BoostedBrandon
BoostedBrandon Dork
10/19/13 11:37 a.m.

A local auto repair place that sells cars (so they can rip you two ways!) has the cleanest little Isuzu Pickup I've ever seen on their lot. I just glanced at it last night, but it is a stick, it is 2wd, and (at least in the dark) appeared to be very straight and rust free. Paint looked good as well. It's a 1992 and is in a very dashing shade of red with those Centerline outlaw wheels that you always see on these things.

How's the 4 banger in these? I used to see a ton of them, so I'd assume they're reliable. Besides rust, any other issue to look for? I have no idea on mileage or any other condition, but for some reason I'm very attracted to this little truck.

Curmudgeon
Curmudgeon MegaDork
10/19/13 12:20 p.m.

The little pickups are amazingly tough. That doesn't mean there are no weak points, though.

The 2.3 with a carb is underpowered and does not get very good gas mileage. The 2.6 with a carb is somewhat better on both power and mileage. Best of all would be a 2.6 with fuel injection, better on power and mileage than either of the carbed setups but still no ball of fire and not stellar gas mileage. There are a very few 2.8 and 3.1 GM V6 powered ones out there, I saw exactly one of them in five years with Isuzu.

The carbs will wear the base plate, causing an erratic idle.

The 2.3's would occasionally crack cylinder heads. Never saw a 2.6 do that.

Some of them used the same rear axle as an S10 where the bearings ride directly on the axle shaft. Like S10's the bearing will chew up the axle surface.

Otherwise, not much went wrong. I had customers with over 300k miles still flogging the hell out of them daily.

impulsive
impulsive Reader
10/19/13 12:33 p.m.

if it isn't a 2.6 I wouldn't bother.

and yeah the 2.6 had head issues like the 2.3, but mostly that was in the earlier castings.

if is the 2.6 it has the more robust MUA 5spd. if it has rear disc brakes then it's the Isuzu 12 bolt axle not the gm crap.

impulsive
impulsive Reader
10/19/13 12:51 p.m.
The 2.6 with a carb is somewhat better on both power and mileage. Best of all would be a 2.6 with fuel injection,

all 2.6 engines in the US were sold with MPFI

mblommel
mblommel Reader
10/19/13 1:17 p.m.

Didn't fuel injection only come on the last ones like '94 and '95?

I agree that these little trucks are tough little buggers. I had a roommate in college with one who never EVER changed the oil and it kept going and going. He also ran it until the brake pistons were actually cutting into the rotors on the front....

I owned a '92 that I got for $850 because the starter had gone bad. It was a fantastic truck. A new starter and a good cleaning had me rolling for well under a grand and I used it as my daily for several years until I traded it for a '91 CRX Si.

My Dad has '93 now. The only major problem was when it blew the head gasket, but I guess that is known issue with the Isuzu 4 cyl.? The mechanic he took it to wasn't very surprised.

The only reason I'm not driving another is I decided to get an old F-150 supercab so I can haul my kids around and tow a car trailer to haul derelicts home on.

They aren't too fast, and the gas mileage isn't stellar but if you need a truck I say go for it.Overall they are great little trucks. Very simple and robust. Too bad they still don't sell something of this sort here these days.

impulsive
impulsive Reader
10/19/13 3:45 p.m.
Didn't fuel injection only come on the last ones like '94 and '95?

yes, for the 2.3. 94 was transitional year, some are carb'd some are EFI & all 95 are injected.

the 2.6 in every application has been EFI throughout its entire production period(88-97)

benzbaronDaryn
benzbaronDaryn Dork
10/19/13 4:31 p.m.

I saw a 4x4 isuzu diesel pup the other day on the freeway, cool little truck. That is my knowledge of isuzu.

belteshazzar
belteshazzar UberDork
10/19/13 8:18 p.m.

somebody gave me an '86 2wd 2.6 5sp fifteen years ago. it was rusty, but surprisingly rewarding to drive. probably because i didnt care what happened.

i chopped up the p'up emblem on the fender & spliced in the emblems from a trooper (the font & size is the same), to make an Isuzu Pooper.

ShadowSix
ShadowSix HalfDork
10/19/13 9:08 p.m.

In reply to belteshazzar:

I just shed a single tear.

jimbob_racing
jimbob_racing Dork
10/19/13 9:49 p.m.

I would buy it and re-badge it with emblems and such from a Honda Passport. Then I'd let people think that it was a genuine Honda pickup.

44Dwarf
44Dwarf SuperDork
10/20/13 6:41 a.m.

Having owned both 2.3 and 2.6 stay away for from 2.3 I've owned 3 of them they all were crap. on;y reason i owned 3 was the 1st one had a blown head gasket two days after i did the trans/transfer case....got replacment...it lasted about 20,000miles then with in one week lost so much compression it would roll out of the driveway when left in 1st. The 3rd ran for ever but never had any power. The 2.6 was never a problem it just keeps on running....brother uses it as plow on his property still some 320,000 on the od with more wood then metal holding the body togeather

ddavidv
ddavidv PowerDork
10/20/13 6:58 a.m.

You can get parts from your local dealer.

Oh wait....

mad_machine
mad_machine MegaDork
10/20/13 8:05 a.m.

I always liked the little Nissan "hardbody" pickups better.. but I would not kick one of these Isuzus out of bed

BoostedBrandon
BoostedBrandon Dork
10/20/13 8:39 a.m.

upon further inspection I've determined this thing is a cream puff. The odometer shows 99k miles, and it even has the original Isuzu tape deck! It goes against my better judgement to buy it, but damn is it tempting...

Curmudgeon
Curmudgeon MegaDork
10/20/13 8:55 a.m.

I could have sworn there were carbed 2.6's out there way back in the late 80's/early 90's. Oh well; not the first time I've been wrong and it won't be the last.

Tell you what: the original P'UP was damn near bulletproof. The last one I saw had a really sloppy timing chain, the guy drove it with the thing rattling and flopping so bad that it chewed a hole in the head where a coolant passage goes, this of course filled the crankcase with emulsified coolant. Heads were not available so we sent the original one tho the machine shop, they welded the hole, resurfaced it etc, we changed the oil and flushed the 1000 Island dressing out with diesel fuel, put it back together and told him that the warranty was that if it exploded he was allowed to keep every part of it. Two years later it was still running great.

Another customer had a diesel P'UP with an unknown but vast amount of mileage, probably in the 700k range from my knowledge of his driving habits. The hinges for the driver door had come apart so he would get into it from the passenger side. The first time I grabbed the driver door handle the damn door fell off, I stood there with a really stupid look on my face and I thought he was going to bust a gut from laughing so hard.

carzan
carzan Dork
10/20/13 9:04 a.m.
Curmudgeon wrote: I could have sworn there were carbed 2.6's out there way back in the late 80's/early 90's. Oh well; not the first time I've been wrong and it won't be the last.

You might be thinking of the Mitsubishi 2.6s. They were carbed until '89.

oldopelguy
oldopelguy Dork
10/20/13 9:45 a.m.

My dad went through several engines in his Amigo due to oil leaks and low oil pressure. Seemed that the thrust bearing surface on the crankshaft wore badly due to the thrust on it from applying the clutch. Eventually it would cause the crankshaft to have too much fore and aft movement and then front and rear seals would go and oil flow through the wider bearing gap would bleed off enough to drop the pressure.

Eventually he found a good used motor from a truck with an automatic, but it took several engine swaps.

Curmudgeon
Curmudgeon MegaDork
10/20/13 10:06 a.m.

Back in da day when the clutch safety switches were first mandated (couldn't start the engine until the clutch pedal was pushed in) thrust bearing failures became fairly common. The reason: the car would sit a week or two, oil would drain off of the thrust faces, the owner would push in the clutch to start the car and hold it there. This meant the thrust faces were pushed up against each other on a dry start, not good. I used to always caution my Triumph and MG driving customers to only start the engine with the shifter in neutral and the foot off the clutch, wait for oil pressure to build before putting it in gear. That's how I start my Jensen Healey to this day.

I guess the TB thing has been fixed for later year engines from the various manufacturers, it's not as common as it used to be.

belteshazzar
belteshazzar UberDork
10/20/13 1:04 p.m.

my '86 2.6 was carb'd. thats how i got it for free. truck wouldnt idle unless your foot was on the gas, and then the starter failed. so if you roll started it AND kept it revv'd you're okay. mechanic quoted the owner a million dollars to rebuild the carb, so he just gave it to me. I bought another carb off a wadded up wreck in a salvage yard for under $50, and drove it two years 'till i found a '70 elcamino i like better.

You'll need to log in to post.

Our Preferred Partners
Tss6NPdFYfxFPFBALc6Fokc4vjqYLMQB8W2MOQoe6BDCIP5C4TVjFVDIMpBmkRfP