What is it that attracts us to these trucks?

[lowbucktruck]

Low-tech, that is part of the appeal on these trucks.  I LOVE wrenching on my old 73 C20.  Heck, you can climb into the engine bay with a beer and a sandwich, a lot more room in there compared to working on these new cars.  Most times when my 73 breaks down (and its seldom) I can usually fix it myself on the spot.  And these trucks were built to LAST!  I grew up on a 450-acre ranch as a kid, and our family used those chevy trucks HARD.  Used to spend summers baling hay and we relied on our Chevy/GMC trucks for towing, hauling, you name it.

And for those of us to actually use these trucks for their intended purpose, we know the value of an old 3/4 ton longbed.  You can haul anything, anywhere.  I had my 1990 Toyota 4Runner (I call it the lil yuppie truck) overheat, blow head gaskets and crack the cylinder heads...  and I needed to tow it to a repair shop (save on the towing bill).  Went to U-Haul to rent a car hauler trailer, and the guy at the counter was asking me if I was sure that my old 73 C20 could handle pulling a 4Runner.  I just looked at him like he was crazy and laughed.  She sure may not be pretty, but she has it where it counts.

Have to agree with others about driving a big ole truck too, feels great to be cruising along in a big hunk of old iron, loud and proud.  My wife doesn't understand the appeal of that old truck.  Don't matter, I do.

[Captkaos]

If you don't want the big drop between 1st and 2nd, get a built 200R4.

[eventhorizon66]

IDK, maybe I didn't learn anything when it comes to transmissions.  And maybe I wouldn't have such problem with the gear spread if my engine had more torque.  Torque cures all ails.

[Stewart G Griffin]

What attracted me......?

When i first understood what a pickup truck was, these trucks were there.  These were the "perfect" truck for the time, and really it still is in my opinion.  I immediately knew that the 73 to current 76ish (this is when i first knew about trucks) were much better looking than the 67-72 series (although some people would beg to differ and i, admittedly, concede that the 67-72 were really the first "modern" looking pickups to come off the assembly line;  Anything before 60 looks---wierd and really most of the 60's models look wierd.)  In addition, i intrinsically "knew" that this series blew away anything ford or chrysler had to offer although thinking back on it, their models actually looked ok compared to what ford and chrysler are "pooping" out today.  (Exception; ram)  Actually, all models, regardless of brand or model looked good from say, 68ish to 91ish including imports.



i mean even the lettering that they originally used---you know the cartoonish letters that don't line up;  As if the person that designed them was toasted when s/he designed them.  Even that i love---it looks so cool---- so far out---so GMish.  i think they stopped using that type of lettering around 80?

Just everything about it---the styling, the two-tone paint (although this was started on earlier serieses?) Even the various wheel covers, i feel, were the best ever produced.  (i will start a different thread on this topic.)


b) But being practical about it, i like these trucks because i think they are probably the cheapest easiest vehicles to maintain/keep running. Not to mention being extremely rugged. Being that it was produced for 14 yrs, really 18yrs, parts are so easy and cheap to find.  i've learned so much about cars from working on it.  The only possible exception may be the 78-88 gm a/g bodies as far as parts availability/cheapness.
  
So my vote is to keep it;

1)What exact engine do you have?  i may have a similar set up, with similar "behavior."  From 0-35 there is nothing, (i have the 2.56 rear) but a few weeks ago, i "opened it up" for the first time just to see what it would do and after about 35mph and when the secondaries open up (q-jet) i was impressed.  Of course, our speed needs may be, and probably are, different.  NOTE: i have the crate 260hp version.

a) also, are you sure you have 250 going to the rear wheels?  You have to remember that with the weight of the truck, the only way to go fast(er) is to spend more money.  Although, still relatively cheap, comparitively speaking.

2) what is your daily driver and what are your speed needs for the truck/hot rod?

3) actually, perhaps more importantly, what rear gear does the truck have?  This could be the key to everything.

[eventhorizon66]

We've got the same engine Stewart and I'm absolutely positive I don't have all 250 hp going to the rear wheels (more like 200 figuring 20% drivetrain loss).  This is my daily for now, so it's gonna stay just the way it is for now, like it or not.  Rear gears are 3.73s.  With a very light foot I got around 17 mpg (70-80% highway) on my last tank, and my worst so far is 12.5 mpg (<50% highway).

The trucks fine, it's just not the dramatic improvement I was expecting over my old 305 with 3.08s.  Well at least it doesn't blow blue smoke on startup or ping going up steep hills, lol.  Gotta accentuate the positive

[VileZambonie]

What do you have behind your 454, Vile?

I just absolutely hate the huge rpm drop between 1st and 2nd.  Maybe a gear vendors would be nice but that's big $$$.  What is your opinion of the gear vendors over/under-drive units for a performance application?

For now it's a TH400 that's built very strong to handle the 454. I have a 4L80 in progress but I am waiting on that til I'm all done with the body work. A 2004R is a simple transmission also just like the 700R4 to build up. So unless you have over 500HP don't be afraid to build one. Personally I would never waste all that money on an overdrive unit.

[eventhorizon66]

A question, Vile: the only versions of the 4L80's that I'm aware of require a computer to control them.  Was there a non-electronic version?  We are talking about what is basically a TH400 with a .75 OD gear, right?

And the main thing that attracts me to the GV unit is not just the overdrive, but mainly the gear-spliting ability for tight Muncie-like shifts.  I always thought a TH400 with GV would be the ultimate performance trans.  But yes the $2500 price tag is definitely steep.  For that I could build three overdrive transmissions.

[Stewart G Griffin]

What are your 1/4 mile and 0-60 requirements for the vehicle?

What does the truck run now in both parameters?

[eventhorizon66]

I have no idea what my current numbers are and really don't have a dead set requirement.  I want it to feel "just right" according to the seat of my pants.

I originally had my sights on something that could easily hang with a stock Lightning or SRT-10.  Then I decided drivability and practicality were more important as it would be my daily for a while.  And I probably didn't have the $$$ to attain this goal anyways.

[Stewart G Griffin]

A stock lightning runs mid to high 15's, so that shouldn't be to hard to achieve.

When i get to it, i will measure 1/4 mile and 0-60 times;  This is another benefit of the new digital speedo i installed (see other post).  i did not know of these features until after i recieved the gauge and read the instructions.

i too, am "underwhelmed" with the performance of this engine.  After all, it's advertised as 260HP.  But i mostly attribute my "lukewarm" performance to not having headers and especially having a tall (2.56) final drive gear.

[Captkaos]

the 260HP crate motor is rated at the crankshaft.  then you got to bolt accessories and a drivetrain to it...  and you are going to loose about 60hp through the drivetrain.  STILL with the peak 350s nearing 180hp from the factory, that is a decent upgrade.

Ligtnings run high 13's in the 1/4.  I have driven my neighbors.  AND they put 335hp/400lb/ft to the tires completely stock.

[eventhorizon66]

Maybe TPI and a rear-mounted turbo.  Now, if only someone were doing something like this so I could have a good reference.

[SUX2BU99]

Stewart is probably referring to the original Lightnings of 93-95 with their 240 HP 351. Them blown L's though from 99-03 are darn quick and easy to make even faster.

Why I like these trucks and why I purchased one as my weekend toy:

1. Reminds me of my youth. I was born in 1975 and graduated high school in 1993. Most of my classmates who had a truck, had one of these. Some had the 88+ but they were generally too expensive to attain. My first vehicle was an 81 Jimmy 2wd 305 2bbl w/ 3.08 posi. Loved it. Short on power though (hence the trading in of it to an 88 Mustang GT 5 speed lol)
2. Original inspiration was a white 86 short step 2wd that was mildly customized that I saw when I was 11 or 12. Fell in love with it's looks.
3. Simplicity. When I was in the market for a weekend toy I contemplated getting a 5.0 liter Mustang again, but older computer-controlled cars wasn't wooing me to buy one. The fact that these things are so simple was a huge bonus. I hate chasing electrical gremlins and did that with a 90 Daytona for a while. No fun.
4. Good looks. Enough said.
5. Availability of parts. Millions made over 14-18 years means parts aren't hard to find and they aren't as valuable yet as the 67-72 trucks.
6. Cheap for speed. A SBC and a TH350 is about as cheap as it gets to make power with.

Downside is the factory-installed rust that all these seem to have, and the biggest thing I wish GM would have done is built an extended cab model. I would absolutely love one.

[eventhorizon66]

Rust is one place I am really blessed, as this truck has slept in a garage it's whole life.  There's another reason not the get rid of it.  Thanks for reminding me.  I'll never find another project that has so little rust.

[SUX2BU99]

Personally I would go with a crate 383 from a well known builder, like Smeding Performance, Awesome Engines or even the GM ZZ383.  That combined with the 700R4 and 3.73 you already have I'm sure will make you grin every time you push the pedal. You bought a crate 260 HP 350? I wouldn't doubt if that's the same or very similar to the stock 215 HP 350's that came in early 90's GM trucks. When they make crate motors, they have higher HP ratings and (I may be wrong, feel free to correct me) that I think is because they don't have to rate them with all the accessories on or they use a different rating system. I would have gone for the 290 HP crate motor at the very least but that's just me.

I just dropped around $2000 after everything was said and done to put new Dart heads and a Comp Cams cam in my truck and I'm a little bummed. But, I'm hoping for big improvements when I swap the 2.76 gear for a 3.42. The 1st gear on a TH350 is quite a bit taller than on a 700R4.

So it looks like abnormal aspiration might be the best avenue to ultimately reach my goal.  Maybe TPI and a rear-mounted turbo.  Now, if only someone were doing something like this so I could have a good reference.

A 383 would be cheaper, though.  And I don't need quite as much hp as I weigh about 600 or so pounds less than a Lightning and almost 1000 lbs less than an SRT-10, assuming I tip the scales at 4000.