Jump to content

4banger

Member
  • Posts

    122
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

Profile Information

  • Name
    4banger
  • Location
    Alberta Eh
  • Drives
    High Output Long Stroke Big Block Boosted Four Banger

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

4banger's Achievements

Enthusiast

Enthusiast (4/11)

38

Reputation

  1. what a combo to put together the 2.7 h.o. in the zr2, I typically won't actually go places where 4lo and lockers are required, I tend to be on foot at that point, so if you won't use those things either and keep it smart with forestry roads, hunting/fishing, game recovery etc. then the Silverado's extra space, super quiet and awesome ride is sure winning me back from the mid-size to full-size segment...that zr2 would be sweet on some 255 80r17's and likely every bit as efficient as it's bigger brother on economy, the colorado/canyon lineup just got so much more appealing now with one of the best 21st century motors in it, sure wish they would bring back manuals though, I'd be in heaven if mine had a 6 spd without rev hang or hydraulic clutch
  2. No difference to me. I’m a couple thousand kms on them and so pleased with the set up.
  3. what's the story on these dash pads? not a fan of the glare/reflection I'm getting off the windshield/dash on my 22 refresh custom plastic dash, it's less than the 22 gmc full load leather wrapped dash rental I had that they put some shiny coating (likely armorall)
  4. just to clarify the obvious, it wasn't the auto start stop? you had to actually push the button and restart it?
  5. ya I was a chevy guy for a long time, last one was 2013 (5.3 6spd) that kept for a year before going to the ram pentastar which I loved but a red light runner took the nose off at the 5 year mark pushing us into the gladiator manual so the kids could learn on the stick (one down and one to go but may sell before the second one gets learners here in December) but was probably in chevy the most of my life and definitely for the 20 years prior to 2013 (mostly 3/4 ton manuals with the 5.7 but a couple half tons in there too), touch wood, things are looking good so far
  6. ya I drank the koolaid, it is a unicorn freedom machine like no other and it's been so much fun with the stick, exhaust/intake, gears etc. that I sold the motorbike...and it did it all, wildly versatile and fun machine, sadly the new pentastars are not as good as the older ones, came out of the gate throwing misfire codes (right bank), others were trying to chase them down and having motors tore apart, new cams etc. and drive back off the lot throwing same codes again, so I didn't follow suit and waited, not to mention my dealer didn't seem very interested in chasing it down either, then it started eating coolant or may have been from the start, again they didn't want to chase it down, so we kept going, needed coolant added twice....2 years and 5 months and 78,000 kms it finally couldn't go down the highway, started losing power, and cylinders at times about 2 year mark, but on last camping trip in may it finally could only limp itself to highway for tow to nearest dealer...new motor, puking oil back up towards intake, they said motor dusted and sticking me with bill which this saga will continue as I just got it back as I've got lots of data and had been commenting on the misfire codes from day 1, but that's their knee jerk reaction to warranty these days, I digress, if it had the pentastar from my 2014 ram I'm sure I wouldn't even be on this forum, would keep rocking the jeep truck until it gave out, now that it gave out so soon and has new motor it's probably going to be rock solid but I'll be leaving the brand for how they are choosing to handle it...it will cost them so much more than that motor once we're done on the forums and social media, they still have a chance though, will start up with jeep cares soon and see if they want to back the dealer and district warranty reps play? where was the hurricane with this one eh? lol, or slap this 2.7t into it? of course then it wouldn't get a manual transmission perhaps but maybe with the jeep it would happen? anyway, great truck, bad motor, thanks for the manual trans fca, that's all you get from me now back to the regularly scheduled program then
  7. best in class performance? I don't get this, don't you have your own requirements/needs? most of what's offered today can easily exceed most of our requirements and needs...and the following year a competitor will offer the next 'best in class' performance engine so you'll be upgrading trucks every year trying to keep up...makes no sense to not choose what YOU need I'd love to know what competitor to the new Colorado's has the 'best in class performance' motor, do tell please. You can't comment yet on what the low tune 2.7t will do economy wise, it may very well have best in class economy when all is revealed, being able to go down to half that displacement with low boost will make it very dynamic in range and it may also end up being the reliability champ also...just like under worked big blocks used to be known to run forever. How could you every buy a vehicle if you're waiting for them to come out the door with 20 year histories and reputations? Super unrealistic, so you do what most of us do, learn how to predict the future based on what's being offered to all we've learned over time. I already can tell you from moving my full size brick around with the 2.7 h.o. that I've never seen economy like that, and now I'm lifted 4" and I'm still getting better than mid size v6 suv economy, empty city and highway, it's like the lift was unaffected due to all that torque low available from the boost (above atmospheric air fuel mixture efficiency) and I half expected this to be the case and here it is proving true. So far the only time it's sucked v8 economy was towing as that's the only time I've asked v8 power from it. You can no longer compare these engines just based on max displacement...they are so variable now in displacements, boost is a constant variable that will ramp to ask, then valve trains that can go low to high lift. So you have a few different aspects in engines now that ramp to task it's like having 3 engines in 1. So you may need to adapt your comparison strategies to account for how dynamic and flexible these engines are now, the turbos offer more of this range, naturally aspirated can only go so far. Yes they can ramp up to v8 power and of course they will suck v8 gas to do it, but they can also ramp down to economy tiny displacement light boost engines for the majority of time. It's a whole new world in these 21st century engines. Also, the hurricane inline 6 should be a nice one, standard output 400 hp and 450 ft/lbs torque, then the high out put around 500 and 475...trade offs as you say, one will last longer than the other and get better economy. But both will do all the work any half ton would ever require with these 21st century power levels. Inline 6 with 2 turbos not as truck like simple as the inline 4 long stroke big turbo...being inline 6 at 3.0 liter something tells me it's going to be a short stroke motor and more car like power delivery seeing as hp/torque numbers are so close to one another, I'll take the long stroke big jug 2.7t from gm all day long over that one as well, hopefully they have some cylinder shut down abilities for economy running and light loads to compete. Ford wouldn't make my list at all with it's v6 tt power plants. And gosh is dodge/fca ever late to the party here with that hurricane, now they will need a few years to prove no flies on the new motor...gm absolutely saw the future better than the other 2 here imo by creating the closest formula to one of the most legendary 4 cylinder engines around (4bt cummins). They have a few years under their belt now with the least amount of flies in all the half ton motors available it appears...it's looking like another legend in the making and gm is good at bringing legends to the table in motor land. Having said all that...and trying to teach the old dog new tricks ;)....what are your truck needs? What do you tow, how many people do you have to move, what activities do you do? have you got a list of minimal requirements? Maybe that's the approach to take rather than trying to figure out if a manufacturer can tweak your nipples most perfectly one year only to have them tweaked even harder by another manufacturer the next year? Your weighting of certain things seems out of whack...you need to make some lists with better weighting of priorities perhaps?
  8. well comparing the n/a 2.5 to the 2.7t was like comparing a Honda Civic to an Acura TL, should at least compare things in the same league, even though you're making 36%+ more power potential with the low tune 2.7t putting it in a totally different league than the 2.5...being able to run on 2 cylinders with variable boost flexibility makes the 2.7t a 1.35 liter engine at times of low power needs with lots of torque down low allowing 2 cylinders to work more than one would think, so I will disagree that the low tune 2.7t can't beat the n/a 2.5 on economy while being in a completely different league for work potential, it is more dynamic, more flexible, 1.35 liter on lower boost to essentially n/a 3.5 v6 power output levels, I'm sure what I just said will bear true once the low tune 2.7t hits the market and we see some economy reports on these running empty I haven't seen what you tow, what do you tow? I know my 3000 lb home built cargo conversion adventure pod would easily be pulled by the low tune 2.7t. It's got 20 ft/lbs more torque than my gladiator pentastar at my elevation which gets it around just fine and it would have that at lower rpm to boot, the pentastar likes its revs, I would take the low tune 2.7t over a n/a v6 everyday of the week and twice on sundays totally agree the perfect truck doesn't exist, I got pretty close with mine but perfect would be a 6 speed manual transmission, fairly heavy flywheel, a reasonably stout non-hydraulic clutch, and NO freaking rev hang, otherwise they nailed it lol, so I live with a damn slush box again...the motor though = half ton perfection, and in 390 ft/lb trim in a Colorado z71 would do everything equally in the smaller package as well, enjoying the space/comfort of the 6 seater full size though, so can't say I'd even consider the Colorado with the Silverado options and h.o. turbo's in basic trims, if I go back to mid size it would be to the gm 2.7t, the ford 2.3 single turbo inline 4 would be a fine choice but you can scratch any v6 twin turbo off my lists when inline single turbos are available, I'm after truck engines not car engines also, I almost went the zr2 2.8 diesel route when I got my 2020 gladiator, the manual transmission got that sale for fca, plus I'd have been off warranty immediately with the diesel, I would have had to go full delete, tow tune, aux. fuel tank and then live with the headaches I get from diesel exhaust fumes, it's all working out, the gm 2.7t is a far better choice than any diesel for anything I do as an outdoorsy dad with a single vehicle do all versatility approach, anyone looking for a solid gladiator manual on 37's with 4.88 axles? will be for sale soon, just gotta clean it up, the 2.7t stays
  9. found it stunning you'd think a N/A 2.5 would even remotely compare to the boosted 2.7 at any level, rule of thumb is when you boost you need half the displacement for similar power level of N/A...so there's that, and oddly here you are mad that you can't get higher power in the lower trim level mid size truck tells me you wouldn't consider the 2.5 wheezer anyway...did you start into the cocktails a little early today? anyway, 2.5 rated at sea level at 200 hp at 6300 rpm and 191 ft/lbs at 4400 rpm, the low tune 2.7t at 237 hp and 259 ft/lbs...if like the other tunes will be mid 5000's rpm peak hp and 3000 rpm peak torque with gobs of it from 1500-4000, so at sea level alone there's 46 more hp and 68 ft/lbs more torque and at much lower rpms (36% more torque is a different level)...where I live at 4000' that 2.5 reduces down to 177 hp and 169 ft/lbs...for a gap of 60 hp and 82 ft/lbs(43% diff.)...again...at much lower rpm turbos completely unaffected by elevation, turbo power delivery down low effortless grunt vs car like high rpm delivery, the 2.7t low tune will have the flexibility to beat the 2.5 on light load economy(2 cylinder mode, low boost pressure) and the ability to work every bit as well as any modern n/a 3.5 v6...something the 2.5 could never do so it lacks versatility only boosted motors can bring to the plate, and knowing that low tune and everything attached to it can handle significantly more loads...will last a long time and have very little for problems, something most guys looking for basic strip down trucks and low total cost of ownership would be ecstatic about so what is your perfect truck then? you're saying it doesn't exist? cab and drive config, power and economy expectations, other 'truck' features that you require?
  10. so the 2.7t built as a long stroke with a diesel bottom end and can handle cylinder pressures of 22 psi boost on gasoline passing the same durability testing as the v8's and can run on 2 cylinders with gobs of torque at 1500 rpm to sip fuel but ramp up to big league N/A v8 power when asked....detuned and boost lowered for economy doesn't scream longevity master and low total cost of ownership to you then? not sure what you're looking for but between the Colorado and Silverado options if it's not there then you're simply not going to be happy at all, with anything in life I suspect, don't like the choice in Colorado? get the Silverado, base engine now is 430 ft/lbs and sorry on the 2.8 diesel, dropping is was brilliant move, the only way to do them properly is full delete and tow tune, but good luck with all the hassles and legality issues, sadly they've made diesels very unappealing to a great many gear heads due to the emissions crap, the gm 2.7t is essentially the closest thing you'll ever see to a modern 4bt cummins powered by gas, regardless of tune...the gm 2.7t is a real truck guys wet dream when you remove all the subjective nonsense interesting comment about turbo v6 ranger 'blowing the doors' off...who buys mid size trucks for drag racing again? I dunno about you but I see a ton of old guys running around in old ford rangers, old Toyota 2wd's, and also auto parts trucks etc. and if I were a fleet buyer in need of mid size trucks the low tune would be first pick, thing should be in a different league of durability and economy for gas and as stated, 259 ft/lbs of torque at low rpm will motivate the truck just fine, retired guys all about the lowest total cost of ownership...so nice to see an option that makes perfect sense for that and ya I disagree that the low tune 2.7t won't be a stud on fuel economy and it will absolutely blow the doors off the N/A 2.5 in ability to work as well, they won't even be in the same league, throw some elevation at it and the gaps would just grow and grow, the low tune would pull my 3000 lb trailer just fine, the h.o. I now own pulls it like a sports truck, overkill for my trailering needs really, I was pulling it with a pentastar ram and then pentastar gladiator and the low tune turbo at my elevation would have 20 ft/lbs more torque and it would have it much lower rpm, it would be preferred to the pentastar v6 where I live, will not go back to N/A engines knowing what I know now lastly what is your ask of a truck? if it's not a full-size 2019+ new gm why did you come to this forum and thread to vent? good luck finding your base mid-size with the baddest motor lol, you don't appear to live in the real world, you can get it in the 1500 gm's though and you can get in in a reg cab shorty to boot, good luck finding that in the mid size segment
  11. well it's not a small motor as a 2.7 four banger may sound, it will be interesting to see what they can stuff it in, they got it into a caddy so could make it's way around wherever the v6's fit, now the Colorado's too replacing the v6 there, I'm sure that was part of the overall plan, it weighs about the same as the 3.5 v6's out there ~375 lbs and seems to fit in those same engine bays as well, gm has a winner on their hands with this motor, could see it like the Chrysler pentastar...stuffed in everything lol
  12. it's a good thing we drive Silverado's, I hear the argument on the low power in the work truck colorado's, I've also see the fleet, parts, run around truck argument as well where they mostly get sold to do and good to keep it from being a hotrod...likely that low tune is going to get economy similar to the 3.0 diesels while still having respectable power, 237 hp & 259 ft/lbs at any elevation is pretty sweet, example; city I live in is 4000' and my Jeep Gladiator rated at 285 hp & 269 ft/lbs but has 252 hp and 238 ft/lbs here, so the jeep would have about 15 more hp but 21 ft/lbs less torque, basically a wash, and something tells me the longevity of that base tune motor will also be next level, I'd guess they aren't giving it the full 22 psi, so maybe it's more like 12-14 psi (ford ecoboosts around 18 from recollection) and maybe the 390 ft/lb tune is getting 18-20 psi? just gotta step up to a z71 to get the 390 ft/lbs tune which should fit a lot of needs and not be too Lincoln, I'm sure that will feel every bit as strong as the 430 ft/lbs in the Silverado, heck that's within 10-20 ft/lbs of the gen 1 cummins torque with nearly double the hp, I think it's great to see those options, also I think if getting the kids a base first truck the low tune makes lots of sense for economy and keeping it from being too fast for a light duty daily where economy and longevity are top priorities I'd be looking awful hard at that low tune model, it could be a total cost of ownership king, not just in truck land but auto land period, a retired guy's wet dream perhaps?, especially appealing if one didn't have a trailering need preferring naturally aspirated v8 power levels
  13. I went a different way around it, got the custom instead as things already color matched, then did a boss plus treatment myself At least there's a visual of what it may look like if you color match.
  14. it was going to be on my custom trail boss order that I cancelled, so the answer is yes, the z's and the Tb's have the 2 speed transfer case
  15. awesome news, doesn't appear to be any flies on it so far also agree, I'm at nearly 5000 kms on my 22 h.o. and in love with this motor, smiles per miles are pretty good I had an epiphany the other day about it and how to describe it to others... If the 5.3 and the 3.0 had a baby this would be it, it's a perfect blend of the performance and economy of both those motors, while weighing a lot less than either and at the low end of maintenance costs. Would you rather 8 666cc naturally aspirated short stroke cylinders that lose 3% power every 1000' elevation or 4 680cc boosted to 22 psi long stroke cylinders that lose no power at elevation? One of these things is more 'trucky' than the other. It's definitely a 21st century option and the easy choice over the 5.3 now imo. Hard to believe it's the new base motor, I would have payed a couple k to option it over the 5.3. we're definitely going to see how it lasts here in Alberta with a hunting/fishing/camping family and some working remote miles as well
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.