John813

At end of day if you aren't happy with the truck, or have that lingering thought of durability, then evaluate the cost to move on and see if it's worth it. Rams still have AFM and their lifters have durability issues but seem to fail later on compared to your mileage. TBD on their new 3.0L TT 6. I would avoid first year anything FCA engines. I've had 3 ecoboost vehicles and all 3 had issues, one was a defective head, cam phaser failure etc... My brothers Gen 2 Raptor had his cam phaser fail as well and there's been plently saying they failed a 2nd time. To be determined on if your new lifters it may last another 100k+ or 9k before they go out again. I've read some on forums/facebook groups that had no issues post one failure/some that never had failure going on 100k+ miles. It's a bad design imo. My plan of action is to delete the DFM completely with new parts and a tune once the powertrain expires. I knew going into this truck the lifters were a potential weak point.

Meh, I'm going TRX or Raptor all day at that price point.

At the ford dealer I used to go to they had a handful of techs retire/switch dealers and the new techs were absolutely useless. A common issue like the IWE line going bad on my F-150(warranty) was something they couldn't figure out. Wasn't until I traded it in when the dealer fixed it, as it probably tried to engage 4x4 during a test drive and sounded like a tin can rattling on a wheel spoke

The only thing I wish Chevy did differently with the 2.7L HO was pair it to the 10 speed. Not sure why they still have the 8 speed transmission around. Ford has the 2.7, 3.5 SO & HO, and 5.0 all hooked up to the 10 speed trans in the F-150's.

IIRC it the comparisons for the 4.3L and 5.3L 6 speed trucks. The 5.3 8 speed trucks got 1 MPG improvement. The 6.2 10 speed 19 trucks got 1 MPG improvement in the city, but combined was the same. How, why? I dunno.

I wish, but it would be in the highest trim trucks with insane starting prices. One thing if they have the same MSRP as a TRX(78k) but I doubt it would be that cheap.

FWIW last fillup my truck showed 17.9 MPG on trip 1 and I filled up ~18.5 gallons. 327 miles. ~17.68 hand calc mpg. Close enough for me.

Turbos and less cylinders is the future for ICE, with some hybrid tech at some point this decade IMO before the full switch to EV. With maybe Chevy maybe going straight to EV skipping the hybrid tech Ford beat everyone to the V6TT party and is one step ahead with the powerboost. Although through my real world testing there is no real MPG savings between a 5.7L Hemi Wagoneer vs a 3.5L Expedition with close to the same gear ratio (3.21 8 speed Jeep vs 3.31 10 speed ford). 17.3MPG vs 17.6MPG The only ecoboost full size I saw noticeable MPG improvement from was the 2.7LTT, which is a very good engine. Honestly would have zero complaints using it as a DD. Got over 23mpg driving a 2.7LTT 5 years ago as a 2 month loaner lol. No doubt in my mind Chevy will release a 3.XLTT engine that will kill off the 5.3L and possibly the 6.2 shortly after in a few years. Ford still has the 5.0, which has yet to get much R&D compared to the ecoboost in the trucks. Seems like Ram has rung the death bells on the 5.7L in the 1500's with the Wagoneer going 3.0LTT in both lineups. But the wagoneer MPG barely moved going from the 5.7./6.4 to the equivalent 3.0 engines, but they'll get boatloads of more torque.

Only use 93.

That's BS and I hate that most dealers have no loaners now due to the shortage in chips/supply of cars. Did they at least say how long a "diagnosis" would take? Like they would get on it right away or in a week.

Well, that's annoying. They replaced all the components and it's acting up. Makes me wonder if it went bad that fast or install error?

I drive in L9 and sport mode. Z71 package with 3.23 gears South Florida fwiw so flat roads and low DA. Highway at 78-80 I get 18-20 mpg depending on wind. My commute is 25 miles highway 3 miles city during the week. My overall average is 17.X MPG(trip 2 is lifetime). I take off aggressively in city driving. One tank I had 50/50 city/highway and it was 16.2 mpg-with me once again taking off quickly and having a boral exhaust installed. Only run 93. 99% sure when I bought the truck the dealer put in 87. Definitely felt like the truck was pulling timing/down on power. Once I got 2 half tank fillups it was back to feeling quick for a truck.

For me, one thing for it to possibly go out once. I had a 6.4L Hemi go out at 72k miles on one side and it was fine till I sold it with over 100k miles. But, I would admit I would lose the love for the truck if the lifters would fail early and often. Sort of wish they could just do a delete if it failed but I know GM won't do that. Was hoping that it was just a bad batch from 2020- early 21 for the trucks that failed early on but the your truck build date is fairly recent.

Has anyone had a second failure of the replaced parts? Would be something to replace lifters every 6k miles, for a ridiculous example.

Sure, the 2.7L TT only makes 30 less torque than the 6.2L but IMO the 6.2L could be tweaked to get close to 500 torque by GM easily. It may knock down the MPG by 0.5 so they won't do it. I've had a few ecoboost trucks. They are peppy and easy to tune, but also had the most issues out of those engines compared to DOHC or OHV V8 engines. One of the driving factors for me buying a 22 Silveradonew was that I was wondering when Chevy may drop the 6.2L in favor of a v6TT. I know that was a reason for me to buy the wife a 22 Wagoneer with the 5.7L over the 23 with the 3.0L TT.