- Seller: vince p (Contact)
- Location: Seattle, Washington
- Mileage: 41,167 Shown
- Chassis #: TKL249Z529697
- Title Status: Clean
- Engine: 350 cui V8
- Transmission: Automatic
Square-body Chevy pickups continue to draw attention from collectors, restorers, and enthusiasts alike, and this 1979 Chevrolet K2500 4×4 looks like an honest project for someone wanting a heavy-duty classic with plenty of potential. Located in Seattle, Washington, this 3/4-ton pickup is said to have just 41,167 miles on the odometer, though there’s no documentation to prove it, and it comes equipped with a 350ci V8 and an automatic transmission. The seller also notes that it runs well, though it “needs restoring,” making this one a promising candidate for a straightforward revival or a full cosmetic refurbishment. They are asking $4,000 or best offer.
By 1979, Chevrolet’s square-body trucks had fully established themselves as some of the toughest and most versatile pickups on the market. Their clean, upright styling has aged especially well, and values have climbed as more buyers recognize how usable and collectible these trucks have become. A K2500 adds even more appeal, thanks to its 4×4 drivetrain and heavier-duty underpinnings, which set it apart from the more common half-ton models.
This example is listed with a clean title and appears to be an unrestored truck that has survived well enough to remain a running, driving project. The seller doesn’t go into detail about its overall condition, but the combination of V8 power, four-wheel drive, and claimed mileage could make it attractive to buyers looking for a square-body they can improve over time. Whether your plan is to preserve it as a workhorse, restore it to factory specs, or build a rugged weekend truck, this Chevy seems to offer a solid starting point. Chances are the mileage is 141k, but given how excellent parts supply is for these, you can easily find everything needed to make it like new.
The truck is being offered here as a Barn Finds Exclusive, so send the seller an offer via the Make An Offer button and leave any questions in the comments below. If you’ve been waiting for a 3/4-ton square-body 4×4 that still looks affordable and approachable, this 1979 Chevrolet K2500 may be worth a closer look. What do you think?
Sold a pile of these back in ’78 and ’79. I think the 1500 models kind of edged past the 2500s. There were a few 3500s there as well but they rode as rough as a Dodge. Those two years were the best that GM cranked out. There was a problem with the transmission case cracking above the rear mount and it was determined that the weight of the 203 transfer case contributed to it.
GM came out with braces that ran from the lower inspection plate on the bell housing (which was now cast aluminum) to the transfer case itself. We never had a problem with failed transmission cases after that.
This one looks like it’s running a 203 transfer case. I had the same setup in my K1500. I was never very fussy about it but I really can’t say anything bad about it; it worked just fine until just before I pulled the truck off the road at 330K miles.
The 350 should take it anywhere you want to go, and bring you back. I ordered mine with the 400, which never gave a moment’s trouble except that it burned oil right from the get-go and was always a quart to a thousand throughout the time I had it. That was OK; contrary to popular belief at the coffee shop, if they didn’t use any oil, there was something wrong with them.
One of the most common questions I got asked was, “How much oil should an engine be burning before you need to do something about it?” I always told them my version of the truth: “When a billowing blue cloud follows you everywhere you go, you should think about it. If you drive down to Great Falls (125 miles) and have to put oil in it before you can drive home, then it’s time for a teardown.”
400 SBCs, because of the siamesed cylinders, were notorious oil burners, and mine was no exception. I just carried oil in the truck and poured it in. But I sure had some whizzing contests with customers over oil consumption though.
“I want a NEW engine on warranty!”
“Why?”
“Because it’s burning oil, and I’ve had 25 GM vehicles that didn’t use any.”
“How much oil is it burning?”
“It doesn’t matter. I’ve had 25 GM vehicles and they didn’t use any…”
“Well, GM isn’t going to simply warrant a new engine on your say-so; we need to do an oil consumption report and then consult with GM for permission to do a teardown.”
“That’s a bunch of bull–! I’ve had 25 GM vehicles and they didn’t use any oil!!!” Extra exclamation marks because the customer was getting pi$$ed.
“Well, that’s the way GM is going to do it. And they aren’t going to authorize anything other than a teardown and re-ring unless there’s nothing worth fixing. They simply aren’t going to give you a new engine.”
“I’ve had 25 GM vehicles and they didn’t use any oil! Get me a new engine!”
To make a long story short, the guy tore a strip off the boss, the salesman who sold him the truck, then, he opened up the operator’s manual and started calling the gripe numbers in the back. In the end, he traded the truck in at a dealership at least 100 miles away. My story ends when the new owner drove the exact same truck to our dealership a couple of months later, complaining about some water seepage past the weather stripping on the passenger’s side door. I asked him if he had any other problems (eg. engine). He told me that it used a quart of oil between changes and that was it.
“That’s not burning oil,” he said. Who was I to argue?
Hey Geo, worked at a KW GM dealer, oil burners got a quick hone job and Ramco rings, that stopped the oil issue and got them out past warranty. When and if they came back you had to bore the block because those Ramco rings would eat them up.
I remember at some of the GM zone meetings, some guys talking about Ramco rings. I only used what GM supplied through regular channels. Funny thing was: if GM ever authorized a teardown (in my days with GM I recall a couple of six cylinders, a Pontiac 400 and an SBC 400) the customers seldom kept them; they usually traded them off while the vehicle was down. The new owners never complained; at least not to us…
Looks like a new fender on the drivers side, now all ya need is one on the curb side, inners, floors, cab corners and probably a radiator support and you’re good to go. Don’t forget to throw a sheet of plywood in the bed to cover the holes.
I know they are basically the same add says Chevrolet emblems say GMC back when this was built the only difference was GMC was built on its own assembly line where Chevrolet shared the assembly line with whatever else they were assembling that day . the market has softened just a little bit two years ago this would have sold for $10k because that’s what people would pay now I think it’s priced about right for what you get good luck to the seller
I bought a new GMC heavy half in 78, a buddy bought an 80 K20. Both trucks were built in Baltimore, Janesville also built both on one line.
Compared to some of the same vintage square bodies I see for sale in my neck of the woods the 4k is reasonable if it does run good as advertised. I don’t believe that 41k mileage claim 141k I would believe.
Drove by this the other day as it was parked on the street here in West Seattle where I live. What really caught my eye wasn’t just seeing such a rare beast here in the city, but that it had an old school For Sale sign attached to it.