| |
Click on image for the lowdown. 
====
| | |
9 members (Nhluvstruck, 32Fordpuchoptop, Bill Hanlon, DHedrick, Ponchogl, Southerntruck, Otto Skorzeny, 1955 1 Series, 1 invisible),
125
guests, and
0
robots. | | Key: Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod | | | Forums66 Topics128,113 Posts1,056,279 Members48,439 | | Most Online14,466
Apr 26th, 2026 | | AD Chevy Trucks  Over 6,000 pictures Brad Allen has an awesome collection of Chevrolet factory pictures that he has set up from film strips. Check them out!
Lots of work on Brad's part ... pure enjoyment (and references) for you!
| | THANKS!
For helping keep this great
old truck web site
on the Internet for over 30 years! and not clogged down
with Ads!  Again, thanks!
| | 
#84317 10/15/2007 2:01 PM | Joined: May 2007 Posts: 112 Shop Shark | | Shop Shark Joined: May 2007 Posts: 112 | Hi guys,
When we speak about "heavy duty" for the GMC engine, What means in comparatives terms with the Chevy engine. I mean the people have to think that the GMC last longer?
Thanks | | |
#84318 10/15/2007 2:51 PM | Joined: Aug 2007 Posts: 23 Junior Member | | Junior Member Joined: Aug 2007 Posts: 23 | I think it has more to do with they were putting different engines in the GMC's back then. You could get a big block V-6 in a GMC. These engines were all about torque and pulling power. From what I can see and read they did out last the straight six's of the chevies, but for good reason. And, they had plenty of draw backs of there own. I'm sure they did't get the fuel milage the straight six's got and they would be more trouble to shift and drive because of the low rpm power. I would rather have a 230 than a 305 V-6.
Just me opinion though. | | |
#84319 10/15/2007 4:26 PM | Joined: Mar 2004 Posts: 874 'Bolter | | 'Bolter Joined: Mar 2004 Posts: 874 | GMC blocks were supposed to have a higher nickel content making them wear longer.
They also had full pressure oiling systems long before Chevy did. | | |
|
|
| |
