Home Forums Gear Hunting Trucks and Four-Wheel Drives Chevy or GMC 1500 with the 4 cylinder

Hey guys, truck prices in the east are starting to go down and it seems that there are a lot of low mile newer 1500's with the 4 cylinder out there. Talk me in to or out of buying one. I have always been a v8 guy but price could dictate what I buy. I will use it mostly for running around the mountains of North Central PA but I will also be towing a light Camper with it.

Here you go… https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbt...s/18478412/new-chevy-1-2-ton-w-2-7l-4cyl

I have driven a Silverado with the 2.7 liter motor a couple of times, not a bad motor. Probably not the choice if you are towing at the limit all the time but fine for everything else.

Around my area they're knocking of a ton of money on Silverados with that motor. Always been fond of the 4x4 with a 5.3L V8, probably not going to change?

If it can haul a bag of golf clubs or a weeks groceries, it's plenty of engine for 3/4 of pickup owners.

The number of pickups going up & down my road that clearly have never hauled anything more than golf clubs is amazing. My wife says it's related to small MANHOODS !!!!!!

engineers, research-aholics, gear junkies etc. who thoroughly research a topic and all options before jumping in with their wallet have gravitated to the 2.7 turbo from gm

there are multiple videos out there with the gm engineers who discuss this motor and it's ground up design for truck duty, they had the high tech dual volute turbo in mind and designed the motor around it, the brilliance in the inline big jug long stroke design is very much the old cummins formula, it went so well the first 3 years they added a bunch of power, then went so well the next 2 years they now give it the same long 5 year 60,000 mile powertrain warranty of the diesel...the gm engineers will tell you it's one of only 2 motors they've tried to kill and couldn't...they will also tell you that (at least the newer high output 430 ft/lb 2022.5's and newer) put down more axle torque in 1st gear with the 8-spd than the 2005/6 8.1 big block 4-spd did

it's a fascinating rabbit hole to go down, I have about 40,000 miles (60,000 kms) on my 2022.5 refresh high output and its the best half ton motor choice in the market period. not a gm guy or brand loyal, but I am a research guy and so on this go round it was the 2.7

you cannot go wrong with this motor, it's the 21st century interpretation of the cummins formula, on gas, for a half ton....big jug, long stroke, inline, single turbo...can't seize it, no lifters (common warranty item on the v8's) etc. the 2.7 is the least worked on by the gm techs, gets great mileage when you want/empty etc. but it can pull big time work duty and suck the same fuel as the 6.2 because it can do the same work as the 6.2...at 4000' elevation with naturally aspirated power loss of 3% every 1000' and only 0.05% loss from boosted engines the 2.7 actually has 22 ft/lbs more torque than the 6.2...

anyhow, lots one can learn about this motor or you could just ask on hunting forums lol...you're welcome

That is why the Ford Maverick is brilliant and I am seeing a lot of them around here.

haha I see that too, 90's mini truck crossed with a Subaru baja crossed with a Subaru wrx turbo motor....what's not to love, an awd mini-truck that boogies, throw some Michelin cross climate 2's on it, should be a sweet golf/ski/commute machine lol, maybe even day trip hunting machine also, I just bought one to daily and keep the miles off my half ton, just couldn't bring myself to do a car, will pick it up in about an hour, good value, base xl with the 4k tow and a couple small extra's...boosted 4 bangers are the bomb

My son bought a 2.7L Silverado about 8 months ago or so in FL. 20K miles now and no problems. It’s his daily driver. Not much off road time because of his schedule, but has had it on the beach a few times. He really likes it.

I drove it last month during a Christmas visit. Seems like a nice truck. Not trading my superduty just yet though.

Recently drove one of the new Colorados with this motor for a bit. Very capable it seems. Mileage is about what you would expect for a motor with that kind of output. Not the mpg of the 3.0 diesel for sure.

neighbor bought one. He loves it. From riding with him, it seems to do well around town, going to the bar or Home Depot.

Yep. My '22 non-H.O. now has ~33K miles without issue. Just returned from an 1150-mile hunting trip towing a flatbed trailer with a Polaris Ranger, 65-gallon water tank, and a bunch of gear and average 14MPG for the trip. It tows my 25' travel trailer very well. I live at 6K feet elevation and usually camp at 8K or better. If I needed to replace it, I'd probably buy the same truck.

How'd she figure that out?

Ouch!

Cracks me up, to insinuate a 4 cylinder is like a "6bt cummins". It's not.

Good engine though! A truck engine should always have a longer stroke than the bore diameter. It really helps push that torque down lower in the rpm range, where you need it.

The firing sequence of an inline six does this even better. I'd be willing to bet that the 3.0 duramax does even better, producing even more torque from idle-1800 rpms.

Not to mention, a far smoother engine. I bet that 2.7 must be vibey as fk above 3000 rpms.

Used to patrol the pipeline in 4bt cummins-powered snow cat. That fkn thing would rattle your brain apart.

Nope, smooth as can be all the way to redline.

Cracks me up people can’t read and comprehend lol.

Cummins formula: Inline, extra long stroke, big jugs, single turbo, diesel.

Gm 2.7 formula: Inline, long stroke, big jugs, single turbo, gas.

One is ancient all mechanical (6bt/4bt) turn of last century type sh1t lol and 1200/750 lb motors. Counter balancing likely not much a worry back then.

The other is a clean sheet design using the same FORMULA with everything the latest this century can give us. We get a 21st century TRUCK motor, puts out more torque than gen 1 cummins, weighs so little in comparison to those iron tanks that it can go in midsize platforms, has double the hp. Why long stroke? Wat more torque than hp is why...it’s a truck formula.

Go ahead and run the formula on the rest of the half ton segment motors and see if anyone else as close to cummins as the GM 2.7.

I tried to save y’all some time. I do do my homework, you go ahead and do your own then, or spout off in ignorance which seems the American way lol.

GM is the only one who has developed an actual truck motor for half tons this century. Fords square stroke v6 twin turbos I don’t think qualify as they did put them in trucks but designed from cross platforms. The short stroke v8’s similar, sports cars or trucks. The diesels will be designed for trucks but there is only one true gas truck motor in segment. Doesn’t look like any others are coming either.

We’ve come a long way. The design formula is all truck. The displacement is what it is to meet the power levels they wanted. Big jugs drive turbos more efficiently, that’s why less cylinders, it’s goes on and on. If you’re smarter than the GM engineers who tell you about this in videos online then go ahead and tell us lol.

Or go learn about subject before you jump in on one leg and look the fool.

Haha, you fkn little twatt. I build 4wd engines. I don't care what you read.

The 3.0 inline 6 duramax diesel bests it in everything towing, fuel economy, low end torque. The 2.7 is a good base model engine, but it ain't no inline 6 truck engine bud.

I have two Ram trucks with the Cummins 6.7l, my 2500 daily driver and 3500 for towing my race car trailer. That is when I am not towing it with my RV that has a 8.9l Cummins. Also have a 2017 BMW X5 35d with their 3.0l inline six. I am a huge fan of inline 6 diesel engines. I like their torque curve and they are a bit easier to navigate around the engine bay when necessary in my opinion.

The odd ball is our 2012 Beetle with an inline 5 cylinder. It is gas and I am not sure of the design, but it is shockingly smooth at idle and higher RPMs.

That little 4 is a heck of a motor. And 26psi is a lot of squish.

What ever happened to GM’s 4.?ltr in-line 6? That could have been a heck of a motor with forced induction.

Probably worse mpg than the 6+ltr v8’s though.

The Atlas series were well designed engines. Yes, the i6 Vortec 4200 could be made to run hard with forced induction. In stock form it performed close enough to the 5.3 V8 while returning much better fuel economy.
The problem was the length of an inline 6 cylinder engine, it didn't fit in an engine bay designed for a four cylinder long V8. When the GMT360 platform died, so did the i6.

Look at the service costs you'll have coming up on those used trucks. The high output small turbo engines had some expensive service and maintenance parts at 75-100,000 miles compared to the 5.3 when I was truck shopping 4 years ago.

Haha, you fkn big twatt. 'Jeez you got a big pussy, Jeez you got a big pussy....why'd you say that twice?'...

I think we agree on more than we don't. The 2.7 doesn't vibe. It's nothing like the Bt's, spent a lot of time in gen 1 6bt's and love them to bits.

The only issue with the 3.0 durmax is it's a diesel lol. A ton of us don't want the emissions systems headaches, it's a lot of extra gear, fluids, shat to go wrong. Case in point, neighbor got the new duramax and I got the new 4-banger...we both do a lot of miles, him for work pulling light trailer, me and kids pulling light trailer most weekends for hunting and fishing year round. He's gone limp mode a few times and had to have in shop for fixes already. I haven't. I'm at about 40,000 miles now (60,000 kms). Just change the oil and rotate the tires.

So if I could get a deleted 3.0 I'd be all over it but Elon musk couldn't delete these new gm's computers. So the next best thing is that formula but in gas...which is the 2.7. One cat...which is basically attached to the back of the turbo which is attached to the side of the motor...not sure you could even steal that thing, well played gm.

If you were to blend the performance, economy and driving dynamics (relaxed low rpm) of the 3.0 and the 5.3 you get the 2.7t...absolutely brilliant. A lot of half ton buyers have no time for the diesel stuff, not all of them are 90% highway, a lot have to do stop/go daily duty. How fast does that diesel warm up? Would it be happy start and stop town work all the time? 2.7 warms up super fast, does it ALL at a high level including work and long miles and city start stop daily. The diesel is more of a one trick pony that's got a lot of fat no one wants to deal with down the road or from the get go. Gas all the way in half ton segment. Going gas with a truck formula was brilliant. It's almost like they took that right out of my brain while I was sleeping lol.

Now...as for your inline 6 better than inline 4 insinuation...is the 6bt better than the 4bt? or are they the same exact thing with one having 2 cylinders chopped off the end? Correct...exact same, one isn't better than the other.

The gm being a 4 instead of a 6 is because of the output level of a 3.0 inline 6 on gas is too high for their goals and as gm engineer said that less of bigger jugs are actually more efficient at driving the hairdryer. In other words why didn't they just gas-ify the the 3.0 as they are both built with same forged bottom ends and designed for those high boosted cylinder pressures etc? There's arguments for and against between these two and which one is smarter in design but their goals of power outputs dictated the configuration.

Anyway, the diesel doesn't even enter into the equation for most buyers now with the emissions bullsh1t. I wish, I would love to have that peak work at 1500 rpm, I loved the old bt power delivery and all of it just off idle. Too many trade offs now though. Guaranteed the 2.7t will do the most work for the lowest total cost of ownership and headaches of all the half ton engine options available right now. If you look at the entire segment and math it out...that 2.7t 4-banger is where the highest odds are of this.

You're all welcome lol.

couple reasons the 2.7t is the displacement that it is and that it is inline 4 instead of 5 or 6...

2.7 was the displacement needed to give the power levels they wanted for mid-size to half ton duty
inline 4 was chosen as bigger jugs drive the hairdryer more efficiently than smaller higher number of cylinders do

for perspective, if you took that 2.7t (2726cc) at 681.5cc per cylinder (5.3 is only 666cc btw ) and took that 310 hp and 430 ft/lbs torque dived by 4 you get 77.5 hp and 107.5 ft/lbs torque per cylinder. Now make it an inline 6...you end up with a 4.1 liter with 465 hp and 645 ft/lbs torque...sounds juicy but a bit much for a half ton platform. It would be perfect base in the 2500/3500's though...I'd be super down with that! and don't doubt that the future we may see something like that in the 2500/3500's as gas turbo should be what they're all working on right now for that segment! they are getting tired of the diesel emissions issues in that class also...but miss the boost performance and work dynamics so gas turbo is the future

next comments will be why don't they turbo the 5.3 or 6.2 or 6.6 in the 2500/3500's to give the guys who're done with diesel headaches and option, some even ask why not for 1/2 tons...doh, too much power for frame/transmission/running gear/brakes etc......look back at the output levels, lets say they target 1000 ft/lbs for that segment, well if the 2.7t gas needs 6.4 cc per ft/lb so you'd need 6.4 liter engine, in shorter stroke higher revving v8's currently the hp would likely end up too high for segment though and no as efficient if they could go inline, even with the same ratio of power to torque of the 2.7t with long stroke you'd end up about 727.3 hp for a 1000 ft/lb torque equal of about 6.4 litres of displacement...fun to math out, inline 6 like the cummins in the 5.9-6.7 liter displacement should land them in the torque range they want but go extra long stroke to keep the hp in check and more efficient for truck work, build a truck motor not a sports car motor please aim for 1/2 to 2/3rds hp/torque ratio for work motors

pretty sure cummins was working on a gas powered 6.7...that would be about perfect, they would have the best 2500/3500 truck motor as soon as it's released imo and it would sell well, hope ford and gm are working on similar

Cummins has just announced their X10 (10 liter) fuel agnostic motor, the second in the line after the X15. They have stated that a fuel agnostic b6.7 is next in the plans.

It sounds like Chevrolet is really on to something special with the 2.7 inline 4 cylinder. I never thought I would see the day that 4 cylinder would be this capable. Nonetheless, I can’t buy one, as I’m not part of the UAW family.

my son purchased a new Maverick last spring 2023 and pulls his 18 ft. boat with a 90 Mercury on it, the Maverick truck works great and still gets good gas mileage , that is a great little truck.

I wouldn’t go as far as calling it a TRUCK, but mine hauled 21 bags of feed tonight, the 2” pump with hoses and a can of fuel this morning. and another load of feed before that It’s a comparatively inexpensive solution for light duty pickup work, both in depreciation and operation. Fuel economy is in the high 20’s, and a set of tires is $600. We’ll see how long before the valves clog up from being direct injection and how long the turbos last.

If I need a truck, I’ll get one of the Kenworth’s…..

I just got my maverick for a daily also try and save the 2.7t for the weekend trailer adventures and I’m loving the sh1t out of it. My 2nd Ford ever, had an 84 tempo coupe back in the day.

It’s 0-60 is quicker than 90’s 5.0 mustangs and current Subaru wrx. It’s lively as reactive like a sports car and goes like one but has a booty and 4k tow package lol. Pretty smart little run about.

Currently with my chev 2.7t I just pulled my cargo camper build with dual diesel heaters, solar etc 400 miles and camping on ice in an ice fishing derby and we flew here as if empty. Passed lots of stuff. Living these boosted 4-bangers. Now I wanna build a lighter ice trailer for the maverick and get my total weight down to same as just my half ton without trailer when on ice lol. Current trailer 3000 lbs, 3” lifted, chev has 4” lift, hunt/fish as much as possible, logging 60 nights in it a year but still working full time and getting kids through high school. Our 4th trip this winter so far.

And yeah the mav is not a truck. Just a more useful sports car really. Trucklet? It’s like a blend of 90’s mini truck, Subaru baja and Subaru wrx.

Stankcoy you fkn suburbia dumbass. Crank/piston-rods/pistons have to be forged when you demand that much from a 4 cylinder engine.

Regarding the 4bt/6bt comparison, the 4bt didn't have the inherent balance of a 6bt. It was a rattle trap compared to a 6bt.

It's a cost cutting measure, to go 4 cylinder. Less machining, less forged components and less raw material

The 2.7 gets piss-poor fuel economy compared to the 3 0 inline 6, hauling equal loads. Like any gas engine would.

A 4 cylinder will never equal an inline six in a truck.

Man, it must suck being swayed by marketing literature and youtube videos, than actual mechanical experience........

Mavericks are for bull dikes.

Lol I tinted my windows on the maverick. They way I like to commute I don’t really wanna be seen. This maverick is a beast for this, hang on when you hit the skinny pedal and corners like a sports car and fit in the skinny lanes.

That’s right hillbilly. It doesn’t get as good a mileage as diesel. I told you it splits the performance and ECONOMY between the 5.3 and the 3.0. Its drive dynamics also splits. It’s smooth and it’s quiet, and has effortless whoosh. My 5.3 buddy always comments how quiet it is when he gets in it. For us hunting and fishing all the time and logging the long miles it’s a beauty option if you don’t want the headaches of diesels. Fuel economy is part of the equation and I’m not wrong in mathing out which of these will be lowest total cost of ownership. Remember it’s one of only two engines GM engineers couldn’t kill. It’s a truck motor, built for work. Less is always more when done right and this 2.7t is the epitome of that in half ton motor segment.

Yeah you got Alaska to try and hold over Alberta here but we get the weather too. I got my poor 2.7 to start after 1 hour plugged in at -40 after sitting for five days through -39 to -46. It wasn’t pretty and threw a few low volt codes the dealer had to clear but I was curious what it could do. I got 10 weekends on ice fishing last year in the trailer, can’t equal that this year due to later ice but this past one on cold lake with -20 lows she fired right up on auto start after 3 days of sitting. Obvious easy burger. I work and play all over the province. I don’t have to do all the winter prep you do it’s pretty rare with these modern gassers to need the block heater. You would need to do half the procedure to yours with this engine over the diesel...maybe you just found your next truck lol.

You’re welcome. Go drive one and tell me how rough it runs lol.

And it’s about cylinder pressures. Turbo Diesel still has more than boosted gas so that’s why the forged bottom end and built like the diesel with the hardest cylinder liners known to man. If you did your homework you’d know all this about this 2.7t, it’s built like a diesel because it’s basically the same thing just a different fuel type. Low compression ratio spark ignition vs high compression squish ignition. Not sure why you’re not about this motor? It’s all truck. They couldn’t go inline 6 on gas, would have been too small and revvy, less torque more hp and 3.0 too much displacement for boosted gas half ton power levels. Have a look at the new hurricane 3.0tt in-line 6 from dodge. Similar hp to torque numbers, 2 extra cylinders and 1 extra turbo, great sport car motor. It’s got too much power for mid segment half ton platforms and not enough for a 2500/3500 segment...swing and a miss dodge.

The 2.7t inline 4 with bigger jugs and longer stroke is the way to fly. At least dodge got one thing right by going inline but facked the rest of the formula...typical dodge.

Well there it is, if you can't start the truck unassisted in mild below zero temps without tripping a bunch of sensors, than GM didn't properly coldweather test the engine, and they still took your money. That's bllsht and I'd ask for a refund. The platform needs more development. If this happens again, don't flee to the dealer like a lost puppy dog, once the engine is warm, shut off truck, pull the positive battery cable, to reset the computer.

You and I have more in common than you know, youre just too green and soft to understand. The term you're lacking, is an undersquare engine, where the stroke is longer than the bore diameter of the cylinder. It's a good thing in a truck, and something everyone should desire, regardless of the cylinder count. Rarely, are V8's ever built undersquare. Only a couple recent ones come to mind: 7.3 powerstroke and the toyota 5.7.

I'm currently many thousands of dollars into BUILDING a custom gas truck. From axles to engine. And of course, I'm building an undersquare torque monster gasser that will start unassisted, in the coldest of temps.

I understand what Alberta is and isn't compared to Alaska. I ship boats there for moose/elk/bear hunters who must run lots of water, but still get good fuel economy.

Regarding your ice fishing by vehicle, thats cute and adorable! 2007 Iin between 2 Iraq deployments, I built a custom ice house that broke down into its own 2 fx8ft sled. We would snow machine 30-40 miles to remote locations and catch scores of burbot and Lakers.

Nowadays, I haul entire pike fishing camps by dog team, or even massive sheefish off the sea ice, by dog team as well. No beta male suburbia truck would get to where I go, baby boy.........

I think big talkers should post some pics or STFU.😁

F U Finger in pic for a Campfire identifier.🤣😂🤣

I think that's a marginally decent idea, so clarify some things. Are you "talkin" to me?

What is your name?

Are you mildly familiar with what I do? There's hundreds of thousands of dollars in film work already spent, following only a tiny slice of my crazy business. Pictures, why?

I haven’t found the line where it needs help to start. The auto start I tried before plugging in at -40c. Plugged in for an hour maybe hour and 15 and then push button started it. Poor thing wasn’t happy but that was a test. Note, skip the auto start. The under volt trip for engine light was no biggie, bugger sat in 39-46 below for 5 days, battery was low, no biggie, two seconds to reflash in the dealer drive thru. I suspect it will start daily at -30-35 but I’ll skip the auto starter next time I test it.

Lol almost went for a jet boat this year as I haven’t played that game yet since I’m just a wet behind the ears pup. Had my sheep stint and did my back country solo stuff already. Slowing down and into the being out there and started late with kids so trailer has been our adventure pod and we’ve filled the walls nicely with fish and hunt photos. Got into sturgeon last year, just got back from Lakers trip, already have 4 over 40” on pike this winter our best being 8 over. Prairies to mountain tops, I’ve done a lot of it but still lots to do yet.

I think of building a truck one day also and yes it would be gas as well. You’re probably building it lol. Closest I can get is this GM 2.7t currently. It was the easy button.

We have both motors 23 gmc with 2.7 and 24 gmc with 3.0. When it drops below 10 we plug our vehicles in. Both are great motors, both start up fine down here in south central cold weather.

John what is the 2.7 gas power like compaired to the 3.0 diesel?

PRETTY GOOD QUESTION ???

The 2.7 8-speed transmission has issues according to the Web, the 10-speed is supposed to be a good one joint developed between Ford and Chevy and is in the 3.0 diesel.

early 8-spd had some rough shift clunk issues that annoyed people, all sorted by about 2020, so that's old news

important to know they were merely annoyance issues...not problems in terms of function or reliability, just cold 1-2 shift clunks that's all, no failures etc. the 10 Spd has it's own [bleep] you can read about also

here's the good news, the 8-spd is everywhere and it's lighter, and with the broad torque curve of the 2.7 it suits it better, on all the top 3-4 gears it's a 500 rpm gap at highway speeds, ideal really, 1-downshift at a time it does, not like the 5.3 which will go into scream mode on cruise hitting a hill towing lol....2-3 gears at a time, no thanks...anyway, anyone curious should go spend some time in the 2.7 8-spd, it's a very well set up combo

I drove the refresh 10 Spd 6.2 for a few weeks before getting my 2.7 8-spd refresh and I never even noticed the transmissions were different, when I read about it weeks later I had to think back and try to remember if there was a difference

that internet sure can hang onto things eh? it's a non-issue, I'll take the 8 over the 10 7 days a week and twice on Sundays....less is more the formula for the 2.7....the 8 is the right transmission for it

Buddy has a Colorado with the 4 cyl. engine, says he wishes he bought one with a bigger engine. Only reason he went with the 4 cyl. is that was the only red one the dealer had on the lot. Adequate power is more important to me, I don't care what color my vehicle is though I wouldn't have one of the current battleship grey models.

Seems like you really DO care about color. rayciss against the greys...

Hunts I don't.much care for the Grey color either..your last.new ranch truck was a Ford with the 7.3 gas or a 6.2 ? how do you like it?mb

'22 Chev 3500 with the 6.6 and 6 spd auto and a '15 F-250 6.2, 6 spd auto.Love the chev motor and trans but don't care much for the truck. Like the Ford but wish it had the chev drivetrain.....

I guess that I don't see the need for a 10 speed automatic transmission if the engine has enough power and torque. Are those upper shift points just final drive over drive gearing ratios? The V6 cars we drive are 4 and 5 speed and the V8 truck 6 and they all run at under 2,000 rpm on the highway and seldom downshift here in the flat lands. Lots of us grew up with three speed transmissions and I remember an old dodge a kid at school had that was a 2 speed push button transmission. Doesn't all that shifting with the newer transmissions bug you a little?

Huntsman 22 thank you , I been thinking of a 3/4 ton with a 6.2 or 7.3 for pulling a 30 ' travel trailer..mb

In the midsize new Colorado/Canyons you can get the base grandpa tune with about 237 hp and 259 ft/lbs torque. Then there is the z71 trailboss middle tune of 310 hp and 390 ft lbs and then the zr2 tune that adds 40 ft/lbs to that. With also ability to buy those 40 ft/lbs after if you got that middle tune.

You cannot upgrade the grandpa tune models.

Did your buddy buy the grandpa tune?

He can’t get a bigger engine just 3 different levels of boost, 10 psi, 22, psi and 28 psi...pretty sure those are the current numbers. The grandpa tune should be the fuel economy and longevity champ. It’s aimed at fleet buyers and the retired fuds will likely catch on.

And yeah 95% of vehicles are bought on looks, only 5% of us care more about the objective.

Watched a video that had an engineer from GM talking about these engines. He recommended the mid tune for longevity, over the base tune. He said the base engine had smaller and lighter parts in it and it would not stand up to much abuse. The mid and top tunes are built much heavier and are built to last. So there ya have it.

Yeah saw that. What I remember was that he said don’t tune the base up as they left out certain things that weren’t necessary for the base power levels. And that if you did try to tune it up things would break. And yeah he said everything from the top tune is in the middle tune so no worries about going from middle to top tune with their little reflash money grabber option. The base tune will last as good or better just don’t ‘chip it’ lol.

You'll see more of them rattle apart. That long stroke, and lack of inherent balance that you get with the inline 6's, I would not rev one of the 2.7's beyond 5000 rpms.

A casting defect from a certain batch from 2023. They've been building them since 2019 and in half tons and Cadillacs from then to now. So their mold developed a problem at some point and they are taking care of it. No big thing. People have been salivating for 5 years trying to find some sort of weakness in these engines, but nothing, not a common failure of anything nor common warranty item...the 5.3/6.2 are green with envy lol.

Well done to chase it back and get things replaced. He couldn't find an actual online failure report. Silver lining is right and does sound like a proactive move by GM. Well played. Buddy cracked me up, went from doom and gloom to rosy then back to doom and gloom. It's not slimmed down aluminum etc. lol...buddy cracks me up, still guys talk about this engine and haven't researched much at all, hardest cylinder linings in the world. Their engineers said it's one of only 2 engines every that they couldn't make fail/sieze in their torture testing.

Remember, they knew...if the 4-banger had issues in half ton platform...it would probably spell the end of GM so this thing is built considering this very reality. You can't introduce a 4-banger in a half ton to V8 addicted AMERICANS without going full out in development and testing.

So...buy with confidence folks.

Mainer....better watch that video before jumping to conclusions you fkn big twatwaffle ;), none have rattled apart lol. Go drive one...smooth baby and don't worry you don't have to rev them past 5000, screaming up a steep hill way too fast with a trailer I think I might see 4500 briefly...all the power is down lower than that, peak torque is 3000 but it's square from 1500 to 4000 or more. They've already been out for 5 years. The video even said he can't find any reports of a failure due to this. It's a batch run in 2023 they've figured out and are handling it like champs.

well look at that...it was 12 whole trucks

[/url]

[url=https://www.gm-truck.../#google_vignette]12 whole trucks, lmfao

take it back Mainer

I had seen quite a few days ago, that it was an isolated , small number for engines.

They did good, very proactive. But until a failed engine is inspected by an independent shop, nobody will truly know what's going on, or the extent of the problem.

You'll see more of them rattle apart......

none have rattled apart, you're spreading misinformation based on assumptions, I got you though

They don't place the 2.7 in a Tahoe or Suburban....Most likely for good reason.

Addition: A friend is a Chevy dealer, he said GM keeps shoving the 4 down his throat for his floor plan. Reason being, they are cheaper to make, yet he had to charge the same. Said they run well enough….but his mechanics say go with the V8 if you are in for the long run.


Addition2: Friend has a 4…goes through a quart every 1500. GM says that is normal. His highway MPG isn’t any better than my V8.

The 2020 GMC 1500 I had with the 5.3L, 60,000 kms and a bent rod and collapsed lifter…any better?

Most definitely, if one had to bet on one vs the other. The 5.3….327CI….has a solid track record.

I’ll also take the mechanics advice over the you tube GM engineers. What would one expect them to say?????

The 5.3 is not a 327. Two completely different motors.

5.3 3.78" bore x 3.62" stroke

327 Chevy: 4" bore x 3.25" stroke.

Anyhow, the 327 in stock form, hits 6500-7000 rpms in second and third gear, completely loaded down with 4000 lbs of green firewood. Smoothest, quickest reving small block I've ever owned.

Thanks for the clarification….

Completely different design too.

great 2.7 thread 90 plus pages and multiple years deep of owners there on one of the gm forums, the oil is discussed heavily, I ran some slippery Amsoil thinking it was best available for awhile and It used oil, let the dealer change it with their stuff and it doesn't, doesn't matter as hardest cylinder liners known to man and the engineers couldn't seize it or kill it (one of only two) so just don't get all that and a bag of chips with the super skinny oils and you're gtg

the half tons do more work and bigger bread and butter segment than the Tahoe and suburban...9000+ tow capacity on my 2.7, so you're wrong, there's a different reason they don't...yet, likely just too hard a sell for the more upscale luxury segments, despite it being the smartest half ton motor in the segment...the fancy foo foos that care more about options, technology, autonomous driving and gadgets than solid engineering won't understand lol...that'll be why

We get it, you bought a 2.7 and think it's a loaf of home made bread....Nothing more going on here. You got the bread and no butter.

Addition: Every foo foo option on a Suburban and Tahoe is on the higher end 1500's...Hmmmm

Just started driving one for a work truck a few weeks ago. I don't think I'd want to tow much of anything especially in any mountains or hills but not a bad pickup so far.

It does very well, especially at elevation. I live at 6K ft. and can be at 11K in just over an hour. Much better in the mountains than my old 5.3 and the 6.0 we had in my wife's 2500 Suburban.

I ordered a Canyon so it will have the 2.7, looking forward to trying it out, not towing heavy anymore. Selling my 2500 with the 6.6 gas, but it has been a great truck and engine. No issues like the 5.3, POS engine.

I’ve got a 5.3 in a 2004 Suburban that has been outstanding. Nearly 270,000 trouble free miles.

The 06 I sold a while back has about the same miles on it.

Same deal, no issues.

Only issues a 5.3 had were the AFM engines and those issues can be easily remedied.

Actually come to think of it just about any engine that's been designed in the last 15-20 years from the big 3 have had some sort of problems.

Thats what happens when the government forces them to make more efficient engines.

That’s probably because it doesn’t have the cylinder deactivation.

$250 or less remedies that.

A bit more if a guy wants to completely eliminate it by getting inside of the engine.

Yep, you’re right.

Lol, I take it you got one of these foo foo models? Haha, are you even a real truck guy?

It’s hard to get through as people just can’t seem to wrap head around what boost really does. That turbo is another bank of cylinders that is unaffected by elevation. So if you live 2000’ and under and never spend much time above you’ll not like see all the boost benefits.

I live at 4000’ there’s a hill near here the highest point of the transcanada highway about 4700’, we all have to tow it heading west to play. At this elevation the 2.7t has 90 ft/lbs more torque than the 5.3 and it has that at 1100 rpm lower.

There’s plenty of tow test videos online. It runs around a 5.3 all day long. It can actually do more work than the 5.3 and it can suck the gas to prove it. At my elevation I have 22 ft/lbs more than the 6.2! Sure it has 63 more hp but it’s also much heavier.

So have fun with that work truck but it’s more work truck than a 5.3 as it has a proper truck motor in it.

No I couldn’t get one at the time….tho if I could have, I would have. I just need a hunting truck, so given a choice, I would rather have something nice. Work trucks don’t interest me at all.

However, real truck guys usually are not driving around in 4 cylinders. 🤣

It’s a good motor ruined by the afm/dfm lifters nonsense which I think started after 2014 sometime? Might have to look that up. I had a 13 suburban foo foo ltz 5.3 6-spd and it was solid, thirsty but it was a short experiment as turns out I’m a truck guy lol. If get a 5.3 now just delete all that afm/dfm stuff and should be good. Or just find the ones with the truck motors in them lol...2.7t.

That’s what the big block guys said to the cummins guys back in 1989. Oops

My custom is a long way from old school base lol. Full power seat, mirrors(heated), keyless and push button start, power windows with the 1-touch etc, heated rear window, air/tilt/cruise, auto-start, onstar bullshit. Don’t need heated seats and steering wheels with auto-start. I’m beyond comfortable and it’s ideal for giving big game animals their first (and last) truck rides.

Ps for the thread. My best bud has a 14 5.3 and similar cargo trailer we drag around all year for hunting and fishing. There’s nowhere that motor has proven better, and it eats a bit more gas. It’s a good motor as I’ve said, just not with afm/dfm lifters stuff. The 2.7t is smarter choice if buying right now imo. The v8’s already shot through the liver as the future is boost. It will just take a minute to get there. Same as the cummins did to the NA big blocks. Boost or die.

You should probably verify with some gm dealers techs and service managers which is the least worked on half ton motor. While many of the 5.3/6.2’s have been in for a few sets of lifters and the diesels for emissions limp mode issues the 2.7t doesn’t have a single common warranty issue yet in 5 years.

People like to people though...move slow in groups, don’t like change lol.

Lucky for you though you’ve been brought up to speed finally. Choose wisely.

AFM was introduced in '07 with the body change.

5.3 and 6.0 only at that time.

Hey guys, I originally posted this thread and wanted to chime in. I did end up buying a 2022 pre-refresh Limited Trail Boss with the 5.3, Has 12k on it when I bought it earlier this year. This particular model did not have the the afm/dfm so i'm not too worried about those. I have put 3k on it and no issues at all.

I’m certain I lump dfm/afm together. Whatever all the emissions stuff is that has the lifters and takes them out routinely under warranty. On gm forums it’s one of the most common warranty claims. Research away but all the stuff past a certain year has this common issue, it may be post afm. The 2.7 guys don’t have to worry about it though as they don’t have lifters. Nor a common warranty issue discussed on forums or seen by techs. Just change the oil and rotate the tires.

More issues than lifters with the 5.3 AFM engines.

Oil consumption can be an issue when you don't have a cylinder firing and seating those rings when combustion takes place.

The 2.7 Turbo gas engine also has AFM as well as 2 other operating modes.

Yup it can shut down to two cylinders and has 3 cam profiles as well. And ability to ramp boost up to 28 psi. It’s very dynamic. But no lifters. The engineer videos show the actuator that shifts the cam to one of the three positions. Pretty slick and simple. 5 years no issues, engineers couldn’t break it in torture test, and passed all the same truck duty cycle testing any other truck engine needs to get through.

Dropping down to 2 cylinders is pretty cool. It can really sip for the empty highway stuff. But as said it can do more work than the 5.3 and is closer to the 6.2 at moderate elevation. Overall economy on fuelly shows its dynamic range ability and and boost efficiency about 13% better than the 5.3. Progress is great. Tow mode negates the afm but it isn’t an issue with this motor.

The performance of the Chevrolet 2.7 4 cylinder is pretty amazing. I never thought such performance was possible from such a small displacement.

Boost any engine that can handle it and things can get sporty.

I wonder what years/models/engines that the tow mode kills the AFM?

My '08 still deactivates 4 cylinders in tow so anything under 60 I just leave in 3rd.