I’ll admit that I don’t follow full-size pickup trucks closely, especially new ones. I have watched values on older versions rise over the last several years and they have a devoted following. I think one of those reasons may be that the new ones are just gargantuan in size. There are still a lot of older Ford F150s and Ford Rangers on the road and the size of both of those vehicles seems to make sense for their respective segments. That being the case, I’m looking more closely now at various older full-size trucks and came across this stellar example in the form of a 1974 GMC 2500 pickup, located in Katonah, New York and available here on Bring A Trailer for a current bid of $4,500.
This GMC is a well-optioned truck with high zoot level Sierra Grande trim (includes deep grained vinyl upholstery, simulated wood-grained accents, full gauge instruments, molded door cards with map pockets, deep pile carpet, molded headliner and better insulation). But wait, there’s more! This Sierra also has the Deluxe Camper Special package which includes, among other things, higher gross vehicle weight, dual fuel tanks, higher rate rear leaf springs, fourteen bolt heavy-duty GM axle, sliding rear window (supposedly, this example is minus that), tie-downs, slide-out rear bumper, bed stabilizers, and swing-out mirrors.
Under the hood is Mr. Big, a Chevrolet 454 CI Mark IV, V8 engine (which GMC referred to as the “Invader”) generating 230 net HP. This is a pre-catalyst model but I don’t know if the dual exhaust system is stock or an addition. Backing up the big-block engine is a Turbo-Hydramatic 400 three-speed automatic transmission spinning a 4.10 ratio differential. If you’re looking for fuel economy, doubtful this is your ride. The seller doesn’t comment on how this GMC runs but with 63K miles on its clock, I’d bet pretty darn well.
The exterior of this pickup is finished in Grecian Bronze, a typical 1974 color. The finish is strong and I think looks great without the two-tone exterior that was so common on Chevrolet & GMC trucks of this era. It is offset nicely with the white roof (maybe a repaint). The body shows well too, it is aligned and free of rust and any obvious dents or dings. The bed shows some wear, as would be expected, but nothing extreme – it is completely intact and useable. This truck has obviously been well cared for, maintained and stored properly. There are over 200 images of this truck via the listing, they are well done and informative, check them out!
The underside is a repeat story, normal wear, and tear, no visible issues of concern, be it rot, leaks or rolled-over ground damage. While this Sierra is located in New York state, it was a Washington State-based vehicle (note the license plate in the lead image) so that may help explain its really clean condition.
Moving inside is like being transported back in time – it has all of the ’74 era styling cues with yards of tan vinyl and wood applique accents. The usually destroyed GM dash pad appears to be perfect and the cut-pile carpet, which was new for ’74 replacing the older style nylon loop, is just right – some minor wear and fading but that’s about it. It is a very functional environment. The seller adds that the R12 A/C system has been recharged and works – a nice operational aspect that is frequently not the case in older vehicles.
This GMC Sierra is a spectacular find! If I were in the market for just such a vehicle, this is the one that I would go for. Its low mileage coupled with its cleanliness is seldomly seen in a 46-year-old vehicle. While large, it is a manageable size and not so overwrought the way modern pickups have become. The current bid is very reasonable but there are five days to go still. We’ll have to watch this one and see how it turns out. What do you think, any takers?
A truck after my own heart! Back in the day these were commonplace. Seeing one of these with a 350 was a novelty. 1974 was the worst year for fuel economy. We put a lot of them through the shop and massaged them to get them into single digits. Seeing a 4.10 ratio with an automatic is unusual; we had a standard combination in our dealership: Manual transmission-4.10; Automatic-3.73. These were workhorses and never gave up. The A-C is a nice touch; just use the R12 substitute and put 134 in new units only. And dual exhaust was available with a 454.
Correction: ‘get them into DOUBLE digits.’ Got to quit making comments on my cellphone while sitting in the dentist’s office, waiting for my MIL.
Repaint, note tailgate and the 80’s trim. Nice truck. Will bring at least $12 or its RNM on BAT.
What is R12 substitute? Never heard of that, does it work? My Dodge could use a recharge but have been quoted over a grand for a conversion and even then they will not guarantee that I will be happy with the results.
I understand that it’s essentially propane, which has similar properties to R-12. It has been available at NAPA and O’Reilly, and Autozone. Original refrigerant oil works with it; it’s just like using R-12. A lot of people shy away from it because it’s PROPANE, which is explosive. I say that there’s gasoline under the hood too, and it’s also explosive…
I’ve used Duracool a few times in a Chevy Blazer. It got me through a few summers.
https://www.walmart.ca/en/ip/duracool-mobile-air-conditioning-recharge-sealer-kit/6000130570423
I believe it is called R512. Look that up.
Im painting this truck right now lol
It will carry or tow quite a bit with the Camper Special package, but fuel economy isn’t its selling point. Now, while you can certainly wake that 454 up with an empty box all you’ll do is wheelspin.
I have a cream color BB 74 3/4 ton. She does pull great but has a gas drinking problem. I don’t think AA or AAA can assist overcoming them addiction fuel demons 😉
Pssss (in a whisper voice) I didn’t think BAT 🦇 was an allowed word here 😱
Yeah, I always thought that the internet was big enough that they didn’t have to reference other people’s sites!
I’m a fan! Nice truck.
Nice trucks. The 454 c.i. gets 10 mpg on the highway no matter what you do.
10. Get used to it. Dual tanks preferred as one can practically watch the
fuel gauge needle drop while in motion on the highway. YOW.
But, they’ll tow anything…lots of torque.
Geez I have a 2014 HD that only manages 12 mpg. Progress?
I have a 2004 Sierra 2500HD 4×2 with a Duramax diesel that gets 21.5 mpg on the freeway.
Interesting that you say that, Andy. They can improve the efficiency of an engine and the aerodynamics of the vehicle itself but the one factor that remains constant is that it still takes X number of BTUs of energy to move the mass down the road at X mph. It’s simple physics. A gallon of gas contains (on average) approximately 125K BTU of energy; a gallon of #2 diesel fuel contains approximately 144K BTU. The spec hasn’t changed much since the 50s. Emission controls really screwed that up during the 70s because it suddenly took a tremendous amount of gas just to keep the engine turning because everything was leaned out and retarded down to nothing but burned valves and short tempers. They started doing it to diesel engines during the 90s. True the engineers are gaining the power and efficiency back but it’s been a hard grind. Unfortunately, the bottom line is still the same old formula. I argued this at length with customers and discussed it at length with my students in the night courses I instructed at the local tech college. My ’49 Chevy gets into the upper teens with its 216 Babbit-Pounder and my ’13 Chevy Avalanche gets mid to upper teens with its ultra-efficient 5.3. It doesn’t seem fair…
I agree on changes needed but additional ways are available to get the mpg up
on these. My 54 3100 does better too on mpg.
Hummer is going electric as is Tesla.
My ideas or thoughts on trucks makes me scratch my head often and always ask WTF with no brainer gearing never applied to trucks.., we make it look cool snd play with power…but thats all..
Back ground..
I would bet at least 50% of all trucks sold at 40-65 grand plus never haul more than groceries or a once year get mulch.
Nothing wrong with this but fix the mpg…
Solutions..
Why can’t the truck gears use new technologies and old to fix the problem.
I am an older guy that has driven farm trucks to dump trucks and tractor 🚜 equipment .
Okay heres the pitch take the trans mission with electric programs and combine the two stage gearing …similar to a dump truck 9 low and 9 high gears through a mid transfer box similar process.. or think the four wheel transfer approach to flip a switch to the rear gears ⚙️..
So with most new trucks
never haul but show nice new four doors and no bed but it pulls some boats .
Have the default trans to airplane gears to mpg… but…….
With the granny gears allow to pull down a house if needed at horrible mpg when needed by flip the switch.. this would more than triple mpg…
Then if you tie in some hybrid one could probably exceed 30 mpg or better.
Lets face it since people buy no changes will occur
Well, CS, they’ve been working on that for a long time. That’s why you can now get 8-speed transmissions and trailer-towing modes. New trucks are more efficient but it still goes back to that old physics formula: energy to move the mass. A lot of people have thrown out the theory that if you run a higher speed axle ratio, you will use less fuel. Sounds good but in reality the poor engine lugs continually under its peak performance curve. Consequently, it’s using more fuel per power stroke. I had a customer who ferried trailers (RVs, car-haulers and cargo trailers) from the Great Lakes to the west coast. He used a GMC 1-ton dually with a 454 for years. It was a manual transmission with 4.10 gears and he continually reported 7-9 mpg. He wore that truck out and bought a Dodge with a Cummins diesel. The dealership ordered all of its trucks in with 3.25 gears (because some engineer said that they would use less fuel). Well, he was lucky to see 5 mpg and his trips became longer because he couldn’t maintain his speed, especially traveling through MT and encountering those wild west winds. He complained but the dealership ignored him. He came to me and we tuned the engine the best we could but he was still way shy of what he got with the 454. He finally went to a great deal of expense to change his axle ratios to 4.10 and it was like getting a different truck; his fuel consumption was cut down to half and he was able to make better time. I told him to take his figures back to the dealer, which he did but they were quite obstinate; engineers were MUCH smarter than lowly mechanics. I might add that there’s a reason an engineer is a mechanic with his brains knocked out…
My 4X2 1995 F150 has a 302 with a 5-speed and I get 18 mpg on the highway but it’s probably the lightest body style, a regular cab short box. New trucks are heavy these days, especially the 4-doors which seems to be the only body style you see now. Add 4-wheel drive and all the options available or the heavier duty models and the curb weight goes up. The curb weight of a 2020 F250 runs from 5,677 to 7,538 lbs; that’s a lot of weight to move, so MPGs suffer.
Personally, I don’t care for the newer pickups; they have too many doors and they are just too massive. Even the so-called mid-size Ranger is a foot longer than my ’95 F150. I’ve owned it since 1999 and have just restored my old F150 after 11 years sitting idle though I’ve still got a few things left to do. I’m retired so I appreciate the 18 MPG it gives me, I can’t afford to drive a pickup with single-digit MPGs. I still have my ’97 Ford Ranger that has a puny 2.3 4 cylinder and a 5-speed that gives me 28 MPG highway. Not exactly a powerhouse but I pass a lot of gas stations with it. I’ll probably sell it this spring as I don’t need two pickups but my wallet will miss it.
If you love these old square bodies like I do you don’t give a darn what the mileage is ..you savor it like an expensive scotch… You just drive something different when you’re gonna go on a longer drive …i have a 90 4×4 suburban bought it for $275 twenty years ago..rebuilt everything over last 20 years..still only have $2000 in it.runs like a dream ..it drinks gas but i only drive it about 2x’ s a week …its my nostalgia fix..going to sell it to be practical but i know I’ll regret it
And I’ve savored a lot of expensive scotch, and JD, and just plain old Wild Turkey. That could explain why my liver enzymes sometimes go off the chart these days. I’ve got a square body GMC too. It took me all over the country to the tune of 330K miles. It has got to be the best truck I ever had. Trying to restore it but so many things get in the way–like money. Maybe one day…
This truck can sell for more than $4500…otherwise someone almost stole it.very desirable vehicle to me anyway
A Sierrrra Grrrrande’, ( whistles) and I have a lowly High Sierrrra, well, not lowly, fact is, it’s not trimmed much different than this. It’s the same truck, people,,,anyway, I’d say this is an average price for this, it’s not like new. 454, meh, ok for pulling something, my 350 now gets about 15mpg( with air cleaner top flipped) and unless you are pulling something, the 454 could get about the same empty. The 350 just doesn’t have enough oomph for that. Looks like some things have been systematically replaced, and plenty more to do, I’m sure. Good thing, everything is at Autoplace, just make sure to sign up for the “Preferred Customer” perks,,,
Looking at 6-8 MPG with the automatic. Could all be changed by revising the primitive 1974 emissions, but fair amount of work.
Gas mileage, I had an 84 Dodge D250 with a 360 and auto, it got 10 mpg fully loaded or empty. They used to tell me the space shuttle got better mileage. Surprised when I bought a 99 Dakota, used, had a 318 auto 4X4, it only got at best 12 mpg. Found original window sticker at the bottom of the glove box, 12 city, 15 highway. Never saw the 15, couldn’t figure out why it was so bad as designed. Didn’t seem underpowered.
Man, that 454 would look good between the frame rails of my Caprice
My dad had a ’74 base Sierra. One detail unique to ’73-4 models is the GMC emblem on the upper left corner of the tailgate; base models had them pressed into the sheetmetal itself (raised, actually) and I wonder if that’s under the chrome ones on this optioned-up truck. For ’75 they moved to the channel between the taillights, under the latch handle, where the CHEVROLET lettering had been all along on those for the pressed in base model letters, with chrome attached emblems on fancy trucks being on the right-hand side of the metal trim piece, again where Chevy’d had it since ’73.
It seems to me that the tailgates are the same all the way through. Well, Chevy or GMC, but I think they are all stamped and they just put the bright panel over the stamping and carry on…
This a nice truck and the 454 option makes it even more interesting. The 74’s were bad on gas. The 350’s got only 12 MPG and the 454’s were probably around 10 so not that much worst.
I was trying to get some gas mileage ordering a red 74 C10 fleet side shortbed with the 3.07 rear and the 4 barrel carb 350 engine with 160 HP. It was almost identical in power and performance to my friend’s 74 shortbed with the 2 barrel 350 and 145 HP as we raced them several times. Our races were comical to our friends. The heads with small valves, poor cams, smog equipment, etc might have been the low point for power and performance. Most people seemed to like the looks of their square body trucks which also had a nice ride. I kept mine until the late 1980’s and rust issues caused it to be turned into a 4 wheel drive mud racer. The original 350 was replaced in 1993 with a trophy winning 383 which was quite a change.
I question why somebody would drill new holes on the right side of the bumper to mount the license plate when there are already two existing holes in the middle of the bumper to mount it.
It is just odd to me.
Im painting this truck right now lol
Just ;ought a 74 K2500 with a 350. I was in the Air Force and didn’t get the chance to tinker with one of these. So I’m mostly looking for help and advice. Barron Broomfield in Portales NM . I will be joining soon.