Jump to content

2022 Silverado 2.7 liter

gmer140
 Share

Recommended Posts

gmer140 Enthusiast

gmer140

Posted
Posted (edited)

So I have 10k miles on my 2.7 liter. Haul a brand new 29' RV.  5800 dry weight. My question is I get very bad gas mileage driving 65 mph on the freeway.  Average 9 mpg. W/O RV I get about 25 mpg.  Is this typical for others? 

 

Last time I forgot to push trailer mode button...and noticed the instant mpg was much higher.  When I pushed button immediately down shifted. Wondering if it's hard on truck and tyranny not to be in trailer mode.  Thanks for the time. 

Edited by gmer140
newdude Senior Enthusiast

newdude

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, gmer140 said:

So I have 10k miles on my 2.7 liter. Haul a brand new 29' RV.  5800 dry weight. My question is I get very bad gas mileage driving 65 mph on the freeway.  Average 9 mpg. W/O RV I get about 25 mpg.  Is this typical for others? 

 

Last time I forgot to push trailer mode button...and noticed the instant mpg was much higher.  When I pushed button immediately down shifted. Wondering if it's hard on truck and tyranny not to be in trailer mode.  Thanks for the time. 

 

 

You'd get 9mpg if it was a 5.3 or a 6.2 as well towing.  

 

Tow/haul mode should be used in your scenario.  It lets the transmission and the engine work better to pull the load.  

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
KARNUT Senior Enthusiast

KARNUT

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, newdude said:

 

 

You'd get 9mpg if it was a 5.3 or a 6.2 as well towing.  

 

Tow/haul mode should be used in your scenario.  It lets the transmission and the engine work better to pull the load.  

When I was pulling up until the early 2000s my pulling heavy MPGs was the same with gas or diesel. At that time the TQ ratings were close to the same. Today the big diesels across the brands are so powerful that medium and light pulling is effortless so the mileage is better. Is it worth the upgrade is the question.

  • Like 1
gmer140 Enthusiast

gmer140

Posted
  • Author
Posted
On 8/13/2023 at 10:59 AM, newdude said:

 

 

You'd get 9mpg if it was a 5.3 or a 6.2 as well towing.  

 

Tow/haul mode should be used in your scenario.  It lets the transmission and the engine work better to pull the load.  

Thx for reply. I had a 2019 5.3 b4 this truck. I think I got a few mpg better hauling.  But not nearly as good not hauling. Used to hear lots of exhaust noise. 2.7 I hear lots of turbo and engine noise. Quite a difference 

gmer140 Enthusiast

gmer140

Posted
  • Author
Posted
On 8/13/2023 at 11:18 AM, KARNUT said:

When I was pulling up until the early 2000s my pulling heavy MPGs was the same with gas or diesel. At that time the TQ ratings were close to the same. Today the big diesels across the brands are so powerful that medium and light pulling is effortless so the mileage is better. Is it worth the upgrade is the question.

Good point.  My son has the 6.2 diesel. It's a beast of a truck!

Transient Senior Enthusiast

Transient

Posted
Posted
On 8/14/2023 at 11:11 PM, gmer140 said:

Good point.  My son has the 6.2 diesel. It's a beast of a truck!

Who makes a 6.2 diesel?

4banger Enthusiast

4banger

Posted
Posted
On 8/14/2023 at 10:10 PM, gmer140 said:

Thx for reply. I had a 2019 5.3 b4 this truck. I think I got a few mpg better hauling.  But not nearly as good not hauling. Used to hear lots of exhaust noise. 2.7 I hear lots of turbo and engine noise. Quite a difference 

you'll get worse than the 5.3 towing because the 2.7 has more torque and will maintain the hill speeds better and you'll actually get there sooner so to speak, it's a direct relationship of power required to move the load, as other poster said you'll get pretty similar with all 3 gas engine choices, the 5.3 will wheeze more on the hills and simply can't make the power the 2.7 can so it can't suck as much fuel, pretty wild that these engines can go empty and run on 2 cylinders and sip fuel like a smaller discplacement motor should and then it can go beast mode and put down big block power when you ask it to, enjoy that ability to go from mild to wild, it's like the Incredible Hulk of motors 😉

  • Like 1
New chevy 2010 Enthusiast

New chevy 2010

Posted
Posted
On 8/12/2023 at 11:12 PM, gmer140 said:

So I have 10k miles on my 2.7 liter. Haul a brand new 29' RV.  5800 dry weight. My question is I get very bad gas mileage driving 65 mph on the freeway.  Average 9 mpg. W/O RV I get about 25 mpg.  Is this typical for others? 

 

Last time I forgot to push trailer mode button...and noticed the instant mpg was much higher.  When I pushed button immediately down shifted. Wondering if it's hard on truck and tyranny not to be in trailer mode.  Thanks for the time. 

Same mileage towing for me, took my Robalo 18ft boat down to Maryland and got between 9-12 MPG but get almost 24 empty, just the nature of the beast. I was in tow haul mode the whole time towing. 

  • Like 1
fondupot Senior Enthusiast

fondupot

Posted
Posted

Sounds about right. I towed a 5000lb load a few weeks ago and averaged about 10mpg.

 

Normally I average around 19-21 mixed driving 75% highway.

  • Like 1
Mshawn Enthusiast

Mshawn

Posted
Posted

Had a 2023 custom 2.7 T, 4x4 for a week . Loaded up trailer with 3032e tractor with bucket and bush hog on it. Drove 133 miles to my uncles place to drop off the tractor. Used new Silverado RST 4x4 5.3 to go pick it up a few months later. 2.7 got 8 gallons average. 5.3 got 11 average. Same route same towing weight.

  • Thanks 1
KARNUT Senior Enthusiast

KARNUT

Posted
Posted

Gear ratio and wind can determine mileage too. I’ve picked up two miles per gallon on a return trip over 185 miles on the same day. 

4banger Enthusiast

4banger

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 8/29/2023 at 10:53 AM, Mshawn said:

Had a 2023 custom 2.7 T, 4x4 for a week . Loaded up trailer with 3032e tractor with bucket and bush hog on it. Drove 133 miles to my uncles place to drop off the tractor. Used new Silverado RST 4x4 5.3 to go pick it up a few months later. 2.7 got 8 gallons average. 5.3 got 11 average. Same route same towing weight.

I just did a trip empty 450 km (280 miles) for work, got 11.2 l/100km (21.0 mpg) one way at 112 kmh(70mph), then 4 days later came back, same conditions/weather etc. and got 13.0 l/100km (18.1 mpg) home at same speed. This was hand calculated mileage. It surprised me, I was sure I was going to set a record as it just killed it on the way there. But unless you go both ways you cannot say the 5.3 is better. I have seen this first hand now and just recently too and it was 2.9 mpg different!...earlier in this month is when I did this. Was going to brag a bit about how awesome it can be empty on highway lol. I still did brag because even the full both ways round trip turned into essentially the factory hwy rating, I started bragging too soon when up there and had to come back after the trip and tell my friends the truth about the return trip and average lol. You can't account for elevations, winds, although I found winds neutral or normal both ways, I didn't have a screaming tailwind on way up nor fight a bad headwind on way back. 

 

The average came out to be 12.1 l/100km and it's highway rating is 12.0...and I have 4" lift, no chin spoiler, and 985 lbs of added fuel/tools/gear. Love this truck, still very impressive real world mid to northern Alberta highway round trip totalling 560 miles or 900 kms, about as controlled conditions as you can get, mild traffic both ways, only had to pass a handful of trucks either way.

Edited by 4banger
  • Like 1

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

    • richard wysong
      Needing this part.

      By richard wysong · Posted

      Looks like it's riveted to me. What is wrong with that 1? Welcome to the Forum!
    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      Missing pieces of the Assembly   Detergency vs Solvency   Not the same thing. Detergency is the mechanism that surrounds solid particulates preventing amalgamation. Usually accompanied by a Dispersant whose job it is to keep those encapsulated particles in Suspension. Solvency keeps things that can be dissolved in solution.    Salt is a solid that can be dissolved. Pepper is a solid that cannot be dissolved. A detergent/dispersant is effective on pepper but a solvent is more effective on salt. As long as the solids remain in either state, dissolved or dispersed then they can be be removed with the oil upon change.    How many wranglers does it take to herd cats? Depends on how many cats your herding. How much sponge does it take to soak up water? How much water is there to soak up? Point is most oil blends start with some herding ability and next to zero sponge and recently even fewer wranglers are being sent to do the same job.    So you start with a dozen cowboys and zero cows but at the drive progresses you pick up cows along the way, but not cowboys. At some point you have more cows that the wranglers can handle and some leave the herd. Deposits. And the API has an acceptable number of cows they are willing to let loose. In the ideal world zero is the right number for he rancher but to the butcher....a few lost is fine. This cow is beat to death. Let's move on....   Solvency isn't something oils on the Walmart shelf care about AT ALL. Problem is, you motor does. Fuels driven varnish sticks rings and only a solvent can keep them in check. The bet is that the solids driven portion that plug the expander rings and the oil drain backs and VVT screens and AFM screens will be an issue long before varnish is. Not that it wont be but if they market well enough the consumer can be kept ignorant enough to either believe it is "normal" (A quart in 1 or 2K is normal) OR is kept at bay longer than the first owner is likely to hang on to the unit. Solvency cost money.    Now the OEM's have John Q. Public buffaloed into the belief that the number cows accumulated along the trail is a known and predictable CONSTANT. It isn't. Nor is the rate at which they crossed paths with them. Only the number of wrangles is constant. Or was. Each new generation of oil sees fewer and fewer of them.    So what happens when the number of cowboys is lower (lower TBN) with each seasons trail but the trial is longer (OCI) and the number of cows along that trail continues increase? (Conditions that promote deposits).    For awhile the blenders were on to something. Better bases are harder to degrade (fewer cows) but that was overtaken by a longer trail (OCI) and improved breeding (More cows) while continuing to reduce the cowboy staffing levels (TBN/Aniline #).    Marketing has been successful. We've fired most of the staff, cows breed line bunnies, the trail is ten times longer and we've convinced the boss his ranch is in better shape that it ever was.    That kids is just the cleaning side. The side few pay attention to.     
    • davester
      Needing this part.

      By davester · Posted

      hit a junkyard.
    • Z45
      PF63 Oil Filters Going Away?

      By Z45 · Posted

      Mann+Hummel since 1941 per their web site 
    • B07
      Needing this part.

      By B07 · Posted

      Looking for this part for my truck. They don't sell just that one piece and to get it you have to pay over $100 even used for the whole air tube. The piece the hose clamp snaps into that is held on by the screw and nut. If anyone has access to one please let me know.

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...