Jump to content

First Drive: Chevy's 2.7L Turbocharged Four Cylinder

ThomCannell

Recommended Posts

ThomCannell Enthusiast

ThomCannell

Posted
Posted

2019-Chevrolet-Silverado-Turbo-100.jpg

Thom Cannell

Contributing Writer, GM-Trucks.com

November 23rd, 2018

 

What makes a Silverado a Silverado?


The thing is, regardless of our love of V-8 power and torque; V-6 engines are the heart of the truck market. Well, Chevrolet says they are.

 

Read Thom's 2.7L Deep Dive

 

A few days ago, in Scottsdale, Arizona, we put this proposition to the test, logging miles in a 2019 Silverado powered by the all-new 2.7-liter designed-for-trucks engine. And, as Doug Marcaida might exclaim, "This engine will run!"

 

2019-Chevrolet-Silverado-Turbo-113.jpg

 

Arriving on site, we were greeted by competing vehicles from Ford and Ram. The Ford was powered by its 3.3-liter V-6, the Ram by its 3.6-liter V-6. Before setting foot in a Silverado we took those competitors for a spin to see what Chevrolet—and GMC—are up against.

 

 

As you know, Chevrolet has six engines available for Silverado, the older 4.3-liter motor, two versions of the venerable 5.3-liter, one with simple cylinder deactivation, the other with full Dynamic Fuel Management, the 6.2-liter gas engine and a 3.0-liter Duramax diesel. The diesel and 6.2L are paired with a 10-speed automatic transmission with stop-start, and others use 8-speed automatics.

 

As Chevy’s business strategy encompasses High Value (Work, Custom, Custom Trail Boss), High Volume (LT, RST, LT Trail Boss) and High Feature (LTZ, High Country) segments, you can see where value customers—mostly fleets—will use the V-6. LE and RST customers will have a wide choice of engines, as will the luxury crowd. Some of that choice revolves around chrome-plated emotions. 

 

2019-Chevrolet-Silverado-Turbo-106.jpg

 

Back in January, at the launch of the new Silverado, Rich Scheer director, Exterior Design, Chevrolet Trucks said, "Chrome has become more polarizing, and more personal, than any other aspect of truck design. Some customers want no chrome at all and only body-color or blacked-out trim. Others feel a truck isn’t a truck without chrome bumper, but feel extra chrome can be too 'flashy.' Others want as much chrome as they can get." 

 

Our Red Hot RST with Jet Black seating fell into the no-chrome zone, the only bright work being on the bowtie, nameplate and bright alloy wheels. We didn’t feel the lack of chrome detracted from its handsome appearance.

 

The all-new 2.7-liter truck engine was specifically designed for Silverado and Sierra (and we're sure several other trucks, soon), and meant to deliver value, which is defined as durability, reliability, performance and fuel economy. The 2.7L is the standard engine for High Volume LT and RST where it delivers 310 horsepower, 348 SAE-certified torques, which is 22-percent more than the 4.3L V-6. There’s no skimping on comparable power. 

 

2019-Chevrolet-Silverado-Turbo-104.jpg

 

We think one of the selling points to customers (and management) is the new engine’s EPA rated fuel economy of 20 mpg in the city, 23 on-highway and 20 mpg combined. Notice the high rating for city, where many lifestyle trucks reside. The other thing that’s easily overlooked is the essentially flat torque curve from off-idle 1,500 to 4,000. Equally neglected is that torque doesn’t drop off at 4,000, instead knocking out about 300 lb.-ft. at 5,000 rpm. In other words, it is a solid powerhouse right to the redline.

 

Some facts we didn’t stuff into our engine story are the Direct Injection and the 10:1 compression ratio that enables. We did touch on the integrated exhaust manifold and how it has a separate in-head cooling system, and that using predictive algorithms the electric water pump can push cool water into the head as soon as you mash the throttle. We also skipped over the charge-air cooler, intercooler to some, with a very low restriction rate and ability to lower intake air temperature by 130°F. 

 

2019-Chevrolet-Silverado-Turbo-105.jpg

 

Our notes from driving the competitive vehicles reminded us that the Ford 3.3L in a XLT trim is pleasant, fairly quiet, competent, and under vigorous acceleration feels somewhat leisurely. It gets the job done—with no load. We were surprised by steering pushback from smooth-road imperfections. The Ram Big Horn had a huge display and more modern IP/IC resembling an expensive watch face. Ram has always biased its gear set for impressive launch off the line, so felt more powerful than Ford. We did note tinny controls on steering wheel. Overall, Ram Big Horn was more pleasing, though acceleration produced greater drama than Ford. We didn’t drive the current 4.3L due to time constraints, so can’t offer a head-to-head comparison. 

 

What owners will expect of this powertrain—and please think, "what happens when I step on the long black pedal"—is power, durability, power, reliability, power, and of course, power. 

 

In Phoenix downtown traffic, hitting almost every stoplight, the new 2.7L and its 8-speed moved ahead briskly, easily keeping up with traffic with only mid-throttle application. The engine just works. It's happy and strong, and on two-lane highways where passing is important it spools up quickly and does its job. You do get some engine noise of course, but with far less drama than other base engines. 

 

Outside Phoenix, on the back roads where we could do Wide Open Throttle runs, the 2.7-liter revved somewhat higher than a larger engine might, and with a different kind of engine sound that wasn’t intrusive or thrashing. If we were idling at 1,500 rpm and then accelerating briskly, we got a somewhat noticeable lag that's similar to any engine's transmission kick-down lag-time. However, if we had any pre-existing power, for instance when climbing steep grades or prepping for passing, then there was no lag between throttle and acceleration. Overall, it feels like a pleasant base engine and we are certain we'll see it in other vehicles. 

 

2019-Chevrolet-Silverado-Turbo-103.jpg

 

Official EPA for our RST was 21 Overall, 20 City, and 23 Highway with an axle ratio of 3.42. That is a standard towing ratio, not a high fuel mileage ratio attempting to bias the fuel economy figures. We’ve seen that, haven’t we? There’s no cheating, no fudging, so those EPA mileage figures are in the ballpark. Again, it's a real truck, a real truck engine.

 

If you’re wondering about cost, our RST with 43% Made In USA parts, listed at $50,625 including $1,495 destination. We had $7,630 worth of options like Bose audio, HD rear vision camera, aluminum wheels, 10-way adjustable seats, the Safety Package of backup and forward assist, trailer hitch, etc., all the cool stuff you'll likely add to your truck. 

 

2019-Chevrolet-Silverado-Turbo-107.jpg

 

Our final thoughts, the all-new 2.7-liter should not be compared with a 6.2L V-8 that transforms a Silverado into a Corvette with a bed. However, it is an engine that will knock your socks off when thinking of the technology that makes a relatively small turbocharged engine effectively and reliably move a truck. 
 

2019-Chevrolet-Silverado-Turbo-102.jpg

2019-Chevrolet-Silverado-Turbo-108.jpg

rkj__ Enthusiast

rkj__

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, ThomCannell said:

we are certain we'll see it in other vehicles.

^^^ That's a bold statement.  I'll be watching with interest. 

diyer2 Senior Enthusiast

diyer2

Posted
Posted

Like all products brought to market it will satisfy some of the crowd.

 

I'll stick with the V8.

 

:)

garagerog Enthusiast

garagerog

Posted
Posted

What strikes me is how that turbo 4-banger fills up the engine compartment, must because of the turbo plumbing, intercooler, etc. I'll bet you that engine will be a nightmare to work on (read more billable labor hours for the dealership). My old 05 K1500 with a 5.3 has wayyy more room under the hood.

rkj__ Enthusiast

rkj__

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, garagerog said:

What strikes me is how that turbo 4-banger fills up the engine compartment, must because of the turbo plumbing, intercooler, etc. I'll bet you that engine will be a nightmare to work on (read more billable labor hours for the dealership). My old 05 K1500 with a 5.3 has wayyy more room under the hood.

The other night, I was watching some Motor Week Retro Reviews on YouTube from the late 80s and early 90s.  One of the categories they compared was access to key components for ease of maintenance for the backyard mechanic.  You don't see much mention of that in modern reviews.  Everything is a sea of plastic which obscures everything but the oil fill, and washer fluid fill.  You can't even change a blinker bulb without undoing over a dozen fasteners to get some plastic out of the way.  Sigh.

gammafrench Enthusiast

gammafrench

Posted
Posted

On the Ford test drive: "We were surprised by steering pushback from smooth-road imperfections."

Isnt that putting it mildly? That's been the case with Fords for years.

Doug_Scott Senior Enthusiast

Doug_Scott

Posted
Posted

Have they shortened the nose on the 2019 trucks? Wonder why they didn't try the 4.3l engine?  They had to know that would just make people question its continued use in a truck.  Saying they ran out of time is a bit of "convenience" excuse.  They had 12 hours if they wanted only daylight tests, leads me to think the 4.3l fell short. 

 

The video is a waste of time to watch, no exhibition of fast acceleration, just plain advertising shots with no sounds from the truck at all. 

 

Not a fan of the big chrome letters on the top of the fender.  Silverado is too long a name for that location in that font size. 

 

The idea that a slow response of the downshift at low speeds is somehow now considered normal is hard to understand or believe.  Electronics should be able to make decisions faster than the hydraulics work, so just say it's the torque management trying to save the warranty claims on the driveline that cannot handle the hard driving, instead of playing it off as being the norm. 

qwank Senior Enthusiast

qwank

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, rkj__ said:

^^^ That's a bold statement.  I'll be watching with interest. 

It's going to find it's way into the Camaro to replace the current 2.0T

rkj__ Enthusiast

rkj__

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, qwank said:

It's going to find it's way into the Camaro to replace the current 2.0T

They were pretty clear about this being "a truck motor from the beginning."  They would have to do some serious back pedaling on that statement to drop it in a Camaro. 

harborc Enthusiast

harborc

Posted
Posted

My 2018 Colorado with  2.8 Duramax 4 cylinder seems to have way more room under the hood than this full size truck with a smaller 4 cyl engine.

Campier Enthusiast

Campier

Posted
Posted

355 hp and 383 lb.-ft. of torque on my 5.3L V8 from 2014 vs 310 hp and 355 lb-ft on this turbo L4. 

 

I tow a travel trailer with 50 sq.ft. frontal area. Power does make a difference when towing at highway speeds, which for me is 60 mph. Will the loss of 25 hp make a difference?

 

I use a commuter car for my daily driver, so the stop and go fuel economy specs don't matter to  me. However, I applaud GM for making a truck that has the same city mpg as my 3000 lb Celebrity from 30 years ago. 

Nargg Enthusiast

Nargg

Posted
Posted
22 hours ago, garagerog said:

What strikes me is how that turbo 4-banger fills up the engine compartment, must because of the turbo plumbing, intercooler, etc. I'll bet you that engine will be a nightmare to work on (read more billable labor hours for the dealership). My old 05 K1500 with a 5.3 has wayyy more room under the hood.

Actually, take a closer look.  I noticed right away that GM used that nice air induction system to cover the massive hole created by the smaller engine.  There's quite a large space under the air intake at the front of the engine compartment.  Quite clever in many aspects.  Make a great air intake, and use it to make the engine compartment look better.

Nargg Enthusiast

Nargg

Posted
Posted
21 hours ago, Doug_Scott said:

Not a fan of the big chrome letters on the top of the fender.  Silverado is too long a name for that location in that font size. 

 

They do that for a "throwback" style for the new trucks.  Many of the paints used now are very similar to 40 and 50 years ago paint.  Not appealing at all.  I'm waiting for the first major style update in 2021.  That is if GM follows their norm and redoing style  the 3rd year after release.

garagerog Enthusiast

garagerog

Posted
Posted
27 minutes ago, Nargg said:

Actually, take a closer look.  I noticed right away that GM used that nice air induction system to cover the massive hole created by the smaller engine.  There's quite a large space under the air intake at the front of the engine compartment.  Quite clever in many aspects.  Make a great air intake, and use it to make the engine compartment look better.

I was talking about the cowl to radiator support area, not fender to fender. The use of all that useless plastic looks like a GM camouflage attempt to hide the fact that there is not really a real truck engine hiding underneath. :D

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      Can it still be Assembled I?    Stribeck says that we need a certain amount of viscosity under conditions of load and velocity to prevent two surfaces of a know roughness from tearing each other asunder. And we have marketing trying to tell the masses that those two surfaced require less of that commodity due to more exact limits being placed on the same old clearances. We also know that there are limits to how hard something can before it becomes to brittle to be viable and to smooth to 'wet' the surface and that both of those conditions have been known and met since about the Second World War.    That viscosity value shook out at 10 centistokes at 212 F just under a hundred years ago.  Give this a look: [Anton Parr]     What is advertised is the Kinematic viscosity (mm2/s) or that which has been density adjusted but the value we are after is the dynamic viscosity (mPa.s) or true viscosity. You can see that this number is dependent on density thus base stock and temperature. You can also see that an SAE 30 doesn't reach that value in this example. However an SAE 30 that is at the upper end of the SAE 30 range; 12.5 cSt (mm2/s), might. 12.5 * .83 = 10.375 (mm2/s). If you could find an SAE 30 at the upper end these days.   Then there is the complication of viscosity modifiers or VII or VM, whatever you wish to call them. Polymers added to very thin base oils, perhaps 3 to 6 cP oils, that will meet the SAE *W30 spec at 'tested' shear rates and 100 C/212F  target temperature. So a polymer fortified base that is a fraction of the 10 cP requirement Stribeck insist upon.   This could be all well and good if those polymers didn't have two very problematic 'features'. They shear or loose viscosity both 1.) permanently and 2.) temporality. And they do both omitted in the advertised data with the distinct  purpose of deceiving the consumer of the actual operating state of the fluid. I've shown the example of Warren Oils COSTCO 10.91 cSt 5W30 formuation several times where the 100 C HTHS value is 6.9 cP!! That's the temporary shear down and with and SSI or shear stability index of 9.4 cSt. Note the intentional deception in using mixed units?    After a short while that 9.4 cSt oil has a viscosity corrected dynamic value of 7.8 cP. But as the SSI is still within the range of an SAE *W30 whose lower value is 9.3 cSt.    This allows them to continue to call this SAE 16 weight oil a 30 weight, the cake, and still meet the API requirements for fuel efficiency IMPROVEMENT mandated by the EPA. The eating of the cake. By the time you've worn out your motor doing the responsible thing by adhering to the warranty requirements, (the stick), you get deprived of the carrot, wear control. So sad, to bad.   So what can be done? Do I need actually say? [Anton Parr]       Even this must be monitored if the oil is on the low side and the VII an organic or you opt for a 0W40 with an even lighter base oil and more / higher MW VII. (Note the lower density of the 40 weight versus the SAE 30 mono-weight?)    There is another workaround. Temperature. An SAE *W30 run at a bulk temperature of between 180 and 195 F.    Being the belt and suspenders sort I am I do both. Run it cook and run it heavy.    In Part II I'll work the AW package. 
    • Atlas
      Wow I'm in a pickle. (Broke down truck) and a story.

      By Atlas · Posted

      So, do I go elbow-deep on this thing or list it for sale and play dumb? Seems to "runs good."   I'm about $1200 away from having: -a rebuilt injector ($300) -a new cat ($250) -a new cat back exhaust (OE style) ($300) -a new AC compressor ($200) -AC refrigerant charge ($150)   In theory, this should rectify the obvious detracting issues from its value and operability. Cold AC with a non-squeaking AC pulley both sounds and feels good. An exhaust that isn't cut/hacked in 17 different places and doesn't vibrate on a crossmember would make it sound and feel less janky. A working cat would help the stink, and will save the earth, but *if and only if* the fuel system is working properly, which would also address the intermittent "rich" CEL.   Heard a good one... CEL for "Rich condition" means you haven't spent enough money on the truck lately, and it's letting you know.   Rebuilding the injector would seem to be the most important part. Replacing the cat would be secondary. I don't think mine is plugged or overly restricted, but it might be a little restricted? I have no good way to tell other than seat of the pants feel. I hate the smell.   The current theory is I have a rich idle problem: A bad fuel pressure regulator, or a leaking injector(s) being the highest probabilities. I already replaced the FPR but that doesn't mean its replacement isn't also bad. It was a new part from Dorman, but the packaging looked like it had been sitting on a shelf for 20 years.   This is the (single) upstream O2 sensor shown at idle. I'm getting a lot of "rich" it seems. Sometimes it stays high like that and doesn't drop down. That makes me think it's processing injector leaks or a partially stuck open injector.     Other times it looks like this. Nice oscillations between rich and lean, which is what I think it should be. Under load and at speed, the oscillations are nice and tight and uniform looking, high and low.     Fuel trims suggest the PCM is compensating pretty hard at idle to pull fuel out. But it's not enough to trip a CEL. Something about slowing to a stop: brake vaccum booster, EGR, or the EVAP purge is delayed, or there's pooled fuel in the intake again that's draining into a cylinder is enough to set the CEL. Of course, in two days of driving, it hasn't set. I was hoping to actually look at the freeze-frame data when it sets. IAT is high because it's idling on an 83 degree day here.  
    • Another JR
      Gasser Subforum Has Been Quiet - - So, Regenerative Braking and Using L10

      By Another JR · Posted

      Have considered installing a DC to DC charger in your camper to replace your isolator?  
    • newdude
      Gas fill door

      By newdude · Posted

      Common failure.  You need to replace the fuel door housing.   The painted cover transfers over to the new housing.  To remove the old one there is 4 spots where you poke the plastic to release it.  
    • newdude
      Gasser Subforum Has Been Quiet - - So, Regenerative Braking and Using L10

      By newdude · Posted

      No such thing as regenerative braking on a pure ICE vehicle.     Regenerative braking is the re-capture of energy from electric motors and stores it in the battery pack.  So hybrids, PHEV and EVs have regenerative braking.     What you are seeing is the charging system changing modes is all.  Its likely entering charge mode for some sort of reason is all.  All of the charging modes will be listed below.   As for L10 vs D.  L10 turns off automatic grade braking.  L10 puts you in control of grade downshifts where in D it will automatically do it based on brake pedal position and other factors.  Otherwise L10 and D drive exactly the same aside from that one aspect.    Battery Sulfation Mode The BCM will enter this mode when the interpreted Generator output voltage is less than 13.2 V for 45 minutes. When this condition exists the BCM will enter Charge Mode for 2–3 minutes. The BCM will then determine which mode to enter depending on voltage requirements.   Charge Mode The BCM will enter Charge Mode when ever one of the following conditions are met:   Windshield wipers are ON for more than 3 s. Climate Control Voltage Boost Mode Request is true, as sensed by the HVAC control module via serial data. High speed cooling fan, rear defogger, and HVAC high speed blower operation can cause the BCM to enter the Charge Mode. The estimated battery temperature is less than 0°C (32°F). Battery State of Charge is less than 80%. Vehicle speed is greater than 145 km/h (90 mph) A current sensor malfunction exists. System voltage is determined to be below 12.56 V When any one of these conditions is met, the system will set targeted generator output voltage to a charging voltage between 13.9–15.5 V, depending on the battery state of charge and estimated battery temperature.   Fuel Economy Mode The BCM will enter Fuel Economy Mode when the estimated battery temperature is at least 0°C (32°F) but less than or equal to 80°C (176°F), the calculated battery current is less than 15 A and greater than −8 A, and the battery state-of-charge is greater than or equal to 80%. Its targeted generator output voltage is the open circuit voltage of the battery and can be between 12.5–13.1 V. When fuel economy mode is active, the generator is not charging, only maintaining open circuit battery voltage. The BCM will exit this mode and enter Charge Mode when any of the conditions described above are present.   Headlamp Mode The BCM will enter Headlamp Mode when ever the head lamps are ON (high or low beams). Voltage will be regulated between 13.9–14.5 V.   Start Up Mode When the engine is started the BCM sets a targeted generator output voltage of 14.5 V for 30 s.   Tow/Haul Mode (if applicable) Pressing the Tow/Haul Mode button located on the center stack, the vehicle system voltage is raised and the remote (non-vehicle) battery will be charged. Having the headlamps on will raise the system voltage and if the Tow/Haul button is applied it will not serve any purpose. The voltage is regulated between 13.9-14.5 V.      

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...