Jump to content
  • Sign up for FREE! Become a GM-Trucks.com Member Today!

    In 20 seconds you can become part of the worlds largest and oldest community discussing General Motors, Chevrolet and GMC branded pickups, crossovers, and SUVs. From buying research to owner support, join 1.5 MILLION GM Truck Enthusiasts every month who use GM-Trucks.com as a daily part of their ownership experience. 

2021 Silverado 2.7 WT


Recommended Posts

On 4/3/2021 at 2:14 PM, f8l vnm said:

Nuff said....

It's a great summary but it's missing torque curves, which would show why the turbo feels so much stronger than the 4.3 and in some situations even the 5.3. An engine produces power outside of "peak hp" or "peak torque", somehow that never comes up in these discussions, but peak power figures only tell a fraction of the story.

 

So the 14% difference in torque is only when both are at peak; the difference will probably be closer to 30% or 40% when you compare both engines running at (say) 1500 rpms.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, the wanderer said:

It's a great summary but it's missing torque curves, which would show why the turbo feels so much stronger than the 4.3 and in some situations even the 5.3. An engine produces power outside of "peak hp" or "peak torque", somehow that never comes up in these discussions, but peak power figures only tell a fraction of the story.

 

So the 14% difference in torque is only when both are at peak; the difference will probably be closer to 30% or 40% when you compare both engines running at (say) 1500 rpms.

Actually wanderer it's at WOT at ANY rpm. Everyone seems to forget that and ICE is a DEMAND device and only produces the power required to over come the resistance applied. In a trip today of 150 miles my data recorder never showed more than 75 REQUIRED horsepower. Not even on the on ramps of I-80, not on the steepest hill. A Flathead 239 CID Ford can put up that number. I don't drive 'matted' 25% of the time an neither does anyone else. Dyno curves only matter at WOT. Who does a dyno pull at 30% ????

 

Everyone, put dyno sheets down and step away from thoughtlessness. 

:wtf::wtf::wtf:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

And once again we are comparing the the flex fuel 4.3 on 87 to the 2.7 at maximum boost. Try again on E-85/ 

According to the US Department of Energy, E85 is flex fuel. You have to compare them apples to apples, grumpy. The vast majority of people don’t use E85, plus it is not as efficient as gasoline, so your mpgs suffer, which makes the gap wider vs the 2.7... you’re practically saying yes, the 2.7 is better at all those things, but in a perfect environment, the 4.3 may beat it in one area. The ol “I’m not as good as I once was, but I am as good once as I ever was” that you live your life by.

 

Do they not have debates on how the 4.3 is the best motor ever in the previous gen forum? 

 

 

Edited by 2020SilveradoCC
  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/30/2021 at 10:29 AM, Descartian said:

Too much bitching from all sides. I’m out of this thread. 

I understand why you say this. It’s just grumpy bear being grumpy bear. If you look at almost every 2.7 thread on this site, he is on it. It’s just a waste of time and counterproductive to everything the forum is about. I think everyone just gets tired of not being able to have one 2.7 post that is helpful. Instead, it’s constantly people commenting on them telling them why the engine sucks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, 2020SilveradoCC said:

According to the US Department of Energy, E85 is flex fuel. You have to compare them apples to apples, grumpy. The vast majority of people don’t use E85, plus it is not as efficient as gasoline, so your mpgs suffer, which makes the gap wider vs the 2.7... you’re practically saying yes, the 2.7 is better at all those things, but in a perfect environment, the 4.3 may beat it in one area. The ol “I’m not as good as I once was, but I am as good once as I ever was” that you live your life by.

 

Do they not have debates on how the 4.3 is the best motor ever in the previous gen forum? 

 

 

But only when I'm doing the comparison?

Give it a rest!

Hello Turbo v N/A!!

Nope. 

E-85 is a power adder just like a TURBO.

It's totally fair as MOST PEOPLE DON'T RUN AROUND ON FULL BOOST EITHER.

By your argument the 2.7 whips the 5.3 below 3,000 rpm.

Lord give it some thought. 

 

Not at all. I'm saying a distinction without a difference and allot of added complexity.

GM trying to be a FORD 

 

No they have debates as to why the 5.3 is a better motor than the 4.3 and the 6.2 is better than both.

The 4.3 is just the sites whipping post.

Makes me think it's what others wish to be.

😉 

 

I'm not anti 2.7. Made that clear in several post not. Nice engineering. Once again.

I'm against people peeing down my leg telling me it's only raining.

 :crazy:

 

 

This isn't FuelEconomy.Gov or the EPA... this is 135,000 miles in the real world.  Every tank of every year. Until I see a 2.7 do this HAND CALCULATED / PUMP METERED over at least 100,000 miles I'm calling :bs: 

 

You don't have a 2.7 now, you ain't never had, there isn't one in the future better than this.


 

image.thumb.png.ab33403d73d219abf3350acb9b8564fe.png

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But only when I'm doing the comparison?

Give it a rest!

Hello Turbo v N/A!!

Nope. 

E-85 is a power adder just like a TURBO.

It's totally fair as MOST PEOPLE DON'T RUN AROUND ON FULL BOOST EITHER.

By your argument the 2.7 whips the 5.3 below 3,000 rpm.

Lord give it some thought. 

 

Not at all. I'm saying a distinction without a difference and allot of added complexity.

GM trying to be a FORD 

 

No they have debates as to why the 5.3 is a better motor than the 4.3 and the 6.2 is better than both.

The 4.3 is just the sites whipping post.

Makes me think it's what others wish to be.

[emoji6] 

 

I'm not anti 2.7. Made that clear in several post not. Nice engineering. Once again.

I'm against people peeing down my leg telling me it's only raining.

 :crazy:

 

 

This isn't FuelEconomy.Gov or the EPA... this is 135,000 miles in the real world.  Every tank of every year. Until I see a 2.7 do this HAND CALCULATED / PUMP METERED over at least 100,000 miles I'm calling :bs: 

 

You don't have a 2.7 now, you ain't never had, there isn't one in the future better than this.


 
image.thumb.png.ab33403d73d219abf3350acb9b8564fe.png
 
 
 

Rofl holy crap he’s saying he gets to compare E-85 because the 2.7 has a turbo, which is the whole point. He can’t see it anyway since I called him out over multiple threads about his lies by omission but this conversation twisting takes the cake. How delusional can an individual truly be.

Hey, Grumpy, for your chart, is that stock thermostat, stock torque converter, stock oil weights, and intact towing configuration? No? You left that part out conveniently, didn’t you. [emoji23]
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

Actually wanderer it's at WOT at ANY rpm. Everyone seems to forget that and ICE is a DEMAND device and only produces the power required to over come the resistance applied. In a trip today of 150 miles my data recorder never showed more than 75 REQUIRED horsepower. Not even on the on ramps of I-80, not on the steepest hill. A Flathead 239 CID Ford can put up that number. I don't drive 'matted' 25% of the time an neither does anyone else. Dyno curves only matter at WOT. Who does a dyno pull at 30% ????

 

Everyone, put dyno sheets down and step away from thoughtlessness. 

:wtf::wtf::wtf:

 

HP/Torque ratings on an engine are measured at one spot; where it makes the most/peak HP, and where it makes the most/peak torque. For the 4.3, its:

285 hp @ 5300 RPM

305 lb ft  @ 3900 RPM

 

When you're truck is running at 3000 rpms, it's not making 285 HP, it's making far less, about 170 HP. 


Notice in graph below how peak torque hits about 3900?

At 1500 rpms, the 4.3 is at 240 lb ft.

At 1500 rpms, the 2.7 is at peak torque, 348, and it's pretty much flat all the way there to redline.

 

Which means, the 4.3 is making only 68% of the torque the 2.7 is, at 1500 rpms.

 

 

 

 

https://media.gm.com/media/us/en/chevrolet/news.detail.html/content/Pages/news/us/en/2013/Jun/0619-silverado-v6-fe.html

 

spacer.png

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Keep it going and Grumpy will add you to his list of blocked people. He is yesterday's snowflake that still thinks he's relevant today. Notice how he dodged the point about how inefficient E85 is. Gasoline produces more power than E85. In order for an engine to make peak energy on ethanol it needs to be built for it. None of GM's engines are. GM's engines are only built to accommodate ethanol. Big difference.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most people give results from personal experience, no brainer I know. This is how it works in my world. Some people think you should do it their way and only. Or your a hash tag idiot. I’m lucky I have 4 vehicles. Two 4s one V-6 and a V-8. I like them all. My performance 4 gets worse fuel mileage than the much quicker performance 6. Different times. One is an 01, the 6 is an 2011. The 2.7 could be the new best GM gas engine time will tell. I’m open minded. Just a few short years ago if it wasn’t a tuned V-8 with loud pipes. I wouldn’t leave town with it. I just drove across country in a CRV. It pretty much drove itself. I never thought something so small could be so comfortable.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep, you really need to own one to be able to tell the tale.

I do. 2020 Silverado 1500 2.7T. Almost a year and a half now.

It is a much better truck than my 2014 Silverado 1500 5.3 was.

It's peppy and gets better mileage on 87 octane.

I like it a lot.

I could care less about all the numbers.

Real life experience tells me all I need to know.

It's a good little engine and I'm glad I bought it.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
HP/Torque ratings on an engine are measured at one spot; where it makes the most/peak HP, and where it makes the most/peak torque. For the 4.3, its:
285 hp @ 5300 RPM
305 lb ft  @ 3900 RPM
 
When you're truck is running at 3000 rpms, it's not making 285 HP, it's making far less, about 170 HP. 

Notice in graph below how peak torque hits about 3900?
At 1500 rpms, the 4.3 is at 240 lb ft.
At 1500 rpms, the 2.7 is at peak torque, 348, and it's pretty much flat all the way there to redline.
 
Which means, the 4.3 is making only 68% of the torque the 2.7 is, at 1500 rpms.
 
 
 
 
https://media.gm.com/media/us/en/chevrolet/news.detail.html/content/Pages/news/us/en/2013/Jun/0619-silverado-v6-fe.html
 
061813-sae-2014-silverado-torque-chart.jpg
 
This and the fact low end torque is great for towing, which is why.... Well, diesels still exist and are primarily bought for towing and fuel economy. I don't get why this guy is still here arguing. I feel bad for the op.
Link to comment
Share on other sites



Keep it going and Grumpy will add you to his list of blocked people. He is yesterday's snowflake that still thinks he's relevant today. Notice how he dodged the point about how inefficient E85 is. Gasoline produces more power than E85. In order for an engine to make peak energy on ethanol it needs to be built for it. None of GM's engines are. GM's engines are only built to accommodate ethanol. Big difference.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk




E85 does allow you to build more power due to its higher octane rating, but it loses out to gas in btus (~20% lower.)

Just a minor correction.
Link to comment
Share on other sites






E85 does allow you to build more power due to its higher octane rating, but it loses out to gas in btus (~20% lower.)

Just a minor correction.
You are correct. I was just trying to keep it simple. All the gasoline engines I've seen that take full advantage of E85 were modified and tuned beyond what simple bolt ons would achieve. Those engines were dedicated to run E85 only. In order to run gasoline a new tube needed to be uploaded into the car's ECU.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

I am a used car dealer I tow a 20' open car trailer  2300 #  every week

from Tallahassee FL. to Dothan Alabama loaded , This week I had a 2005

F150 crew cab 4x4 Lariat on the trailer My 2021 regular cab 2.7 WT. Towed this 

Like a dream 70 mph 13.5 mpg I love it !  9600# Trailer rated.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.