Lady Liberty (by way of Emma Lazarus) said it best: “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses…” There’s no other explanation for the irrational affinity I feel for abandoned derelicts. The more forlorn its state, the more likely I am to cut across three lanes of traffic to get a closer look, well-being be damned; therefore, the threat of tetanus belongs to nature, not nurture. These three ’70s mediums once pulled the yoke as roofing trucks, and they’re advertised on Marketplace with a cryptic $4500 price tag. Each? For all three? There’s no way to tell without asking, and I won’t be the one to ask this time. But that didn’t keep me from going all in on my reconnaissance.
This is the ad, the heading of which reads “1976 GMC Truck.” Not one of them is a 1976 GMC truck, but that’s not important.
All 3 run and drive… Will need brake work just leaking lines. Ford has pto dump box. Super low miles under 30000 on all 3 one owner.
My intention is not to harshly judge advertising or intimate that the claim of running and driving covers a lot of ground. I love old, worn out vehicles, and these workhorses deserve some respect, in something under 800 words.
The most veteran of the trio is a 1972 Ford F600. The trucks were locked, but I crawled underneath for a quick look – the Ford definitely has an FE/FT engine. How do I know this?
I prepared for a “false buy.” Since I can’t have everything (although I try), I sometimes mentally prepare for a hypothetical purchase by ordering brochures for these same hypothetical purchases. That may sound insane – think of me what you will – but now I know that the Ford most likely has a 330 or a 361 V8. As stated in the ad, it also has a PTO unit, which could come in handy if you do the sort of things that I’ve never had to do in 46 years. I think I like the looks of the Ford best, but it’s also the roughest, at least when the box is taken into account, so I’d pass on this one.
I was hoping for a weird GMC V6 under the hood of the next truck, a 1974 GMC 6000, but the brochure claims that only Chevy engines were available in 1974. This one has a small-block under the hood, so it’s basically a Chevy with different trim. To digress, there were thousands of variations of all three of these trucks; an operator truly could tailor their vehicle to their needs. The variety of wheelbases, transmissions, and axles is staggering.
Before I continue, it behooves me to say that these trucks have been off the road for quite some time. Not only will the brakes need work, but they will need all new tires, which always adds considerable expense to your new-to-you old truck. These belong to the Ford.
The GMC has some typical Michigan rust on the exterior, but the bed is in better condition than the Ford’s. The small-block is an easier proposition to find parts for than any Ford FE, so it has that working in its favor. Finally, being a “squarebody” gives it a little extra cachet, since that generation of truck is currently wildly popular. General Motors used this body style forever for a reason.
As some folks say, however, I’ve saved the best for last. Although I didn’t crawl underneath this 1976 Chevy C60 (bonus points for its bicentennial credentials), I imagine that it has the same 350 as the GMC, although a 366 big-block was also available. The Chevy has less rust than the others, and I’ve already prepared myself for finding one.
Greenlight Collectibles recently released this “patinaed” 1980 Chevy grain truck, and I bought it about a year ago because of my love for all things with wheels and an engine. Little did I know that I could someday have the real thing.
But not right now: I have no need for a roofing truck, as much as I’d like one. These three have been sitting here for a month or so, and I hope they find a buyer that doesn’t immediately head for the scrap yard. As a man who has tried selling things that few need or want (Anyone want a set of 13″ small bolt pattern Chrysler wheels? 10 bucks, OBO!), I know how fine a line one walks to find a “good home” for something you own. As a guy who makes impulse purchases, however, I also know how quickly a purchase can cease to make sense. Maybe my doppelganger will show up and sweep these things off their feet. Until then, a little shopping never hurt anyone.
I drove quite a few of these medium trucks in the early ’70s. Lots of Fords with the 330; a hard working truck engine. One was a Chevy with the little 283 V8; that really wanted (and needed) to rev; not a lot of low-end torque. The 292 six would have been a better choice.
A bit hard to imagine who’s going to give these a loving home. But who knows?
I’m afraid that Bill is correct in his comment below that they’ll be scrapped. I only hope that some of the parts could be of use to someone.
Worked on a ton of these, the GM’s in particular. The 366 was the better choice over the small block. The small bocks were really tortured in the medium duties. The drivers generally didn’t take maintenance seriously. Too long between oil changes, keep driving it even if it’s got a miss. Pinging so badly from lugging. Engine governors were easily disconnected. The “ram horn” exhaust manifolds would fry the sparkplug wires and bake the rocker cover gaskets into rock hard cracked crud. Give me a 366 or the 427.
Maybe one of these days, I’ll get over and crawl around the Chevy to see if it has a 366, but I love your first-person experiences with a wide variety of vehicles.
These big block medium-duty motors were able to withstand glowing hot manifold (headers sometimes) operation day in and day out, grossly overloaded. My old man hauled a 38 foot trailer with 20 cords of wood with one. Motor job every two or three years. No way a small block would have withstood this.
I’m having a hard time understanding the bed of the Ford. It doesn’t look like the frame bent? Why is the side at an angle? Did it fall down? If it did, why not raise it back up, instead of putting up the strange extension at the top?
I don’t know, maybe these would be good for some farmer or rancher that has a need once or twice a year for a couple of weeks.
I always thought these GM trucks looked a lot better than their successors, the TopKick/Kodiaks, with the weird headlights.
I was too busy getting an overall view on the trucks to look too closely at the Ford’s bed, but something is definitely rotten or has come unbolted in that bed…it’s not the frame of the truck.
A YouTube provider named Silas has a scrapyard in Kansas. His YouTube name is “Adventures made from scratch”. Silas specializes in older trucks of all types. He buys, sells [and dismantles] many similar trucks, quite a few are rust free western vehicles, and the demand for rust free cabs is high.
Problem is, trucks with this level of corrosion are a difficult sell even if it has the PTO and dump bed. Right now scrap values are way up and a truck of this weight is worth more in total scrap value than they typically sell for as a running and driving vehicle. These trucks typically tip the scales at around 9,000 to 11,000 pounds, with flatbeds nearer the lower weight.
$4,500 for all 3 trucks is absolute top Dollar assuming they all run and drive with minimal work [like installing batteries and bleeding the brakes], and are genuine 30,000 mile vehicles These trucks likely have air or air over hydraulic brakes, and a brake overhaul can quickly get pretty expensive! I would hazard a guess that current scrap value is approaching $1k each, as they sit, and scrap buyers will probably not pay more than $1,500 for all 3.
I haven’t kept an eye on scrap values, but it’s too bad that they’re up. That’s usually when the old stuff disappears. Of course, one could argue that nobody wanted it while it was still around, but it’s still unfortunate.
To my (very) untrained eye, these look like work trucks in every sense of the term, and mean business, quite literally.
So, with no other knowledge than what’s in the article and comments, I can’t feature anyone spending the money and making the effort to keep these old horses going for their intended purpose. I’m going to guess the glue factory will be their next (and final) stop.
More likely they have vacuum boosted brakes. There is a master cylinder on the usual firewall location and it operates the hydrovac brake booster that is usually located on the outside of the left frame rail under the cab if it has a step under the cab like the Chevy in the picture, if it has a step tank under the left side of the cab the booster would be on the left rail behind the fuel tank.
You are also correct about the hydraulic brakes being expensive to repair. I was of the opinion that in the long run air brakes were probably cheaper.
I think hydraulic brakes were probably the most hated work in the shop. I’d rather rebush a Hendrickson suspension then work on hyd brakes on medium and heavy duty trucks.
I was thinking that maybe someone enterprising could get himself into the heavy hauling business. But, since whoever owns them has given up on them I will bet that there are serious problems that are way too expensive to fix. One can only inagine what 50 years of abuse has done to them.
I can only imagine that time has not been kind; having resurrected much better cars that have been sitting, I know the work it takes. There’s no magic wand with this stuff.
I like the 70s Ford mediums with the 330 FT but I can usually find nicer ones as farm trucks in Oregon. Sun burnt from the high desert but minimal rust. If I had the land I’d rock an F600, C60 or Loadstar with a flatbed dump. Too bad they don’t have scissor lift bodies. according to the Salvage Workshop video where he scored three 1980s vintage trucks those have good resale value.
I’d like to take a carspotting trip to Oregon someday. It would be nice to see some nice dry vehicles for a change.
Around here at least the roofing business has transitioned to A) one-source supplier delivery usually with a conveyor belt and/or hoist to deliver materials straight to the rooftop and B) for the haulaway the roofer’s F350 or Ram 3500 or whatever attached to a gooseneck BigTex or equivalent trailer that sits in the driveway next to the roof during demo day, gets filled, and then hauled away in the evening. As a result trucks like these are no longer needed/used as they are not efficient enough, too single-purpose, and require lots of manual labor to load/unload.
These to me look to be at the end of their line. Not modern enough to be useful enough or provide a big enough tax break to a business, and not old enough to cash in on the “vintage” fad currently strong amongst all classes of trucks.
Yep, and they’re too big to be hobby trucks for most people.
I spent a lot of time and miles working on and driving the ’73-’89 G.M. medium duty trucks, to this day they are still among my favorites. They handled well and had a good turning radius. The gasoline V-6 was still available in them in ’74, even though it was not listed in some of the sales literature. Agree the 366 was preferable over the 350 or 292. With the right transmission and gearing the 427 was surprisingly strong for a gas engine.
You know, I thought that the V6 hung on until ’74, but when I got the brochure in the mail, I figured I was mistaken. Thanks for the verification, Bob.
Love all three. Will always associate these medium Fords with UHaul.
What a cool old truck! I wonder if you could turn that into a car hauler. 🙂
Reminds me of the truck in the movie Funny Farm, when they tried to drive over the rickety old bridge.
I hate seeing old trucks at (or a little past) the end of their lives. The problem is that you about have to make a business case for one, unless you have a farm and room for old hobby trucks. And the business case looks tough to make on any of these. If I could figure out a use for it, that Ford speaks to me.
I never liked ’70s Ford trucks until about five years ago. Now, I think they look great. Most of the time, my tastes stay roughly the same, but this is one of those instances where a little more time with an idea made a difference. 🙂
My F600 bucket truck blew its oil filter off while climbing a steep grade. I floored it till the engine locked up to get out of the road. It was back in service the next day and seemed no worse for the experience. The FE engines were no match for a small block Chevy in a drag race but they certainly were tough.
The only FE experience I have is with my T-Bird’s 390, but everything I’ve heard about them says they’re tough as nails.
My 410 has 153,000 miles on it and then one f the FE log exhaust manifolds cracked. Cracked in half no less. So the head came off in order to deal with the exhaust bolts. I better rebuild this head so the other head came off. I guess I’ll rebuild the rocker shafts now. Let’s get the replacement logs planed smooth. Oh, while I am at it maybe I should remove the block and rebuild it also before putting it back together. I check the heads today at the shop before block goes in the end of June. Should probably do a story on tear down and rebuild of an FE.
Yep, “while I’m at it” is a hard nut to crack. Did you send the rockers out to be rebushed? Are you going to do the final assembly?
No, on the rockers since I have NOS stands, springs, and rockers to go on the shafts. Lucky eBay finds a couple of years ago. As for final assembly the answer is most likely yes as the shop is backed up and owner is having a hard time finding qualified people to hire. He also told me today he is now having a hard time finding parts like pistons and bearings especially cam bearings.
By the way have you ever seen a bare 235 Chevy six block or 1938 Pontiac straight eight block. I just did and they are one big massive pieces of iron I’ll tell you that. Way more impressive that a FE or big block Chevy V8.
My heads ready next week with new valve springs decided on since there maybe a cam change so just being prepared in case or not. Naturally new guides and hardened exhaust seats.
I read on one of the forums that FE cam bearings are impossible to get right now. I hope you can grab a set so you’re not in limbo for too long.
Oh, I doubt that muchly. Maybe you can’t go in a parts store and get ’em; maybe RockAuto won’t have ’em, but I bet I could have multiple sets of ’em on the way with five or ten minutes’ worth of phone calls, probably without getting through this quickie offhand first list: Old Car Parts Northwest; Egge Machine; Sinskies Motor Mart, and Kanter Auto.
https://www.northernautoparts.com/part/db-f33
It looks like Northern Auto Parts has them on their website; who knows if they’re currently in stock.
Well he said cam bearings in the general sense from his usual suppliers for the engines he is working on. He doesn’t have my block and I already have the required NORS main and rod bearings and can get NORS cam bearings (Made in USA) so I am good. Others not so much.
They’re all too old and in bad condition, no one could use them. And I love old trucks. Afraid they’ll go to the junk yard
I used to haul silage in trucks like these years ago. Lots of these medium duty trucks grew old and obsolete long before they wore out. The farms that used to run these as silage trucks in my area have all switched over to diesel 10 wheelers long ago. They can haul twice as much for the same fuel cost. I have nightmares about a GMC just like that one pictured above that I used to drive. It had power steering, but it took 8 turns, yes eight turns to steer from lock to lock. Prisoners don’t have to suffer such misery. Nowadays most can’t drive the manual transmission that these have, or the two speed rear ends, nor would they want to. These are crusher bound.
One of the many jobs I had in my younger days was as a labourer for an apiarist (honey bees) this involved driving all over the state of Victoria (Aus) in a Ford just like the one here, it had some sort of 6 cylinder diesel engine and it was incredibly slow, loaded with honey or empty hives, it made no difference.
The thing I remember is the good build quality of the cab and the beautiful shiny red paint and white grille.
The other truck the company had was a British D series Ford, which rattled and wasn’t near as comfortable as it’s US cousin.
The Americans really put some style in their work vehicles.
If the motors are still good that’s about all they’re good for is a good used motor. Other than that, crush ’em. They’re worth whatever scrap value they have. As far as being available with that six cylinder GM 292? the biggest pile ever built! I would have rather have had the old 305 V6.it was a gas hog , but it was a workhorse. My experience with that235,250 and 292 motors,they ran hot and didn’t oil the top end sufficiently.30,000 on a 283 in a truck that size? it was always working under a load,is equal to about 100,000 on a passenger car 283. which means wore out! Cylinder 8,it’s got to be pumping oil by now. You going to try to do a brake job on a truck like that,you’re going to have three times the value of that truck by the time you’re done.
Neither of the GMs here would have a 283; the only small blocks available were 350s. Still, everything you said applies; not to mention, 30,000 miles doesn’t include all the idling these trucks were probably subjected to.
The school district that I attended back in the 1970’s into early 80’s bought GMC school buses exclusively from the early 1960’s into the early 70’s until switching over to Internationals.
The 60’s GMC’s had the 305 V6’s with 5 speed manual.
They also purchased GMC’s from 1970 through 1973.
Those had a larger 351 V6 with 5 speed but the final two buses of the batch had the V6 with Allison 4 speed automatics.
The last of that group were retired by 1983 and most of the fleet by then was comprised of International S series with the 345 V8 and Allison Automatics.
By the time I graduated, they had acquired a group of GMC’s with the 8.2 liter diesels and automatics.
I was lucky enough to ride in an old-at-the-time ’74 International that was replaced with a Chevy medium about halfway through my third-grade year. Both were automatics; I believe the International had an Allison because it said so on the gear selector. It certainly was a diesel because I remember the sounds and smells of it idling.
I believe that the Detroit 2 stroke diesel 6V53 was available on International Loadstar trucks and busses in the 1970’s so that is probably the diesel that was in the bus that you rode.
International brought out a larger line of diesels for their truck and bus platforms in the early 1980’s.
Oh man, Dave…now I’m trying to remember standing outside the school almost 40 years ago. I might be making up memories, now that I think about it. I know the Chevy was a diesel, but the International might not have been. The number of the International was “74-6,” but I might be remembering the sound of the Chevy. Drat – I wish I could rewind the tape on this one. A Detroit would have been cool.
Agreed with everyone else that they are going to end up being scrapped. At best, they will have the motors pulled for something else.
Medium duty trucks are a blight, especially old ones with Split rims and Hydraulic brakes that parts are no longer available for.
If the Ford has an FT engine, even that isn’t worth much more than scrap. They are different enough from the FEs used in cars and pickup trucks of that era that they are of little use to most people. I naively bought one a few years back, ended up scrapping most of it.