Cheap tow-pigs: Ford vs. GM

In reply to volvoclearinghouse :

That's odd. Back in IL every single GMT400 had no cab corners & was rusted above at least the rear wheel wells, if not the front. The rear bumper was also rusted through on my 88, and the reason I finally sold it was the rear hitch mounting holes on the frame rusted/broke through while I had a car on a trailer. 

Down here on the coast they're mostly all solid, though I did see an ad for a GMT800 with rusty rockers. 

Worked a deal to get a Ford 600, I believe that is the series, It's an Older Truck 370ci  engine with a Manual trans and 2 speed rear. Short Wheel base body is really Good But last time driven the Brakes locked up, Not an Air brake truck so Non- commercial Tag!

In reply to Pete Gossett :

It's not just the body- I know a couple of people at work with GMT800's and they have had brakes lines rust through, and suspension hard points.  Its somewhat alarming- especially given that the 800s are newer truck than the 400s.  Not to say the 400's are all completely clean- cab corners do seem problematic on those, especially the extended cab models- but the 800's seem worse.

In reply to rslifkin :

I have owned two early (non intercooled) strokes and loved them.  215hp is correct, but even with 10k towed behind me I could top any mountain at or above the speed limit.

Even the same could be said about the 180-hp 6.5TD I used to haul the same trailer.  Pretty much any of the turbo diesels will be way more than adequate, and nearly all of them will trump their gas counterparts with a trailer on the back... all while doing it with 60% better MPG.

Pete Gossett said:

In reply to yupididit :

That's what I expect, but I'd like some more details. For example, I owned an 88 C1500, that was replaced with a 99 E3500. The van was worlds better than the pickup - it felt better built, had far better ergonomics, and got better mileage despite it being a 350 vs. the pickup's 305. Which is to be expected being 11 years newer. But how much difference would there be between a later GMT400 vs. an early GMT800 - would the differences be that noticeable?

Earlier I said in this thread that I go for "enough" power to tow and that often means a V6 is adequate.  The 350 TBI is not an engine that I would call adequate.  Its awful.  180-215 hp, 300 torques, and terrible MPG.  If I'm going to get 6mpg towing 10k, I at least want to be able to not cause 30 people to put on their flashers behind me because I can't get out of my own way.

Tiny swirl port heads, low compression, fuel nozzles that squirt liquid fuel instead of injectors that atomize it, poor valve seals that leak oil, low power, low torque, terrible MPG... Don't get me wrong, they're pretty reliable, but they don't excel at anything.  They don't make enough oomph and they drink fuel like an athlete drinks gatorade.

I would rather have a 4.3L V6 or Ford's 4.2L V6 instead of a 5.7L TBI.

Pete Gossett

One more point in favor of the 800 vs 400 discussion (and I had a pretty nice example of a 400 in my 99 Suburban 1500) which I replaced with an 04 Suburban 2500:  Brakes.  The more modern generation has vastly superior brakes.  My 99 has binders that I would classify as barely adequate, the 4 wheel discs on the 04 are friggin awesome (by comparison anyway).

The other is stiffness.  The old 99 was built on a platform that had been around since Bush senior which AFAIK was an update of a chassis that had been around since the early Reagan years.  It showed, the truck jiggled and wiggled, it shook over bumps and felt pretty unsettled at times (with new shocks and tires).  The 04 is stiff and pretty responsive, it's still a big girl but the weight feels more controlled and confident.  I probably didn't need to get a 2500 but the ride isn't bad at all IMO, I kinda prefer firm to squishy. 

In reply to KyAllroad (Jeremy) :

Thanks, that's good data to have!

Good point, Jeremy.  I was getting so ticked at truck manufacturers putting their beds so sky-high.  It makes towing a 5th wheel hard, I can't use my slide-in camper, and just general cargo loading is a pain.

So I compared Dad's 98 1-ton to his 08 1-ton.  Turns out they really have to be that high with the frame height.  We considered lowering his 08 so we could use it to tow his 5er, but we can't.  In order to keep enough suspension travel it really needs to be that high unless we C-notch the frame to give more axle clearance.

Old school frame:

Newer frame:

Yeah, the 800 is just so much better at everything than hte 400.  HAving owned and driven both there's really no comparison. That gap starts to narrow with the 800 and 900 though IMO. 

In reply to Bobcougarzillameister :

I totally agree. The only thing that makes me gravitate towards the GMT900 is the 6-speed trans.

I know its apples to oranges, but having towed with both a 2000 7.3 PSD F350 SRW truck and a 454-powered GMT400 K3500 that was 7 years older, the K3500 wins.  Independent front suspension, lower center of gravity, more stable-feeling all-around.  

Now, the 1991 Dodge W250 with the 5.9 Cummins...that thing was a hoss.  But with only 160 HP, it would occassionally run out of breath.  And the truck had all the refinement of a Russian troop transporter.  

I like that the GMT400 is not jacked up to high heaven- loading and getting in and out is easier.  

TBI and non-Vortec might be low tech, but they work.  And my TBI 454 has never gotten under 9 mpg, towing a 2 car hauler.  

You're right, they work, but that's all they do.  They don't excel at anything.  They're the worst choice in all of this as far as I'm concerned.  Given the myriad options in his price range, I can't recommend the one that just exists when he could get something that would be so much better.

To me, they just exist.  You can buy an LS truck or a 4.6L Ford and say you have a legitimate tow rig.  Buying a TBI is like saying "I wanted it to physically function with the least amount of ability I could get by with."  So much more out there that ISN'T a TBI that I can't recommend it.

In reply to curtis73 :

If you're complaining that a 215hp TBI gas engine can't pull a trailer up a hill at adequate speed but a 215hp diesel can, something is wrong.  HP makes speed on hills with a load, not torque. 

You just have to be willing to rev the nuts off the gasser when you actually need all the power.  So if peak HP is at 4500 rpm, you very well may need to be spinning north of 4000 up a long hill for 15 minutes straight.  But if you let it do that, it'll pull just fine.  The diesel's only advantage in that situation is that it can climb the hill at 2000 rpm and not make as much drama out of it. 

well I am getting this 84 ford 600 for a thousand bucks but looking at it today I find the 22.5 tires though New looking are REALLY Tall. Georgia truck so body isn't rusted  the steel plate bed has to go so I will look for a dually bed to put on. won't be a comfortable ride with the short wheelbase but will serve the need. and at least the cost of a house less.

rslifkin said:

In reply to curtis73 :

If you're complaining that a 215hp TBI gas engine can't pull a trailer up a hill at adequate speed but a 215hp diesel can, something is wrong.  HP makes speed on hills with a load, not torque.

That's somewhat wrong. Consider an easier to understand scenario: modern NA 1.6l 160hp vs early 6 litre V8 with 160hp. Which one is faster in an equally heavy chassis? The V8, by far. Why? Average power.

Average power in the lower performing engine is much closer to peak power, or equal to peak power, worst case. In a high performing engine, average power is about 3/4 of peak power, shift to shift. IE, your lower power engine effectively has 33% more power across the used range, if purely accelerating.

So yes, you need to rev the crap out of it, but worst, you need to *keep* revving the crap out of it, if 215hp is what you need, whereas the diesel likely has most of that half way down the rev range.

This is why I like my pre-Vortec 454.  It makes 385 ft-lb of torque.  But where does it make that torque?  At 1900 RPM.  My 1991 Cummins 5.9?  400 ft-lbs at 1600 RPM.   Both are 5 speed stick shift trucks.  So, the driving characteristics are very similar.  Except the 454 uses about 50% more fuel.  For my limited usage, that's fine.  The 7.3 PSD I had was somewhere in between the two in mpg at 15 empty, 11-12 towing.  It made way more power and toque than either and had both to spare for any kind of towing, but it was a real drama queen in the maintenance department.  

460 fords make great towing engines, too.  

In reply to FreeEMSFred :

That's correct.  I refer to it as "power under the curve".  It's why we can laugh at engines in the 70's and 80's that made such terrible peak power numbers but in reality weren't as terrible to drive as those numbers would suggest.  A TBI 350 with 190 peak HP makes power across a really broad range.  Wife's 91 4x4 'Burb powers up hills like nobody's business and knocks down 15 MPG all day long, with 190k on the odometer.  And sips maybe 1/2 a quart of oil in between 4,000 mile changes.   In my book, that's _not_ terrible.  In fact, yesterday, driving through Pennsylvania, we were climbing one of the large hills on US-15 in the 'Burb, loaded with the family and our gear coming home from the kids' grandparents' house, and we dusted off several other vehicles going up those hills.  

Average power affects acceleration, but it has no effect at all on ability to hold a steady speed climbing a hill, given a respectable set of gears to use.  If you're holding a steady 4500 RPM at a steady road speed while climbing a hill and the engine is putting out 200hp under those conditions, then it doesn't matter at all what the engine is capable of at 2000 RPM.  

rslifkin said:

Average power affects acceleration, but it has no effect at all on ability to hold a steady speed climbing a hill, given a respectable set of gears to use.  If you're holding a steady 4500 RPM at a steady road speed while climbing a hill and the engine is putting out 200hp under those conditions, then it doesn't matter at all what the engine is capable of at 2000 RPM.  

Assuming your gearing allows that.  Modern, peaky engines are "acceptable" only because they're mated with 6, 7, 8, or more speed transmissions to keep them in the powerband.  Again, this is why a malaise-era sub-200 HP engine works OK with a dead-simple 3 or 4 speed transmission, and tall gears out back.  

Example: My 240D Mercedes makes a peak of 68 HP.  There is a hill near me that, if I approach it in 3rd gear, which redlines at 60 mph, I can make it up, in third, at 50-55 mph.  However, if I approach the hill at, say, 40 mph in 3rd, the engine RPM drops, as does the speed.  I can downshift into 2nd, which redlines at 40 mph, but then the maximum speed I can maintain on the hill is 40 mph, for if I attempt to shift into 3rd at that point, the engine (and car) will slow down again below 40 mph.

I just know my loaded up 7.3 excursion with 7k lbs behind it climbed up the badland hills going to Palm Springs in 110 degree weather, was climbing at 55mph (cali tow mph limit) and just over 2k rpm. No issues at all and this is a steep winding uphill road where there are many drop offs for overheating trucks. Trans temps stayed down. I passed a few gassers towing boats and cars like it was nothing. And going down the other side of the hill my braking was effortless.There was a new 6.7 f250 with a huge 5th wheel travel trailer that cruised by me like I was standing still. 

You can tow most things with almost any full size SUV or Truck. But, I like to be able to do it with the least amount of effort and stress. Braking, cooling, ride quality, stability are all factors that matter when towing to me. 

FWIW if towing is the main purpose, nothing replaces diesel. They are just meant for lugging and hauling.

markwemple said:

FWIW if towing is the main purpose, nothing replaces diesel. They are just meant for lugging and hauling.

True, but if total mileage will be well under 10,000 annually(probably more like 6,000-8,000), and towing miles will be about 1/2 that, is a diesel worth the extra expense to purchase & repair? It doesn't seem like it.

Oh, and I called on an 04 Yukon last night with a recent rear-main seal replacement due to an oil leak, and now excessive crankcase pressure, for $1800. It sure sounds like the plugged cat I just battled on the Vette, but I don't think I'm lucky enough to make an $1800 gamble that's all this Yukon would need.

In reply to Pete Gossett :

No...sounds like a perfect match for your C4

yupididit said: You can tow most things with almost any full size SUV or Truck. But, I like to be able to do it with the least amount of effort and stress. Braking, cooling, ride quality, stability are all factors that matter when towing to me. 

Which is also why I chose the 8.1 liter (496cid) 2500 Suburban. Very little effort or stress to tow my 35 ft, 9500 lb travel trailer up steep hills and slow it going down the other side. And comfy, stable, and competent at all times. Also, no diesel noise and fumes in the campground when pulling in late or pulling out early.

Pulling the 27 footer was a breeze:

And the 35 footer is easy, too:

In reply to Chris_V :

Looks good and I love how the color scheme all works out lol.