Is there any way to tell the model year of a 1967-72 GMC truck other than decoding the VIN? I’m not aware that GMC made any styling changes to this truck at any point during its run. Chevrolet at least had the common decency to change the grille nearly every year it made its identical truck so we could know its model year at a glance.
I know of but one tiny change, the addition of side-marker lights in 1968. This one has the lights, so we can rule out 1967 as its model year.
I found this truck at one of my favorite lunch spots and watering holes on the north side of Indianapolis. I see it on the road a lot, actually; this was the first time I found it parked. Props, of course, to its owner for driving it so much, and for leaving in original condition with all this great patina and wonderful signs of the use it’s gotten.
At least GMC got a lot of mileage out of its grille tooling. GM accountants had to be very happy.
I think, but could be off here by a year 71-72 has the vertical grille bar painted black. Seems as fi the grille stamping itself is slightly different.
The upright hood shows this is at least a ’69, the ’67-68 slanted back more. Chevy got the same change at the same time.
Here’s the ’71 Jimmy brochure showing the late grille treatment;
http://www.oldcarbrochures.org/United%20States/GM%20Trucks%20and%20Vans/1971_Trucks-Vans/1971_GMC_Jimmy_Brochure/slides/1971_GMC_Jimmy-01.html
The flat-cowl chassis’ nose sheetmetal was the ultimate in amortized tooling in this generation. It ran until 1984, 11 years after the full-cab trucks’ redesign. For ’85 it finally caught up with the 1973 look when it got a fiberglass tilt nose. It’s an especially interesting case since probably 90% of flat-cowl chassis become school buses and almost all the rest armored cars, and the two things the public might express concern to operators about being hauled in an “old” truck are their kids and their money…
Here’s the ’77 brochure showing a new-old school bus alongside new full-cab trucks, themselves built from 1973-90 without change (there was an alternative nose from ’79 or ’80 but it ran alongside the ’73 look)
http://www.oldcarbrochures.org/United%20States/GM%20Trucks%20and%20Vans/1977_Trucks_and_Vans/1977-GMC-Trucks-Folder/slides/1977_GMC_Trucks-10-11.html
Looks like a seriously honest, hardworking truck. At almost 50 years old, it has done more than its share of heavy lifting.
I will say this. Cost accountants and “bean counters” get a bad rap on our site. No I am not one of them, and I had more than my fair share of encounters with the dark side of cost containment in my career. Like HR people, these people have an influence, which at times, seems beyond what others would prefer. This has led to an outsized reputation. However, cost accountants (and HR) do serve an important purpose in a corporation. Time and materials should be managed, and yes, as Jim you alluded to, kept within reason.
I’m willing to guess that there are some readers on CC from accounting land. Let’s try to stay positive and respectful on CC when we refer to our friends in cost accounting. They are not always our enemy. Thanks.
Good call about accountants and human resources.
It’s all about checks and balances. I don’t think anyone here has a problem with accountants but when things get out of balance, with more focus on cost than quality, is when things get off-kilter. And we can all think of examples of that. I deal with it daily at work as do many others who frequent this site.
And, speaking of work, I love the HR people where I work. If I don’t talk to them daily it seems as if something is wrong. So while I’ve never said where I work or what I do (specifically) all I will say is as a manager with 390 direct and indirect reports, I’d be paralyzed without my allies in human resources.
I’ve always thought of GMC as being a ‘serious’ truck builder. That being the case, why fritter away money on needless grille and trim reshuffles? Change for changes’ sake seems to be the antithesis of a serious sixties truck.
And that would please the accountants.
They should sell a badge kit to replace the G M C on the hood with H O N E S T. At least for this particular one. I like it and am liking older trucks more and more every day, even (especially?) in this green. Good find!
Is that a T-3 headlight I see there?
Talk about about original, it still has a Guide T-3 high beam.
Good eye – it makes sense that the high beam would be a survivor getting less use than the low beam. I think repros are available, but unlikely that the owner of this truck would spring for such a sealed beam.
The 1967 GMC had its letters debossed into the center of the grille instead of having the pot-metal letters bolted to the hood. Nice truck. Would love to have one with the V6.
I do and it is!
This is a ’69 or ’70 model. As with Chevrolet, the ’67 & ’68’s have a similar nose treatment, as well as the ’69 & ’70’s, and the ’71 & ’72’s. I can easily narrow it down to one of the three groups, but the exact year is more difficult.
It is a nice old truck that is obviously still in it’s intended use. You don’t see many trucks (or cars) this old that are all original at least in appearance, even down to the hub caps.
Ummm…
’67 GMC has the name embossed into the grill.
’68-’70 moved the “GMC” to the hood. Hood became upright for ’69, plus it gained the matching grill surround.
’71-’72s used a different grill with a black-painted vertical center section.
“At least GMC got a lot of mileage out of its grille tooling. GM accountants had to be very happy.
At the time, it looks like Chevy outsold GMC about 4 to 1, so over five years the GMC tooling made about 20% more parts than each year of the Chevy tooling.
Therfore, each year that passed made it harder to justify investment in tooling for a low volume part that wouldn’t come close to Chevy yearly production numbers.
There were loyal GMC buyers who would never buy a Chevy.
Very nice! My mother knew a guy who owned a 3 door GMC Suburban of around this vintage, and in the mid 1970s it looked to be in about the same condition. I remember thinking at the time that while Chevy trucks were starting to get civilized, the GMCs were still all business.
Somewhere along the line GMC became General Motors-speak for Just as good but more expensive.
What is interesting about these GMC’s compared to similar vintage Chevy’s are the mechanical differences. The major difference was the availability of the GMC V-6 in the ’67 through ’69 models. Other differences were that GMC’s had rear leaf springs as standard equipment, Chevy’s had rear coils with leafs as an option on heavier models. Most GMC’s had Dana-Spicer rear axles, Chevy usually used GM corporate or Eaton. Many 4X2 GMC’s had New Process 4 speed manual transmissions, Chevy usually used Muncie gear boxes.
Excellent find Jim. This nose design would have worked so well on the Dodge Fargo/D-100 pickups with the quad headlights and crosshair grille looking aesthetically very close to the Dodge/Chrysler 300 brand. While being an improvement visually over the dual headlight design Dodge used in these years.
Worked at a state park on the park maintenance crew several summers during college. The park had one of these in its pool of work vehicles…dark green ’69 or ’70, 4×4, 350 SBC, 4-speed. Man, thing was a blast to bomb around in, on road or off. Every day we’d all fight over who’d get to use it. A real man’s truck, although the several girls on the crew loved it just as much as did the guys.
67s have no side marker lights, and the small rear window was standard, with the larger window available as an option. With the 68s, the large rear window was made standard across the board.
Nice article. Always nice to see an old truck in stock form still in service after nearly 50 years.
I’ll always have a sentimental soft spot for the 1968 GMC CS1500 longbed pickup because it was the last vehicle my father bought when I was a child, and in later years I learned how to drive in it (mastering the 4-speed transmission) drove it throughout my high school and college stints. It didn’t impress the girls, except an Aggie major. Wish I still had the truck.
In addition to the differences others have pointed out, particularly the rakish hood slant, the 1967-68 GMCs (and Chevrolet) had a three-spoke steering wheel, hand-operated parking brake and three knobs on the instrument cluster: headlights, windshield wiper/washer and manual choke. Also the optional side trim was a thin chrome strip that ran along side the fenders and door and along the wheel arches.
1969 and later years had the more upright hood, wider side trim (but did not run alongside the wheel arch), had two-spoke steering wheel, modern foot-operated parking brake and the manual choke knob deleted.
As I recall, back then GMC was considered as the more business-like truck, i.e, having standard rear leaf springs compared to the rear coil springs on the Chevy. Also GMC offered the big V-6s that could give the V-8s a run for the (low-end stump pulling torque) money.
After the 305 and 351 V-6 was discontinued from the GMC line, there wasn’t much difference between GMC and Chevrolet, except for exterior differences, e.g. headlight and grille and of course the rear leaf springs vs coil springs until 1972 when Chevrolet offered rear leaf standard, if I recall.
Another thing I remembered was the GMC could be sold with the Buick-Oldsmobile-Pontiac dealers (who desired to offer trucks) whereas Chevrolet was exclusively Chevrolet.
Don’t know when GM began marketing the GMC as the upscale truck to the more pedestrian Chevy.
There used to be a ton of these still in daily service back in Colorado. On a recent trip there about 2 weeks ago–I saw not one being driven. The only one I did see was rotting away in someone’s yard in south Loveland. What a forlorn sight it was to behold.