4banger

Ok, so we have couple things to update on. 1. they swung and missed on my oil leak with that front cover business. Put some miles on and did a trip with trailer let em check again and goes back in Friday for new oil pan and gasket as attempt #2 to figure out the oil leak. I mentioned the poly vs aluminum oil pan but looks like same type going back on. Shrug. 2. On the trip coming home with my little trailer threw codes climbing a good hill and lost power, could still maintain a little above 60 mph but like lost boost as engine had to roll much higher rpms near or at redline on anything less than flats. So credit she got me home but have new one. So they pulled codes when back and apparently there’s a bulletin and gm aware of issue but no apparent fix yet. Mass air flow related codes. After it was at home and sat for days the next start the engine light was out. So feels like normal again but just a bit of back and forth to dealer without trailer so can’t really tell. Had anyone else heard about this yet? Can anyone verify this bulletin? just under 90,000 kms now so just under 56,000 miles starting my 3/4 ton gas v8 research now lol

Ok, just got the call, 'front engine cover' is what appears to be leaking, bunch of parts/seals ordered, will be a few weeks, once that's done they can then confirm if anything else like oil pan. Since it's slow leak will be driving it until parts are in one of which is direct from usa which is the culprit to making this a few weeks away. Will take it from there and update when it's done.

Well I climbed over the engine couldn't see anything suspect, then got under front end and still nothing but peering back I could see shine off my new oil filter, so then went in under passenger side to oil filter and definitely some seepage going on that side and what appears to be below block where anything wet can be found and only one side of the oil pan looks like it gets any, and yet nothing hits the ground, a drop forming on the oil filter. And now I'm recalling my service guys said sometime ago they noticed oil pan sweating and would keep an eye on it over time, I do have the refresh power but still the older black plastic oil pan and recall hearing newer ones were coming with aluminum oil pans, so here's hoping that's what the issue is. I can't see anything higher up from this quick look at things. Will update when I know more on Thursday.

Ok boys, just went in for service and tires at 85,786 kms (53,316 miles) and tech noticed 'oil leak passenger side of engine'. I remember reading from about page 100 onward so betting it's one of these things. It goes back in Thursday for diagnosis and fix, under factory powertrain warranty to 100,000km, I do have extended to 160,000 kms (with deductible) but we're still on factory warranty. I'll update of course to add to the collective database. I just did a round trip for work that was 2516 kms or 1564 miles and average economy was 11.6 l/100km (20.3 mpg) so consistent with new (4" lift, no chin spoiler, 33x10's, 900 lbs over stock with fuel tank/tools/gear), much of that trip off pavement roads into remote mine site end of road north type trip), haven't noticed oil consumption between 5000 km oil changes but haven't really checked either and nothing is on the ground under truck when parked so must just be some visible oil the tech saw but not a big enough issue to be noticed by ground or 5000 km service intervals. I run Petro-Canada 87 octane (feels happy and quick), live at 4000' and play a lot between 2500' and 5000', and I pull a 3000 lb trailer primarily, especially since about the 50-60,000 km mark when I added a commuter vehicle, except the odd long work trip I'll take this truck without trailer for it's hwy comfort over the commuter. Any guesses to what this issue will be? Maybe we can offer a prize to the correct guess? A jr g-man badge maybe?

That was a good post. Prolly look into liability and legality stuff first! also on my light trailer with dual axle, brakes on all 4 wheels, 3000 or 3500 lb torsion axles, and brake controller keeps things smooth at left lane gtfoh speeds and stoppy like I’m empty not towing too, so just like driving an extra long empty truck, definitely set up for ‘sport towing’, if that’s even a thing? I have contemplated putting a ‘This trailer pulled by a 4-cyl...Try to keep up.’ Decal on back door of trailer.

Rule of thumb for me for comfortable towing is half the door rating. ‘Comfortable’ to me is stay with traffic, have some ability to pass. Whenever I’ve towed near limit it’s just not comfortable and feels like truck won’t hold up for continued duty with those Max loads. I read this and immediately thought 2500 or up, heavier suspension and running gear and transmissions etc, heavy towing and half tons don’t really go together. Not interested in being under speed limits or struggling so my comfort levels aren’t same as everyone’s, I stay loaded fully time and we go as many weekends as we can and live in it as we go. Even with towing the half rating I still have air bags to level properly for comfortable towing as my trailer is nose heavy and I carry weight in my box, 400 lb fuel tank just part of it. having said that we have no problem running empty no trailer speeds in any lane we want while hitched up so that’s my comfort level goals lol, we get out of town quick and can roll left lane speeds for extended periods to get out of town far enough to get past traffic and then slow down a bit for the long hauls from there

Can’t make v8 small enough for boost in half tons. Gotta be half the displacement because that’s what one turbo does for moving air, it’s like a whole bank of cylinders you can fit in your hand. I can live without the subjective attribute of sound of a v8, I was over my last 5.3 in a couple weeks, now a few years in on the turbo and smile and love the sound every day still. And it’s a stealth bomber for hunting and scouting and early morning campground polite etc. Game changer for this outdoorsman.

48,000 miles on my 22.5 2.7 HO 8spd and no issues at all. It tows almost full time now that I commute in a little maverick. 4” lift, and lots of 4wd required for primarily hunting and fishing duty. Around 900 lbs of fuel and tools and gear added to truck and low 3000 lb range on adventure built lifted alum cargo trailer.

Yes on adding 2 cylinders to the turbomax and slightly bigger turbo if needed. A manual option would be cool but 8-spd is plenty with the torque curve. Keep it long stroke, single turbo, inline. Light and simple. Just need transmission to handle the extra power. Which at 77.5hp/107.5 ft/lb per cylinder would be 465 hp and 645 ft/lbs and be the sport motor in half tons but a perfect base engine in the 3/4 and 1 tons. Boost is the future. A 6 cylinder turbomax with its 680cc jugs would be 4080cc (4.1 liter). Would need a stout transmission and running gear for that amount of torque. They nailed the output levels for the 2.7t and lighter running gear to suite half tons. That could make me waffle between motors. No NA motors in my future. Too heavy complex and loss of power at altitude. Keep the torque curve down low with long stroke big jugs.

Nice info, didn’t know about the 5 mains, but expected since it was designed as a boosted truck engine from the start. Just a gas powered diesel lol. They chose the turbo first then built the motor around it. Amazing 57mm dual volute is the equivalent of another bank of cylinders without the weight, added parts, and loss of power at elevation plus power down much lower for truck preference. And as engineers said, it can put down more axle torque in 1st gear than the old 8.1 big block 4spd did. Also, I have a problem with the Ford 2.7tt. 1. Two turbos, 2. Two banks of cylinders. 3. Square stroke. 4. Less main bearings lol. 5. It’s a multi platform design not just truck duty design. 6. It’s a Ford. kidding my commuter is a Ford maverick xl 4k tow 2.0 turbo, pulls my buddies 16’ crestliner fishing boat with ease for day trips and it’s basically a Subaru wrx baja, a rapid express sleeper and I love driving it too but not near the quiet relaxed Cadillac on the Hwy like the chev is

Expensive smiles depending on budget they may be more like grimaces lol had one for a few weeks, hauls ass and sucks gas, front end feels heavy and wallowee compared to light agile front end on the 4banger

Naturally aspirated engines lose 3% power per 1000’ elevation. Turbo motors 0.05% per 1000’. At around 5000’ the 2.7 has about 90 ft/lbs more torque at 1100 less rpm than the 5.3 and within about 5hp. Me (2.7 HO) and my hunting and fishing buddy (5.3 2014) have both and pull a few thousand lb cargo trailers set up for hunting and fishing. Sometimes we only take one rig and his comments when in mine are how quiet it is and more relaxed on hills. I usually take a few less liters on fill ups when travelling together also. 2.7 is basically the love child of the 3.0 and the 5.3. But no lifters, no heavier 10 spd as no need with the torque curve of turbo and no def fluid or emissions headaches that come with diesels. There are more wins for the turbo but those are just some key ones not to mention most reliable and lowest cost of total ownership of maybe all half ton motors period not just GM. Still smile every time I drive my truck at the effortless quiet low rpm power and when I wanna get in a hurry it’s impressive. My poor trailer does a lot of 75-80mph runs to get those lines soaking for the weekend lol and I couldn’t be happier with it. Would not go back to a na vehicle and not a diesel fan either although my trailer has two diesel heaters so I’m a fan of those. No emissions crap on those to worry about lol. I’d get over your aversion to boost and single turbo long stroke big jug inlines(cummins) as those are truck engines. The 5.3/6.2 are short stroke camaro engines. The 2.7 is the smartest choice period in half tons but especially so for higher elevation and actual truck work involved. Shots fired.

Well, we the people have been conditioned to love drama. And lots of v8 and diesel loving Americans have been salivating and creating drama around a 4 banger goes into a half ton lol...but it's been 5 years of nothing but winning as GM knew it could spell the end for their bread and butter segment. That's why it's one of only two they couldn't kill/seize in their torture testing. People were slow to realize and still a long ways to go that this is built as a gas powered diesel etc. as a long stroke truck engine. Anyway, it's nothing but drama, these things will be around a long time.

same here, my 22 refresh has been trouble free

saw a recall video for a 2023 batch of 2.7's mid-size and full size, defect in casting in the block, no online reports, guy goes from doom and gloom to rosy and back to doom and gloom, like most who try to find an issue with it...he wasn't well researched, someone can find and post here? hardest cylinder liners known to man and forged bottom end as the above link mentions etc. built like diesel...so he's like many who have been salivating for some sort of common 2.7 issue or common warranty item....poor buggers, it's been 5 years and they are still salivating for something....this block recall for free new engine had this guy just ecstatic to finally have some click bait on the 2.7 lol...anyway surely it will affect some the posters here so may as well post in the thread...found it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FvawXY9Who4

lol I drove some for work and my old man had a 91 srw 3500 4x stick with the banks power pack and 4:10's, camper, 4-horses to the mountains, those cummins will put you to sleep on the highway as good as anything, such a great highway sound...alrighty then, all I was trying to do was get all the perspective possible around 'value' in here and dispel any misinformation, as there's never a full picture around newer things, people as a larger whole move slow to the understandings

reasonable, remember though the puny inline-6 5.9 cummins 12v received a lot of the same love from the big block crowd, sure earned it's stripes though, because it's one heckuva formula for a truck engine something else you'll love then is the 4 can go down to 2 cylinders lol, much appreciated when idling around sites all day at -40 and you don't need gas for the week, when the rental hemi that was with me needed fuel every 2 days....I didn't know about that benefit until witnessed first hand, it's a smart option, that gets a lot of ignorant bashing because it's a 4-cylinder, when the gm engineers set out to design a new 'truck' engine around a turbo they let the formula and displacement land where it may, they didn't choose a displacement, the power levels they wanted for half ton platform chose the displacement for them not sure if it was in 2 cylinder mode or not but have to assume a bunch of it was, you have to throw in neutral and put park brake on to idle longer than 10 minutes but not a huge deal for those days, also anytime you wanna drop out of that mode and just run on all 4 just throw it in tow/haul mode, you also drop 8th gear out of the picture too from recollection anyway, clean sheet truck engine design based around the high tech dual volute turbo they wanted to use ended up being a long stroke big jug inline...they probably looked at 3.0 and 6 cylinders but would have been little short stroke and make too much hp not enough torque for 'truck' application... look at the combined work/speed of work (torque/hp) totals from all these gm half tones, 5.3 383+355 = 738, 3.0 460+277 = 737, 2.7 430+310 = 740....all three of them land within 0.4% of each other. That's no accident. So the 2.7 displacement is no accident...those are the power levels they want for majority of half ton platform, the 6.2 is the outlier and hot rod option...at least until about 4000' elevation. The turbo motors lose no noticeable power all over this continent. And yes the 3.0 may be a little higher now?, was just giving the comparison as of 2022 refresh timing. Both turbo motors can take more tunes down the road, they built them strong and future ready. Gotta market things incrementally and get you excited every few years for a few more ponies. it's not a 4-banger in the old economy car gutless naturally aspirated stigmas...most of us show our age when we scoff an say 'you can't put a 4-banger in a half ton truck'....you can, and it was a brilliant move by gm to build a modern turbo engine and land on this formula to do it, it was asking what will be the best design for this turbo for truck duty that landed the configuration and the displacement was what it had to be for the power levels they were after, the engineers explain that if you watch the videos where they tell about this engine and I like my 4 banger, same way the 5.9 cummins guys liked their little turbo motors back in the day also maybe this is a useful perspective?...since you replace a bank of cylinders with a turbo, just imagine removing the turbo for a bank of cylinders and double the displacement...5.4 litres it would be, it has bigger jugs than the 5.3, 682cc vs 666 cc...so no surprise, it makes more work unaffected by elevations and lower in rpms, long stroke for the win for trucks...if you haven't tried one, maybe try one before ruling things out like a Fudd lol...relax, in jest, I'm a total Fudd about a lot of things, I think my old cummins love is why I get this 4 banger so much, same formula but on gas and for a half ton

the engineers in video said 5.3 is 160 lbs heavier, also, two headers, two cats, dual exhaust? the 4 banger has one of everything, it would be hard pressed to outweigh a typical modern aluminum 3.5 v6, yup...no lifters, one head, one string of valves, lighter trans, it's less of everything to support it and you feel it on the nose and in handling overall and my assessment of the 6.2 handling as a wallowing fat pig compared is still accurate, I spent time in both, 3 weeks with the pork chop knowing I was getting the turbo, I paid extra attention to log the differences, anyone else here do the same?, I'll take that W for no lifters, and another for boost and having no power losses due to elevation, another W for having peak torque 1100 rpm less...and another for having way more peak torque lol...can you solve for the lifter stuff on the 5.3? sounds like it...still a good motor, I've got a gazelle that can pull stumps lol and one of only 2 engines the gm engineers admitted to not being able to kill in trying to kill them in testing...

I did not say the 535 lb difference was all motor. Learn to read better. I said I don’t know much of that difference was motor. Yes 10 spd vs 8, yes at4 stuff, spray liner, 10” longer box, leather sunroof side steps. We know at minimum 160 lb was motor lol but the gmc 6.2 felt like a tank compared to lighter nimbler custom. Now that we cleared that up. Pump your air with 8 cylinders or 4 and 1 turbo. The only possible advantage I could come up with for the 8 was subjective....sound. A useless measure. And in fact for truck duty for long highway and outdoorsman stuff the stealth of the turbo motor has proven a bigger winner also. enjoy your lifters and weight and loss of power at elevation and fuel economy etc

I drove both, I spent 3 weeks with a 6.2, have you driven both? I haven’t tried to hit my limiter because it’s a truck and didn’t with the 6.2 either because it too is a truck and 100 mph is fast enough which is where I tend to let off on an aggressive pass. Either will hit the limiter quick. I drive pretty fast, left lane, flash slow azzes etc and either truck has more than enough power for sport fun. Yes at my elevation the 6.2 has 63 more hp but 22 ft/lbs less torque but has that weight differential...they are closer than you think when hitting the skinny pedal big boy. Also remember the 2.7 peak torque comes 1100 rpm lower. It pulls hard everywhere including the highway. Includes towing, it hits 100 mph lickity split, with my trailer too. I towed that trailer with the 6.2 also. When I wanna do 80 mph and pass anyone going slower while towing (rips to 95 mph) with either I get 24 l/100 (9.8 mpg) over a 400 mile run. What does that tell you? Well it should tell you that the 2.7 can do all the work the 6.2 can and it can suck the same fuel to show for it. The 6.2 range of work is less though, empty mpg much better with the 4. Remember the 2.7 has more axle torque in first than the 06 8.1 big block, maybe you didn’t watch the vid with the engineer telling that story? Maybe that’s why I said in 1st gear in terrain mode I do not miss my two speed transfer case at all. Pay attention...class is in. The 5.3 isn’t in the same league here, it’s still nice strong motor (best bud has one and we trailer together lots) but the dynamic range of the 2.7 and lack of power loss at elevation puts the 2.7 into a class that can run with the 6.2 when it comes to work. hp is speed of work, torque is work...the only real number that matters is the torque because these are trucks, and I’m thinking all these newer 5.3’s are aluminum, the GM engineers on the 2.7 said the 2.7 is 160 lbs lighter than the same gen 5.3’s. The 6.2 or 5.3 are tanks in comparison. You can replace an entire bank of cylinders/heads/cams/header etc with just a turbo to pump that air instead. Welcome to the 21st century. I don’t think you’ve done your homework on the 2.7 nearly as much as I have on the v8’s. Nice try though. You should learn that gen 1 4bt/6bt cummins formula because GM basically copied it with this long stroke inline big jug single turbo beast of a 4 banger. Absolutely brilliant truck motor. 6.2’s would be great in a camaro lol i didn’t buy my 2.7 to save gas either, I bought it for the work engine it is and all the other advantages it offers over the short stroke sports car motors and diesel, because I bought a truck and I do truck things with it

Lol you won’t see any chev half tons out there. Like I said, whatever you wanna try with your new half ton I’ll do it just as easily. The two speed transfer case vs the axle torque of that 2.7 in 1st which is more axle torque than the 06 8.1 liter 4-spd big block and in a much lighter truck and that terrain mode is game changer, try it before you knock it. Sounded gimmicky to me until I was in a shitty situation and it blew me away. Confirmation that the two speed transfer case is not needed at all with this torque down low engine and 8 spd and that mode.

Will go anywhere you do with my truck with no problems and easier as I’m lighter, nimbler and more clearance.

The sound of my last 5.3 was great but was over it very quickly, this 2.7 spooling subtle all the time has been far more grin inducing for the entire time closing in on a couple years now. Appreciating the overall quietness and politeness of this motor as an outdoorsman has been so pleasant and relaxed. some need to mix sports car vibes with their truck, for those who value it more as a truck and work/miles/hunt/fish stuff/camp when i was younger I would have fought this more but I guess I spent too much time in a gen 1 cummins manual in the 90’s and will take big jug boosted inline sounds over v8 sounds in a truck any day, spent a ton of time behind 350 and 454 4-5 spds back then also

2.7 has (4) 682cc cylinders (long stroke, boosted) 5.3 has (8) 666cc cylinder (short stroke) 6.2 has (8) 770cc cylinders (short stroke) gen1 cummins 5.9 735cc (extra long stroke, boosted) 2.7tt v6 Ford 449cc (square stroke, boosted) just fun info but while there were other differences between the loaded long box crew at4 6.2 rental I had which I weighed before returning it and picking up my custom 2.7 crew short box, which I also weighed when I got it, they were 535 lbs different, both empty trucks with full tanks of gas, couldn’t tell ya how much of that was motor, likely more than 160 lbs that they say the 5.3 weighs more than the 2.7, that 6.2 has massive jugs, have a hard time thinking that’s same block as the 5.3 anyway, one of these trucks felt like the wallowing pig that it was and the other is a nimble goat by comparison, that 6.2 could really get down but the turbski is no slouch, if you want a sports car with a bed and not worried about the weight of a big lump over the front axle or the fuel economy then have at it, and your lifters too lol if work is more important for a truck then ignoring the boosted 2.7 that does more of it at elevations beyond 1000’ than the 6.2 would be silly, boost is the future and the 2.7 is the most modern truck engine going for gas powered, solve the lifters issue and the 5.3/6.2 are still great motors for those that only like to by 20 year old tech motors in their brand new trucks the big block big jug boosted 4 banger is a better way to pump air, the advantages are so many, the only one to be seen from the na 8’s is subjective at best (some like the sound...great way to by an engine lol)

Reserve judgement on the 2-speed transfer case until you see what the single speed in terrain mode can do. Blew my mind when had to chain up to get my trailer 4 kms through a provincial park and onto the ice after a winter rain turned the world into a skating rink. It was almost too aggressive the engine braking etc. amazing mimic of 4-low. 18" isn't bad but the tires are crap so bad value as you're changing anyway, sold my 20's and went to 17's on a custom 4x and did a 4/3" ready lift, my truck is lightweight and no fat as compared to any other configuration. I guess if you have a heavy v8 pig and only 2" factory lift maybe you will be bashing the skids on everything lol...I dunno, we hunt/fish full time and drag our little trailer to do it, skids over a lifetime haven't really saved anything for me, just collect junk and get in the way of service work. And if people think box liners are a mandatory that's weird af, just haven't thought it through I guess or not actually gone without, would love to hear of one story of a truck in the past 20 years that needed a box because it didn't have a liner. It's dumb, people just don't think about these things, sort of gets institutionalized that you need all this extra fat...makes someone money that's for sure. Just added weight and cost for no gain. You cannot take your box out now. Rubber bed mat is the efficient must have box accessory, then a roll up tonneau pretty handy optional second place accessory. The 2.7 being a 21st century motor makes more work power than the 5.3 for 160 lbs less weight, no idea how much lighter it is than a fat 6.2. Has only a single large cat stuck to the side of the motor and a single exhaust out. Very much a 21st century gen 1 cummins formula applied to gas engine design, a single turbo, inline, big jug, long stroke and one of only 2 engines gm engineers couldn't seize in torture testing. So this thread is about value, the z-71 or tb aren't where the value is imo, it's in standard LT or Custom trim...do a couple of your own things and that's the way to fly. Everything else is just fluff, noise, weight, and cost. Pick a theme and go for it. I like max efficiency with least amount of fat...now everyone can figure out their own lane and go for it. Just my thoughts to help give the full perspectives to this topic...that's all, take it or leave it, no biggie. and the TB looks...much like the 5.3 or 6.2 sound, subjective features but after a couple weeks novelty wears off