By on April 4, 2011


While the large numbers of Scouts on the extremely urban and snow-free Island That Time Forgot never made sense to me, it’s no surprise that the tough little International Harvester trucks still roam Colorado in large numbers. Still, with so many Scouts, some are going to end up facing The Crusher, and that’s what’s happened to this battered ’70.

It looks pretty solid at first glance, but closer examination reveals plenty of Bondo-covered rust. Still, there should have been plenty of life left in this truck. I blame cheap Subarus!

Damn if I can ID IHC V8s at a glance. If this is the factory-installed engine, it should be a 180-horsepower 304 (not to be confused with the unrelated AMC 304).

I’m tempted to buy one of the valve covers to hang on my garage wall.

Compare this instrument panel to the “information centers” that came later. Sure, most of those cheapo gauges probably failed by 1975, but they sure look cool.

We need more road vehicles made by farm equipment manufacturers!

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

16 Comments on “Junkyard Find: 1970 IHC Scout...”


  • avatar
    Zackman

    I mulled over buying one of these as I was perusing my first new vehicle purchase in 1975. By then it was “Scout ll” I didn’t buy one because all the other Scouts I saw around town didn’t appear to be aging well and rust was busily at work. At least the factory gauges could be replaced by SW’s!

    We need vehicles that are that simple again! Would they sell? I wonder…

    • 0 avatar
      Birddog

      The majority of the general public wouldn’t know how to start a vehicle this simple..

    • 0 avatar
      Educator(of teachers)Dan

      The funny thing is depending on the year the starting procedure wasn’t that simple.  (I’m thinking of my 307V8 – quadrajet which had a factory designed starting procedure of 1. Press gas pedal to floor ONCE. 2. Release.  3. Turn key.)  Of course I’m waiting for the day when one of my children sees the ordinary key in the ignition of my F150 and says; “What’s that, Dad?”  Stupid “push to start” buttons in everything. 

    • 0 avatar
      Zackman

      The starting procedure gets even better with a manual choke! Pull out knob halfway, pedal halfway to floor, start engine, wait a moment until the engine starts to sputter, gently push in choke knob gradually as engine warms up. What a pain! Oh – first, you have to turn the key to “start”, then push starter button! At least that’s the way it was on my first car – a 1952 Chevy.

    • 0 avatar
      Scoutdude

      Those gauges are Stewart Warner units made of IH/Ford specs and yes with a change of senders “real” SW gauges will fit right in.

    • 0 avatar
      Smorticus

      I hope they would sell. I have had this idea for a while. Would a car company attempt to make the simplest most efficient vehicle that can be easily owner maintained? I doubt it, but would love to see it. I’ll even allow for the crappy plasticy style with no distinction between bumper and body. If a vehicle came with mechanical controls, power steering, power brakes, a set of tools, and a service manual as the only standard equipment would anyone buy it? I would and add a radio and possibly a/c. Could the reliance on computer software be eliminated and still keep the emissions standards without that crazy maze of tubes solinoids and filters on an early ’80s carbuereted engine? I don’t know, but would love to see it.

  • avatar
    panzerfaust

    I’ve seen less roadworthy examples than this one still gouging paths along the fruited plains of flyover country.  But its pretty hard to keep ahead of the body rot on them unless you do a full rotisserie restoration which at this point isn’t worth the trouble.

    • 0 avatar
      krhodes1

      My Great Uncle Paul did exactly that, at HUGE cost, to the Scout II that he bought new. I believe it was whatever the last year was. Rotted to Hell in pretty short order, of course. He tucked it away until he retired, had the restoration done, and now uses it on sunny days in the summer only.

      Runs in the family, sort of – one of my other Great Uncles has a ’70 Chevy Pickup, short-wheelbase 4wd, in pee-green metallic  that he bought new that has JUST cracked 20K miles and is so minty-fresh that you would have to see it to believe it. I don’t believe he has ever driven it in the rain, never mind the snow. It is an absolute time-warp, even has the 1970 vintage aluminum cap on the back of its little 6′ bed.

  • avatar

    The bodies might not stand up, but they would go through or over anything.  I don’t think there is a 4×4 out there today that would even come close to the abuse these Scout’s would handle.

    • 0 avatar
      panzerfaust

      For sure, and International was known for having a much heavier chassis in its pickups, Travelalls and Scouts than comparable vehicles from Ford or GM.  Had a friend who owned a 63 Travelall, it had a V8 and the chassis was closer to a one ton than a 3/4 ton as rated.  Also had a locking rear diff and a low gear ratio that combined out pulled more than one Blazer or F150. 

  • avatar
    Jeffer

    I was given a 1963 Scout some years back, it differed very little from the one pictured except it had a removable soft-top. The motor was a four banger that looked like a V8 sawn in half, which it likely was. IIRC it was a slant four.

    • 0 avatar
      Scoutdude

      Yes it was the pass side of the 304 in the case of the 152 that was used in 1963 and the 196 used in later years was the pass side of the 392. The vast majority of the engine parts do interchange between the 4 and V8 versions.

  • avatar
    Birddog

    I’ve wanted a Scout since I was a kid. I lived about two blocks from an IH parts depot that was also used as a staging area for much of their equipment and vehicles. There were Scouts (Scout IIs actually) almost everywhere. Until they weren’t.. It was like a rust bomb wiped them all out at the same time.

    I was recently looking for a II but anything worth buying was big bucks and the rest were worse than the one pictured above. So I settled on a 79 Cherokee.. 

  • avatar
    Scoutdude

    Definitely not the original engine. The 304 was never available with a 4bbl and since it’s deck height is shorter than the 345/392 you can’t swap intakes. That intake having an EGR valve and being a square bore with the recess puts the intake at least as a ~77-8 model year which would make it a 345 if the intake goes with the engine. The definitive way to ID is to clean the gunk off the boss under the front of the pass side head where they stamped V3xx and the suffix of A meant a lt duty cost reduced version while the E suffix denotes that it was fitted with the flat top emissions pistions and corresponding heads. That intake will bring around $100 bucks and those headlight surounds parking lights and grille are in demand as well not to mention the slider windows and really really hard to find in that good condition rear seat. If I didn’t do Scout II’s and have my share of spare 4bbl intakes for future projects…..but those pieces will sell on E-bay for good money. I see an easy $1000 worth of parts there.
    All in all I know many people who have put much much rougher Scouts back on the road or are driving them in worse condition.
     
     

  • avatar
    Andy D

    IH parts  are  mostly unobtanium.  I see  a  Blue one    in the  summers,  but  most  are  long  gone.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Subscribe without commenting

Recent Comments

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Authors

  • Brendan McAleer, Canada
  • Marcelo De Vasconcellos, Brazil
  • Matthias Gasnier, Australia
  • Tycho de Feyter, China
  • W. Christian 'Mental' Ward, Abu Dhabi
  • Mark Stevenson, Canada
  • Faisal Ali Khan, India