2021 Silverado 2.7 WT

Descartian · March 26, 2021

The problem with the 2.7 is that it’s already at its max limits. There’s no modding, no adding power and although it is to be seen we commonly see that a engine run at its max capacity does not have the same longevity as an under driven engine.

Grumpy Bear · March 26, 2021

1 hour ago, the wanderer said:

ok, you personally don't realize it, but everybody else over 40 certainly does. V6's STILL do not have the same trust by many people as a v8 does. You're simply continuing the tradition of hating on something you haven't purchased, and probably haven't driven.

The 4.3 was too old, it reached EOL. They probably could not make it work with emissions. It had a really good run, just like the 3800 I loved so much in one of my previous cars.

The bottom line is; the 2.7 decimates the 4.3 in every metric; except perhaps longevity which is still an unknown. Don't be so hard on it, Grumpy, I for one would purchase it before the 5.3.

Oh boy. :crackup: You like most of your generation don't seem to understand the the Ecotec3 4.3 IS NOT the Vortec platform. It's a total clean sheet design started in 2014 with all the other NEW Ecotec3 motors and still more that able and relevant. How is it that anyone old enough to drive doesn't know this?

It is blood bother to the current 5.3 & 6.2 motors. It will pass any emission test the other two will and driven by an adult will give nothing away in fuel efficiency. I'm currently sitting on 135K miles of 28 mpg life time. Over 30 mpg over the six summer months. Let me know when your 2.7 matches that.

Here's something else the seems to escape the multitudes. Thermal efficiency driven by a stand alone Turbo is about two decades past it's sell date the WAY GM does it. Cam-less Free Valve, Koenigsegg and Atkinson cycle aka MAZDA are much more current. And yes you can turbo those as well. But you guys can't handle AFM/DFM so a camless motor would send you round the bend. GM is doing the same old same old getting you to buy the last of their ICE's. The 4.3 is a rock.

You might have a hard time with this idea but us old guys know something you young guys haven't lived long enough to experience yet. "There is nothing new under the sun".

Son, IF it has a motor and wheels I've driven it, likely raced it and can fly the box and wrapper it came in.

Want up to date? Tesla is a snail. Take note at 4:40 F1 motors are...drum roll please V6's

newdude · March 26, 2021

45 minutes ago, Grumpy Bear said:

Here's something else the seems to escape the multitudes. Thermal efficiency driven by a stand alone Turbo is about two decades past it's sell date the WAY GM does it. Cam-less Free Valve, Koenigsegg and Atkinson cycle aka MAZDA are much more current. And yes you can turbo those as well. But you guys can't handle AFM/DFM so a camless motor would send you round the bend. GM is doing the same old same old getting you to buy the last of their ICE's. The 4.3 is a rock.

There's been multiple reports that Mr. Koenigsegg and his Freevalve wanted to license it to OEMs to put it into production.

IMO, Freevalve would almost single handedly extend ICE engines for MANY years. The big EV push wouldn't have hit as quick if Freevalve was all over the place. Lighter engines, infinite control on valve timing, cylinder deactivation, faster catalyst warmups, varying operational cycles to optimize and reduce emissions.

TNTSierra · March 26, 2021

1 hour ago, Descartian said:

The problem with the 2.7 is that it’s already at its max limits. There’s no modding, no adding power and although it is to be seen we commonly see that a engine run at its max capacity does not have the same longevity as an under driven engine.

Isn’t the 2.7L in a Cadillac and make like 15 HP and 32 TQ more than the truck?? I don’t think it’s reached it’s limit. It has a ton left.
Now I will agree with you on longevity! Who knows but the 4.3L is bullet proof. It’s a shame they didn’t mate it with 8 spd or 10 spd.

Grumpy Bear · March 26, 2021

1 hour ago, newdude said:

There's been multiple reports that Mr. Koenigsegg and his Freevalve wanted to license it to OEMs to put it into production.

IMO, Freevalve would almost single handedly extend ICE engines for MANY years. The big EV push wouldn't have hit as quick if Freevalve was all over the place. Lighter engines, infinite control on valve timing, cylinder deactivation, faster catalyst warmups, varying operational cycles to optimize and reduce emissions.

Infinite valve control. How many years did we spend finding ways to increase ramping rates and velocities? Roller cam was a long way up the food chain from the tri-lobe model T cams but the Free Valve technology is, as the kids say, Off the Chain!

f8l vnm · March 26, 2021

50 minutes ago, TNTSilverado said:

Isn’t the 2.7L in a Cadillac and make like 15 HP and 32 TQ more than the truck?? I don’t think it’s reached it’s limit. It has a ton left.
Now I will agree with you on longevity! Who knows but the 4.3L is bullet proof. It’s a shame they didn’t mate it with 8 spd or 10 spd.

I think that's partly because on the Cadi I believe its a 91 octane rating? I could be wrong. The power difference could be 1 LB of boost . None the less hard to believe you cant dyno tune a turbo engine/E85 for more power. I do agree I don't think its maxed out.

OnTheReel · March 26, 2021

Every. Single. Time. Someone posts about their new 2.7 truck.

Look how most trucks get used and tell me it isn’t pretty much perfect for 90% of people.

And if they made it more tunable it would be fun to turn that thing up to 11 and see what it can do. I’ve always been jealous of the performance people get out of the ecoboost trucks with just a tune.

newdude · March 27, 2021

14 hours ago, f8l vnm said:

I think that's partly because on the Cadi I believe its a 91 octane rating? I could be wrong. The power difference could be 1 LB of boost . None the less hard to believe you cant dyno tune a turbo engine/E85 for more power. I do agree I don't think its maxed out.

14 hours ago, OnTheReel said:

Every. Single. Time. Someone posts about their new 2.7 truck.

Look how most trucks get used and tell me it isn’t pretty much perfect for 90% of people.

And if they made it more tunable it would be fun to turn that thing up to 11 and see what it can do. I’ve always been jealous of the performance people get out of the ecoboost trucks with just a tune.

Yep the Cadillac CT4-V version is 10 speed and tuning. Same mechanicals so the truck version would totally be capable of the CT4-V power numbers if the ECM can be exercised (which is getting harder and harder).

Cadillac CT4’s Engine Created a “Torque Monster” (gm.com)

Quote

A dual volute 2.7T engine is standard in the CT4-V (325 horsepower and 380 lb.-ft. of torque) and available in the CT4 Premium Luxury (310 horsepower and 350 lb.-ft. of torque) 1. The engine was originally developed as a clean-sheet design for GM with first use in the 2019 Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra. But from the beginning, this engine was also planned for Cadillac’s new sub-compact sedan as well. And for CT4, what is under the hood is much more than a truck engine.

“While the CT4’s 2.7T engine shares basic engine hardware with the GM trucks, CT4’s refinement and manners are delivered through Cadillac-specific content and tuning. The result is faster response, more power and more torque in the CT4,” said Kevin Luchansky, Cadillac assistant chief engineer, Global Engines. “The engine is matched perfectly with a segment-exclusive new 10-speed transmission, both being low mass with low inertia, which provides rapid rpm build and very crisp shifting.”

Edited March 27, 2021 by newdude

the wanderer · March 27, 2021

17 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

Oh boy. You like most of your generation don't seem to understand the the Ecotec3 4.3 IS NOT the Vortec platform. It's a total clean sheet design started in 2014 with all the other NEW Ecotec3 motors and still more that able and relevant. How is it that anyone old enough to drive doesn't know this?

It is blood bother to the current 5.3 & 6.2 motors. It will pass any emission test the other two will and driven by an adult will give nothing away in fuel efficiency. I'm currently sitting on 135K miles of 28 mpg life time. Over 30 mpg over the six summer months. Let me know when your 2.7 matches that.

Actually I didn't know that no, I don't even own a GM at this point so that's probably why I "don't know this". Nice attempt at trying to turn this into a generational debate though, good grief.

However you're probably still missing key points, such as that 5.3 "brother" is also getting dropped (both the 4.3 and the 5.3 with AFM). Think it's obvious, emissions and/or mpg aren't there for these engines. They upgraded the 5.3 with DFM but the 2.7 destroys the 4.3 so why bother upgrading it? They can also use the 2.7 in more cars/trucks, so it's a better fit in the lineup.

Grumpy Bear · March 27, 2021

25 minutes ago, the wanderer said:

Actually I didn't know that no, I don't even own a GM at this point so that's probably why I "don't know this". Nice attempt at trying to turn this into a generational debate though, good grief.

However you're probably still missing key points, such as that 5.3 "brother" is also getting dropped (both the 4.3 and the 5.3 with AFM). Think it's obvious, emissions and/or mpg aren't there for these engines. They upgraded the 5.3 with DFM but the 2.7 destroys the 4.3 so why bother upgrading it? They can also use the 2.7 in more cars/trucks, so it's a better fit in the lineup.

So you admit you don't know what you're talking about but sure you're correct?

And your positive because of assumptions you 'think make it obvious"

So the only thing your sure of is that my opinion has no value.

I see.

You have a nice day.

Ultimate 2022 · March 27, 2021

16 hours ago, OnTheReel said:

Every. Single. Time. Someone posts about their new 2.7 truck.

Look how most trucks get used and tell me it isn’t pretty much perfect for 90% of people.

And if they made it more tunable it would be fun to turn that thing up to 11 and see what it can do. I’ve always been jealous of the performance people get out of the ecoboost trucks with just a tune.

I was thinking the same thing. People can’t seem to accept that buyers are happy with their 2.7T.

the wanderer · March 27, 2021

2 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

So you admit you don't know what you're talking about but sure you're correct?

And your positive because of assumptions you 'think make it obvious"

So the only thing your sure of is that my opinion has no value.

I see.

You have a nice day.

What, you mean like making presumptions about an engine you haven't driven or owned? Funny how find a problem with my post but not your own baseless speculation.

Correct, I find no value in your opinion of the 2.7, you clearly think the 4.3 is the world's greatest engine so I don't know where you can go from there. Only downwards I presume. (Oh sh|t, another presumption, my bad.)

TNTSierra · March 27, 2021

4 hours ago, newdude said:

Yep the Cadillac CT4-V version is 10 speed and tuning. Same mechanicals so the truck version would totally be capable of the CT4-V power numbers if the ECM can be exercised (which is getting harder and harder).

Cadillac CT4’s Engine Created a “Torque Monster” (gm.com)

I thought so. I remember reading an article on car and driver or motor trend bragging about how nice this motor is paired with the 10 spd. Let’s hope GM boosts the HP/TQ on this and pairs it with the 10 spd.

Also put this in the Colorado/Canyon as a syclone/SS variant would sell very well.

f8l vnm · March 27, 2021

Heck that 3.6 Turbo engine GM has in the ATS ( too lazy to check what other GM cars get this engine ) really scoots out. Couple of guys in the Cadi boards have them on tune /DP and E85 running deep into 10s. Easily picking up 150+ HP

March 27, 2021

So you admit you don't know what you're talking about but sure you're correct?
And your positive because of assumptions you 'think make it obvious"
So the only thing your sure of is that my opinion has no value.
I see.
You have a nice day.

Geez guy, way to come off as an old jerk. I guess you nailed the name.

Sent from my SM-G781V using Tapatalk