The 1947 - Present Chevrolet & GMC Truck Message Board Network







Register or Log In To remove these advertisements.

Go Back   The 1947 - Present Chevrolet & GMC Truck Message Board Network > 47 - Current classic GM Trucks > The 1967 - 1972 Chevrolet & GMC Pickups Message Board

Web 67-72chevytrucks.com


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-04-2022, 01:07 AM   #1
Accelo
Senior Member
 
Accelo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: washington
Posts: 2,194
By the numbers for 1972.

By the numbers for 1972.

These trucks could be ordered in several bed lengths. Today’s collectors love the shorter 6.5-foot bed, or 115-inch wheelbase. More than 273,000 two-wheel-drive trucks with eight-foot beds were made in 1972, compared with just under 40,000 short-beds. This means only 14.5% of the trucks were short beds.

The biggest engine — the 400, which was really a 402 big block represented 8% of production. A/c delivered in 33% and a TH400 automatic in 28% of trucks.

The Cheyenne Super package 7% of trucks that year. That package includes all the wood-grain exterior trim and deluxe interior fittings, such as wood-grain dash inserts, a headliner, deluxe upholstery and more.

Other rare options include bucket seats and center console (4% of production), the AM/FM radio (3% of production), a tilt column (9%), cargo lamp (5%) and an in-dash tachometer (2%). Three-point seat belts, which were generally dealer-installed.

Just interesting and hopefully correct. I have actually seen only one truck with the three-point seat belts. Very rare indeed.
Accelo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2022, 01:52 AM   #2
jumpsoffrock
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: California
Posts: 926
Re: By the numbers for 1972.

Love it man, informative post.

I am honestly staggered at the amount of these trucks built...I just can't believe this many were made. It really helps me from feeling bad when I see 4-5 of them parted out.

Funny enough I'm replacing my rusted white cab from 5/72 with another white cab from 1/72
jumpsoffrock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2022, 08:55 AM   #3
special-K
Special Order

 
special-K's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Mt Airy, MD
Posts: 85,863
Re: By the numbers for 1972.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Accelo View Post
By the numbers for 1972.

These trucks could be ordered in several bed lengths....

...Just interesting and hopefully correct. I have actually seen only one truck with the three-point seat belts. Very rare indeed.
That's what I was going to say, Interesting, but accurate? What is the source for this info? I didn't think GM had records on how many trucks got what option.
__________________
"BUILDING A BETTER WAY TO SERVE THE USA"......67/72......"The New Breed"

GMC '67 C1500 Wideside Super Custom SWB: 327/M22/3.42 posi.........."The '67" (project)
GMC '72 K2500 Wideside Sierra Custom Camper: 350/TH350/4.10 Power-Lok..."The '72" (rolling)
Tim

"Don't call me a redneck. I'm a rough cut country gentleman"

R.I.P. ~ East Side Low Life ~ El Jay ~ 72BLUZ ~ Fasteddie69 ~ Ron586 ~ 67ChevyRedneck ~ Grumpy Old Man ~
special-K is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2022, 10:39 AM   #4
Jason Banks
Senior Member
 
Jason Banks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: TX
Posts: 1,533
Re: By the numbers for 1972.

I cargo lamp really only 5% ? I had a 71 and 72 that both had the cargo lamp...
Jason Banks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2022, 10:58 AM   #5
72tutone
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: St.Louis
Posts: 635
Re: By the numbers for 1972.

Wow.. Awesome info. My 72 super meets some of those statistics, but not all.

Factory AC, 3.08 gears, Longbed, no tach. Only lap belts. But, I do have the cargo lamp. I thought that was standard on the 72?

No buckets, bench seat w/houndstooth AM/FM radio. No tilt.

Needless to say its been completely revamped and most of those things are now gone.
72tutone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2022, 11:21 AM   #6
Accelo
Senior Member
 
Accelo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: washington
Posts: 2,194
Re: By the numbers for 1972.

Sourced on the internet. Thus my caveat. Maybe the cargo lamp specification is for individually ordered and not part of a package. Or just BS? I don't know. But I agree it seems suspect. However, much of the other information is believable.

The short bed was less expensive. It would be interesting to me, to know the percentage of SWB that were sold with 6 cylinder motor compared to the Long Box Trucks.
Accelo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2022, 01:08 PM   #7
Palf70Step
State of Confusion!

 
Palf70Step's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Gulfport, MS USA
Posts: 46,745
Re: By the numbers for 1972.

I tend to remember that the 400 could be a small block or a BB 402. I remeber someone telling me that many years ago, but not for sure.
__________________
Bill
1970 Chevy Custom/10 LWB Fleetside
2010 Toyota Tacoma PreRunner SR5 Double Cab - DD

Member of Louisiana Classic Truck Club (LCTC)

Bill's Gallery
Life isn't tied with a bow, but it's still a gift.
Live simply. Love generously. Care deeply. Speak kindly. Leave the rest to God!
Palf70Step is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2022, 01:52 PM   #8
Steeveedee
Who Changed This?
 
Steeveedee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Simi Valley, CA
Posts: 10,186
Re: By the numbers for 1972.

True, except the SBC 400 wasn't installed in the '72 and older.
__________________
~Steven

'70 Chevy 3/4T Longhorn CST 402/400/3.56 Custom Camper

Simi Valley, CA
Steeveedee is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2022, 02:48 PM   #9
72tutone
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: St.Louis
Posts: 635
Re: By the numbers for 1972.

Pretty sure its a BB as it was a 396 punched over to a 402 CI. But they badged it as a '400' on the fender.

I don't think they ever offered a 400 small block. I could be wrong through.
72tutone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2022, 03:59 PM   #10
RustyPile
Registered User
 
RustyPile's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Elkhart, Texas
Posts: 1,582
Re: By the numbers for 1972.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 72tutone View Post
Pretty sure its a BB as it was a 396 punched over to a 402 CI. But they badged it as a '400' on the fender.

I don't think they ever offered a 400 small block. I could be wrong through.
The small block 400 was a passenger car only engine, never offered in trucks.

There are rumors and "synthetic" reasons roaming about as to why the 396 was bored .030, and not installed "as is" in trucks. A .030" overbore certainly doesn't add much in the power column. It appeared to be a political move as opposed to a practical move.
RustyPile is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2022, 04:40 PM   #11
old51sedan
Registered User
 
old51sedan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Williamston, Mi
Posts: 880
Re: By the numbers for 1972.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RustyPile View Post
The small block 400 was a passenger car only engine, never offered in trucks.

There are rumors and "synthetic" reasons roaming about as to why the 396 was bored .030, and not installed "as is" in trucks. A .030" overbore certainly doesn't add much in the power column. It appeared to be a political move as opposed to a practical move.
I remember when I ordered my new 72 elcamino, I ordered the 400 and I remember the salesman saying to me (you realize that this will be a big block). I ordered it, when it came in I traded my 69 C/10 in on it.
old51sedan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2022, 04:54 PM   #12
Steeveedee
Who Changed This?
 
Steeveedee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Simi Valley, CA
Posts: 10,186
Re: By the numbers for 1972.

402 BBC was available in the early '70s in everything but 4WD. IIRC, '70 on up only big cars could get the 400 SBC, at least through '75, because my parents had a '75 Caprice convertible. There was one in there. I've read here that somewhere in the square body era the 400 SBC was offered in a 4WD. Thus my statement, above. Not too knowledgeable on square bodies.
__________________
~Steven

'70 Chevy 3/4T Longhorn CST 402/400/3.56 Custom Camper

Simi Valley, CA
Steeveedee is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2022, 06:12 PM   #13
Palf70Step
State of Confusion!

 
Palf70Step's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Gulfport, MS USA
Posts: 46,745
Re: By the numbers for 1972.

I was unsure of when the 400 was started, but early mid 70s was as good as my mind was working. Person that made the comment back then did have a short 4x4 now that think about it.
__________________
Bill
1970 Chevy Custom/10 LWB Fleetside
2010 Toyota Tacoma PreRunner SR5 Double Cab - DD

Member of Louisiana Classic Truck Club (LCTC)

Bill's Gallery
Life isn't tied with a bow, but it's still a gift.
Live simply. Love generously. Care deeply. Speak kindly. Leave the rest to God!
Palf70Step is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2022, 06:35 PM   #14
Lee H
Registered User
 
Lee H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Upland Ca
Posts: 4,139
Re: By the numbers for 1972.

I always enjoy reading these statistics.

"with just under 40,000 short-beds" I'll bet there are way over double that today posing as originals, just like the 67 BB vette, 69 Z28, 67 GTAs.
__________________
1972 C10 SWB, Air, PS, PB, 350/350THM. Second owner.

1965 Corvette roadster, 44K miles, 327/365 SHP, 4 speed, side exhaust, knockoffs, teak, second owner (bought in 1970), Have ALL numbers matching components.

My frame off restoration thread: http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=556703
Lee H is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2022, 07:04 PM   #15
Dirt's72
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 1,105
Re: By the numbers for 1972.

Of the 40k shortbeds how many were stepside vs. fleetside?
Dirt's72 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2022, 07:13 PM   #16
RustyPile
Registered User
 
RustyPile's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Elkhart, Texas
Posts: 1,582
Re: By the numbers for 1972.

Quote:
Originally Posted by old51sedan View Post
I remember when I ordered my new 72 elcamino, I ordered the 400 and I remember the salesman saying to me (you realize that this will be a big block). I ordered it, when it came in I traded my 69 C/10 in on it.
I think your memory is correct.. The Elcamino (is that correct spelling??) is considered a truck, thus the salesman's comment about it being a BB.
RustyPile is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2022, 09:27 PM   #17
Accelo
Senior Member
 
Accelo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: washington
Posts: 2,194
Re: By the numbers for 1972.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RustyPile View Post
There are rumors and "synthetic" reasons roaming about as to why the 396 was bored .030, and not installed "as is" in trucks. A .030" overbore certainly doesn't add much in the power column. It appeared to be a political move as opposed to a practical move.
The reason for the change from a 396 to a 402 was because the laws governing the amount of pollution changed. Only so much emissions were allowed on motors under 400 C.U. and a different standard for motor over 400 C.I. The change happened in 1970. National Environmental Policy Act that established the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The EPA was created on December 2, 1970 in order to implement the various requirements included in these Acts.

GM had a bunch of marketing money invested in the 396 so they bored out .030 and it was instantly included in a different standard and as a result it was easier to meet the emission criteria.
Accelo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2022, 11:42 PM   #18
jocko
Senior Member
 
jocko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Godley, TX
Posts: 17,937
Re: By the numbers for 1972.

I’m a little skeptical of the source. The cargo lamp was standard equipment on Cheyenne and Cheyenne Supers in 72. If 7% of the production run was Cheyenne Supers, it's mathematically impossible for only 5% of the production run to have Cargo Lamps (in other words, if zero Cheyennes were built in 72, then the cargo lamp % would = the Cheyenne Super %, 7%). I have seen production stats in the past, but never RPO stats, would be very interested if there is a good source out there somewhere.
jocko is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2022, 07:12 AM   #19
special-K
Special Order

 
special-K's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Mt Airy, MD
Posts: 85,863
Re: By the numbers for 1972.

Someone is creating info for the sake of conversation. As Jocko and I have said, no stats on RPO numbers were kept by GM. Look at all the internal information that SS Tim was able to dig up that no one else seemed to be able to. The RPO stats we discussed as non-existent.

As far as the 396 bored to 402 goes, I always figured it was for the same reason the 283 went to 307 the 327 went to 350, and the 427 went to 454. All manufacturers bumped up displacement once emissions standards were put in place and compression was reduced.

I know the 400 SBC was offered in trucks later in the '70s.
__________________
"BUILDING A BETTER WAY TO SERVE THE USA"......67/72......"The New Breed"

GMC '67 C1500 Wideside Super Custom SWB: 327/M22/3.42 posi.........."The '67" (project)
GMC '72 K2500 Wideside Sierra Custom Camper: 350/TH350/4.10 Power-Lok..."The '72" (rolling)
Tim

"Don't call me a redneck. I'm a rough cut country gentleman"

R.I.P. ~ East Side Low Life ~ El Jay ~ 72BLUZ ~ Fasteddie69 ~ Ron586 ~ 67ChevyRedneck ~ Grumpy Old Man ~
special-K is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:31 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright 1997-2022 67-72chevytrucks.com