Originally Posted by Nick_R_23 (Post 7878036)

The thing I would be most worried about is the brakes. People get all excited about what the truck can haul, but if you can't bring that load to a stop, especially in an emergency or on steep declines, all the towing capacity in the world won't do you any good at that point.

My advice would be to find a later model, early-mid 2000's 2500HD or 3500HD. They have newer, more reliable, engines, better transmissions, Overdrive, all the extra coolers built in, hydroboost brakes, and 4 wheel discs. Not to mention better mileage (I average 11 mpg with my 6.0L when towing, with an 18' steel trailer, bed full of tools/equipment, and a full size truck on the trailer), and a more comfortable vehicle overall for a long haul, especially with A/C!

Originally Posted by Nick_R_23 (Post 7878036)

The thing I would be most worried about is the brakes. People get all excited about what the truck can haul, but if you can't bring that load to a stop, especially in an emergency or on steep declines, all the towing capacity in the world won't do you any good at that point.

My advice would be to find a later model, early-mid 2000's 2500HD or 3500HD. They have newer, more reliable, engines, better transmissions, Overdrive, all the extra coolers built in, hydroboost brakes, and 4 wheel discs. Not to mention better mileage (I average 11 mpg with my 6.0L when towing, with an 18' steel trailer, bed full of tools/equipment, and a full size truck on the trailer), and a more comfortable vehicle overall for a long haul, especially with A/C!

Originally Posted by Desert1957 (Post 7878847)

Carbureted 454's suck an unbelievable amount of fuel, without an overdrive, and 70 MPH. OMG! Maybe 4 MPG.

IMO , not sure how long that motor will last cruising it at 3000+ RPM.

Originally Posted by SCOTI (Post 7878042)

C30 disc/drum brakes are adequate for these needs. Newer technology is nice, but the old stuff is still capable of getting it done.

Originally Posted by slotard (Post 7878270)

I didn't realize a 2500HD with 6.0 got Hydroboost, interesting.

Even so, the heavier duty square body brakes are good. My recollection is that my C20 has bigger rotors than a 2500HD of the era you speak of (not by much, but a little). Obviously no ABS though.

Originally Posted by Edahall (Post 7878827)

There is no replacement for displacement so 454 engine wins big time over the 6.0 in the newer 2500 HD's.

Originally Posted by Desert1957 (Post 7878847)

Carbureted 454's suck an unbelievable amount of fuel, without an overdrive, and 70 MPH. OMG! Maybe 4 MPG.

IMO , not sure how long that motor will last cruising it at 3000+ RPM.

Originally Posted by slotard (Post 7878015)

Whether or not 70mph is reasonable really depends on tire size... but it probably isn't. My C20 is 350/350/4.10/30.5" but I very rarely go that fast. If you do go that fast, 8mpg seems optimistic.

Originally Posted by Alex V. (Post 7879184)

4.10's with 30.5" tires is on the short side. My '85 with 32 inchers and 4.10 is right in the sweet spot at 60, doesn't protest at 65, but you can tell everything's spinning good and fast at 70+. 3.73's put a truck with 32" tires at 2,800 @ 70, which if you look at factory literature for the mid 80's truck 454, is right at its torque peak.

Originally Posted by Alex V. (Post 7879184)

4.10's with 30.5" tires is on the short side. My '85 with 32 inchers and 4.10 is right in the sweet spot at 60, doesn't protest at 65, but you can tell everything's spinning good and fast at 70+. 3.73's put a truck with 32" tires at 2,800 @ 70, which if you look at factory literature for the mid 80's truck 454, is right at its torque peak.

Originally Posted by dieseldawg142 (Post 7878908)

so do f.i. 454's!
my fuelie 454 crew can manage 'bout 5-6 mpg's empty, 3 or 4 when towing with the camper....but it does run all day long at 3200 at about 55-ish....:lol: (4:56's)

Originally Posted by slotard (Post 7879146)

The 454 makes more torque at lower rpm, while the 6.0 makes the torque at higher rpm. I've certainly seen people claim that, comparing a 454 truck to the 6.0, the 454 tows better. Don't know if it's true.

Originally Posted by Alex V. (Post 7879173)

They are thirsty but the very worst mine's ever gotten was 9.5, towing a 9,000 lb. trailer 450 miles at 60-65. And they will last.

Originally Posted by Nick_R_23 (Post 7878987)

They aren't terrible, but remember that the OP is looking at a "cheap" truck that is nearly 40 years old...when were they last serviced? What condition are they in now? I'd rather not find out during an emergency stop.



Yes, even the early 1500HDs got hydroboost. It was a very nice setup.



This is some pretty old school thinking...today it's more about engine efficientcy than it is about simply cubic inches. I've towed with both and I can tell you that I was less than impressed with the 454, new tech is where it's at. That '78 454 was rated somewhere about 240hp/370lb•ft, when it was new. Even the older 6.0L was rated at 300hp/360lb•ft, at nearly a 100 cubic inch disadvantage. Some of the later ones got bumped to 361hp/385lb•ft! The 454 does have a longer stroke, but that's about the only advantage you'll find with that engine. The 6.0L is lighter, more efficient (better mileage/more hp per cubic inch), won't overheat on long climbs, fuel injected, backed by overdrive, and will outlast a 454 by a long shot. To me, guys that are stuck on 454s are there for the badge. Modern tech has left these engines in the past. Sure, they can make reasonably cheap power, but when there are many better options out there today, take advantage of the technology available!

Originally Posted by Desert1957 (Post 7879811)

Doesn't sound right , My combo gets 10-12 pulling all this.
Iv'e had both , I prefer the 454

Originally Posted by dieseldawg142 (Post 7878908)

so do f.i. 454's!
my fuelie 454 crew can manage 'bout 5-6 mpg's empty, 3 or 4 when towing with the camper....but it does run all day long at 3200 at about 55-ish....:lol: (4:56's)