Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
On 7/28/2021 at 6:35 AM, Jonathan Akers said:

I will say I wish I drove an Ecoboost before pulling the trigger on the Silverado, but I was just worried about reliability (Found On Road Dead). How do the F150 2.7 and 3.5 compare to the GM 2.7? Can't really find much on youtube about how they drive.

At least here in Southern California Ford charges $995 for the 2.7L and $2,595 for the 3.5L Whereas Chevy gives you $2,000 back for choosing the 2.7L In that regard I don't think it's fair to compare the 3 engines. Both EcoBoosts are solid choices and the 3.5L is a beast of an engine. However, it really boils down to each person's needs. The 2.7L engine fits my needs really well and I can't say I miss the 3.5L. If I'm not mistaken you probably have the most miles on a 2.7L of anyone here and you drive in much tougher conditions than me. If you can manage with a 2.7L I think most city slickers should be fine.

Posted
On 7/23/2021 at 2:10 PM, Bill Reinhardt said:

Got a few questions for those with the 2.7L, hopefully you guys can help me out.

 

I'm interested in the 2021 Elevation models. Having a hard time deciding between the 5.3 and the 2.7 for my use. For how I use a truck, payload is key. It will be my primary means of transport as well (75% city/25% highway). With that said, it seems like the 2.7L is right up my alley as the payload is north of 1800 lbs and gets the best city mileage of the lineup.

 

However, it seems like there are comments of turbo or transmission lag when passing on the highway. Wondering if these comments are justified? From some of the video reviews I've seen, the reviewer will give it some juice to represent a pass, the engine will rev up, then the reviewer will count 1 or 2 seconds until the truck actually spools/shifts, then finally accelerates. Does not appear to have that issue from a stop. If anyone could share their experience, that'd be appreciated.

 

If the lag is real, it would probably annoy the hell out of me. I also have to ask if the issue goes away with the 5.3L, or if it's an 8-speed problem (or both). My local dealerships are getting a few more trucks in over the coming weeks that I can go and drive to find out for myself, but just wondering what the tribal knowledge is on this topic before hand.

How fast do you plan on driving and do you deal with a lot of hills? In the City the 2.7L has more than ample torque to cruise around and minimal turbo lag. On the highway I can easily hit 85mph with 4 passengers total and about 400 lbs of cargo in the bed, but that's on flat stretches. On steep hills I think the 5.3L will probably do better, but flip side is I believe you also take a hit on payload.

Posted
6 hours ago, 2.7fanboy said:

How fast do you plan on driving and do you deal with a lot of hills? In the City the 2.7L has more than ample torque to cruise around and minimal turbo lag. On the highway I can easily hit 85mph with 4 passengers total and about 400 lbs of cargo in the bed, but that's on flat stretches. On steep hills I think the 5.3L will probably do better, but flip side is I believe you also take a hit on payload.

 

Can't drive too fast where I live, it's also pretty flat. Seems like the 2.7L is a good fit, now do I wait for the 2022 refresh?

Posted
3 hours ago, Bill Reinhardt said:

 

Can't drive too fast where I live, it's also pretty flat. Seems like the 2.7L is a good fit, now do I wait for the 2022 refresh?

If you find one now that you like and can get a decent deal I would. This chip shortage might go through 2022 and who knows what kind of deals there will be then. 

  • 4 weeks later...
Posted

Just picked up my 2021 Silverado RST on 8/25 with the 2.7L. I wanted to thank everyone that contributed to this thread. I was initially dismissing a 4cyl in a full size truck but pulled the trigger after seeing the positive comments here. I wouldn't have even gone to look at the truck if I hadn't seen this thread. I realized that for what I want the truck for, I don't need 12,000lb towing capacity but 9,000 is plenty. I doubt I would ever tow more than about 5,000lbs anyway. Maybe a small travel trailer when I retire to wander the country in style.

 

I drove the truck home about 55 miles and was impressed with the ride and the power of the engine. I have only had the truck 2 days but so far I'm very happy with my purchase. I left Chevrolet for a bit but am happy to be back in the bowtie family! 

 

I've ordered running boards and an organizer tray for the console. Still trying to decide what else to get...

 

Thank you again!

Laura

  • Like 2
Posted
13 minutes ago, Cougfan said:

Just picked up my 2021 Silverado RST on 8/25 with the 2.7L. I wanted to thank everyone that contributed to this thread. I was initially dismissing a 4cyl in a full size truck but pulled the trigger after seeing the positive comments here. I wouldn't have even gone to look at the truck if I hadn't seen this thread. I realized that for what I want the truck for, I don't need 12,000lb towing capacity but 9,000 is plenty. I doubt I would ever tow more than about 5,000lbs anyway. Maybe a small travel trailer when I retire to wander the country in style.

 

I drove the truck home about 55 miles and was impressed with the ride and the power of the engine. I have only had the truck 2 days but so far I'm very happy with my purchase. I left Chevrolet for a bit but am happy to be back in the bowtie family! 

 

I've ordered running boards and an organizer tray for the console. Still trying to decide what else to get...

 

Thank you again!

Laura

Glad to hear someone say they dismissed the 2.7 then drove it and changed their mind!  They are hard to come by right now due to manufacturing but when you can, replace the rear shocks with Bilsteins. It makes a huge difference in ride. That combined with the light engine, my RST handles pretty darn good for a truck!

  • Like 1
Posted

I’ve had my 2020 Silverado with the 2.7T now for almost 2 years and I love it. 
Just got back from a 3100 mile trip from North Texas to Montana via South Dakota and the Black Hills. 
Four adults with 500 pounds of luggage and crap. 
My son and I did the driving. The truck performed flawlessly. Mileage was awesome. I didn’t put the pencil to it but when we filled it up it gave us a 600 mile range. 
We drove about 4 over the speed limit sometimes doing 85 just staying with the traffic.

My son owns a 2019 Silverado with a 5.3 and was really impressed with the 2.7. He said there was no way the 5.3 would get the mileage that the 2.7 does and the power was just as good. 
I’m very happy with my little 4 banger!

  • Like 1
  • 2 weeks later...
Posted

Just got back from a 500 mile trip to pick up some deck boards from my sister in Medford, OR. I loaded up as many of the boards that would fit in the bed and headed back north up I-5. I had 4 small mountains to go over with mostly 6% grades, and the truck just drove up those hills, with all that weight in the back, like it was nothing. Really impressed with the power the engine has. The truck was very comfortable on the drive and even my pup (that hates to ride in the car) didn't seem to be as stressed out in this truck. I got about 23mpg on the way down and 20mpg on the way home. I know I'll get better mpg as the engine gets a few more miles on it. The only problem I had was my iPod would only play about 10 songs and then stop. I had to keep unplugging it and plugging it back in. 

 

I know there are people out there that say they will never get the 4cyl in a truck, but if they would just drive it, they might be surprised. Just like I was.

 

 

  • Like 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, JimCost2014 said:

Is he/she a Husky?😬😮

No, she's a little Min Pin/Chihuahua mix. I'm a Washington State University Cougars fan. I would NEVER have a Husky 🤣 

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, Cougfan said:

No, she's a little Min Pin/Chihuahua mix. I'm a Washington State University Cougars fan. I would NEVER have a Husky 🤣 

Cougfan gave it away, and you are correct, you can not have just one, you need 4:  GO DAWGS!!!

IMG_0585.jpg.df46f37d3e7d518718f00ec6d46f4c36.jpg

Edited by JimCost2014
  • Like 2
Posted
1 minute ago, JimCost2014 said:

Cougfan gave it away, and you are correct, you can not have just one, you need 4:  GO DAWGS!!!

IMG_0585.jpg.df46f37d3e7d518718f00ec6d46f4c36.jpg

 

Oh gosh those dogs are all beautiful!! I can only have one where I live and it has to be less than 30lbs so couldn't have 1 the size of yours. Maybe both our teams will have better luck next week. I have family members that have gone to both schools but my heart is in Pullman...GO COUGS!

  • Like 1
Posted
10 minutes ago, Cougfan said:

 

Oh gosh those dogs are all beautiful!! I can only have one where I live and it has to be less than 30lbs so couldn't have 1 the size of yours. Maybe both our teams will have better luck next week. I have family members that have gone to both schools but my heart is in Pullman...GO COUGS!

I hope so, no offense to Montana, but that was one of the most embarrassing loses I can remember. 

 

The "Dawgs" thank you for the compliment👍

 

And congratulations on your truck, great to hear you like it!!!

Posted
 

Glad to hear someone say they dismissed the 2.7 then drove it and changed their mind!  They are hard to come by right now due to manufacturing but when you can, replace the rear shocks with Bilsteins. It makes a huge difference in ride. That combined with the light engine, my RST handles pretty darn good for a truck!

:wtf: I keep seeing this Bilstein koolaid. I have made the switch (after my stockers wore out nearly 70k later and miles of back country driving), the difference is slight and I can only imagine that much less so when only doing one end. I bet 9 out of 10 people if given the chance to ride back to back with only a rear shock change on stockers that are low miles at that would not be able to tell a difference. Even replacing all four when worn out the difference wasn't huge...

 

Tyler

  • Like 1
Posted
 

Just got back from a 500 mile trip to pick up some deck boards from my sister in Medford, OR. I loaded up as many of the boards that would fit in the bed and headed back north up I-5. I had 4 small mountains to go over with mostly 6% grades, and the truck just drove up those hills, with all that weight in the back, like it was nothing. Really impressed with the power the engine has. The truck was very comfortable on the drive and even my pup (that hates to ride in the car) didn't seem to be as stressed out in this truck. I got about 23mpg on the way down and 20mpg on the way home. I know I'll get better mpg as the engine gets a few more miles on it. The only problem I had was my iPod would only play about 10 songs and then stop. I had to keep unplugging it and plugging it back in. 

 

I know there are people out there that say they will never get the 4cyl in a truck, but if they would just drive it, they might be surprised. Just like I was.

 

 

Might want to change your signature, it isn't a twin turbo but rather a single turbo 2.7L motor. 

 

I am stocked for this motor when it arrives in the midsize trucks. My buddy just got one as a company truck and with the market he decided to sell his 2500 Ram and keep this since they offered him more than he paid for it nearly 2 years ago. This four cylinder was plenty powerful for his hauling and towing needs (he has 5 acres and raises donkeys, it was plenty of truck). I can only imagine how it will do in a 1k lighter truck (please keep the CCLB in the next gen Colorado/Canyon and up the towing and payload a little). 

 

I will say my other buddy just picked up a 3.0 d-max and that he says is impressive and it sure is quiet. I need to go for a drive in both those trucks next time I see them. 

 

Tyler

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

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • 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. 
    • 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.  
    • Have considered installing a DC to DC charger in your camper to replace your isolator?  
    • 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.  
    • 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...