67-72 motors available 4x4 Chevys Trucks - Page 2 - The 1947 - Present Chevrolet & GMC Truck Message Board Network

1969k10stepside · 07-19-2007, 11:35 AM

No exceptions,none,no,no 4wds with a big block stock in 67-72.A big block 2wd could be converted by NAPCO and then you have a big block 4wd but there was still no stock ones.

**special-K** · 07-19-2007, 02:29 PM

He can build a small block to do the job.Or,see what he can do in the Hot Street Class.

Tech Inspector · 07-24-2007, 08:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CrashEd

Is this the guy.

I suspect all the bigblock ford guys are whining about the bigblock chevy smocking them on the track. LOL!!
Was there no special order i always thought if your willing to wait for it that they would build it as ordered.
Ed

Yep, that's The Man. Really good truck. I actually went through some old shop manuals I have that I had forgot about having and found the actual Chevrolet flyer for the year in question. No big blocks offered during the time frame in question. 250, 292, 307,350, and 400 was only engines available during this time. To answer the question Ford vs Chevy, actually it is a Chevy against a Chevy. One has more horses than the other. That causes problems everytime.

OLDCHEV4X4 · 07-24-2007, 08:48 AM

In 1972 the 400 was actually a 402, witch is a bored out 396, witch is a BB.
But still not available in the 4x4.

prg machine · 08-10-2007, 02:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by special-K

They started putting 400 SBCs in 4wds in`73.

The 400 was considered a mistake by GM and they discontinued it beacause of cooling problems

BurnoutNova · 08-12-2007, 10:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by prg machine

The 400 was considered a mistake by GM and they discontinued it beacause of cooling problems

wrong

prg machine · 08-13-2007, 09:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BurnoutNova

wrong

Wrong??? What are you basing that fact on. I can qoute what I said from technical manuals. If I am wrong , please state specificaly what I am wrong about. This is an educational forum, and we would all like the facts based on the statements so everyone can learn.
Thank you.

BurnoutNova · 08-13-2007, 09:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by prg machine

Wrong??? What are you basing that fact on. I can qoute what I said from technical manuals. If I am wrong , please state specificaly what I am wrong about. This is an educational forum, and we would all like the facts based on the statements so everyone can learn.
Thank you.

I can pick apart what you said a number of ways. For one, you didnt specify what GM 400 ci engine you were refering to. It could have been a Chevy, or a BOP. I also dont belive that GM ever said there was a probleom with thier original engine design in its original configuration. I do belive they had TSB's about using improper cylinder heads without steamholes, but this is my specualation, not a fact. I also belive if GM thought they had a probleom with thier 400 ci engine they wouldnt have produced it for 10 years. Finally, the biggest reason i claimed you were wrong is becase i have always been under the impression that GM discontinued the chevy 400 because of its inability to meet US EPA emission regulations.

prg machine · 08-14-2007, 09:58 AM

Okay , since you choose to "pick me apart" , while there are a few pieces of me left, I will say that I didn't intend to turn this into the old 400vs whatever topic.
Simply put I will rephrase my statement: GM discontiued the 400 SB. It was a poor design because it was unique to the small blocks in that it had a different block cooling design that has nothing to do with the heads. This design caused unreliability in the engine . It would heat up unevenly causing an out of round bore and scuffed cylinder walls leading to early high oil consumption.

I didn't start this. I am not out to "pick apart " anyone here, just state the facts and the history as it applys to the 4x4 trucks.

Thank you.

BurnoutNova · 08-14-2007, 10:14 AM

[QUOTE=prg machine;2309019] It was a poor design because it was unique to the small blocks in that it had a different block cooling design that has nothing to do with the heads. This design caused unreliability in the engine . [QUOTE]

Again, your overlooking certain facts. You claim the unique cooling design had nothing to do with the heads. I understand the 400 has a siamiesed bore, not allowing coolant to pass between the cylinders... But when used with the proper heads they cooled fine. About the early oil consumption, LOTS of engines from that era had this probleom, back then most engines just didnt last as long as they can now.

I still would like you to quote the technical manuals you have about the 400 being discontinued and being a mistake by GM

68K20 x Drill · 08-14-2007, 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BurnoutNova

...you didnt specify what GM 400 ci engine you were refering to. It could have been a Chevy, or a BOP

You mean I could have got my truck with a Pontiac motor

prg machine · 08-14-2007, 03:12 PM

I am now totaly in pieces! Nothing left to care to respond here.

Read " how to re-build your Small Block Chevy" by David Vizard
Go to the paragraph under the 400 SB then read the paragraph about reliability.
Call Mr. Lindvig at Lindvig machine in Phoenix Oregon and ask him about the 400s that they used to maintain for truck fleets at the lumber companys.
Then pick them to pieces if you choose.
I am done with this topic. No more to be said.
Thank you.

07-19-2007, 11:35 AM	#26
1969k10stepside Registered User Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: USA Posts: 21,019	Re: 67-72 motors available 4x4 Chevys Trucks No exceptions,none,no,no 4wds with a big block stock in 67-72.A big block 2wd could be converted by NAPCO and then you have a big block 4wd but there was still no stock ones. Last edited by 1969k10stepside; 07-19-2007 at 11:36 AM.

07-19-2007, 02:29 PM	#27
special-K Special Order Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Mt Airy, MD Posts: 85,851	Re: 67-72 motors available 4x4 Chevys Trucks He can build a small block to do the job.Or,see what he can do in the Hot Street Class. __________________ "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 ~

07-24-2007, 08:48 AM	#29
OLDCHEV4X4 Registered User Join Date: Apr 2000 Location: Chester County PA, USA Posts: 1,228	Re: 67-72 motors available 4x4 Chevys Trucks In 1972 the 400 was actually a 402, witch is a bored out 396, witch is a BB. But still not available in the 4x4. __________________ 72 k/10 short wideside 72 k/5 Blazer 72 K/5 Blazer - obstacle course racer 72 custom/10 8' bed 70 K/5 Blazer 67 C-30 GMC Flat bed 86 GMC K2500 Plow Truck 85 GMC K3500 84 M1008 85 M1008 77 G30 Motor Home 72 Sears 12hp Tractor Glenmoore, Pennsylvania

08-14-2007, 09:58 AM	#34
prg machine Registered User Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: oregon Posts: 1,069	Re: 67-72 motors available 4x4 Chevys Trucks Okay , since you choose to "pick me apart" , while there are a few pieces of me left, I will say that I didn't intend to turn this into the old 400vs whatever topic. Simply put I will rephrase my statement: GM discontiued the 400 SB. It was a poor design because it was unique to the small blocks in that it had a different block cooling design that has nothing to do with the heads. This design caused unreliability in the engine . It would heat up unevenly causing an out of round bore and scuffed cylinder walls leading to early high oil consumption. I didn't start this. I am not out to "pick apart " anyone here, just state the facts and the history as it applys to the 4x4 trucks. Thank you.

08-14-2007, 10:14 AM	#35
BurnoutNova Registered User Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: CA Posts: 2,057	Re: 67-72 motors available 4x4 Chevys Trucks [QUOTE=prg machine;2309019] It was a poor design because it was unique to the small blocks in that it had a different block cooling design that has nothing to do with the heads. This design caused unreliability in the engine . [QUOTE] Again, your overlooking certain facts. You claim the unique cooling design had nothing to do with the heads. I understand the 400 has a siamiesed bore, not allowing coolant to pass between the cylinders... But when used with the proper heads they cooled fine. About the early oil consumption, LOTS of engines from that era had this probleom, back then most engines just didnt last as long as they can now. I still would like you to quote the technical manuals you have about the 400 being discontinued and being a mistake by GM Last edited by BurnoutNova; 08-14-2007 at 11:02 AM.

08-14-2007, 03:12 PM	#37
prg machine Registered User Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: oregon Posts: 1,069	Re: 67-72 motors available 4x4 Chevys Trucks I am now totaly in pieces! Nothing left to care to respond here. Read " how to re-build your Small Block Chevy" by David Vizard Go to the paragraph under the 400 SB then read the paragraph about reliability. Call Mr. Lindvig at Lindvig machine in Phoenix Oregon and ask him about the 400s that they used to maintain for truck fleets at the lumber companys. Then pick them to pieces if you choose. I am done with this topic. No more to be said. Thank you.



Register or Log In To remove these advertisements.

Register or Log In To remove these advertisements.