Chevrolet Releases EPA Numbers for 2019 Silverado 1500 Four-Banger

2019-Chevrolet-Silverado-RST-030 copy II

The first half-ton pickup truck to ever offer a four-cylinder engine will be the 2019 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 when it goes on sale in late November. The turbocharged 2.7-liter inline-four-cylinder engine will be the most fuel-efficient powertrain combination Silverado 1500 offers with an EPA-estimated 20/23/21 mpg city/highway/combined for two-wheel-drive configurations.

Standard on the mid-level LT and RST trim levels, the 2.7-liter overhead cam will deliver 310 horsepower and 348 pounds-feet of torque, which is considerably more power than the Ford F-150's or Ram 1500's entry-level V-6 engines (the 3.3-liter and 3.6-liter, respectively). Additionally, the max towing capacity for the engine will be 7,200 pounds, with a max payload capacity of 2,280 pounds.

This four-banger is one of the most advanced engines GM has produced; it's gone through more than 475,000 validation tests and 1 million miles of real-world testing for durability and performance. Its innovative features include a continuously variable dual overhead cam valvetrain, a dual volute turbocharger for decreased lag times, and a new, more seamless and aggressive stop-start technology.

The entry-level 2.7-liter-equipped 2019 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 LT (2WD crew cab) will start at $38,395 (including destination) and be mated to GM's eight-speed transmission. Although this new four-cylinder engine does not offer better highway or combined fuel economy numbers than Ford's or Ram's entry-level V-6 engines, the significantly better horsepower and torque numbers should be a satisfactory trade-off for many. Expect the new engine to make to dealerships before the end of the year.

Manufacturer images

2-7L-Turbo-with-Active-Fuel Management-and-stopstart-technology copy II


Comments

@ papajim Is that all you got.

I'm glad you get your mileage. There are FAR more people who own ecoboost engines that don't get the claimed EPA fuel economy like my previous post stated.

Posted by: TNTGMC | Oct 10, 2018 1:19:29 PM

and you know this how again? do you know how people drive, maintain, their vehicles?

i also know people who have the 6.2 Gm's and have yet to talk to anyone getting over 21 mpg's, but somehow you get 22 to 23 MPG's but i'm not here to call you a liar because i don't know how you drive or maintain your vehicle

https://www.f150ecoboost.net/forum/129-2018-ford-f150-ecoboost-chat/69034-first-official-2018-f-150-hand-calculated-mpg.html

@ Ford Drools

Well sir, Like I have stated go to Fords Forums. you pulled up one of many and as you see on there those comments. some of those guys are getting 16 mpgs!! WOW!!!

Also, like I have stated, I have a great friend who is lead mechanic at a huge Ford dealership here in Midwest. He has TONS of farmers, businessman, and regular folks who are not happy with the FE of the ecoboost.

AS for my MPGs. I get that constantly traveling down interstate 29 going to Omaha, NE to visit family. Could care less what you think or if you believe me. My "nephew" (Ford guy) still can't believe I get those numbers. I even took him to Omaha, and he was dumb founded. (BTW...that side of family who are farmers have ecoboosts and don't come near EPA FE...so ya he gets upset about it!!)

As for taking care of it. Well the beast is washed and waxed once a week, oil changed by dealership, and it has 7500 miles on it now since April when I bought it new. I don't drive it everyday. I have 98 to do that for me! I plan on keeping it for a very long time! Especially when it gets those kinds of numbers.

just the truth | Oct 10, 2018 1:49:23 PM

PLEASE STAY ON TOPIC. You have been warned

@ Ford Drools

Well sir, Like I have stated go to Fords Forums. you pulled up one of many and as you see on there those comments. some of those guys are getting 16 mpgs!! WOW!!!

Also, like I have stated, I have a great friend who is lead mechanic at a huge Ford dealership here in Midwest. He has TONS of farmers, businessman, and regular folks who are not happy with the FE of the ecoboost.

AS for my MPGs. I get that constantly traveling down interstate 29 going to Omaha, NE to visit family. Could care less what you think or if you believe me. My "nephew" (Ford guy) still can't believe I get those numbers. I even took him to Omaha, and he was dumb founded. (BTW...that side of family who are farmers have ecoboosts and don't come near EPA FE...so ya he gets upset about it!!)

As for taking care of it. Well the beast is washed and waxed once a week, oil changed by dealership, and it has 7500 miles on it now since April when I bought it new. I don't drive it everyday. I have 98 to do that for me! I plan on keeping it for a very long time! Especially when it gets those kinds of numbers.


Dang computer logged me out! UGH

papajim you are the one off topic.

GM's V8 gets equal highway MPGs compared to this little 4 cylinder. Ford's 6 Cylinder gets 26 MPG highway, much better than this little 4. What is GM doing? Why would they bring this to production?

there's a scientific name for that, but I'll make it easy for you.

You are cuckoo.

Plain crazy. There is no pill or treatment for your condition. Science isn't even trying to find one.

Well sir, Like I have stated go to Fords Forums. you pulled up one of many and as you see on there those comments. some of those guys are getting 16 mpgs!! WOW!!!

and as you see there's guys getting 22, 23, and 24 mpg's hand calulated WOW!!!

that's my point everyone is different you stated in an earlier post that a ( large percentage) by FAR a getting less MPG's

@ Ford Drools

Glad you see that MORE don't get EPA than do. And yes, some do get it. But also my stepdads 13..granted 6 spd, still has never gotten over 19 mpgs ever with it. He even travels highway 77 where he travels to work and never goes over 65 mph.

Now, my nephew claims that if you mess with the gapping of the spark plugs, it helps with FE.......I don't know if true, bc if it was I would think Ford would use it?

Again, lets wait for comparison, love to see how it tows, drives, and REAL world performance!

TFL drove the truck earlier this year and didn't know it was a 4 cylinder and thought it was a V8. The way it drove, handled, accelerated were totally surprised it was a 4 cylinder.

Glad you see that MORE don't get EPA than do

ok we are not on the same page that's what you're saying not me
going back to the forums
out of 25 MPG posts
2 are getting over 16
3 are getting over 17
1 is over 18
the rest are over 19 to 25
The twin-turbo 2.7-liter V-6 (with all-wheel drive) 19 mpg city/24 highway

so do you still think MOST are not getting the rated MPG's

@ ford drools

No they dont. For goodness sake. Your at one forum. There are tons of posts about this. Plus, I'll go with a certified Ford mechanic who is a DIE hard ford guy and he even says that more dont get it then do

And I see it first hand within the family that they dont. Congrats that maybe u do, but more dont than do....

So I should stoop down to your level (but I won't) and call you a liar bc there is no way you get that MPGs.. Sound familiar??

I'm glad you get your mileage. There are FAR more people who own ecoboost engines that don't get the claimed EPA fuel economy like my previous post stated.

As for this engine. Lets wait for a comparison, but I from day one have not agreed with it being in a half ton. Especially when the 4.3L and 5.3L get just as good fuel economy and my 6.2L has gotten 22-23 all day long running 70 down interstate to see family members.

This engine might be the next ZR2 motor. Especailly if ford puts 2.7L in their Ranger Raptor


Posted by: TNTGMC | Oct 10, 2018 1:19:29 PM

If you remember the back and forth we had, you actually stated two different mpg ratings. That is when I called you a liar. You then said you mis typed the one time. Okay, fair enough, that can happen. I simply referenced GM truck forums (with a link as proof) that had several pages of owners of 6.2 trucks reporting their mpg's. I don't recall one being over 19 mpg and most being around 15-16 and said you'd be an exception. Coincidentally "GMSRGREAT" came to your defense and said he too gets 24mpg all day long at 75mph. You then got all defensive, called me "jealous little motor man, can't handle the facts" etc. blah blah blah. I am on the Ford truck forums. I see way more people with the 2.7 posting at, near or above EPA than I do below. Early 3.5 EcoBoost did have probably around 50% of owners report not being able to achieve epa ratings. I have never argued or defended that. Back to this topic...... No way would I buy this engine over the 5.3 if I'm buying a GM truck. Even if it performed marginally better, the resale of a 4cyl will not match the 5.3 most likely. I do think on paper, the 2.7 is a great fit for the mid sized trucks.

No way would I buy this engine over the 5.3 if I'm buying a GM truck. Even if it performed marginally better, the resale of a 4cyl will not match the 5.3 most likely.

@2.7

Did you wash your hands after you pulled that out of your b*tt? Neither you (or me) has any idea whatsoever what resale will be for these trucks in 3 or 4 years. A four cylinder turbo was the last think I was expecting GM to do with the 1500s, but I'm open.

The key thing I like better about the GM (and Toyota) 2.7 approach is fewer cylinders, a third fewer moving parts. The four cylinder 180 degree rotation is preferable to a smallish six. In fact I remember one of the Asian firms had a 2.7 six cylinder back about 20 years ago (Kia?) and it was the worst of all worlds.

We'll know in a couple of years.

@ 2.7l

Resale? Its WAY to early to think that. Its not even released or tested yet. Who knows what u.s. mindset will be in 4 years

This engine likely has more moving parts than most V6. This is a double overhead cam with cam phasers and the abillty to switch between low and high lift. Also the engine has two balance shafts.

More ignorant comments. Shocker. This engine is for c.a.f.e only. 1500's soon will be like a prius. The real trucks are 2500's and above because their not regulated the same as 1500's. This engine is to comply with the government nothing more.

We'll know in a couple of years.


Posted by: papajim | Oct 10, 2018 4:11:05 PM
@ 2.7l

Resale? Its WAY to early to think that. Its not even released or tested yet. Who knows what u.s. mindset will be in 4 years


Posted by: TNTGMC | Oct 10, 2018 4:16:07 PM

"the resale of a 4cyl will not match the 5.3 most likely."
That is a hypothetical, but I'd bet on it. In 4 years come on here and write 1,000 times "2.7EcoBoostRoost was right!! Dismissed!!

Im not geting excited about this 4 banger in a full size truck,,once you put some load on it will strugle and mpg will suffer..
Fwiw
My 08 Silvy with 4.8 V8 still gets 25 mpg btw..
no serious isues either after all these years

@ 2.7l

If it makes u feel better or sleep better. Wtf

@ 2.7l

If it makes u feel better or sleep better. Wtf

This might be a good engine except for a price point starting a $38,395 makes it less appealing. If this ends up being a good engine then maybe in the future they could offer it in a work trim and possibly the Colorado/Canyon. I prefer 4 cylinders but I would pass on this till it has been out a couple of years and until it is offered on less expensive trims.

Typical diversion tactics:
1) These are the specs, but there are no reviews, so shut up.
2) These the are specs and the reviews, but you haven't driven it yourself, so shut up.
3) These are the specs and the reviews and you have driven it, but have you checked the stock price?

Posted by: Taggert | Oct 10, 2018 12:57:07 PM


I agree 100% on this Taggert you acurratley described the Gm shills that populate this comment section. I will add #4:

4) When the best selling truck in the game introduces a new idea they say "why try different engines", "they won't sell any". Only for their favorite to do the same and follow the leader.

@ full size/taggert

Diversion tactics....are those the same excuses you Ford guys have after comparison tests and your so called "class leading" trucks underperform? Hmm...interesting

This engine hasn't been tested or anything and you guys are going bonkers..... Its kinda funny!

Diversion tactics....are those the same excuses you Ford guys have after comparison tests and your so called "class leading" trucks underperform? Hmm...interesting


Posted by: TNTGMC | Oct 10, 2018 5:56:01 PM

From the guy who crys foul at the Edmunds test. Then calls everyone names when they don't agree with him. Then gets defensive over some simple common sense logic. Can not make this stuff up!!!!!

This engine hasn't been tested or anything and you guys are going bonkers..... Its kinda funny!


Posted by: TNTGMC | Oct 10, 2018 5:56:01 PM

It actually has been tested. EPA tested. That's what the people are "going bonkers" over. It's underwhelming results. I know you never stay on topic, but don't fault others for commenting on the topic. Dismissed!!

Posted by: TNTGMC | Oct 10, 2018 2:11:30 PM (not in blue again)

Posted by: papajim | Oct 10, 2018 2:11:58 PM (another papa post right after a TNT post)

Dang computer logged me out! UGH

Posted by: TNTGMC | Oct 10, 2018 2:12:52 PM (another TNT post "official in blue logged in" admitting that the above TNT post was you.)

You are not very bright. And you wonder why everyone thinks you're a 14 year old kid or just a really big loser without a life. Or both. You constantly surround yourself with these mistakes. All you needed to do was have johnnydoe or GMSRGRETTA laugh at your post.

@ 2.7l

If it makes u feel better or sleep better. Wtf


Posted by: TNTGMC | Oct 10, 2018 5:30:43 PM

You know how I fall asleep fast? You've heard of counting sheep right? I count all the gas pumps that I drive by and see Chevy 6.2's sitting at!! Works like a charm! Zzzzzzz...Zzzzzzz....Zzzzzzz

Pathetic MPG.

@ 2.7L

Your an absolute clown! My computer at worked logged me out of my admin. So when I posted my comment it wasnt in blue. Please stop being such a clown. Grow up

And yes you and your ford guys are going bonkers.. No it hasn't been tested in a real world comparison test yet which I have stated now 4 times. Please read my comments and get educated! Something I can tell u truly lack!

Its your comments all the time about 6.2L that get u in trouble. Its no wonder why your jealous. Otherwise, you wouldnt bring it up. Say what u want but u constantly attack me and my 6.2L bc your little engine with 2 turbos doesn't live up to what my small block V8 does. Poor guy.....now I know u dont sleep well. I'd be upset to buying a so called "class leader" and it under performs!

But hey, the good lord treats u well. Amen brother. Maybe when u say your prayers tonight you'll finally sleep better.

I respect the fact that GM is trying something new, and they do have good test results, but I still like the V8 engines. I’m in my late 30’s, but I’m really a big fan of the old school pickups and farm equipment. On top of that are pickups have a really hard life, and every year they keep on putting more plastic junk on them, and front bumpers are about worthless now too.

the guy who crys foul at the Edmunds test. Then calls everyone names when they don't agree with him. Then gets defensive over some simple common sense logic. Can not make this stuff up!!!!!

@ 2.7L

It was a review sponsored by RAM. Again your intellect speaks volumes!
And calling names?? Hmm...look into mirror. And I quote: "or just a really big loser".....who constantly makes mistakes?

As for me supposedly being a 14 year old kid??? A 14 year old with a masters and working on a second one?!? Thats an amazing accomplishment!! That being said, Even a 14 year old would choose a 6.2L over a 2.7L ecoboost

GM has always been more conservative with MPG numbers, Ford over promises.

@cotton farmer--Agree, I am not a fan of plastic front bumpers, turbo engines, and the myriad of electronics they put on most modern trucks but that is what is selling. I am more into form following function. That is one reason I have owned a truck for the past 33 years. The turbo engines are much better than they were 30 years ago but I really don't need the extra horse power. The auto industry is mainly going to smaller turbo engines with multiple gear automatics to meet the new fuel efficiency standards which work as long as the turbo charger does not kick in too much but then that was true for the old 4 barrel carbs of the past once you hit the gas hard the extra 2 barrels would kick in. The days of a simple truck are long gone along with the manual transmission which has become a unicorn.

Posted by: papajim | Oct 10, 2018 8:34:46 PM

the FAKE papajim

"Highly disappointing, hmm would I rather have a proven Ford ecoboost 2.7 V6 with considerably more power and 3 mpg better highway fuel economy, or would I rather have this new 4 cylinder?" ---- Posted by: Texas1836

Given those choices, I'd take the Ford. But I'd rather see a turbo version of GM's 3.6L V6 instead.

You constantly surround yourself with these mistakes. All you needed to do was have johnnydoe or GMSRGRETTA laugh at your post.

Posted by: 2.7EcoBoostRoost | Oct 10, 2018 6:32:52

Not sure who GMSGREATTA is but as the owner of a 6.2 Silverado I laugh at all ecobust engines especially the 2.7.

"The new GM engine intends to eventually replace the big V6 in pickups with a sophisticated and powerful sub-three liter engine. For anybody hoping for FE there's your cupcake! It has over 300 HP and over 300 torque, so it should be suitable for daily use, and it's a turbo so it should be happy pulling a load as well.
Because it's not a six, it should be very smooth. Because it has a 180 degree crank the exhaust should sound very racy, unlike the competition's truck that needs an audio speaker to cover the sound of the sewing machine under its hood.
Coupled to a modern automatic trans it should be a solid daily driver, with some HD pretensions
What's not to like?" ---- Posted by: papajim

Everything. That full-sized truck can't do that much more than my normally-aspirated V6 Colorado and gets worse fuel mileage!
Only 200 pounds more towing capacity. The only advantage that big truck has is the overall area/volume of the bed and even that's not much larger than the Colorado's, either.

@Jeff S

I appreciate your nostalgia for the old style trucks, but my memory is still sharp enough to remember tuning my cars, vans and trucks back when.

Tuning our trucks and cars to run good when cold AND hot was a trick, not to mention making carefully calibrated adjustments to the fuel mixture screws, the dwell adjustment and the hitting the timing just right wasn't always easy and it got more difficult along the way because the government was trying to make the cars run leaner every year.

For that reason and others I really appreciate the EFI and the electronic spark management. When OCB II came along in the late 1990s I was convinced that we had arrived.

It wasn't until I tried my hand at actually using scan tools and doing the diagnostics that I realized how much we still have to understand about the ways cars run to fix them.

obd II is even better!

You will come around eventually, Mr Fox.

I mostly drove compact pickups for years and I came to really appreciate the extra interior space in the cab of fullsize trucks.

We won't know for a while if GM was right about their new 2.7 but they did a TON of test miles in it before deciding to go all out.

Yikes!!! Those mpg's in the article are for 2WD..., It only gets worse when equipped with 4WD..., Ouch gm...

Jeff s: Yes Sir, the thing that gets me is that with the electronics on the pickups nowadays it has to go to the dealership to be worked on, and being in a small town the closest dealership is 30 miles away. Now, don’t get me wrong I would like to own a diesel pickup, but from what I’ve read it would take 150K miles just to break even buying new, which I won’t be buying new, and from my research I can’t afford to maintain one anyway, but if you have a better answer I’d like to hear it. I just can’t justify a diesel right now, because I run empty 80% of the time, and the rest of the time I can get by because I’m not too far away from the fields.

I drove an '18 Silverado last Friday while I had my new Colorado in to have some accessories installed (a loaner with about 700 miles on it.) Really guys, how can you possibly be comfortable driving something that big? It felt huge compared to my Colorado which itself feels gigantic next to my old Ranger.

That said, I really can't imagine one of these with a tiny four-cylinder engine in it, even if that engine is turbocharged. And when you consider its towing/hauling capabilities is hardly any more than my V6 offers in my (slightly) smaller Colorado; why would anyone want this? If you ask me, this is a huge mistake on GM's part... no better than many of their other ill-conceived concepts. This engine in the Colorado could easily replace the V6 currently carried and probably offer improved economy at the same time. It wouldn't bother me nearly as much as it does in the huge Silverado.

@cotton farmer

There was a great driver when I was a boy named Al "cotton" Farmer. He eventually had to retire from injuries but he was a racer with gumption.

Regarding modern electronics. Don't be afraid to try. Sometimes the guys at the dealer shops are pretty good, and sometimes not. If you know a little about the modern systems you're in a better position to advise the repairman in the event you prefer to pay someone else to fix it.

2 cents.

Or you could withhold judgement until you've actually driven one.

Papajim, Yes Sir, I’m also considering going back to a 1/2 ton and beefing it up with overloads because a 6.0 gets 14mpg going downhill with a tailwind, and 12 and under in normal driving conditions. Cotton prices are dropping, and things are fixing to get tight in the finances for all of us farmers.

This engine in the Colorado could easily replace the V6 currently carried.

I'm quite sure that GM would love to retire the 4.3 and the 3.6 as soon as they can be reasonably replaced with an equally robust four cylinder truck engine.

Never forget that four-cylinder racing engines ruled the Indy 500 for decades. They sounded cool as hell too.

@cotton farmer

My dad grew up on a farm so I've heard a lot about it. It takes nerves of steel to ride the commodities roller coaster if you are in farming. The guys in the Wall Street offices buy/sell commodities like cotton and beans all day long, but they don't have serious skin in the game like the farmer does.

Good luck with this current market. Like a high dollar poker table, it always comes back around if you can afford to wait it out without ruining your nerves.

Papajim: Thank You Sir, I do appreciate it and we’re doing the best that we can, and I think we’ll make it, at least I hope to. When new tractors sticker for $250K and new pickups are going for $60-70K a person sure has to have it in their blood to do it. At least I do have a B.S. Degree to fall back on if it comes down to it.



Post a Comment

Please remember a few rules before posting comments:

  • Try to be civil to your fellow blog readers.
  • Stay on topic. We want to hear your opinions and thoughts, but please only comment about the specified topic in the blog post.
  • Your email will not be shown.

If you have a TypeKey or TypePad account, please Sign In

Home | Buy or Sell a Truck | News | Special Reports

Powered by Cars.com. By using this site, you agree to our terms of service | © 2017 Cars.com | Privacy Statement | Contact Us