it
 

Registered
Joined
3,428 Posts
I think once a vehicle reaches a certain age,say 20yrs old , mileage becomes less important to me than overall condition

when looking for a bronco,you are looking for a pretty specific vehicle and for for me mechanical condition ,while important, is much less important that good structure and lack of rust
mechanical ,while can be expensive,is easier to fix than the dreaded iron oxide monster

around me, you pretty rarely see many cars 25 yrs old as they pretty much evaporate with rust
 

Registered
Joined
1,872 Posts
Mileage means nothing if the machine was well maintained. Mine has 211k on it and the paint is 99%, interior 95% and runs and drives like brand new. It has had oil changes on time every time, spot on maintence, and gentle use its entire life.
 

Registered
Joined
9,829 Posts
I got an 89 in 99 and it had 140 on it then. It was strong as an ox. All i ever did to it was radiator, heater core and front main seal. Wish i still had it
But it would have only been 10 years old at the time. There's a huge difference between a 10 year old truck with 140k and a 20 year old truck with 140k.
Mileage means nothing if the machine was well maintained. Mine has 211k on it and the paint is 99%, interior 95% and runs and drives like brand new. It has had oil changes on time every time, spot on maintence, and gentle use its entire life.
Everybody seems to think that being owned by a grandma and having maintenance done perfectly makes a vehicle vastly superior. I can tell you that's not the case. Driving like an old lady isn't necessarily better in any way, it can be worse because it leads to excessive carbon buildup, not to mention excessive wear caused by infrequent driving. My dad claims he's easier on his car because he's a more conservative driver. I may drive slightly faster but I don't slam it into gear immediately after starting it and take off, or shift into drive while it's still rolling backwards. I also don't start it just to move it 5 feet for no reason then turn it off.
Being driven slower doesn't equal less wear.

I hear people selling used cars say that their car was religiously maintained with 3k OCIs all the time. Your car doesn't give a shit if your oil gets changed at 3000 miles or 3500 miles. Hell you could go an extra 1000 miles and be fine 90% of the time. If 500 extra miles on an oil change is enough to make any noticable difference then you're doing something wrong. Having everything done 100% spot on to the maintenace schedule only makes the owner feel better. As long as the maintenance was done regularly at resonable intervals for the given conditions that's all that matters. You'll find these vehicles very rarely and when you do you're gonna pay a premium for it 90% of the time. To me the extra cost just isn't worth it, especially when a vehicle is this old. Bottom line is unless its already been done you can count on all new bushings and alot of seals to keep it handling good and leak free.

I think once a vehicle reaches a certain age,say 20yrs old , mileage becomes less important to me than overall condition

when looking for a bronco,you are looking for a pretty specific vehicle and for for me mechanical condition ,while important, is much less important that good structure and lack of rust
mechanical ,while can be expensive,is easier to fix than the dreaded iron oxide monster

around me, you pretty rarely see many cars 25 yrs old as they pretty much evaporate with rust
In my area rust free or close to rust free Broncos are pretty common. The bigger problem is vehicles that have been wheeled, half ass repaired, abused, or just generally neglected.
 

Registered
Joined
363 Posts
I think once a vehicle reaches a certain age,say 20yrs old , mileage becomes less important to me than overall condition

when looking for a bronco,you are looking for a pretty specific vehicle and for for me mechanical condition ,while important, is much less important that good structure and lack of rust
mechanical ,while can be expensive,is easier to fix than the dreaded iron oxide monster

around me, you pretty rarely see many cars 25 yrs old as they pretty much evaporate with rust


Completely agree.

Rust is way more costly in general to fix than mechanical issues are, and a good portion of mechanical issues you can do on these trucks if you are handy and have some basic (and maybe a couple not so basic) hand tools.

Body work and rust repair however requires specialized tools, and as a mechanic buddy of mine once said to me:

"Any idiot can turn a wrench. Body work is an art. It requires a real artist."

And he was talking about why he couldn't do body work; because it's SO easy to mess up and have a crappy looking car.


I'd rather take one with a tired worn out engine and a rust free body than one with a brand new crate 351 and rust holed floors.
 

Premium Member
Joined
5,774 Posts
Where in CA are you anyway? I've been seeing lots of BKO's on CL.
 

Registered
Joined
82 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
Where in CA are you anyway? I've been seeing lots of BKO's on CL.
I'm in Orange county and i see them from 2000k-7500k with the latter having brand new this, or recently installed this etc..

You guys hit it right on the head, a truck that has low miles(insanely low) has probably been sitting and really doesnt make it any better than a truck with 200k
 
1 - 20 of 31 Posts
Top