Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[oletrucks\]\s+Considering\s+53\s+GMC\s+hauling\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[oletrucks\]\s+Considering\s+53\s+GMC\s+hauling\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. [oletrucks] Considering 53 GMC hauling (score: 1): Author: "dave riffel" <cafe_dave@hotmail.com>; Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 16:52:10 PDT; Well, I got a lot of great advice on this so far. Thanks to everyone. I think in light of the extensive mods necessary to my 1/2 ton I would likely be better off looking for a 3/4 ton or better. Even; /html/oletrucks/1999-08/msg00534.html (7,678 bytes)
2. Re: [oletrucks] Considering 53 GMC hauling (score: 1): Author: Advdesign1@aol.com; Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 06:29:34 EDT; 53 was the first year for one ton Bendix brakes on Chev, and probably same for GMC. They agre good. I don't have any problems with my 54 one ton chev wrecker, even when overloaded. 3/4 ton brakes are; /html/oletrucks/1999-08/msg00542.html (7,775 bytes)
3. Re: [oletrucks] Considering 53 GMC hauling (score: 1): Author: Thomas Allen <thomasa@halcyon.com>; Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 13:45:26 -0700; If it's as you say, I wouldn't think twice about snapping this one up. My guess is that it would have a 248 engine. Other options, if you can find them, would be 270 or 302. All are better than a 235; /html/oletrucks/1999-08/msg00548.html (8,954 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]