It’s easy to forget that the SUV era we live in goes back a ways. Like 1946, actually, although that was just the beginning. But the seeds planted with that first Willys Station Wagon yielded a highly unexpected bumper crop; more like an invasive species that has come to dominate the market.
There were a number of key milestones in the expansion of that market segment, but arguably the key one was 1996-1997, when two key segment players appeared that would quickly dominate their respective sub-segments: the 1996 Toyota RAV4 and the 1997 Ford Expedition. And here’s two survivors of each at the curb to remind us of that pivotal time.
The Expedition was the first “tweener” full-size SUV, bridging the gap between the two-doors (Bronco, Blazer, Ramcharger) and the long Chevy Suburban. It turns out our Ford identified a vast gap indeed; more like a grand canyon. The Expedition was a huge (literally) success, and quickly gained a rep for its outsized profits for Ford of over $10k per unit, thanks to its very prosaic F-150 underpinnings and half its body. What a formula for success!
The Expedition ignited a huge fad for large 4-door SUVs that has only grown, along with their size. Due to its popularity, the Expedition became something of the poster boy with a target on its back from the anti-SUV contingent. They were attacked for all the obvious reasons, not that it did any good. Folks have just given up and now they’re driving…RAV4 hybrids.
My presumed shot of the RAV4 turned out to be a dud, but you know how these looked. Along with the Honda CRV that arrived one year later, they defined the segment that has come to be the most popular in the country, and much of the world: the unibody “compact CUV”. They were a lot more compact back then than they are now, but the name has stuck. The RAV4 has been the best selling non-pickup in the land for some years now, with the Tesla Model Y breathing down its neck.
The RAV4 has grown a lot more since these two first appeared than the Expedition, adding 17″ of length (163″ to 180″ currently), whereas the current Expedition is only 4″ longer (210″ vs. 206″) than the original.
Related CC reading:
Curbside Classic: 1946 Willys Jeep Station Wagon – The First Modern Station Wagon and SUV
Curbside Classic: 1997 Ford Expedition – My Introduction To Excess
Curbside Classic: 1994-2000 Toyota RAV4 – Light Trail Blazer
I think of the Chevy Tahoe as the pioneer in the full size, but smaller than Suburban, category. It came out in 4 door form a year before the Expedition. Though as a short wheelbase GMT400 Suburban is wasn’t as distinctive as the Expedition. Interestingly, when Ford applied the SuperDuty approach to their SUV with the Excursion, it wasn’t a huge success though they have a cult following now.
The Chevy ‘burb dates back to something like the mid-1930s, but was 2wd then so not a true suv in the sense that we think of today.
One wonders why so many in warm country opt for 4wd when they don’t need it, I was amazed at how many 4wd suv/cuv/pickups many we saw in Florida recently, and I’d wager few of them ever go off road or are owned by tradesman who require 4wd, they’re being mostly used as everyday grocery-getters and commuters, at a significant penalty in fuel consumption.
I have owned two 4WD Expeditions (1999 and 2009) and then switched to 2WD in 2015 largely because I had no need for 4WD living in central Texas (and also to save a few thousand bucks). Woops. On our first trip to Prescott, Arizona for Thanksgiving it snowed and we were stuck. To answer the question above, that is why people in sunny climates buy 4WD – they do not spend their entire life in that sunny climate.
Don’t think of it as four wheel drive. Our Pilot had Honda All wheel drive, good up to 15 mph. It is designed to unstick you in unexpected places, not get you into places you shouldn’t be going. Many of my southern neighbors like the all wheel drive for it’s ability to keep you on the road in the rainy season. Our roads are not designed to shed water like northern roads. we mostly just pave the cowpath unless it’s an Interstate
I think that the Expedition is a bit longer than the Tahoe, and has a third row. Correct me if I’m wrong, but did Tahoes of this vintage offer a third row? The full size SUV was embraced by people that did a lot of towing, and needed to bring the family along. It was superior to the minivan for this job, though it also became popular as a people mover. For those that only carry passengers the minivan still wins out in my eyes. I think that the big SUV is more practical than the crew cab pick up, they’re more flexible and can carry lots of cargo and passengers. If you’re going to carry really dirty stuff, hook up a trailer.
The compact SUV makes a lot of sense as a sedan and station wagon replacement. Most of the utility and flexibility of the bigger SUVs at a lower cost.
I like the way that the Expedition looks, every model year. I suppose that a person that needs the capability could have an Expedition as their only vehicle. What you pay out in extra gas, you could save in registration, insurance, and maintenance costs of supporting multiple vehicles. As long as you don’t have a long commute!
The compact SUV is pretty versatile, and if the buyer is really honest in what they need, they could probably get by with one. The big SUV is a status symbol and a personal reward. There isn’t that much difference in gas mileage between the Expedition and the earlier Explorers, and the bigger SUV is definitely more comfortable and versatile. And there are tons of used big SUVs on the market.
My sister in law and her husband had an Expedition of this vintage, initially to tow his boat, but then as a family vehicle. She had an absolute belief that bigger was safer, and drove it appropriately (full gas or full brakes, nothing in between.) (Of course they weren’t statistically safer, until stability control became common in the mid 00s. Rollover accidents killed and injured more than the sheer mass saved in collisions with leaser vehicles.)
Amazingly, she had no accidents (but their daughter totaled it quickly with a, ” the left arrow was green it’s his fault” type of accident.
Only positive thing I’ll say about either of them is they still at least looked ruggidish with their tall sidewalls, ample ground clearance, protective cladding and open wheelwells. Modern Crossovers and even full size SUVs look particularly appalling to me because they look like sedans below the beltline by comparison, just flat high offset wheels and low profile tires, tight wheel opening gaps low ground clearance.
Mostly I just look at these two as home wreckers.
A customer drove to lunch in the first model RAV4. After arriving at our lunch destination I seriously thought about walking back. I thought RAV stood for “Really Awful Vehicle”.
I will say that with the refinements/ improvements over the years we will definitely consider one for our next vehicle. We are at the point in life where we should be stepping down while exiting a vehicle. That, along with its moderate size makes it a serious contender.
Oh yes the 90s cheap fading plastic era… while the vehicles might have drove great and been great, that plastic has always turned me off. The RAV4 can be forgiven a little bit because it’s cheaper but the expedition could have had a better quality plastic bumper or a painted bumper for the price these things where going for. Thank God Chevy only put this stuff on the avalanche and not the Tahoe or suburban oh the Aztec has it to. I keep saying this I swear car companies back then between the interiors and this plastic/rubber look cladding had a contract agreement or stock investment in Rubber Maid
It causes no surprise that the Expedition has lengthened so little, for had it done so in the proportions that the RAV has, the machine would have to be re-named the Destination. It would surely be both at the point of departure and that of the the intended conclusion of the journey when parked anywhere at all.
Ah, the marvel of SUV’s. Once small (now medium), once medium (now large), and large (now PF*) size. Build them cheap and pile them high, and they shall come. And they did, and they did, and they do and do still.
*Planet Fucker tm
I remember those first generation Expeditions being quite popular in my area but today they are virtually extinct.
I know! I think they were all traded in for Teslas.
The Expedition and their like only fueled the European impression that Americans believe it is their god given right to consume a disproportionate amount of the worlds resources.
Then what happens, 4 x 4s (aka Chelsea tractors) and SUVs dominate European sales where the smaller roads and ancient cites are even less suitable for these oversized tools
I will admit such vehicles are the right choice for the outback of Canada and the wilds of the USA, but in a city or urban environment, come on
Even my own family has not escaped the lure, my 85 year old father drives a BMW X5 M-sport, I have to admit the performance is very impressive, but would be so much better in a normal Estate car and would not attract the negative connotations of an SUV, some people are actually getting hostile to them
I think of supercars in the same way, 200mph with traffic and speed limits, what is the point? you can have a lot of fun in a tuned 1275 frogeye Sprite / MG without the excessive cost and waste of resources
For the future I think cars have to be fit for purpose and as light and efficient as possible. The old stuff is irrelevant now, but shows how out of step the world was even as late as the 90s for todays challenges and priorities
All completely true. The world of the human ain’t rational.
I say this as one myself (so I’m told).