Pickups aren’t really my thing. However, when I saw this one out of the corner of my eye, something made me pull over to take a closer look. I’m glad I did. There are some serious surprises in and under this truck.
You’re going to have to help me out with this one though and forgive me in advance, I know many of you are much better versed in trucks than me. What caught my attention initially was the short cab with dually setup.
While those aren’t unheard of (but relatively rare around here) the truck just looked a little different than normal to me. So as I approached it and started to take some pictures, I took a look at the For Sale sign.
Hoo Boy, it is different! A “1972” Chevy Custom 30, mated to a 1994 Dodge 4×4 Chassis, all powered by a 2-stroke Detroit Diesel 4-53T engine. $7500 seems very ambitious to me, but there may well be a lot I am not considering.
Also, I was under the impression that this would have to be at least a 1973 model, not a ’72 as 1973 was the first year for this body style, no matter what the man’s sign says. In any case, the 30-version would be the 1-ton, it being a regular cab with dual rear wheels means that it was one of the “Big Dooley” versions.
Silver is not its original color, looking around the gaps it appears that it was a medium tone metallic green originally. Maybe even the same color as my old Concours wagon?
Coming around the front, that doesn’t seem like an original grill either. But, hey, it’s an old car, we can open the hood, nobody will mind. After fiddling around with the latch for a while, eventually it opened for me.
Yup, that there is a Detroit Diesel engine. It looks like it belongs right in there. From what I can tell, the engine alone weighs around 1230 lbs even though it’s only four cylinders, each one displacing 53 cubic inches, for a total of 212. Not much displacement for an engine weighing over half a ton. But it’s a two stroke, so it makes more power than the displacement might suggest. The truck version of the 4-53T was rated at 170 hp at 2500 rpm, and 402 lbs ft of torque (full specs here). Needless to say, these are very noisy. It seems like it would be more at home in a larger (commercial) truck, for which it was designed.
At least this truck is hauling something, looks like parts for another (more modern) turbodiesel engine and a tailgate.
I thought I’d take a shot of the rear axle and was surprised to find that this was probably the cleanest part of the whole package. That wiring bundle leaves a bit to be desired though. Maybe the project is only 99% complete.
Here is a shot of spacer that the builder used to mate the bed to the frame.
The inside looks in fairly good condition as well. That bench actually looks sort of comfortable. That appears to be a Norse transmission shifter, nicely carpeted! For that matter, the dash is upholstered in the same material as the seats, both of which look to be in great condition. You don’t really see thick, heavy upholstery like this anymore.
I see the Sierra badge on the dash, which indicates it came from a GMC rather than being original to this truck. However the steering wheel has the Chevy logo. Bonus points for the apparently functioning 8-track player. Alas, I couldn’t tell who the artist was on the cassette.
And another case of a GM doorpanel with the color somehow actually falling off of it.
In any case, it is certainly an interesting mashup of parts. One wonders – what happened to the top half of the ’94 Dodge 4×4? And also what happened to the bottom half of the Chevy? Maybe there is another truck running around as a reverse build…I’ll keep my eyes open.
Editor’s Postscript: This is a fairly common engine swap into Chevy/GMC trucks of this vintage (not the Dodge chassis, though). A neighbor down the street some years back had a Suburban with a 4-53. There’s a number of videos of these trucks in action, but this is probably the best one.
I like it though I’d want taller gearing than the video example so its running near or slightly under peak torque at highway cruising speed, the auto trans would have to go, might be easier to build one my way than fix this one though.
It had been many years since I heard a Detroit Diesel two-stroke on our streets. Until last friday evening, when this Seagrave Tiller drove through our village. A member of the volunteer fire department got married, and his fellow-members arranged something special. They sure did….
I just had to look it up, and I found it here: http://www.bosbrandweer.nl/us-fire-trucks/
It was imported from Newark, Delaware. The engine is a 450 hp DD V8.
Seems to beg the question of “why do it”. I know the short answer is “because I can”. I can’t fault the creativity of the builder even if the execution of his dream is a little crude in places. It’s definitely a bigger project than I could ever hope to construct.
Here’s another 4-53 powered Chivvy pickup that I saw in Barrington, NH in 2010, albeit one with all the rough edges smoothed off.
The motor…
The other side…
…and the hind end. Note the plate…
Sweet ! .
I’d love this .
The even painted the engine Detroit Diesel Green .
I have a few cans of that paint stashed away .
-Nate
“why do it”? Because of the unique sound these make. As well as because diesels in pickups are a “thing” in a certain crowd, and this is not the usual diesel.
Exactly! 🙂
The whine of the blower and scream of those pipes do make some sweet music. It reminds me of the sound the 6-71’s made in the Old Look GM transit buses of my youth.
Very cool!
The exterior design of this truck is handsome yet determined looking. An attractive, all business, simple, straight forward Chevy truck ready to get to work.
I understand the CURRENT Chevy (and GMC) trucks are designed as a tribute to this 1973 – 1987 body style.
Kind of a “fist in the wind” look.
I’m at a loss of words… 🙂
While these “built” customs don’t usually ring my bell, I at least understand them most of the time. But not this one. I get the 4-53 in a chevy pickup but the Dodge chassis baffles me. If that is really what it is, my hat is off to one of the most skilled and determined wrench-twisters on Planet Earth. The only guy who could beat him would have to use a Twin I Beam Ford chassis under one of these trucks with, what, maybe John Deere power?
There was a person who ran an Allis-Chalmers engine in a Ford. It was a solid axle setup, though. A John Deere 329 or 404 would be too obvious.
The only problem I see with the engine in this truck is that it’s a two stroke diesel engine. Generally, in order for a light truck to be driven on the freeway or the streets of any town, it has to be a four stroker.
This one has a brand new set of license plates laying in the cab so I assume it’s ok with the authorities here. Of course I doubt they checked anything before issuing the plates, especially if it’s titled as a 1973.
Yeah. That’s the concern I would have. I like diesel engines, clattering noise and all, but I would also want to be able to use *it all the time I need it,* not just around the house, or around the farm, as farming equipment, but for towing a travel trailer, or hauling garbage to the dump, etc. Diesels shouldn’t be confined to the farm. Nor should only heavy duty trucks, like Peterbilt, Kenworth, or Mack, be allowed to be offered with diesel engines. Whatever the size of the truck and grade, if it’s being used, it should be offered, either as standard equipment, or as an option, a diesel engine.
There isn’t anything stopping any manufacturer from offering diesel engines besides perhaps a perceived lack of market demand.
Current manufacturers that offer diesels in one or more light-duty vehicles in the US: Audi, BMW, Chevrolet, Dodge (RAM), Ford, Mercedes, Porsche, VW and I am sure I am forgetting at least one. I had a diesel and liked it a lot, but not enough to stop me from replacing it with a gas engined vehicle. I can go either way, both have their benefits. If you are serious about buying a diesel, there is at least one option in most every size class from at least one manufacturer.
Perceived is right. Diesel engines may not be for everyone, but I believe that there are people out there who do indeed need a diesel engine, maybe some who want a diesel engine option. And there are people who have enough money to pay the extra cost to buy the diesel option. The problem is that car makers refuse to listen to buyers. The demand is there if car makers are willing to listen.
Don’t confuse old workhorse diesels with today’s expensive, complex, and rather unreliable light duty models. Combined with high initial cost and current high diesel fuel prices, there’s not very many situations they make sense for today.
I agree. I don’t know anyone who doesn’t want a reliable workhorse diesel. I was so against government EPA imposing every emissions restrictions left and right against anything diesel. I want to breathe clean air as much as anyone. But these emissions regulations and pollution standards are so un-realistic, it’s laughable.
One of the reasons that they may have put that old Chevy body on the newer chassis may be to circumvent and local emissions testing regulations as many areas have exemptions for vehicles older than a certainly model year. If it is licensable in its home state then it could be driven on the streets of any town as long as it is personal vehicle. Now if it is licensed as a commercial vehicle then it can’t enter CA.
Fact is that there aren’t that many people interested in diesels for anything other than heavy light duty trucks. It costs lots of money to develop an emissions compliant engine and certify it. So it does not make financial sense to offer diesel engines across the board.
That makes sense. If I could afford to buy a diesel pickup truck, I’d use it to tow a travel trailer weighing up to 4,000 lbs. That sounds reason enough to buy a diesel powered truck.
I don’t need something like this but I sure wish I had the skill to do it. Farm show magazine had someone that installed tractor engines in Ford trucks. They seem to be road legal so who knows?
I can’t help but wonder what happened to the original ’94 Dodge body, bed, and engine to justify conversion to this weird Frankentruck.
Got rolled in an off-road “accident”, perhaps?
The most puzzling part of this is why go to all of that work and still be listening to 8 track tapes.
You probably can’t hear it anyway when the engine is running, so why upgrade the radio?
The wildest part about this whole creation is the Chevrolet body is still intact. Most of these bodies dissolved like an Alka-Seltzer tablet in water.
Kudos to whomever did this. I rather like it in a weird way. I suspect the owner made use of what was available to him and – voila! – this happened. It’s amazing what a mixture of creativity, skill, and lack of resources can accomplish.
But seriously Jim, you should consider getting this pickup. You wouldn’t have to rent U-Haul vans and the entertainment factor with this hybrid would exceed any other pickup you could get.
This is in Colorado so not much salt.
I just did a reverse lookup, it’s a Verizon cell out of Denver. Anyone daring enough to call the owner and have a chat?
It’s located in Fort Collins, CO. I nominate KiwiBryce to call from New Zealand… It was still there as of 2pm yesterday which is when I first saw it and took the pictures.
I’m holding out for a conversion van version. We could caravan to the next meetup.
I may know of a good donor van body. Only had 800 miles put on it in the last sixteen months. It’s always been stored inside so no bolts are corroded together.
The engine will be the fun part. Something air cooled would be the berries.
Oooooh – like a 6-71 in a 4×4 chassis under a stretched Studebaker Zip Van? Someone has to make this! 🙂
Good combo, but I think Jim was alluding to a certain unloved conversion van in Missouri. So now the question is what chassis and engine should go into the Shafer Frankenline.
Since Jason mentioned “air cooled”, it needs a MAN air cooled diesel engine, for sure. Now for the chassis. A Studebaker truck 1 ton chassis with dual rear wheels would probably be about right.
I had been kidding about this mashup, of course, but then when noodling around looking for something else, I came across a 63 Studebaker stake bed with a DD 3-53. It seems that Studebaker offered some 3 and 4 cylinder DD engines in its big trucks near the end. Did not know that.
Engine
They sure did. We touched on that in the Champ CC, including this picture (by cohort dave_7) of what is probably about the heaviest-duty truck ever made by Studebaker, oddly very near the end of its life.
Oy, I need to go back and re-read that one. Didn’t stick, for some reason. I would love to find one of these big ‘uns to write up.
Also seen in Barrington, NH in 2010. This one dates from 1963, too…
Put me in the camp of “don’t get it”. The torque is half-ton territory today. Why would anybody pay $7500 for this? It’s not a classic, it’s not in great shape, and it’s not all that capable.
I suspect it is something like Jason suggests, where somebody built it using what they had available. But that doesn’t make it worth that much.
It’s worth whatever that engine is worth, IMHO.
That is, provided someone actually wants an old DD that badly.
I hear that these old DDs have lost much of the appeal they once had, and that parts, especially for the 53 Series, are becoming difficult to find. They are way too heavy in relation to the power they make.
These swaps were not all that uncommon back in the day. I’m guessing old 4-53s were not that hard to come by.
Sweet looking truck. I’m generally not a fan of customs, but I do like this. I love the horsepower/torque rating of the DD engine under the hood. If only that much torque was available for Chevy/GMC Diesels when they first hit the market. 🙂
This probably wouldn’t get a second glance in Cuba (conceptually speaking).
Probably not.
I love the swap, the interior work is a little too Rednek Custom for me though.
There’s nothing like the sound of a Detroit 2 Stroke driven in anger.
Great bodystyle.
All the rest, kill it with fire.
GM did offer a real DD in a light truck back in the late ’60’s. The P30 (Step Van) had a 3-53 option. While it had less hp/torque than the 250ci gasoline six, there must have been a fleet demand.
Low end torque and relative ruggedness are generally what diesels are known for. I would think that the Detroit Diesel engine would have the same amount of torque or even more than that of the gasoline engines of the time.
Ruggedness, yes, but look at the net torque specs in the attached chart from Chevrolet. Even the lowly 230ci gas six makes 200ft-lb@1600rpm net. That is still more than the 3-53N (159ci) diesel 189ft-lb@1500rpm. It still takes cubic inches to make torque, even with a supercharged two stroke.
Yep, Sean I was thinking the same thing: Redneck piece of work, i.e., frankenstein beast of a truck. Speaking of “beast”, Even the owner’s phone number hints of the “Numbers of the Beast”.
Although rare, you can still get a single-cab dually. You probably won’t find it on the lot, but you can order one. They’re popular with people who transport things for a living, because the cab/chassis combination is the lightest one available, leaving the most of the GVW for towing.
$44k buys you a RAM 3500 SLT single cab with Cummins Diesel, 6-speed manual, and dual rear wheels.
Blech. This thing is worth what you could sell the front axle (may rear also), transfer case, and a couple of other parts for, plus a couple hundred in scrap (scrap value is really low right now).
Now if it had an inline Cummins 12 valve engine, it would be a different story as those are fetching crazy-high prices right now.
The removal of the Cummins is probably the hardest part to grasp of this build. Old body on newer chassis, especially a diesel Dodge can’t be that unusual. This is more like putting a flathead V8 in a Mustang!
“And another case of a GM doorpanel with the color somehow actually falling off of it.”
I would expect that the grayish color is the original interior color and the panels were repainted red at the same time the seat and dash were reupholstered, probably when the truck was painted silver.
My dad had a ’74 GMC 3/4 ton in metallic lime green with a greige interior.
The tube grille was a fairly common aftermarket item. I hadn’t seen 4-53 conversions but I 6V-53 setups were popular for drag racing circa 1990.
Regular cab DRW used to be pretty common in the 70s-80-early 90s before crew cab everything.
I’ve seen Chevys and GMCs with the tube grille, and I’ve never liked how they make the front of the trucks look. They’d make a good temporary fix, but I prefer the stock grille whenever possible. If it needs to be replaced, I’d want it replaced with a NOS stock grille.
An unusual and interesting conversion – I’m a fan of mash-ups, and am in awe of anyone with the level of thought and skill required. I must say I find the exhaust note of the 4-53 in the video to be really quite intoxicating.
I assume the bed is welded to the frame though it is hard to tell. Eye catching truck for sure.
It’s difficult to tell.