Это видео недоступно.
Сожалеем об этом.
2019 Chevy Silverado 2.7L Turbo! | Not Quite A V8 Replacement...
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 1 апр 2019
- When Chevy created their new 2.7L turbo truck engine, they decided to go in a different direction than Ford did with their 2.7L Ecoboost V6. Instead of making it a V8 replacement, the Chevy / GMC 2.7L four-cylinder turbocharged engine is designed to be more of an upgrade from a V6 rather than a full-on V8 replacement and that is critical to understanding the way the pickup we drove this week behaves. That means the competition for Ford's 2.7L Ecoboost F-150 is not in fact the Silverado with the new 2.7 but rather the Silverado or Sierra with the 5.3L V8.
Join Today: bit.ly/2WdCEwW
The Best Cars, Trucks & SUVs: • The A List - The Best ...
Follow AoA on Facebook: theautobu...
Follow The Mountain Garden: goo.gl/icFWcd
i like that you focus on the small details, like passing speed and not just 0-60 and HP numbers. those are important things for people to know
The 4 banger does fit the lifestyle of the average consumer who doesn’t use their trucks to tow or work, so I think we should give some credit to Chevy for actually bringing something innovative to the pick up market, aside from the “Ecoboost”
All I gotta say is this damn engine should have been in the Colorado/canyon.
@ Kabloosh No Dude the Colorado needs the 5.3 or better yet the 6.2 !
Kabloosh I agree. This engine hooked up to the 10 speed auto would make the Colorado a really quick little truck. And I imagine that it would tow more also.
I'd agree, if they kept the smaller version of the Colorado/Canyon twins from before 2014.
My thoughts exactly. This could easily replace the 3.6L V6 in the Colorado/Canyon since that motor while great in a Impala or Traverse seems to lack low end torque.
@@KobiBlevins I'd say it's pretty damn quick right now. I have an 18' V6 4X4 crew cab and it runs away from my buddies 5.3 Silverado to 60 mph.
0 to 60 in 6.1 seconds is mighty impressive along with a 14.8 quarter mile.
This seems like a great option for people who use their truck to move people, help a friend move furniture; maybe tow a 5,000 lbs boat or camper in the summer. It has all power on tap like a turbocharged engine should and will still get decent mileage on the Interstate. I for one look forward to it if it's decently priced and surmise it would fill the great majority of people's truck needs.
bring back the Astro van as a modern interpretation with this 2.7 L turbo engine. I would buy it.
You are the first reviewer to actually explain the logic behind this engine. Thanks
I just bought one and I love it! It does everything I need a truck to do.
I got mine a month ago and I completely love it ! I use to have a 2012 silverado 4.3, wanted a v8 but got convinced for the 2.7 turbo and I'm amazed
I did too. Refresh version
I bought this truck today and it drives so smooth and the turbo whistle is already there stock! love it. And it is faster than the v8.
Itsthepurp Bu I wonder how long it will last ,In thinking about buying this truck but I’m not so sure yet
Daniel USA got 8k miles on it now, been perfect 👌 so far
Itsthepurp Bu i just got mines, I honestly love it for daily driving
not faster than my 2014 high country
How’s the towing
Alex, the engine option explanation was seriously impressive. The only way to improve it would be a full-on PowerPoint presentation. :)
This. Man explains everything in a super crystal clear manner. Hence why I love this channel.
I build the Silverado and Sierra and was real curious how the four cylinder engine was. Love these trucks!
I have the 2021 version, and it’s great. I won’t be towing much if anything at all. I will a lot of wood and such and the crew cab has plenty of room for the family. I love it.
Just got a 2021 Silverado with the 4 cylinder and it’s drives and feels really nice just hoping it’s reliable down the road
I need to remind you guys that in 1996. The top v8 half ton engine was a 5.7 v8 with
255 hp/330 pot @ 2800rpm. The 2.7 has 310 hp/348 pot @ 1500 rpm. It will out pull the 5.7 all day long.
@Mysterious Stranger From Arizona and the vortec will outpull the 1988-93 sbc 350 till the electric transmission gives away
The 2008 Ram with the 4.7L V8 has 310hp @ 5,650RPM. The towing capacity is 3,300 lbs.
Towing is about torque, this little beast has some torque but it also produces 75 hp per cylinder or 1.89 hp per cubic inch, This 165 CID engine will suffer internal stress more than that of a 255 hp 350 cubic inch engine, (.73/1) overtime this 4 cylinder will diminish in returns both hp and trade in value, these engines will be worn out due to the amount of work required. Generally if you want an engine to last 300,000 miles you have to keep the hp/in3 to 1:1 or lower. What we have here is the newest version of the 3.5L 5 cylinder debacle, advertised as a five cylinder that had the power of a six cylinder and the mileage of a four cylinder, personally I think they had it backwards. But if the driver is a latte drinking gentleman from the cities who thinks Four Wheelin' is parking on the grass at Central Park and pulling is tying off the dog leash on the back bumper then all is good.
you replied to me about the 910 ft/lb duramax diesel compared to this 2.7, what a shame you don't really know what you are talking about, this 2.7 is never going to outlast a diesel especially under loads, the fact is diesels have more torque than horsepower because they typically have long strokes and low RPM compared to gasoline engines, diesels are the workhorses of the world. This engine will be useless in 10 years, if the owners do any hauling or towing it will be crap, you cannot compare head to head a gas and diesel motor, anyone who has ever driven a truck knows diesels pull harder and last longer doing it. This engine is 970 ft/lbs and 445 hp, the reason for that is the 1,600 rpm peak torque, so while this little engine that can't is burning up the rings in a scream fest the diesel is just chugging along.
I love this engine when I drove it. It felt every bit as good as my 5.3 and smooth as hell. Wish I had one honestly
🤣
@ Marc Scoggin That 4 Banger will long be dead when the 5.3 is still running strong !
@@thunderbolt5354 I doubt it. Alot of people said the same thing about the ford 3.5 ecoboost v6. Turned out to be a great engine
@@Carolina-gj1wh Many more EcoBurst engines have had problems then the 5.3 GM V8 and the Ford 5.0 V8 !
@@thunderbolt5354 Ecoburst!!! That's a good one😂😂
TFL has this truck in real world testing on same patch of road they use for every test vehicle getting 24.5 mph highway driving. That is very impressive for a fullsize halfton truck.
This truck wasn't designed to tow a house down nor to blow the doors off a mustang. It was design to haul/tow a typical halfton load and get very good fuel economy. ....
Love my 2020 Silverado turbo. Great for the city, and pulling on the weekend
Bub 3 Years from now you will wish you had opted for the V8 !!!
@@thunderbolt5354 why is that? I'm curious because I bought the 2.7 turbo as well lol
@@davidms1992 that guy been talking crap about this truck's in all youtube videos lol.
@@mannycatalan1136 I was about to say the same thing. Weird dude.
I'd be interested in seeing a comparison between the Turbo 4 and the V8 in the Rockies at 6,000+ feet of elevation. Forced induction typically makes a huge difference at altitude.
Good review! A lot of people are bashing this engine for its small displacement and turbocharging. Here's my theory on it, this engine is not designed to be a heavy hauler but more of a daily driver for the average truck owner and being that they don't ever tow or haul much(if any), I think it was a smart move on GMs part to offer it. This engine will probably be more popular than some think. It's most likely that it won't be overworked but driven for economy, which from the reviews that I've seen, its doing well so far. I could be totally wrong here but time will tell.
Everything a v6 already did, only far more expensive to maintain and fix.
@@stupidass4567able not so much with the 4.3, although it is a good engine for durability, the fuel mileage is poor and the power ratings are lower than this current offering. You are absolutely correct about the expensive repairs part though. So in the end it may be a wash as far as upkeep goes.
Well I currently own a 2012 Chevrolet Silverado crew cab 5.3 with a 150000 miles the truck has been exceptional not the 1st problem still has original plugs & wires... my buddy just bought this exact truck we towed a 7x12 Box trailer Loaded with dirt bikes and gear probly 2000 pounds total 400 miles I can honestly say it pulled as well or better than my V8 i was completely amazed although the gas mileage was a few miles per gallon worse but we were doing between 75 and 80 too. Pulled like a champ
For some reason I see so many new Silverados here in Minnesota . Very nice looking truck
i'm old. there is no reason why this light truck should be any larger than a 1968 F-100. so puffed up. so filled with air, like a pastry.
Hahahaha!!!!
Great description!!!
Safety regulations my man.
Cumple zones and such buddy but I do miss how size efficient old trucks were but weren't safe for shit.
F-150s have been that way some time too
Wisdom right there
Ahhh yes......a full size, four cylinder for darn near a house payment for a couple years. After the depreciation gives no viable ROI. With all the tech, gadgets, paper thin metal & Hipster/Soccer Mom appeal.....these things should be getting substantially more MPG than my 20yr old GMC. No thanks.
every car has a negative return on investment
@@alexsbikesandmotors P1 F40 Supra Superbird
When you add forced induction it uses more fuel.
Id rather have the 4.3 and 4.8L.
No Replacement for displacement
Rob Ervin, no kidding. My 95 8.3 powerstroke gets better MPG and more power than the little 2.7. Smaller motor does not mean better MPG. We have friends who own new f150s one with the 3.0 V6 & 5.0 V8 and they both get 15MPG. It’s a brand new truck. They should be getting 18-20 MPG with the V6.
Overpriced junk that will not hold up. No thanks not for me! Not in this lifetime...To many people know whats going on behind the scenes at the manufacture,sabotage and deindustrialization of america's industries from the inside out.Is that something you would buy into or invest in? Not me!
Good luck finding an online review of Ford's 2.7 and 10-speed offered since'18 as the second cheapest engine. Best combo IMO. Chevy makes you pay dearly for that same transmission.
I agree. Chevy is famous for only offering certain engines/transmissions in specific packages. Ram and Ford have much better availability across the trim packages. I would also like to see more reviews on the 2018 an 2019 2.7 ecoboosts since they updated it last year. In my opinion it really is the best combination of power and efficiency.
Ppl might laugh but this is the future, technology is changing our perceptions. This is the future of things to come. Nvr forget semis have a straight 6 cylinder and they get their power from their turbos.
I'm after the torque like in a Harley Davidson.
A turbo I6 sounds fine. Full size trucks have always had 6 cyl options. That 4 cyl seems to be very reliant on boost, which adds stress, stress reduces reliability. Old LS trucks are still kicking at 300,000 mi.
Semis may have inline sixes, but the pistons are the size of gallon paint cans. No comparison in cubic inches.
This engine performs better than you'd expect
They should have just turboed the v6
Or just design a newer V6. They're probably just using a more powerful version of the old push-rod based 4.3 from the S10. But I could be wrong.
The 4.3 is a great motor my grandpas 2014 4.3 4x4 has almost as much power as my 2011 chevy silverado 5.3 and mine only gets 17 highway while his is getting 24 mpg on highway
@@andrewmoore4744 The newer 4.3 puts out the same hp as the 5.3 in my 04 Silverado when it was new. But the older 4.3's were much weaker being only 200hp. Those were best in the S10's, had potential and sounded similar to the v8's with the right exhaust. A simple Cherry Bomb glass-pack gave them a good grumble. :)
@@Slane583 true
@@Slane583 the new v6 is based on ls motors. They used the old Chevy design ones up until 2014.
I feel like if these 4 bangers can stand the test of time, theyd make perfect motors to swap into lighter car frames and have instant 300 hp.
Home.$lice I want one in an equinox would be a beast!
25 mpg is pretty impressive for 70 mph average in a full size 4x4!
He said all that out of memory. Wow. 👏
Still not making a point ,the 5.3 is a beast sounding old american v8
Sounds pretty quiet tbh...
Chevy: Talks shout about Ford switching to Aluminum bodies.
Also Chevy: Makes 2.7l turbo 4 cylinder.
GM giving the 10-speed only to the strongest engine with the broadest power band that doesn't need that many gears and would be better off with less gear shifts, but doesn't give it to the small turbo engine with narrow power band that needs more gears, typical GM...
turbo engines don't have narrow power bands. modern turbos often get peak boost as low as 1600rpm
It says torque at 1400 rpm. That's like what a semi does. High torque at low rpms. Gets u off the line when loaded heavily.
Husky Dinosaur it wont run at that torque though, thats wide open at 2000 revs. So in more civilised driving a 10 speed would be superior
Antonio Akiki wut? Lol
Jesse people assume that a car that is rated 400 nm at 1500 rpm will make that even when you are feathering the throttle
They should put that turbo 4 cylinder engine into the Chevy Cruze.
jimmy_t he’ll yeah. Or since the Cruze took over the cobalt a rwd or awd Cruze coupe! Lmao
Umm that's not going to happen GM killed the Cruze.
Write Opel a letter, GM stopped production of the Cruze.
I have the 1.4 l turbo charged engine in my 2017 Cruze RS
666revelator yea it’s nice gives the compact car some power. Wasn’t exited going from a 3.6 v6 in my 2010 Chevy Malibu to a small 1.4 but it takes off don’t get me wrong. Would love to see a diesel one but it was already hard enough to find the rs model.
GM needs to fix the Terrible Turbo Lag on their engines!
Tuning on lower octane will normally have lag like it should. Most GM vehicle are on that type of fuel. I'm pretty sure with some intake work and better fuel lag will be reduced.
Mileage ain't much for a 4 cyl is it? Ford F-150 gets better mpg with a V8
Yes but at least you don't have to drive a Ford
And Ford aint gonna be in repair shops every 5k miles
So will this pos when you try to climb a hill and the poor engine will succumb over 20psi boost until it blows up.
Well I'm pretty sure they make boost controllers and I have driven 3 Chevy and GMC trucks from brand new to between 150 and 200k miles with nothing more than oil changes and new batteries. But I would not own a full size with a small displacement forced induction engine. Boost is for bigger and stronger iron blocks in my opinion. Cheers keyboard warriors.
Ford is good if you plan to keep it for 3 or 4 years, while Chevys are good for 20 + years but I would get the 5.3
People seem to forget that the 2.7T is probably the reliable engine GM makes currently. Both V8 have had very bad reliability for the past 10 years
Yeah, with the 2.7l HO it seems like GM might shrink their engine options down the 2.7l I4 HO, 6.2l V8 and the 3.0l duramax. The numbers for the 2.7l and 5.3l are just too similar.
It may have been true in 2019, but not 2023. The dealership I work for has maybe 1 5.3 V8 new on the lot. Everything else is the 3.0 diesel and the 2.7 4 Cylinder. The 4 banger has just about replaced the 5.3 entirely. It is tremendously popular in my area of GA.
Call me old fashioned but I would stick with the proven 5.3L or even the V6. This four banger sounds full or promise and also full of future repairs, recalls and basically ditching the truck if something (turbo or related components) fails out of warranty.
I'm not a total Chevy/GM nut, but I quite like the 5.3. Aside from it being in my 04 Silverado it reminds me of the older 327, which is my favorite Chevy v8. The 327 doesn't seem to get all the glory like the 350 does. Which makes me unimpressed when someone says they have a built 350. Which is a (been there, heard that.) deal for me. :)
@@Slane583 well 350 is low cost and very durable and widely available you can find them at junkyards and do a quick swap and get more use out of the truck
@@bryanmartinez6600 The 350 is a great engine. I just don't like them because everyone and their grandma has one. It just doesn't impress me when someone says they're building a 350 because it's been done to death. There's no originality behind it. Now when it's something that's a little different than my interest is peaked. Like if someone was to modify a 4.9L Ford 300 inline-six because it's normally just a basic engine. :)
@@Slane583 I really wanted an F150 with the 4.9 extended cab and 4×4 but that's like trying to find Waldo. I ended up getting a Nissan Titan, but the 4.9 is also a very durable engine with good torque at low rpm. They were mostly used on single cab long bed 2wd and are still pretty rare, the 350 equivalent of Ford would be the 302.
@@bryanmartinez6600 The closest I got to owning one was a few years ago when a previous neighbor gave me an old 87-89 F150 extended cab that had a 4.9 in it. But it was only 2wd and we couldn't register it because it didn't have a title. So we ended up selling it. Other than that all of my grandfathers previous trucks had the 4.9, were 2wd and all standard cab short bed. All of them pulled has trailer with his tractor on it just fine.
GM, the official brand of "how can we copy Ford, but make it worse?"
Sheehy lol couldn’t have said it any better 😂
Well if they had done it right on the marketing side of things. They call it their base engine, which would make the best base engine in the segment. Problem is though that a base engine is an engine that goes in the base trim truck and this one doesn't. So GM, you can't have it both ways. You can't say don't compare it to Ford's second tier engine but then don't offer it as a base engine. It has to be compared to Ford's 2.7 except for maybe one trim exception, but with a higher starting price for LT vs XLT (the lone exception), that argument is still hard to make.
A gasoline direct injection naturally aspirated pushrod straight six would be better
Does long term reliability come to mind? GM isn't known for good quality 4 cylinder engines. Add turbo and ... wow. I think I'd wait a few years to see how it hold up.
Those techs have been around for so long, I don' t think it's going to be that big of an issue. We'll see when someone in the aftermarket takes it apart, or when some of these trucks put on the miles.
I don't think durability was tops in their agenda, for that, get the V8. Period.
Yeah, I will wait until these 4cyl turbos show up with 100k miles with no breakdowns, then I will take a second look.
Seems like you can hear the extreme tick that was in all the terrains and equinox’s when he’s going over the engine specs, GM and their fans call it normal but a huge number of the equinox’s and terrains blew up including my in-laws and my bosses wife’s car, I don’t trust it
GM Ecotec 2.0T has had DI and full VVT since 2006. Well proven turbo-4's.
I would like to see how well that 4cyl will pull my 42' camper up the hill to deer camp
Seems to me that the 5.3 dfm is the best gas option if you intend to use this as a truck while the 2.7 is for people who just commute or do city runabout stuff. I wonder if the 3.0 will just be the same VM motori as in the Ram 1500 as GM decided to use the 2.8 VM in the Colorado/Canyon instead of the Isuzu 2.5.
@@robertprewitt7777 A truck as a city run about?
@@MrConor159 common sight these days in many north American cities
The 3.0l diesel in the GM half tons, is an inline 6. The VM Motori in the Ram, is a v-6. Most certainly not the same engine.
Mainly for people that hunt but doesn't like campers rather tent people that doesnt pull huge trailers just like 10 bags of concrete and some post in a smaller area then a place with tons of land where you dont need a big truck to do 1 big load only small loads but need a bed for more room and not messing up the trunk of your sports car someone that wants to go mudding or to the mountains but dont want to own a jeep ect thats what I think he's trying to say anyways thats what the market is aimed for and it is faster then the 5.3 v8 but not the 6.2 v8 but alot of truck owns dont tow trailers and not getting the trailer package in all trucks brands is close to 2k cheaper
Bet this will be a more reliable engine then people believe.
If Chevy would hybrid this little engine like Ford is doing with the new Powerboost, Chevy would have a blow out winner IMO.
360 HP 410 Torque.
In regard to your comment about TFL test results. They test at higher altitude and they also use gasoline with 10% ethanol. I’ve watched them do their famous fill up until it clicks and wait 30 seconds. You can see the 10% ethanol sticker on the gas pump in the background. I think your test results are more accurate because the majority of vehicle owners are below 5K feet. I also think the manufacturers test results are near sea level and using non 10% ethanol gas to improve the MPG EPA figures.
You have the best explanations. I have a hard time paying attention and comprehending things but you put things over in such a way it's a treat to watch your videos and in 15 minutes I have such a better understanding of the topic.
Actually, the 2.7t can most certainly replace the v8, especially with the 2022 refresh 2.7t producing 420 ft/lbs of torque. I didn't think I would ever type this but after some wheel time with a 2.7,.. it is darned impressive and absolutely perfect for what most people will be doing and towing. In fact, I find the torque curve way more satisfying and 'diesel' like than the 5.3.
I'm sure my man card will take a beating for this and don't get me wrong, I'm still very much v8 guy, but GM did something right here. I think it would be cool if GM would eek even more power out of this setup, and I hope they do.
Now, the jury is still out on longevity but we'll find out..and of course, the sound. Just like folks didn't care for the 3.5t in the Raptor, maybe some creative exhaust can help here.
they upped it to 430
@@james2042 Saw that. Will be interesting to see what's up when they show up in the wild.
These v8s really arent as reliable as people think. These arent the old 5.3 vortecs that were bulletproof. These new trucks love dropping lifters
GM impressed me with that technology I'm buying one nxt Tuesday for about 34k I use to be a ram guy in fact I still own a 2500 diesel, but am scared of a def diesel.
That was the best auto review that I have ever seen. Very thorough comparison over a few models and trim lines, even manufacturers and yet, relatively easy to understand. I only had to rewind a couple of times. very impressive numbers for this truck. Just hard to wrap my head around the 4 cyl turbo tho. Incredible journey from the 5.7L Vortec.
The 2030 Silverado.
Featuring a 1.5L triple supercharged 3 cylinder with a 24 speed transmission!
Not optimal for towing. I'd stick with a V8. Also, it sounds like a Honda Accord.
Todd S how is it not optimal for towing? Maybe on the Ike Gauntlet it burns some extra fuel. But otherwise it should save fuel throughout its life. With modern transmission this replaces the 5.3 in all applications. It makes huge power and torque. Suggestions it won’t be durable have no data behind them yet. GM has a good track record on this stuff. It isn’t Ford.
@@777jones I'll clarify, it's not optimal to tow as large of a travel trailer as the V8 option.
@@Todd_S This Truck has almost as much power and torque as the V8. And it is replacing the V6. Not the V8. So in that it is more power than the V6 was.
Putting so much stress on the 4 cyl also limits the lifespan greatly and returns even worse mpgs
It's optimal for a soccer dad who does not tow though.
Love the new position of your camera.
I wish GM would offer a manual trans as an option in this.
Why not use the 4.3 make it a twin turbo. With all this new tec I'm sure you could get plenty of power and good mpg
Never happen they want to go all electric 😂🤣😂and they don’t listen to what people want
Didn't Chevy turbo the 4.3 v6 in the typhoon or cyclone? A modern version could be something special.
Would love to see a breakdown of this 2.7L 4 cylinder vs Ford's 2.7L V6 ecoboost engine. V6 vs 4 cylinder but same displacements
Blake Swan why Blake? I mean fords ecoboost has two more cylinders and two turbos vs one. Not a fair comparison at all.
Would love to see that also. Ford's 2.7 is a $990 option over the base NA V6. Chevy's 2.7 will likely be priced the same.
GMs 2.7 doesn't compete with Fords 2.7
The 2.7 is a direct competitor to the 5.3 because it comes in the same truck. What you could have vs what you get, is the definition of competition.
The 3L TT V6 in Cadillac is a direct competitor to 5.3L. Max tow on 5.3L is 11,600 vs 7200 with 2.7L. Exactly how is that a direct competitor??
This engine was never intended to be a V8 replacement, it's a much better base engine than the 3.6L v6 dodge offers or the 3.3L v6 ford has. The 2.7T has over 100lb-ft of torque more than the competitors at a much more usable RPM(1500-4000rpm). It also has slightly more horsepower as well.
This engine get 3mpg better city than the 5.3L engine, so overall combined average is 2mpg higher. That might not seem like much but over 100k miles it saves close to $3000, that's on top the $1300 saved not buying the optional 5.3L V8.
Can it pull a two door camper fully loaded up and down the mountainside in southern and north of the east of usa
4.3 needed a supercharger and option turbos and it was a great motor test for long term
Originally I purchased the 20 year model with the 4.3 V6. It was good for the time I had it yet I had a couple of gripes with it. The 4.3 had decent power but you had to put your foot in it. The gas mileage sucked. I traded it in for a 21 year model with the 2.7, and I am a lot happier! Huge difference in speed, power, and gas mileage. It's peppy, and smooth. The driving dynamic is also car like nimble because the motor is not as heavy as the other options. I hope to keep this truck for many years!
And the 2022 model gets a torque bump to 430lbft, this engine just straight up replaces the 5.3 now, but they don't wanna kill off the 5.3 yet the same way ford keeps the 5.0 despite the 2.7 being the objectively better engine.
Also want to clarify I live in North Carolina where every other car is a Charger JC already enough. So I’ve got something you don’t see at every other light and it’s fast enough for the street so I’m happy.
No the I4 Turbo is not a V8 replacement but the 4.0L I6 Turbo GM may build based off this 2.7L will be a replacement for that 5.3L.
A twin turbo Inline-6 would be great. One of the last good Ford engines was a 300 cu in inline-6.
Using fewer cylinders to do the work of a V8 engine with forced induction will affect long term engine reliability. Especially with the G.D.I. added. Ford truck owners have found that out with their "Eco-boost" engines.
Well the 4 Cylinder will be cheaper to replace when it blow up.
matthew paine really? A 5.3 can be picked up everywhere for around 400 dollars
@@bentrimble2167 You know I was not being serious with that commit, but since you want to be serious... Well, If you are a Mechanic or have the time and tools the 5.3 is a better choice. If not, then a smaller cheaper less complicated engine will be cheaper to have someone else replace. I don't think Mechanic is going to get a Junk yard 5.3 for $400 bucks and stick it in your truck, and even if he did he would not tell you so he can charge you more. Bigger engine more parts equals more labor.
Crazy that size truck fitted with four cylinder engine.
It's unpopular, but it's an excellent engine. Taking things like water pumps off the belt and controlling them electronically and with brushless motors is a huge step. We are looking at the future with this setup.
Electric water pump $800. Mechanical water pump $250
Personally i prefer the V6 over the 4 cylinder. If you a want a four cylinder, get a midsize truck. If you want efficiency, get a diesel.
Ricky Trager - the only way I’d buy one is if they had it as the engine in a regular cab 1500 or Colorado in a SS trim with a performance upgrade over the standard 2.7 might make an interesting truck at that point.
Ricky Trager I just bought this truck turbo whistle and good pick up and go and 7.2k in towing is all I need
This engine should be with a Hybrid will very nice, like Toyota Tundra 3.5 V6 450 Hp& Ford F-150 3.0 450 hp , 10 speed trans, they are going to relisten in 2021 , 30 mpg per gallon:)
Love this engine I've had it for about 8 months now and its been super good no issues I even put in a leveling kit and 33 inch tires and it handles really good!
Just got mine 2 months ago so many ppl have bashed me
@@superstat703 lol yeah there's gonna be alot of haters but what can u do if u like it and it does what u want it to do who cares man l them hate
6Th Gen Rudy yeah man. Idont see myself trying to haul anything huge just was tired of depending on people for my home so ifigured hey this shpuld be good. Which truck do you have?
@@superstat703 thats the same thing I was thinking when I bought my truck man have the regular Silverado LT and u man?
6Th Gen Rudy igot the silverado custom
I'm a chevy guy and this is embarrassing...truck looks horrible and a 4 cylinder wow........what a pile of crap I don't care if it is turbo charged if I wanted a rice burner I would buy a damn honda
You only burn americam rice with any diesel made today..
Oh a cummins you say? Lets see..its turbo and an inline 6. I guess all the duramax and cummins guys are riceburners then???
@@lastmanstanding6081 haha good one
The truck looks fine...its the 4 cylinder that socks. Buy a Toyota if you want 4 cylinders.
@@lastmanstanding6081 no all the duramax and cummins guys are just concrete cowboys lmfao little skinny tires big ass rims lots of smoke no power
@@randomchannel5966 thats not always true . Some people leave their stuff alone and have it work and be reliable .. at least as reliable as it can be
Really good in depth review! I appreciate it!
Long term reliability is yet to be seen. You have allot of electronics combined with a small displacement engine being pushed just about all the time. For a truck like this I'd rather have a bigger displacement lower HP but higher torque engine.
And another great, thorough review, Alex.
GM needs to hire a new design team for both interior and exterior in my opinion.
Congratulations to this reviewer as being one out of only two organizations to do a worthy truck review. However, just as is the case with TFL, GM is being let off the hook on a couple of huge points that are bad for their customers and frankly deceptive.
Firstly, it should be stated emphatically, that Chevy and GMC marketers should not be getting away with declaring that a particular engine in a truck segment is a "base" engine, when it is not the base engine in the lower trims. The fact that the 2.7L turbo is the standard engine in the LT and RST ($39K and up) for Silverado 1500 and comparable trims in Sierra, but are not even available in the lower trims does NOT make this engine a true, "base" engine; where a full-size base price is under $30K MSRP. The reason it can't be a base is that a base should be available at a base price, but the way GM tries to manipulate the segment for their own benefit, what you end up with is a new engine in a new truck that is thousands of dollars more than what a Ford customer can get any of their four gas engines for, because with Ford, one can get any configuration XL or XLT with any of their four gas engines cheaper than the lowest-priced LT double cab 2.7L turbo 4 (except for single cab short bed not available with the 3.5L Ecoboost and the customer s limited to 3). Additionally, with F150, all 4 gas engine choices available at all price points are far more advanced and newer than the base engines in the Chevy and GMC lineup, and all but their base is mated to a ten speed. This means that a customer can actually choose, for instance, an optional 2.7L Ecoboost-powered F150 mated to a ten speed and mpg estimate of 20/26/22 and 400 peak ft-lb torque in a truck for around $31.5K including destination, whereas the cheapest Silverado or Sierra with their so-called base engine starts at least $7.5K higher. Even if comparing an equal XLT trim with an equal configuration Super Cab, Ford's 2.7L twin turbo V6 has a competitive price. The media should be calling GM out on this, because what they are doing is claiming that the new 2.7L turbo 4 should be compared to the Ram 3.6L Penstar with eTorque and Ford's 3.3L V6 with dual fuel injection, and using the fake-news proclamation that it's a base engine, when in fact, it is not a base engine, because it's not an engine available in a base truck.
Secondly, in this video, they put up an EPA mpg estimate chart that showed the 4.3L V6 estimates in the previous GM-branded a truck and those numbers are now invalid, as the new truck with that carryover 4.3L V6 mated to a six speed loses 3 mpg as compared to the old truck; 17 combined, compared to 20 combined, respectively. So looking at it this way, the new turbo 4 actually gets up to 4 mpg higher than the 4.3L, and so if the 2.7L turbo were a true base engine, then it would represent value to the consumer, but since it is not available and since the new body is such a gas guzzler, then it must be stated that this truck is a huge disappointment, but the power trains are actually very good. But since no media outlet is writing about such topics, then I must assume, they are not representing the consumer like they should be.
Been using one while the ¾ton 6.4 hemi ram is in the shop, it's surprisingly good for a 2l.
I got 40 miles on 6 gallons of gas.
I wouldn't pay 35k for it, maybe 18-22k new imo
The front end of that truck makes me want to puke
Had a 17 Silverado 5.3 now I have a 19 f150 2.7. The 2.7 in the ford feels like it would blow the doors of the Silverado.
will also blow up before the silberado
Highly unlikely, both the 5.3 and 2.7 are proven to be solid engines. The Chevy will however rot away...
Disposable weed eater engines - good luck on them in a few years..... Moronic 1000 speed transmissions $50,000+ is insanity
EXACTLY!!!!
Give me a real V8 anyday!!
really promising engine, thanks for the review, though not really looking to update my supercharged 2001 5.3 :)
I still prefer the 5.3L V8 and 6.2L V8 over the 2.7L I4 Turbo, but I actually think the 2.7L I4 Turbo more fitting than the 4.3L V6.
Well done again Alex
only time will say if the turbo 4 can last more than it's warranty 🤔
now I would love it if the 4.3 V6 be turbocharged 😉
Buy a 4.3 V6 truck and install a turbo kit.
Be a nice motor for the S10 they should still be making.
That front hit every branch of the ugly tree
4.3 turbocharged engine with a 10 speed and a two stage rear end box
Lololol if the Silverado v6 runs like a 4cyl and drinks like a v8 I can’t figure it out on this full size 4 cyl
So, you would have to anticipate a pass and drop a few gears to spool up the turbo?
With a four cylinder why not make it front wheel drive too? Completely puss it out
How does your 20.8 fuel efficiency compare to the trucks computer? And what octane fuel is recommended for the 2.7L Turbo in this truck?
Recommended octane is 87.
I'm buying one next week
I love that companies are going back to turbo factory options. But I really hate that they are going 4 banger with it. Yuck
Great review as always Alex
I can say my GF has a Buick GS 4 cylinder turbo with Zzp Performance pipe, Zzp Performance waste gate, blow of valve and tune. It hauls azzzzz and kicks most sport's car's iv came up to. Alot of HP and torque. Before people say they would not like it, try it first. I'm glad it replaced the 4.3 piece of junk. I know I own a 2001 blazer S10 4.3.
Brings new meaning to the term "I could have had a V8".
Funny GM gets on the small boosted engine in a big truck wagon after Ford decided turbos are not a cure all came out with a new 7.3l push rod V8.
Really they could have just increased the V6's displacement to 4.6l and used the same cam profile and head design as the 6.2l V8 and got a slightly more powerful engine for much less engineering investment.
The MPG would be slightly less but the cost would be lower since it can run on cheaper fuel.
That would make too much sense tho! Not enough warranty repairs etc!
It would last too long!
The LS engine design is an all around great engine design in my opinion.
Looks like the guy in the back is digging a grave!
Planting flowers
How is that 2.7L (and trans combo) in normal city traffic situations, where you repeatedly creep along, stop, make your way up to 45 mph, coast down over and over again? Any shift clumsiness or lumpy power output?
Alex, please get yourself first in line to review the new 3.0 turbo Diesel. Now! Thanks (c:
Some people just want a truck. They don't really care or dont really need to haul or tow so this motor may work for them. But to go down to a 4 cylinder is kind of questionable. Gm says they put it through the same tests as the v8s so we'll just have to see how it turns out. For me the 6.2 or 5.3 is what I would choose.
Why would i buy this over a f150 2.7 ecoboost?
Less moving parts equal greater long term durability, same advantage that the Cummins holds over the higher hp v8 diesels.
He only said it REPEATEDLY. This is has the 4.3l v6 is its crosshairs. It's not the mid level engine competitor. Fords 2.7l v6 IS targeted at the mid range engines. They are not direct competitors.
@@forearmshiver5520 I respectfully disagree 100% . How is this more reliable then fords 2.7 when it is unproven . This engkne just came out. How in the world you do have any clue on it being more reliable . It is one thing to put put a educated comment, another to put out one with absolutely no facts behind it . Fords gen 2 has also been improved in just about any weak points of the prior gen 1 design. Dual timing chains, dual port injection , better turbos, egr , exhaust. Did I mention a 10 speed , which gets considerably better milage then GM 8 speed in the 2.7.
@@ShyaMiss Yea but it makes zero sense to even consider this engine , when Fords 2.7 only cost 995 over base . Fords 2.7 is better in literally every category including mileage.
@@calebniederhofer6529 that's fine, it's your opinion that you would rather pay a bit more for the Ford 2.7. But it changes nothing in regard to the target of this 4cyl. It's meant as a base engine. When truthfully looking at it in that context, it beats ANY of the other offerings. I personally do not want it, but the same is true for the base v-6's. I dont want any of those either. However, I would absolutely take the turbo 4 over the base level v-6's. The eco boost 2.7 is a strong running little engine, but as previously stated, it is not the direct competitor.
I just got mines, 2wd. It’s not a v6 or v8 but it runs well, fast, good for daily drive. I’m just worried how long it’ll last. And the only thing I dislike about it is that it sounds like a Honda if you put your own muffler on it lol