Truck Project in the Future

So, I'm thinking 6 months down the line after I get my Dart back and the gremlins sorted. I'm kind of looking for a truck I could either enjoy or tinker on. The truck will not be used as a daily driver, but it must be able to tow an open trailer with a car and haul parts on occasion. When it's not towing, I'd like it to either be a relaxing cruiser (nothing special horsepower wise) or a part-time off-road rig (mud and sand kind of stuff) as I sort of miss the Baja days. I'd prefer it to be a Mopar that can be bought on the cheaper side (less than $5k).

I have two options I was thinking of. Either going with an '81-'94 Ramcharger/D150/W150 or a '75 and older Ramcharger/D100/W100.

So, the pros that I can think of with the '81-'94 vehicles is that they're newer. Parts are abundant in parts stores and junkyards. The Magnum engines are going to output a lot more than the older 318/360's. Fuel injection! Should be safer due to safety regulations. Ramcharger comes with 4-wheel discs. The cons I see with them are that I don't necessarily like the looks of them compared to the older trucks and they have to be smogged. If they fail smog, it could mean big bucks to repair which may not be worth it on a cheap truck.

The pros that I can think of with the '75 and older vehicles are that there is absolutely no smog (huge benefit - no semi-annual inspection and free reign on engine swaps). If I get a small block (318/360) I can throw on my spare Paxton supercharger. If it's an LA engine, I can have a smaller inventory of small block parts as my Dart will have a 408. I like the looks a lot better than the newer vehicles. Besides that, the cons are more along the lines of safety and availability of parts. I am a big advocate of disc brakes and I believe they didn't become standard on trucks till about '73?

Either way, both sets of trucks can be had for less than $5k. I don't really care if it looks pristine or is a beater. What are your thoughts? Any other options?

I can tell you one thing for a fact, short wheelbase trucks, and especially Ramchargers are HORRIBLE tow vehicles! They look cooler no doubt, but they just are not practical for towing or hauling anything.

I'd look at an older 3/4 ton. Will have at least a Dana 60 rear and a 44 front. Be better set up for towing/off road. In CA it shouldn't be hard to find one with no rust. I'd go reg cab long box or ext cab short box. To get one with fuel injection worth anything you'd be looking at a '92 or later (92 the 5.2 magnum came out, 93 was the 5.9), the earlier TBI truck are gutless. U could get a big block til '78. They're prone to rusting around the drip rail at the front of the cab, if one is rusty there move one,not an easy fix. Happy hunting!

Perhaps you mean 81-93? 94 was a completely new body style. Most of these did not have Magnum engines or fuel injection. See WO23Coronet's post on when the Magnums came out. The LA engines had TBI fuel injection in 88/89 (318/360). I'm not aware of any Ramcharger having rear discs either.

4WD trucks didn't have disc brakes on the front until 1975, except I think the Ramcharger had them in 74. The 75-79 trucks were full time 4WD and the front axle is the least desirable axle of all generations of Dodge trucks. The 2WD trucks had discs standard in 73 but optional in 72.

So, what I'm getting from this is probably aim for an extended cab or long bed '73-75 D100/D200 pickup to get the lack-of smog, front disc brakes, a good rear end? Maybe a '75 W100/W200 or a '74-75 Ramcharger.

All of my information on the Ramcharger I listed were from kbb or wikipedia so who knows how accurate it is?

Nope. Regardless of what KBB or Edmunds says.

You could get by with a shortbox if:
1) You're not towing often/far/fast/heavy.
2) You drive well in advance of your actual position on the road.
3) You ensure you have working trailer brakes.

Otherwise I agree with what everybody else suggested.

If you want to bump up your budget a bit I know where there's a tricked out '78 shortbox 2wd with zero emissions equipt. from the factory available.

I've towed with various short wheel base vehicles. Not fun, they tend to want to whip. For lighter loads they did ok, but towing cars was sketchy a few times. Now I tow with a long box 3/4 ton and it's night and day difference. I will say the 3/4 ton sucks at off roading compared to the short wheel base rigs.

So, now where I'm getting to is buy a '73-75 3/4 ton long bed or extended cab for cruising and towing and find an alternative, budget friendly off-roading rig.

For towing, would 4WD prove to be significantly more beneficial than 2WD? Aka, is it really worth looking for a W series truck over a D series?

Unless you need (or want) the 4x4, it will have little positive effect on towing, 4x4 slightly decreases MPG (which will be in the 10-12 mpg range anyway), and adds more drive train upkeep.

I think I would give some thought to how much towing you will actually be doing with the truck as well. 3/4 tons are more expensive for up keep then a similarly equipped 1/2 ton (tires, brakes and suspension parts all cost more for a 3/4 ton then for a 1/2 ton). An extra spring (or 2) in the rear spring packs will make a standard issue long box or extended cab short box 1/2 ton truck into a great tow rig if the trailer has he proper brakes and if your really going to be towing once a month or less. Gene

It's not going to do much towing. If anything, no more than probably 100-200 miles round trip once a month or so unless I start getting more into my racing. But I wouldn't mind a decent 2WD truck that I could cruise around town while my Dart is being worked on.

If you're just towing your dart on an open trailer, a half ton will do fine. You could do a lifted one with some nice tires and it would do ok at doubling as your off road rig.

Please buy a CLUB CAB with a SURE GRIP, not an extended cab with a posi...

What about a Regular Cab with a Torsen?

So, just for reference, these are what I should be looking for except being in running condition and/or cheaper? Probably straying away from the short beds or step-sides?

http://inlandempire.craigslist.org/cto/5362866569.html

http://inlandempire.craigslist.org/cto/5350653941.html

http://losangeles.craigslist.org/sgv/cto/5327260349.html

http://orangecounty.craigslist.org/cto/5356120824.html (Crew cab just for Rhinodart )

I would take the 73 crew cab out of those choices, but if you are going to be towing long distance I would get something newer say mid 90's and up. Those old trucks are a lot more fatiguing to drive long distances than something modern.

The crew cab has a rusted through roof, big block (not entirely bad) and is a long truck, which makes them a pita to park. The rusted roof is the biggest problem.

Of the ones listed, I'd go look at the one with the topper (the 2nd one listed). Gene

The rust can be repaired fairly easy and for 2200 bucks it's the best deal. The others are over priced...way over! I just (cheaply)bought a one owner D200 this week and waiting on it to be delivered Saturday. It will the new tow truck for my '78 Chrysler Conqueror boat.

Why are you narrowing your search to early 70s trucks? oh.. that's right. They are cheaper to maintain. Are you sure about that?
There are good trucks and good deals to be found if your patient enough. What about 1990's Cummins diesels?

There was a time I wouldn't give a pick-up truck a second look. Long wheelbase Dodge Sportsman or Tradesman vans were my favorite race car tow vehicle. I could haul family, friends to the track and tools on the construction site. If I was still racing I would consider getting one.

https://orangecounty.craigslist.org/cto/5363031086.html

https://orangecounty.craigslist.org/cto/5362215955.html

https://orangecounty.craigslist.org/cto/5327794567.html

He was looking for a larger pickup truck, old enough to be emission test exempt. The vans do not fit within either request, and the diesel is out of the given price range. If he is expanding the request perimeters....

I've had great luck with my 93 Dakota, and it has pulled a car trailer. Older Dakota's, around here, are getting pretty cheap as well. Any V8 Dakota that is not the short box, standard cab would tow a trailer great, and the gas mileage is up a couple mpg more then the full size trucks, until you get into the 2000 model year and newer Dakotas.

But, I don't have to meet emission tests, and I don't have to get it tested every year either.

Is the emission test exception based on the vehicle being so many years old (like anything over 30 years old does not have to be tested), or is it locked at a specific model year (must be a 1980 model year or older)? Gene

I never said the vans did fit the (his)bill. They were my preference years ago and were posted as EXAMPLES of whats out there. Things aren't always as cheap as they seem especially when it comes to 40+ year old vehicles and the constant upkeep that comes with them not to mention how unreliable they are.. I merely IMPLIED he expand his search regardless of Cali smog tests. I would assume the vehicles I have links to are California smog legal or were until recently.
Vans are cheap and plentiful and the diesel besides a good looking truck the asking price isn't written in stone.

I forgot about the Dakotas and yes, they're pretty affordable and plentiful out here. I've always liked the R/T's.

As far as emissions testing goes, anything built in 1976 or newer must go through semi-annual emissions testing. It must retain it's original emissions equipment and pass the appropriate smog requirements for that specific engine. Any modifications to the engine or the exhaust (in front of the Cats, such as headers) must have a CARB certified sticker or stamping on it. An engine swap can occur, but the engine has to be newer than the vehicle and it must retain that engine's original emissions equipment and pass the smog requirements for that engine. If it's a simple swap (Magnum 360 for Magnum 360) usually you can get away without going to a smog ref. If it's something more extensive (Magnum 360 for Hemi 5.7), a smog ref may need to be involved. Depending on how their feeling that day and the quality of your work will deem if your swap is legal or not. Otherwise you just go in to a buddies shop for your semi-annual smog check, drop him a couple large bills under the table, come back in a couple hours and Wallah! Your car is smogged. That is not an option for me.

I am not a fan of vans and if I was going to be stuck with a roof, I'd rather get an SUV like a Durango. Although I would possibly pay a tad more for a diesel as I know some of the 90's Cummins tend to be more reliable if maintained properly live a long time. I just don't really know how to maintain and operate a diesel vehicle. Not that I can't learn.

70's trucks aren't too expensive to maintain. Can they nickel and dime you to death? You better believe it.

That being said, my 73 d100 adventurer (like the one with the topper) was a 318/727/9.25 truck. When I got it, I replaced pulleys (someone AC deleted it incorrectly), hoses, belts, alternator, battery, voltage regulator, power steering pump, aluminum intake, carb, fuel pump, tires, mini starter, and drove the snot out of it. It made a trip to Sacramento from riverside. It got 11 up 13mpg down. I trusted that truck to go ANYWHERE. I even put 3/4 ton springs under the rear because I was pulling trailers and hauling hay. Lots of hay. That truck drove and rode great. All the replacement parts were more or less within a few months of ownership. Most were done "just because" since the truck sat for a number of years.

My 74 w200 that I just bought has been an entirely different story. She sat for 12 years. Took minimal effort to get running. New rubber fuel lines, fuel pump, dropped on a known good used carb, battery, and cleaned out the gas tank behind the seat. She fired right up. Drove her for a bit, and brakes went out (fixed). Then head gasket blew (fixed) clutch went out (in process of being fixed). I have replaced radiator, hoses, belts, heater core, power steering pump and hoses, battery, voltage regulator, and some misc stuff. I have about $2k into it above purchase price. I've had it for almost 2 months. BUT there is nothing else wrong with it. I put in a bench seat in place of the buckets and the ride is substantially better. She rides rough, but she IS a 3/4 ton 4x4. Once all the kinks are worked out, she will be as dependable as my 73 d100 (the one that got wrecked).

Granted I DO have a yard full of extra parts that has kept me from having to buy stuff, the cost of maintaining these trucks is not too bad. Plus, they are so dang easy to work on.

Muumuu, find one that is already in good shape. I should have just ponied up the extra cash and bought the power wagon that was going for $6700. It was turnkey, needing paint.

Oh, and I've been eyeballing that purple 73 for a while. I'm not going to go out of my way to make an offer, but if it goes below $1000 I may consider it. Afterall, I DO have a spare running/driving drivetrain or 2 haha

This is true on the nickel and dime stuff. That's what gets expensive

I know it's an older thread, but I was randomly talking to my coworker today about cars, he found it quite peculiar that I would want a truck, let alone an old truck. He said, if I were to get a truck, I should probably look into something that's 2005 or newer just because it rides significantly better and is much more comfortable than the older trucks (even the trucks of the late 90's). So, that would probably lead me to a Ram 1500 or possibly a Durango (though, I'm not a huge fan of that body style). Would you say a late 90's truck is considerably more comfortable than a truck from the mid-2000's?

My 2005 Ram was like riding in a luxury car compared to my '98 Ram SST. I took the 05 on trips all over the US and loved it. That's my 2 cents.


Durango... uck

Hope they were better built than the 1st gen. Rams. I own a 95 with 125,000 miles they were built cheap . Was conceder trying one of the newer one 3/4 ton diesels but wasn't sure of the durability on them.

My 2003 Ram is much more comfortable than my 99 Dakota. Both had the high end SLT packages. We took a trip to Vegas from Dallas in the 2003 and it was great. Seats and suspension are better in the newer trucks as is the noise reduction.

I have had an 86 D100 , a 92 D150 both 2wd short bed regular cabs, a 2000 then a 2002 Durango and I have to say my 08 H.Q.C. rides better and is more comfortable than any of them. even with air bags and a leveling kit and a lot more powerful.

I do like my 92 though....

And is their a real cut advantage of having a Regular Cab over the Quad Cab? I'm not really used to driving long vehicles so that's my only real con. I'd imagine that once I start wanting to throw more than one other person into the vehicle the Regular cab would get really annoying really quickly.

Regular cabs are fine if it's an automatic 2wd. 4 speed and 4wd, the center passenger gets uncomfortable. Plus when you have a regular cab, and have custom reclining seats, you can't recline them. Half the reason I put the bench into the 4x4 is because I like to go randomly camping. Did it in my 73 where I would just follow a trail as far back as I could go, and park. Spend the night, then go home. Just enjoying the solitude. With my 4x4, I can get to farther back places.

When I first started driving the 74 power wagon, I thought it rode rough. After driving it, it feels comfortable for what it is. I rode in my friends brand new Prius (only has 2500 miles) and after a short drive (~20 miles) my back was killing me. Hopped in my 3/4 ton 4x4 and my back felt great.

Take a few on test drives if you can, so that you know what will work for YOU an not what works for others. I like the crudeness of the 70's trucks. Others freak out at every squeak and wind noise.

My Dart had a lot of squeaks and wind noise so it won't freak me out. What I'm worried most about is after a 3-5 hour drive to Vegas or something if I'd be beaten up from the trip. Whereas, a newer truck may have a more comfortable suspension and cruise control (something that may become more of a necessity on long trips with my knee issues).

i used a 89 2 wheel drive ramcharger for yrs to tow our 67 dart along with a few different cars , normal saturday tow set was trailer was 16 ft deck with 5 ft tongue ,sb 67 dart,220 honda 4 wheeler on the tongue,a mountain bike strapped to the tail gate along with cooler some tools 5 gallon of gas me ad my sis and was good for many 215 mi round trip to a drag strip

See if you can rent a truck or test drive one for a week-end before you buy, take it on a 3 -4 hours test drive.
I drive a new Ford F 150 with a tow package and it is for me uncomfortable if you are behind the wheel for over a few hours. If you are on the shorter side the seat is terrible and most people who ride in it say is rough from a passenger perspective.
I would say the best tow vehicle for me would be an early 2000's Chevy (gasp) suburban.

That's not a bad idea. I am kind of short at 5'7" tall. With my hip mobility issues, it can be difficult getting into a tall vehicle. It helps to have the bolt-on side steps.

Actually, that's why my coworker brought up the idea of a 10 year old truck. He has an early 2000's Tahoe and said that Chevy really did their work when trying to make trucks and larger vehicles more comfortable. Then Ford and Chrylser followed in their footsteps.

I agree for traveling a quad cab is more comfortable, back in 92 my wife and I towed to the Mopar Nats in Columbus ( about a 7 hour one way tow) with my D150 regular cab and and an open trailer it was ok but a little cramped with not much room to stretch out. And all our stuff, (suitcases etc ) had to go in the back under the tonneau cover. In 05 we went to Indy for a Mopar race ( about a 12 hour one way tow.) with my Durango and 20 ft enclosed trailer and it was much more comfortable plus all our stuff fit inside. Now we don`t travel as much racing with the furthest being four hours but my H.Q.C. is even better with tons of room and room to stretch out and most of our stuff fits in the back seat.

Most newer trucks with over sized cabs have shorter boxes, an 8' box with larger cabs is really hard to find, as are standard cab trucks. The ride quality of the newer stuff is leaps & bounds better then the old stuff and seems to get better every year. I can't help but wonder if replacing the old seats with a modern seat isn't 1/2 of the difference, but the suspensions seem to be softer, and the trucks are heavier, all of which adds up to better rides. Seat position has a lot to do with ride comfort. I spend a lot of time getting the seat in a good position when ever I build a new hot rod.

The used truck market around here finds 10 year old trucks in your original price range have 200,000 miles, or some kind of issues. Used Durangos here also seem to have an unusually higher % of issues compared to ones that don't. That means either no one is selling them unless they have issues, or the Durangos have more issues. The fact that Mopar had commercials telling about the "all new Durango re-design" a few years ago would lead me to believe there were more issues with the older ones.

My next truck will probably be an extended cab (or whatever you want to call it), keeping small stuff out of the weather has advantages, and extra room inside standard cab Dakotas is very limited. Gene

Your expectations keep changing as this post goes on. First it was a beater truck and now looks like your willing to open your billfold a little more, which is good!
In 2007 I was pricing Dodge 4 door Cummins here in Ohio and everything I found in my price range was late 90's models with a quarter million miles and rust. I gave up and started searching Ebay and found that Dodges are cheaper in Texas. I bought my 2005 with 78 thousand miles for 18K! The same price that high mileage '99 and 2000 models were going for here. It originally sold new in California.

DHere's one for you muumuu. If I was in the market, this would be MINE! 1975 d100


FWIW, I'm about to drive my 74 power wagon to Salt Lake City Utah in a few days. I don't mind the ride at all. Even a friend mentioned how solid it felt going over a huge dip. The truck just stuck to the road.

My expectations are always changing. Take for instance my stroked vs. supercharger thread for my Dart that went back and forth for a month. I'm a guy that tries to see all sides of the dice before he rolls. I like to take into consideration everyone's opinion. Once I make the final decision and commit to it I'm generally happy with my choice because I've researched my options and have thought about it for a long time.

To be honest, I've always liked the idea of having a truck, but no one in my family has ever owned a truck. Even all of my siblings, parents, aunts, uncles, and cousins. If not a car, all of them have had vans or SUV's because that's what got the job done for them. However, they had fairly light SUV's and never needed to tow a vehicle which I plan on doing in the future.

Why would you tempt me with a vehicle that pretty much fit my initial criteria located 2-3 miles away from me? The only things I'm not too fond of is the long bed (although probably better for towing) and lack of a tailgate. If the bench seat is good underneath the towel, I would keep it, otherwise I'd figure out a way to adapt the buckets that were in my Dart. But, I can't get it right now as I don't have a place to put it and I am awaiting the arrival of my Dart.

The thing about the old trucks, after learning from my Dart, is that I'd want to go through it completely before putting it to road work. So knowing me I'd want to replace/fix almost everything. Rotors/drums, pads/shoes, bearings, bushings, ball joints, shocks, springs, radiator, wheels and tires, steering box, etc. So, what was a $3k truck just now became an $8k investment. Although that truck would have probably ended up with the top end (ported J heads, M1 intake, 750 blow thru carb, and Paxton Supercharger) from the 360 I bought since I decided to stroke it.

$3k is a bit for a long bed needing a bit of stuff still...

For $3k you can buy a late model Suburban or pickup (in a Chevy) that you can pretty much jump into a tow or use and not worry about. Will need to be smogged but they go through pretty much with no probs anyways.

I have bought and chopped up a ton of big block late model Sub's even...all been pretty nice things and paid less then $1500 for all of them. Even bought a ton of dually's too and paid less than $3k for them, usually closer to $2k and that is with alcoa's (etc) on them. Suburbans are cheaper for the what you get for the money and how clean they are... but hard to beat them or Chevy trucks for bang for the buck around here IMO.

(assuming you just want something to use that is and not necessarily another project) and if you did want a project I think a short bed early truck would be the way to go..at least for chance of getting your money back out of it in the long run, or something unique like a crew cab,etc)

Good luck in whatever you find. Before you buy a truck look a full time four wheel drive power wagon. Nothing like driving a 7000 lb 3/4 ton truck that pulls and pushes you thru the corner. It was so much fun driving that truck in high school the four speed was a plus too.

I think I found you one...

http://sacramento.craigslist.org/cto/5382683801.html


Not in Calif. but close by...

http://kpr.craigslist.org/cto/5383335442.html

79 needs to be smogged...probably much much better off with either a pre 1975 or a late model injected thing IMO...

If the lack of tailgate and bench seat condition is a deal killer, I have a spare tailgate I'd let go and a set of bucket seat bases that need a home. Plus I'm leaving for Utah so a spot in my driveway just opened up for a bit.

Where there's a will, there's a way!

Newer trucks don't always ride better. My daily driver is a 4wd with an offroad package and has a very stiff ride. The Sweptline 2wd trucks I've driven, with the front I-beam axle and leaf springs, didn't seem bad and maybe better in comparison. I'm sure the 72-93 2wd IFS trucks have an even better ride.

I was a passenger in someone's 2000s Nissan 2wd truck and it felt like riding in a luxury car compared to my truck.

What are your guy's thoughts on the newer Rams or Durangos with the Pentastar V6 and 8-speed transmission? Do you think that would be up to do the task or would a 5.7L Hemi be better? There are quite a bit of pre-owned Ram 1500's on the dealer lots. The only problem with the newer trucks is I'm going to have to trade in my daily driver (currently getting 24-25 mpg combined - rated at 26 combined) so I'll be losing about 5-6 mpg using the truck as a daily driver. If gas gets to $4/gallon like it did a couple of years ago, I'll be miserable and will probably have to buy a Dodge Neon to replace it for daily driver duties. Lol.

Here's an example of one. 5.7L hemi and 8-speed Quad Cab with 22, 000 miles on the clock.

http://www.glendorachryslerjeepdodge.com/used/Ram/2014-Ram-1500-2a5658ef0a0e0adf1b5616a03d9d8081.htm

Bringing this back from the dead... Again. So, thinking back on this and actually looking at the market the past couple weeks, my mind started pointing to Dakotas. I looked at first Gen's because they're cheap and light and then I started looking at 2nd Gen's and didn't really see anything that caught my eye.

Now I'm starting to look at Ram 1500's. I'm looking more at the 94-01 era and maybe into the early 2000's, but I don't want to spend too much money. Most of what I'm looking for is a truck in the $4k or less range. This vehicle will not be my primary mode of transportation, but a backup vehicle that I can use to haul parts or tow the Dart when needed be. I don't figure I'd put more than 2-3k miles a year on it. I think now, what would be a good combo is a 4x4 Extended Cab, short bed, with a 5.9L. If I do go this route, sometime in the future I would like to do some slight modifications to it so that I can take it on some trails out here in California. Maybe a 2-3" lift with bigger tires. Nothing crazy like a trailing arm kit. What are your thoughts?

Around here a 94-2001 means rotted out door bottoms, box sides above the wheels, and junk front fenders. You probably won't experience the rust issues where you live. Then a cracked dash board, tore driver side seat, and wore out front suspension about every 3 years (pretty much all the suspension parts) are standard equipment. The trans issues the early trucks had have probably been addressed by now. Then, plugged or broken cats and loud exhaust is expected. Past that, most seem to run pretty well, deliver decent ride comfort, and seem capable of pulling down 16-18 mpg on the highway, 10 mpg in town.
97 to about 2004 seem to be slightly better trucks, but I'd be weary of 2006 or 2007 or newer trucks. The 97-2004 1500 seems to be a pretty good bang for your bucks. The 2500s have higher maintenance costs, and most 3500 are over priced. Of course, this is all my opinion. Gene

I haven't seen the any rot on any of the trucks out here, but torn seats are in almost every ad with the occasional cracked dash. I found a couple trucks in the area that loom decent, but each has their pros and cons.

https://inlandempire.craigslist.org/cto/5503838308.html

http://orangecounty.craigslist.org/cto/5509288460.html

http://orangecounty.craigslist.org/cto/5517628504.html

I found this one a few weeks ago...


1998 Ram

I'm kind of at an internal struggle at what to look at. The blue '01 has all of the options I like but has the most miles. The '02 has most the options I want, but seem to be a little weathered on the outside and priced a little more than what I want to spend at the moment. The Regular Cab is the cleanest out of the 3, but doesn't have 4x4, extra room in the back seats, or a 5.9L.

If it were me, there would be NO WAY I would consider a newer truck to 'tinker on'.

Here's some older ones that look OK.

http://bakersfield.craigslist.org/cto/5517735630.html

http://bakersfield.craigslist.org/cto/5510856091.html

http://losangeles.craigslist.org/sfv/cto/5484754162.html

http://losangeles.craigslist.org/sfv/cto/5506463993.html

http://losangeles.craigslist.org/lgb/cto/5491693395.html

http://losangeles.craigslist.org/wst/cto/5460160189.html

One in your town.
http://losangeles.craigslist.org/sgv/cto/5442949519.html

You're forgetting that any car newer than '75 has to go through a routine smog check every 2 years and cannot have any modifications unless it has a CARB tag on it. Usually the most you can do is a set of headers, a cat back, and maybe a cold air intake. Besides that, everything must be stock. The other half older than '75 are about out of my price range right now.

I already talked to the guy in my town. That car has been listed for 2-3 months at that price. There's a reason why it hasn't sold yet. It's definitely a $1500 truck.

All you guys that can buy clean 70's dodge trucks and are allowed to be picky need a slap...just the jealousy coming out that's all

Oh well.

I love California and I'd live there if I could but there are some unfortunate rules in regards to cars.

Guess that's one nice thing about NY, older cars only require a safety inspection.

Still, if you have a decent budget, find a cheaper one from '72-'75 and put some bucks into it. The newer ones are boring!

I'm a little gunshy of '02's.

Back in '05 I bought an '02 with about 40K miles on it.

Four years later I was calling the finance company to come repo the dang thing.



At the time that pic was teken, the truck still had less than 100K on it, but, it needed at least $4K of repairs. The truck was basically spitting parts faster than I could pay off the note.

Mine was a 2 wheel drive with the 4.7. Oddly, for all the horror stories you read about now on the 4.7, that was the one thing that wasn't giving me issues. Everything else was crapping out.

In all honesty, my current '93 Dakota with almost 164K miles on it has needed and does need less work that that truck.

If you kind of read between the lines in regards to the smog testing, I'm thinking that "they" don't want you driving around in a a poorly tuned junker or a race car with open headers. There are millions of cars built between 1976 and the OBDII cars, NONE of them are allowed to have any modifications to perform better?

So, do they start looking at engine block numbers? Like say you put a 360 in place of the 318 in your 1976 D100 they fail you? Or if you put a Performer intake with a Holley carb on said lo-po 318 they say no dice? What if you spend the time and effort to tune it well enough to pass, what then?

With my truck, I am kind of doing what "they" want for my own benefit. I'm getting rid of the 'performance mods' the P.O. did - huge cam, hi-rise intake etc. I drive the thing regularly on longer trips (110 miles+) so fuel economy is somewhat important. I bought a milder cam and a low-rise intake to replace the overkill Ricky racer stuff in hopes of seeing double-digit mileage.

I also got an A/F gauge to monitor how rich the thing was. When you tune your junk correctly I would guess the added benefit is reduced emissions. (to a point) I have no idea how my truck would look on a sniffer test in California but I'm guessing it would fail miserably. I suppose that's the issue...

Regardless, there's really none of that critical thinking involved with a newer truck, it's just replacing stuff that doesn't work if you can't do any 'modifications'. Have fun messing with EVAP and EGR codes.

Correct...you need to keep all of the original emissions related items on the engine. The smog test is not only a dyno type tail pipe test but also a visual inspection of the engine, evap system, etc, etc.

Going to a 360 from a 318 wouldn't be an issue most likely, but you would have to keep all of the original smog/emissions related devices the 318 used.

You can upgrade as long as the replacement parts have a C.A.R.B. (CA air resources board) number for them.

That is why most people here don't try and mess with performance upgrades on anything from the late 70's and 80's era. Better off to go with a pre-1975 or something later model that there is easy to get smog legal bolt ons for (exhaust, tuners, etc)

At least our stuff doesn't rust.

There's always a trade-off...

I get the best of both worlds. I buy my cars from the west coast and have them shipped out here. Then I can do whatever the heck I want with 'em.

Well, I'm in Michigan and I rented a Ram 1500 Big Horn with a 5.7L Hemi. I have to say, it's a pretty nice ride. I feel tiny compared to it. It seems to drive along the freeway with little effort. It has decent acceleration when you mash the pedal. My only gripe is that I suck at parking it.