New guy looking for help with 1962 GMC
 

Hello everyone, I am new to the club. I just purchased a 1962 4WD K1500.

I am trying to find out more info about the truck. It has a flat wooden bed that was supposedly a factory option. The guy I bought it from called it a farm option and only a small number were produced at the factory. I can't find any info on the truck model anywhere.

Was this a factory option? What was is called and where do I find out more info about it? I am wondering what gearing it has etc.

Here is a couple of pictures.

Re: New guy looking for help with 1962 GMC
 

According to Jolly's info, a 1500 would not have 6 lugs. Only 1000. Post your VIN and your GVW. Also check your flat bed mounting structure to see if it has scab welding or factory welding and any GMC logos or Part numbers. See if it has a brand name on the bed that someone here may identify as known aftermarket. Bottom line: I don't know anything, just trying to up my post count.

Re: New guy looking for help with 1962 GMC
 

You know enough.
Every one of those were valid questions.

I notice, for example, amber turn signal lenses.
Would have been clear on the '62 (it was 1963 that the amber was adopted, if memory serves me correctly).
Weathering on the hood and fenders doesn't appear to match the rest of the body, suggesting those may have been replaced.

Haven't seen any literature showing a factory flatbed, of course now that I said that someone will post one... :)

Re: New guy looking for help with 1962 GMC
 

Got this from a friend. GMC never offered a stake bed on a K series truck. C1500 and C2500 trucks could be ordered with a stake bed. They were 8 foot on the 1500 and 9 foot on the 2500. First pic is from a spec sheet. Blue is 1000 series pink is 1500. Next pic shows blue 2500 series stake is available on 133 wheelbase only. Green and pink are k1000 and k1500. No stake was available. Last pic is a picture of the stake bed descriptions.

Re: New guy looking for help with 1962 GMC
 

I just received the title. And it calls out that it is a 1962. The gross vehicle weight reads 3200 pounds.

I looked up the but I don't have it with me right now to post. It shows that it was built in Fremont California plan and is a K 1/2 ton.

I just talk to the guy I bought it from and he swears that it was a factory option although I can't find anything that leaves me to believe that it was. It mounts very cleanly to the chassis and looks to be very professionally done if it was not an original package. The color matches perfectly with the rest of the vehicle.

Re: New guy looking for help with 1962 GMC
 

If he is the original owner I guess you can't argue. If he is not, ask him what he basis his belief on. Someone told him? He thinks it? He assumes it? Paperwork? Nice to know that from him. Either way, you got it, it's neat. One of a kind.

Re: New guy looking for help with 1962 GMC
 

Back in that era depending in what part of the country the truck was sold being it was a K series 4wd model the truck it was most likely a special order and the dealer could have installed the bed before the customer took delivery. Both my fathers 62 K-1000 and 68 K-2500 had to be special ordered. The GMC Truck Center in San Francisco simply did not stock 4wd trucks on a regular basis.

Re: New guy looking for help with 1962 GMC
 

The whole trucks looks to have been repainted possibly a Red oxide primer, look at the bracket that holds the front GMC letters that's supposed to be black, it's the same faded red oxide.

Re: New guy looking for help with 1962 GMC
 

The vin number is K1002CJ1006

The guy that I bought it from was not the original owner. He had heard from the person he bought it from that it was original but I trust you guys and the books that I've read so far that leads me to believe it is an aftermarket bed although it looks to be very well done and matches the frame very nicely.

Re: New guy looking for help with 1962 GMC
 

The VIN indicates it is a 1000 model (not a 1500) and the six lug wheels also suggest that, it would be relatively safe to say it is a "half ton" truck.
The "J" verifies it as a 1962.

That it probably is a red primer, as noted by bigblockv6, and since it is wearing similar to the grey primer I painted by first GMC with... I'd suggest the uniform paint job is due to it having been repainted. Being a 4x4 I wouldn't be surprised if the front has been replaced as a 4x4 that is actually used off road tends to get damaged/beat up. Probably got the new paint at the same time it got new body parts.

Is that VIN off the title or off the plate in the truck? Just curious...

Re: New guy looking for help with 1962 GMC
 

K1002CJ1006, 4WD-1/2T-Long bed-Oakland, CA-1962-the 6th truck to roll out of that plant!!! It's Legit. Adding a flat bed would have been a piece of cake for an aftermarket co. or a handyman.

Re: New guy looking for help with 1962 GMC
 

Oakland sounds more like it! If I'm not mistaken trucks started coming out of the Fremont Assembly plant around 1965 or 66.

Re: New guy looking for help with 1962 GMC
 

The vin number is off of the title. I have not actually pick up the vehicle yet I have to trailer it home this weekend. Ultimately I would like to find a bed for it but wanted to learn more about the flatbed if it truly was an original option that was a rare. I didn't want to remove a feature that was quite rare coming from the factory if that truly was the case.

I was also trying to do some homework to see if I could figure out what type of gearing and rear end it had in it if it was a unique model. I guess I was hoping that it was something special. Either way I am excited to start working on the project.

Re: New guy looking for help with 1962 GMC
 

According to the 1962 sales brochure the only ratio available on the K1000 series is a 3.54. The differential would be a Dana 44 and an optional Powr-lok limited slip was available.

Re: New guy looking for help with 1962 GMC
 

FYI, when you buy a vehicle, you always want to make sure the title VIN matches the VIN plate. At least on trucks after about 1955.1.

Re: New guy looking for help with 1962 GMC
 

Good point. I will make sure I check once I get the truck home.

One last question. As far as I know the engine is all original. That being said, do I need to use a lead additive in the gas? I assume that I use 87 octane. And how about oil? Is there a recommended oil weight and additive to use in the V6. The truck has 75k miles on it.

Re: New guy looking for help with 1962 GMC
 

This thread got right to the business of investigating your truck! Lots of knowledgeable folks here to help you with it!

I will start out with a welcome from the Black Hills! I'm jealous of you new folks coming in that are running across these GMCs!

Well I think most here will agree this truck IS something special. Too many of them when found get cut up in to hot rods or modern cruisers. Post more pics when you can!

DAC

Re: New guy looking for help with 1962 GMC
 

87 octane is fine, but not Ethanol. Find a place that has real gas or the alcohol in the ethanol gas will tear up your carburetor. You don't need to add a lead additive.

For the oil everyone has a favorite, but something high in zinc is preferred because it's an older flat tappet engine. I use Rotella 15w40 Diesel oil with a boron based friction modifier to keep things spinning smooth and protected.

The GMC engines are based on a diesel design so keep them lubricated and they'll run longer than you will. :thumbsup:


One more thing, make sure you get the short oil filter. There's a 6 inch filter and a 9 inch filter. The long one is for a different engine. You want carquest part number 85121 or Fram part number CH106PL. :goodluck:

Re: New guy looking for help with 1962 GMC
 

Thank you for the feedback on gas and oil. I really appreciate everyone's help getting me up to speed. I'm sure I will be back with many more questions. I have been doing a lot of reading to try to learn more about my new toy.

Re: New guy looking for help with 1962 GMC
 

NP! The best advise I can give is get out there and touch her. Take pictures of her (and post them!), drive her around the block for fun, and never tear anything up that will take more than a day to fix or you'll get frustrated at first.

After you've had her a while and the love takes hold take on the bigger projects. I can't tell you how many times I've seen a beautiful 60s GMC that someone bought with grand ideas and 3 months later it's for sale in pieces in buckets because the first thing they planned to do is powdercoat the frame. If you're not driving, you're not livin' :thumbsup:

Re: New guy looking for help with 1962 GMC
 

i have a question on the use of lead additive. i thought all engines built before unleaded gas came around, needed the lead to lubricate the valve seats. i have seen small block chevy heads with the seats completly gone. do the 305 heads have hardened valve seats? ive been running aviation gas mix in my 66 c1500 to keep some lead in the fuel, but that gets expensive. I use ZDDPLUS, oil additive with valvoline 10w 40 conventional oil, the rotella is excellent as well. both have great additives, just trying to put another option out there

RICK

Re: New guy looking for help with 1962 GMC
 

The 305 V6 engines didn't have hardened seats but GMC V6 engines 351 through 478 did have hardened valve seat inserts. Also the V6 did survive through 1974 so early 70's V6's were designed to run on low lead or no lead gasoline.

Re: New guy looking for help with 1962 GMC
 

thanks for the info

RICK

Re: New guy looking for help with 1962 GMC
 

Let me re-phrase what you are saying...I don't need to use a lead additive in my 305v6 from 1962? Am I understanding you correctly?

Thanks.

Re: New guy looking for help with 1962 GMC
 

No, I'm just informing you on changes that were made to the V6 in later years, if you would decide to go with later model heads at some point.

Re: New guy looking for help with 1962 GMC
 

No, you do NOT need to add a lead additive in your gas for the 305 V6. You can (It won't hurt anything) but it isn't necessary. The only gas thing you need to worry about is E10 Ethanol.

Re: New guy looking for help with 1962 GMC
 

Well that E10 ethanol is a bit worrisome. In many cases there is no choice if you want to put gas in there at all. I have had some bad experiences of rubber parts not holding up, but kits are not that expensive. All the rubber fuel lines are new, I hope they last.
What is really scary is the proposal to increase the ethanol to 15%, but from what I have heard manufacturers are pushing back as they say that level is too destructive on the fuel system.
What I have noticed on my newer vehicles is a significant drop in mileage this winter. They purport that the winter mixture is for pollution. What I don't understand is if you get 25% less mileage, you use more fuel to cover the same distance, what is gained??

Re: New guy looking for help with 1962 GMC
 

The few studies I have seen that showed fuel economy on the same vehicle, E-10 and pure gas, the difference has been pretty close to the amount of alcohol involved. At 10%, the fuel economy dropped by 10%. Net result is you pay more for less fuel.
The alcohol isn't a benefit, it should never have become a standard. While it sounded good in theory, it fails in practice. The crop production to produce the ethanol removes crops from the food/feed chain causing those crops to cost more overall. Part of the increase to fuel prices was the inclusion of ethanol. It wasn't a concern when only a few places were using a blend (had a farmers co-op that used alcohol/gas mixture back in the early 80s).

I went to look and see what the difference in "power" was and found a chart that doesn't include gasoline as a fuel, but claims to compare all the alternate fuels to gasoline... in the chart it is indicated that we import nearly 1/2 of the oil used... must be an old chart. As of 2013 we import nearly 33%, not half, of petroleum used.
The comparison baseline, according to footnotes, is based on E0, E10, and one other fuel... no wonder the chart indicates that E10 is equivalent to the baseline... it isn't measured against straight gas.
According to the chart on Wikipedia, 1 gallon of E10 is equivalent to 1.02 gallons of gas. That may be the effective numbers, but in MPG what I have observed is a lot larger difference, closer to 1 gallon of E10 being equivalent to 1.10 gallons of straight gas.

My old '63 Chrysler -hated- the blend. Lost so much power. I hate the price of straight gasoline though, as a local station here does sell it but its almost a dollar a gallon more (mostly because he doesn't like selling gas, his "in the black" is largely due to auto repair, so gas is a sideline that cuts into the auto repair time). But even though he is always higher priced, to get non-alcohol fuel isn't cheaper than the blend is difficult due to scarcity.

According to the same chart on Wikipedia, 1 gallon of E100 (ethanol) is equal to 1.50 gallons of gasoline, and 1 gallon of M100 (methanol) is equal to 2 gallons of gasoline. So not running straight anything if we can help it I hope!
Diesel is the only thing that is "higher" in power, and LPG/LNG is around 1 gallon equivalent to 1.5/1.3 gallons of gas (only a savings if LPG/LNG is cheaper).

Just a bunch of fuel trivia this morning... :)
I'm not sure how much of the data really applies in the real world, as opposed to the laboratory.
Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gasoline_gallon_equivalent

Re: New guy looking for help with 1962 GMC
 

i would say your real world #s on ethanol, methanol, & lpg are right on the money. living in iowa, we have had e-10 since the early 80's. i could tell back then that i could drive alot further on straight gas than ethanol. the price difference didn't use to be such a wide split. when it was about 10 cents difference, the cost of either fuel was about equal per mile. but anymore with 40 cents or more split, i think is cheaper per mile to run the ethanol, as well as being alot easier to find.

the bad side is ethanol is corrosive. it is hard on electrical windings in fuel injectors. it also degrades plastic, rubber, and aluminum parts in the fuel system.

from my experiance the older the vehicle, the more trouble and maintenance issues you will have with ethanol. part of this is because older vehicles tend to sit for periods of time without running. ethanol draws moisture.

i don't put e-10 in my 66 gmc' because i dont drive it every day. nor do i put it in my mower, chainsaw, weedeater, or any other small engine that sits more than it runs.

rick

Re: New guy looking for help with 1962 GMC
 

A friend of mine who has a lot of air cooled small engine equipment to maintain his place has stopped using ethanol based fuels entirely. It has ruined too much equipment and carburetors. He was using racing fuel in them, right, leaded 110 octane, he then changed when he learned that the racing fuel maker was offering a 97 octane, unleaded designed for small air cooled motors. Even though it costs $12.00 a gallon, comes out cheaper than replacing equipment.