GMT400 Development Video

[Bob B.]

In case this has not been posted here before:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dEdaZ5HQb4

[1976gmc20]

For better or worse, GM went the route of a slightly more compact and fuel efficient pickup following the fuel shortages and gas price increases of the 1970s. They certainly succeeded, but Ford and Dodge stayed with bigger and beefier looking pickups in those years. Consequently, you hear a lot of people say that F/D made a "better" pickup and some of that attitude carried on into the new millennium, especially using pickups for commercial/agricultural use as opposed to personal/recreational use. GM started moving back towards bigger "beefier" pickups in later generations and now all three are continuing this trend to a ridiculous extreme.

So the 88-98 GM pickups are exceptionally handy for use as a "pick up truck" as opposed to trying to be nearly a medium duty truck, at least in looks and bulk.

[Bob B.]

There is some truth to that, but living with all 3 major pickup makes of that era I can say the slightly smaller GM trucks did anything the other two did and drove a lot better than either. My only gripes with the 400 series trucks were the welded on door hinges (ever change those?) and the 4X4 IFS on the 2500's and 3500's could have been stronger (that issue wasn't resoved until the 2011 HD's). The 400's are becoming classics just like the 67-72's are and plenty seem to have survived. Can't say that about contemporary Fords and Rams.

[Keith Seymore]

Originally Posted by Bob B.

In case this has not been posted here before:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dEdaZ5HQb4

Very cool; thanks for posting. I saw a few people I recognized.

A few recollections:

1) When I first saw the GMT400s I didn't really like them. I hurried and bought an '87.

2) The HVAC system was not well received. In the previous C/K/R/V trucks we had sliding levers which provided positive tactile feedback without looking down. Not so with the buttons. We also had some more aggressive owners push their fingers right through the display. Even today when driving my GMT800 version I long for those old manual levers.

3) Same with the gages. The spinning disc of the speedo was difficult to read and was changed in later years to remove the little line segments between the numbers.

The fuel gage was also problematic. One of our star development engineers ran a truck out of fuel out in the remotest area of the proving ground. He stomped in to the boss's office and threw the keys at him, saying "the NEXT time you give me a truck to drive you better make sure it has GAS in it!"

Our boss was humbled. "I thought it was full" he said.

K

[1976gmc20]

Originally Posted by Bob B.

There is some truth to that, but living with all 3 major pickup makes of that era I can say the slightly smaller GM trucks did anything the other two did and drove a lot better than either. My only gripes with the 400 series trucks were the welded on door hinges (ever changed those?) and the 4X4 IFS on the 2500's and 3500's could have been stronger (that issue wasn't resoved until the 2011 HD's). The 400's are becoming classics just like the 67-72's are and plenty seem to have survived. Can't say that about contemporary Fords and Rams.

It was certainly a perception among people. I've heard it a lot in Montana where "Fords are the best pickup" blah-blah-blah. Well, they might be for the first hundred thousand miles

[1976gmc20]

My 89 Chevy pickup has the slider levers and a small knob for the fan, but it is non-A/C.

I hate the +/- volume buttons on the radio, though.

Seems like all the newer vehicles have a different set of controls for everything: hvac, wipers, lights, etc. // old man rant

[Bob B.]

About the gauges, I remember GM did change them early on. We had an early 1988 that had the segmented dials, and they were hard to read in bright daylight. I liked the HVAC controls but on the early versions you couldn't manually select recirculate.

[special-K]

GM really did their research and came up with a great truck. Time has proven that. I was heavy into trucks long before these came out and my first impression was GM really screwed up. Based on the primitive notion that a truck has to look big and strong, I saw these as wimpy. And IFS? I really hated that. I still prefer the traditional 4wd design, but that IFS did the trick. Again, time has proven that. Being a GM Truck guy I gave GM the benefit of doubt citing they were truly changing with the times in a responsible way. There was a lot of buzz back then about "less excess" and I am all about that and that is what these trucks represent. The guys who say these trucks aren't good trucks are basing that on their simplistic first glance perception. Like a big oaf assuming he can kick Bruce Lee's butt or a making a move on a woman plastered with make-up. Look a little harder and you'll find out otherwise.

I hated the change, but I kept my mind open. I knew the other trucks were a lot of unnecessary bulk. I knew these rode nice with virtually no wind noise. A builder got an 8-lug K2500 for his laborers to use. They were rough on that thing. Broke the back window and dents in no time. They hooked it up to a stuck concrete truck. Nothing broke. I observed these trucks for five years, then decided to buy a new one. No regrets. That truck worked for me for 22 years. It did everything I ever asked it to do.

I liked everything about the '92 dash. I don't know how anyone could punch the buttons out without trying. Mine never broke in 335k miles. I liked how you could mix by the display. An advantage over the prior design with levers was mixing defrost and heat

[1976gmc20]

I was always driving stuff 20 to 40 years old so I didn't get my 89 until 2013! And that was a fixer upper.

One disappointment was that the inside of the bed was too narrow for my half seed drill chainsaw box to fit cross-wise like in the 76 so I had to fit it lengthwise inside the wheel well which makes for an odd cargo area remaining. And likewise the old crossover box that I got for free wouldn't fit either.

But it was nice to have a narrower pickup to fit between the trees. With the x-cab it takes a lot of room to turn but it has never refused to go anywhere I've pointed it: through ditches, over stumps, up sidehills and twisty places.

I just wish it was a regular cab 2500HD with a granny gear five or four speed.

[Bob B.]

Here is another video about an interesting GMT400 version, the 1993 dedicated CNG fueled 2500 pickups. I was involved in this program to a certain extent as I worked for a large utility fleet that was one of the original customers for these trucks. The program was interesting, to say the least. The trucks were eventually all recalled due to an issue that I was told later really had nothing to do with the truck or the fuel system. You may notice a GMC Syclone and Typhoon in the background. That probably was not an accident, the Syclone, Typhoon, and the CNG 2500 were all modified by Production Automotive Services.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2o9V61kcTLI

[special-K]

I didn't realize max pressure was 3,600# to the regulator.