Jump to content

Gorehamj

GM's New Silverado 2.7L Gas Turbo Engine Is Faster and May Be More Fuel Economical Than Colorado With 2.8 L Duramax

Recommended Posts

2019-Chevrolet-Silverado-2-7l-turbo.jpg

 

 

John Goreham
Contributing Writer, GM-Trucks.com
10-9-2018

 

General Motors released the preliminary specifications for the Silverado 1500 with the 2.7-liter gasoline turbocharged engine. The torque and horsepower were already known to us. 310 horsepower and 348 lb-ft of torque. That torque is delivered from 1,500 RPM all the way to 4,000 RPM. What GM added today was the fuel efficiency and 0-60 MPH time numbers and they are impressive.

 

Chevrolet says that the new 2WD Silverado will accelerate from 0-60 MPH in 6.8 seconds.  By contrast, Motor Trend recorded a 9.7-second 0-60 MPH time for the Colorado ZR2 Duramax diesel.  Truck Trend's testing revealed a 9.55-second run. The much larger Silverado is much quicker than the Colorado Duramax. But who cares? Diesel isn't about quick sprints.

 

Diesel is about fuel economy. Here the numbers are a little less easy to match up directly. One number that does match up perfectly is the City cycle fuel efficiency. GM says the new Silverado will earn a 20 MPG city rating. That matches the Colorado Diesel's rating (of 20 MPG). The Silverado 2.7L will be rated at 23 MPG Highway. The Colorado Duramax is rated at 30 MPG Highway. The question we don't know the answer to yet is which fuel, regular, or premium will be required. It matters because if the engine can use regular unleaded fuel, it will have a Combined fuel economy rating higher than the Colorado with the 2.8L diesel due to the higher fuel cost for diesel. AAA pegs the average cost for diesel fuel right now, ahead of the winter season when prices rise for diesel, at 11.4% higher than regular unleaded fuel. Premium unleaded is currently the highest-priced liquid-fuel at about 16% higher than regular unleaded. So if GM required premium fuel, the new 2.7-liter turbo's fuel economy will not be that impressive. 

 

GM is rating the Silverado 1500 with the 2.7-liter engine at 7,200 pounds. The Silverado 2.7L will reach peak torque more quickly than the Colorado Duramax diesel. However, for a short duration in the RPM band, the Duramax has a 21 lb-ft advantage in torque. 

 

We've reached out to GM and asked what fuel will be required. Of course, we are comparing a full-size truck here to a midsized truck. Imagine the comparison of a Colorado equipped with the 2.7-liter gasoline engine tuned for regular fuel vs. a 2.8-liter Duramax. GM could potentially have a midsized gasoline truck with lower fuel costs, quicker speeds, and equivalent towing capability to its diesel.  The Torque and HP curves for both engines are shown below. 

2.8 duramax diesel curve.png2.7 t chevy curve white background.png

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be really fun if GM picked one of their more powerful engines from their lineup, and put it in the ZR2 Colorado and the Denali Canyon. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very pathetic 0-60 times for the Duramax in a small truck like the Colorado.  Yeah it matches what the silly pathetic eco diesel on the Dodge Ram does but still pathetically slow. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read somewhere that the optimal displacement for a gas engine is in the neighborhood of

500 ccm (30.5 cui) per cylinder.

It'll give you the best fuel economy in relation to the power output, or vice versa.

Ford's 2.7 L V6 is sitting at 450 ccm per cylinder and GM's 2.7 four banger at 675 ccm.

So Ford's engine is closer to the magic number than GM's. But there're more parts moving around.

That's why I would feel more comfortable with a 2.7 L four banger than a V6.

I'd really like to test drive one :)

As for the diesel, it really comes into play on the highway and when towing. With its fuel economy.

 

so long

j-ten-ner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The Silverado 2.7L will be rated at 23 MPG Highway."

 

Seems low. The 2019 5.3L V8 2WD is rated at 23 MPG highway.

 

 

Capture.JPG

Edited by gone_fishing
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly do think this engine makes far more sense in p/u truck vs the NA 3.6 from Ram and the 3.3l from FERD?  I mean it pumps way more Truck Torque than those engines and the curve is silly looking?  I kinda of dig the engine and would like to drive one.  GM should be able to hit 22 city and 26hwy with mild hybrid attached to it?  Don't think GM has shown it's cards YET and that 2.7l could be very versatile....LOVE THE GENERAL BUT.....I love GM'S small blocks even more!

Edited by mookdoc6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, j-ten-ner said:

I read somewhere that the optimal displacement for a gas engine is in the neighborhood of

500 ccm (30.5 cui) per cylinder.

It'll give you the best fuel economy in relation to the power output, or vice versa.

Ford's 2.7 L V6 is sitting at 450 ccm per cylinder and GM's 2.7 four banger at 675 ccm.

So Ford's engine is closer to the magic number than GM's. But there're more parts moving around.

That's why I would feel more comfortable with a 2.7 L four banger than a V6.

I'd really like to test drive one :)

As for the diesel, it really comes into play on the highway and when towing. With its fuel economy.

 

so long

j-ten-ner

 

 

Yeah the German carmakers were the first to really embrace this concept across their engine families. 

2L 4-cylinder

3L 6-cylinder

and now lots of 4L V8s

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

20 city / 23 highway for 2.7L I4 turbo

 

18 city / 24 highway for 4.3L V6

 

Both are RWD. Which one would you drive?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, waltchan said:

20 city / 23 highway for 2.7L I4 turbo

 

18 city / 24 highway for 4.3L V6

 

Both are RWD. Which one would you drive?

 

Having not driven either engine, I can't tell you which one I would pick.  I can tell you that my choice would be based on driving characteristics and pricing, not fuel economy.  The fuel economy of those two choices is so close, I would consider it a draw.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If was just driving and these were the choices for longevity I’d choose the V-6. On the other hand I’ve tuned just about everything I’ve driven. The turbo 4 in a single cab tuned, could be the quickest GM truck on the road.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO, the new 4cyl turbo should also be offered in the midsized trucks.

 

I would have guessed with its torque curve that it would get better highway mileage........say 26-28 or so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are members here claiming 19mpg city and 24mpg highway (averages) with the 6.2 !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There are members here claiming 19mpg city and 24mpg highway (averages) with the 6.2 !


Someone is also claiming 39 mpg with the 4.3...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, KARNUT said:

If was just driving and these were the choices for longevity I’d choose the V-6. On the other hand I’ve tuned just about everything I’ve driven. The turbo 4 in a single cab tuned, could be the quickest GM truck on the road.


Sent from my iPhone using CRAPatalk

Now you're talking!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A 2wd reg cab shortbed with a 2.7T could turn into a really fun truck I think.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×

Important Information

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