The 1947 - Present Chevrolet & GMC Truck Message Board Network







Register or Log In To remove these advertisements.

Go Back   The 1947 - Present Chevrolet & GMC Truck Message Board Network > 47 - Current classic GM Trucks > The 1973 - 1987 Chevrolet & GMC Squarebody Pickups Message Board

Web 67-72chevytrucks.com


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-28-2015, 09:58 PM   #1
cochino12
It followed me home?
 
cochino12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Yup
Posts: 5,751
4.3 V6 too small for good mpg?

Just picked up a really clean '86 c10 w/4.3 for super cheap. Any idea what kind of mpg to expect? Seems like a pretty small motor with really poor HP/Torque numbers for a truck that heavy.

Thanks

Adam
__________________
Adam

That's why they call it a shortcut Kyle, if it was easy it would just be the way.

86 c-10 SWB
85 CCSB
90 GMC K30 Crew SRW
1985 C30 Dually
cochino12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2015, 10:06 PM   #2
manimal
Registered User
 
manimal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Southern Kalifornia
Posts: 3,066
Re: 4.3 V6 too small for good mpg?

Not sure about the '86, but my 92 TBI 4.3/5spd gets 25mpg.
__________________
------------------------------------------------------
-Lance
2000 Chevy C2500, 5.7, 4L80e
1999 Suburban K2500, 7.4, 4L80e
1980 Camaro..son's car...PROJECT
manimal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2015, 10:12 PM   #3
old Rusty C10
Robert Olson Transport
 
old Rusty C10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: recent transplant to NC USA
Posts: 20,299
Re: 4.3 V6 too small for good mpg?

I had one years back.. truck has no real guts and mileage wasn't any better than an 8 they used to say the power of a 6 with the mileage of an 8 I much prefer my 350
__________________
Bob



1951 International running on a squarebody chassis


"If a man's worth is judged by the people he associates himself with, then i am the richest man in the world knowing some of the fine people of this board"
http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/a...t.php?f=25&a=9 (you can review the site rules here!)


PM Me for your vehicle/parts hauling needs in the North East US or see my Facebook page Robert Olson Transport

Live each day to the fullest.. you never know when fate is going to pull the rug out from under you...
I hate cancer!!
old Rusty C10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2015, 10:22 PM   #4
cochino12
It followed me home?
 
cochino12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Yup
Posts: 5,751
Re: 4.3 V6 too small for good mpg?

Quote:
Originally Posted by manimal View Post
Not sure about the '86, but my 92 TBI 4.3/5spd gets 25mpg.
Damn that would be great!

Quote:
Originally Posted by old Rusty C10 View Post
I had one years back.. truck has no real guts and mileage wasn't any better than an 8 they used to say the power of a 6 with the mileage of an 8 I much prefer my 350
That doesnt inspire much confidence
__________________
Adam

That's why they call it a shortcut Kyle, if it was easy it would just be the way.

86 c-10 SWB
85 CCSB
90 GMC K30 Crew SRW
1985 C30 Dually
cochino12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2015, 10:23 PM   #5
Matt Man
Registered User
 
Matt Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Buhl, Idaho
Posts: 1,438
Re: 4.3 V6 too small for good mpg?

I had one in my 06 single cab, got about 17mpg. Wasn't much better than the 8 cylinder really.
__________________
86 c30 crew cab dually 454/400 4/6 drop SOLD 1-8-11
1981 chevy K10 short Bed Scottsdale SOLD 10-26-2020
67 GMC Stepside Straight six/3 on the tree "The Peach"
2020 Silverado Double Cab LT Z71 5.3 8 speed Daily Driver

K10 build http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=671934

The Peach build http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=733903



Matt Man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2015, 10:34 PM   #6
rich weyand
Registered User
 
rich weyand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Bloomington Indiana
Posts: 1,041
Re: 4.3 V6 too small for good mpg?

I had a 4.3 with overdrive and AWD and about 3.95:1 (3.73:1 on short tires) in a '95 Safari, and got 17-18 mpg. It was also really quick with that axle ratio and short tires. It was also about 800 pounds lighter than a K10. Anyway, got 160,000 miles on it and gave it away to a friend who was still running it last I knew.
__________________
Rich Weyand

1978 K10 RCSB DD.
rich weyand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2015, 06:54 AM   #7
Keith Seymore
Registered User
 
Keith Seymore's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Motor City
Posts: 9,210
Re: 4.3 V6 too small for good mpg?

My '87 TBI got about 20mpg - 22mpg with an overdrive manual trans and 3.73 gears.

I always thought it was plenty peppy for general use; I drove it yesterday after I hadn't been in it for a while and was still impressed.

I'd be willing to take on any generic untuned 305/350 V8's in a little drag race...

K
__________________
Chevrolet Flint Assembly
1979-1986
GM Full Size Truck Engineering
1986 - 2019
Intro from an Old Assembly Guy: http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=342926
My Pontiac story: http://forums.maxperformanceinc.com/...d.php?t=560524
Chevelle intro: http://www.superchevy.com/features/s...hevy-chevelle/
Keith Seymore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2015, 11:23 AM   #8
KrazyRay
Registered User
 
KrazyRay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Oroville, CA
Posts: 4,827
Re: 4.3 V6 too small for good mpg?

Tbi 4.3 good, carb 4.3 bad IMO.
KrazyRay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2015, 11:37 AM   #9
71swb4x4
Senior Member
 
71swb4x4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brookings, SD
Posts: 10,497
Re: 4.3 V6 too small for good mpg?

I like my 4.3's. Today I have 2 4.3's, a 4.8 and a 6.0 in 2005-2006 work vehicles. The 4.3's have been MUCH more reliable than the 4.8 and the 6.0. Granted I am just one experience, but it's the only experience I have to go on. Gas mileage is decent, reliability is phenomenal.
__________________
Some people are like slinkies, they aren't good for anything, but you can't help but smile when you see one tumble down the stairs.
71swb4x4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2015, 12:20 PM   #10
Burbnasty
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Michigan
Posts: 47
Re: 4.3 V6 too small for good mpg?

The 4.3 mid 90s work truck, was always the same mileage as the 350. Probably cuz it has to work harder to get up to speed i guess.
Burbnasty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2015, 12:57 PM   #11
Matt Man
Registered User
 
Matt Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Buhl, Idaho
Posts: 1,438
Re: 4.3 V6 too small for good mpg?

On a positive note, these engines are very reliable.
__________________
86 c30 crew cab dually 454/400 4/6 drop SOLD 1-8-11
1981 chevy K10 short Bed Scottsdale SOLD 10-26-2020
67 GMC Stepside Straight six/3 on the tree "The Peach"
2020 Silverado Double Cab LT Z71 5.3 8 speed Daily Driver

K10 build http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=671934

The Peach build http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=733903



Matt Man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2015, 03:45 PM   #12
Tom
driving is in my blood
 
Tom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Mesa AZ
Posts: 5,733
Re: 4.3 V6 too small for good mpg?

A correctly running 350 usually gets the same mileage as a 4.3. My 98 5.7 gets 22mpg freeway. They are so reliable because they are a genI 350 minus a couple cylinders. Good motors as far as v6's go and the new all aluminum 290ish HP version is what everyone always wanted the 4.3 to be power wise, really impressive.
__________________
-78 c10 short/step: 388cid, M20, 5/5 drop, lots more. Playtoy and first vehicle.
-98 c1500 x-cab: 5.7L, 17" rims, 5/6 drop, flowmaster, helper bags,NBS rear disk brakes.
-02 Suburban 4x4: leveled front
-CBR600F4i, CBR600RR, CBR1000RR, and standup skis
DISCLAIMER: I cant spell for the life of me.
Tom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2015, 02:24 AM   #13
slotard
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Alameda, CA
Posts: 877
Re: 4.3 V6 too small for good mpg?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom View Post
A correctly running 350 usually gets the same mileage as a 4.3. My 98 5.7 gets 22mpg freeway. They are so reliable because they are a genI 350 minus a couple cylinders. Good motors as far as v6's go and the new all aluminum 290ish HP version is what everyone always wanted the 4.3 to be power wise, really impressive.
I sure wish I got 22mpg freeway in my 350/350 C20... then again, 4.10 rear end makes that far more difficult.
__________________
1973 C20, 350/350
slotard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2015, 08:24 AM   #14
tucsonjwt
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 3,188
Re: 4.3 V6 too small for good mpg?

1/2 ton weighs a lot less than a 3/4 ton truck, so gas mileage will never be very good with a heavier truck. Add a 4:10 rear axle and you can forget good mpg, regardless of the engine. On the other hand, a 3/4 ton truck will haul/tow a lot more. As a daily driver a 3/4 ton is usually a bad choice.
tucsonjwt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2015, 02:03 PM   #15
slotard
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Alameda, CA
Posts: 877
Re: 4.3 V6 too small for good mpg?

Quote:
Originally Posted by tucsonjwt View Post
1/2 ton weighs a lot less than a 3/4 ton truck, so gas mileage will never be very good with a heavier truck. Add a 4:10 rear axle and you can forget good mpg, regardless of the engine. On the other hand, a 3/4 ton truck will haul/tow a lot more. As a daily driver a 3/4 ton is usually a bad choice.
I don't think there's as big of a weight difference as you're suggesting. I'd be surprised if it was 10% (for the same cab/bed/engine/tranny, and my single cab long bed 350/350 matches most 1/2 tons, other than the utility bed). The bed and the gearing are what kill mileage on mine.
__________________
1973 C20, 350/350
slotard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2015, 02:03 AM   #16
cochino12
It followed me home?
 
cochino12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Yup
Posts: 5,751
Re: 4.3 V6 too small for good mpg?

I think I've decided to yank this 4.3 in favor of a 350. The quadrajet on this 4.3 is a 4 bbl ? does anyone know what cfm it should be?
__________________
Adam

That's why they call it a shortcut Kyle, if it was easy it would just be the way.

86 c-10 SWB
85 CCSB
90 GMC K30 Crew SRW
1985 C30 Dually
cochino12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2015, 11:50 AM   #17
MikeB
Senior Member
 
MikeB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: North Texas
Posts: 3,544
Re: 4.3 V6 too small for good mpg?

I had a neighbor back in the 80s whose company changed from 5.0 engines to 4.3 in their company Impalas. I still remember him saying the 4.3 had a lot less power and got no better gas mileage.

But if you have a very nice truck with a 4.3, and you find yourself wanting more power, there are aftermarket performance parts available for it (from Edelbrock, for example). Many times an engine with mild aftermarket cam, intake manifold and carb, and more aggressive ignition timing will actually get better mileage than a stock engine. Of course that's assuming your truck doesn't have to pass a state emissions test.

And don't forget to go with dual exhaust, or at least a less restrictive single exhaust system (larger pipes).
__________________
Mike
1969 C10 LWB -- owned for 35 years. 350/TH350, 3.08 posi, 1st Gen Vintage Air, AAW wiring harness, 5-lug conversion, 1985 spindles and brakes.
1982 C10 SWB -- sold
1981 C10 Silverado LWB -- sold, but wish I still had it!
1969 C10 (not the current one) that I bought in the early 1980s. Paid $1200; sold for $1500 a few years later. Just a hint at the appreciation that was coming.
Retired as a factory automation products salesman.
Worked part-time over the years for an engine builder and a classic car repair shop.
Member here for 24 years! This is the very first car/truck Internet forum I joined. I still used a dial-up modem back then!
MikeB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2015, 03:18 PM   #18
joedoh
Senior Member
 
joedoh's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Doodah Kansas
Posts: 7,774
Re: 4.3 V6 too small for good mpg?

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeB View Post
I had a neighbor back in the 80s whose company changed from 5.0 engines to 4.3 in their company Impalas. I still remember him saying the 4.3 had a lot less power and got no better gas mileage.
the 4.3 impala was a V8 engine, a "baby LT1".

My vortec 4.3 v6 trucks get 20-23mpg combined. I had a 5.7 vortec suburban that got 19 highway and I loved that truck, but not for the power.
__________________
the mass of men live lives of quiet desperation


if there is a problem, I can have it.

new project WAYNE http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=844393
joedoh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2015, 04:44 PM   #19
csdineley
Registered User
 
csdineley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Morgantown, Wv
Posts: 294
Re: 4.3 V6 too small for good mpg?

cochino12: yes a "Quadrajet" is a 4bbl. And Quadrajet's only came in two sizes 750 and 800 cfm.

I don't know how much a half ton squarebody weighs. But my '87 3/4 ton reg cab long bed 350/sm465 weighs 4900-5000 lbs depending on how much gas I have.
__________________
87 V20, Vortec 350, Sm465, Np205, Dana 44, 14bff 4.10's
csdineley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2015, 05:17 PM   #20
tucsonjwt
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 3,188
Re: 4.3 V6 too small for good mpg?

My 83 C20 regular cab long bed weighs 5600 lbs. empty. What does a similar 1/2 ton weigh? Looks like about at least 1000 lbs. less for a 1/2 ton:

http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=430180
tucsonjwt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2015, 05:35 PM   #21
Firebirdjones
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Prescott, Arizona
Posts: 2,396
Re: 4.3 V6 too small for good mpg?

My 79 1 ton SRW single cab long bed 2 wheel drive with a 454/400 turbo scales exactly 5300 lbs. with one 20 gallon tank full. It's loaded with options as well.
With 3.73's I get just a shade over 14 mpg highway cruising, and a steady 12 mpg in town. It's actually very respectable for what it is, my wife drives it daily.
Firebirdjones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2015, 05:11 PM   #22
slotard
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Alameda, CA
Posts: 877
Re: 4.3 V6 too small for good mpg?

Quote:
Originally Posted by tucsonjwt View Post
My 83 C20 regular cab long bed weighs 5600 lbs. empty. What does a similar 1/2 ton weigh? Looks like about at least 1000 lbs. less for a 1/2 ton:

http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=430180
Odd, mine was around 5200 with a utility bed with a bunch of tools in it. Also a C20 regular cab long bed.
__________________
1973 C20, 350/350
slotard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2015, 10:14 PM   #23
cochino12
It followed me home?
 
cochino12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Yup
Posts: 5,751
Re: 4.3 V6 too small for good mpg?

Quote:
Originally Posted by csdineley View Post
cochino12: yes a "Quadrajet" is a 4bbl. And Quadrajet's only came in two sizes 750 and 800 cfm.

I don't know how much a half ton squarebody weighs. But my '87 3/4 ton reg cab long bed 350/sm465 weighs 4900-5000 lbs depending on how much gas I have.


I thought it was something like that but 750 sounds huge for that little motor. Thanks

Adam
__________________
Adam

That's why they call it a shortcut Kyle, if it was easy it would just be the way.

86 c-10 SWB
85 CCSB
90 GMC K30 Crew SRW
1985 C30 Dually
cochino12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2015, 11:15 PM   #24
83 Silverado
Registered User
 
83 Silverado's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Windsor, Ontario
Posts: 78
Re: 4.3 V6 too small for good mpg?

Its not running a Rochester Dualjet, it the two barrel built in the Quadrajet body with only the primary's and no holes for the secondary's?
83 Silverado is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2015, 10:39 PM   #25
barry1982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Waskatenau, Alberta
Posts: 259
Re: 4.3 V6 too small for good mpg?

My Son has a 90 1/2 ton with a 4.3 , TH400 auto and a 308 Diff. Fantastic combo.... peppy around town, and still makes great mileage on the highway.
Of coarse the young fella wanted to swap in a 350.... But for a young guy with a limited budget, you just can't beat this thing. Reliable as the day is long
barry1982 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:53 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright 1997-2022 67-72chevytrucks.com