Welcome back! Today’s Shitbox Showdown is a celebration of massive engine displacement. We’re looking at two heavy-duty trucks with engine sizes that have to be seen to be believed, and fuel economy numbers that are best not to think about.
But first, let’s check in on yesterday’s Chevies. I guess this one was pretty much a foregone conclusion; nobody wants a Citation for six grand, especially with that Beretta sitting next to it. But as I’ve said before, the cars I pick are the ones I think you’ll want to talk about, not necessarily the cars you would want to buy, and by that measure, the humble Citation is, once again, a success.
And about that Beretta: I’m glad to see so many of you appreciate it. I always liked the styling, ever since I first saw spy shots of it in AutoWeek. This one is almost perfect; the only thing that could make it better is a five-speed manual. Okay, you’re right – a Quad 4-powered GTZ would be better still, but those are getting really scarce.
So let’s talk about engine size. What do you consider a “small” engine? What’s a “big” engine? It’s relative to the vehicle, of course; the old 3.5 liter Rover V8 is enormous in a Triumph TR8, but barely sufficient for a Range Rover. When you get to the edge cases, though, everyone is pretty much in agreement about what’s considered “big.” And today’s vehicles are definitely edge cases, both equipped with the largest V8s offered. Let’s take a look.
1988 Ford E-350 Club Wagon XLT – $4,250
Engine/drivetrain: 7.5 liter overhead valve V8, three-speed automatic, RWD
Location: Lake Oswego, OR
Odometer reading: 165,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives great
Ford’s E-series vans are legendary. These big friendly boxes-on-wheels are dependable, capable of feats of strength worthy of a Festivus celebration, and often pretty cheap on the used market. They’ve hauled everything from church youth groups to plumbing supplies to aspiring rock bands over the years. But while most Ford vans make do with an inline six, or maybe a small-block Windsor V8, this one has its doghouse stuffed full of 460 cubic inches of cast-iron V8 goodness.
It started out as a Club Wagon, the fancy passenger-carrying E-series, rather than the workhorse Econoline, which means it has carpet and velour seats and fake woodgrain trim like it’s an LTD or something. This one has had its rear seats removed and replaced with racks of storage bins, probably by the current owner, who seems to have used it to tow a rally car. This is good; it means they’re One Of Us.
This van runs and drives great, and has had a lot of recent work done to keep it that way. The only non-functional item according to the seller is the air conditioning; it’s all there, but it has never worked for them. Oh, and the gauge for one of its two fuel tanks doesn’t work. This could be an issue, because, according to the seller, this van gets between six and nine miles per gallon. Ouch.
But it’s pretty clean and rust-free and looks ready to be put to work. You could haul a boat with it, or take the bins out and put seats back in and use it for family road trips – after you take out a second mortgage for gas money, that is.
2002 Chevrolet Silverado 2500 HD – $5,000
Engine/drivetrain: 8.1 liter overhead valve V8, five-speed automatic, RWD
Location: Marble Falls, TX
Odometer reading: 158,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives great, but has an exhaust leak
460 cubic inches not enough for you? Don’t worry; I got you covered. Here we have a three-quarter-ton Chevy Silverado pickup, equipped with a big-block Vortec V8 displacing 496 cubic inches, or 8.1 liters if you prefer. This beefy engine powers the rear wheels through a heavy-duty Allison 1000 automatic transmission. I know some of you would rather have a manual – and one was theoretically available – but this is a good transmission. Its aim is true. (Oh come on; I had to.)
It’s a big truck overall, too; a crew-cab long-bed GMT800 is 21 feet, 4 inches long – not something you want to try to parallel-park. But if you absolutely need to haul four or five people and a bed full of 4×8 sheetrock, this will do it. The seller says it runs and drives great, and has a new battery and tires as well as a recently replaced radiator and water pump. It does have an exhaust leak that will need sorting out, but the seller isn’t specific about where.
Inside, it’s a standard-issue GMT800, which is not a bad thing at all. It’s not really what you’d call a fancy truck, but it’s comfortable on long trips, and holds up pretty well for GM plastic and velour. It’s a nice way to get home after a long day on the jobsite.
Outside, it’s a bit battle-damaged, but hey, that’s what trucks are for. There’s a big wrinkle in the right-hand side of the bed, and another just below the right taillight, and a pretty good bonk in the front bumper, as well. It all just adds character, as far as I’m concerned. The locking toolbox is a nice touch, as are the step bars on the sides.
Do either of these beasts actually need these massive engines? Of course not; either one is available with smaller V8s that would do the basic job required of them just fine. And if you’re commuting long distances, these are probably really bad choices. But if you go by the theory that it’s better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it, then for occasional use, the big engine is the way to go. So what will it be: a big box on wheels, or a loooong bed truck?
(Image credits: Craigslist sellers)
You will never find me behind the wheel of one of those Econolines again. Back in college, 20 years ago, I went through a training to drive school-owned 11-passenger vans so that I could help drive my crew team to practices. We had a fleet of four vans, two Chevys and two Fords, that the team regularly used, and it was always a much happier day when Coach tossed me the keys to a Chevy.
The Chevys were ’91s (they had dealer badges on the back for a Chevrolet-Peugeot dealer!), and I always assumed the Fords were significantly older until one day I flipped down the visor, saw the registration card, and was shocked to see that they were only ’89s. Compared to the Chevys, they had at least a decade, if not a decade and a half, more slop in every single control, and felt unbearably wheezy on hills with a full load. I’m sure they had the Windsor, not the 460, so this one wouldn’t necessarily have that problem, but I can just feel the mushy pedals and that skinny steering wheel flopping all over but taking forever to respond to any input—there was zero charm in that experience.
Because I had the training, I sometimes got roped in to drive for other events, and one of my proudest days was when I was piloting a slightly newer, full-length Dodge Ram van (roughly 19′ long) and executed a perfect, one-time-back-and-forward parallel parking job into a just-long-enough spot. It can be done! But I’m not sure I could do it again…
That Club Wagon is at least a 3/4 ton and maybe a 1 ton. That thing’ll definitely haul.
I’m going to correct some things, not because I want to be super pedantic, but because these are common misconceptions and most people really don’t know better.
“We’re looking at two heavy-duty trucks…”
These are not heavy duty trucks, or even medium duty trucks. These are both one tons. Vehicles under 10,000lb GVWR(including both of these) are considered light duty trucks. Heavy duty exclusively refers to trucks over 26,000lb GVWR.
And, related, “When you get to the edge cases, though, everyone is pretty much in agreement about what’s considered “big.” And today’s vehicles are definitely edge cases…”
These are big engines *for a light truck*. As always, this is still relative, and larger vehicles generally have bigger engines. And there are a whole lot of larger vehicles on the road, these are not even close to being an edge case.
That is one aspect of marketing vs. regulations that really confuses people and is hard to talk about without pulling out the entire salon kit for your neckbeard. They sell 3/4 and 1 ton trucks to average consumers as “HD” or “Heavy Duty” when they really only eclipse the realm of “Medium Duty” according to the DOT on the high end. I also only know any of this because AAA can’t seem to decide if my E350s require medium-duty tows or not…
I was ready to vote for the 460…perfect motorbike hauler with those shelves and such. Then the truck has the 8.1. Not a choice at that point. Pickup all the way. Oh no it has an exhaust leak! Even if it’s the manifold, that’s a simple fix on an older GM pickup.
I will however 2nd @origamisensei on it possibly being a scam. Here in Colorado a truck like that is 8-10k…even though 2WD
I don’t see any reason to believe this is a scam. KBB lists a private party range of ~$4900 to $8900 for this truck in good condition. This truck is probably on the lower end of “good” condition given its flaws. I see a few 2wd trucks on Autotempest right now for between $3700 and $7500, so this is not an outlier.
Also, I am not a Chevy guy, but I regularly look at early 2000s Ford Super Duty trucks. I have seen several 2wd trucks in comparable condition to this Silverado for $4,700 to $8,000, and those trucks have the extremely desirable 7.3 Powerstroke engine. As Shop-Teacher posted below, these trucks are at the bottom of the deprecation curve. If you want an early 2000s truck, now is the time to buy.
I also don’t see any of the typical scam indications in the ad (same vehicle listed for sale in multiple places, other ads for the same truck listed for a higher price; also, nothing is coming up in a reverse image search or when I google the VIN.). Scammers are lazy, so it is usually fairly easy to spot them.
I think this is a case of the owner knowing what he has and pricing it appropriately. I tend to do this when I sell vehicles privately – it is nice for both buyer and seller to skip the BS and list your vehicle for the right price from the beginning.
Lol maybe it’s a location thing but in my area there’s no 7.3 for $5k-$8k. About 10-15k for kind of a higher miles one, and a minimum of 20k for a nice one.
Where are you at?
I’m near Tampa, Florida. Most I see here are listed for $10,000+ like the ones you see, but I regularly see cheaper ones as well.
Here is a 1999 for $4,600:
https://tampa.craigslist.org/pnl/cto/d/pinellas-park-1999-ford-powerstroke/7721473519.html
This truck is a bit worse than the Silverado in shitbox showdown, but it looks decent to me. The owner claims there is a lot of rust, but I can’t see any major issues in the photographs. I think this person doesn’t know what real Midwest rust is. This truck has a lot of miles, but that isn’t a huge deal on these trucks.
There was a red 2001 with the 7.3 for sale last month; the ad isn’t up anymore so I presume it sold. That was listed for $5,000 and had around 225,000 miles. It was a RWD single cab.
Dang, that is a LOT cheaper than in Idaho. That would be like $12k bare minimum up here.
I see 7.3 trucks similar the one above for sale about once a month. They are common here, mostly because they haven’t rusted out. I am tempted to buy these trucks to resell in other regions.
I’m going with the van. I need to make my collection larger. Hmmm… Lake Oswego. That’s not far at all! I’ll have a ’51, a ’84, and a ’88!
The Chevy isn’t a scam? Even with the bumps and bruises and exhaust leak that price seems low. I don’t need a pickup and yet it tempts me. It’s no-nonsense, full-tilt truck functionality.
This generation of truck is at the bottom of their depreciation curve. It’s also a 2wd, and the 6.0 LS engine is more desirable in the market than the 8.1 which is the final gen of the old school big block engines.
These being my favorite trucks, if I had money and space, I’d be buying them up right now.
My heart is with the Ford, my head is with the Chevy.
Truck wins for me. I am not going to attempt to justify this truck as being useful to me. I just want to be able to say I have a truck with a 8.1 liter engine. Greta Thunberg would not approve of this truck, and I like that.
The van is great, but as a card carrying member of the GMT-800 trucks are the best trucks ever club, I wish I had $5 grand to spare to I could tell that Silverado’s owner, “Shut up, and take my money!”
I’d buy the van and turn it into the “Mutt Cuts” van from Dumb and Dumber! 😉
Neither of these would suit my lifestyle but, if I have to choose, I’ll take the truck for the color, the interior (even I can manage to fix a little headliner sag), the exhaust leak that’s preferable to the van’s windshield leak (it was a wet winter here) and the Elvis Costello reference.
I like the van, but the truck is probably more targeted for its intended use (towing). The van may’ve pulled a trailer while loaded with parts, but that’s stretching the people mover’s purpose.
I’d like the truck better if it wasn’t a crew cab. Extended cab, long bed, good enough for hauling crap.
The 8.1 is an excellent mill, and the allison behind it is just as good. This is an easy one. As much as I love Econolines, 80’s era 460s are not my favorite.
Van, please.
I don’t want a massive pickup truck and would have some use for an van, so it’s a pretty easy choice today, but that single-digit mileage… oof. I’m hoping the “6-9 MPG” is tied directly to the statement about towing, and it will actually do better than that when not loaded.
I won’t be towing a rally car or anything, so I thought there might be some room to swap the gearing in the diff and get better economy, but the seller says it’s “comfortable to drive fully loaded at 75 MPH”. That says to me the rear gears are already numerically fairly low, unless the seller is comfortable cruising at 4k RPM.
A quick google shows this model getting about 9.5mpg, so… yeah.
Anyway, remove the shelves, pull the nasty carpet, and do the floor in plywood with vinyl flooring over it. Use the original seat mount points to attach some tie-down rings and it will be a good stuff-hauler.
As the proud owner of a formerly 460’d E350
no
no it don’t get more
D’oh 😐
The greatest part was that 460 had possibly the flattest load to fuel consumption curve of anything I’ve ever seen. I went to retrieve another van in Richmond, VA driving from Atlanta on I-95/85, so fairly flat the entire way. Running empty on the way to Richmond, about 8.7 MPG. Pulling 7000 pounds of another van and trailer on the way back, about 8 MPG on the dot.
I can literally get worse fuel economy simply by driving 75mph vs. 65mph.
I have absolutely no idea how this is possible. That engine is like 90% losses and 10% useful work. It’s already in the linear entropy-to-work zone just by existing. It only heats the globe up as its main purpose and you extract some motion as a side effect.
The 7.3 IDI-TT setup in it now converts fuel to loud noises instead.
Some people have reported low teens from 460s in manual 2wd single cab relatively lightweight pickups. But no, a huge e350 with 3spd automatic will never ever see double digit fuel economy. Even 9mpg is significantly above average.
Also d’oh 😐
I borrowed my buddies early 80s extra cab 2wd 460 powered F350 when I needed to pick up a new cab for my 78 regular cab 4wd 400 powered F150. I didn’t think it was possible to consume more fuel than my truck, but it did. On his truck you could actually see the fuel gauge moving down, on mine you couldn’t. I think his got 7mpg, while mine got about 11. Incidentally, after flipping (literally) and totaling my 78, I bought an 88 F250, regular cab 4wd 351, and it also got 11 mpg.
Now I’m in a 14 Hemi Ram 1500 – and it not only gets almost double the gas mileage as those trucks (19) but it tows a big load better.
All the drag coefficient of a pallet of cinder blocks!
The truck is tempting because it’s from Texas, and a van from the PNW might have mushroom problems. But for practicality, van > truck any day of the week.
Hard to turn down a flat-hood Ford van, but when you can get a modern BBC* for similar money you go with BBC.
*Big Block Chevy, pervert
If you see a white couch in the bed, RUN!!
British Broadcasting Corporation?
Uhm, yep. mm hmm.
All respect to the truck voters, but we’ll take the Club Wagon for its versatility and slightly more manageable size.
Also adding headers and 3 inch exhaust will help fuel economy on the van. I’ve had several 460s and the intake and exhaust really cause problems. The best I got was 14mpg with a KN full kit, and silencer tube delete couped with long tube headers and free flowing cats, x pipe and true dual all the way back. Factory exhaust on a 460 takes all of that volume through a single 1.5 inch pipe. No air in, no air out.
Good to know, been wanting to get some MPG improvements on the F250. Just changed out the factory muffler and babby tailpipes for a single 3″, trying to think what to do next. These guys claim their low-profile throttle body gets 2-3 more MPG.
I hear headers don’t get you much over stock manifolds in towing applications.
Headers didn’t add a ton of torque, but the less restrictive flow made mine more efficient and a small increase adds up when you put half a million miles on it up and down stevens pass.
As for towing, I’ve never had much change in economy towing vs not with my 460s, but I put that down to towing a consistently bulky but not particularly heavy load i.e. a 20 foot enclosed car hauler filled with tools and cabinets, so mostly empty space.
I’ve also looked at their setup and I’m guessing that has more to do with the straight down orientation of the throttle body than anything else, look into converting from bank fire to sequential using the mustang computer and you’ll see the same numbers from my experience. Damn I miss that stupid pink truck.
It seems like you really know how how to maximize the fuel economy of a 460. I have a friend who has been wanting to get better out of his 1995 460, he only gets 7ish. Any chance I could get you two in contact?
I told you most of it, but you’re welcome to have him shoot me an email. I think it’s visible on our profiles, yes?
I cant figure out how to do that. I might just be dumb.
I didn’t realize we can’t look at each other’s profiles so no you’re not any dumber than the rest of us, at least not any dumber than I am.
Since that won’t work you can pass along looking at 460ford, pirate 4×4, and obs ford forums and search for sequential conversions. It took an electronics guru to wire my old one up for me which is why my current one is still bank fire, my last guy passed away a few years ago and I havent found a good one since. Also for the really quick adding of some air in, a hole saw on the air box, and a hack saw taken to the plastic “silencer horns” in the intake halfway between the air box and throttle body should net some modicum of improvement. Those two got me to double digits, admittedly I was closer to double digits than 7ish to start.
Basically think of these as an asthmatic person, huge lungs but can’t get air in or out.
As for the bank fire to sequential conversion, if one does not have an automotive electronics savant, you can go aftermarket it just gets very pricey very quickly.
Every 460 I’ve seen has a factory dual exhaust. Still only two 1.5″ pipes, which is still really small, but twice as good as one.
It looks like dual, and it is from the muffler back, but it combines just behind the motor into one pipe on the passenger side then stays single through the cat to the muffler.
The truck is newer, a cooler color, likely gets better mpg, and probably more reliable too. So I voted for the blue truck
That picture of the cookie-cutter houses with the pickups lined up out front is Peak Texas.
Yeah right? People who make $75k per year live in a $500k house and drive a $90k pickup truck.
The economy is not the problem here, overspending and over-indebtedness are the problem.
Are we looking at the same picture? None of those are $90k trucks.
You could buy all four of those trucks for $90K.
To be fair, the neighborhood in the pictures looks middle of the road and none of the vehicles look brand new. These people might actually truck for work.
Yeah. Those houses are all semi-detached and probably condos, given that outside of interwar Baltimore and Philadelphia and a few scattered suburban attempts in the ’70s we really don’t do fee simple semis in the US. Which means that all those truck drivers aren’t even hauling much in the way of mulch home from Home Depot, but it’s a slice of lower-middle class America rather than a high-priced Toll Brothers hellscape.
I like the flexibility of the van, and it would be less of a pain to park than the 21 foot long Silverado. The terrible fuel economy isn’t a big deal for me because it would be a part time hauler. I can live without AC since I’d rarely spend more than an hour driving at a time.
I have a long bed crew cab Chevy and can testify that it is indeed pretty hard to maneuver and park. It doesn’t fit in a normal parking space and the turning radius is dismal.
Back in for the win!
Mine is a 34 year old ford but, same. You park out in the sticks and hope that you can get back out again through the rest of the lot when the time comes.
I really don’t want either one at 12mpg. I flipped a coin and went with the Van
12 mpg with either of these would involve hypermiling.
A 5.3L 1/2 ton Suburban gets 12mpg.
It shouldn’t…….
Our 2000 Suburban 5.3 reliably got 15 mpg in mixed use driving. Best mileage ever was in a trip through the UP of Michigan in 2008 – we got a solid 19 mpg due to many miles driven at 55 mph. Most reliable vehicle we’ve ever owned…
I have the 460 in my old F250 and can confirm how bad these are on gas. My truck was getting 4 mpg so I took it to the mechanic. He fixed it by adding a bigger gas tank.
Ohh boy, no need for either but at least the Chevy MIGHT get out of single digit mileage on the highway. My guess is you would want earplugs in the the Econoline, we had a bunch of 460 powered F350 work trucks of similar vintage at my first job out of school and they are loud, coarse engines. Add in a C6 and I bet highway runs are misery.
I got about 11-12 mpg in a 2500 Avalanche with the 8.1L. 13 was possible in pure highway driving.
This truck is a bit heavier but has the 5 speed Allison in place of the 4L85E. So it’s probably a wash. Great tow rig though.
Doesn’t meet any need I have but I fully respect the Chevy as a better tow rig.
I’d actually have a use for the van, and it has probably been better maintained.
At least in the case of the Chevy, the 6.slow doesn’t really pay off its lower power with better economy. The 8.1 is the only choice in these trucks.
Well, if you… Wait. Did you just make a good take?! Hot damn. I guess this day was bound to happen at some point!
I’m sorry, do I know you?
Thankfully, No
Who stole all your A’s?
The Acura Integra A-Spec needed them more than I did.
Agreed – it’s all about torque in a truck. The 8.1 has about an extra 100 torques over the 6.0 and if you get an 8.1 that doesn’t have piston slap, they pretty much last forever.
I wish it was all about torque in a truck. When you drive a truck with truly low horsepower but good torque, you will learn that horsepower matters too.
Can confirm. The ‘Legendary’ Ford 300cid was unable to do interstate speeds in a regular cab, regular bed, 5MT F-150 while towing an NC Miata on an open aluminum trailer. Talk about disappointing.
Interesting because I was thinking specifically about a recent road trip in my 1995 f150 300ci 5spd single cab long bed. Now, it never did interstate speeds stock with the 3.55 gears. I recently regeared it to 2.73 for an easy 80mph. However, going from Boise to Salt Lake and back with a trailer, I spent most of the time at WOT at 75mph or so. There were only a few hills slower than 60mph fortunately.
But yeah, horsepower matters.