1989-91 R/V3500 Series

[ClassicTVMan1981X]

This forum can also be applicable to the 1989-91 "R" and "V" 3500 series trucks (crew cabs and chassis-cabs), too (these three years assumed such designations to distance themselves from the then-new C/Ks of the period)?

The 1988-98 forum would be used to talk about the R3500 chassis-cab's 1992 successor, the 3500HD.

While we're discussing about them both, what would you rather get: a 1989-91 R3500 chassis-cab, or the 1992-98 3500HD chassis-cab?

~Ben

[Tx Firefighter]

I have an 88 cab chassis 3500 truck. I'd trade it in a second for a 3500hd.

I'd like to have the solid front axle and the 19.5 wheels over my current independent suspension and 16 inch wheels.
Posted via Mobile Device

[meatwagon83]

id rather have the r/v 3500, but this decision is based purely on looks

[Keith Seymore]

Originally Posted by meatwagon83

id rather have the r/v 3500, but this decision is based purely on looks

Funny you should say that, because when I first saw the GMT400 I didn't like the looks of it so I hurried and bought my '87 (which I still have today).

Similarly, when I first saw the '81 pickup I didn't like it so I hurried and bought an '80.

My dad always said "...if you had been around back then you would have seen the '55 Chevy, not liked it and hurried to buy a '54" (lol).

K

[Keith Seymore]

Originally Posted by ClassicTVMan1981X

This forum can also be applicable to the 1989-91 "R" and "V" 3500 series trucks (crew cabs and chassis-cabs), too (these three years assumed such designations to distance themselves from the then-new C/Ks of the period)?

Yes.

My first day in engineering was the day the groups split into the carryover C/K/R/V vs the new GMT400 truck.

I was assigned to the carryover C/K/R/V.

K

[ClassicTVMan1981X]

I'm wondering: which engine did you like for the R3500 / 3500HD chassis-cab? Three were available: the 350 (5.7L) or 454 (7.4L) gas, and the 6.2L diesel.

~Ben

[meatwagon83]

454! duh!!

[Tx Firefighter]

I'd take a 350 of the choices. With deep gears they pull mostly as good as a big block and give better mileage. I've had four trucks so far with stock 454s in them and they a pretty gutless.
Posted via Mobile Device

[Keith Seymore]

6.2L! Duh!

[GM72K10]

Originally Posted by Keith Seymore

6.2L! Duh!

Absolutely

[meatwagon83]

Originally Posted by Keith Seymore

6.2L! Duh!

good god why?
6.2 hp-143@3600 rpm, the redline might i add!
257 lb-ft @2000 rpm

7.4 230hp@3600 rpm
385 lb-ft@1600rpm
besides gas mileage why would you want the diesel? wanna talk about gutless!!? and if you bought a one ton truck for mileage you bought it for the wrong reason!

[Keith Seymore]

Originally Posted by meatwagon83

good god why?
6.2 hp-143@3600 rpm, the redline might i add!
257 lb-ft @2000 rpm

7.4 230hp@3600 rpm
385 lb-ft@1600rpm
besides gas mileage why would you want the diesel? wanna talk about gutless!!? and if you bought a one ton truck for mileage you bought it for the wrong reason!

...Because it will run on french fry grease...

I'm a huge fan of diesels because of the opportunity to run alternate/bio fuels.

Plus - I was being a little bit silly and playing off the brevity of your original response -

K

[V30 mongo]

My little ditty about "work trucks" has made points about Ford and Dodge as being built for heavy use. This is a forum on Chevy/Gmc trucks. True, the newer model trucks will carry more and pull larger trailers than there older counterparts, but that is all they will do. Wrecker trucks, dump tucks, salt spreaders, etc. all require one thing to operate at capacity properly, a power take off. This device, attached to transmission or transfer case must be able to supply at least 25 horse power to operate attached equipment. All newer trucks do not have PTO capabilities on ther 4x4 transfer cases and only some automatic transmissions will accept a PTO unit and then only a special "hot shift" type that is only capable to run a hydraulic pump that will supply only about 10 GPH. They will not take the mechanical shift type PTO units and reversable PTO's are impossible. This will run a small dump body, but to use it for a wrecker or salt spreader, it will not operate it at any speed to be usefull. Also, the rear frames on most of the newer trucks is nice and flat and this is good for the mounting of vocational bodies, but the location of fuel tanks and exhaust systems make it a nightmare to fit PTO drive shafts and there driven equipment. There is a lot more to just how much a truck will carry or pull to make it a true "work truck".

[meatwagon83]

Originally Posted by Keith Seymore

I was being a little bit silly and playing off the brevity of your original response -

K

yeah i caught that! ive always considered the 6.2 a slug and have seen quite a few pulled in favor of a 454

[Desert1957]

Originally Posted by Keith Seymore

...Because it will run on french fry grease...

I'm a huge fan of diesels because of the opportunity to run alternate/bio fuels. K

I make a living on fixing Diesel engines that run on 20% Bio, ONLY older mechanical injected Diesel engine can pass it through their old nasty injectors. NEW electronic engines have much more sensitive injectors that cannot pass any trash at all.

Keith PM me for more info on this topic , If you want.

Desert

[ClassicTVMan1981X]

I wonder if you have any pictures of these to show?

Thank you,



Ben

[83GMCK2500]

Originally Posted by ClassicTVMan1981X

This forum can also be applicable to the 1989-91 "R" and "V" 3500 series trucks (crew cabs and chassis-cabs), too (these three years assumed such designations to distance themselves from the then-new C/Ks of the period)?

The 1988-98 forum would be used to talk about the R3500 chassis-cab's 1992 successor, the 3500HD.

While we're discussing about them both, what would you rather get: a 1989-91 R3500 chassis-cab, or the 1992-98 3500HD chassis-cab?

~Ben

You know 1987 was the first year for the R- & V- designations, right? Also, what is typically referred to as the 88-98 bodystyle is known as the GMT-400 platform and it ran from 1988-2002. The 3500HD chassis-cab that you mentioned was built through 2002.

[ClassicTVMan1981X]

Originally Posted by 83GMCK2500

You know 1987 was the first year for the R- & V- designations, right? Also, what is typically referred to as the 88-98 bodystyle is known as the GMT-400 platform and it ran from 1988-2002. The 3500HD chassis-cab that you mentioned was built through 2002.

Of course, in mid-1987 the C30 became the R30 and the K30 was the V30, which ran through 1988. The 1987-91 GMC equivalents were always known as R/V3500.

~Ben

[GM72K10]

Originally Posted by ClassicTVMan1981X

Of course, in mid-1987 the C30 became the R30 and the K30 was the V30, which ran through 1988. The 1987-91 GMC equivalents were always known as R/V3500.

~Ben

1987 models were ALL R and V series, not Mid 87. Had an 87 R30. 86 was the last model year for C/K designation for square bodies. Correct me if I'm wrong.

[Keith Seymore]

Originally Posted by GM72K10

1987 models were ALL R and V series, not Mid 87. Had an 87 R30. 86 was the last model year for C/K designation for square bodies. Correct me if I'm wrong.

You are correct.

K

[V30 mongo]

There is a need for a "real" one ton made in the USA today. Comfort ,styling, high speed,CD/nav/wizz bang, etc. are all nice, but there is the need for the small dump truck, wrecker, snow plow/salt spreader in the US today as always. The simple made, heavy duty one ton type truck is not available any more except by Hino and such. Some of us need a good work truck that is really made for "work" that is smaller than a Mack.

[Dooley]

Originally Posted by Keith Seymore

You are correct.

K

No C/K 1987 model year trucks were built.

[special-K]

The '92 C3500HD is not the successor to the '91 R3500. The 3500HD was a whole new animal and is actually more than a one ton,even though it's called a 3500. These are more like the predecessors to the C4500s built with Van cut-down cabs. They are in no way apples to apples. The last R/V regular cab pickup was the '88 3500 dual rear. The last R/V regular cab was the '89 cab & chassis. The last R/V truck was the 90/91 2500/3500 crewcab. The '92 C3500HDs weren't offered with the 6.2. They were 6.5s by then and were also also offered w/6.5TD late-92. That would be my choice.

[83GMCK2500]

special-K, there was an overlap with the 6.2L/6.5L for a couple years, the 6.2L was available in 1992 & 1993.

[Mr. 250r]

Couldn't force me to own a 88/92 body style lol i think its one of their worst designs, this is on looks alone because i like ifs =-o