F-150stxguy

So the HO 2.7 would technically be the second generation? Do you think a lot of companies will use this for fleet? I wish there was more data on this power train. I’ll be looking to buy this upcoming spring. So far I haven’t read about any glaring issues. But this engine must be built pretty damn stout to handle all that pressure, on the flip side it’s loaded with up to date technology that gives me pause, like the DFM and sliding cam. GM seems to have their priorities and funding into electric……do you think they invested enough research and development on this mill as compared to Ford like they do their ecoboost? Ford went all in back in 2010/11, but this is gm’s what, second boosted application in recent years? I wish there was more data.

I’m also interested in a 2wd regular cab. It’s a toss up now between Ford’s base 3.3. Or Chevy’s 2.7. I know if I stay out of the turbo I’ll likely outperform expected mpg with the 2.7. I always beat epa mpg estimates. A couple things Ford has going for it is dual injection and the 10 speed transmission. I’ve heard a lot of bad stuff about the 8speed. I know that I’ll love the torque of the turbo though. decisions decisions.

That is incredible mileage for your particular configuration. Hell I would be happy with that.

Absolutely would like to read feedback from people who have that configuration. The only thing I demand it has is the automatic locker. From what I read a lot of GM trucks come with it. Im not expecting miracles because of the speed limit here, but when I move back north I’m sure I could get at least 26 lifetime mileage. Before I moved down here my 4x4 crew cab 2.7 F150 was sitting at 24.7 lifetime with around 20,000 miles. It’s amazing the jump in mileage when you slow down a little in a brick lol. How are you liking yours? Any issues or concerns yet?

This is a great thread to read. I’ve caught up a few pages. I still have my older car I’m driving around and still haven’t pulled the trigger on the new 2.7 Chevy regular cab. I’ve been looking on the local lot but I doubt I’ll see one and probably have to custom order. I have a hard time thinking I would be comfortable running 87 octane in the dead of summer in south west Texas. It regularly gets above 100 here in the summer. Granted, my truck will probably be living in Maine in a few years, I could see getting away with it up there in God’s country. Anyhow, I would probably run 87 in winter and 89 in summer. Id be very happy with some of the gas mileage you guys are reporting. I would be very interested in seeing what a 2wd regular cab could eek out. About a month back I saw a bare bones Ford regular cab, 2wd with the 3.3 naturally aspirated 6 at the dealer. It was marked up a little but nothing extreme. I drove by the following day the ****ing thing was gone lol. What a crazy market we are in. I remember a few years ago up north I saw an F150 4x4 with the 3.5 naturally aspirated 6 sit on a dealers lot for a whole damn year, and the price was listed at 26,000. I’d jump on that right now.

I know down here in the OIL FIELDS, most working trucks are Ford, and many many companies and people will tell you straight up the F150-450 hold up better than the rest, next would be GM trucks. Most companies here put their money where their mouth is. I myself am buying a Silverado regular cab 2wd because of gas and commuting, and I am interested in the L3B, but I don’t see how anyone can bash Ford or GM. They’re pretty close in my opinion. Both have their fair share of recalls, duds, problems etc. but if you get a good one in either brand it’ll go many thousands of miles with minimal repairs.

Thanks. Hopefully this is inherently more reliable than its OHV AFM/DFM counter parts. The only concern I have is my commute would almost be 50 miles of very little stopping at 55mph, I could be on cruise almost the whole way. Seems like it would be prime territory for running in less cylinders. While I bet I would get amazing mpg, I would be worried about day after day and week after week of running on less cylinders. Maybe I would just need to make it a habit of stepping on it once in awhile lol.

Anyone know how the AFM operates on these engines as opposed to the 5.3 or 6.2? I’m guessing it’s pretty different considering this is an OHC. Also, can the AFM be disabled if I use tow-haul mode?

Absolutely. Is the 2022 model not yet available for GM? I’m used to Ford’s model year scheduling, so I’m not sure if GM does it differently. When I try to build the 2022 Chevrolet, it doesn’t let me option the regular cab with the standard bed (only long bed), and I was under the impression that for the 2022 model year, they were bringing back the standard bed for regular cab. For sure, in addition to the regular bed, I would love the increase in torque from the HO. And since I’m getting possibly the lightest version of truck, that thing will move with authority but also give me great mpg on my long 55mph commutes. I bet I can see 26-28 consistently if I set cruise.

supposedly 2022 comes with this configuration, but it doesn’t let me build it on the GM website. Maybe the dealer will have to do it or the website isn’t totally up to date. This is also the configuration I’m most interested in.

Please do. I would be very interested to see if you notice a difference. Hey, I’m not gonna complain if I can run 87 for the life of the motor without the worry of LSPI or pinging on 87 lol. It would save me a lot of money over the years with my long commutes to work. My home is in Appalachia. We don’t have mountains here, (I’ve never called them mountains), flat landers usually do, but we do have sudden steep, curvy, grades of hills that I haven’t really seen anywhere else in the country, including the Rockies or Ozarks. The valley is semi flat until you go up my hill to the house, then it’s just a sudden straight up climb with quite a few curves. That’s why I love boosted applications. Winter time can get sketchy, especially coming down. I get familiar with redline with naturally aspirated engines, especially with a load lol. Now you guys have real mountains. And some pretty Monstrous grades. I can see why you would love this engine. I’m nowhere near the elevation as you.

Can the L3b take advantage of higher octane? I know in my F150 I saw higher mpg, not substantial, but it was there. And I could absolutely tell the difference in how it operated on 91/93 compared to 87. I live on top of a 2000 ft hill and it’s a steep climb all the way to my driveway. Not so much worried about winter, but when it gets hot and humid out. Wonder if I would be better running 89 as opposed to 87?

Exactly. I really don’t understand the concept of them using the 10 speed on every other engine except this one. The only thing I can brainstorm is that the combination hasn’t been tested enough together? Ford did the same thing with their base 3.3 for a few years. It wasn’t until recently it was mated to the 10 speed. If I hear any rumors of the 10 speed coming next year I will for sure wait.

Yeah I was reading about that a little bit ago. Pretty impressive engine. I was impressed when it was first introduced, I was just waiting to hear what the beta testers have to say. There doesn’t seem to be a lot of issues popping up. I should be okay. Ford’s 2.7 is a documented 400,000 mile motor (at least) or taken care of. I only hope so for the l3b.

I think I’m going to order a 2.7 come may or June in a single cab 2wd. It should get solid mpg and have some fun to it too. One thing is though, I’ll be pissed if they introduce the 10 speed combo next year. Maybe I should hold off one more year? Any long term owners here? How are you liking it ?

Well it doesn’t even let me build a WT regular cab on the Chevrolet website for the 2022. Anyway, I’m trying to decide between the regular cab Chevrolet or the regular cab F150. Both would be 2wd. The F150 allows me to build a regular cab, normal bed with the benefit of 3.73 and elocker. The Silverado doesn’t offer the elocker. The 3.3 is what I would get, it’s a pretty reliable engine from all accounts. Then again, the 2.7 turbo would allow for much more power in base configuration, my only issue is, it hasn’t been out in the wild for long. The 2.7 is what I would prefer. I’m moving back home and commute to work and back would be at least 100 miles round trip. Both would offer solid MPG in that configuration, but I need reliability.

I would agree with Karnut. ****ing around on two lane 75+ mph roads in Texas is a literal death sentence. There’s been many instances where cars are doing 80-85, and little shoulder. Especially in West Texas. There’s been many instances coming from Wichita falls to far west Texas where I’ve had to pass a semi on one of those roads, and before you know it there’s another car in the distance barreling your way. Can’t just lolligag.

Definitely. I drive the same way pretty much. Back when I was home in the North East, and driving on county roads with little stop signs on the way to work, I had got my ecoboost up to over 24 mpg lifetime. Then when I moved to Texas that was destroyed. It’s amazing what air resistance and a brick will do to gas mileage. By the time I got rid of my truck the average gas mileage was dropping, with the In city driving and merging onto freeways and then the two lane roads. The two lane roads down here are a ******. Hardly no shoulder and 75 mph. People usually go 80 at least. When I’m on the freeway I usually stay in the right hand lane, ha!

This thread and many like it are why I want to stay with OHC. I know I can have phasers and chain stretch problems, but damn, not to the tune of 4 k!! That’s ridiculous.

thats incredible gas mileage. I wouldn’t be mad at that! I’ve always heard great things about the 4.3 as well. Honestly, if it were an option I would have considered it.

In all honesty I would be happy with the 4.3 too if they still offered it. I mean I’d be happy with the 5.3 or even the 6.2 but that’s over kill for me. It’s going to be a daily driver, long distance travel vehicle while hauling occasionally and towing once in awhile. The 2.7 definitely seems like a good engine and perfect for the lighter Silverado trucks. im almost positive I can get better than 23.7 lifetime average in GM’s 2.7 than I got in my F150. The regular box single cab will definitely come in grey, get aluminum wheels, rear wheel well liners and maybe at a latter date, suspension upgrades. I’ll have fun using it for work and using it as a faux little rally truck. Less maintenance too without the 4x4. And I still get the locking rear as I understand it, unless GM changes it for 2022. I’ll definitely have to custom order, but I think this is my next ride.

This is the kind of ride I would be interested in with the revamped 2.7. As long as it comes with an USB plug and cruise control. I would even opt for the vinyl. In 2wd I’m sure it would be a pretty decently light package and get a smidge better gas mileage.

That is incredible mileage. I imagine range would be great too. Do you run 91 octane or 87?

Thanks Custom. I’ve been trying to read all I can on the engine.

I will say I wish I drove an Ecoboost before pulling the trigger on the Silverado, but I was just worried about reliability (Found On Road Dead). How do the F150 2.7 and 3.5 compare to the GM 2.7? Can't really find much on youtube about how they drive. —- Jonathan Akers —————————————————————- I just came from a 2.7 ecoboost. The engine was the best part of the whole truck. It’s also Ford’s most reliable engine most likely. It’s incredibly stout. There’s documentation on a Ford forum of a man who travels emergency delivery across the eastern half of the United States who has driven an early 2015 2.7 ecoboost to around 450,000 miles with oil changed and filter changed. And a sensor I believe. Stock turbo. Sometime did happen mechanically at the end and he did trade the truck in for a newer one, but I don’t think it was turbo related. It’s also Ford’s most sold engine in the F150 line up and I’ve seen far far fewer problems as compared to the 5.0 and 3.5 on any type of community board. It’s proof that If the block and internals are built right from the ground up to be forced induction, it can have the same longevity as an 8 cylinder, non forced induction. Thermal cycles and friction are what do internal combustion engines in, and Ford has skimped in that area with their 3.5 ecoboost. Look at the Tundra’s 3.5 twin turbo…….if everything is engineered and up to par, I’d bet on average that engine will last even longer than Ford’s 3.5 ecoboost. They DIDNT skimp on the engine cooling. This is what interests me about the GM 2.7. Inline engine with only one turbo. And forged internals with a stout block and iron liners. The cooling and thermal system seems to be there to make this a long lasting engine.