Good morning! For your mid-week Showdown we’re going to look at two beat-up old short-bed trucks, one from Chevy and one from Dodge. Both are manuals, both are V6-powered, and both run and drive just fine according to the sellers. Sorry, Ford fans; I couldn’t find a comparable F-150 to add to this mix.
I sort of guessed what the outcome of yesterday’s vote would be, and I was right. It’s hard to beat a decent-priced Honda Civic, especially a desirable model that hasn’t been messed with. The Civic Si left the base-model Dodge Stealth in the dust.
Many of you called the Stealth “bloated” or “underpowered,” and yeah, with what’s basically a minivan V6 hauling that much car around, you aren’t going to impress anyone with sheer acceleration. But speaking as a fifty-one-year-old guy with more things that hurt every morning, comfort counts, and a bigger, heavier car is just going to be a nicer place to be. Twenty years ago, I’d have taken the Civic in a heartbeat, but now, I think I’d rather have the Dodge.
Now, let’s talk trucks. Historically, short bed single cab manuals have been the enthusiast’s choice when it came to full-size trucks, and if it has a stepside bed, even better. They may not haul as much stuff, but they look cooler doing it. Such trucks are more likely to be basic models, though, which means six-cylinder engines are common. Only one of these is a stepside, but they’re both sticks with V6 engines. Let’s see what you make of them.
1990 Chevrolet C1500 Cheyenne – $2,600
Engine/drivetrain: 4.3 liter overhead valve V6, five-speed manual, RWD
Location: Dallas, TX
Odometer reading: 198,000 miles
Operational status: “Excellent motor,” the ad says
I suppose it goes without saying that I’m a fan of the GMT400 trucks. I own one, and it’s high up on my list of favorites of all the vehicles I’ve owned. Like mine, this truck is powered by the basic three-fourths-of-a-small-block 4.3 liter V6. Unleash the fury of all of its one hundred and sixty horsepower, and it sounds just like the school bus you rode to third grade in. Unlike mine, this truck has a five-speed transmission, geared more for play than for work.
The seller is a person of few words, so we don’t get a whole lot of information to go on here. But there isn’t a whole lot to this truck mechanically; the throttle-body fuel injection system is simple and robust, the NV3500 transmission is pretty bulletproof except for some issues with sloppy shift linkages, and since it’s 2WD, there’s not much going on underneath either. It has air conditioning, and the compressor looks kinda-sorta-newish, so maybe it even works.
This truck appears to have had some upgrades above its original Cheyenne trim level. The floors are still rubber, but the seat has been replaced by a more cushy bench seat, maybe out of an up-level truck, or maybe out of some luxury barge or other. The plastic dash is, of course, trashed; they get brittle and fall apart long before the rest of the truck does. And unless I’m mistaken, the grille and headlights have been replaced with a later Silverado grille and composite headlights; this should have big rectangular sealed-beam headlights and a gray plastic grille.
It has also been painted – if you want to call it that. The flat red is primer, I would guess; the truck appears to have been red originally. GMT400 stepside bed sides are fiberglass, and this one looks like it has lost a few arguments with parking lot bollards. The rear bumper is also absent; it looks like it might have had a fiberglass roll pan back there at one point, but that’s gone now too.
1998 Dodge Ram 1500 – $3,700
Engine/drivetrain: 3.9 liter overhead valve V6, five-speed manual, RWD
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Odometer reading: 300,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives great
In 1994, Dodge surprised the truck world with a whole new line of trucks, styled to look a little bit like big rigs, but with comfortable, car-like interiors. Sales went from “Oh right; Dodge makes trucks too” to “Hotcake sellers wish business was this good.” This truck wasn’t the first step towards pickup trucks taking over the market, but its place in that history can’t be denied.
This truck is equipped with the smallest available engine, a 3.9 liter V6 which, like Chevy’s 4.3, is basically a V8 with two cylinders hacked off. And like the Chevy, its placement at the far back of an engine bay designed to accommodate much longer engines makes for a comically large cooling fan shroud. The trucks have one other thing in common as well: both use the same New Venture 3500 five-speed transmission. This one has been rebuilt recently and has a new clutch. The seller says you could “drive this truck anywhere,” despite its high mileage.
The seller didn’t see fit to include any decent interior photos, but what we can see is what’s expected: basic rubber floor mats, sturdy cloth upholstery, and an aftermarket stereo wedged into the dash. It’s all dusty and a little bit broken-looking. This is one area where I really do miss ’60s and ’70s trucks; steel dashboards and vinyl seats age better than all the modern plastic stuff. It all gets equally beat up, but the old interiors wear it better. This just looks tired.
It’s pretty tired outside, too, with sun-scorched paint and missing trim. It looks straight and rust-free, though, which is something. And I like the basic steelies with beauty rings; they’re good honest truck wheels.
Short-bed single-cab trucks like these are useful for work, but it has always seemed that their primary purpose was to look cool. These are both too old and tired-looking to impress anyone, but they’ve still got some life left in them. And just because they have V6s now doesn’t necessarily mean they need to keep them. But which one is a better deal? You tell me.
(Image credits: Craigslist sellers)
They’re both rolling turds so I went with the one that kept more internet fake money in my pocket.
I’ve had 2 4.3s but never in a GMT400. Gimme the Chevy.
The Dodge is overpriced and the Chevy is a worn out heap. I’d rather pay a little too much for the truck in better condition than save a little money on something that looks ready to roll over and die.
I started off leaning towards the Chevy, because Dodge is Dodge, but the Dodge seems to be in much better shape.
FWIW, having owned one, you could get a Cheyenne with the Silverado frontend for about an $150 option.
Figured I would take the Chevy when I started but oooff it’s just beyond beaten. The crappy paint and replaced parts probably indicate a lot more damage than the broken bumper and dents already do. And what great photos of truck by overpass and some dude in the photo near the bumper. Beyond the lack of info in the ad and the half-assed photos, I want nothing to do with it.
I’ll take the Dodge and clean it up a little. I do think a comparable Ford would have taken this showdown though but who knows.
I know some people say mopar or no car but not me. My, and my families, experiences with Chrysler haven’t been overly positive. On the other hand a few friends have owned absolute beat to crap and poorly maintained GM trucks from this era and while they weren’t pretty they always started and got from A to B. So Chev it is.
Indy said “it’s not the years, it’s the mileage”, but I’m going with the Dodge in this case. Very high miles, but possibly cared for better than the Chevy? I don’t fault a work truck for working, but every owner has their own habit for vehicle care and maintenance.
Much respect for the OBS trucks, but that Chevy has been rode harder and put away wetter than the Ram, and I fear the retrofit front end and primer paint job were intended to mask some larger front-end shunt. Plus, as others have suggested, modern step-sides look weird. We’ll take the Ram.
Damn, my dreams of 3-some spoiled again!
As for single cab shortbeds, the biggest advantage is the ability to park in the average suburban garage.
Yesterday’s Ranger Splash article got me looking at CL for stepsides/flaresides. I’ve always liked them, although I prefer the early 80’s/late 70’s versions more. I found an ’89 GMC single cab stepside (350 SBC+4spd auto, peeling silver paint) in Corpus Christi, Tx for $8500, so, despite what others are saying, these DFW area prices actually seem reasonable.
Between these two, I’ll take the Chevy steppy.
I’d go for the Ram in this case, if for no other reason than I feel like I’d have less of a chance of being beaten to death under an overpass when I went to pick it up.
The rule on getting a crappy truck to do crappy truck things with is generally “get the cheapest you can find”. I can’t follow that rule here. The Chevy looks like it has seen bad things. The Dodge wears it better. I’m not a slave to what plays best in my neighborhood, nor is my neighborhood all that judgemental in the first place, however I would feel better personally wheeling down the street in that Dodge while hauling all matter of things around. The Chevy? Not so much.
Having driven both, these Dodge’s do have pretty comfy and rugged interiors. Looks like it mainly just needs good cleaning inside and I bet the plastics are fine. The Chevy just looks more trashed overall and I know how fragile these early GMT400 interiors are. The Dodge just looks like less work to be presentable.
I guarantee the top of the Dodge’s dash is cracked to pieces, because they all are. Nonetheless, the Dodge is in way better condition, and is the right call between these two.
OK – I can live with a carpet dash toupee on something like this.
Yep, for sure. Totally forgivable.
I can’t stand a nasty, torn, shredded interior that I have to interact with every time I drive the car. I once bought a cheap ’89 Cherokee Laredo. It was filthy inside but once I cleaned it, it looked great. No torn fabric, no dash cracks, good door cards. The exterior was in bad shape but it bothered me less since it was winter beater. I resprayed it in dad’s driveway and went on my merry way. Sold it later for what I paid.
Personally I’m not a big fan of step side trucks, but I still picked the Chevy because it’s 1. Cheaper, and 2. I don’t trust any vehicle that has a K&N sticker attached to an unlatched air cleaner box.
With you on the K&N sticker.
The only modern step sides I can tolerate are the mid-aughts Fords that barely had an indentation on the sides of them that did not abruptly terminate at the cab.
This is a tough choice, mostly because both are bad options for the money. I picked the Chevy because GMT 400s are cool trucks. While this truck is a terrible example of a GMT 400, if the price were lower (around $1,200 or so) I might be interested in it. I have no delusions this could ever be a nice truck, but it could be fun.
I am also not a fan of second or third generation Dodge Rams. My objection is the front end styling. As I recall, they were trying to emulate the look of semi-truck, but I don’t think they succeeded. To me, the front end styling doesn’t match the rest of the truck and looks awkward. It is distinctive, but not in a good way. Still, while I have no interest in this truck for any price, I think it is probably a better choice as a work truck than the destroyed Chevy.
This one was tough. I love the 4.3 in the Chevy and GM trucks of this era in general, but really dislike stepsides on modern trucks. They look totally out of place since cabs ditched their separate fenders, and this one is cracked up pretty badly. I am also not a fan of errant wires present in this one. I love the styling of these ‘90’s Rams and this one looks pretty straight, but have been bit hard by Chryslers in the past. I guess I’ll go with the straight, non-molested truck with a new clutch. Pretty steep price, but going Ram today.
less money, less miles, less Chrysler.
Never owned a GM truck but I would if the right one came along. This one isn’t it.
I love seeing that crappy little radio the Ram has. I had the same one in my zx2; it is like $20 at Walmart but it gets the job done. Still picking the stepside though, I’ll have some change leftover to add that head unit.
I have a very similar one in my ‘94 F150. It took me back to high school going to Walmart and getting the cheapest unit I could find along with the wiring harness and install kit. I did spring for “decent” Pioneer speakers from Best Buy, tho. Haha.
I like the Dodge better, but not enough to pay $1100 more than the Chevy to get it. And my uncle had a Chevy just like that well into the 2000s, though his looked much nicer, even near the end of its life.
I guess things really are bigger in Texas because these are two of the biggest shitboxes to appear here in awhile. No thanks, I’ll walk.
Today we have two pieces of shit on the same Texas shingle. No thanks.
Stepside Chevy. She’s rough, but she’s also perfect candidate for an LS swap with a good transmission, lowering (only a little bit) and making a good little muscle truck out of her.
I’m a GM truck guy at heart, but that one has been beaten within an inch of it’s life. Too many owners, too many questionable modifications, too much body damage and missing parts.
The Dodge looks more like it was owned by one person, of the stick and stay and make it pay mentality. It’s worn, but stock. It’s rough, but not raggedy. Between these two, that’s the one that I bet will get me home.
Solid logic
Chevy all day.
The Dodge looks like half the engine is under the cowl, making it a PITA to work on.
I actually scrolled back to the picture to check that the hood wasn’t Astro van short