Big 6 or V8 - The 1947 - Present Chevrolet & GMC Truck Message Board Network

factorystock · 10-07-2017, 01:31 PM

Time is 1967, before big block in pickups, what do you choose. Biggest six is 292, biggest V8 327. A magazine decided on doing a test on similar C 20''s with same trans, tires and axle ratio and throwing a camper on back. Results were interesting, V8 was a little quicker, but worse gas mileage. 6 performed better at lower rpms, with a little better gas mileage.

68Gold/white · 10-07-2017, 01:55 PM

Both engines are marginal cubic inch wise, for a pickup, my opinion. 327 would be smalles engine I'd every use. It just takes a goodly amount of torque to push a heavy pickup around. Needs to be 350 or larger. Yes, that's 67. I'm thinking now tough.
Yes less cubes will work....it's still a free country. I admire folks with 6 bangers, just like the olden days, cool!

weq92f · 10-07-2017, 05:38 PM

That's cool! Nowadays the Big Six has at least one turbo.

-klb

**special-K** · 10-07-2017, 06:47 PM

All brainwashing aside, both of those engines would still be more than adequate for today. Shoot, most new trucks out there don't haul more than a nickle by the time the payments are made. It's not like most are daily haulers like most old ones were, that did everything that was asked of them with ease and still can.

Killer Bee · 10-07-2017, 07:23 PM

interesting article, thanks for posting..

what if they had compared these, two years earlier?

**Stocker** · 10-07-2017, 07:59 PM

It's an understatement to note that trucks -- all vehicles, in fact -- were much more basic 50 years ago. And inflation has blown price comparisons out of the water.

But still.... less than $2600 for a new 6-cylinder truck and a hair over $2700 for a V8 model. Almost makes my head explode.

davepl · 10-07-2017, 09:06 PM

I think it's crazy I have a new GM that does 0-60 in 2.95 while our trucks took 24.5 seconds!

BTW, that $2700 in today's dollars (adjusted for CPI) would be just over $20,000, which you'd be hard pressed to buy a basic WT truck for, but it might be possible.

Alex V. · 10-07-2017, 09:46 PM

Cool comparison! Really neat to see how the two engines stacked up.

In The Ten Ring · 10-07-2017, 10:13 PM

Make mine a 292 with 3OTT and overdrive (only available on 1/2 ton I think).

292 with 4-speed in floor would be another pick. 3.73 rear end unless I lived where my truck ended up, then the 4.11 is needed because hills are curvy, steep, and common. No interstate here in 1972.

If my 250 ever goes out I hope to replace it with a 292.

I would have sprung for the 1 ton stepside also.

1972RedNeck · 10-07-2017, 10:41 PM

They should have thrown a 351E in the mix as well - I bet it would have beat both...

**kwmech** · 10-07-2017, 10:59 PM

292 with some added goodies, 4.11 gearing, turbo 400 with an overdrive or a 4l80e. I would love to get my hands on a complete 292.

In The Ten Ring · 10-08-2017, 02:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kwmech

292 with some added goodies, 4.11 gearing, turbo 400 with an overdrive or a 4l80e. I would love to get my hands on a complete 292.

One is for sale in the parts forum, saw it a couple hours ago. Not far from me if I had the space to store it.

**Bob B.** · 10-08-2017, 12:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1972RedNeck

They should have thrown a 351E in the mix as well - I bet it would have beat both...

I was going to say that! Wonder how a 305 V-6 would have compared, probably very similar to the 292 I would imagine.

**kwmech** · 10-08-2017, 01:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob B.

I was going to say that! Wonder how a 305 V-6 would have compared, probably very similar to the 292 I would imagine.

My first truck was a 69 GMC 3/4 ton with the 351 V6 and a 4 speed. Had 3 fuel tanks and you sure needed them all. I think the truck got about 7-8 mpg on a good day.

1972RedNeck · 10-09-2017, 11:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kwmech

My first truck was a 69 GMC 3/4 ton with the 351 V6 and a 4 speed. Had 3 fuel tanks and you sure needed them all. I think the truck got about 7-8 mpg on a good day.

You do realize that transmission and rear end gearing has more to do with fuel fuel mileage than engine selection? If you bought a truck with a 351, chances are, you bought it to haul heavy with 4.56 or 4.88 rear gears. Even if you had a 230 with those gears, it's going to suck fuel.

**kwmech** · 10-10-2017, 12:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1972RedNeck

You do realize that transmission and rear end gearing has more to do with fuel fuel mileage than engine selection? If you bought a truck with a 351, chances are, you bought it to haul heavy with 4.56 or 4.88 rear gears. Even if you had a 230 with those gears, it's going to suck fuel.

It had 4.10 gearing, I know this for sure, b'cuz we were towing a decent load and broke the pinion gear. This was back in the late 70s and early 80s

BCOWANWHEELS · 10-07-2017, 11:51 PM

292,s suck the gas

10-07-2017, 01:31 PM	#1
factorystock Registered User Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: west coast Posts: 3,380	Big 6 or V8 Time is 1967, before big block in pickups, what do you choose. Biggest six is 292, biggest V8 327. A magazine decided on doing a test on similar C 20''s with same trans, tires and axle ratio and throwing a camper on back. Results were interesting, V8 was a little quicker, but worse gas mileage. 6 performed better at lower rpms, with a little better gas mileage. Attached Images

10-07-2017, 01:55 PM	#2
68Gold/white Registered User Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Ark City, Kansas Posts: 3,387	Re: Big 6 or V8 Both engines are marginal cubic inch wise, for a pickup, my opinion. 327 would be smalles engine I'd every use. It just takes a goodly amount of torque to push a heavy pickup around. Needs to be 350 or larger. Yes, that's 67. I'm thinking now tough. Yes less cubes will work....it's still a free country. I admire folks with 6 bangers, just like the olden days, cool!

10-07-2017, 05:38 PM	#3
weq92f Registered User Join Date: Oct 2016 Location: Dallas Texas Posts: 3,157	Re: Big 6 or V8 That's cool! Nowadays the Big Six has at least one turbo. -klb __________________ 67 C10 fleet fuel injected '70 402, 700r4, 3.73 posi 07 335 sport turbo 6sp 94 Trans Am GT LT1 6sp posi -- sold after 22yrs 99 540 sport V8 6sp -- sold 73 240z L24 4sp -- given to friend 68 C10 step 350/350 3.73 open -- sold

10-07-2017, 06:47 PM	#4
special-K Special Order Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Mt Airy, MD Posts: 85,852	Re: Big 6 or V8 All brainwashing aside, both of those engines would still be more than adequate for today. Shoot, most new trucks out there don't haul more than a nickle by the time the payments are made. It's not like most are daily haulers like most old ones were, that did everything that was asked of them with ease and still can. __________________ "BUILDING A BETTER WAY TO SERVE THE USA"......67/72......"The New Breed" GMC '67 C1500 Wideside Super Custom SWB: 327/M22/3.42 posi.........."The '67" (project) GMC '72 K2500 Wideside Sierra Custom Camper: 350/TH350/4.10 Power-Lok..."The '72" (rolling) Tim "Don't call me a redneck. I'm a rough cut country gentleman" R.I.P. ~ East Side Low Life ~ El Jay ~ 72BLUZ ~ Fasteddie69 ~ Ron586 ~ 67ChevyRedneck ~ Grumpy Old Man ~

10-07-2017, 07:23 PM	#5
Killer Bee Registered User Join Date: Jan 2016 Location: Barber City, CA Posts: 4,795	Re: Big 6 or V8 interesting article, thanks for posting.. what if they had compared these, two years earlier?

10-07-2017, 07:59 PM	#6
Stocker 20' Daredevil (Ret) Join Date: May 2003 Location: Jefferson State Posts: 13,692	Re: Big 6 or V8 It's an understatement to note that trucks -- all vehicles, in fact -- were much more basic 50 years ago. And inflation has blown price comparisons out of the water. But still.... less than $2600 for a new 6-cylinder truck and a hair over $2700 for a V8 model. Almost makes my head explode. __________________ - Mike - 1972 K20 LWB 350/350/205 RIP El Jay

10-07-2017, 09:06 PM	#7
davepl Registered User Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Redmond, WA Posts: 6,332	Re: Big 6 or V8 I think it's crazy I have a new GM that does 0-60 in 2.95 while our trucks took 24.5 seconds! BTW, that $2700 in today's dollars (adjusted for CPI) would be just over $20,000, which you'd be hard pressed to buy a basic WT truck for, but it might be possible. __________________ 1970 GMC Sierra Grande Custom Camper - Built, not Bought 1969 Pontiac 2+2 427/390 4-speed Coupe 1969 Pontiac 2+2 427/390 4-speed Convertible

10-07-2017, 09:46 PM	#8
Alex V. Registered User Join Date: Mar 2013 Location: Campbellsville, KY Posts: 888	Re: Big 6 or V8 Cool comparison! Really neat to see how the two engines stacked up. __________________ Alex V. ------ 1967 C10 Suburban, 350/NP435, Green/Green, PS, PB, HD cooling, charging, shocks, and springs. 1985 GMC C3500 SRW, Sierra Classic, 454/TH400, white/blue.

10-07-2017, 10:13 PM	#9
In The Ten Ring Registered User Join Date: Jun 2013 Location: West Virginia Posts: 6,421	Re: Big 6 or V8 Make mine a 292 with 3OTT and overdrive (only available on 1/2 ton I think). 292 with 4-speed in floor would be another pick. 3.73 rear end unless I lived where my truck ended up, then the 4.11 is needed because hills are curvy, steep, and common. No interstate here in 1972. If my 250 ever goes out I hope to replace it with a 292. I would have sprung for the 1 ton stepside also.

10-07-2017, 10:59 PM	#11
kwmech Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Colfax-California Posts: 8,598	Re: Big 6 or V8 292 with some added goodies, 4.11 gearing, turbo 400 with an overdrive or a 4l80e. I would love to get my hands on a complete 292.

10-07-2017, 11:51 PM	#17
BCOWANWHEELS Registered User Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: KINGSPORT,TN. Posts: 3,035	Re: Big 6 or V8 292,s suck the gas __________________ I BELIEVE IN JOHN 3:16



Register or Log In To remove these advertisements.

Register or Log In To remove these advertisements.