I've spent many highway miles in a GMT400 and couldn't recommend it enough. Great for everything except for fuel economy. But, if you're looking at older V8 SUVs then I guess fuel economy isn't important.
I've put 60k on my XJ in the past 5 years. Mostly highway. A little different but still an older SUV!
Pretty much anything you want could be re-sprung for comfort (at the expense of body roll... which could be helped with sway bars)
I've had a couple old IH scouts that didn't suck. I had a 65 Scout 80 that wasn't bad, but the short wheelbase made it a little like a see-saw. Growing up we had a 78 Scout II that was actually pretty nice. The seating was uninspired (as in... worse than school bus seats) but that can be fixed.
GMT400 is a good starting point. I always marveled at the ribbed seats in the 88-93 years. Dad had an 88 K2500 with the ribbed bench seat and it was remarkably comfy. I borrowed it to tow my camper from PA to FL and I found myself needing to stop for a meal or a bathroom long before I got butt-sore.
Square-body Suburbans have the same suspension as the Blazer, but the wheelbase makes them far more forgiving.
I would honestly suggest that you get what you want and make it into what you want. There are some limitations with some SUVs. Like Jeep XJ Cherokees from the 90s and their reverse trailing arms sending NVH into the cabin like a cannon, or going back as far as the 50s with 2wd solid front axle beams.
Also depends on the budget. You can make anything you have into anything you want with enough wallet.
Two things I would lookk for: longer wheelbase, and good seats. My 1971 Jeep Commando rode really well because of the wheelbase vs a CJ. I wouldn't recommend the seats though.
In reply to Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) :
I never noticed the XJ NVH like you point out, but pickup flexing in the middle like a hinge and constantly bouncing is what does it to me.
I'll probably notice the Jeep thing next time I am in one, though
Antihero (Forum Supporter) said:I would never recommend a Wagoneer or a 70s Cherokee for any reason. The only way I would own one is if it was basically that body with nothing Jeep left. My parents owned one, twas horrid.
Which sucks because I think they look good
Not trolling you but we had five. '77 through '87. 360's and 401. Both GM and Chryco transmissions. Aside from a poorly executed power window in the tailgate they were all very trouble free even well into the 100k miles. No big deal now but at the time that was something.
But looks aside I would never recommend one over a GMT 800.
ZJ Grand Cherokees ('92-'97) are super comfy, with seats like an overstuffed armchair, and darn capable, plus everyone wants Cherokees and Wranglers, so they don't have insane prices.
Opti said:For me that point is the GMT400 chassis and its contemporaries. As much as I like squarebody chevys, (and would get another one) I think they give up a lot of drivability to GMT400s.
I toyed with a ramcharger for a while but couldnt find one I liked. Ive owned a 1st Gen Ram, and I loved it but wouldnt want to live with one as a driver.
The K5s Ive driven drive like a truck out of the 60s.
I have no experience with wagoneers, I looked for one for about 2 years and they where all basketcases so I gave up.
You can modify and sound deaden anything, im only refering to the ones ive driven in close to stock form.
For me if you get older than mid to early 90s, taking one on a trip isnt just to hop in and get there, its more of an event about the car.
If your not talking about a driver and just looking for a toy, then get whatever you like and modify to be quiet and comfortable.
/thread.
In reply to dj06482 (Forum Supporter) :
When I got mine it stopped ok and the pedal was pretty good...for a gmt400. I did 1 ton calipers and good new parts everywhere else and it has a legitimately good feeling pedal and stops very well now. I keep thinking about swapping to the gmt800 master to see what kind of improvement it makes on an system thats been completely replaced and has a new stock style master.
The 4x4 Suburban and Blazer/Tahoe went to IFS in '92 when the body changed. Earlier is straight axle in front. 1996 brought OBD 2 and Vortec engines. The interior was freshened on '95. All are good, just different.
All the 2wd models have IFS since the mid 60's.
Opti said:In reply to dj06482 (Forum Supporter) :
When I got mine it stopped ok and the pedal was pretty good...for a gmt400. I did 1 ton calipers and good new parts everywhere else and it has a legitimately good feeling pedal and stops very well now. I keep thinking about swapping to the gmt800 master to see what kind of improvement it makes on an system thats been completely replaced and has a new stock style master.
I skipped all the other mods, put a GMT800 master cylinder in and it stops right as rain now. Literally like a different vehicle.
I've got hundreds of thousands of miles in GMT400s and really like them. Just bought a GMT800 and the big thing there is really that it's a lot quieter and the brakes are good out of the box, but it is only something that I notice because I have both to compare with. The squarebody trucks from the '80s aren't bad, but you're getting back into vehicles that are often not geared well for high speed modern interstate travel and tend to be very noisy inside.
Fords of the GMT400 Chevy era seem to be much more trucklike and feel like an older era of vehicles to me. No experience with Chrysler stuff.
The biggest thing on the GMT400 brakes is to do the brake reset. Here's the process:
1) Make sure rear adjusters are cleaned and properly lubricated
2) Find a big hill you can safely back down at a high rate of speed (20-25 MPH)
3) Reverse down the hill until you hit about 20-25 MPH, and hit the brakes hard (ideally just shy of lockup)
4) Repeat 2 more times
5) Drive away with the best GMT400 brakes you could ever imagine
That literally worked miracles on my truck, and greatly improved the pedal feel. I'd follow the process every few months, and especially before any hauling or towing.
The GMT love is pretty strong here. I must say I had a 95 1 ton diesel that I really liked, and my son has the 3/4 ton diesel we picked up last summer that is still great to drive. Smooth quiet and comfortable. But....they do not excite me. Probably because been there done that twice now. Still, I better keep it on the short list.
A 401 CJ said:Antihero (Forum Supporter) said:I would never recommend a Wagoneer or a 70s Cherokee for any reason. The only way I would own one is if it was basically that body with nothing Jeep left. My parents owned one, twas horrid.
Which sucks because I think they look good
Not trolling you but we had five. '77 through '87. 360's and 401. Both GM and Chryco transmissions. Aside from a poorly executed power window in the tailgate they were all very trouble free even well into the 100k miles. No big deal now but at the time that was something.
But looks aside I would never recommend one over a GMT 800.
I'm sure there are good ones out there but berkeley me this one was terrible.
It's end came when the people we sold it to rolled it off a steep mountain, then treked down said steep embankment to light it on fire because it wasn't dead enough.
dj06482 (Forum Supporter) said:The biggest thing on the GMT400 brakes is to do the brake reset. Here's the process:
1) Make sure rear adjusters are cleaned and properly lubricated
2) Find a big hill you can safely back down at a high rate of speed (20-25 MPH)
3) Reverse down the hill until you hit about 20-25 MPH, and hit the brakes hard (ideally just shy of lockup)
4) Repeat 2 more times
5) Drive away with the best GMT400 brakes you could ever imagine
That literally worked miracles on my truck, and greatly improved the pedal feel. I'd follow the process every few months, and especially before any hauling or towing.
Interesting.....
I mean, I wouldn't say the brakes are the worst I've ever felt on my 97 but.....they aren't the best at all
You'll need to log in to post.
