![]() |
This site is not affiliated with AGCO Inc., Duluth GA., Allis-Chalmers Co., Milwaukee, WI., or any surviving or related corporate entity. All trademarks remain the property of their respective owners. All information presented herein should be considered the result of an un-moderated public forum with no responsibility for its accuracy or usability assumed by the users and sponsors of this site or any corporate entity. | |||||
The Forum | Parts and Services | Unofficial Allis Store | Tractor Shows | Serial Numbers | History |
Know anything about 1960s-1970s GM Big Trucks ? |
Post Reply ![]() |
Page 12> |
Author | ||
BuckSkin ![]() Orange Level ![]() Joined: 12 Sep 2019 Location: Poor Farm Points: 643 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posted: 26 Mar 2023 at 6:47pm |
|
I am trying to identify a 1960ish GM heavy duty truck; it could be a Chevrolet or it could be a GMC.
I used to could answer anything I ever needed to know on the 6066GMCGuy site; but, alas, that vast store of knowledge has vanquished forever..... It is surprising how little concrete information on these trucks is out there. An all too common modification that happened to way too many of these trucks, and the one in question, is the original hood --- it could have been a butterfly or it could have been a tilt --- gets replaced with a Brigadier (or Bruin) tilt hood. If you will notice, the crease on the Brigadier hood does not match the crease on the Classic door and cowl (or whatever you call that area between door and fender/hood). This truck has the cab style of a 1968-1972 GM pickup; however, the big truck year model usage of this cab style doesn't coincide with it's use on little trucks; I am fairly certain the big trucks started the style in 1966. GMC were either H/J-series (butterfly hood) or C/M-series (tilt hood); I don't know if Chevrolet followed this same nomenclature or if they had a different naming scheme. I also don't know whether the H/J and C/M were options available during the same years, or if one succeeded the other. The truck in question has a split two-piece windshield and round plastic cab-lights. I didn't get close enough to determine whether the cab-lights were original or a poor man's replacement for the classy chrome torpedo style ($3 apiece as opposed to better than fifty bucks a pop), but they do look original in the photo. The West Coast mirrors don't look original. Inside the cab, I can see a much later RoadRanger shifter and it appears to come up awfully high; a man would have to sit on a stack of catalogs to reach all the gears. Also, notice the three back windows. I can't understand why information on these trucks is so hard to find; I have wasted hours and know less than I did when I started. Twenty years ago, I could find anything I needed to know in a few seconds; anymore, all I can find is useless drivel and copy/pastes of the same useless misinformation. Thanks for reading; thanks for looking; and, thanks for helping. ![]() Edited by BuckSkin - 06 Feb 2025 at 7:47pm |
||
![]() |
||
Sponsored Links | ||
![]() |
||
BuckSkin ![]() Orange Level ![]() Joined: 12 Sep 2019 Location: Poor Farm Points: 643 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
![]() Edited by BuckSkin - 06 Feb 2025 at 7:49pm |
||
![]() |
||
exSW ![]() Orange Level ![]() Joined: 21 Jul 2017 Location: Pennsylvania Points: 914 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
That's a different one. I'd nearly bet GMC because of the glass layout. Many people don't realize that prior to 1972 GMC's really were different than Chevy. GMC was much more likely to be a specialty rig.
|
||
Learning AC...slowly
|
||
![]() |
||
DMiller ![]() Orange Level Access ![]() Joined: 14 Sep 2009 Location: Hermann, Mo Points: 33111 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
What is being looked at are 8500 and 9500 series GMs
They had no letter class just numbers Earlier 1950s/early 60s were three digit no letters |
||
![]() |
||
Ed (Ont) ![]() Orange Level ![]() ![]() Joined: 08 Nov 2009 Location: New Lowell, Ont Points: 1409 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
Those were not bad looking old truck. Hood looks correct. Needs some work to line up - check front hinges and rubber bumpers on firewall to line up.
|
||
![]() |
||
Codger ![]() Orange Level ![]() ![]() Joined: 23 Dec 2020 Location: Utopia Points: 2198 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
For a while when I was much younger I drove a 68 MH9500 GMC. Had a 6-71 Detroit Diesel, (238hp) RT-910 Fuller Roadranger transmission, and Reyco 101 spring suspension. I really liked it as it drove like a large pickup truck to me. They were still pretty common on the roads in the late 70's but were getting rusty. The one I drove was an extended hood, and had dual headlamps where most of the others I'd seen were single headlamps and a short hood.
I have old Polaroid photos of the truck but they are stuck together from a basement flood several years ago. Those cab marker lamps in the photo are not original to the truck as the chrome base and amber glass, (and later plastic) Yankee, Vis-A-Vis, or Truk-Lite styles were original.
|
||
That's All Folks!
|
||
![]() |
||
steve(ill) ![]() Orange Level Access ![]() ![]() Joined: 11 Sep 2009 Location: illinois Points: 85458 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
![]() |
||
Like them all, but love the "B"s.
|
||
![]() |
||
BuckSkin ![]() Orange Level ![]() Joined: 12 Sep 2019 Location: Poor Farm Points: 643 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
The H/J-series (H=single; J=tandem) were 93-inch BBC. C/M-series and N/M-series were 114-inch BBC
I would carefully try steam to separate them; either a boiling tea-kettle or one of those hand-held steam cleaners. The wife has a steamer with a long hose and various nozzles for steaming wrinkles out of clothes and I have a hand-held steam cleaner that has an assortment of nozzles. I would go easy and use only enough steam to get them to separate and not enough to make them soggy such that the image layer comes away with the back of the previous photo.
|
||
![]() |
||
Codger ![]() Orange Level ![]() ![]() Joined: 23 Dec 2020 Location: Utopia Points: 2198 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
Thanks for the tips. I'm going to try that. The 9500 I drove was tandem, but not twin screw. Always thought it was an "MH" but maybe not? I can't say if the suspension was original to the truck or not, but it was Reyco 101 as I rebushed all of it when employed there. I don't remember much, (if any) of a "doghouse" in the cab, but as stated the hood was longer than others I'd seen.
Rode pretty well too for spring ride.
|
||
That's All Folks!
|
||
![]() |
||
BuckSkin ![]() Orange Level ![]() Joined: 12 Sep 2019 Location: Poor Farm Points: 643 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
So it was a "dead tandem" as in front axle live and rear axle an idler ? I may be wrong, but I never knew of a factory original dead tandem; all I ever saw/drove were after-market or homemade creations. They might have carried a bit more weight, but they were helpless in the least likely situations, such as pulling out of a parking lot onto a highway and the drive axle end up spinning in the air when the drive wheels get to that low spot where the parking lot meets the built-up highway; such could get one killed if he was crowding his luck trying to beat oncoming traffic and get stopped right in front of them. I drove a dead tandem L8000 Ford dump truck with 3208 Cat and 5 and 2 and hardly a day passed that someone didn't have to pull me out, usually on almost level ground. The air bags on that one would push down the dead tandem, but there was no second set of airbags to lift it up clear of the ground. Most of the leaf sprung dead tandems had no means at all to raise or press down the tandem. Many homemade ones were designed such that when empty, the dead wheels didn't contact the ground. A lot of the homemade dead tandems had no brakes whatsoever on the dead axle. You have given me another quest = to find out if dead tandems were ever a factory option.
|
||
![]() |
||
Codger ![]() Orange Level ![]() ![]() Joined: 23 Dec 2020 Location: Utopia Points: 2198 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
The front axle was an idler, the rear was the driver. I never got hung up at all and Reyco 101 is/was a very good suspension with good articulation in comparison to many others of the day. It rode very soft for spring except when bobtail of course. An empty 40' flat smoothed it right out. Not a powerhouse by any stretch but was very dependable and started pretty easily in cold weather.
Typical of any Detroit of the day, a small "snort" would get it fired off easily.
|
||
That's All Folks!
|
||
![]() |
||
BuckSkin ![]() Orange Level ![]() Joined: 12 Sep 2019 Location: Poor Farm Points: 643 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
If it were an aftermarket kit, I imagine the front axle had a "hump" to clear the driveshaft. I have seen more than a few homemade dead front axles that were drive axles with the hogs-head and cover removed; the driveshaft went through the opening. Wooden plugs were driven in the inside end of the tubes and either the bearings were packed in grease or plugs and vents added on each side so they could be "wet" axles. The reason dead front axles were used, instead of the dead axle being the rear one, was to keep from having to stretch the frame. Quite often, when a longer frame was needed anyway, a dead rear axle was included to prevent the truck rearing up on steep hills or when a moving load shifted to the back, such as liquid or livestock. I have seen cattle rear up a truck on a bad hill; and, if the livestock bed were open top, the front cattle would climb over the backs of the ones trapped against the tailgate and escape; or, on a stout closed top bed, a heavy truck or tractor would need be chained to the front end and pull it back down, hopefully before the cattle trapped underneath smothered to death --- they smother pretty quick. We have a lot of really steep bad hills around here.
|
||
![]() |
||
Lars(wi) ![]() Orange Level Access ![]() ![]() Joined: 14 Sep 2009 Location: Permian Basin Points: 7697 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
We have a couple, maybe three old trucks (class 8) in the fence row with ‘dead axles’. All appear to be factory originals, if I recall the front axles of the tandems are the drive axles. I would have to go take a look. All three units started their lives in California with 4,500 gal fuel tanks set up to also pull a pup fuel trailer.
|
||
I tried to follow the science, but it was not there. I then followed the money, and that’s where I found the science.
|
||
![]() |
||
DMiller ![]() Orange Level Access ![]() Joined: 14 Sep 2009 Location: Hermann, Mo Points: 33111 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
Early GM Tandems trying to save expense on these trucks were Tags, Pusher axles were a Dealer or sub contractor add as I helped ID many of those in the 1970s. Belt Drive Tandems were really popular in Midwest in the 1960s, actually had a client had over a dozen spare "Rubber Bands" in his shop, ran off Corrugated type Dayton Wheel Spacers, MAJOR PITA to install and were tire eating contraptions when used routinely.
Had my Share of GM 500 and 600 generally 630 series Round Grills that had Gas Engines, inline Sixes that SWILLED gas. Actually had a soft spot for Gull Wing 9500s with 8v and 12V Detroit Diesels, horrible to work on but sounded cool.
|
||
![]() |
||
BuckSkin ![]() Orange Level ![]() Joined: 12 Sep 2019 Location: Poor Farm Points: 643 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
So that is why so many of the older Dayton spacers were corrugated. Back in the 60s and 70s, more that I saw were corrugated than not. It is about 50/50 now, corrugated or smooth. As much stuff as I have seen, driven, and worked on, I have never seen a drive belt between the tires. I guess my idea isn't so original as I thought---- ; I have been designing a live tandem addition for my twin-engine F-350 and have came up with the idea of putting sprockets between the rear duals and connecting them with roller chain. I had also thoroughly considered connecting front to rear with drive rods like a steam locomotive. Thanks for enlightening me about the belt driven rears. |
||
![]() |
||
Alberta Phil ![]() Orange Level ![]() ![]() Joined: 13 Sep 2009 Location: Alberta, Canada Points: 3882 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
Had a customer years ago who had a Mack with this setup on it. Belts were a pain to replace after picking up a rock between pulley and belt. Usually broke the belt. Edited by Alberta Phil - 27 Mar 2023 at 8:50am |
||
![]() |
||
Codger ![]() Orange Level ![]() ![]() Joined: 23 Dec 2020 Location: Utopia Points: 2198 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
The one originally installed on my Mack was Page&Page. I didn't need a tandem drive so removed it.
|
||
That's All Folks!
|
||
![]() |
||
DMiller ![]() Orange Level Access ![]() Joined: 14 Sep 2009 Location: Hermann, Mo Points: 33111 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
Chain Drive tandems date back to the 1930s, Loggers used then NW US.
![]() This actually a 1947 Ford off Ford Trucks .com Can Laugh, that has VACUUM Applied Brakes not Air Brakes. Size of chambers dead and usually Dead giveaway.
Edited by DMiller - 27 Mar 2023 at 11:32am |
||
![]() |
||
BuckSkin ![]() Orange Level ![]() Joined: 12 Sep 2019 Location: Poor Farm Points: 643 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
Thanks for the photo. Okay, after extensive eyestraining searching, I am seeing plenty of 7500s and plenty of 9500s, but I have yet to see anything 8500 except bus chassis. My mystery truck is single axle with a tilt-hood cowl, so definitely a C-series; I think it is too old to be N-series (1973-1976) I have seen photos of 1967 and 1968 with the three rear windows, but they had butterfly hoods. Google doesn't help a bit by plastering dozens of late model pickups for every big truck in a search specifically for big trucks. I wish they hadn't shot down that 6066GMCGuy site; I would have had this figured hours ago with plenty of photographic evidence. I read that a divorce case with a court order caused the abolishment of that site; it sure drove a lot of old GM truck aficionados to tears.
|
||
![]() |
||
BuckSkin ![]() Orange Level ![]() Joined: 12 Sep 2019 Location: Poor Farm Points: 643 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
I am having trouble putting a date on the butterfly/93"BBC or tilt hood/114"BBC business.
B-Model 1960-1966 7500 = 1963-1978 9500 = 1966-1978 And a bit of bewilderment on the SRA versus tandem story; I see tandems even in the lower numbered medium dutys. I am fairly certain that a 7500 could very well be a single axle; can a 9500 be SRA as well, or are all 9500s tandems ? One would think somebody would have documented all of this ages ago --- someone already did = 6066GMCGuy; I guess nobody else saw a need compared to the massive amount of information he had gathered in one place. |
||
![]() |
||
DaveKamp ![]() Orange Level Access ![]() ![]() Joined: 12 Apr 2010 Location: LeClaire, Ia Points: 5957 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
Ten Amendments, Ten Commandments, and one Golden Rule solve most every problem. Citrus hand-cleaner with Pumice does the rest.
|
||
![]() |
||
BuckSkin ![]() Orange Level ![]() Joined: 12 Sep 2019 Location: Poor Farm Points: 643 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
The top link was the good one; it goes nowhere now; that link comes up all over the web and is a dead end. Thanks for the forum link. I may have already made mention of it; my mystery truck is single rear axle and has Dayton wheels. I just now was looking at a 1966 9500 tilt hood and a 1967 9500 with butterfly hood; both of these had the single back glass. According to that, I am beginning to believe that butterfly and tilt hoods were options as well as the three back glasses as I see them overlapping in year models as well. Does anyone know what it took to determine whether 7500 or 9500 ? Other than being SRA, this truck looks plenty heavy duty enough to be a 9500.
|
||
![]() |
||
BuckSkin ![]() Orange Level ![]() Joined: 12 Sep 2019 Location: Poor Farm Points: 643 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
Found this one in my collection, taken at Paris, Kentucky, Saturday_27-July-2019.
The sign in the window says it is a 1966 GMC 9500, the very first year for the 9500. It is Tilt-hood, so either a "C" or a "M". It is single rear axle, so definitely a "C" So, this truck is a 1966 GMC C9500; were it a butterfly hood, it would be a H9500. I can't see beyond the glare to tell whether it has a single rear glass or three. Curiously, and quite unque from what I have been seeing, this truck is on BUDDs. Some references state the H/J to all be 93"BBC and all C/M and N/M to be 114"BBC; but, I have found that information not to hold true as I am seeing plenty of 93"BBC with the tilt hood. It may hold true if the sentence were turned around a bit; maybe all 9500L, the 114"BBC, are tilt-hood C/M(1966-1978) or N/M(1973-1976) --- it's enough to make a man go over the hill talking to hisself. ![]() Edited by BuckSkin - 06 Feb 2025 at 6:26pm |
||
![]() |
||
truckerfarmer ![]() Orange Level Access ![]() ![]() Joined: 26 Jan 2013 Location: Watertown, SD Points: 3232 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
Link worked for me. |
||
Looking at the past to see the future.
'53 WD, '53 WD45, WD snap coupler field cultivator, #53 plow,'53 HD5B dozer Duct tape.... Can't fix stupidity. But will muffle the sound of it! |
||
![]() |
||
Tbone95 ![]() Orange Level Access ![]() ![]() Joined: 31 Aug 2012 Location: Michigan Points: 11964 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
both links work for me?
|
||
![]() |
||
Codger ![]() Orange Level ![]() ![]() Joined: 23 Dec 2020 Location: Utopia Points: 2198 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
The one I drove had a fiberglass tilt hood and was a bitch to get over being very heavy. I don't remember the grab handles and always lifted via the wheel arches. Again, no doghouse in the cab I remember and it did only have the single back window. All Dayton, (spoke) wheels on 10.00X20 bias tires. Haven't seen the truck since 1981 but I'm sure it's still around if not on a back fence row someplace.
I remember it being a pretty good truck as it never really gave problems I know of. Other than rebushing the rear suspension, never did anything to it myself. Seems it needed king pins but if so, I didn't do the work. It had painted pinstriping that was nicely done, stainless mirror brackets with heated mirror heads, and an air drivers seat. Also had chromed lock rings, (steer axle) wedges, and center hub caps on the wheel hubs. Always assumed it was never a fleet truck citing these items.
|
||
That's All Folks!
|
||
![]() |
||
BuckSkin ![]() Orange Level ![]() Joined: 12 Sep 2019 Location: Poor Farm Points: 643 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
That's almost amazing ! I have been using Chrome and repetitively trying to connect with the top link for days and all I ever get is "This Site Can't be Reached" I just now tried again a couple times. The bottom link works fine and takes me to a GMC enthusiasts forum site which I have bookmarked - Thanks. P.S. I just now tried with Pale Moon browser and got "Site does not Exist"
Edited by BuckSkin - 28 Mar 2023 at 7:19am |
||
![]() |
||
Ed (Ont) ![]() Orange Level ![]() ![]() Joined: 08 Nov 2009 Location: New Lowell, Ont Points: 1409 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
That is a neat looking single axle!
![]() |
||
![]() |
||
BuckSkin ![]() Orange Level ![]() Joined: 12 Sep 2019 Location: Poor Farm Points: 643 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
Those chrome caps that cover the axle end are nice and no problem on Dayton wheels; it's a different story when they are on Budds as most of them are a wee bit bigger around than the wheel center. With no discernible doghouse, I wonder if the truck you remember may not have been the 114"BBC long hood 9500L. Compare where the wheel skirts on that truck come back to with the yellow truck in my first post - 21-inches makes a lot of difference. The wheel skirts on the yellow truck extend past the edge of the doors; whereas, those on the brown truck don't even get past the rear edge of the hood. I drove a few 93"BBC and they all had a bit of a doghouse.
|
||
![]() |
||
BuckSkin ![]() Orange Level ![]() Joined: 12 Sep 2019 Location: Poor Farm Points: 643 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
The nuts don't look like proper hub-pilot nuts; I don't see any flange-washer. Of course, that don't mean a thing as I see plenty running around with entirely the wrong nuts and then people wonder why they bust so many wheels. It would also be interesting to see if it had proper long studs for Aluminum wheels, or short steel wheel studs with barely a thread holding; I see that a lot as well. I run into a lot of dual Aluminum Budds bolted on the short studs and there is barely half-a-thread caught in the nuts; a lot of chrome nut covers get sold just to hide their sins.
|
||
![]() |
Post Reply ![]() |
Page 12> |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions ![]() You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |