Inliners International Forums General Discussion Engines GMC Vs GM Inliners..........

What was the reason of GMC having their own inline while the Chevy side had theirs? It seems from what I see that the GMC is the better truck powerplant, so why didn't GM continue to advance it and use it in both GMC and Chevy pickups?

I could never grasp the reason of this or GMC's Monster V-6's.......Granted most people either love or hate the V-6's(I happen to really like them), but why didn't they offer them in the Chevy's? A great low end truck motor built for work if you ask me.

How much do those monster V-6's weigh, same as a BBC?
So why would you want something that heavy & not produce the HP/torque of a BBC?
I believe the 292 , you can make more power than the GMC truck engines.

GMC only makes trucks and has always marketed itself as GM's heavy-duty work truck brand, and you had to pay a little more for them. I dont hate those big stump puller V6's but they could have just went ahead and used a diesel. Speaking of diesel how about the 6.2, now thats an engine you either hate, or you really hate!!!

Good question for starting a range war here!

My information generally points to the fact that GMC was always a truck and coach firm that over time was driven into making light duty trucks for their fleet customers who wanted the same big truck reliability in a small truck. Conversely, Chevy was a car manufacturer that was pulled up to making trucks because their car customers liked the brand and wanted a truck with the same nameplate features as the cars.

This is really where worlds collide. Great topic to get a full-on thermonuclear war going with Chevy versus GMC guys.

If you look at literature from GMC in the days when they started making light duty trucks, it ALWAYS celebrates how the small trucks were built just like the big ones - and they were in many ways - and they even used the tag line theme "Get a REAL truck - Get a GMC!" in advertising of the 40s and 50s. Body features on light and medium duty GMCs are cosmetically identical or nearly identical to Chevy trucks in like years. But peel away the wrapper and you'll find a lot of differences in key areas. One of those areas was the power plant. GMC launched the 228 in '39 in light duty trucks. It was a full pressure insert bearing engine built to same engineering standards as their large truck engines. Many of the chassis features on small trucks before '47 were identical to big trucks. Look at the '47/'48 GMC 3 bar grille and it's is attached to the frame rails (not the radiator assembly like Chevies) exactly the same way they constructed the big trucks; for flexibilty and torsional longevity. It is my opinion that they discontinued this design in light duty in '49 because they concluded that it was overkill, but that is just my opinion.

Trucks need low end torque and power. GMC applied their truck building brains to all the trucks they built regardless of whether they were big or small.

Irrespective of where this discussion goes, it shouldn't be confrontational and it is not something that should divide our members. We are all children of our inline heritage. To find a common enemy, well, that's why God gave us the V8!

Just some brain droppings and take them for what they are worth.

Gentlemen;

A "war" is not needed at all.

I've always felt that by doing it this way (Chevy & GMC trucks) it gave them, (GM) a larger 'market share' by having two truck divisions, having several models each.

Remember; each of the competition had only one, back then.

This of course, was long before the Falcon Ranchero was copied and allowed to flood the marketplace.

The rest is history, I guess.

hi, TP

i live in danville and have 3/4s of a six in my model a! it's a 4-banger mercruiser/chevy, the 181 ci version.

an interesting engine from GMC was a 12 cylinder gas job, made from two V6s in a fire truck. when i was in the air force, they had one at langley afb. had an awsome sound.

i always liked the GMC sixes better, than the old 'babbit-beaters' but have seen a few 216 and 235 chevies that could kick some flathead ford butt! i've seen a LOT of GMCs that could do it, though.

GM's later 292 inline six was designed as a light truck powerplant to succeed the Chevrolet 261 and the GMC 270-302. It wil make more horsepower at higher rpm, and it has seven main bearings rather than four contributing to that interest. i believe that a well-built 302 will equal and often exceed the low- and mid-range torque of any later 292. The choice between one or the other depends on application and intended use.

When we compare the GMC 270 and 302 to the Chevrolet inline sixes of their own generation, a well-built 302 will clearly out-perform any 216, 235, or 261 in a chassis of equal weight. A 261 can compete with a 270, but both are limited by displacement. As we used to say, "They ain' no substitute for cubic inches." When faced with a full-out Ford flathead,"3/8 x 3/8" or larger, or with a Cadillac, Olds, Buick, or Chevrolet v-thing from that era, i want a GMC making all the torque it can (and a transmission and differential to stand up to it).

God's Peace to you.

d
Inliner #1450

John, when was the Falcon Ranchero copied? By whom? I'm confused, but it doesn't take much to get me confused.

Ford Falcons didn't come until 1960 as far as I know, and the el Camino was out in '59. Maybe you mean the Ford Ranchero that came out in '57\?

In all fairness, we need to look to our brothers down under and the early 50s (GM) Holden Utes which clearly preceeded the Rancheros when they started in '51.

So who copied who?

Had both at one point or another.........You'll never get a big block to run where a V-6 will. They were a big thing years ago in single/tandem axle trucks around here, a GMC with a V-6 would out gross a BB equiped Chevy and out run it to boot! That is why I often wondered why you couldn't get them in the Chevy's........

I didn't intend to start a war, just wondering why they didn't do it from a Business "Stand Point".........But I guess things were different then compared to now.........I wish they would do the same thing now days........I'd really like to buy a regular Cab GMC 3/4 ton with a CUMMINS instead of a oil burner from rice land.

Rancheros in the early sixties were based on Falcon components instead of the earlier big Ford Rancheros. He's probably talking about Japanese pickups. I remember the Hillman Utes that were imported to the U.S. from G.B. in the early fifties, and they looked more like the early Japanese pickups than did the Falcon based Ranchero.