What's the verdict on the Hurricane engine in the Ram 1500? Pretty impressive torque/HP numbers for an engine that size. Too early to make a call on reliability yet I suppose.
You can have boost or you can have economy, but you can’t have both at the same time. Putting a hard load regularly on a turbo engine is going to make it thirsty. They are good for roles where you only need that power occasionally, as they can be fairly miserly at low loads.
I'd be inclined to give it a year or two before I'd buy a pickup sporting one. Of course, I'd say that about any engine with less than five years of real world use. That said, if Stellantis decided to build a modern version '68 Dart around either the SO or HO version, especially if it had available awd and a manual, I'd be at my local dealer the second one hit the lot.
Read they have a problem with the water pump, which is plastic. No real fix has been put forward yet. Other than that they seem to be a pretty stout engine. I still like the Hemi though.
Last edited by TwoTrax; 03/27/25.
SAVE THE EARTH - Spay or Neuter ALL Democrats & Liberals!
Read they have a problem with the water pump, which is plastic. No real fix has been put forward yet. Other than that they seem to be a pretty stout engine. I still like the Hemi though.
Yep, hard to beat the Dodge V8. Interestingly, my 23 model spark knocks a bit, whereas my 19 never did. I put 245,000 miles on my 19 with no engine issues whatsoever.
There was a one turbo half ton motor that has no issues and it’s been out since 2019. So few issues they added power in 2022.5 and so few again they upped the warranty to same 5 year 100k as the diesel. Gm makes it and is the only true truck engine as designed from ground up to be one. 5 mains (Ford 2.7tt v6 has only 4) basically a gas powered diesel. If you wanna play turbo there is one to look at you won’t have to worry about issues with.
Yes turbos can suck fuel. One turbo is basically moving the air of another bank of cylinders but can fit in your hand.
I got the gm 2.7 inline 4 turbo and at 310 hp and 430 ft/lbs it compares with 5.3v8 at 355 hp and 383 ft/lbs. the dynamic range is greater though so when taking it easy you can sip less than 5.3 and when you want to work harder you can sip more fuel than it also.
Torque is the work, hp is the speed of work. The 2.7 starts with 47 ft/lbs more than 5.3 and as elevation gains that gap widens. I live at 4000’ and at around 4500’ I have 90 ft/lbs more at 1100 rpm less than the 5.3 and I’m within a few hp. You lose 3% power per 1000’ naturally aspirated but only 0.05% boosted.
My buddy has 5.3 and we both tow similar cargo trailer camper builds year round fishing and hunting and I usually put in a few less liters at gas station stops. I also row a lot less gears on hills etc. Much quieter, relaxed and low effort. I’m also lifted and crew can and he’s extended cab non lifted.
Won’t be able to go back to NA engine.
They are not designed for fuel economy. You have to make them half the size for similar outputs because the hair dryer moves that much air. Mine was designed from ground up as a truck engine for work as noted by its higher torque rating than hp, 310 hp but 430 ft/lbs. inline 4, single turbo, long stroke. If you’re stuck on v8’s you’re stuck in 20th century. Educate yourselves and you’ll get back up to speed. There isn’t a single downside to boost.
The problems aren’t with boost led engine but finding ones designed for task at hand. The fords square stroke multi platform v6’s with two turbos...yuck. New tundra same thing? At least hurrycane is inline but tiny cylinders and short stroke likely since its hp and torque numbers so similar, and two turbos. It’s tricky to build a turbo truck motor as they don’t need much displacement when you add hair dryer, the gm engineers nailed it, they knew bigger cylinders are more efficient at spinning turbos also. They chose the turbo first then built the truck engine around it, the configuration and displacement chose themselves as they said for the output goals they were after.
Last edited by stinkycoyote; 04/25/25.
I am the Father of Modern Terminal Ballistics. Shots Fired.
From what I had read it was basically the same block that BMW uses in their cars which has been a bullet proof reliable engine. I understand the attraction to the engine but my thought was take that blue print of reliability and make it bigger. Maybe a 4.0l or make a 4.9l /300 ci like Ford had and just put a single turbo on it. It’s common knowledge that more junk on an engine is more things to go wrong.
There was a one turbo half ton motor that has no issues and it’s been out since 2019. So few issues they added power in 2022.5 and so few again they upped the warranty to same 5 year 100k as the diesel. Gm makes it and is the only true truck engine as designed from ground up to be one. 5 mains (Ford 2.7tt v6 has only 4) basically a gas powered diesel. If you wanna play turbo there is one to look at you won’t have to worry about issues with.
Yes turbos can suck fuel. One turbo is basically moving the air of another bank of cylinders but can fit in your hand.
I got the gm 2.7 inline 4 turbo and at 310 hp and 430 ft/lbs it compares with 5.3v8 at 355 hp and 383 ft/lbs. the dynamic range is greater though so when taking it easy you can sip less than 5.3 and when you want to work harder you can sip more fuel than it also.
Torque is the work, hp is the speed of work. The 2.7 starts with 47 ft/lbs more than 5.3 and as elevation gains that gap widens. I live at 4000’ and at around 4500’ I have 90 ft/lbs more at 1100 rpm less than the 5.3 and I’m within a few hp. You lose 3% power per 1000’ naturally aspirated but only 0.05% boosted.
My buddy has 5.3 and we both tow similar cargo trailer camper builds year round fishing and hunting and I usually put in a few less liters at gas station stops. I also row a lot less gears on hills etc. Much quieter, relaxed and low effort. I’m also lifted and crew can and he’s extended cab non lifted.
Won’t be able to go back to NA engine.
They are not designed for fuel economy. You have to make them half the size for similar outputs because the hair dryer moves that much air. Mine was designed from ground up as a truck engine for work as noted by its higher torque rating than hp, 310 hp but 430 ft/lbs. inline 4, single turbo, long stroke. If you’re stuck on v8’s you’re stuck in 20th century. Educate yourselves and you’ll get back up to speed. There isn’t a single downside to boost.
The problems aren’t with boost led engine but finding ones designed for task at hand. The fords square stroke multi platform v6’s with two turbos...yuck. New tundra same thing? At least hurrycane is inline but tiny cylinders and short stroke likely since its hp and torque numbers so similar, and two turbos. It’s tricky to build a turbo truck motor as they don’t need much displacement when you add hair dryer, the gm engineers nailed it, they knew bigger cylinders are more efficient at spinning turbos also. They chose the turbo first then built the truck engine around it, the configuration and displacement chose themselves as they said for the output goals they were after.
Interesting information. Hopefully they (Ford and Dodge) figure out that magic. I’d love to see some longer stroke purpose built inline sixes for trucks. I had a 1984 Ford F150 with the 300 straight six. I loved that truck. I always wondered what it would do if it had a turbo.
There was a one turbo half ton motor that has no issues and it’s been out since 2019. So few issues they added power in 2022.5 and so few again they upped the warranty to same 5 year 100k as the diesel. Gm makes it and is the only true truck engine as designed from ground up to be one. 5 mains (Ford 2.7tt v6 has only 4) basically a gas powered diesel. If you wanna play turbo there is one to look at you won’t have to worry about issues with.
Yes turbos can suck fuel. One turbo is basically moving the air of another bank of cylinders but can fit in your hand.
I got the gm 2.7 inline 4 turbo and at 310 hp and 430 ft/lbs it compares with 5.3v8 at 355 hp and 383 ft/lbs. the dynamic range is greater though so when taking it easy you can sip less than 5.3 and when you want to work harder you can sip more fuel than it also.
Torque is the work, hp is the speed of work. The 2.7 starts with 47 ft/lbs more than 5.3 and as elevation gains that gap widens. I live at 4000’ and at around 4500’ I have 90 ft/lbs more at 1100 rpm less than the 5.3 and I’m within a few hp. You lose 3% power per 1000’ naturally aspirated but only 0.05% boosted.
My buddy has 5.3 and we both tow similar cargo trailer camper builds year round fishing and hunting and I usually put in a few less liters at gas station stops. I also row a lot less gears on hills etc. Much quieter, relaxed and low effort. I’m also lifted and crew can and he’s extended cab non lifted.
Won’t be able to go back to NA engine.
They are not designed for fuel economy. You have to make them half the size for similar outputs because the hair dryer moves that much air. Mine was designed from ground up as a truck engine for work as noted by its higher torque rating than hp, 310 hp but 430 ft/lbs. inline 4, single turbo, long stroke. If you’re stuck on v8’s you’re stuck in 20th century. Educate yourselves and you’ll get back up to speed. There isn’t a single downside to boost.
The problems aren’t with boost led engine but finding ones designed for task at hand. The fords square stroke multi platform v6’s with two turbos...yuck. New tundra same thing? At least hurrycane is inline but tiny cylinders and short stroke likely since its hp and torque numbers so similar, and two turbos. It’s tricky to build a turbo truck motor as they don’t need much displacement when you add hair dryer, the gm engineers nailed it, they knew bigger cylinders are more efficient at spinning turbos also. They chose the turbo first then built the truck engine around it, the configuration and displacement chose themselves as they said for the output goals they were after.
Interesting information. Hopefully they (Ford and Dodge) figure out that magic. I’d love to see some longer stroke purpose built inline sixes for trucks. I had a 1984 Ford F150 with the 300 straight six. I loved that truck. I always wondered what it would do if it had a turbo.
That is one of the legends of truck motors. We have similar tastes.
If I read right this hurricane is a bit longer stroke than bore so technically a little under square and haven’t read up on it for issues but will in a year or two. Glad it’s inline and could live with two turbos, more of that. Maybe gm will gasoline the 3.0 for a 6.2 replacement in half tons? Got hosed on warranty on last dodge product so they are done for life with me. I hope their motor does well as it will help get more inline options.
I am the Father of Modern Terminal Ballistics. Shots Fired.
Turbo engines CAN get gas mileage. Especially on flat, varied terrain or not towing heavy.
You have two options with two results.
Drive it like a weak engine, get good mileage.
Drive it like a strong engine, enjoy the performance, mileage suffers.
Nice easy starts, picking up speed. Steady speed/cruise, it will roll right along. The turbo will build boost and pull like a freight train up hill, then sip gently in full the rest of the time.
Most think they don't give milage because they gotta get into the boost at every opportunity.
If not equipped with a manifold pressure gauge, get one. Then practice keeping g at half boost or less when accelerating.
Turbo engines CAN get gas mileage. Especially on flat, varied terrain or not towing heavy.
You have two options with two results.
Drive it like a weak engine, get good mileage.
Drive it like a strong engine, enjoy the performance, mileage suffers.
Nice easy starts, picking up speed. Steady speed/cruise, it will roll right along. The turbo will build boost and pull like a freight train up hill, then sip gently in full the rest of the time.
Most think they don't give milage because they gotta get into the boost at every opportunity.
If not equipped with a manifold pressure gauge, get one. Then practice keeping g at half boost or less when accelerating.
Spoken like an old trucker.
Drive by your boost gauge, keep an eye on the pyro on the long pulls.
from recollection for similar output levels to na engines the turbo will improve efficiency 12-13% and when I researched fuelly.com actuals it actually came out that way, but yeah you will lose less speed and need less gears loaded on hills so they will do more 'work' and pull more fuel than na but worth it, the power losses due to elevation go away, the front end weight goes away, lot less parts, it's more dynamic range of performance...hair dryers driven from exhaust gases are an awesome way to move air into the jugs, so many benefits
I am the Father of Modern Terminal Ballistics. Shots Fired.
GM can’t even make a normal V8 that doesn’t blow up anymore. I wouldn’t trust the general when it comes to forced induction either......
The v8’s have dfm lifter issues and hearing some bigger internal issues on 6.2 and the diesel only seems to be emissions stuff but they all fight with that. Their two boosted engines don’t have issues (common warranty known problems). The 10spd’s also talked about quite a bit on the gm forums. But it’s crickets on the 2.7t and 8spds. The early 8spds only had the clunky 1-2 shift when cold in am but pretty uncommon now and didn’t affect it as in an issue other than it annoyed drivers.
That’s from someone who’s spending time on gm forum which forums are a source of where issues are brought to light and condensed. So you’re mistaken when you assume about them not being able to do boosted trustworthy. I won’t speak much on the others on issues as I haven’t put the time in on their forums to get the condensed versions of what the common issues are currently but I did spend time on them when I decided on my next half ton. Now I only keep tabs on gm forum to confirm as years for by my research was solid and it is. Which is why I’m sharing it right here right now.
When I needed new half ton I did research all half ton motors and trucks. When I was done I ended up gm 2.7 turbo with 8spd. I’m not brand loyal. I’ve had them all except Nissan. Luckily I don’t need or want high level trim vehicles that force the other engines and 10spd transmission. 48,000 miles later and mostly towing about half the rating and not a single issue, smiles per mile are max and it was the most likely choice for lowest cost of total ownership over long run over all half ton option.
Do your own research thoroughly and you’ll probably see same thing. If you can’t do research well and or combined with brand loyalty or hate issues then you’ll get it wrong. You gotta put aside all personal stuff and just go after data for your needs. Takes a lot of hours of reading, watching videos, chasing down each rabbit hole of each engine, know how to listen to the guys making videos that have not learned anything about what they are talking about and just pretending like they know for their clickbaits and views etc. There’s a ton of info and tons more misinfo in the digital world so unless your a researchaholic you may not understand the landscape and how to navigate it for the actual info. Anyway, best of luck.
You roll the dice on all of them. When I chose I rolled on the most info I could find and process to my own conclusions for my truck duty goals intended. I want a long term potential not one I turn in every few years that’s always under warranty so does not matter etc.
Go see you if you can find a half ton gas motor with less issues than the gm 2.7, good luck, it doesn’t have any issues lol. There isn’t even one that can tie it. 😉
Another tip in forums is listen when the techs speak who work on them for a living every day. Which transmissions they have to crack open the most, which engines they have to do warranty work on the most, what issues they have to warranty on those engines etc. In the gm half ton family the one they barely mention other than they never have to work on them is the 2.7 and same for the 8spd, they crack open wat more 10spds and always working on the v8’s. I’ll leave diesel out as I don’t go diesel for emissions reasons, and they are tough to delete now but the 3.0 has less issues than the v8’s and they are minor for most part in emissions.
I would not be afraid of the coyote in the Ford and when I researched it ended up number 2 on my list for a motor I probably wouldn’t have issues with but I had more factors to include in decision. But if I was dead set on a na v8 that was my choice. I’d still probably take their 2.7tt over it but not with gm’s 2.7 in existence. But the 2.7t won out for a bunch of reasons that suited where I live and what I use a truck for.
Last edited by stinkycoyote; 05/03/25.
I am the Father of Modern Terminal Ballistics. Shots Fired.
![[Linked Image]](https://i.postimg.cc/050xcBLB/Abbyand-Rum.jpg)
