PDA

View Full Version : Question about wood hauler



Ron Jones near Indy
10-26-2004, 8:52 PM
Other than the obvious, what is the difference between a Chevy and a GMC pickup? Is the difference mainly cosmetic or is it mechanical? :confused:

John Miliunas
10-26-2004, 10:05 PM
Ron, I'm by no means a pro on this and I don't even know if it's still true. However, there was a time when it was said that the GMC units came off of "real" truck assembly lines and were just this side of being a bit more heavy duty than their Chevy cousins. Can't swear to the reliability of that info and certainly don't know present day stats. Back "in the day", I had a couple friends who had both at some point in time and did indeed claim that their GMC's were a better unit. :cool:

Kent Cori
10-26-2004, 10:09 PM
Ron,

I really like my 2002 Sierra. It has been a great truck for hauling wood and towing a horse trailer. If I were in the market again, I'd certainly have another GMC at the top of my list.

Ray Thompson
10-27-2004, 12:11 AM
I don't want to burst the GM bubble but they go down the same assembly line. They share most components but have a few differences that the consumer has to place a value on. If I were a cynical person I might take the attitude that the differences are a marketing ploy, but, I'm not,, I'm not,,,,,, wellllll.

Ray

Gary Max
10-27-2004, 4:29 AM
The biggest difference I know of

They ain't built by FORD.

Just my thoughts---smile

Tony Falotico
10-27-2004, 6:28 AM
When I replaced the engine in my '83 GMC a couple years ago, I used a motor from a Chevy (van). Fit like a glove. When I go to the recycle center (junkyard) for parts, I get 'em from GMC's or Chevy's -- exact same part. Go to a parts house or dealership parts dept, be it GMC or Chevy, they look at the exact same diagrams, exact same part numbers. Like John, I've heard they are 'built differently', that the suspension in GMC's are built better (stronger) --- but you would have a hard time convincing me of that, especially in today's cut cost - profit oriented business culture.

Chris Padilla
10-27-2004, 1:54 PM
I've always thought that GMCs were a tad bit higher-end than Chevrolet. In other words, they would get power windows where it wasn't an option for Chevy. I don't think this is true any more today and frankly, I would think they should just make one line and could probably save money by elimnating all the GMC nameplates and stuff.

Donnie Raines
10-27-2004, 2:27 PM
Like Ford and Mercury(and Mazda to some extent)...Acura and Honda...Infinity and Nissan...Volkswagen and Audi....Lexus and Toyota(and Scion)....

it just goes on an on......all marketing to some extent. Now, I am not suggesting that a Toyota Corolla is the same as a Lexus LS430. But the the compaines do share ideas and some of the lines are almost exact. Take the VW Passat and the Audi A6...same chasis, motor and even many interior parts. Yet, the VW is priced 10K less..........?....

I think either brand you go with will be fine, just a matter of fitting it into the budget.

Steve Clardy
10-27-2004, 2:46 PM
Don't know about present day look-a-likes on GMC and Chevy now, but during the late 60's and early seventies, they were basically the same frame and body.
Some of the GMC had a torsion bar front end, chevy did not.
GMC had a complete different line of engines, nothing close to Chevy.
GMC had one of the first V-6 engines, a big massive heavy thing.

Grills were different, trim was different, dash was different.
Back then, a GMC wasn't as pretty as a chevrolet.
GMC was favored more as a work truck, due to the heavier engines and not having the fancy accessory packages that were offered on Chevys.

I bought a new 1971 chevrolet cheyenne. I had looked over the same year GMC, and didn't like the looks. Chevrolet was better looking to me.
GMC and Chevy both had small block engines by then, same identical engine if you got the same cubic inch small block. 302 or 350.
I ordered a 1971 chevy with a 402 big block. All it was was a slightly converted 396 engine. I don't remember GMC offering that version of engine.
And I got converted to a Ford nut in 1973. I was a kid then, couldn't keep transmissions and rearends in Chevys, but a Ford wouls stay with me.
My Dad and Uncle used to always tell me, if you want to race, drive a chevy. If you want to get to work, drive a Ford. Lol
Steve

Tony Falotico
10-27-2004, 10:18 PM
by elimnating all the GMC nameplates and stuff.

EXCUSE ME CHRIS, Don't you mean "by eliminating all the Chevy nameplates and stuff" ?? :D

Pat Monahan
10-28-2004, 1:43 AM
Ron - I can't say for sure that both models come off the same assembly line, but it would make sense that they do. Apart from grills, tail lights, interior design and some options, they are the same truck. The real difference between the two is marketing ( i.e.image) and, of course, price. GMC has always been marketed as the heavy duty working truck, and had/has an upscale image. Chevy was/is marketed as a no-frills "affordable" model. This has been consistent with the positioning of GM brands relative to each other. Chevy was, for the most part, the least expensive GM brand (Cadillac being the "you want how much??") As far as parts go, for example, I had a 1990 Lumina 2 door, sold it in 2003. Most parts for the Pontiac Grand Prix, Buick Regal and Olds Cutlass were interchangeable with the Lumina. The platforms for these were all the same - saves a ton of cash on engineering, producing, shipping and stocking parts. Tear the sheetmetal off these cars and remove interior trim and they are the same.
Tony - the exterior mounting points of small block Chevy engines have been the same from at least the early 1960's to at least mid 1980's. The only differences would be which side of the block alternators and such bolt on ( of course, different bore/stroke combinations, 2 or 4 bolt block, rod type (i.e. X, O, "pink", forged, cast, etc.) can be determined from block casting numbers).
Geez, sorry for rambling on, guys, but before there was ww, there was racing!
Hope the info helps
Pat