Last December, I bought a 1974 Chevy C10 for $750. It had a 4-speed with a 250 Six. It was a longbed std. cab pickup. 119,000 miles. I bought with the intentions of fixing it up and selling it for profit.

Concidentally, I also own a 1974 Ford (as seen in my signature). 82,000 miles. It too is a longbed std. cab.

I ended up selling the Chevy to my father for $950 (much less than the advertised $1500...which it was worth.) He got a good deal IMO.

Although I was never able to directly compare the two vehicles side-by-side, I did come off with some impressions.


#1: The fact that Chevy didn't have forward-tilting seats in '73 and '74 really confuses/annoys me. All that room (no fuel tank), and they didn't make the seat tilt forward.

#2: The 250, although only a Six, puts out some decent power. But never seemed to have the same effect as my V8 Ford or my dad's 300 in his '84. And despite all my hard work, I never did get it to run like it did out of the factory. I came close, but she still don't run quite right. My V8 Ford purrs just fine though. Always has since I had it.

#3: My Ford is a little harder to start, but (not counting the tranny issue) gets going a lot quicker. The Chevy was a good starter, but always took a little while to really warm up and get going.

#4: If you think the 70's Ford pickups were the most unaerodynamic vehicles built, you haven't seen my '74 Chevy. The front end is literally a vertical wall.

#5: That Chevy got about 10 mpg. My Ford gets 8, and that's with a dying tranny.

#6: Tires make all the difference. Chevy always had traction, the Ford never does. Chevy's got near-new tires, the Ford is almost running on nothing.

#7: The Ford feels wider in the cab, but narrower in overall vehicle width. Maybe that was just because the Ford has power steering and the Chevy doesn't.

#8: Chevy bumpers, even the heavy-duty ones, were not well-designed for stepping on.

#9: Ford makes better latching devices for the glovebox.

#10: Chevy doors in 1974 were not well designed for pulling on to close the door.

 

74 model vehicles of almost every make were the worst of the worst for performance and fuel mileage. The emission controls were the worst as it was the year before catalytic converters were implemented. Catalytic converters allowed the manufacturers to back off some of the emission controls which made the engines run better and more efficiently. Chevrolets and GMCs in states that used salt for slick roads rusted away long ago if they were 73-79 models. The others rusted also but not nearly to the extent of the GM products. I had a half ton GMC with a 350 and it would get almost 8 MPG in the interstate. My brother had an identical Chevrolet that used even more gas and they both ran fine.

 

I had both a 73 C10 Cheyenne Super and a 74 F-100 Ranger XLT.
Both weren't all that great even being the top of the line at the time. No pwr anything, no cruise control. Everything at the time was both modern and primative.
1.Chevy seat did fold forward, it was either an option or part of the Cheyenne Super package. Ford made it standard from the get go.
2.Chevy I had was a 454 underachiever. Got about 10 mpg in town or hwy. Ford was 390 with more power (!) than the Chevy and got about 16 mpg hwy and 15 city.
3.Ford got a 4 bbl carb and nonfactory cruise control after warranty expired. It would run without problems or stumbling new. Chevy sounded great but ran like a POS from the start. It broke 10 rocker arms inside of 5600 miles. I traded it for the Ford because of this.
4.Aerodynamics back then is what airplanes had. Cars and trucks had stylists.
5.See #2.
6.Chevy wore out original tires in about 5k miles. Ford eventually went through a couple sets of radials and went another 175K miles before being traded.
7.My Chevy had power steering and turned just great...if the engine was working. Ford had power steering and wasn't the sharpest turning truck I've ever had...
8.Chevy bumpers were crap, and Ford bumpers were somewhat tougher but not much better. None of them were meant to step on.
9.Ford was just better by a factor of 75.
10.Chevy had rust through on the door bottoms when I traded it after 9 months. Chevy was missing some trim pieces that had fallen off before I traded it. Ford doors were just a couple pieces of sheetmetal welded together. Nothing rusted through or fell off the Ford in the 6 years that I owned it.

So, it's no surprise that I swore off Chevy and now buy Fords.

 

Yeah, I didn't really consider the fact that almost all vehicles built in '74 were bricks as far as aerodynamics were concerned...

 

I had a 79 CK20 Chevy 4x4. 350, 4sp, 3:73 gears. It was a good truck. I got 14 MPG. but Chevys in the 73-79 era had frame breakage problems. By the steering box. Ford had a much better frame. Ford offered 2 V8s a 351 & 400. both better torque engines than the Chevy. Also the 4sp in the Chevy had a real wide ratio between 3rd & 4th. Pulling a trailer I would spend a lot of time in 3rd gear when pulling hills. Today, I would love to own a 1979 Ford F250 4x4 400, 4sp. Today a 1979 Chevy CK20 4x4 does nothing for me.

 

Interesting topic. I have a 73 C10 350/350 that I inherited from my grandfather. It gets 10mpg city and moves along pretty good. I not only had the frame crack but when I got it the cross member was broken almost in two and held together with a chain! The truck looks bad/runs good. I have considered selling it but it's worth more as a beater. That must be why my 2000 F150 only has 46K on it. All in all I would say that the Ford is probably built a little stronger but this thing just keeps going.

 

Just because the engine is able to run does not mean that it is safe to operate! Pull that engine and tranny, crush the rest as it'll make some good scrap metal.

 

"Just because the engine is able to run does not mean that it is safe to operate! Pull that engine and tranny, crush the rest as it'll make some good scrap metal."

or have a "gross overkill" welding party and reinforce everything.

 

Actually I tried welding it but eventually I just changed out the cross member.