2.7 Turbo 4 Fan Club

[Nanotech Environmental]

On 8/26/2019 at 3:07 PM, KARNUT said:

It could be a good engine or bad. After paying to be a Ginny Pig on some of GMs bright ideas in the past. Eight-six- four and 5.7 diesel. I’ll keep an interested eye on this one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

FWIW, those engines were made in the low point of the idiotic myopic beancounter era 1970-1990. The messes created then is what ultimately caused GM to go bankrupt in 2008. Since the late 80's, early 90's it appears Engineering/Design has gradually gotten more & more of a say in things. GM powertrain has built some real classics since then. 3.8l, LS series, Duramax, and many more. 
If this 2.7 can go the distance, it will get added to the list. Really, the bar was set pretty low with the Ford egoboosts. All it has to do is be a bit more reliable, last a bit longer and get better mileage than those, which shouldn't be that hard, given all the troubles those motors have had..

This engine really should also go in the midsized twins IMO. That would be a great combo.

Edited August 30, 2019 by Nanotech Environmental

[MDSilveradoGuy]

19 hours ago, PikeFork said:

Just wish GM would offer leather interior and the 2.7T together. Chevy salesman told me they have had requests for the 2.7T in the LTZ model. 

I have a fully loaded RST with the 2.7, including leather. You can equip them quite well.

 

You just can't get a GMC with leather and the 2.7.

[Cpl_Punishment]

2 hours ago, MDSilveradoGuy said:

I have a fully loaded RST with the 2.7, including leather. You can equip them quite well.

 

You just can't get a GMC with leather and the 2.7.

It seems strange to me that you can get leather in an LT (or RST) but not an SLE or Elevation. Isn't GMC supposed to be higher end than Chevy? 

[bws258]

just bought mine on Monday and this thing is a blast ... quick steering, quick throttle response, and a beautiful engine noise ... plus, I'm not banging my knee against a stupid center console!

[MDSilveradoGuy]

3 hours ago, Cpl_Punishment said:

It seems strange to me that you can get leather in an LT (or RST) but not an SLE or Elevation. Isn't GMC supposed to be higher end than Chevy? 

One would think... there are a lot of poor decisions GM is making with these trucks.

[bws258]

55 minutes ago, MDSilveradoGuy said:

One would think... there are a lot of poor decisions GM is making with these trucks.

they want to push you up into Denali ... or be at least SLT

 

and heaven forbid if you want leather cooled seats in a bench configuration

[MDSilveradoGuy]

1 hour ago, bws258 said:

they want to push you up into Denali ... or be at least SLT

 

and heaven forbid if you want leather cooled seats in a bench configuration

I'm an odd bird - I would have snatched up a 2.7L High Country or Denali in a heartbeat if I could. I originally wanted the Duramax but got tired of waiting - and I needed more capability and room than my Colorado had.

[LT4Banger]

4 hours ago, bws258 said:

just bought mine on Monday and this thing is a blast ... quick steering, quick throttle response, and a beautiful engine noise ... plus, I'm not banging my knee against a stupid center console!

Same! Only thing I’m not liking is mine downshifts hard af when take my foot off coming to stop...

[Brian S.]

On 4/7/2019 at 12:06 PM, 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.

Tell that  to the guy with the small 6 cylinder F150 that drives away from your 5.3l up the on ramp.....

 

Ford has proven pretty conclusively small turbo engines can move trucks around and tow fine. This new 4 cylinder turbo is a interesting engine, the CD review said the peak torque comes on so low you'll never notice the lag.

 

One thing I would note about these engines they mainly seem to benefit the manufacturers. Building half the engine, putting a compressor on it, and selling for the same or more than V8s. I've read a lot of F150 EcoBoost threads, and heard from owners, the mileage is not really much different than 5l in real world use.

 

What I'd really like to see from GM is the 4.3l with a turbo.

 

All that said, I recently traded in my 2017 5.3l SLE double cab for a Certified 2018 5.7l Ram Laramie Crew cab. Wasn't much money out of pocket as the Sierra was paid for, and I felt like trying something new after buying 6 Silverados/Sierras since 2005. Ram seems like a nice truck, and with the certified warranty I figured I couldn't go too far wrong.

 

If it's as "reliable" as the 2000 Ram Laramie I had, I'll be back in a Silverado faster than you can say "GM". Those trucks were bullet proof for me.

 

[Silverado4x4]

On 8/31/2019 at 8:26 AM, Brian S. said:

Tell that  to the guy with the small 6 cylinder F150 that drives away from your 5.3l up the on ramp.....

 

Ford has proven pretty conclusively small turbo engines can move trucks around and tow fine. This new 4 cylinder turbo is a interesting engine, the CD review said the peak torque comes on so low you'll never notice the lag.

 

One thing I would note about these engines they mainly seem to benefit the manufacturers. Building half the engine, putting a compressor on it, and selling for the same or more than V8s. I've read a lot of F150 EcoBoost threads, and heard from owners, the mileage is not really much different than 5l in real world use.

 

What I'd really like to see from GM is the 4.3l with a turbo.

 

All that said, I recently traded in my 2017 5.3l SLE double cab for a Certified 2018 5.7l Ram Laramie Crew cab. Wasn't much money out of pocket as the Sierra was paid for, and I felt like trying something new after buying 6 Silverados/Sierras since 2005. Ram seems like a nice truck, and with the certified warranty I figured I couldn't go too far wrong.

 

If it's as "reliable" as the 2000 Ram Laramie I had, I'll be back in a Silverado faster than you can say "GM". Those trucks were bullet proof for me.

 

Not going to happen. Had a guy from work try to get me at a stop light as he had that eco-boost in his F-150, slowly pulled away from him up to 65 till we let off and don't say he didn't know what he was doing as he runs a drag car at the track. We got a good laugh at it the next day I saw him. He even power brake to build boost and got me by about a half truck off the light then I just walked right past him.

[heymrdjCW]

Not going to happen. Had a guy from work try to get me at a stop light as he had that eco-boost in his F-150, slowly pulled away from him up to 65 till we let off and don't say he didn't know what he was doing as he runs a drag car at the track. We got a good laugh at it the next day I saw him. He even power brake to build boost and got me by about a half truck off the light then I just walked right past him.

If it was a 2.7, it’s possible. 3.5 is just a no. Stock for stock, and without mechanical issues, 5.3 is a complete and utter turd to any 3.5 ecoboost. Having owned both I can say that with fact. Off the line, the 5.3L was slower than my naturally aspirated 1.6 Fiesta thanks to piss poor torque management. That thing had less than 120HP and a terrible 6spd auto.

[Silverado4x4]

1 hour ago, heymrdjCW said:

If it was a 2.7, it’s possible. 3.5 is just a no. Stock for stock, and without mechanical issues, 5.3 is a complete and utter turd to any 3.5 ecoboost. Having owned both I can say that with fact. Off the line, the 5.3L was slower than my naturally aspirated 1.6 Fiesta thanks to piss poor torque management. That thing had less than 120HP and a terrible 6spd auto.

Nope he has the 3.5 and as far as you saying the 5.3 is a turd off the line your just flat out wrong with the 19s and the 8 speed. I see your driving a 17 go drive a 19 and come back and see if you have the same response. I guess your Fiesta is quicker off the line as its about 2000lbs or more lighter but once that 1.6 runs out of juice quickly its done.

[Nanotech Environmental]

2 hours ago, heymrdjCW said:

If it was a 2.7, it’s possible. 3.5 is just a no. Stock for stock, and without mechanical issues, 5.3 is a complete and utter turd to any 3.5 ecoboost. Having owned both I can say that with fact. Off the line, the 5.3L was slower than my naturally aspirated 1.6 Fiesta thanks to piss poor torque management. That thing had less than 120HP and a terrible 6spd auto.

I have a '17 Sierra 1500 DC 4x4 with a 5.3 and a 6 spd/3.42. It's certainly no turd.  
Stock, they can run into the high 14's, which is right on par or within a tenth or two of the stock EB 3.5's in the same configs. They aren't giving up anything.
I expect the 19's are noticeably quicker given they're much lighter.

I have a suspicion that these engines are conservatively rated, as they regularly beat the Ram 5.7 hemis which are rated at a lot more power.

Now, can we please get back to discussing the positive merits of the new 2.7 turbo 4?

Edited September 4, 2019 by Nanotech Environmental

[greco2003]

New here currently driving a 2017 Colorado 2.5L I4 going to test drive the new Silverado with the 2.7L turbo Saturday. I’ve driven the 5.3L v8 already really liked it looking at a 2.7L RST all star edition double cab. From what I’ve seen on the reviews people seem to like this engine. Does it feel week at all during take offs or anything thanks.

[Jricharc]

Interested to hear your thoughts on the two, I’m looking to get a 5.3 or the 2.7 depending on the deals.