Your time machine wish: things you wish GM had done in this era...

[67 twins]

Originally Posted by CKfan

No wooden bed floors.
Buddy bucket option thru 72.
Seal off the cowl crap catcher and delete kick vents.

Absolutely not! The kick panel vents & the wing windows are the two best features of these trucks.

[HO455]

Originally Posted by 67 twins

Absolutely not! The kick panel vents & the wing windows are the two best features of these trucks.

Times two!

My own would be.

1 1/4" sway bars on all the trucks.

Door lock key cylinder on 3rd door on Suburbans.

3 point seat belts standard in all three rows of Suburban seating.

Fold flat second row Burban seats like the squarebodys came with.

Rear heater or defogger grid on Burban/Panel rear windows.

An 18 to 22 gallon tank instead of the 15 gallon fuel tank on Burbans and Panels.

Loving the 3 door life!

[CKfan]

Actually, I have reconsidered.
I love the kick vents, they have made me a lot of money over the years repairing them for people.

[54blackhornet]

How about continuing this body for another decade before going to the square one. That would have allowed GM to institute all the thoughts above.

[Greg58]

I wish GMC trucks would have continued to offer Pontiac V8 engines till 72.
Like they did in the late 50s, a torquey 428 or 455 would have made a great truck engine.

Greg

[Bob B.]

Originally Posted by factorystock

X2! For those daily high mileage and higher GVW hauls, you can't beat diesel power. Running the larger and more refined toroflows up to the early 80's could have been a game changer for GMC.

A few dealers did Toroflow swaps on V-6 pickups, it was almost a bolt in swap. Supposedly GMC did give the idea some thought.

[Bob B.]

Originally Posted by Greg58

I wish GMC trucks would have continued to offer Pontiac V8 engines till 72.
Like they did in the late 50s, a torquey 428 or 455 would have made a great truck engine.

Greg

Look close at this page from the 67-72 'Assembly Manual' and tell me what you think:

[jabborabbo]

Originally Posted by ratty69

How about the overdrive unit used on 3 speeds available on 4 speeds and autos?

They were made by Borg Warner IIRC, and I was under the impression they were strong, reliable units. (Never owned one.)

Not wanting to take this thread sideways with details, so I'd wish this if it was technically possible.

Actually, overdrive as standard on all three-speeds…my ‘67 L6 is really revving at 80 mph in 3rd gear…the truck gets 15 mpg (on the highway anyway), which really ain’t nothing to gripe about considering, but a few more mpg’s along with lower rpm’s would be nice….

Otherwise, absolutely NOTHING!!!

[toms68cst]

Wider stance on the drum brake trucks or offer disk brakes in the early years of our series.

Inside frame-mounted gas tank. Cab mounted tanks are such a throw-back to the 1930's.

A REAL 4-speed manual. The ch-465 is a 3-speed with a granny gear.

I can't believe that any of these changes would have added much to the cost of manufacturing our trucks.

[MARKDTN]

Enjoyed reading these. I definitely agree with more rust protection but to be fair nobody had that at the time. Disc brakes earlier would have been nice. External fuel tanks would have been nice. Delay wipers would be awesome. But how about an LT1 (but with TH400 trans) engine option from Camaro and Corvette of the day. I will never understand why GM did not offer Tuned-Port fuel injection from the IROC in the 88-95 timeframe trucks. I would have much rather had an SS350 (or even SS305) with a Tuned-Port than an SS454 with a throttle body.

[jumpsoffrock]

Originally Posted by dmjlambert

A little more leg room and head room.

Originally Posted by samkost

Dmjlambert beat me to it.
An extended cab version my 6’ 3” frame would appreciate.

I'm 6'3" but very skinny, and my head almost hits the ceiling.
But I always thought it was because it has the wrong seat in it lol
I guess it's not just me

Originally Posted by CKfan

No wooden bed floors.

Careful there, pal. Or we're gonna get "taken care of" by the mafia.....

Originally Posted by special-K

Muncie M22

Originally Posted by MARKDTN

Enjoyed reading these. I definitely agree with more rust protection but to be fair nobody had that at the time. Disc brakes earlier would have been nice. External fuel tanks would have been nice. Delay wipers would be awesome. But how about an LT1 (but with TH400 trans) engine option from Camaro and Corvette of the day. I will never understand why GM did not offer Tuned-Port fuel injection from the IROC in the 88-95 timeframe trucks. I would have much rather had an SS350 (or even SS305) with a Tuned-Port than an SS454 with a throttle body.

Yeah, they also should have offered a "sport truck" option: LT-1 From the Vette or Z28, M22, 12 bolt posi, nicer interior, Maybe a different more aero grill.
Really surprised they didn't see the sporty stylistic potential of these trucks and offer them to the people who don't care to use them for work.

[HO455]

Judging from the photos in "Development/Concept photo thread" it is apparent that the younger design group employees did recognize the sporty truck market. Unfortunately all the decisions were made by 50 plus year old conservative executives who earned their bones with the Advanced Design and Task Force trucks. There were no John DeLorean's were in the truck group. Just stodgy old men safely finishing out their careers.

[factorystock]

I like these previously mentioned items, full foam seat standard, front stabilizer bar standard. I will add, full syncro 3 spd standard, GM continued to use the older non syncro 3 speed in '67 and '68 on 6 cyl pickups when they had the newer full syncro 3 spd box on the same era V8 pickups. Rear leaf springs optional on '67 2wd 10-20 series.

[ratty69]

Originally Posted by Bob B.

Look close at this page from the 67-72 'Assembly Manual' and tell me what you think:

Too cool! An actual option that nobody ordered, or an almost-option that got canceled? Or maybe a dealer-install only?

So close, yet so far...

[Bob B.]

Originally Posted by ratty69

Too cool! An actual option that nobody ordered, or an almost-option that got canceled? Or maybe a dealer-install only?

So close, yet so far...

I am thinking GMC was considering going back to Pontiac V-8's to keep their trucks 'different' than Chevys, particularly after the V-6 was dropped.

The diagram is clearly of a Pontiac V-8 (unique heads and exhaust manifolds, starter on the left, oil filter on the right) in a 1970 GMC (models CE-CK 150-250).

The engine wiring harness would have been unique to the Pontiac V-8 with the starter wiring on the left and oil pressure switch/temp. sender on the right. Of course B-O-P pattern Turbo 350 and 400 transmissions would have been used, possibly manual transmission trucks could have used the '55-'59 bell housings.

Looks like the Pontiac V-8 idea got a little further along than just talk.

[ratty69]

Originally Posted by Bob B.

The diagram is clearly of a Pontiac V-8 (unique heads and exhaust manifolds, starter on the left, oil filter on the right)...

Yep, definitely a Poncho for all that and more.

It would be interesting to know if existing parts were called out to do this installation, or if everything was clean-sheet. (If records exist.)

This subject seems like it could (and should?) be its own thread. Thanks for posting this.

Now, back on topic:

Dually with a bed? Power goodies like windows and seat?

[chipmaker 1985]

Rear view mounted map lights and steel floor steppers would have been awesome.

[jumpsoffrock]

Originally Posted by ratty69

Dually with a bed? Power goodies like windows and seat?

Not sure how we all forgot these, very good ideas.

[LT7A]

Originally Posted by HO455

Judging from the photos in "Development/Concept photo thread" it is apparent that the younger design group employees did recognize the sporty truck market. Unfortunately all the decisions were made by 50 plus year old conservative executives who earned their bones with the Advanced Design and Task Force trucks. There were no John DeLorean's were in the truck group. Just stodgy old men safely finishing out their careers.

Well... You actually pretty much got exactly what you wanted as far as getting someone like DeLorean involved in the GM truck program, but not in the way you wanted it. DeLorean was made the head of GM's North American car and truck operations in 1972. I read that he did have a lot of influence on truck design at that time. Maybe so much that it was a completely new truck... in 1973. Now, I realize that's not what you meant because if it was, you'd be posting in the SquareBody section rather in the 67-72s I don't actually know why that generation was scheduled for redesign after just six years and you make an interesting and valid point, but JZD himself did get into truck design, albeit as the big boss. And I read that the new truck was his last design project before leaving... And getting stuck in traffic, or traffick.

[special-K]

I always wished GM made a Blazer/Jimmy the size of the original Bronco, Jeep, Scout, Land Rover. I don't mean not build the K/5 we know, which was the first of it's kind that opened up a whole new segment for the rest to follow. But I always wanted to cut down a 69-72 K/5 to that standard size for better off road maneuverability. To be comparable with the rest, which would be the best.

[67 twins]

Originally Posted by special-K

I always wished GM made a Blazer/Jimmy the size of the original Bronco, Jeep, Scout, Land Rover. I don't mean not build the K/5 we know, which was the first of it's kind that opened up a whole new segment for the rest to follow. But I always wanted to cut down a 69-72 K/5 to that standard size for better off road maneuverability. To be comparable with the rest, which would be the best.

So like an S10 Blazer?

[70c10-08]

Originally Posted by special-K

I always wished GM made a Blazer/Jimmy the size of the original Bronco, Jeep, Scout, Land Rover. I don't mean not build the K/5 we know, which was the first of it's kind that opened up a whole new segment for the rest to follow. But I always wanted to cut down a 69-72 K/5 to that standard size for better off road maneuverability. To be comparable with the rest, which would be the best.

Wasn't the original Blazer concept vehicle or sketch from 65 or 66? Completely different from the Blazer that was actually built? Because I remember seeing that and thinking how cool that would have been if they would have built it and, a pickup version. Think about it, we could have had a small pickup rather than Isuzu derived LUV that we had. Could've even used the four cylinders that they used in some of the base Novas with the optional inline sixes. And a lot of these ideas that have been posted already are really novel and great ideas that should have been done.

[1970cstblazer]

The Blazer that was in process prior to the one that came to be was an UGLY creation.

I'm glad that one never made it past the clay mockup phase!

[chipmaker 1985]

Originally Posted by 1970cstblazer

The Blazer that was in process prior to the one that came to be was an UGLY creation.

I'm glad that one never made it past the clay mockup phase!

Jeebuz! Looks like the bastard child of a squarebody k5 and AMC gremlin.

[68Gold/white]

Originally Posted by Warrens69GMC

Would have been nice to have Disc Brakes whether stock or optional equipment 67-70.

Speaking of all the Pontiac mentions...

I have a 77 Pontiac Trans Am, original owner. I am restifying it, still needs work. I used to have a subscription the 2 of the Pontiac magazines. The editors of one of the magazines were brain storming one day talking Pontiacs. One of them mentioned knowing someone that was close to John DeLorean, possibly having contact information for him.
They went beyond dreaming and asked him to call this "friend" (maybe to see if he was BSing, OR NOT). They made the call, asked him if they could have DeLorean's phone number and call him??? The friend said that John wouldn't mind...........

They called him and he agreed to a phone interview. He was thrilled to do so. Pontiac was his baby, and he was smack in the middle of it from 1959-1969.

My point...
I don't have the Magazine, BUT do remember 2 distinct things Pontaic HAD planned for the first or second year of the GTO's.

THey were going to use front disc brakes AND radial tires!!! Somebody in the heiraechy at GM got all mad about those things and disallowed them. May have been Ed Cole. He was afraid of Pontiac leap frogging over Chevrolet at GM. Chevrolet was the darling of the company and could not be passed over by an internal company inside GM..

Imaging radial tires and disc brakes on a 64 GTO, talk about a leap forward. Brakes and tires were the 2 things that held back the performance of all Hot Rod cars back then.

Woulda been nice for pickups too!!!