1973 1210 Travelall
- Thread starter RobertC
- Start date
ihpartschad
IHPA General Manager
Was that originally a 5 speed or did you put that in there. Very nice clean t-all.
Thanks.
The t-34 was ordered when the vehicle was purchased. It was ordered in March, I took delivery in June 1973 -- thought the delay was for the 5 speed, but I have since learned there was also a "shortage" of 392s.
I "picked" the rear axle ratio based on the rpm I wanted to run in od on the freeway -- I figured out the formula and ran the "numbers" for the 3 axle ratios (3.54, 3.73, 4.10). 3.73 equaled 75 mph @ 2800 rpm in od.
The current tires - michelin 245/75x16 ltx m/s - are a little taller (approx 1 1/2") @ 30.7 than the original goodyear nylon 9.50x16.5.
The IH salesman would let you "walk thru" the option book when you special ordered a vehicle, so I also got (ordered) the 12x3 front brake shoes (probably part of the towing / camper special packages).
The t-34 was ordered when the vehicle was purchased. It was ordered in March, I took delivery in June 1973 -- thought the delay was for the 5 speed, but I have since learned there was also a "shortage" of 392s.
I "picked" the rear axle ratio based on the rpm I wanted to run in od on the freeway -- I figured out the formula and ran the "numbers" for the 3 axle ratios (3.54, 3.73, 4.10). 3.73 equaled 75 mph @ 2800 rpm in od.
The current tires - michelin 245/75x16 ltx m/s - are a little taller (approx 1 1/2") @ 30.7 than the original goodyear nylon 9.50x16.5.
The IH salesman would let you "walk thru" the option book when you special ordered a vehicle, so I also got (ordered) the 12x3 front brake shoes (probably part of the towing / camper special packages).
ihpartschad
IHPA General Manager
That is super sweet, I just wish I had a time machine. I would love to walk through the dealership and build the truck I wanted. Glad to see this one is still in the original hands. Welcome to the site!!
Drew Merrick
Member
I have heard that in 1973 there was some kind of strike that effected all truck manufacturers. Because of that IH had some shortages of 392's. I have seen a 1973 Travelall that had a rambler 401 installed in it from the factory probably due to this 392 shortage.
You have had that rig a long time !
I guess I will add a couple "thoughts" on the amc 401 in 73 t/a and pickups.
This cannot have been a "casual" change.
I think all combinations (gvw) of t/as / pickups with a 401 had to be "smog certified" with the various transmissions -- for both the fed and CA regs. Not a small task.
I believe IH was already planning this for 74 and up vintage -- which included some "changes": side motor mounts instead of front; engine "set back"; "rear dump" exhaust manifolds.
My memory is not that good, but iirc in the 70's, you could not get certain engine / trans combos in CA because the big 3 did not run the combos thru the CA smog certification.
This cannot have been a "casual" change.
I think all combinations (gvw) of t/as / pickups with a 401 had to be "smog certified" with the various transmissions -- for both the fed and CA regs. Not a small task.
I believe IH was already planning this for 74 and up vintage -- which included some "changes": side motor mounts instead of front; engine "set back"; "rear dump" exhaust manifolds.
My memory is not that good, but iirc in the 70's, you could not get certain engine / trans combos in CA because the big 3 did not run the combos thru the CA smog certification.
Michael Mayben
IHPA Tech Moderator - Retired & No Longer Online
Your perception of "the deal" is the same as mine, I've seen a small bit of substantiation regarding the same!
The rambler motor was definitely a stopgap...after all the years of humpin' and pumpin' the "legendary" durability of the sv product, why did they even consider puttin' a passenger car motor in the hole???? Because...cost!
It's an ok motor for a car, definitely much livelier in performance and nearly 200lbs. Less dead weight, but it don't come close to bein' a truck motor on the magnitude that IH built a rep!
The m/y '73 inclusion of the rambler motor "option" is a real bastard! The '74/'75 (and into '76 if ya believe the parts lists) vehicle is nearly completely different under the skin, from the cowl forward! And the motor (no matter which one installed) was shoved down and back to more "balance" the traditional IH nose-heavy attitude. The side mounts made a single motor series that had to go down the transfer line in the engine plant that could be used in both sii and fullsize/medium duty apps. No longer had to have all the various engine mount configs used over the years in fullsize stuff, horse shoe mount, dog bone mount, etc.
The worst part is that scruuball autotrans "kickdown" pos linkage they came up with for both the sv and the rambler motors, total monkee rig, almost as bad as a Scout 80 throttle control! No....worse!
I've never seen any proof of that urban legend that the squarebody stuff was gonna see a "light" oilburner motor. Only talk! And that was during the "first" bloom of oilburnin'...during that time when the world was gifted that marvelous pos "small block chevee" diesel/350 gas motor with no carburetor, distributor, or spark plugs! Can we spel "oldsmobile"??
But given that the IH light duty rigs were way behind the power curve engineering/development-wise as compared to chryfordrolet pickups and 'burbans, then the hand writing was on the wall. The unit sales numbers from m/y '73 on were not even on the planet as compared to the big 3!
The emissions deal just drilled abuncha more screws into the lid of the IH "consumer vehicle" coffin. Took the sii several more years to die of lack of interest!
The rambler motor was definitely a stopgap...after all the years of humpin' and pumpin' the "legendary" durability of the sv product, why did they even consider puttin' a passenger car motor in the hole???? Because...cost!
It's an ok motor for a car, definitely much livelier in performance and nearly 200lbs. Less dead weight, but it don't come close to bein' a truck motor on the magnitude that IH built a rep!
The m/y '73 inclusion of the rambler motor "option" is a real bastard! The '74/'75 (and into '76 if ya believe the parts lists) vehicle is nearly completely different under the skin, from the cowl forward! And the motor (no matter which one installed) was shoved down and back to more "balance" the traditional IH nose-heavy attitude. The side mounts made a single motor series that had to go down the transfer line in the engine plant that could be used in both sii and fullsize/medium duty apps. No longer had to have all the various engine mount configs used over the years in fullsize stuff, horse shoe mount, dog bone mount, etc.
The worst part is that scruuball autotrans "kickdown" pos linkage they came up with for both the sv and the rambler motors, total monkee rig, almost as bad as a Scout 80 throttle control! No....worse!
I've never seen any proof of that urban legend that the squarebody stuff was gonna see a "light" oilburner motor. Only talk! And that was during the "first" bloom of oilburnin'...during that time when the world was gifted that marvelous pos "small block chevee" diesel/350 gas motor with no carburetor, distributor, or spark plugs! Can we spel "oldsmobile"??
But given that the IH light duty rigs were way behind the power curve engineering/development-wise as compared to chryfordrolet pickups and 'burbans, then the hand writing was on the wall. The unit sales numbers from m/y '73 on were not even on the planet as compared to the big 3!
The emissions deal just drilled abuncha more screws into the lid of the IH "consumer vehicle" coffin. Took the sii several more years to die of lack of interest!
I thought I would post a picture of the new front shock mounts that Jeff and Darrin put on my Travelall at the end of oct.
Over the years, the rivets holding the original front shock mounts to the frame have "failed".
The resulting "repairs" were much less than satisfactory -- not enough front "shock travel".
After finding out about ihonlynorth (and seeing the excellent work in their "builds"), I finally called Jeff to ask if they could "do something".
Darrin cut off the old welded on front schock mounts and put a set of the Ford mounts they use on scouts. Plus a set of bilsteins at all 4 corners.
The ride is much better.
Thanks, Jeff and Darrin
Over the years, the rivets holding the original front shock mounts to the frame have "failed".
The resulting "repairs" were much less than satisfactory -- not enough front "shock travel".
After finding out about ihonlynorth (and seeing the excellent work in their "builds"), I finally called Jeff to ask if they could "do something".
Darrin cut off the old welded on front schock mounts and put a set of the Ford mounts they use on scouts. Plus a set of bilsteins at all 4 corners.
The ride is much better.
Thanks, Jeff and Darrin
Attachments
Michael Mayben
IHPA Tech Moderator - Retired & No Longer Online
This is outstanding to see an original, unmolested rig that is upgraded in such a nice fashion without being a hack job! What an improvement Robert!
Them ihon kidz are purdee dam special ain't they??
Them ihon kidz are purdee dam special ain't they??
Steve Grant
Member
I know this post is a year old, but thats nice truck you have Robert. I once drove a 3/4 ton '73 t'all 4x4, with the 5 speed, I should've bought the truck! The engine was worn out, but it still had power, the od was really a plus. I remember years ago my father talking to a guy that owned a '74 t'all, 100 series, this guy bought the truck new with the 401. He replaced it with a 392, the 401 didn't have the torque the 392 did. The 401 hauled ass, towing power wasn't worth a crap. I have a '73 t'all 4x4 with a 392, 55,000 miles on it. Needs paint though. My wife liked the '74-'75 grill and hood more, so I installed that.
Attachments
Thanks.
Nice to see a picture of a nice t/a -- amongst all the scouts...
Our t/a has made a number of trips to the denver area (last in sep 07) over the years. My wife finished high school (south high) in denver - her sister / brother / nieces / nephews / cousins live in the "greater" denver area.
I opted for no 4x4 because I did not think I would "use" it enough -- 1210 to "get" ground clearance... I just go on easy dirt roads in the desert...
Nice to see a picture of a nice t/a -- amongst all the scouts...
Our t/a has made a number of trips to the denver area (last in sep 07) over the years. My wife finished high school (south high) in denver - her sister / brother / nieces / nephews / cousins live in the "greater" denver area.
I opted for no 4x4 because I did not think I would "use" it enough -- 1210 to "get" ground clearance... I just go on easy dirt roads in the desert...
Steve Grant
Member
Nothing wrong with a 2 wheel drive truck. I'm keeping my t'all. My wife drives a '76 Scout, it's one owner. Just curious, what mileage do you get with the od, do you have shift in and out
5th with it much. I have a 727 tf, I get 10-11 mpg with it, I keep it below 65 mph. I have 4.10 gears in it, with 31" 10.50" tires.
5th with it much. I have a 727 tf, I get 10-11 mpg with it, I keep it below 65 mph. I have 4.10 gears in it, with 31" 10.50" tires.
Highway / freeway driving - 10 - 13 mpg - over the past few years. But, I "cruise" a little faster than you do...
I "figured" maybe 1 mpg, but the real reason was to run lower rpm at freeway speed.
Prior to my purchase, I got a "road test" in a 66 (?) 4x4 t/a (prob a 6 cyl w 4sp / 4:10 rear axle) and it was "maxed out" at 60 mph on the freeway -- and very noisy. I knew I could not stand to drive it the approx 500 miles to death valley.
Shifting in / out of od -- in my "terrain" not so much...
The "split" is 55 mph -- in od, my t/a is at the bottom of the "torque curve" at 2000 rpm. (btw, the IH salesman told me not to run it below 2000 rpm when I bought it.)
"it" will pull from 2000 rpm in od if it is not a steep grade or at "high" altitude.
We went to sparks (reno), nv over thanksgiving (i80 / donner summit). I ran 65 - 70 mph (2500 rpm) -- the only time I shifted back to 4th (or 3rd) was for traffic slow downs. Did one gas check on the return trip -- sparks to about davis - when I switched tanks and the mileage was 12.6... A lot of "downhill" in that leg, though...
For perspective / terrain you might be familiar with, in 2007, I had to use 3rd ("wound out" 40 mph) on the steep grades to get up to the eisenhower tunnel (going east I 70). But, I do not think the engine was running as good as it is now.
In 3rd gear (which is any "in town" driving), my t/a gets around 7 mpg...
I "figured" maybe 1 mpg, but the real reason was to run lower rpm at freeway speed.
Prior to my purchase, I got a "road test" in a 66 (?) 4x4 t/a (prob a 6 cyl w 4sp / 4:10 rear axle) and it was "maxed out" at 60 mph on the freeway -- and very noisy. I knew I could not stand to drive it the approx 500 miles to death valley.
Shifting in / out of od -- in my "terrain" not so much...
The "split" is 55 mph -- in od, my t/a is at the bottom of the "torque curve" at 2000 rpm. (btw, the IH salesman told me not to run it below 2000 rpm when I bought it.)
"it" will pull from 2000 rpm in od if it is not a steep grade or at "high" altitude.
We went to sparks (reno), nv over thanksgiving (i80 / donner summit). I ran 65 - 70 mph (2500 rpm) -- the only time I shifted back to 4th (or 3rd) was for traffic slow downs. Did one gas check on the return trip -- sparks to about davis - when I switched tanks and the mileage was 12.6... A lot of "downhill" in that leg, though...
For perspective / terrain you might be familiar with, in 2007, I had to use 3rd ("wound out" 40 mph) on the steep grades to get up to the eisenhower tunnel (going east I 70). But, I do not think the engine was running as good as it is now.
In 3rd gear (which is any "in town" driving), my t/a gets around 7 mpg...
Steve Grant
Member
Eisenhower is a pretty good grade. Do you do much towing with your truck?? Thats respectable mileage for your 392. Just curious what did you pay for your truck new in 73'??
Actually, I think I was able to get back into 4th when it flattened out some before the tunnel itself.
No towing -- except once when I flat-towed my disabled corvair (3000 lbs) home from the sierra foothills with no problem (1978). Using a rented bumper hitch
: lucky I did not hurt us / someone else...
I got the "over-sized" tires (9.50x16.5) and the underslung spare tire carrier. At the time, the underslung spare tire carrier and the IH towing hitch were mutually exclusive -- could not "fit" the hitch if the spare tire was there -- probably why they offered a front mount spare tire carrier.
The 5 speed od transmission is not a good transmission for towing (especially hd towing); IH recommended the 5 speed direct for towing...
Sticker price was 5917.21 -- paid with tax & license 5332.08 (not counting interest)
No towing -- except once when I flat-towed my disabled corvair (3000 lbs) home from the sierra foothills with no problem (1978). Using a rented bumper hitch
: lucky I did not hurt us / someone else...I got the "over-sized" tires (9.50x16.5) and the underslung spare tire carrier. At the time, the underslung spare tire carrier and the IH towing hitch were mutually exclusive -- could not "fit" the hitch if the spare tire was there -- probably why they offered a front mount spare tire carrier.
The 5 speed od transmission is not a good transmission for towing (especially hd towing); IH recommended the 5 speed direct for towing...
Sticker price was 5917.21 -- paid with tax & license 5332.08 (not counting interest)
Last edited:
Steve Grant
Member
Well cool deal Robert, again you have really nice truck, glad to a see a well cared for orginal owner piece of machinery.
), here is a scanned copy of the window sticker for this t/a:
