Talk:Chevrolet C/K

message: I am of the opinion than there is in this article enough information, pictures and such that it warrants reason to have seperate articles on each generation of the c/k. I may get to creating them myself. I think this page should be kept and perhaps shortend to still provide some information on the whole series and special models/editions, but generation-specific articles would better allow for more detail and more expansion. also, I think the title should be GM C/K or general motors C/K or such as gmc also made the truck, and while the trucks are most surely close enough for one article, chevrolet and gmc are seperate brands and the chevrolet-only title could be more inclusive of the sister brand. Keserman (talk) 22:30, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  generations/brands 

message: : Chevrolet offered the 6.2 Diesel engine option in the C10 1/2 ton chassis pickup as far back as 1979, possibly earlier. I have found documentation through GM mentioning this in their 1979 Truck build books...
::Hmmm.  I looked at the 1979-1984 GM parts book.  Page 31 rev 84.1 1981 Engine Series LF9 diesel (350) No LH6 6.2 diesel . Page 32 rev 84.1 1982 Engine Identification LH6 6.2 and no LF9.  I would like to get my hands on a 1973-9 truck build book.Hatzie (talk) 20:36, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Diesel Engines 

message: It needs to be noted that Suburbans were 2 door bodies (not counting the back door/gates) through the 1966 model year. From 67-72 Suburbans had 3 doors, with the third door on the passenger side. From 1973 on, Suburbans were 4-door body style.-WK-4.245.36.143 (talk) 05:44, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Suburban

message: This article states the GMC Sierra was introduced in 75, but I know that Sierras were available from the 1960s at least.  Anyone know for sure? —Morven 05:19, May 9, 2005 (UTC)
:The Sierra was a trim option begining in the 1971 model year, and was the equivelent of the Chevy Cheyenne. Formally, the top of the line trim package was the CST (Custom Sport Truck). 1972 saw the top of the line become the Sierra Grande and the Cheyenne Super.
:Also, it should be noted that, initially, only GMC models had the 1500, 2500, 3500 series designations, the Chevy equivelents being 10, 20 and 30 for 1/2, 3/4, and 1 ton models.--139.78.96.87 02:42, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trim Levels 

message: The picture of the 1989 GMC Sierra 1500 is not a GM C/K pickup truck.  By 1988, the Sierra was its own model produced by GMC.  The fourth generation would be better represented by a Chevy C/K.
--Zouf 01:17, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My brother-in-law has an '88 Sportside.  I'm sure he has a pic he'll "donate." ⇒ BRossow T/C 01:55, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: About the "Fourth Generation" Picture

message: My dad's 6.5TD is a 1995.
Blows the 6.2TD being replaced in 1997 thing out of the water, now, doesn't it? --Bhtooefr 01:21, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If you can provide more correct info, please do so! If you can provide a reference for your information, it would be all the better. The real beauty of Wikipedia is that you can actually correct misinformation and not just sit back and complain about it. :-) ⇒ BRossow T/C 14:32, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have been told that it debuted in 1991.5, but I'm not sure. I would have edited it, but I don't actually have confirmation of WHEN it actually happened ;) -Bhtooefr 20:26, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  6.5TD intro date? 

message: This article should mention that the 1973-87 c/k and its gmc counterparts had fuel tanks near the cab (side saddle fuel tanks). In collisions, they were very vulnerable, and because of their location, if they were hit, it often caused catastrophic fires that could kill the occupants. In other words, these models were the 'pinto of pickups'. I believe this feature of the design eventually led to a lawsuit.
::First, please sign your posts.  Second, it did lead to at least one lawsuit against GM - but it also led to a lawsuit against NBC by GM which resulted in a very public apology by NBC for not fully disclosing the many problems in their overly dramaticized test, which included an overfilled gas tank, an improper fuel filler cap, and incendiary devices placed on the truck being impacted.  The 1973-1987 GM C/K truck was not signifigantly more dangerous than the Ford and Dodge contemporary competitors, and the sheer number of these trucks still on the roads should attest to the actual danger of those tanks in practice.  Fire-damaged vehicles are rarely salvaged in any form other than as parts-donor vehicles due to the extensive and effectively irreparable damage caused.  It is also extremely unfair to compare it to the Pinto - the Pinto fires were clearly caused by a design flaw that allowed an exposed bolt to easily puncture the rear-mounted tank in even mild rear-impact collisions.  While the side-mounted tanks on the truck are not in the safest position, there is no blatant single design flaw that causes them to be punctured in a statistically signifigant number of collisions.  Please perform your own research before making wild claims. 
::Besides, the '67-'72 had the tank mounted inside the cab, directly behind the seat.  Mine has yet to explode.  Ayocee 04:59, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  side saddle fuel tanks 73-87 

message: I'd hack this out myself, but maybe there is a nugget of fact in there that can be sourced and rephrased:
"The basis for Chevy's slogan, "The Most Dependable, Longest Lasting Trucks on the Road," the 73-87 Chevy/GMC pickup is the most common "old truck" seen today, and for good reason -- they are simple, servicable, reliable, and like all Chevys, have the power to get the job done."
The slogan is a "fact" I guess.  The part about them being the most common old truck is a bit assertive - relative to number sold, for instance?  And has anyone ever measured this?  The part after the hyphen simply needs to go. human 20:18, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for fixing it, whoever did so. Huw Powell 01:44, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bizarre promotional blurb at end of 73-87 section 

message: Does anyone have some insight into when the changes were made from normal carb, to electronically controlled carb, throttle body injection, tuned port injection, etc?  
they went to throttle body inject in 1987, but some late 1986 models have it as well.
71.207.156.16 12:32, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Intake systems 

message: Not to criticize, but I wonder if the photos of the trucks used in this article should be factory stock representations, and not customized models? The reader should have an idea of what the truck looked like when it was originally manufactured, not what a later owner did to it 30 years later, IMO. Photos of factory stock Chevrolet trucks from 1960-1998 — either original factory promotional photos or current-day photos — are readily available and can be posted easily following the guidelines. [[Briguy52748 18:41, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I absolutely agree.  Also, I agree that a "custom" truck file might make sense, especially for things that many people do the same way - ie, lift kits, motor upgrades, disc brake conversions, etc. Huw Powell 01:45, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Photos of trucks

message: For those who don't know, these models also offered a 327,  and my 67' K20 has 3 fuel tanks 2 saddles and 1 behind the seat. As for glamour truck, i can go places jeeps haven't heard of.
 As is correctly stated in the article, the 327 ci. V-8 was replaced by the 350 for 1969. Also, those extra 2 fuel tanks were a dealer installed option and were not listed in the GM option and spec book "Truck Data Book" (GM) BrianAlex (talk) 21:53, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  1967-1972 

message: I have a base model 2000 GMC C2500 WT with a 6.5 diesel (not the 6.6 Duramax).  If the C/K 3500 ran till 2001 alongside the new body style trucks it would be good to note.    
It would be similar to the 88-91 R/V full ton dually that had the same body as the previous generation 1/2 ton truck for 4 years past the "end" of 1/2 ton production. Hatzie (talk) 20:49, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  CK series End 

message: There's no info about the GMC big block v6 on the page.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GMC_V6_engine
Since the article is geared towards the Chevy I didn't see a sensible way to add the info in, so I didn't want to step on anyone's toes. Did there used to be a GM page?
08:57, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Big Block V6 

message: Sorry, but the lists of every engine, every option, every standard feature and every year-to-year change have to be cleaned up.  While it's fine to use Wikipedia as a starting point, Wikipedia is not a directory of information or statistics.  There are plenty of other Chevy truck fan sites and info sites out there with all the reference info one could need.  This article should be more readable, with info summed up in paragraphs as much as possible.  Really, it could be cut down to half its current size while still covering all the major points, so feel free to dig in. --Vossanova o< 20:47, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I've brought it back into the realm of readability, at the very least. I kept most of the information intact, I wasn't going to get that deep into it. Just converting those awful lists into prose did wonders. I did pull the lists of trim packages out of the "aka" fields, they didn't fit there, they weren't complete anyway, and they're far better explained in the text. I fixed a couple grammatical things in the Brazil section but there isn't enough information there to make sense of what's being said so I couldn't really clean that section up. --Sable232 (talk) 04:47, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup 

message: How many 1967-1972 C-10 trucks did GM make?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Korn4u19 (talk • contribs) 22:21, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  1967-1972 

message: in 1971 the change from the 396 to the 400(402) was actually a change. The 402 is actually .030 inch larger bore than the 396. The engine blocks otherwise remained basically the same. but the increase in bore size did up the displacement by roughly 6 cubic inches. Wingnut33 (talk) 05:22, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The 402 came about when GM "recycled" a bunch of slightly defective 396 blocks by boring them out. When the recoverable 396 blocks were gone is when GM made the 402 a regular production engine. I suspect the original 396-but-really-402 engines were the bored out 396 rejects. Should be verifiable by casting numbers, if any of those "396" engines are still around. Bizzybody (talk) 10:07, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  engines 

message: I have the original General Motors publication titled "Chevrolet Trucks 1969,Truck Data Book"
 and it lists three different 3 speed transmissions available; 3-spd,Heavy Duty 3-spd and 3-spd with overdrive.
 There is also another 4-spd manual that was available,namely the New Process 435CR which had a 4.56-1 low gear ratio (Other brand trucks used this transmission with different gear ratios,Chevy and GMC used this one).It had one P.T.O. (Power Take Off).
 I would add these if I knew how.BrianAlex (talk) 23:42, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Transmissions Omissions 

message: What year was the change to a nearly vertical front slope on the second generation hood? Bizzybody (talk) 10:00, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Second generation hood change? 

message: I somehow deleted a whole section I wrote, was having issues with my browser, can an admin revert the article back to before I screwed it up. My apologies. 
Never mind, I think I fixed it or undone the damage I did. 
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Stephanosblue (talk • contribs) 23:38, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deleted a whole section (!)  

message: Maybe this only applies to the medium-duty C-Series, but I've seen trucks from the 1967-72 era that have badges boasting 427 cid engines (http://www.imcdb.org/vehicle_832479-Chevrolet-C-60-1969.html). So should we make it seem like the biggest engines are 402s? ---------User:DanTD (talk)  00:04, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bigger engines 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Chevrolet C/K. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120122072414/http://www.exponent.com:80/nbc-dateline/ to http://www.exponent.com/NBC-DATELINE/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:39, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Big 105 Million jury verdict overturned by appeals court in June 1994
GM Wins Appeal Over Side-Saddle Gasoline Tanks : Courts: Jury had awarded $105 million to the parents of a 17-year-old boy who burned to death in traffic accident, Los Angeles Times, Donald W. Nauss, June 14, 1994.
::definitely some interesting history.  FriendlyRiverOtter (talk) 22:40, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  lawsuit history of side-saddle gas tanks 

message: I personally believe the picture at the top of the article, is not a good enough picture, the truck shown is in bad state, and we may need a truck that is in reasonable condition. Averagetennesseejoe (talk) 17:11, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Main Photo Issue 

message: As this model line is far from obscure, there is a great deal of information that can be included on an article related to the Chevrolet/GMC C/K.  However, such an advantage can also prove to have its own issues, as the length of an article can become an issue that needs to be addressed, balancing between being informative and becoming information overload.
To better accommodate the information, perhaps it is time to make this article a parent article of the multiple generations of the C/K model family.  The Ford F-Series is a good template of how to create separate articles (the 1973 and 1988 generations have enough content to stand on their own right now, along with the 1967; the 1960 certainly has room to grow) for each model generation.  This has been done with a number of articles related to the best-selling vehicles in the world, including the Volkswagen Golf and Toyota Corolla.   
While this would be a major undertaking and migration of content, it would allow for an updated format to present and edit content for viewers and editors.  Thoughts?  --SteveCof00 (talk) 09:51, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Splitting this article up by generation?