Ok, I figured this might be of interest to some. 26-mile 1990 SS Pickup for sale.

Mobile so not sure on the pic working, but I don't think any smart Aggie, even with fond memories of these, wants to pay $52K for one today. Still, kind of funny.

Friend of my dad had one of these when I was a kid. Always wanted it, but I'm going to have to pass on this one.

When I was in high school and kid in my class had one of these. His dad bought one and gave him his 85 Chevy 4x4, Then the dad decided he preferred his old truck and gave the 454SS to the kid.

Lucky SOB.

$52K seems pretty high for what's basically a museum piece. It'll get there someday I'm sure but my guess is it'll be a while.

That's definitely another one of those things that take me back. I've known two people with on, but even back in the mid-'90s the one I was around was getting pretty ratted out. Also that gen interior definitely had its share of rattles, especially in and around the dash!

You can pick up one that is in great shape for 25K.

I had an 89 SW with a 350. Still miss that truck, and have recently considered buying an old 454 SS. In my opinion, it was the last great truck that Chevy made.

A friend of mine had one of these in high school. I was a dog.

The best thing about the 454 SS is the 5 lug 14 bolt. A Vortec 454 would be a major improvement if one were to keep it a big block and not go for the Lord's chosen LS engine.

IDAGG said:

---

TMoney2007 said:

---

What a waste,... Cars are meant to be enjoyed and this one wasn't that nice to begin with.

For anyone wondering...
Horsepower: 230 hp @ 3600 rpm
Torque: 385 ft-lbs. @ 1600 rpm

Nice low torque peak.

---

Yeah people forget how much more powerful modern engines are. Us olds remember the good old days of the muscle cars of the late 6os etc. When you actually go back and look at the specs...they really aren't that impressive anymore.

For instance a 1967 Camaro SS 350 made 295 HP

My Acura makes 305 HP.

---

The Testarossa went 0-60 in 5.2 seconds. There are many cars out there that you can buy used for less than $20k that can beat that handily.

That's not to say that straight line acceleration is the only thing that matters, but its pretty mind blowing how fast cars have gotten when consider all the extra safety equipment and emissions guidelines.

Had a 3/4 with that same cloth interior, niiiiice

Same kind of thing but it was a Chilton manual that covered something like 25 years of Ford Trucks. Your problem will probably not look anything like what's in the picture.

Quote:

---

We know you've been waiting all this time to find out how much it costs, so we'll put it in plain English: $52,900. That's quite the appreciation considering the truck's included window sticker shows an MSRP of $18,863

---

Works out to about a 4.5% return on his money.

Not counting storage costs.

WildcatAg said:

---

IDAGG said:

---

TMoney2007 said:

---

What a waste,... Cars are meant to be enjoyed and this one wasn't that nice to begin with.

For anyone wondering...
Horsepower: 230 hp @ 3600 rpm
Torque: 385 ft-lbs. @ 1600 rpm

Nice low torque peak.

---

Yeah people forget how much more powerful modern engines are. Us olds remember the good old days of the muscle cars of the late 6os etc. When you actually go back and look at the specs...they really aren't that impressive anymore.

For instance a 1967 Camaro SS 350 made 295 HP

My Acura makes 305 HP.

---

Comparing the 0-60 times of a modern top end Camary/Accord/Fusion to the Super Cars of our youth is a good way to ruin old childhood dreams.

My 89 Mustang LX 5.0 was black with red interior.

---

Nice. I had a '91 LX 5.0. I think the color was called Midnight Blue.

Red Rover said:

---

WildcatAg said:

---

IDAGG said:

---

TMoney2007 said:

---

What a waste,... Cars are meant to be enjoyed and this one wasn't that nice to begin with.

For anyone wondering...
Horsepower: 230 hp @ 3600 rpm
Torque: 385 ft-lbs. @ 1600 rpm

Nice low torque peak.

---

Yeah people forget how much more powerful modern engines are. Us olds remember the good old days of the muscle cars of the late 6os etc. When you actually go back and look at the specs...they really aren't that impressive anymore.

For instance a 1967 Camaro SS 350 made 295 HP

My Acura makes 305 HP.

---

Comparing the 0-60 times of a modern top end Camary/Accord/Fusion to the Super Cars of our youth is a good way to ruin old childhood dreams.

My 89 Mustang LX 5.0 was black with red interior.

---

Nice. I had a '91 LX 5.0. I think the color was called Midnight Blue.

---

Either of these notchbacks? I wanted one so bad.

AgCPA95 said:

---

Red Rover said:

---

WildcatAg said:

---

IDAGG said:

---

TMoney2007 said:

---

What a waste,... Cars are meant to be enjoyed and this one wasn't that nice to begin with.

For anyone wondering...
Horsepower: 230 hp @ 3600 rpm
Torque: 385 ft-lbs. @ 1600 rpm

Nice low torque peak.

---

Yeah people forget how much more powerful modern engines are. Us olds remember the good old days of the muscle cars of the late 6os etc. When you actually go back and look at the specs...they really aren't that impressive anymore.

For instance a 1967 Camaro SS 350 made 295 HP

My Acura makes 305 HP.

---

Comparing the 0-60 times of a modern top end Camary/Accord/Fusion to the Super Cars of our youth is a good way to ruin old childhood dreams.

My 89 Mustang LX 5.0 was black with red interior.

---

Nice. I had a '91 LX 5.0. I think the color was called Midnight Blue.

---

Either of these notchbacks? I wanted one so bad.

---

Mine was a hatchback. And the hatch weighed as much as my wife's GX460.

My first car was an 84 Mustang GT convertible so it had the notch look. It also had the 4-cylinder turbo............

I forgot how terrible the dash was on those early GMT400s. Buttons instead of dials for climate control and radio, tape deck way off to the right. No needle for the speedometer.

Yeah the old style gauges reminded me of my grandpa's '73ish Continental. The structure inside the dash was pretty much crap as well. My dad's broke somewhere deep inside by the time his Suburban was 10 years old and the gray button and instrument panel part sagged about 1/2" down from the rest of the dash on the left side.

A modern consumer car doing 0-60 in 5 seconds is nowhere near as exhilarating as doing the same in an older sports car like a Testarossa. Sounds, vibrations, traction limitations, and manual transmissions make a world of difference in driver experience.

silverado_lover said:

---

The best thing about the 454 SS is the 5 lug 14 bolt. A Vortec 454 would be a major improvement if one were to keep it a big block and not go for the Lord's chosen LS engine.

---

LSX 454 would be the only acceptable LS in this truck. It would be a shame to put a sub 400 cubic inch motor in one of these trucks. In a regular Silberado, sure, but not a 454 SS.

Giving it 80% more horsepower doesn't seem to be much of a disservice.

Regardless, it pretty much is a regular Silberado.

aggieforester05 said:

---

silverado_lover said:

---

The best thing about the 454 SS is the 5 lug 14 bolt. A Vortec 454 would be a major improvement if one were to keep it a big block and not go for the Lord's chosen LS engine.

---

LSX 454 would be the only acceptable LS in this truck. It would be a shame to put a sub 400 cubic inch motor in one of these trucks. In a regular Silberado, sure, but not a 454 SS.

---

I think some new graphics and a LS 427 could be acceptable too...

Some of the difference in feel comes down to sound deadening in modern cars and the exhaust system. If you pulled all the sound deadening out of a newer car with a stick shift and put a pretty free flowing exhaust in, you could get closer.

Handling is a whole other thing as well. A light car with a good suspension and a really good (possibly manual) steering rack feels completely different to drive fast.

TMoney2007 said:

---

IDAGG said:

---

TMoney2007 said:

---

What a waste,... Cars are meant to be enjoyed and this one wasn't that nice to begin with.

For anyone wondering...
Horsepower: 230 hp @ 3600 rpm
Torque: 385 ft-lbs. @ 1600 rpm

Nice low torque peak.

---

Yeah people forget how much more powerful modern engines are. Us olds remember the good old days of the muscle cars of the late 6os etc. When you actually go back and look at the specs...they really aren't that impressive anymore.

For instance a 1967 Camaro SS 350 made 295 HP

My Acura makes 305 HP.

---

The Testarossa went 0-60 in 5.2 seconds. There are many cars out there that you can buy used for less than $20k that can beat that handily.

That's not to say that straight line acceleration is the only thing that matters, but its pretty mind blowing how fast cars have gotten when consider all the extra safety equipment and emissions guidelines.

---

without making this political, it does make you wonder what cars would be capable of today without government restrictions.

I know right? Your modern diesel pickup truck, burdened with all sorts of emissions equipment, only makes 1000ft/lbs.

The math is pretty easy on the performance,... Also, the math is pretty easy with you calculate how many people survive crashes that wouldn't have otherwise.

I always wanted one of these, but that price is ridiculous.

I worked at a Chevy dealer for a short while. I got to PDI one of these. One of the procedures was to torque the lug nuts; one was finger tight, while another on the same wheel was over 150lb-ft. Thing overheated on the five mile test drive.

Not impressed by the truck other than its novelty