![]() 11/26/2014 at 21:29 • Filed to: None | ![]() | ![]() |
How horrible would a first-generation Sonoma with the 2.8L V6 and a 5-speed manual be to drive?
The 2.8L only makes something like 130 horsepower. But its a single cab, short box , RWD truck that I'm looking at.
Horrible/Genius idea: Buy the truck and sacrifice the Safari for the 4.3 to drop in the Sonoma. It should theoretically be a pretty straightforward swap.
Update: I just did the math. It has a better power/weight ratio than the Safari. It should be perfectly fine.
![]() 11/26/2014 at 21:32 |
|
I doubt the transmission could handle the torque from the 4.3 and at the end of the day its a truck which limits the amount of fun, but thats not to say it wouldn't be
![]() 11/26/2014 at 21:37 |
|
![]() 11/26/2014 at 21:38 |
|
I'm not 100% sure, but the transmission is possibly the same one that went into early Safaris. There were 4 different 5-speed manuals that were used throughout this generation of the truck so I'm not sure.
![]() 11/26/2014 at 21:39 |
|
Can't be any worse than a second-gen Ram 50 with the 92hp 2.0L I4 and a 5-speed manual.
![]() 11/26/2014 at 21:39 |
|
Among other issues, you would be spending every winter staying home.
![]() 11/26/2014 at 21:40 |
|
Most definitely not.
![]() 11/26/2014 at 21:41 |
|
Sand bags. Exactly how my dad made it through 12 years of winter in a RWD Silverado with the 5.7.
![]() 11/26/2014 at 21:41 |
|
When I worked at the salvage yard we got in a '98 S10 extended cab with the 4.3L and an automatic. We were using it as a yard truck - drive out to cars to get small parts instead of walking out there and back.
The parts guys sold the bed and all 4 alloy wheels off of it, so we put 4 donuts on it.
It would do burnouts without even trying.
![]() 11/26/2014 at 21:44 |
|
Wow, the 4.3 makes a lot less than I originally thought, you'd probably be fine with that transmission.
![]() 11/26/2014 at 21:44 |
|
I would spend an extra few bucks and find one with a 4.3. It's not really worth the trouble of swapping in a 4.3. Buy the 4.3 truck, and eventually swap in a 350.
![]() 11/26/2014 at 21:46 |
|
The only 4.3s I can find have been beaten to hell and back. This one only has 65,000 miles on it and other than the sagging headliner is super clean.
There's one clean 4.3 and it is teal .
![]() 11/26/2014 at 21:50 |
|
Plasti-dip. My parents had a 2.8 Blazer and sold it pretty quickly because of the terrible gas mileage. My Dad got a K5 after that. If that says anything.
![]() 11/26/2014 at 21:51 |
|
It probably wouldn't be that fast, but it may be plug and play with an engine swap if you can open the 4.3 up a little bit.
![]() 11/26/2014 at 21:52 |
|
get the teal one. It's an early 90s GM truck. Teal is ok.
![]() 11/26/2014 at 21:52 |
|
Not horrible at all! Any RWD manual small truck should be awesome, and remember, it's small and light for maximum fun :)
LS swaps are easy too :p
![]() 11/26/2014 at 21:54 |
|
Looks good to me.
![]() 11/26/2014 at 21:55 |
|
Its a GM truck so I say go for it. Only all my experience with GM trucks have been 3500's. My dads 93 Dakota was a nice little truck but I was 9 when he got rid of it so I font remember much about how it drove. I still loved the hell out of her.
![]() 11/26/2014 at 21:56 |
|
Teal is not okay, teal is never okay.
![]() 11/26/2014 at 22:01 |
|
On the other hand, it definitely won't be as good as a first-gen S10 regular cab longbed with a '78 Camaro 305 and a Turbo 350. Which is what my dad has.
![]() 11/26/2014 at 22:03 |
|
The 2.8 is a noted piece of crap. I had one in my '91 Isuzu Trooper. Had to replace a cylinder head at less than 80k miles.
![]() 11/26/2014 at 22:03 |
|
http://www.ebay.com/itm/GMC-Other-…
![]() 11/26/2014 at 22:03 |
|
ha!
![]() 11/26/2014 at 22:04 |
|
I put 350lbs of sandbags in the back of my truck and it made no difference at all.
![]() 11/26/2014 at 22:07 |
|
You were the person I had in mind when I said that. I knew snow bags wouldn't make a tiny bit of difference, but I figured I'd let you tell him that.
![]() 11/26/2014 at 22:09 |
|
Other about $12,00 more than the truck I'm looking at.
![]() 11/26/2014 at 22:11 |
|
*shrug* that's how my dad did it. Its very rare that the roads by my house aren't salted and plowed anyway.
![]() 11/26/2014 at 22:15 |
|
It still gets around just fine. I don't even have winter tires on it.
![]() 11/26/2014 at 22:29 |
|
Your username suggests otherwise.
![]() 11/26/2014 at 22:32 |
|
LS swap is the only answer nowadays. You can get one cheaper than a 4.3, they are basically indestructible, and there are plenty of swap parts available. A 4.8L would be cheaper, more reliable, and get better mileage than a 4.3L.
![]() 11/26/2014 at 22:34 |
|
I already have a free 4.3 at my disposal though, that's the thing.
![]() 11/26/2014 at 22:39 |
|
That's still going to be '80s technology. It could possibly be "better" than the 2.8L, but I would run away screaming from anything TBI these days when a LS can be had so cheap. Like anything in life, if it's out of the budget then it's not going to work out. A free perfectly running 4.3L might be cheaper in the long run.
![]() 11/26/2014 at 22:58 |
|
Just because it can do it doesn't mean it likes doing it.
![]() 11/27/2014 at 20:02 |
|
Sagging headliner means it's already trying to help you strip the interior for weight reduction.
![]() 12/01/2014 at 09:19 |
|
Not horrible to drive. Awesome to drive.
However—even with the 4.3, these things are SLOW.
![]() 12/01/2014 at 09:19 |
|
Should be fine. The 4.3 was offered with this transmission.
![]() 12/01/2014 at 09:21 |
|
You were on summer tires, I belive.
Snows make a huge difference.