Three-Quarter Tons Of Charm: 1968 Ford F-250 vs 1976 GMC Sierra 2500

Sbsd 9 1 2023
ADVERTISEMENT

Good morning! It’s the Friday before Labor Day here in the US, so what better time to look at a couple of all-American beasts built for labor? We’ll check them out in just a minute. First, let’s finish up with yesterday’s blackout Toyotas:

Screen Shot 2023 08 31 At 4.56.01 Pm

Well, that’s decisive. To be fair, I don’t think the Celica is a bad deal at all, and it sounds like many of you agreed; it’s just that the Supra is even better. And I was wondering if anyone was going to mention Shirtless Guy in the photos.

So yesterday, I found two possible pairs of vehicles: those Toyotas, and a pair of charismatic three-quarter-ton pickups, both manuals, both with fresh and excellent-running V8s, and both at the blue end of the spectrum. I had a hard time choosing which one to feature, and then it occurred to me – just pick one pair, and use the other pair the next day. So today it’s truck day. Here we go!

1968 Ford F-250 Ranger – $2,500

00t0t 49b3iksuwyz 0ak07k 1200x900

Engine/drivetrain: 460 cubic inch overhead valve V8, four-speed manual, RWD

Location: Gig Harbor, WA

Odometer reading: 77,000 miles (probably rolled over at least once)

Runs/drives? Doesn’t expressly say, actually…

The fifth-generation Ford F-series trucks have not only aged well; I would go so far as to say that they actually look better all old and scruffy like this. It’s as if Ford designed them with surface rust and dents in mind from the start. Patina gives these trucks character in a way that really suits the shape of them. And teal over white is quite possibly the ideal color combination for them.

00q0q 5yg2wqehy7n 0ak07k 1200x900

This particular F-250 Ranger has had the same owner for twenty-five years. They built an engine for it, a big-block Ford 460 chock-full of hot rod parts – but they don’t say how long ago that was, or what sort of condition it’s in now. But it has been my experience that if someone goes to the trouble of name-dropping high performance parts in the ad, they’d also tell you if something was preventing it from running, so I have to assume this one runs, and probably pretty well. It will be an appalling gas-guzzler, but I bet it gets up and moves.

00909 Jhab0ruuh3f 0ak07k 1200x900

It actually doesn’t matter much if a truck like this is a manual or an automatic, but this one has what I’m assuming is a four-speed manual. If it were a three-speed, it would be on the column, I imagine. The length and shape of the shift levers in trucks of this age is always something to behold; it’s probably two feet long if you straighten out all the twists and turns.

01111 Hhdxlgxfx5k 0ak07k 1200x900

Like the majority of west coast trucks, this one only has some surface rust. It is lacking most of its paint on the hood and roof, but overall it looks solid. And it has those cool locking compartments built into the side of the bed.

1976 GMC Sierra 2500 – $2,250

01010 Lp8lftwvgrz 0ci0lm 1200x900

Engine/drivetrain: 350 cubic inch overhead valve V8, four-speed manual, RWD

Location: Centralia, WA

Odometer reading: 58,000 miles (rolled over at least once)

Runs/drives? Great, according to the seller

I only recently learned that GM’s term for this generation of truck is the “Rounded Line.” Ironic name for a truck that could be convincingly depicted out of cinder blocks, but there you have it. Though in fairness, now that I look at it, there are quite a few rounded lines in the design, but I think I’ll just stick with the “squarebody” nickname.

00n0n 9vmfffqqnfp 0ci0lm 1200x900

This one is a GMC, from before the big redesign in ’81 that drastically changed the shape of the front end. It’s also a three-quarter ton, powered by a brand-new example of the ubiquitous 350 small-block V8, and what I’m guessing is my beloved Saginaw-Muncie SM465 four-speed manual with a “granny” gear. The seller just had the engine replaced, and now is going overseas (in the military, I assume) and wants to sell it before they leave. It runs and drives great, and although the seller calls it “ugly,” I don’t think it’s too bad at all.

00o0o Hampyfirlnj 0ci0lm 1200x900

The great thing about these trucks is that as long as GM keeps selling these crate engines, you’ll be able to keep them going. At least, as long as you keep the rust at bay. Squarebodies are notorious for rust, and while this one looks pretty solid still, a new owner should take some steps to keep it that way.

00z0z Jjowbgmtdof 0ci0t2 1200x900

Or you could just use it as a weekend warrior as-is. It doesn’t quite have the charisma of the Ford, which is hard for a Chevy guy like me to admit, but I have no doubt in its ability to get the job done.

Yeah, I know, I’ve done old trucks a lot. What can I say? I like ’em. And these two strike me as particularly good deals. Mechanically solid, with just the right amount of scruff around the edges, and far more reasonable prices than some old trucks are commanding these days. So which one will it be?

(Image credits: Craigslist sellers)

About the Author

View All My Posts

58 thoughts on “Three-Quarter Tons Of Charm: 1968 Ford F-250 vs 1976 GMC Sierra 2500

  1. So this is an emotional pick for me, my dad had a ’74 and a ’79 GMC. The earlier one had the same powertrain as this, the ’79 was a half-ton with 6 and 3 on the tree.

  2. The F250 is beat to shit. Having owned one of them, I can say they also drive like shit, especially if the suspension and steering gear isn’t all absolutely perfect. And if the roof skin isn’t already rusted through, it will be soon.

    The Square body looks way more solid and they’re pretty hot right now, so this is a damn good price. Square body all day everyday.

  3. I had a Chevy 3/4T of the same year named BUF aka Big Ugly F*****. Bullet proof! When I sold it to a local guy (who annoyingly is still driving it) it had a bit over 350K miles on it, verified because I put the last 200K on it myself and was still running the original engine, trans, rearend, and drive line. I replaced the clutch 3 times and the the universals twice. Your mileage may vary!

    If one were to purchase this beauty, I would reccomend replacing the cargo box with a flatbed and perhaps some side rails. I did this so I could carry a BMW w/sidecar. It was also very practical for other uses.

    Hell, if I didn’t already have a very fine 2004 Silverado w/180K miles on it (starting a new legacy?) I’d be looking at this thing myself.

    1. Upon review of the photos, I would point out the condition of the wheels, tires, and hubcaps are in great shape which speaks well to the care given by the owner.

      On the other hand, two different sets of plug wires is a bit disconcerting. On that note, the gray wires are haphazard as hell, while the red ones are very carefully installed using the original mounting points!

      1. The red wire aren’t plug wires. Plug wires are all gray after looking at the ad. The red wires look new and you can see one that splits off to the alternator

  4. I like vintage Ford trucks, but this one is pretty rough. Had to vote GMC just because it seems more complete. But I bet if you contacted the seller you’d find they’ve “already left the country”, but if you “send money via Western Union we’ll ship the truck to you”.

  5. You mentioned the Ford’s odometer had probably rolled over once. I’d say the whole damn truck has probably rolled over at least once. In high school, I slid out of the bed of this truck’s twin into the middle of the road, so I voted for the Ford because, you know, memories.

  6. Reading the ad on the big block 68, along with no engine pics, I wonder if there’s even an engine installed? Says he built a big block (with ‘Elderblock’ manifold!) and has too many projects….

      1. Thanks for reminding me. I once crafted a heat-blocking adapter out of maple piano pin block plank to put a Weber on my Subaru GL wagon.
        >to mitigate leaks from the grain I soaked both sides with multiple layers of the old shellac gasket glue. That actually worked for the more than a decade before the car passed beyond my care

  7. The square is the easy choice here — The rock-solid and relatively efficient 350 coupled with a bulletproof SM465, conventional upper/lower control arm IFS, and the general ease of maintenance and repair.

    The Ford is neat, but the 460 is a lazy turd of a motor that will never return more than single-digit fuel mileage, and that “twin I-beam” front suspension is complete garbage.

    All that said, both trucks are priced well for the market. If the Chevy was closer, I’d be sorely tempted to press it into service for weekend hauling duty.

    1. “…and that “twin I-beam” front suspension is complete garbage.” Amen. Sure, it was a step up from a solid axle, but there’s farm equipment with more sophisticated front ends.
      

    1. You’ll have to replace the whole front end, though. There’s no way to lower HD 3/4 ton twin I-beam Fords. The kit doesn’t exist, so you’d have to fit either a 1/2 ton front end or go Mustang II to drop it.

  8. Man, why couldn’t the GMC be the same vintage as the Ford? The generation that came before the squareback is awesome, but it was too short, while the squareback lasted too long.

    I voted for the Ford

  9. Both are great options. I prefer the Ford, but it would be nice to know more about its mechanical condition or at least see a picture of two of the engine compartment. I’m still going with the Ford, though. While I like the GMC, 60s and 70s Ford trucks are some of my favorite vehicles. I regularly say this on shitbox showdown, but this is a vehicle I would buy if it were for sale locally (assuming there aren’t major issues the ad didn’t disclose). Unfortunately, google maps says this truck is a 3,140 mile drive from my house, so I’m going to have to pass.

  10. 460 is bigger then 350. Should other things be in consideration for this choice yes. They weren’t though. Including, that the seller put has much effort into that listing as I did into school. C’s do in fact get degrees.

    1. I have the 460 in my ’77 F250. It is a decent engine, but fuel economy is absolutely horrendous (I have averaged 7 mpg over the last 15,000 miles). These trucks are slow even with the 460, so performance isn’t greatly improved over smaller engines. The 460 is better for towing, but I’m not towing with a 50 year old truck so that doesn’t matter. A smaller engine and 12 mpg seems like a much better option.

      1. Truth and same goes for FEs. They’re freaking boat anchors and parts are bank compared to SBFs. A warmed over 351w will serve you better in almost all cases.

  11. I’ll take the GMC. While the alternator and battery look new, I bet that 350 is used but new to this truck. Still a squarebody for that price is a good choice

  12. I was very confused at first, because a brand new crate 350 is quite a bit more than $2250.

    But upon clicking through to the ad, it just says engine “replaced”, not that the replacement was new.

    Despite that, I prefer the cleaner appearance of the GMC; Mark may appreciate dents in his trucks but I don’t. Give me the square body.

Leave a Reply