Jump to content

Any 2.7 Elevations that are lifted?

ESierra
 Share

Recommended Posts

Nestor Romero Enthusiast

Nestor Romero

Posted
Posted
On 6/22/2022 at 1:51 PM, 4banger said:

Well that's the stigma anyway. It's just not how it works though. Case in point, 1989 dodge introduces the cummins turbo diesel, nice long stroke low hp but way more torque than hp rating and at way lower rpm than the naturally aspirated competition. In an era of big block v8's as the alternatives. And that tiny little 5.9 liter displacement could have a big camper on, 4 horses in the trailer behind and head to the mountains getting good mileage while the v8's wheezed so hard and sucked fuel at open bar rates. The reason that cummins was able to do that with it's anemic initial ratings of 160/170 hp and 400/410 ft/lbs torque...was because the turbos eliminate elevation...they only lose 0.05% power per 1000' but the naturally aspirated 3% per 1000' so elevation largely eliminated and easy to equal the big block competitors if not surpass them.

 

The 2.7t is the same formula...long stroke turbo with way more torque than horsepower and at lower rpm than naturally aspirated peak torque numbers. Stay with me here...I live Calgary Alberta, 4000' elevation. Where I live I have 22 ft/lbs more torque than the 6.2 and I have it at lower rpms. I'm sorry but this little boosted 4banger is far more truck designed engine than either of the 2 v8's which are both short stroke motors fyi. The 5.3 isn't really in the same league when elevation comes into play, they are equal at sea level but the 2.7 walks away from there. The 6.2 still has 62 more hp at my elevation despite that 22 ft/lbs torque deficit but it's burning 30% more fuel around town here, I know as I just returned a 2022 6.2 rental that I just put about 1000 miles on and picked up my 2.7 two days ago and closing in on it's first tank of break-in at about 260 miles right now and just under half tank on it's first tank! and it's 30% less fuel by the mpg rating on both trucks dashes back to back. And this torque pull is effortless...torque spins those tires, that's why diesels are preferred for the big trucks...it's not the diesel, it's the turbo's that make them special and able to pull down respectable mileage and power combined, turbo regardless of gas type is going to run lifts and tires and loads better than the v8's at most elevations above sea level where 60% of us live and with less gas consumed for everything but the longest steepest heaviest pulls. 

You seem to know what you’re talking about 

 

I have a question 

 

I got a 2023 TB Lt with the 4 cylinder 2.7 turbo

Came stock with 275/65/18 tires and 3.42 rear axle ratio.

If I install 295/70/18 will it affect performance significantly?  I do not care about MPGS.

I’m concerned about sluggishness. 

(already know the 296/70/18 tires clear UCA’S on stock 18” wheels)

  • Replies 31
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

pepe48134
pepe48134

Nothing extreme but I did a 2" lift with Bilstein 5100's and Nitto 34" Tall 275/65R20 w stock wheels on my 22 refreshed Silverado LT 2.7L. Nitto is the only 34" tire you can get in non Light Truck loa

TNTSierra
TNTSierra

Maybe because a 4 banger is mostly bought for fuel economy!?🤦‍♂️   And throwing bigger tires and a lift on it will destroy what it’s main purpose was built for!?!  🤷‍♂️

pepe48134
pepe48134

Top is just Bilsteins in front Bottom is with 1" rear blocks

Posted Images

4banger Enthusiast

4banger

Posted
Posted
On 12/26/2022 at 5:35 PM, Nestor Romero said:

You seem to know what you’re talking about 

 

I have a question 

 

I got a 2023 TB Lt with the 4 cylinder 2.7 turbo

Came stock with 275/65/18 tires and 3.42 rear axle ratio.

If I install 295/70/18 will it affect performance significantly?  I do not care about MPGS.

I’m concerned about sluggishness. 

(already know the 296/70/18 tires clear UCA’S on stock 18” wheels)

it's just rolling mass and drag, you've added more contact patch(drag) and whatever the rolling mass is, I know the stock 275 65r20's that came on my custom were 78.4 lbs per corner as I weighed them before and after I changed them, I ended up doing something super rare and went to a lighter weight combo and went 4 lbs lighter per corner with a 17" lightweight wheel and skinny tire the exact same height. I gained performance and mileage even going to load range 3 all terrain but most aftermarket wheels are absolute slugs, heavy wheels and heavy tires, most aim for looks vs performance enhancements, things in motion want to stay in motion, heavier wheels/tires don't want to change direction as easily and take more work to get up to speed and more work to slow down (brakes)...having said all that, your turbo will spin them every bit as good as the v8's, you've got more torque at lower rpm, the truck least likely to feel them is the diesel at it's got 460 ft/lbs at a mere 1500 rpm which is half of the the 2.7's peak torque rating

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

    • newdude
      2027 3.0 l Duramax

      By newdude · Posted

      Thrust bearing is a very small window.  But nice try.   Turbo oil filter?  Haven't seen any failures.  Change your oil more frequently.  Use a better oil than the factory oil.  
    • newdude
      2026 sierra bad brake controller

      By newdude · Posted

      There is a p/n called out in the one PI that GM has.  Curt 57003 inline load adapter that is used for LED trailers that are having trouble with these newer trucks.  No cutting, no splicing, etc.  GM did update the lighting module around 2023 to better pick up trailers with LED lighting, but it still can happen.     Here's the link to the Curt site for it - 7-Way RV Blade LED Electrical Adapter (Not a Wiring Extension) SKU #57003 by CURT   The PI I am referencing - MC-10208985-9999.pdf   Its not just a GM deal either.  Newer Fords and Rams have this same problem.       In another PI, they recommend that the trailer has a Pollock brand 7 way on it as that is who makes the truck sides for the OEMs.  GM is also big on making sure the trailer is trouble free.  So no wiring issues, all lights are functional, better quality 7 way plug, etc.     The other PI I am referencing - MC-10178359-9999.pdf   The model year range is older but it is the current PI for 2014-2026.  It calls out the Pollock RV HD 7 way they recommend.  
    • Atlas
      Wow I'm in a pickle. (Broke down truck) and a story.

      By Atlas · Posted

      That's part of the problem...the EGR has already been replaced, and I've already had the complete intake assembly removed, and the EGR passages were clear at that time. That leaves wiring, PCM, or another variable that I wasn't expecting. Best I can tell, it's not wiring or the PCM, so I'm grasping for straws.   The PCM uses the MAP reading to confirm the requisite loss of vacuum in the manifold when the EGR activates. Since that's vacuum related, it involves a lot of other systems which could play a role.   The overall diagnosis has to be considered too. The fuel lines in the intake had rubbed through and were dumping fuel into the intake, drowning the cylinders in fuel, and putting raw fuel into the sump and cat converter. The fuel system has been fixed but the complete path of damage may not be. If the cat was damaged and melted the internals, it could be partially obstructed and also playing into the EGR issue.   I'm retracing my steps; trying to go back to thinking thinking Horses not Zebras based on the clues I've been given. These engines aren't *that* complex.   Could it be, now that the truck is running well, that carbon and crud from being run with the fuel system in disarray is now dislodging and clogged my clean EGR passages where I can't see?  That's what the code is actually saying. The flow is restricted, dummy. Retrace step 1.   I may just need to remove the lower intake again. Before I do that I'm going to try removing the EGR and running the engine for a few seconds to see if it will blow anything lodged in the egr passages out through the open ports.     That's been helpful in the past. For the spider injector, there's no guarantee I'll get a working one. The spider I have seems fine now that the high pressure fuel line isn't making an early delivery via large hole. SO at least I'm not marooned and looking for one of those.   Row52 (dot com) is also a good one for watching for vehicles at local yards.  
    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      Disassembly may be Required!   Every blender makes claims but do  you ponder those claims? What was really said? Was it true?  Motive for saying it? What does in infer?  Is that inference true?    Let's do one.    Claim: Made from shear stable base oils.    What was said: Base Oils are shear proof.   Was it true: Yes.  ALL base oils are Newtonian.    Motive / Inference: To imply the fully formulated product is Shear Proof.    Is the Inference true?: Most fully formulated multigrade oils contain Viscosity Modifiers or VM's, sometimes called VII or Viscosity Index Improvers. There are four types. One is in fact shear proof but it also has a bad effect on extreme cold flow and is restricted to use in specialty oils. A second has limited shear called a 0-5 SSI polymer. Meaning its shear is limited to a range of zero to five percent as reported by the ASTM D6278 Shear Stability Index test. A few high end oils, like Torco SR-5, use them and brag about it profusely. Actually all that use it point it out. The last two shear dramatically and are often marketed as a 'feature' of the product aiding the oil to meet fuel standard requirements of ever stricter rules. One shears more than 5% and the other up to 20%. As you make guess, cost is directly linked to shear down and as such the majority of oils use the cheapest organic polymers sold to make grade and pass stringent tests.    PPD's or Pour Point Depressants also shear a bit, only a few percent and hide inside the 0-5 SSI capabilities.    The blender knows he can not out engineer Stribeck. Physics is not a suggestion. But he can wordcraft the unsuspecting toward believing a false claims INFERENCE. This is LEGAL. It is COMMON, and it is EFFECTIVE.         
    • Jsdirt
      2006 Silverado HVAC sensor location in dashboard

      By Jsdirt · Posted

      I don't recall ever dealing with one on an '06 and back. It may not even exist on that. I can't remember for sure.   Any kind of ice in or after the evaporator is normally due to low charge with both a clutch-cycling orifice tube system, and a TXV system.

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...