Will GM’s New 2.7-Liter Turbo Gas Engine Pull Stronger Than Its 2.8-Liter Duramax Diesel?

Doug_Scott · August 18, 2018

4 hours ago, Hazmat401 said:

Honestly.... this should be a very good motor.

Lets be real... this engine is perfect for "those" who want a pick up truck more than they need one... especally when a mid or full size sedan or a mid sized pick up would better suit your purposes

Also and this should go without saying for any turbocharged engine.... you are going to have to run 91-93 gas to achieve maximum hp/tq along with maximum reliability

I'll gladly call myself a hypocrite because I rather have a 6.2L

The only reason I have a pickup truck is that after having 2 fusion done in my back and expecting a third fusion later this year I simply cannot fold myself up enough to get into a car anymore. This new engine will get a serious look by me as my 2010 is approaching 10 years old.

Cowpie · August 18, 2018

3 hours ago, Hazmat401 said:

Honestly.... this should be a very good motor.

Lets be real... this engine is perfect for "those" who want a pick up truck more than they need one... especally when a mid or full size sedan or a mid sized pick up would better suit your purposes

Also and this should go without saying for any turbocharged engine.... you are going to have to run 91-93 gas to achieve maximum hp/tq along with maximum reliability

I'll gladly call myself a hypocrite because I rather have a 6.2L

Yeah, it is going to call for higher octane fuel. My preference would be using E85 over premium to achieve that. That is one reason I never consider a motor that cannot use E85. Ricardo and Cummins already have proven that a small displacement motor using E85 along with DI and Turbocharging can attain some very respectable power and diesel like fuel economy to boot. And given that I filled the other day with E85 at $1.84 a gallon compared to Premium which was about $3.20, it makes a whale of a difference.

hizzo3 · August 31, 2018

Running E85 you get more out of it with higher boost. And you don't always have to run higher octane fuel. Modern DI engines handle crap fuel pretty well. Bumping down to regular is a walk in the park, just expect power to go with it. Great thing about this process is that the computer can adjust the boost based on octane.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

Doug_Scott · August 31, 2018

7 minutes ago, hizzo3 said:

Running E85 you get more out of it with higher boost. And you don't always have to run higher octane fuel. Modern DI engines handle crap fuel pretty well. Bumping down to regular is a walk in the park, just expect power to go with it. Great thing about this process is that the computer can adjust the boost based on octane.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

It can also adjust camshaft duration and lift to control mechanical compression at will. This engine sounds like it can be altered to be as mild or wild on demand to please near all users.

Many decades ago one of the then major cam grinders offered a cam and piston/connecting rod kit that gave compression ratio that measured near 13:1, and ran on low octane fuel. The trick was in the cam grind that effectively killed compression in low engine speeds, but as rpm's rose, so did compression. Can't recall which cam grinder it was. It was back in late, 70s, early 80s. It wasn't Crane, or Comp Cam'!! ¿!

scarfile · February 25, 2022

I don't care what they say... If your towing, Diesel is the ONLY way to go. i pull a 5000lb camper with my baby Duramax and don't even know it's back there. 14.5 mpg

Grumpy Bear · February 25, 2022

On 5/23/2018 at 3:48 PM, Colossus said:

I wonder if we'll see it kill off the 4.3 v-6..

On 5/23/2018 at 5:49 PM, Grumpy Bear said:

In your dreams. 10 million hours invested in that platform.

Can not believe nobody jumped all over this!

:rollin:

customboss · February 25, 2022

L3B has more TQ in the HO tune, 430 TQ.

I run my 348 TQ version on 85 octane with no issues. I am testing mixing to 87 octane but the snow, ice, and cold are throwing me off getting stable MPG data.

The Duramax 2.8 TD is 369 TQ capable with a lot lower 180 HP than either of the L3B truck engines.

For comparison the Cadillac L3B is 384 TQ and 325 HP vs mine which is 310 HP.

I drive my L3B Trail Boss like a diesel, I do not use needless RPM romps but allow the Tq to carry me along and accelerate slowly.

I am averaging 20 MPG mostly on 85 octane in CO mountains.

I don't see myself ever towing so this engine IMHO would be in a lot of its 22 PSI boost capability alot if towing against the wind. That would eat fuel.

I see this design as a spark compression engine really meaning GM wanted it to do a lot of things pretty well but towing its going to be working. The 310 HP 430 TQ version may pull differently.

The 4.3L V6 was bullet proof NA engine but low HP, low TQ so it's all a trade off for what a owner requires.

customboss · February 25, 2022

PS max TQ is achieved at 1500 RPM for all L3B. No need to romp it and burn fuel needlessly.

KARNUT · February 25, 2022

I did an experiment year’s ago between a V-10 and the Cummins. Same TQ the V-10 had double the HP and RPMs until redline. I use the same rear gear. The dealer claimed the V-10 could handle pulling heavy. I usually kept my pulling trucks 100K miles about two years. Two advantages to the V-10. It was like getting free fuel for 40K miles with the price difference. The big advantage was being able to downshift to maintain speed on long hills. I could downshift to third and maintain 60 MPH. You couldn’t downshift to third until 45 with the diesel. The V-10 was more fun to drive empty with about 150 more HP. I like the sound better with twice pipes and megaphones. It happens I was doing lots of demos and pulling my equipment all over. It was fun and games until 45K. Then she blew. Lucky I had extended warranty. If you have TQ down low in a gas and can keep the RPMs under 3K. Maintain speed without constant high RPM downshifts. I can see a gas. Our other V-10 an automatic would hardly shift out of second gear pulling heavy. I had to put a 390 gear in and slack way off the detent cable. Manually shifting the transmission. Once’s the engine was replaced I traded in for a power stroke.

newdude · February 25, 2022

I wonder if there was enough 2.8 Duramax sales if GM will possibly downscale the 3.0 Duramax? They've got an EPA/CARB compliant product to work with, just chop 2 cylinders off and drop it in the mid twins.

Either way, the 2.7T in the twins will kick butt. Should smoke the 3.6 V6 even.

Edited February 25, 2022 by newdude