Let's hear about them. Curious to your opinions, etc. I know they're not a 465 but good enough for highway cruiser if you wanted? Let's hear it.
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.
NP833 tranny
- Thread starter thatK30guy
- Start date
A buddy built an 84 k10 with one OEM. Put a nice 400 small block in it and ripped it around town for a while on 3.42s and 33s. Nice driving truck.
Just looked up the specs. I think I'd go with a 3500 long before I considered one of these. And I have, but the 3500 is borderline IMO for longevity...and the 833 is apparently rated for 40ft-lbs less (80 if the 3500HD).
I suppose for really light duty work, with a small engine? 2WD would probably be pretty easy, but that dual trans/t-case shifter setup is probably uber rare. And I don't recall ever seeing a body dimpled for that shifter, like all were for the 465. Curious if the 833 trucks all came with a removable trans tunnel? I assume the tunnel must have been different, given how much effort they put into the 465 stamping/dimpling, for probably 2% of all the trucks made lol.
I remember seeing one of these in the wrecking yard back in the day. Not sure where my pic went, but it sure threw me when I saw that truck!
Not my pic.
I've seen only one in a junkyard in an '82 Chevy K10 with a 6.2--which I was going to buy for $500,but the bastids crushed it before I returned from the bank with the cash,was gone maybe a half hour at most..
It had the "red block" 6.2 and that A833 Mopar 4 speed overdrive transmission--overall the truck was better than the one I was driving too,it was scrapped because it lacked a title!..
Those transmissions are not as beefy as a SM420 or 465 ,(not much is!),but for a daily driver the overdrive is nice to reduce highway RPMs and the gear spacing is much better than the "dump truck" 465's ratios..
Mopar used these in many 70's cars like Volare's and B-100 vans,the phone company vans around here almost always had these transmissions..I don't think they are that weak,but I suppose if you go around doing burnouts and speed shifting one you may have regrets--I'd trust one more than a 700R4 though!..
Only bummer about using one in a GM truck is the bell housing pattern is specific to this transmission--I saw a whole swap setup on Facebook recently for I think $1000!..(I posted on it in the craigslist thread if I remember right)..they didn't sell many factory with this transmission so it'll be a hunt to find one..
It had the "red block" 6.2 and that A833 Mopar 4 speed overdrive transmission--overall the truck was better than the one I was driving too,it was scrapped because it lacked a title!..
Those transmissions are not as beefy as a SM420 or 465 ,(not much is!),but for a daily driver the overdrive is nice to reduce highway RPMs and the gear spacing is much better than the "dump truck" 465's ratios..
Mopar used these in many 70's cars like Volare's and B-100 vans,the phone company vans around here almost always had these transmissions..I don't think they are that weak,but I suppose if you go around doing burnouts and speed shifting one you may have regrets--I'd trust one more than a 700R4 though!..
Only bummer about using one in a GM truck is the bell housing pattern is specific to this transmission--I saw a whole swap setup on Facebook recently for I think $1000!..(I posted on it in the craigslist thread if I remember right)..they didn't sell many factory with this transmission so it'll be a hunt to find one..
I have one.
Holy crap dude. That's cool and funny at the same time.
I do know of a complete truck for sale with the 4wd 883 setup on Instagram. Look up Bornforadventure if anybody is really wanting one.
If anyone I figured you would!
I bought a parts truck that had one originally, came with a 6.2 diesel, but was swapped with a 465 and a 350 gas. I still have the shifter boot/ plastic housing deal for it.
My fascination with the 833 is mating it to a fuel injected 250 inline 6 and some mild 3.73's or even 4.10's on mild P-metric tires around 33" or so to try and get 25 mpg in a SWB truck since they're lighter. Just something to keep the square body interest on the roads but just as a driver instead of a toy.
Hell if its doable I say go for it. But I'm skeptical of 25mpg in one of these rigs, any gas engine. Best I've ever seen with a 305 was 17-18, but maybe a very light truck with 50 less cubic inches can do it?
What were the I6s mated to in these trucks originally? Were they ever up against an OD trans in a 2WD? It would be good to know what the MPG was originally.
I know I was disappointed after my swap, my MPG essentially didnt change regardless of what I had done, even over 1983 carb/engine tech. Nothing very obvious, in any case. I had hoped for even a couple MPGs.
Personally I feel one of those new small diesels would be a cool swap, and probably net good MPG, but that's a whole different path.
An '81 SWB I had about 25 years ago had the 250, 465, 208, 3.73's on 31's and I got 18 with that setup all from the factory. I was hoping the fuel injection and overdrive would bump that number up slightly. I know 25 is a long shot.
"Properly" (no idea if running lean at cruise) tuned I got the same highway MPG with my '83 K5 (305/Q-jet/manifolds/700R4/208/3.08's, 31") as I get in my present K5 (L31 350/TPI/Headers/465/241/3.42/33's), 18MPG, best ever. 1518 vs. 2263RPM @ 65MPH, respectively.
I've been through a few iterations of this drivetrain: carbed 305 w/OD, carbed 350 w/manual trans, injected 350 w/manual trans. I think the only thing missing is an injected 350 with OD, but that was done to death with the TBI trucks, and 18MPG is tops I've seen on those too.
If you have the parts already, I'd certainly enjoy seeing what the I6 and OD trans could do on the freeway. From my experience, and every dyno test I've seen, injection really only seems to make a noticeable difference on drivabilty, when a carb is working properly, if comparing apples to apples for the most part. I don't think I'd fixate on injection right off the bat. Injection is far better, I'll never argue it's not, but in this case, if it's initially just an MPG challenge, I'd not waste the effort immediately.
2.73's with no OD trans would get you roughly to where the 833 would be for RPM's (if it has better rear gears), not sure how those would feel with say, a 465 and an I6. I have run numbers a few times to see how gears, tires, and trans ratio might be "optimized" for one of these rigs, but unfortunately I kept coming back to the 3500 in terms of overall performance. You can gear the truck well, gear splits aren't ridiculous, and it shifts good. In town the 465 is often a two speed in my rig, an 833 would be about the same, the 3500 however, has yet another usable gear before you get to 1:1.
I've been through a few iterations of this drivetrain: carbed 305 w/OD, carbed 350 w/manual trans, injected 350 w/manual trans. I think the only thing missing is an injected 350 with OD, but that was done to death with the TBI trucks, and 18MPG is tops I've seen on those too.
If you have the parts already, I'd certainly enjoy seeing what the I6 and OD trans could do on the freeway. From my experience, and every dyno test I've seen, injection really only seems to make a noticeable difference on drivabilty, when a carb is working properly, if comparing apples to apples for the most part. I don't think I'd fixate on injection right off the bat. Injection is far better, I'll never argue it's not, but in this case, if it's initially just an MPG challenge, I'd not waste the effort immediately.
2.73's with no OD trans would get you roughly to where the 833 would be for RPM's (if it has better rear gears), not sure how those would feel with say, a 465 and an I6. I have run numbers a few times to see how gears, tires, and trans ratio might be "optimized" for one of these rigs, but unfortunately I kept coming back to the 3500 in terms of overall performance. You can gear the truck well, gear splits aren't ridiculous, and it shifts good. In town the 465 is often a two speed in my rig, an 833 would be about the same, the 3500 however, has yet another usable gear before you get to 1:1.
I think 25 Mpg is not achievable in a square.
Would be cool but good luck.
Would be cool but good luck.
A late friend had an '81 C-10 short bed with a 250 six ,it had a 5 speed transmission ,supposedly it came factory with it according to the build sheet we found in the seat springs--it looked just like the one GM put in Chevy Monza's for a few years,it had the shifter made into the tail shaft housing..it was a former AT&T truck..
Truck had 2:73's and the gearing was nice as far as the splits between gears,and 5th was overdrive..truck was quite light and we made a flatbed for it out of street sign square tubing,the galvanized stuff with holes punched in it every inch or so..the owner drove it to NH a few times and claimed to get close to 20 mpg with it...he later swapped in another older 250 six with a TH350 out of a '70 Nova ,as his left leg was getting weak and he was getting tired of clutching and shifting..
He claimed it still got 15 mpg with that combo in it..
In our travels we came across some square body C-10's with rather bizzare engine & trans swaps...one was a 80's C-10 with a 2.5 4
cylinder from a '77 Monza ,with the same 5 speed mentioned above..
Another one I was impressed with was a '77 C-10 that had a 2.8 V6 from an 80's Camaro in it with a 5 speed..the thing was very fast ,surprisingly..
I've seen others with Pontiac 400's,Olds engines of all sizes (307,350,455),and even saw one at a swap meet in CT for sale that someone adapted a straight 6 Perkins diesel from a farm tractor to the SM465 ..guy claimed it got over 20 mpg in city driving,but he didn't take it on the highway much because it had 4:56 gears..
Truck had 2:73's and the gearing was nice as far as the splits between gears,and 5th was overdrive..truck was quite light and we made a flatbed for it out of street sign square tubing,the galvanized stuff with holes punched in it every inch or so..the owner drove it to NH a few times and claimed to get close to 20 mpg with it...he later swapped in another older 250 six with a TH350 out of a '70 Nova ,as his left leg was getting weak and he was getting tired of clutching and shifting..
He claimed it still got 15 mpg with that combo in it..
In our travels we came across some square body C-10's with rather bizzare engine & trans swaps...one was a 80's C-10 with a 2.5 4
cylinder from a '77 Monza ,with the same 5 speed mentioned above..
Another one I was impressed with was a '77 C-10 that had a 2.8 V6 from an 80's Camaro in it with a 5 speed..the thing was very fast ,surprisingly..
I've seen others with Pontiac 400's,Olds engines of all sizes (307,350,455),and even saw one at a swap meet in CT for sale that someone adapted a straight 6 Perkins diesel from a farm tractor to the SM465 ..guy claimed it got over 20 mpg in city driving,but he didn't take it on the highway much because it had 4:56 gears..
Yep, 83 C1500. 6.2, 700-R4, 3.42's and 235/75's. I bought it fro Can Can and DD'd it for 6 years.
Regular mixed driving, about a 50/50 mix of city ad freeway I'd regularly get 21 mpg. That would be the US gallon. Driving back and forth between Edmonton and Vancouver it would pull 25-27 mpg depending on how much of a rush I was in. Speed limit all the way...27 mpg. 10-15 over all the way, 24-25 mpg. Again US gallon. It was 750 miles between my old house in BC and the new place in Edmonton. I never had to stop for fuel and usually had between 1/4 and 1/2 a tank still when I got there. Dual tanks obviously.
That’s why I couldn’t remember
These are the numbers I recall all the time when I think about what mileage COULD be. 27MPG in a 31 gallon tank is 837 miles. That would last a LONG time, even cutting the MPG in half offroad or in town. Why I'd love to see someone swap one of those new ~3L diesels in.
You are the only guy I know that got that kind of mileage.And I know you are truthfull. That is way cool mileage!
My brother in-law claimed 30 mpg with his 6.2 1/2 ton 4x4 but I didn’t believe him.
But when i said it couldn’t be done is was talking about with a gas engine, not a 6.2 diesel.
30 mpg to the Imperial gallon is a stretch but not impossible. Bit of a tailwind, flat ground, right on 1800 rpm and he may not have been lying. The farther from 1800 rpm I got the worse the mileage got.
With a gas engine, I'd say no way...and especially not with a straight 6. Sure smaller cubes, but inefficient intake/exhaust and head flow doesn't make for a really thrifty engine. A 4.8 LS with NV3500, 2 WD, lowered 4/6", some 205-75 15's...might get you low to middle 20's to the US gallon.
With a gas engine, I'd say no way...and especially not with a straight 6. Sure smaller cubes, but inefficient intake/exhaust and head flow doesn't make for a really thrifty engine. A 4.8 LS with NV3500, 2 WD, lowered 4/6", some 205-75 15's...might get you low to middle 20's to the US gallon.
I just remembered that '81 C-10 my late friend had ,ended up with a 267 V8 that he got from a 80 Impala,the salvage yard said it was a 305,but the casting numbers proved otherwise..
He had the 250 six & TH350 from the Nova in it for about 6 months when someone offered him $500 for the engine,and he got the 267 V8 for $100 ,the yard gave him $50 back when he told them it wasn't a 305...the truck still got between 15 and 20 mpg with the V8,but it accelerated much faster..
I don;t think a square body pickup can get much more than that no matter what engine & trans it has,its just too heavy and the wind resistance is just too great..maybe a small diesel could,but it would be a dog most likely too..
He had the 250 six & TH350 from the Nova in it for about 6 months when someone offered him $500 for the engine,and he got the 267 V8 for $100 ,the yard gave him $50 back when he told them it wasn't a 305...the truck still got between 15 and 20 mpg with the V8,but it accelerated much faster..
I don;t think a square body pickup can get much more than that no matter what engine & trans it has,its just too heavy and the wind resistance is just too great..maybe a small diesel could,but it would be a dog most likely too..
