Ready To Haul It All: 1966 GMC Carryall

1966 GMC Carryall

If we were in the market for a parts hauler, this GMC would definitely be on our list of potential shop trucks. I guess it isn’t a truck per say, although it is based on a truck. This is another barn find that has already been cleaned up and sorted. The paint is said to be original, it looks to be to me, and the 305 V6 is original as well. The interior has been replaced and looks fantastic. The seller also went through the brakes and installed a new exhaust. This rig is ready to haul parts, lumber or the whole family! So if you need a sweet looking truck that can do any or all of those things, you can find it here on eBay in Sacramento, California with a current bid of $17k.

Fast Finds

Comments

  1. metalman

    What do you mean it’s not a truck? They were built on a truck chassis. They can actually haul as much, if not more, than a lot of the new stuff. And I should know. Been working on vehicles for 30+ yrs.

  2. Jimmy V

    According to the trim plate, this is not the 305 c.i. V6, but the larger 351 c.i. V6

  3. Howard A Member

    My old man had one of these to pull our camper. I was a kid and don’t remember much, except it was blue and the sound of the V-6 wasn’t like his Oldsmobile. Don Garlits had one too that he pulled his drag car around with in the ’60’s. For years, GM went back and forth with International with the Travelall, both extremely popular trucks. They were driven hard and few survived. Great example here.

  4. Walter Sherrouse

    My dad had a 1963 model that was a 3/4 ton. He did everything with that vehicle. From family trips, hauling livestock, towing trailers, it could do it all. We had the V-6 with a heavy duty 4 speed. What a tank!

  5. Charles H.

    Wonder why they never offered this engine in the Chevrolet versions?…..or did they? I just never have seen a Chevy with the 305 or 351 V6 engine, all were either the inline 6, or the SB V8……

    • Howard A Member

      Hi Charles, the GMC V-6 was GMC specific, 1960-1974, no Chevy’s used this motor. They came in several displacements, 305, 351, 401 and 478. They made an impressive (looking) 702 “twin six”, V-12, basically, 2, 351’s end to end, sharing a common crankshaft to compete with diesels, but fell horribly short and was discontinued. ( some claim it got 2 mpg)

    • Dave Wright

      Howard is correct, GMC was trying to build real trucks at the time (like IHC) while the other manufacturers were clinging to there car based truck models. The GMC V6 was a real truck engine not one pirated out of a sedan.

    • Gene

      I had a 305 in a 4×4 with a 4-speed, had a 4bbl carb feeding the 2bbl manifold through an adapter. Swallowed fuel like crazy but would pull anything. Also those V12s were used by the Air Force in missile haulers. A lot of the engines wound up running irrigation pumps in Montana and Wyoming.

      • Dave Wright

        Being stationed at the depot for missile carriers (and being an Incureable junk man) I cut up several with V12 GMC’s. They were worth nothing then but now there is a company rebuilding them into hotrod engines. Surprisingly, they are not that heavy. They get fair HP out of them but tons of torque. They would be great in a car with an exposed engine…..when my dad operated the V6’s in his truck company, they were great engines but when he shifted to later GMC’s with 350-366 engines and IHC’s with 345’s his fuel usage went down 30-40%……I would buy a 702 V12 in a second to play with.

  6. geomechs geomechs Member

    I want this. I don’t even think I’d paint it–yet. I would just go out and enjoy it. Unfortunately I’d have to do this by myself because my better half doesn’t like Burbs or station wagons. If it were a panel she’d be all over it. This is in really nice shape and needs to be enjoyed just like it is for a spell. Interesting to see that this one has the larger engine. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a light truck with the 351 before. New paint eventually…

  7. Matt Tritt

    I had a 63 2 1/2 ton bobtail box truck with the smaller engine. It also had an enormous 2-speed rear end and would haul anything – I usually carried around 6 tons of oranges (and other fruit) in it and, aside from being almost shaken to death by the lack of a suspension seat, it was the “perfect” truck. Gobs of torque and 10 MPG empty or loaded. It had > 400,00 miles on it when I sold it and it was running like new.

  8. JW454

    My mom’s cousin had one of these that was a 3 speed on the column. Occasionally, due to bad bushings, it would hang up between gears. She would jump out with her handy screwdriver, open the hood, and free the shift levers at the lower end of the steering column. Then she jump back in and away we’d go! Ha! That was a hoot for us kids.

  9. Rob S

    Haven’t seen one of these in a long time! Cool! My friend has a 61 with 4WD and mint!!

  10. jim shoe

    patina looks phony to me
    floors have less wear than panels
    mho

  11. Skip

    Decent old truck but not worth what they’re asking. I managed a small, volunteer ambulance service for many years. We provided standby service for sporting events: car races, rodeos, football games, etc., and in the ’80s got our first Suburbans after having worked out of station wagons and coach-type ambulances for many years. We had a ’71 Suburban that had been built here in Texas that we got in 1981 for a whopping $500…equipped. It came from a small funeral home in Dallas. Turns out that two of the larger funeral homes in Dallas County competed regularly for the county ambulance contract; and whoever got the contract would subcontract with some of the small outfits in the outlying areas. This small service had regularly subcontracted with the main contractor for many years; but in ’72 another co. got the contract and didn’t reup the contract with the smaller operation. So it was used basically as a worktruck with lights and siren until we got it. And I’m so glad we did, because for the 8 or 9 years that we had it, it was a workhorse.

    Our ambulance service did standby work all over West Texas and the Panhandle area for many years and even all over the state here and there,so that Suburban did its share of travelling. When everything started going wrong with it that could go wrong, we retired it sometime in 1989. That felt like putting your own kid out to pasture!

  12. Charles H.

    Thank You Howard A. for the interesting info!…..I had heard of the 702 “Twin Six”, boy, that was an interesting bit of engineering!…..would love to see and read about some of the machines using this wild power plant……

  13. Dave Wright

    The engine builder that specializes in them has a good website……look on Google. It will show up…….this dang Tablet won’t attach stuff. ThunderV12.com

  14. waynard

    This is a really nice truck, respectfully maintained and upgraded without going overboard.

    I had two of these (Chevy’s actually), one running, one parts. Hated those clam shell doors: shin and forehead breakers. I converted the driver to barn doors. With a new 350 it ran like snot down a two-year old. I’d have another, but I’m still working on the ’46 Suburban I drive daily. (And I probably will be ’til time immemorial).

    I think 17K plus is way too high for this though.

  15. BRAKTRCR

    I always thought these V-6 engines were based on the 348/409 V-8’s just like the 4.3 V-6 engines, that were based on the Small Block Chevy. They certainly look like that, but I am no expert by any means, and defer to those of you wiser than me.
    It is a beautiful Sub, I am quite surprised at the price at well over $17K so far. Geeze I could see $10K maybe $12k but what do I know. Congrats to the seller, and condolences to those like myself that would love to have such a fun vehicle. Powerglide, power steering and brakes, and prepped for AC all seem like a dream come true.

    • Dave Wright

      These V6 GMC’s are a totally uneque engine. They are a true truck engine, forged crank, Rods and Pistons, sodium cooled valves……heavy duty stuff.

    • geomechs geomechs Member

      Hi BRAKTRCR. No, like Howard says a few spaces up, the GMC V-6 was entirely its own product; designed and built by GMC. It seems to me that the smaller motor (305/351) had the Pontiac/Olds bell housing bolt pattern but the larger motors (including the 702) used an SAE pattern. There was even a V8 (637) that was based on the larger V6 (478). GMC also developed a diesel version (Toro Flo–some called it a Toro-flop) based on the 478 and 637. The trouble with that was the Toro Flo was almost as expensive to build as a Detroit Diesel and GMC lost money on that part. As good as the motors were, they simply outgrew themselves; emissions, cost of building, cost of maintaining parts inventory, they just faded away.

Leave A Comment

RULES: No profanity, politics, or personal attacks.

Become a member to add images to your comments.

*

Notify me of new comments via email. Or subscribe without commenting.