We are talking about the pinnacle years of both truck brands, Wich of the two was the better truck
>>28113352Toyota
Can't go wrong with either. I'd pick the Ford, personally. I always thought they looked better as a kid when they were new.
>>28113352I still see a lot of 400's still on the roads, many of which are still being used as work trucks. I only see like one of those Fords every month.
>>28113352Early dash GMT400 >> 92-96 Ford > 80-86 Ford > 87-91 Ford >>>>>>>>> late dash GMT400
Lot easier to work on GMT400
>>28113352Still see gmt400 working in the rust belt (look like shit obviously), I never see 9th f
For me it's the 300 six
>>28113396Purely regional.I currently have both and have had others.The Ford is the better truck by far. Everything is more robust. Just simple shit like tie rods are 50% larger.And GM was still running throttle body injection compared to the multiport on Ford- the performance difference is noticeable.My 400 is plagued with the typical electrical GM gremlins of that era, it's still a solid truck over all but will always be 2nd place
>>28113352Gmt400 hands down. Old half tonnes fucking suck though, they have nothing on a jellybean or gmt800. There's a reason Japanese mini trucks were mopping the floor with the us truck market and then suddenly dried up by the mid 2000s.
>>28113927If the 400 is second place why are there way more on the roads? I live in one of the worst rust locations possible as well. >multiport on FordIs that the nightmare tier optispark bullshit? I'd rather deal with a leaky spider injector.
>>28115269>Poor retards can't afford the newest modelYes, that's why Chevy owners are the bottom of the barrel.
>>28115272>j-just buy a new Ford every 2 years!This is why they sell so many lol.
Based purely on attrition I'd say the GMT400 is superior. Like many others here I must say I see GMT400s far more frequently than 9th gen F150s. I would also argue that the Vortec 350s are a better truck engine than the 302 that is in most V8 F150s of the era. 300 I6 is better than the chevy V6 but who wants a 6cyl if you're buying an old truck? You want the biggest engine available because the thing is already underpowered compared to something 10yr newer.
>>28115274>Rich people have moneyYes.
>>28115300Rich people didn't get rich by wasting money on depreciating assets.
>>28115301Rich people throw more money away on depreciating cars than anyone else. Have you seen how staggeringly poorly luxury cars hold value? Even ferraris depreciate like crazy now unless you have a special model (you aren't allowed to buy one of those until you've spent a ton on the shitty ones though).
>>28113943The the 5.3 and 6.0 are bulletproof sex machines
>>28115307Can confirm. A 2005 Maserati is for sale near me for $2500.
>>28115351No there isn't
>>28115307Wrong
>>28113352Depends on your use. >1/2 tonIf you want dead reliable and you can deal with 2wd, get the 1/2 ton Ford with the straight 6 and the M5OD. If you intend to off road with it or lift it whatsoever, get the 350 Chevrolet. >3/4 ton Get the Ford for 2wd, Chevrolet for 4wd. Finding someone that can properly align TTB is a lost cause. Even with the Dana 50 in the front it never feels planted while towing. >1 tonChevrolet can't compete. The 460 and the 7.3 both shit on GM's options of the time.>>28113927>>28115269When I lived in Michigan I encountered GMT400 trucks all over. Now I'm in Virginia and I never see the GMT400 platform, but I see a lot of the 9th gen Ford trucks. >>28115269MPFI was on the early models. SFI was introduced in 94 for the small blocks and 95 or 96 for the 460 iirc. Whereas Chevrolet went from the glorious TBI to CPI.. a huge step backwards.
>>28115269>Is that the nightmare tier optispark bullshit?Dude.Optispark is GM.....
>>28115379Shut up NIgger.Listen to an actual rich man if you don't believe me.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bs0-G2vIWiU
>>28115376/marketplace/item/1249659166063651kill yourself
>>28115269GMT400s had better sheet metal and didn't rust in half.I see a lot of 10th Gen Jellybean F150s still. Those were good trucks, just plain ugly. The 5.4 in them was a 2v so it was pretty reliable.
>>2811551794 for the 302, 95 for cali, and 96 for everything else, which makes it an utter pain in the arse as any parts store interchange will sell you the wrong electronics. I always felt TTB felt a world better than driving with solid axles, solid axles like to walk around and increase body roll, a shame the 99+ 4wd are solid axle only
400:>(6) 7/16" wheel studsF150:>(5) 1/2" wheel studsThe Ford is about 35% stronger, we did the math one day.And that's typical throughout the trucks.Frame thickness, leaf shackles, u-joint size- everything is better engineered on the Ford.
>>28115904And yet they didn't last as long.
>>28115904>7/16"huh? gmt400's have m14 studs, they're a cunthair bigger than 1/2"ford's insistence on 1/2" studs, and only 5 of them, got them their two first recalls for wheels falling off, and they still havent learned seeing how every generation of truck since '92 has had a recall for wheels falling off
>>28115904>400:>>(6) 7/16" wheel studswrong
>>28113352As far as capability and durability goes, both were great, can't go wrong with either. However for usability, the ride quality and interior comfiness the chevy/gmc had made the ford feel like a school bus.
>>28115809He bought old shitty lasagna cars compared to old mustang's and chevilles which are going up
>>28115293>comparing the 350 to the 302 instead of the 351Come on bro.
>>28116019My bad, it was the previous gen with (6) 7/16" studs.>>28116017Curious how you mentioned that since the GMT400 has (5) wheel studs of the metric equivelant of Ford's 1/2"....
>>28116833they moved to 6 in the early 90's
>>28116888And that changes the fact they were 5 lug how exactly (?)
>>28115517I have a 96 Ford PSD. Just did the front end all new XRF stuff, bearings, everything.You have to find a independent shop to get the D50 right. We have a shop in town that does a ton of them. Needed new camber bushings. Rides perfect now. Taking it to big O or something is a waste of time.
>>28116963because they anticipated the problem and solved it instead of waiting for it to become a problem
>>28113846meme engine, 351w is the ideal to have.
>>28113352i think any GMT would be the best choice,nowadays they are still more common to see than the fords so that tells you somenthing
>>28117008Hell yeah borther.
OBS is just way more aesthetic
>>28113352The two best looking trucks ever made imo, even better than the bullnose and the square body.Either one is a great choice but deciding which is better depends on what you want.>Diesel Ford is the easy choice, the 7.3 shits on everything GM put out>Big V8Probably a toss up between the 454 and 460 either is good>Medium V8 350 definitely the better option here than the 351 especially when it comes to parts availability>Small V8Fords 302 shits on the 305 easy choice>6 cylCloser than one would think the 300 gets all the love for it's longevity but the 4.3 is arguably just as robust (especially tbi) probably go with the 300 but it's a toss up for me personally >Suspension set-up GM easily wins here across the board here unless you get the solid front axle f350>Fuel system GM wins if it's a TBI motor, it is the most reliable fuel system ever created, after GM was forced to quit doing it because of the homosexual agenda Ford probably had a better system than the arachnid injection GM had.>InteriorFord had the superior dash layout, but GM made some incredibly comfortable seats especially in the later models>TransmissionsSettling for an auto in either one is a compromise, get the manual not sure which one was better for that but it's a manual so enjoy
>>28119403>Suspension set-up>GM easily wins here across the board hereI don't remember seeing any stock chevy suspension components winning baja.But class 8 was dominated by TIB/ gutted TTB's.And throttle body injection is trash.Ford multiport (mass air especially but even speed density) is superior in every metric.
>>28113396Thats because I bought them all (I'm hoarding them and you can't have one)
>>28120072But there are no bajas by me, only roads. Whatever shall I do?
>>28119403GM made really good auto transmissions for their trucks. I'd argue they're better than Ford's in terms of longevity, and I have an E4OD with a 351.
>>28120765Do you want suspension that can survive the brutality of Baja or are you just a little bitch that drives a Truck (tm) to work in a vain attempt to bang Tiffany in accounting?
>>28115900>94 for the 302, 95 for cali, and 96 for everything else,Before that was either carb or 2-bank batch-fire EEC-IV MPFI.I know Ford dabbled in TBI systems but I think that was just on 4s and V6s.>>28116993>96 PSD you DO have a spare cam sensor in the glovebox, don't you?>>28119403>Ford probably had a better system than the arachnid injection GM had.They did! EEC-IV is dead reliable. Easy to understand once you wrap your head around the variable frequency MAP sensor signal.I do have to disagree with you on the suspension, though. Twin I-beam is the comfiest damn truck suspension ever produced. Strong, too. The biggest downside is tire wear.
great thread>>28120828i have the e40d with the 300, would it be retarded to swap it for a m5od if it starts going bad? mine seems fine with 200k miles on it and abuse from the previous owner. when i changed the fluid it looked like engine oil it had to have been factory
>>28123378M5OD is for light duty, you probably should be fine with it. Most I've seen people go with ZF5, but my dad swears by the Borg and Warner T5 with a 300. I don't think it would be retarded, E4OD I believe was one of the sturdier autos for hauling after the factory upgrades in 95/96 trucks.
>>28123386Correction: Borg and Warner T-18
>>28123386>>28123397There is no "and" in Borg Warner.>>28123378If the transmission survived 200k miles with abuse, why would you swap it instead if just rebuilding it?
>>28123281>Twin I-beam or TTB?
>>28123773Equal length TIB is superior if 4x4 is not needed.TTB is as robust as a solid axle but still independent without giving ground like production a arm setups. You have to go full trophy truck length a arms to beat it.Protip:>if building an equal length 2wd setup, get beams from an E300.
>>28123281Of course I carry a 10mm wrench and CPS in the glove box.
>>28123845>>if building an equal length 2wd setup, get beams from an E300.Why van I beams?t. 2wd bumpside owner
>>28123845When I redid the suspension in my truck I used energy suspension poly in everything. Leaf springs, shackles, TTB. Makes a huge difference.
>>28119403i ran a bunch of numbers and the ford fuelie intake is better, but ford cucked themselves with E7 heads that only flow about 145cfm, for reference the worst sbc heads ever made only flow about 140cfm. The late TBI heads like 193 and 416 flow about 180cfm, on par with coveted GT40's, and vortecs flow even more at 225cfm, but gm couldnt figure out how intakes work so they only made about the same power as their ford counterparts. If you put an L98 intake, which for some fucking reason was only ever put on corvettes and camaros, onto a vortec truck 350, you're making 400lb-ft of torque. The most powerful small block ford put in a truck, the lightning 351, is only about on par with a stock L98; the heads flow about the same; the intake flows about the same. Why ford ignored the existence of the much superior GT40 head is beyond me.
>>28123861The E300 beams are massive compared to F100.And there are "recipes" for different years/models of kingpins/beam/spindles interchangeability if you want to run the 1/2 ton spindles on the 1 ton beams.AlsoALWAYS bend the big end. DO NOT buy a kit or go to a shop that bends in the middle or at the little end to compensate for camber.For TTB if you don't want to run drop brackets you need to cut/realign/weld the spindle end after about 2" of lift (that's where adjustment cams max out).Class 8 baja (the big boy class before unlimited trophy truck existed and everyone ahifted to 4wd) ran gutted TTB's because they're so easy to mod
>>28123865I went with poly on my custom build ('66 TIB) but just ran rubber on my drop bracket Bronco ('85) and rubber again on my cammed-out leveling kit Ranger ('95 TTB).Rubber is superior, for like a week.It begins to degrade immediately.I'm honestly surprised there hasn't been more advancements with modern tech.Or maybe they have changed the polymer and I missed it.
>>28123903>DO NOT buy a kit or go to a shop that bends in the middle or at the little end to compensate for camber.Wouldn't lowering springs do the same trick?
>>28123918On king pin style I beams (unequal length went to ball joints mounted on adjustment cams) the camber is designed into the beam/spindle pivot point. The spindle pivots on a 1" diameter (variable) steel rod.Raising or lowering causes massive issues until you compensate.
>>28123926>on a 1" diameter (variableI should clarify.Different models/years have slightly different diameters, a specific pin doesn't have variable dimensions.
>>28123926I'm trying to stay at stock ride height, then. I mean, how much wear per year could there be as a daily driver at stock ride height and camber?
>>28123942It's not as bad as haters make it out to be.As long as its within spec.You definitely need to rotate your tires often though.We're talking about a fraction of added wear over other suspension types, they don't just eat tires.So like 45k miles instead of 50k miles as a worst case scenario.Not that 10% is a good number but that's the trade off for ultimate performance.If you're seeing wear rates higher than that then there's an alignment issue.The beams, drag link and king pins are well engineered, if there's an issue it's usually the rubber bushing in the I beam pivot or the radius arm to frame mount.
>>28123942Oh also...Grease your kingpins.There's a zerk fitting in the caps top and bottom. They get neglected.
>>28113352GMT400 was the greatest truck ever made. Simple, easy to work on, the same 350 Chevy from 1957 that had a million parts researched and engineered to make power and torque with ease, with bolt on TBI that was marginally better than a carburetor in day to day driving. And the thing that makes it stand out over the ford was its clean slab sided body, and smoothed boxy edges. Making it one of the cleanest looking trucks ever made.
>>28123965>>28123967Thanks for the answers, anon. Luckily the I-beam pivot and radius arm bushes are new and I greased the kingpins a few weeks ago. I'm about to get this nigger on the road after 5 years of being in pieces.
>>28124052Pic related
>>28124046GMT400 has some major flaws.The electrical system is trash.Look at the tail lights-I've never seen any other manufacturer use a ribbon-style circuit board to go from the plug to the bulb.Not to mention the board is a separate piece that has to be sealed to the housing. Seriously- how the fuck did this pass R&D?!
>>28123733aren't automatic transmissions insanely complicated? I don't know much about transmissions I just know standards are simpler and more fun to drive
I suspect my 300 straight 6 is burning coolant and I might have to do the head gasket, anyone done this have any advice? should I bother with that head gasket sealer in a bottle shit or just rip the thing out of there?
>>28124054Looks like you dropped the front end down from the jack and it hasn't moved (settled) since.Good looking truck.If you ever get the urge to modify, even at stock height there's a handling and tire wear benefit from extended radius arms.And it's a good time to do a custom leveling setup to bring the nose up 2 inches or so.Or you can get goofy.
>>28124077Automatics are easier to rebuild than manuals.It's like tetris.Either the parts stack as you assemble or they don't.If they don't mesh, pull that cluster out and realign.If you can look at an exploded diagram and place parts laying on the bench in the same order, you can rebuild an automatic.
>>28124090Just pull it.It's a simple and easy design.And you get to play with shaft mounted rockers like you're a racecar mechanic.That head gasket sealer is something you use at a shady car lot to make it another 50 miles (IF it even works on that particular failure).
>>28113352I’d do the Chevy and drop a 5.3 in it and put a solid axle up front Then it’d be a good truck
>>28124117That's about how I would expect a response. Use the manual and parts diagrams to rebuild it. I don't understand the manual monkey mind that a maintenance or construction procedure has a hard limit of 5 single lined steps.
>>28124125I'm gonna do an combustion gas test and if its positive im gonna pull it. While I have it apart what else do I need to look for? I know the block can crack and warp and shit but what else? I've never took apart an engine and I know this one has overheated in the past before I replaced the radiator
>>28124110>Looks like you dropped the front end down from the jack and it hasn't moved (settled) since.Yeah and the springs had been swapped to the wrong side. Stock 67-72 springs were different heights with the pass side being longer to account for the offset of the engine. My intent is really to just daily until the wheels fall off. I've rebuilt the 390 completely with a roller cam and roller rockers, the C6 has been gone through and is like new and currently having a 4x4 shop give the 9 3/8" rear a once over.
>>28124138Replace cam gear with an aluminum one.
>>28124133It really is that simple.You don't need "place this here then that there then proceed to step 35". You can basically rebuild it just from that single picture and putting on the next piece in line.
>>28124138Check block deck and head to make sure nothing is warped. I'd take it to a shop and have them check it and replace valve seats while you have it apart.Replace head bolts.When an engine overheats they tend to warp the head, stretch a bolt and that's when the gasket fails- when theres a couple thousandths of an inch extra play.>>28124146Ya I'd replace both but especially if it has the composite gear (varied by year). They "can" last for hundreds of thousands of miles but always have a shorter life than the full metal options.
>>28113352Personally, I'm gonna say the Ford. By that time, they had the roller-cammed engine, with a bulletproof fuel injection and spark system. I think that was the AOD trans, which was pretty decent, even if you couldn't manually shift into second gear. Might've been an E40D.
>>2811335288-94 GMT400s are peak.
