What's new
CK5
Register an account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members.

Does anyone have an actual PIC of a k30?? Do YOU like K30s??

Re: Does anyone have an actual PIC of a k30????

That last pic of the duallys, is that stock with both tires inside the bed instead of the extra fenders ?
 
Re: Does anyone have an actual PIC of a k30????

My friend put a dually axle in his 3/4 ton 78 K20,and he used the wheel houses off another bed to widen his so the inner tires wouldnt rub against the wheel tubs.This led to major modification to his slide in camper,which would no longer fit between the wheel tubs! /forums/images/graemlins/doah.gif--the reason he put in the dually rear end in the first place!.Like they say,one thing leads to another. I dont know for sure,but I dont think any stock GM dually's came that way,I'm fairly sure they had the big fenders on dually's,or a single wheel 1 ton rear end. /forums/images/graemlins/crazy.gif
 
Re: Does anyone have an actual PIC of a k30????

[ QUOTE ]
Im not /forums/images/graemlins/thumb.gif just something cool, with the good axles, good frame, and something that is smog exempt /forums/images/graemlins/thumb.gif I think it would be a good start /forums/images/graemlins/thumb.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Well the only benifets to having the 6.2 offroad that I can see is...

1. Fuel injection and will run at all angles unlike a carburetor.
2. Nice torquey idle for crawling.
3. Probably one of the best "mileage" diesels around. Even the cummins guys have a hard time laying down the mileage that a 6.2 is capable of. (which in my opinion is mostly because the 6.2 was put in fairly light wieght vehicles)

The cons...
1. That sucker is HEAVY! Slightly more than a BBC IIRC.
2. It only spins about 3,000 RPM's, not enough at all for deep mud combined with a the low range 208, 4.56 axles, and your planned 35's you would like to run. That is one badddddddd combo for mud IMHO. You'll be able to count the tire revolutions. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
3. They plain don't put out very much power stock. My 1985 handbook said 135HP/235 ft lbs IIRC. My 406SBC put 215/295 TO THE GROUND at the dyno shop. If I 38's or 39.5's with bogger tread I think I would want more power. My current 406/th700R4/241/4.10's/35x16 boggers is almost perfect in the mud but I think I would be short on power in deep mud with 38.5x15.50's. It takes a LOT of power and RPM's to get through mud that is deep deep deep. That is why you see most dedicated mud trucks running 40" boggers and larger have BBC's because they can't get enough power out of a small block.

4. A 6.2 can be modded to make some nice power, agdieseler, has a nicely built up 6.2. But..... The max power that a 6.2 bottom end can take is about 450 ft lbs of torque. Ffrom my knowledge that is it for the 6.2 and that doesn't solve your RPM problem. 450 ft lbs would be nice and adequit but thats still less than my stock cummins. IMHO a 6.2 and SBC have a lot in common because their bottoms ends in stock form max out at about the same power level. but once again.....You can get aftermarket pistons, rods, cranks, and even blocks to make a hi powered SBC that will roast your standard built BBC. A 6.2 has no aftermarket hard parts built for higher power levels out there IIRC which limits you to that max 450 ft lbs power level.

5. SOmeone correct me if I'm wrong but I think it is quite a bit more expensive to build up a turbo'd 6.2 than a SBC or BBC.


P.S. THis is the info I have gathered over the years, if I'm wrong on something let me know.
 
Re: Does anyone have an actual PIC of a k30????

[ QUOTE ]
2. It only spins about 3,000 RPM's, not enough at all for deep mud combined with a the low range 208, 4.56 axles, and your planned 35's you would like to run. That is one badddddddd combo for mud IMHO. You'll be able to count the tire revolutions.

[/ QUOTE ]

Governed limit is 3600 stock, and can be modded to redline as high as 4200 rpm.

[ QUOTE ]
My 1985 handbook said 135HP/235 ft lbs IIRC. My 406SBC put 215/295 TO THE GROUND at the dyno shop.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you quote 'handbook numbers for a 6.2 and use dyno numbers for your engine to compare to? I've posted the 6.2 dyno sheet a few times and it surpasses the 'handbook' by a healthy margin. HP to the ground without a turbo is roughly 135, but torque is well above your mighty 406 at a respectable 335 lbs.

rene
 
Re: Does anyone have an actual PIC of a k30????

[ QUOTE ]
That is why you see most dedicated mud trucks running 40" boggers and larger have BBC's because they can't get enough power out of a small block.

[/ QUOTE ]

Tell that to my buddy that has cut 44 boggers on his Blazer with a 383 that so far has destroyed chromo axleshafts, and stripped two front ring and pinions in his Dana 60 playing in nothing other than mud.

Oh yeah, and his truck was on the cover of Peterson's too. It's an awesome mud truck, oh, but it must be crap according to you, because you have the mightiest small block ever and you don't have enough power, he must NEED a big block.

Oops his actually has more compression, aftermarket heads, and a cam that isn't smog legal in California. That must be the difference. /forums/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif /forums/images/graemlins/deal.gif
 
Re: Does anyone have an actual PIC of a k30????

Either that truck is a cab&chassis truck with a bed swapped onto it, or it's a regular truck with the cab&chassis dually 14 bolt swapped into it.
 
Re: Does anyone have an actual PIC of a k30????

[ QUOTE ]
I bought my 85 K3500 with 78,000 miles on in from a friend for $1200 /forums/images/graemlins/woot.gif

[/ QUOTE ] ok, sp whats the deal , is your truck a 1 ton???????????? Is says k3500........how many forms of 1 tons did they make in 70s and 80s??? so far its k30......m1008......and 3500?? /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif /forums/images/graemlins/thumb.gif
 
Re: Does anyone have an actual PIC of a k30????

k30, m1008, and 3500 are all 1-tons. chevy stop useing k in the late 80's and started useing 3500 for 1-ton , 2500 for-3/4 ton, and 1500 for 1/2 ton /forums/images/graemlins/waytogo.gif
 
Re: Does anyone have an actual PIC of a k30????

[ QUOTE ]
k30, m1008, and 3500 are all 1-tons. chevy stop useing k in the late 80's and started useing 3500 for 1-ton , 2500 for-3/4 ton, and 1500 for 1/2 ton /forums/images/graemlins/waytogo.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

GMC has been using the 1500, 2500, and 3500 for a while. Maybe they stopped in 73, but 67-72 they had the 4 number designations.
 
Re: Does anyone have an actual PIC of a k30????

[ QUOTE ]
Tell that to my buddy that has cut 44 boggers on his Blazer with a 383 that so far has destroyed chromo axleshafts, and stripped two front ring and pinions in his Dana 60 playing in nothing other than mud.

Oh yeah, and his truck was on the cover of Peterson's too. It's an awesome mud truck, oh, but it must be crap according to you, because you have the mightiest small block ever and you don't have enough power, he must NEED a big block.

Oops his actually has more compression, aftermarket heads, and a cam that isn't smog legal in California. That must be the difference. /forums/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif /forums/images/graemlins/deal.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Isn't 1 o'clock when the kindergarten class takes a nap? What are you doing on the computer, little Timmy? /forums/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif

There are always exceptions to the rule...and no one gives 2 shits if his truck was on the mag cover either, imo. Cool, but it has No place in this argument.
 
Re: Does anyone have an actual PIC of a k30????

[ QUOTE ]

Governed limit is 3600 stock, and can be modded to redline as high as 4200 rpm.

[/ QUOTE ] I was not aware they could be modded to 4200 rpm's. Thats not bad. Does the bottom end need to be specially balanced or anything? Is 4200 safe to sustain for 20-30 seconds? /forums/images/graemlins/thinking.gif

[ QUOTE ]


So you quote 'handbook numbers for a 6.2 and use dyno numbers for your engine to compare to? I've posted the 6.2 dyno sheet a few times and it surpasses the 'handbook' by a healthy margin. HP to the ground without a turbo is roughly 135, but torque is well above your mighty 406 at a respectable 335 lbs.

rene

[/ QUOTE ] I quoted what was in my 1985 spec sheet, so shoot me. /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif 335 lbs to the ground is not bad at all but I have read in numerous mags, and sites that a 6.2 bottom end can take 450ft lbs maximum at the crank and still be reliable. Thats not bad but easily beat with a BBC, and a SBC with some healthy parts. I never stated my 406 was mighty or put out impressive numbers, my point was that it put out more at the ground than what a 6.2 does according to my spec sheet.
 
Re: Does anyone have an actual PIC of a k30????

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That is why you see most dedicated mud trucks running 40" boggers and larger have BBC's because they can't get enough power out of a small block.

[/ QUOTE ]

Tell that to my buddy that has cut 44 boggers on his Blazer with a 383 that so far has destroyed chromo axleshafts, and stripped two front ring and pinions in his Dana 60 playing in nothing other than mud.

Oh yeah, and his truck was on the cover of Peterson's too. It's an awesome mud truck, oh, but it must be crap according to you, because you have the mightiest small block ever and you don't have enough power, he must NEED a big block.

Oops his actually has more compression, aftermarket heads, and a cam that isn't smog legal in California. That must be the difference. /forums/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif /forums/images/graemlins/deal.gif

[/ QUOTE ] Umm, do you know what your talkng about? /forums/images/graemlins/screwy.gif I don't really care what your little friend has in some blazer that I have never seen, heard of, or even have a chance of ever coming in contact with....basically I don't care what the price of rice is in China.


Did you actually read my post geniuos??
[ QUOTE ]
You can get aftermarket pistons, rods, cranks, and even blocks to make a hi powered SBC that will roast your standard built BBC.

[/ QUOTE ]
Look at most tall mud trucks running big tires, almost all of them run big blocks. Most people run BBC's because you can make the same amount of power with milder parts in a lower power band than you can with a crazy modded screaming small block. When you start talking aftermarket hard parts to make monster small block power a BBC starts looking cheaper and easier.

Where do you get off with always thinking I have this fantasy that I have some barely controllable monster small block? /forums/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif /forums/images/graemlins/screwy.gif You think I don't know what kind of difference a larger profile cam and heads make? You can keep your "higher compression than mine" idea that thats better, try running some wonderfull california gas, you'll ping right along down the highway. /forums/images/graemlins/thumb.gif /forums/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif I fight detonation under a heavy load on 91 octane. I'm sure your little friend's 383 makes more power, he doesn't have to deal with our wonderfull far left, I mean, west state....but I'm not running 44's and I have plenty of power for my 35's, gearing, and weight and am perfectly happy.

You sure have a large mouth for someone with a stock 350 besides a carb and intake.
 
Re: Does anyone have an actual PIC of a k30????

Here is a pic of my 1979 GMC K35 that I picked up for $500
side.jpg

Rollbar
d60 front
tube bumper
dual tanks
headers
4 core radiator
7" lift
38's

So I took my parts that I wanted, sold my d44 and only paid $250 for all that.. even gave the truck to a friend whom is in the process of re-building it... /forums/images/graemlins/dunno.gif

The frame is supposedly a lil thicker on 1 tons too.. I also hear that 3/4 ton 14blt ff and 1 ton 14bolt ff have different spring perch widths... /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif
 
Re: Does anyone have an actual PIC of a k30????

so thats it??? just 2 k30s in the entire ck5??? wow. /forums/images/graemlins/thumb.gif I dont beleive that /forums/images/graemlins/rotfl.gif come on lurkers post up the ol k30s!!!! the m1008s!!!! /forums/images/graemlins/thumb.gif
 
Re: Does anyone have an actual PIC of a k30????

Webshots Page
The first album is my K30 that actually says K30 on the side. I baught it for $3000. It is in great condition. Built up 454, 4spd, 205. 4.10 gears. Truck is very tight. No squeeks or shakes all the way up to 100 mph. /forums/images/graemlins/thumb.gif. I tow my 10k lb. 28ft travel trailer with it. Pulls it Beautifly. Passes everything but a gas station. /forums/images/graemlins/ignore.gif
 
Re: Does anyone have an actual PIC of a k30????

Thats what i like..lights on top, everything /forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif /forums/images/graemlins/thumb.gif
 
Re: Does anyone have an actual PIC of a k30????

[ QUOTE ]
That last pic of the duallys, is that stock with both tires inside the bed instead of the extra fenders ?

[/ QUOTE ]

AFAIK GM did make an inline dually, although VERY rare. Ive seen a few, even looked at one for sale a few years back. He said it was factory, but it got about 7mpg from the BBC, and was an auto, so i passed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest Posts

Top Bottom