Chevrolet Powers 2019 Silverado 1500 With Turbo 4: Video

IMG_3293 copy

Every pickup truck maker is looking to create as many weight-saving and fuel-economy-stretching advantages as possible and, so far, all the major players have brought some interesting technologies to the table. Ford, famously, has moved to smaller engines with turbochargers and an aluminum body; Toyota has experimented with composite beds and Atkinson-cycle engines; Ram has a new mild-hybrid system on its V-6 and V-8 trucks; and even Honda has cylinder deactivation and a plastic bed.

Related: A 4-Cylinder Pickup? Chevy Takes a Gamble With 2019 Silverado 1500

With all that said, GM is probably the one player that seems to be doing more to move the needle with new powertrain technology than any other pickup manufacturer. Not only is GM offering two different versions of cylinder deactivation in its V-8 motors (variable fuel management and dynamic fuel management), but it also is coming to market with an all-new inline-six-cylinder diesel engine and now has a super-sophisticated turbocharged inline-four-cylinder engine in select half-ton models. It's likely to become GM's base pickup engine pretty soon.

Of all the powertrain challenges GM has faced, we're guessing a four-cylinder engine will be the biggest, most difficult hurdle to overcome. Why? Because half-ton pickup buyers will be skeptical about the smallest (cylinder-wise) engine ever offered in a half-ton truck. Half-ton trucks are usually used for hard work and play, which traditionally has been defined as requiring a V-8 engine.

Nonetheless, it looks like GM has done its homework. Not only does this four-cylinder engine provide solid horsepower and torque numbers, but it also offers a powerful, fast-acting turbocharger (with dual volutes) that gives it some substantial jump. That's why this engine is standard on the 2019 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 RST, Chevy's most aggressive street-performance package. It will be offered with the new all-wheel-drive system. This will be Chevy's street-prowler of the half-ton lineup, and it is almost 400 pounds lighter than the stalwart 4.3-liter V-6 base engine in the lower trim levels. As you might expect, a lighter truck means more payload and higher mpgs (issues not lost on GM engineers). The turbo four also will be standard on the LT model.

But enough of what might be; here's what we thought about the new engine in a 2019 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 LT crew-cab 4x2 that we drove just a few weeks ago.

Manufacturer images

 

 

Comments

Will the GM 2.7 run with the Ford 2.7? Worse power and fuel economy what's the point.

Will the GM 2.7 run with the Ford 2.7? Worse power and fuel economy what's the point.

Posted by: Just the truth | Nov 25, 2018 8:43:24 AM


The GM 2.7 is going to be the base engine so NO its not meant to compete against the Ford 2.7 Its all explained in the video if you listen.

Do you think they will not be compared?

@ Beno

You’re a victim of GM Marketing propaganda

The paying consumer will, and is, comparing each 2.7L to one another.

Unless it’s fleet, nobody buys the 3.3L

@ Beno

You’re a victim of GM Marketing propaganda

The paying consumer will, and is, comparing each 2.7L to one another.

Unless it’s fleet, nobody buys the 3.3L

It is hard to imagine this new turbo 4 is 400lbs lighter then the 4.3 v6???? I could maybe see 400lbs lighter the the 6.2

if it is 400lbs lighter the whole front end could be made with lighter components , you could save another 100 to 200 lbs on the front end. That should be worth several more miles per gallon. If they leave it as it is, where you can drop in a 6.2, I do not see the advantage....

A few years ago I was looking at a certain truck, no matter what the configuration the epa showed the same fuel mileage with same motor, whether single cab, extended or crew.

@ Beno

You’re a victim of GM Marketing propaganda

The paying consumer will, and is, comparing each 2.7L to one another.

Unless it’s fleet, nobody buys the 3.3L


Posted by: TNTGMC | Nov 25, 2018 9:50:02 AM


FAKE TNTGMC

Not enough ( in this case none ) spelling mistakes

Fleet isn’t going to buy a high tech, low fuel economy 2.7 turbo 4 cylinder. They will opt for the other base gm engine.... 4.3 v6

I love when people make comments about things they haven’t tried or driven. There are an awful lot of know it alls out there.

I'll keep my Fiat 3.6, thanks.

Highway fuel economy numbers are highly disappointing on this engine. If I were considering this engine, I would be comparing it to the Ford 2.7, not the Ford naturally aspirated 3.3 V6, and I am pretty sure the Ford 2.7 V6 would slaughter this engine in any acceleration test loaded or unloaded. I have read in several places that this engine has a pleasant exhaust note, pretty amazing for a 4-banger...maybe they have the Ford beat here? Would be interested in real world fuel economy numbers vs. the Ford 2.7 and Ram 3.6.

Other than cost and weight savings there are too many negatives for this engine to be successful let alone in a half ton. It appears GM opted for direct injection only so there is likely to be carbon buildup on intake valves and heads. And then direct injection in small displacement gas turbo engines tends to increase oil dilution. I will pass on this experiment.

This model is nothing more than a cafe credit to sell the big 6.2 V8. The government has regulated mpg on 1500's no one that actually uses a truck to work and tow will buy this model. Kind of like a full size Tacoma. You get utility but not much truck substance.

Have you ever seen a bunch of Ford girls wet their pants over the EPA guess-sta-mates on a GM half-ton base engine package like this? This truck isn't even on the street yet and the girls want it buried.

HemiV8, the 2.7 GM Turbo was built to be a truck motor pure and simple. It is not a car motor shoved into a truck AKA the 3.6 Pentastar

@ Hemi v8 GM has already took care of the 6.2. Go to the chevy site and try to build a truck with a 6.2. Not even an option on a 2019. The 6.2 is in the list of options on 2018 trucks but if selected you can not go any further until deselected.

The 6.2L is best v8 on the market! It has taken down everything Ford has pushed at it. Putc comparison has proven that! Facts! Not nonsense that some car guys believe

As for the 2.7L by GM. It's a base motor to phase out the 4.3L. It's not meant to directly compete with the 2.7L from Ford. I do like that the motor was specifically designed for a truck! Just not my cup of tea.

This could be the new ZR2 motor I believe in the next generation midsize.

The 6.2 does not really matter if it is not available. The Chevrolet truck build site will not allow a 6.2 truck. The GMC truck build site will allow a 6.2 in the top two levels and only with 4WD.

The 6.2 does not really matter if it is not available

@JTT

True.

The SOHC Ford 6.2 has only been available in their heavy duty FSeries models since about 2012 or so. Cannot buy one in an F150.

At least GM customers have been able to get a GM 6.2 engine in their half ton trucks for quite a while, more than 10 years.

Have you ever seen a bunch of Ford girls wet their pants over the EPA guess-sta-mates on a GM half-ton base engine package like this? This truck isn't even on the street yet and the girls want it buried.


Posted by: papajim | Nov 25, 2018 2:49:11 PM

Theres a lot more that contributes to the weight loss. The frame it self is 80 pounds lighter for example. Whoever doesnt think this engine is practical in the real world let me tell you. Your average truck owner uses their vehicle as a daily driver, and to haul things around when doing yard work etc. This engine is for those buyers. Also for people that dont want to pay for a 6.2. With that being said, its only .5 of a second slower than the 6.2 going 0-60! That's very fast. Lets also bring up the fact that your Ford 2.7 is a car engine that they slapped in a truck. The Chevy 2.7 is a truck engine and was made with heavy duty parts, and engineered to do work. Also the turbo is superior in design. Its going to be the best base engine offered in any half ton ever. Period. Just bc both engines say 2.7 Liters, does not mean they are created equal. So dont get it twisted. New technology allows smaller displacement and more power. GM knows what they're doing. Their engineers are the best in the world, that's why Honda just invested 68 billion in GM. I look forward to the next 5 years of new vehicles coming!

Honda just invested $2.75B in GM's Cruise (autonomous vehicle program) not for GM vehicle drivetrain know-how. It's a smart move given the high cost of entry, lack of experience, and strong competition in the autonomous vehicle world.

With regard to GM's 2.7L, Honda is clueless with small displacement direct injection turbo engines. Do an internet search for Honda's new CRV 1.5L mess - engine can't warm up in cold temps, oil dilution, engine misfires, China recalls. This was Honda's first attempt and it's a fail.

... and I should add, GM's 2.7L 4 cylinder design might be on the same path.

@madmax

“ Lets also bring up the fact that your Ford 2.7 is a car engine that they slapped in a truck “

The 2.7EB first came out in the F150.

Stop with falsehoods

@Tntgmc

Take a breath dude! the 2.7 is another of the Duratec DOHC descendants. While it has some cool casting technology unique to its design, the 2.7 is one of many Ford sixes.

Ford had these Duratecs in sedans, coupes and CUVs more than 10 years ago, before any were ever adapted to rear drive designs.

At that time Ford was still putting pushrod 4.2s in the F150, and Cologne V6s in the Ranger.

Wow. Madmax is one heck of a GM Shill.

Makings claims like Honda invested in GM for their for power trains, and claiming the 2.7 EcoBoost first application was a car.

It hurst being a GM Fan when their are ( GM ) boneheads like that out there.

It’s not a Duratec engine.

It’s Nano.

Just heard this does the closure of the Oshawa plant in Csnada have any impacl in the US?

@ Robert Ryan

It’ll impact Mexico. As that’s where GM will assemble those cars that where once made in Oshawa.

GM will begin readying the Mexican plant shortly

@Papajim
Impact will be in Canada, which has taken the announcement as a bit of a shock

Stop listening to the FAKE papajim (above).

@Robert

The liberal media has everyone convinced that nobody wants sedans. Wrong. The S Class Mercedes sells just fine. Ditto the 7 Series BMW and the big Audi and the big sedans from the other makers. Everybody loves riding in a large comfy seat in a big sedan. Always did.

People hate riding in tiny coupes and sedans better suited to people who are less than 5'7" Big people like big cars. Surprised?

One of the leading reasons that Americans came to love Suburbans and big pickups was interior comfort.

Plant closures in Canada are more about dropping locations that were devoted to small car lines, and/or the final assembly of GM's pickups from Ft Wayne plant, which is probably near capacity.

the 2.7 is a Duratec DOHC descendant.

Names like Nano, Cyclone, etc are just internal jargon at Ford. this is not to be confused with the 1990s V6 that Ford bought from Porsche.

Bulletin: Oil consumption issues with 2.7 may require replacement of cylinder heads according to a recent Ford bulletin.

@ Papajim…
GM under investigation for faulty brake vacuum pumps!
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/gm-under-investigation-for-faulty-brake-vacuum-pumps/ar-BBQ0RME?li=BBnbfcL

No ones perfect.

There are an awful lot of know it alls out there.

@supercrew02

do you really think that GM makes vacuum pumps? Doubt it. Most likely that brake components for modern cars (pads, master cylinders, wheel cylinders, brake lines, calipers) are made by third parties who specialize in brakes.

@papa
Where is the duratec lineage in the EB?? Block is much different design and material. Conn rods in EB are I-beam style...
What’s your criteria to say it’s an evolution of the DT?? 6 cylinders??

Let me add, Ford references Duratec in name only the 3.5 EB is known as the Cyclone family which includes bucket type valve actuation, iVCT, TiVCT....

Ford broke the "my trucks GOTTA have a big dumb V8 barrier" a decade ago for them. Although its true many GM fans being left in the darkness for so long do seem to like being there. If this engine will mechanically hold up it will be a success. If it wont well GM knows the bankruptcy/bail out process so its win win for the general. It still has large primitive engines it gouges its fans for with very subpar high end trim in the chevy (that recently was beaten by the old Ford and new Fiat), and now a modern small displacement turbo and diesel for its half tons. The general went from being 2 steps behind Ford and 1 behind Fiat to being even and untried with the 2. Give them their slow clap. The real disappointment here is the GM 4cyl is starting out being outclassed by Ford's 2.7V6. While Fords tiny 6 isn't standard... the 2 will be compared.

Ford broke the "my trucks GOTTA have a big dumb V8 barrier" a decade ago

@clint

You knew that would would work like a dog-whistle for old Papajim. First question: Which big V8 did Ford have 10 years ago? You can't mean the 6.2, because Ford dropped it from the half ton checklist in 2012 or so. Sure a few of them are sold in fleet Super Duty trucks, but it's mostly over for the Ford 6.2 unless something changes.

Second question: Don't you agree that today's V8s (regardless of maker) are brim full of slick technology? Not dumb.

@papa
It’s over for the Ford 6.2 because there is a new gas engine for HD trucks coming. As an owner of the 6.2, kinda sad so I hope the new motor will be better...

What’s your criteria to say it’s an evolution of the DT??
6 cylinders??? Posted by: Grnzel | Nov 26, 2018

close.

Previous Ford (or Ford-sourced) six cylinder engines were either a

1. vintage straight six
2. cast-iron block/heads (Vulcan)
3. Push-rod (Cologne)
4. Essex 3.8 or Essex 4.2 iron block alloy heads
5. Porsche derived 3.0 DOHC. Alloy block & heads

Or they were a Duratec of some kind or another. 60 degree DOHC. It's just a name Ford used for a family of engines, they even called the Porsche engine Duratec

@ PapaJoke

Plant closures in Canada are more about dropping locations that were devoted to small car lines, and/or the final assembly of GM's pickups from Ft Wayne plant, which is probably near capacity.


Posted by: papajim | Nov 26, 2018 5:55:42 AM

The XTS and Impala ( and Regal ) are what Oshawa made you bonehead.

Far from small cars

@ PapaJoke

do you really think that GM makes vacuum pumps? Doubt it. Most likely that brake components for modern cars (pads, master cylinders, wheel cylinders, brake lines, calipers) are made by third parties who specialize in brakes.


Posted by: papajim | Nov 26, 2018 8:20:36 AM

Read up moron

“ NHTSA says it already knows of nine crashes ad two injuries related to the issue in these GM trucks. The power brake vacuum pump in these models can degrade over time and eventually make it difficult to stop according to NHTSA. “

TNTGMC sounds like he's a little "tender back there" today. His boyfriend must have forgotten the KY again.

Papajim was caught making asinine comments with no facts....

And now look at his childish rebuttal.

Since Brawndo is such a genius, please tell us "the facts," sir

You falsely claimed the Canadian plant produced small cars

Your other falsehood was the GM brakes v

I couldn’t wait for Brawndo to post. Therefore I took it upon myself

May I correctly presume that Brawndo is one of your multiple IDs?

And the stupidity in claiming the 2.7EB is a Duratec

Yes PapaJoke...3 moronically backed comments right here from you



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