Jump to content

2.7 Turbo 4 Fan Club

ShamrockShooter
 Share

Recommended Posts

OnTheReel Senior Enthusiast

OnTheReel

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, Silverado4x4 said:

Talk about a real let down when someone ask you "hey what size motor you got in there?" and you have to say a 4 cylinder.

I didn’t think anyone bothered to ask that question anymore since it seems like 90% of Silverados in the past 20 years have had the 5.3.

 

I would actually be excited if someone asked and I had the 4 cylinder. At least it’s something different, and it seems to be doing quite well. Most people are at least curious about the engine.

  • Like 5
  • Replies 1.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

ShamrockShooter
ShamrockShooter

Well. Gals and Gents this topic was started for people who want to like or appreciate a new innovation. It will be a lot more fun to keep the negatives for another forum topic.   Yes it's a new engi

InertiaFaze
InertiaFaze

My latest 2.7T fuel economy numbers.....   400 mile AVG 29.1 mpg life of vehicle (11111.1 miles) 22.7 mpg

i82much
i82much

now they just need to make a turbo 6.2!

Posted Images

ShamrockShooter Senior Enthusiast

ShamrockShooter

Posted
  • Author
Posted

They tuned the 2.3 turbo in the new ranger to add 75 hp and 92 ftlbs of torque. If you could do something similar to the 2.7 that might be real fun to drive.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

  • Like 2
MDSilveradoGuy Enthusiast

MDSilveradoGuy

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Silverado4x4 said:

Our dealership has one on the lot and its been there since December GM made them take it and its still there, they cant sell it.. I don't care how much HP and torque it has a 4 cylinder doesn't belong in a full size pick-up. Talk about a real let down when someone ask you "hey what size motor you got in there?" and you have to say a 4 cylinder.

Are you really that concerned about what someone else thinks about what is under your hood?

 

Its funny that GM made them take it when dealers around here can’t even get them ??

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
OnTheReel Senior Enthusiast

OnTheReel

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, ShamrockShooter said:

They tuned the 2.3 turbo in the new ranger to add 75 hp and 92 ftlbs of torque. If you could do something similar to the 2.7 that might be real fun to drive.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
 

If they are tunable at some point, I could see a whole bunch of people buying them for that reason alone. 

 

The only thing I worry about is that nobody is going to be able to get into these ECMs. So far everything seems locked up tight. At least for the V8s.

 

  • Like 1
Wiggums Senior Enthusiast

Wiggums

Posted
Posted

Out of curiosity, how is the engine braking?

The 2.7 in Ford F-150's were terrible at that and my area is a very hilly terrain. I hate to brake so I downshift a lot. That was the reason why I opted for the 5.0 V-8 when I bought my new 2016 F-150.

  • Like 1
ShamrockShooter Senior Enthusiast

ShamrockShooter

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Out of curiosity, how is the engine braking?

The 2.7 in Ford F-150's were terrible at that and my area is a very hilly terrain. I hate to brake so I downshift a lot. That was the reason why I opted for the 5.0 V-8 when I bought my new 2016 F-150.
I went down some steep hills yesterday. I didn't notice the grade braking kick in that my 16 had. I also didn't notice any harsh downshift that used the engine to slow the truck.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

MDSilveradoGuy Enthusiast

MDSilveradoGuy

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Wiggums said:

Out of curiosity, how is the engine braking?

The 2.7 in Ford F-150's were terrible at that and my area is a very hilly terrain. I hate to brake so I downshift a lot. That was the reason why I opted for the 5.0 V-8 when I bought my new 2016 F-150.

The TFL review of it on the Ike Gauntlet required 8 brake applications, which is about average across all trucks they have tested. 

  • Like 1
the wanderer Enthusiast

the wanderer

Posted
Posted

I know lots of people think that this engine is stressed 100% all the time; but there was that video some comments back where the engineer talks about how they strengthened the motor just like they would a diesel; ie, if you're not concerned about stressing a diesel (which they all have turbos) then don't stress about this one either. I dunno. Just too new for me I think. Would love to drive one pulling a 6000 pound trailer just to know what it can do.

  • Like 1
MDSilveradoGuy Enthusiast

MDSilveradoGuy

Posted
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, the wanderer said:

I know lots of people think that this engine is stressed 100% all the time; but there was that video some comments back where the engineer talks about how they strengthened the motor just like they would a diesel; ie, if you're not concerned about stressing a diesel (which they all have turbos) then don't stress about this one either. I dunno. Just too new for me I think. Would love to drive one pulling a 6000 pound trailer just to know what it can do.

People would rather make assumptions and dismiss it based on its perceived inadequacies than look at the data or facts around the engine.

 

A small displacement engine with a turbo has proven to be inefficient when running under heavy load and boost. The fact that this engine is getting the real world fuel economy that it does shows how under-stressed it is in its application. The fact that it guzzled gas when fully loaded pulling the Ike Gauntlet shows what it is like when under extreme load.

 

Given its absurdly flat torque curve starting at low RPM (thanks to being in boost down low), it's not really working hard at all in much of the driving conditions it will encounter. The only area that gives me any pause is the sliding camshaft - and not the forced induction setup or anything downwind of it. I still voted with my wallet and bought one.

Edited by MDSilveradoGuy
  • Like 2
Wiggums Senior Enthusiast

Wiggums

Posted
Posted
22 hours ago, ShamrockShooter said:

I went down some steep hills yesterday. I didn't notice the grade braking kick in that my 16 had. I also didn't notice any harsh downshift that used the engine to slow the truck.

On my old F-150, I was used to manually shifting down since I don't really want to use the brakes. Even if you shifted it down manually, is the engine braking effective?

One thing I've noticed on my Silverado V-8 is that it seem to feel like I've shifted in neutral and am coasting which I really like. My Ford didn't do that and I didn't want to go slower while going down hill.

zzrsouth Enthusiast

zzrsouth

Posted
Posted

Bought a Turbo LT a week ago.  I prefer the engine/trans combo over my wife's GMT900 Tahoe 5.3/6AT but I'm used to boosted 4s.

  • Like 1
lrtexasman Enthusiast

lrtexasman

Posted
Posted

Thanks, let us know how it does if you do any towing.  I am considering the 2.7 as I wait for the diesel.  I live on flat terrain and tow less than 5k, so either application fits me.  

ShamrockShooter Senior Enthusiast

ShamrockShooter

Posted
  • Author
Posted

The one thing I did notice is when this 2.7 loaner gets warm I keep getting this funny smell towards the front of the engine. The closet I can describe is gear oil. I don't see anything leaking anywhere. My 5.3 trail boss didn't smell like that.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Jricharc Enthusiast

Jricharc

Posted
Posted

I am intrigued with this engine, I currently drive a HHR SS with the turbo 2.0 and it's tuned and is rather stout.  I just worry about all the tech, one issue and your are stuck with an expensive fix no matter what.  When I look to get my truck later this year I will make sure to give one a test drive for sure.

the wanderer Enthusiast

the wanderer

Posted
Posted
14 hours ago, ShamrockShooter said:

The one thing I did notice is when this 2.7 loaner gets warm I keep getting this funny smell towards the front of the engine. The closet I can describe is gear oil. I don't see anything leaking anywhere. My 5.3 trail boss didn't smell like that.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
 

 

I've test driven two 1500's that were new, and each time I got out I smelled that sort of smell; might just be left over grease/oil that comes from new parts getting hot and burning it off. Same thing when buying a new oven or microwave etc.

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
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Forum Statistics

    250.5k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts

  • Member Statistics

    342,915
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    ChristopherDobson
    Newest Member
    ChristopherDobson
    Joined

  • Who's Online   3 Members, 0 Anonymous, 1,254 Guests (See full list)

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • ChristopherDobson
      Vehicle Payments

      By ChristopherDobson · Posted

      Monthly payment is only part of the equation. With today's prices and interest rates, I'd look at the total monthly cost: payment, insurance, registration, fuel, maintenance, and expected repairs. A vehicle that fits comfortably into your budget is usually the better choice than stretching for a higher trim. I've also kept my vehicles longer over the past few years. New cars have gotten expensive enough that driving one for 10+ years, while staying on top of maintenance, often ends up being the most cost-effective approach.
    • Grumpy Bear
      OCI, not when but why?

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      10 Ford and Chevy engines proven to reach 300,000 miles   You may note a common 3K OCI on this list of gas motors. I skipped over the diesels. Dh'O. 
    • jake111
      Gasser Subforum Has Been Quiet - - So, Regenerative Braking and Using L10

      By jake111 · Posted

      Thanks newdude!  By the time manual selection is needed, I'm probably too much of a control-freak to depend on the transmission sensing braking to activate automatic downshifting.  I would be anticipating the situation and already be manually downshifting.   This truck replaced a 2004.5 LLY diesel with the Allison 5-speed.  Putting it in T/H made noticeable differences (when the torque converter locked, upshift points, downshift behavior).  On this 2024 gasser with the 10L1000 I haven't been able to detect much, if any, difference.  Ok, I can never tell now when the torque converter locks up.  But I also don't notice differences in shifting.  For downhills, I've probably already manually downshifted by then anyway.  Since it's also more awkward (than the 2004.5) to engage/disengage I don't even bother.  Or maybe it doesn't really matter with just a 3k lb. camper in the bed?   Thanks also for the list of reasons the charging system might select various voltages.  However, what I am seeing doesn't fall into any of those categories.  It very definitely, and very consistently, rises after coasting/braking.  Maybe not immediately, but not very long after coasting/braking.  Very consistently drops voltage when no longer coasting/braking.  It might also be interacting with the camper battery charging (I might disconnect the camper and see if it changes the charging behavior).  I also need to recheck turning on headlights for when I want to force it to charge the camper.   Another JR, in June I converted the camper to LiFePO4.  Since it's not a good idea to try to charge lithiums directly using truck, I installed a Victron Orion XS DC-DC charger (which BTW is AMAZING!!).  Being cheap, I only had to buy that one item (besides the battery, of course) to do the conversion.  The camper OEM 120v battery charger (only 19 years old and works perfectly) and the truck feed the input to the DC-DC charger (not at the same time).  But I didn't want the camper charger feeding back to the truck so I kept the old separator.  I considered replacing the separator with a 30amp diode but that means more work and might add another 1/2 volt drop.  One thing that surprised me was the voltage drop over the long 10awg wire run, so I can only charge smoothly at 8 amps (because the DC-DC charger is completely configurable).  Another reason I don't want an added voltage drop with the diode.  I might also be a little lazy but all this work is being done under the sink with a small cabinet opening.    
    • davester
      cam upgrade in CA

      By davester · Posted

      apparently CA smog is (or at least was)  checking that the vehicle is using the oem and/or a ca smog approved tune, so I expect you'll fail inspection doing it.
    • davester
      Possible lifter tick after DOD delete

      By davester · Posted

      yes, leaking exhaust will mess up o2 sensor readings, which in turn messes up fuel trims.

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...