Jump to content

Looking for 2.7 Turbo towing reports!

the wanderer
 Share

Recommended Posts

the wanderer Enthusiast

the wanderer

Posted
Posted

I'm very interested in hearing reports of how the 2.7 is doing with respect to towing modest loads. There is the 2.7 fan thread which I've read through 100%, but just wondering if owners have any other information they might be willing to share?

 

Given an example travel trailer of roughly 5000 pounds:

 

- Does it bring a load up to speed from 0 mph, without redlining?

- How is the MPG (while towing)?

- When you're towing at (say) 63 mph what gear are you in (or what RPM are you sitting at on a flat road)?

- How much hunting does it do for slight increases of speed, or slight hills in the road?

- Comparison vs the 5.3 or 6.2 if you've experience with either engine?

- etc.

 

I have a very curious interest in this engine, and though I won't be trading my current truck in this year, I do like to have all my research done before I need a truck so that I can make a snap decision if/when it comes time.

  • Like 1
Bryant_Olson Enthusiast

Bryant_Olson

Posted
Posted

I have a boat that's maybe 4000lbs fully loaded and I get better mileage towing with my 2.7 than I did with my 2017 5.3.

I love my 2.7, I'll probably never go back to a 5.3. I get better mileage and I like the drive a lot better. All of that low torque just makes scootin around feel pretty effortless.

Sent from my SM-N981U using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Rodek Enthusiast

Rodek

Posted
Posted

Well, I'm not sure if this is helpful or not but I have the 2020 5.3 10 speed combination. It tows better than my brother's 2017 5.3 Silverado with the 8 speed. It gets up to speed better and when towing there's a 1-2 mpg difference with his 5,000lb loaded car trailer.  

 

I currently use my 2020 5.3 10 speed for towing a Jayco 25RB that's roughly 6800-7000lbs loaded. It got 10-13 MPG in driving conditions varying from mountains to  rolling hills and a little flat. Proper towing gear is always used (weight distribution hitch with sway control). 

 

I believe GM has rated the new 2.7 to be able to tow similar weights as the 5.3 due to engineers saying it's cooling capacity is good enough to do so. You may still consider it as it may get a little better day to day MPG. Over time that will add up. 

Bryant_Olson Enthusiast

Bryant_Olson

Posted
Posted



Well, I'm not sure if this is helpful or not but I have the 2020 5.3 10 speed combination. It tows better than my brother's 2017 5.3 Silverado with the 8 speed. It gets up to speed better and when towing there's a 1-2 mpg difference with his 5,000lb loaded car trailer.  


I 100% believe that. I had a 2014 that got better mileage than my 2017. My 2017 was also an LTZ with bigger wheels, which probably had something to do with it. That 8 speed was a clunky turd.

I still love the 2.7 and am getting probably 20% better overall mileage.

Sent from my SM-N981U using Tapatalk

jnissen Enthusiast

jnissen

Posted
Posted

Just get the 3.0L and you will have much better mileage and tow easily. Comes with the 10 speed to boot.

 

When you say the 2.7 gets good mileage... what numbers are we talking?

  • Like 1
Bryant_Olson Enthusiast

Bryant_Olson

Posted
Posted

I'm averaging 19.5 with just about as bad of driving routes as you can imagine.

24 on the highway, 15-16 towing the boat.

The 3.0 is cool and will get definitely get better mileage. But you're also paying 5-8k more out the door and diesel is more expensive. The ROI would be many years out I'm sure. If ever depending on how far you drive annually.

The 2.7 is kind of a gas version of a baby diesel. Peak torque at low RPM, higher torque than hp.

Sent from my SM-N981U using Tapatalk

the wanderer Enthusiast

the wanderer

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thanks for the reports guys, please keep them coming!

 

With respect to the diesel; no doubt I'd love to drive one, but not sure I want to own one. One diesel related issue outside of warranty and you never get your money back.

 

And the other problem is, they only offer them in expensive trims. GM plays games with their drive trains.

  • Like 1
  • 3 weeks later...
Justin Holland Enthusiast

Justin Holland

Posted
Posted
On 1/14/2021 at 10:24 AM, the wanderer said:

I'm very interested in hearing reports of how the 2.7 is doing with respect to towing modest loads. There is the 2.7 fan thread which I've read through 100%, but just wondering if owners have any other information they might be willing to share?

 

Given an example travel trailer of roughly 5000 pounds:

 

- Does it bring a load up to speed from 0 mph, without redlining?

- How is the MPG (while towing)?

- When you're towing at (say) 63 mph what gear are you in (or what RPM are you sitting at on a flat road)?

- How much hunting does it do for slight increases of speed, or slight hills in the road?

- Comparison vs the 5.3 or 6.2 if you've experience with either engine?

- etc.

 

I have a very curious interest in this engine, and though I won't be trading my current truck in this year, I do like to have all my research done before I need a truck so that I can make a snap decision if/when it comes time.

Here is TFL doing a towing test:

 

https://youtu.be/cSxBKR___Sg

mjonesjr84 Enthusiast

mjonesjr84

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, Justin Holland said:

Here is TFL doing a towing test:

 

https://youtu.be/cSxBKR___Sg

I was searching for that video as I was scrolling through reading this thread so I could post it here. That's an excellent video on the 2.7.

 

On 1/14/2021 at 10:24 PM, the wanderer said:

Thanks for the reports guys, please keep them coming!

 

With respect to the diesel; no doubt I'd love to drive one, but not sure I want to own one. One diesel related issue outside of warranty and you never get your money back.

 

And the other problem is, they only offer them in expensive trims. GM plays games with their drive trains.

The diesel comes with a 5 year 100,000 mile warranty. More than likely you'll have a new truck before the engine warranty runs out.

 

The lowest trim you can get the diesel in is the LT. Not much difference in the cost of the Custom and LT. The diesel is only a $950 upcharge in the 2021 models. 

RWTJR Enthusiast

RWTJR

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, Justin Holland said:

Here is TFL doing a towing test:

 

https://youtu.be/cSxBKR___Sg

 

That was surprising and somewhat impressive. For someone who never, or rarely, tows heavy loads this could be a good choice.

 

It's rumored this 2.7l turbo is the engine going into the next gen Colorado to replace the current NA 4 cyl and the 3.6l V6 (sadly maybe the 2.8 diesel also).

 

JMHO

No expertise implied or expressed

Bryant_Olson Enthusiast

Bryant_Olson

Posted
Posted
 
That was surprising and somewhat impressive. For someone who never, or rarely, tows heavy loads this could be a good choice.
 
It's rumored this 2.7l turbo is the engine going into the next gen Colorado to replace the current NA 4 cyl and the 3.6l V6 (sadly maybe the 2.8 diesel also).
 
JMHO
No expertise implied or expressed
Even if you do tow moderately heavy loads fairly often I still think it's a good option. Anything over 8 or 9k lbs in a half ton is a little iffy imho.

Sent from my SM-N981U using Tapatalk

Johnjr Enthusiast

Johnjr

Posted
Posted

I wish they would come out with a regular cab short bed I would consider this engine for my daily driver for work .my 17 year old Duramax is beating me to death. best vehicle I’ve ever owned!

Descartian Enthusiast

Descartian

Posted
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, John Sarappa said:

I wish they would come out with a regular cab short bed I would consider this engine for my daily driver for work .my 17 year old Duramax is beating me to death. best vehicle I’ve ever owned!

I have an ‘05 Durango with 240k city miles on it. It’s been a great truck and virtually problem free. I’m in your camp too, I wish they’d make a single cab short bed or at least standard bed. 

Edited by Descartian
  • 3 months later...
Red Hills New Member

Red Hills

Posted
Posted

I'd love to read more everyday towing reviews as well...however, at this point it would be pointless. Took possession of a 2.7l today to experience it myself! I'm coming out of a 2020 Ranger, pulling a 6000lb TT. With that under my belt, I have no reason to believe the 2.7 wont be up to the task. And..back into a full size, wife just never got comfy in the midsize pulln a 28' TT. (Even as always a passenger) I'll also add, when this motor goes into the Chevy midsizes....those are gonna be fun!

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

  • 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...