they aren't the best at moving people, the short wheelbase doesn't do you any favors in terms of towing and they can't exactly fit much in the bed. So why do I think that they are just right?
they aren't the best at moving people, the short wheelbase doesn't do you any favors in terms of towing and they can't exactly fit much in the bed. So why do I think that they are just right?
Because turning off the traction control makes them rowdy?
The the current trucks, and to a slightly lesser extent the previous trucks (2007+) are very well proportioned is regular cab short box guide. I feel the same.
I can't stop thinking of a 99-06 short bed regular cab Chevy/GMC settup for stage rally. Similar to a Pro 2/4 truck. Basically a low slung mid travel pre runner with 33-35" tires and really cut fenders.
They're fun! And I agree that the proportions are spot on.
GM, IMHO, has had the looks dept sewed up since 1973 for reg cab short beds. The 88-96 is, quite possibly, the best proportioned aesthetically of all trucks ever built. Simple, elegant and room under the hood for all the horses you could ever need to reverse the rotation of the earth.
It doesn't help that this was outside this morning. Throw in a spray on liner, sport bar with some hella rounds (though I'll rock KC light covers), nerf bars, a long travel setup and some skidplates and I'm there.
Some fiberglass fenders, spring under the rear with some Deaver springs... Mmmmmmm good times. Maybe a transfer case with a viscious coupler. Rear hydraulic handbrake. And FUN!!
It's all about the proportions.
Because they are the last traditional "muscle"
V8, RWD, body-on-frame, relatively inexpensive.
That's one genre I've never completely understood. Can't haul much, can't carry more than one person, don't tow all that well, don't handle very well. If I want a two seater, gas guzzling vehicle with V8 power, I don't think a pick up would be my first choice...especially if it can't really haul much or tow much.
Case in point, the Ram SRT10. I think it's pretty damn cool looking, but that's about it. For the money those commanded, I'd get a lot of other things.
I like them because they are sexy.
Sexy is never practical.
I even ~shortened~ my longbox square because sexy.
In reply to Klayfish:
I agree with you on the SRT10, as it charged a premium. However Dodge offered a "rumblebee" package that was the hemi, short gear ratios, etc in a short bed, standard cab that outside of the rear end option didn't carry a premium price. Same goes for the V8 Silverados, other then the V8 option box, you're basically selecting the most cost effective options when spec'ing out the truck.
And Thanks Ross413, now I'm really wanting one with their mid-travel kit. Diffwizard has options are the rear end as insane as a 5.57
They're the perfect size, but utterly impractical if you need to have more than two people in the vehicle. I had two of these, an '89 C1500 RCSB with the 4.3/5spd and an '04 K1500 RCSB with the 5.7/4L60E and loved them both.
AClockworkGarage wrote: Because they are the last traditional "muscle" V8, RWD, body-on-frame, relatively inexpensive.
Yes, this. Didn't we have this discussion a few weeks ago?
Can't say I like the Silverado in that configuration, but I do have a bit of a soft spot for Lightnings... :)
Posted to the best of my ability from my stupid berking phone...
Sometimes I have delusions of pimping out my C1500. Dropped with roll pans, pre-runner, or CAM contender?
..or I just continue to let it sit and rot other than running monthly errands with it.
dj06482 wrote: They're the perfect size, but utterly impractical if you need to have more than two people in the vehicle. I had two of these, an '89 C1500 RCSB with the 4.3/5spd and an '04 K1500 RCSB with the 5.7/4L60E and loved them both.
That's not completely true. I have a crew cab, but often the whole family of six climbs in for things like a week long trip to the grand canyon and back. We do fine. The bigger a person you put in the middle the less comfortable it is, but that's true of back seats in pretty much all 2+2's as well.
mazdeuce wrote:dj06482 wrote: They're the perfect size, but utterly impractical if you need to have more than two people in the vehicle. I had two of these, an '89 C1500 RCSB with the 4.3/5spd and an '04 K1500 RCSB with the 5.7/4L60E and loved them both.That's not completely true. I have a crew cab, but often the whole family of six climbs in for things like a week long trip to the grand canyon and back. We do fine. The bigger a person you put in the middle the less comfortable it is, but that's true of back seats in pretty much all 2+2's as well.
Agreed. Our CC has handled 7 adults (yes, illegal) for 2 hours to drop off people at the airport.
Ugh, I've been looking at stuff like this a LOT this week as frustration with the Cherokee mounts. Would an extended cab, long bed, 4x4 be better, or at least more practical? Of course. Is it cooler? Hell no. It still tows, still hauls stuff, and I can count on one hand the number of times I've had more than one passenger in my car this past year. I think something like this would suit me just fine.
With better wheels of course.
Just because. I will argue all day long that this is the best looking body in the history of trucks, but having owned one, they don't have a bunch of room in the drivers compartment.
The interiors are rough (at least the GMT800's are), but the exterior gets it just right proportionally.
I never knew what the RCSB acronym stood for (Regular Cab Short Bed), but now I can't help but think about a sweet street truck build. I hop over to LS1Tech to check out people's crazy builds from time to time.
And the morning commute would turn into...
Let's see - only fits 2 comfortably, short wheel base, can't tow much, or haul much. Yup pretty well describes a Miata, so just a truck version, so it makes sense that people on this board would love them!
I'm going to say the 73-87 trucks are by the far the best looking. But that's the era I came from and they were everywhere when I was a young impressionable youth.
You'll need to log in to post.
