If you are speaking about that garbage big block truck POS abomination yes, they were a 366. They were anything but "beasts", scrap iron would be a more applicable designation. The LS Gen III and IV 6.0 liters are 364 cid.
Diesel pros and cons
- Thread starter dropped93
- Start date
Disclaimer: Links on this page pointing to Amazon, eBay and other sites may include affiliate code. If you click them and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission.
If you are speaking about that garbage big block truck POS abomination yes, they were a 366. They were anything but "beasts", scrap iron would be a more applicable designation. The LS Gen III and IV 6.0 liters are 364 cid.
ou ar
Easy on the Pontiac Jokes pal!, I had an 87' Grand Prix (350 v8), that old G-Body had the finest interiors of all the G-Bodies, if you are going to make fun of interiors, you should say "Cheaper than an 88-94 Chevy Trucks interior".
True, 6.0 = 366 Cubic Inches
I have to disagree with this. I've been in plenty of '95-'98 chevys that interiors sqeaked and rattled way worse than my '91. if you want to talk cheap interiors I have two words "Chevy Cavalier"
88GMCtruck
I'm all 8-Luggy!
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2010
- Messages
- 4,804
- Reaction score
- 1,326
I like my 6.5L diesel. Good mileage and plenty of power for what I do with it. 6.5L trucks are kinda problematic in areas, just depends on the truck really.
454cid
Sooper Pooper
The 366 was designed for longevity in commercial applications, not maximum power.
I have driven, owned and dealt with enough of them in my lifetime to know that is completely untrue. They also are an un utter failure on all accounts, and hardly have enough power to move their applications without overheating. In GM's infinite wisdom they carried on with these abominations until they finally figured out having the largest cubic inch gas engine in a pickup truck only was silly and implemented the 454 in the 90's. The 427 was a much better suited engine for medium duty and up applications but in stock form was no fun to drive. The 366 has no business being in a 3 ton truck and is a big, gutless fuel slurping pig. I remember a magazine article about a farmer who put a 360 HP LS5 454 into his late 70's 3 ton single axle grain truck. Like all the 366's I know, his got 4 mpg and struggled to do anything. The 454 of course having over double the power moved the truck with ease and his mileage doubled to 8 mpg under the same load conditions. Good job GM. School bus, sure, or 2 tons and down. The only good thing about a 366 is it shares the 3.75" stroke of the 427 and gives you ample supply of the heaviest 3/8" big block rods made and forged cranshafts. Otherwise they are a waste of cast iron.
Last edited:
dropped93
I want one of everything
well the diesel question fell into play based on the year of the truck. id like to find an obs 6.5 in good shape. but if it was a nbs id probably go with the 6.0
454cid
Sooper Pooper
How does you driving them determine falsehood in GM's design and intent? Maybe they weren't suited to a 3-ton truck, but that doesn't mean thy weren't designed for commercial applications and longevity.
Because they fail to adequately handle whatever they may have intended being commercial use and longevity. End of story.
Last edited:
454cid
Sooper Pooper
Well enough of them sold for GM to build them for many many years. They couldn't have been all bad.
That doesn't mean they were good for anything. Don't defend something you have zero experience with just because it has the GM brand tacked to it. The Gov Bomb has been around since 1973 and it's still as much of a failure now as it was back then.
Similar threads
