How Does the 2019 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 Drive With the 2.7-Liter?

03-1526583197792-(4) II

By Chad Kirchner

The 2019 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 due at dealerships in the fall has more engine choices than ever before, offering six different power options for the new pickup truck. One of those new engine options is a 2.7-liter turbocharged four-cylinder gas engine. We had a chance to go behind the scenes to get all the details about the new engine and drive a 2019 Silverado equipped with it during a media event in Milford, Mich.

The 2.7-liter makes 310 horsepower at 5,600 rpm and 348 pounds-feet of torque from 1,500- 4,000 rpm. That engine is mated to an updated version of GM's eight-speed automatic transmission.

The Tech Behind the Numbers

To achieve these numbers, Chevrolet developed a dual-volute turbine. Unlike a twin-scroll turbocharged, a dual-volute system sends exhaust gas into the turbine through two separate inlets, coming off the exhaust manifold. Because the gasses aren't combined before going into the turbocharger, flow is smoother and boost pressure builds faster.

An electronic boost controller keeps everything in check as the 2.7-liter builds up to 22 pounds per square inch of boost. The results are impressive. Chevrolet claims that the 2.7-liter turbo engine reaches 90 percent torque quicker than any other engine in the class. In layman's terms, turbo lag is virtually nonexistent. To reduce friction, the new engine uses a computer-controlled continuously variable oil pump. An offset crankshaft also is at play here.

The 2.7-liter is also lighter than the 4.3-liter V-6 by 80 pounds. Compared to a similar-spec 2018 Chevrolet Silverado 1500, 380 pounds are saved overall from the V-6. A die-cast high-pressure aluminum block and lower crankcase extension saves weight. The oil pan and air-fuel module are also made of composite material.

10-2.7L-Turbo-I4 II

Engineers spent a lot of time developing three different modes for the valvetrain. A high valve lift configuration is used for full power. A low valve lift profile is used for cruising. No valve lift is employed for the active fuel management system.

The various profiles improve torque in the active fuel management mode by up to 24 percent and up to 5 in the low lift configuration. The key here is that Chevrolet is trying to make improvements across the board in normal driving situations, not just when the engine and truck is under maximum load.

Engine Cooling

An active thermal management system is employed on the 2.7-liter. An integrated exhaust manifold, electric water pump and coolant control valve allows the Chevy to control cooling independently via computer. On cold startup, the system can reduce cooling so that the engine and transmission oil warms up quicker. As the engine heats up, the system can increase cooling to maintain optimal temperature. When the engine is warmed up, the system improves combustion efficiency and exhaust cooling.

Another neat trick is that when the truck is in a stop-start situation, the system can continue to heat the cabin without the use of a secondary heating system. Yes, the 2.7-liter has stop-start, but Chevrolet does include a button to disable the system.

To help minimize vibrations from the four-cylinder engine and cylinder deactivation, Chevrolet uses a centrifugal pendulum absorber in the torque converter to smooth everything out. It's a similar setup first employed in the Chevrolet Colorado diesel.

Driving Impressions

Chevrolet emphasized that this engine was built from the ground for the new Silverado. It's a truck engine through and through. To convince auto journalists of that, Chevy invited us to drive the 2019 Chevrolet Silverado with the 2.7-liter back-to-back with a 2018 Silverado equipped with the 4.3-liter V-6. Chevrolet set up a short loop around GM's Milford Proving Grounds with different types of road conditions, so we could get a small taste of what the truck is like to live with. To make things interesting, Chevy didn't tell us that the new truck had the new engine in it. All we knew is that the engine was different, so we were shocked to learn it was new.

02-1526583197792 II

The new 2.7-liter engine is quite impressive. Acceleration is brisk and the shifts are imperceptible with the new transmission setup. All the telltale signs of a four-cylinder engine just weren't there. Driving the 2019 Silverado 1500 unloaded, it's clear why Chevy went with this engine as the base engine on the volume models. Current owners who have the V-6 are going to be blown away by the 2.7-liter. Even some 5.3-liter V-8 owners are likely to be impressed.

This setup is also light. The biggest impression from our short time behind the wheel was just how light the new truck is. The weight savings up front make the truck feel nimbler than before.

Chevy didn't provide details about suspension and chassis tuning, but you can tell shortly after you start driving that this new truck is special. Its lightness translates into a noticeable improvement in handling. Crossing over simulated railroad tracks really emphasized how much stiffer the chassis is, and how much freedom engineers had to build a lighter truck that can handle that kind of choppiness.

Compared to the 3.3-liter base engine and six-speed automatic in the 2018 Ford F-150, the 2019 Chevrolet Silverado 1500's 2.7-liter setup is more powerful and more refined. Performance numbers for this four-cylinder inch up on the performance of Ford's 2.7-liter EcoBoost V-6.

Some unknowns remain. Chevy has yet to provide towing and payload numbers for all configurations of the truck, including the new four-cylinder. We also don't know what the EPA fuel economy numbers will be, nor do we have pricing information. What we do like is when you walk into a dealership this fall to purchase a new truck, the volume models you'll see will likely have this engine.

The 5.3-liter V-8, which we also drove during the same event, remains an upgrade option. Chevrolet isn't getting rid of the V-8 anytime soon. But the new 2.7-liter in the lower trim levels isn't a penalty box for someone who doesn't want to spend a ton of money on upgrading.

We'll spend a lot more time behind the wheel as the 2019 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 gets closer to launch, including testing its the towing capability. But this early teaser has whetted our appetite.

Manufacturer images

 

01-1526583197792-(1) II

04-1526583197792-(2) II

 

Comments

the f150 wins in torque but at 2750 rpm? that is high! what is it at 1500 rpm and at 4000?

@ Smokin

I am with you on offering the old body style also. My only thought was that the 2016 was a restyle and its only been 3 years, maybe phase it out after 2 years? IDK, I was confused also!

@ Grnzel

Yes, trying to by pass this new system is going to be a nightmare. Wouldn't want anything to with it.

@tntgmc
In my expirence with controls it’s always the hardware that limits speed (since processing speed has dramatically increased). This was/is the problem for direct acting valvetrains. I’m super curious to know how they control oil pressure so quickly.

Chevy needs to improve their tranny

@ Ecoboost

Explain?

@TNT

Your not gonna sit here and do the Chevy vs Ford thing? Yet your asking if id rather burn oil or throw a timing chain? Ok now. Like i said to brick, all brands have problems bar none. So if he pointed out Ford's 5.4L problems (a motor that was dropped back on 2010) i figured i would remind him about Chevy's oil burner. I have owned both brands and both have gotten me over 200k miles but you know what both brands at some point broke down and had me riding in a tow truck.

If by EARLY 5.3l's you mean lots of them up to 2013 and even some after that then sure it was an early problem.

There's a big difference? You all are misinformed and do not know anything as to why a Mfg'er built a certain engine

Really pathetic comments today.

There's a big difference? You all are misinformed and do not know anything as to why a Mfg'er built a certain engine

Really pathetic comments today.

@TNT

Your not going to sit here and bash Chevy vs Ford? Yet here you are asking if i would rather burn oil or throw a timing chain. Ok now. Like i told Brick all brands have problems bar none, so when he brought up the Ford 5.4L (a motor that Ford dropped back in 2010) i figured i would remind him about Chevy's oil burner. I have owned both brands and have gotten 200k miles out of both but guess what they both had me riding shotgun in tow truck at some point during ownership.


If by some early 5.3L's you mean the many up until 2013 and then some afterwards then sure it was an "early addressed problem".

I haven't seen a 5.3L with a Million miles, I seen a 5.4L do it. I wonder if the Ford engine is better.

I haven't seen a 5.3L with a Million miles, I seen a 5.4L do it. I wonder if the Ford engine is better.

Ford's 5.4L problems (a motor that was dropped back on 2010)
Posted by: FullSize_only | May 18, 2018

Wrong. Ford continued punishing buyers with the 5.4 until it was dropped from the Expedition in 2014-15

@TNT

Your not going to sit here and bash Chevy vs Ford? Yet here you are asking if i would rather burn oil or throw a timing chain. Ok now. Like i told Brick all brands have problems bar none, so when he brought up the Ford 5.4L (a motor that Ford dropped back in 2010) i figured i would remind him about Chevy's oil burner. I have owned both brands and have gotten 200k miles out of both but guess what they both had me riding shotgun in tow truck at some point during ownership.


If by some early 5.3L's you mean the many up until 2013 and then some afterwards then sure it was an "early addressed problem".

Whoops!! duplicate comments not intended.......

Ford's 5.4L problems (a motor that was dropped back on 2010)
Posted by: FullSize_only | May 18, 2018

Wrong. Ford continued punishing buyers with the 5.4 until it was dropped from the Expedition in 2014-15

I was referring to being dropped in Ford's F-150 pickup, so right in 2010

@ Ecoboost

Explain?

@TNT

Maybe because its shifting program has got to be one of the worst, the low speed shifting characteristics are awful with lots of lag and gear hunting.

@ At fullsize

Holy cow, you like tripled your comment! LOL

We could go on and on about this and that. I never mentioned the 5.4L. I've gone much in-depth the issues those engines had! plus, its a very sensitive topic with Frank bc he has that motor and it must treat him well. Don't feel like arguing with him ANYMORE!!
I was stating that oil consumption was a factor early on in the 07-09 models because of VVT! Now did "SOME" have issues in 10, 11, 12, 13,...sure but nothing like that first couple years. Plus if you check your oil regularly like YOU should you can stay on top of it and its an issue that won't leave you stranded.

I also stated that the Ecoboost, specifically the 3.5L IS a car/suv motor. So it wasn't designed from ground up, like this 2.7L 4 cylinder motor is from GM...AGAIN I DON"T SUPPORT THIS MOTOR IN A FULL SIZE TRUCK! Just stating what GM rep says.

Have they announced if this engine will be E85 capable yet? That’s important to me as I get a lower cost per mile using E85. That’s something I don’t believe the EPA even accounts for with CAFE requirements; using renewable fuels. Or the capabilities a vehicle has, as running cargo with 20 priuses is not better for the environment than driving a pickup truck. Also, engines that require premium to achieve higher gas mileage don’t make any sense to me. You blow up any fuel efficiency gain on higher cost fuel. Oh well, hopefully we can get rid of CAFE standards within the next year or two; they have caused decades of automaker shenanigans already.

don't blame the carmakers for CAFE. Blame liberals and California

Hahaha. Told ya a 4cyl turbo would be good. Papa, educate yourself.

All brands have and will continue to have "junk truck motors in the pipe" just like the all the people that had and still have their 5.3L burning excessive oil issues.
Posted by: FullSize_only | May 18, 2018 12:43:09 PM

The Gen IV 5.3 used in the 07-13 had oil consumption issues. The Gen V 5.3 has not had any issues with oil consumption. There may be a few random reports, but considering there are nearly 4 million Gen V engines (5.3, 6.2, and 4.3 V6), the handful of reports of oil consumption are miniscule.

---------------------
Yeah it's what comes with the vehicle no? If you have to buy aftermarket parts or swap internal engine components to remove it then yeah I would say they are forcing it on you.
Posted by: FullSize_only | May 18, 2018 12:43:09 PM

You don't have to install or swap any internal engine parts to disable AFM. 3 of the options I mentioned for disabling AFM don't require you to touch the engine AT ALL, and two of the three options would never void the warranty under any condition. The option to DELETE AFM is for those that want the components out for other reasons.

-------------
So you are saying that all possible cab/engine configurations from a single can V6 2wd to a crew cab V8 4wd are losing 450lbs?? Umm no.
Posted by: FullSize_only | May 18, 2018 12:43:09 PM

I didn't claim that all configurations are 450 lbs lighter. GM has confirmed more than once, that the 2019 Silverado crew cab will be 450 lbs lighter than a similarly equipped 2018 Silverado crew cab. Since the crew cab short bed is the most popular configuration for any brand of half-ton sold today, I think it's a fair number to use. Even the inline-4 they showed today was 380 lbs lighter than the equivalent 2018 truck with the 4.3 V6.

Hahaha. Told ya a 4cyl turbo would be good. Papa, educate yourself.


Posted by: Dave | May 18, 2018 3:45:48 PM

That guy couldn't even if a school bus hit him.

It may be harder to deactivate this version of AFM since a 3rd party (Tula) developed and owns the proprietary software. 66,000 lines of code just for skip fire and a 12.5 ms rate of change - wonder how they get the mechanicals to keep up? Oil pressure is used so there must be super fast solenoid valve(s).
Posted by: Grnzel | May 18, 2018 1:35:28 PM

The principals used to deactivating it today will be the same tomorrow. These trucks will still be programmed for situations where GM engineers will not want AFM to be active. All that needs to be done is identify the code that handles when the engine should stay in V8 mode.

And like always, shifting into M and locking out the top gear will almost certainly disable AFM as it has on all previous AFM trucks.

Your not going to sit here and bash Chevy vs Ford? Yet here you are asking if i would rather burn oil or throw a timing chain. Ok now. Like i told Brick all brands have problems bar none, so when he brought up the Ford 5.4L (a motor that Ford dropped back in 2010) i figured i would remind him about Chevy's oil burner. I have owned both brands and have gotten 200k miles out of both but guess what they both had me riding shotgun in tow truck at some point during ownership.

Posted by: FullSize_only | May 18, 2018 2:33:23 PM

Where did I bring up the 5.4?

Since you're so concerned about oil consumption, you might want to avoid the 2.7 Ecoboost and Ford's new 5.2 Voodoo. Ford claims that burning 1 quart every 500 miles is "normal" for their 5.2 Voodoo V8.

GM issued TSB's covering oil consumption. Anyone that thinks their Gen IV 5.3 is burning too much can take it in and they will fix it. Still a pretty minor issue compared the the nightmares that were the 5.4 Triton and the first 5+ years of the 3.5 Ecoboost.

Ford..... “check out our turbo v6’s”

Gm...... “hold my beer and watch this”

Congrats to gm for finally having a class leading engine finally in their line up.... wait is a 4 banger full-size pickup a class????

@ Brick

Its no use. U could put facts down in front of them till your blue in the face and they will never listen.
I read the articile on the GT350, and the amount of oil that thing was consuming was SCAREY..never would or have I heard of a manufacturer claiming that much oil was OK!

Here it is:

http//:www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2017-ford-mustang-shelby-gt350-long-term-test-update-2-review

Well the exterior and engine options look very compelling. Now I'm not impressed with the interior or the rear shocks that hang below the axle. Does it still have a wax coated frame?


@brick

All brands have and will continue to have "junk truck motors in the pipe" just like the all the people that had and still have their 5.3L burning excessive oil issues.
Posted by: FullSize_only | May 18, 2018 12:43:09 PM

The Gen IV 5.3 used in the 07-13 had oil consumption issues. The Gen V 5.3 has not had any issues with oil consumption. There may be a few random reports, but considering there are nearly 4 million Gen V engines (5.3, 6.2, and 4.3 V6), the handful of reports of oil consumption are miniscule.

The 07-13 5.3's that are known (even GM) oil-burners are the motors i am referring to, the 5.3 built after 2013 has also had oil burning issues but yes not as many people as 07-13.

=====

Yeah it's what comes with the vehicle no? If you have to buy aftermarket parts or swap internal engine components to remove it then yeah I would say they are forcing it on you.
Posted by: FullSize_only | May 18, 2018 12:43:09 PM

You don't have to install or swap any internal engine parts to disable AFM. 3 of the options I mentioned for disabling AFM don't require you to touch the engine AT ALL, and two of the three options would never void the warranty under any condition. The option to DELETE AFM is for those that want the components out for other reasons.

So if you have to do one of these "options" to disable this gas saving technology then how is this not something that GM provides and hence forces on the truck buyer? I you dont like this "technology" (havent met a person who likes it) then you are FORCED to disable it.

I never said internal parts swapping was needed to disable.

This is what i did say: "If you have to buy aftermarket parts or swap internal engine components to remove it then yeah I would say they are forcing it on you."

In response to you having said this: "There are plenty of AFM delete kits that block the AFM solenoids and replaces the AFM lifters."

--------

"I didn't claim that all configurations are 450 lbs lighter."

Posted by: Brick | May 18, 2018 4:36:56 PM

Well this is what you did say: ALL of the 2019 trucks are 450 lbs lighter due to the aluminum doors, hood, and tailgate, plus the bed is 500 mpa high strength steel, allowing it to be lighter.

Posted by: Brick | May 18, 2018 12:19:03 PM


I would think that "ALL" would mean all. What was i thinking?

Besides has GM confirmed that the CCSB will be 450lbs lighter or UP TO 450lbs lighter? Again does that mean CCSB 2WD V6 all the way to CCSB 4WD 6.2L? Not likely buddy. Hey this isn't any different to when Ford announced weight loss in 2015 and all the GM guys started asking my exact question....


@fullsize_only

When you're in a hole, stop digging.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA GARBAGE MOTORS COMING OUT WITH A 4 BANGER. NO WAY!!!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. AND COPYING FORD WITH TURBOS. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA GARBAGE MOTORS COMING OUT WITH A 4 BANGER. NO WAY!!!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. AND COPYING FORD WITH TURBOS. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

@brick

"Where did I bring up the 5.4?"

You didnt, i incorrectly wrote brick instead of andrwken. My keyboard foul....

Since you're so concerned about oil consumption, you might want to avoid the 2.7 Ecoboost and Ford's new 5.2 Voodoo. Ford claims that burning 1 quart every 500 miles is "normal" for their 5.2 Voodoo V8.

Not concerned about oil consupmtion, especially since i dont own a GM oil burner!! That oil consumption claim by Ford might have something to due with that motor's 8250 RPM redline.

Ford..... “check out our turbo v6’s”

Gm...... “What is Ford thinking putting small turbo motors like that in a full-size truck”

years later.....

GM..... " Check out our new concept: small turbo motor in a full-size truck"

Ford..... " i knew you would follow the leader"

@TNT


Whats no use is getting GM people to recognize when GM follows in Ford's footsteps. Its OK dude, i know Ford has done it too but this time its GM doing it.

wonder how they get the mechanicals to keep up? Oil pressure is used so there must be super fast solenoid valve(s).

Posted by: Grnzel | May 18, 2018 1:35:28 PM

The cylinders are deactivated by shifting the cam instead of collapsing lifters. It looks just like Audi's Valvelift technology. In this case, GM has 3 lift profiles: low lift, high lift, and a no lift for deactivating the cylinder.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FleWuZ0DMro

That oil consumption claim by Ford might have something to due with that motor's 8250 RPM redline.
Posted by: FullSize_only | May 18, 2018 7:46:56 PM

If that was the case, why doesn't the Coyote 5.0 burn up to 2 quarts per 1000 miles? It's 7500 RPM redline isn't far off from the 5.2 Voodoo and there are plenty of guys that thrash their Coyotes much harder than some guy in his 50's cruising around in his GT350. Car and Driver also pointed out that the vast majority of the 17k miles the GT350 has accumulated was done cruising on the freeway to and from work.

Impressive numbers for a 4cyl.
But I have to wonder about those 310 horses vs the 300 horses in a gen 1 Dmax.
For mall crawling and commuting, probably perfect. Put one in a Tahoe.

@ full size

U can say that but did Ford take a 4 cylinder and adapt it to a full size? NO.

Did Ford abandon their V8s and then make "claim" that their ecoboost have best in class "everything"? YES...but their not!

Did Ford rush by putting a car engine into their trucks? YES

Is Ford realizing they were wrong and now putting more emphasis on their V8s? YES. They upcharge for 5.0L now

Did GM stick with the V8s and still get as good or better FE than the ecoboost or coyote? YES

Where do you see GM following Ford?

The only thing they did was add more aluminum to their trucks but if I recall GM was using aluminium hoods before ford started using all aluminum, which now is haunting Ford bc their trucks are at same weight as a fully steel body GM truck....this new 19 GM truck will really make a difference!
And since the whole body isnt aluminium the cost to repair new GM won't be as high a ford bc they just have aluminium on hinged parts.

Interesting and surprising that GM did this .....

Disappointing that the v8's make no more hp. They are more fuel efficient , have better transmissions and will have to haul a lot lighter truck so performance will improve noticeably.

New turbo four is interesting. This is a very impressive engine with a lot of tech and very impressive numbers . 80lbs lighter than the base V6 AND better power torque and fuel economy while coming in a a low entry price. This will be nearly perfect for most people . It will probably be cheaper to get , have better mileage than the 2.7EB while being lighter and smaller....however , less powerful (but not by much ).

I personally prefer big V8's .....but both EB's are impressive in their own rights. This new four should provide impressive capability in low to mid range GM trucks.

Now .....this new four would be PERFECT for the mid size Colorado and Canyon being as powerful as the V6 (and probably no heavier) with the low end torque of the diesel and excellent fuel economy.

@TNT

Again, its not possible to make GM people see when GM follows Ford.....

So your saying that because GM put a turbo on a 4cyl they didnt follow in Ford's footsteps and offer a small engine with a turbo? Next you are going to tell me that this engine was developed before Ford had the EB out and just didnt want say anything!!!

"Did Ford abandon their V8s and then make "claim" that their ecoboost have best in class "everything"? YES...but their not!"

Ford still offers a V8 and what claims about being best in "everything" Ford makes and you disprove for us here on a comment section are beyond me.

You know that Ford rushed into putting a car engine into a truck because you were obviously involved in that project huh?

"Did GM stick with the V8s and still get as good or better FE than the ecoboost or coyote? YES

Not sure GM will "stick" to V8's for long (it starts with one engine) and the EB's now being made get better MPG's than whatever GM engine compares to it. This is going on provided ratings which we all know can be optimistic, that goes for all car makers...


So because GM used aluminum hoods before Ford went to an aluminum BODY it was Ford that followed GM? Nice

GM, I need payload numbers ASAP!

@ full size

And again u ford guys can't see past your steering wheels. To each is own.

And if u want to talk turbo charging. GM had turbo charging locked down in the early 90s with some of their trucks, SUVs, and cars.

U think what u want. Idc. I'm not a fan of the 4 cylinder turbo. I think it will do well as long as u don't use it as a truck! Just like ecoboosts. If u drive them like a sedan/minivan they get decent mileage but GMs V8s get just as good and the heritage of GMs small block for reliability is unmatched. Thats why I want a V8 and choose GM

@TNT

Again, its not possible to make GM people see when GM follows Ford.....

So your saying that because GM put a turbo on a 4cyl they didnt follow in Ford's footsteps and offer a small engine with a turbo? Next you are going to tell me that this engine was developed before Ford had the EB out and just didnt want say anything!!!

"Did Ford abandon their V8s and then make "claim" that their ecoboost have best in class "everything"? YES...but their not!"

Ford still offers a V8 and what claims about being best in "everything" Ford makes and you disprove for us here on a comment section are beyond me.

You know that Ford rushed into putting a car engine into a truck because you were obviously involved in that project huh?

"Did GM stick with the V8s and still get as good or better FE than the ecoboost or coyote? YES

Not sure GM will "stick" to V8's for long (it starts with one engine) and the EB's now being made get better MPG's than whatever GM engine compares to it. This is going on provided ratings which we all know can be optimistic, that goes for all car makers...


So because GM used aluminum hoods before Ford went to an aluminum BODY it was Ford that followed GM? Nice


Posted by: FullSize_only | May 18, 2018 11:22:51 PM

I like this post. I'll respond.

1. GM Development based on truck duty cycles. The EB had issues before it ever ended up in a truck, in car applications. That is the issue most here complain about, Reliability. I have no issue with turbocharged engines, done right, built for the application (diesels for years). The first gen EB was never intended for full size trucks. It actually was a Mazda design at it's roots, not a Ford design.

2. The V8 is not dead yet. Current administration may be ok with current mileage and emissions but the EPA under Obama was already looking into high nox output from high boost, small displacement engines that doesn't show up on the normal EPA testing cycle. Some manufacturers were already looking at going to a more modest boost and more displacement to offset emissions issues on motors like the 2.7EB. This could change at any time due to admininstration changes and it could spell major changes in any of these small engines. Don't just assume that the future is boosting and less displacement. We could see a move back to NA V8's by all manufacturers before they end up electric.

3. Gm did use aluminum on a truck first. They also didn't have the paint fall of the application like so many of the Expy's had. So again we have a quality issue which makes normal people (not diehard brand fans) look pessimistically at said brand when they look for the next vehicle. Look at the glaring discrepancy in large SUV sales since Ford left a 15 year old expy with a 5.4 and poor paint performance rot on the market instead of redesigning it.

4. Oil consumption vs mechanical failure? I can't believe your trying to make this an apples to apples comparison.

@ andrwken

Exactly!! Nice to have someone else see the light!!

Just bc GM made a smaller 4/cylinders turbo doesn't mean they are getting rid of their V8s!

And if they ever do..ioo be first to say I'll be uoset/disappointed in them, but I don't foresee them getting rid of them anytime soon

The v6 eco boost sounds like 1.5 sewing machines.


Posted by: GMSRGREAT | May 18, 2018 12:21:49 PM

And tows like 2.5 Chevy 5.3's..........

lol...OK...geezzz.

I read somewhere that a higher-up at GM said this engine would have class leading fuel economy (I assume he meant for gas engines). I think the F-150 with the 2.7 in a certain configuration is EPA rated at 20 city & 26 highway. Maybe GM's 2.7 will be rated at around 20 city & 27 highway. I think if GM can demonstrate that they have torture tested this engine to death with heavy towing etc., it will end up selling well, probably far more than the 10% of all Silverado's sold that GM is publicly anticipating. If it does indeed sell well, I wonder if they will make an inline 6 out of this engine as well? Using simple math that someone else pointed out, that would be 465 horsepower and 522 foot pounds of torque! Furthermore, that engine would perhaps still be EPA rated at slightly higher fuel economy than the 5.3 or 6.2!

@Texas1836

I appreciate your thoughts but I seriously doubt GM will pursue another straight six (gas) engine. Especially when they have a six cylinder 4.3 Gen 5 truck engine that would quickly become redundant.

Their last foray into straight sixes was an expensive enterprise that went south really fast (six cylinder Atlas).

And tows like 2.5 Chevy 5.3's..........

Posted by: 2.7EcoBoostRoost | May 19, 2018 7:30:07 PM

Now that's just silly.........GROW UP!



The comments to this entry are closed.