[Shotgun]

If this engine were available in higher trimmed trucks and/or with the 10-speed transmission, I believe it would sell much better and build on it's reputation. Yes, the 4-cyl idea in a full-size truck turns away most people. I will add, though, people balked hard at Ford for the EcoBoost at first, too. That has turned out to be a pretty decent engine, albeit with a few hiccups to start. Again, there are those who will go for the 5.0 engine everytime, though.

 

[09W]

If this engine were available in higher trimmed trucks and/or with the 10-speed transmission, I believe it would sell much better and build on it's reputation.

Available up thru the LT RST and LT Trail Boss, so, there's only 2 trims above that (LTZ & High Country).

 

[61BelAir]

It's funny that most of the people saying this are the ones who drove a 150hp 4.3 C1500 back in the 90s.

haha...my first new car (truck) was a 1989 Chevy C1500 Cheyenne reg cab short bed with the 4.3L (160hp) and 5 speed manual. I loved that truck! Here I am 34 years later with 2017 Silverado Reg cab short bed with a 4.3L. The newer V6 makes 125 more HP (137 more HP if I run e85). Its been a great engine so far with no complaints, but it is a little thirsty driving around town. I do have a heavy right foot.

 

[6cylinder]

The V6 always deserved the same kaizen the V8s got.

Apparently kaizan is a miss-spelling that means 'cooking the books'. Which is what a lot of post-Cash-for-Clunkers powertrain pushes look like.

 

[Shotgun]

Available up thru the LT RST and LT Trail Boss, so, there's only 2 trims above that (LTZ & High Country).

To get anything with the 10-speed, you can't get the TurboMax. You can get an LT with leather and keep the TurboMax, but not if you want the LT TrailBoss. Normal GM (and others) packaging restrictions. Want l;eather in the LT TrailBoss? You have to select the 10-speed which then forces you into Advanced Trailering and the Duramax. Geez, Louise!

 

[NHRATA01]

Wondering GMI's interpretation since it was bandied about on the Colorado forums. Does the 5/100K apply to just the engine itself or the full powertrain?

 

[Bigdog]

Nissan boasts that its standard warranty for Titan pickup truck remains "America's Best". GM's powertrain warranty for L3B equipped T1XX trucks is a year longer, but the bumper-to-bumper coverage is two years and 64k miles shorter.

Bumper to Bumper is a far superior option, powertrain warranty's cover very little once you read the font size 1 coverage, i have owned new gm trucks for the last 3 decades and not once have i used a powertrain warranty.

 

[gkr778]

Wondering GMI's interpretation since it was bandied about on the Colorado forums. Does the 5/100K apply to just the engine itself or the full powertrain?

Full powertrain. For model year 2024, GM's action adds 2.7L 4-cylinder L3B to the list of engines that qualify for 5 year/100k mile powertrain warranty coverage. T1XX trucks with the 3.0L Duramax inline six engine already had the enhanced powertrain warranty for model year 2023.

Confirmation from KBB:

A Chevrolet spokesperson tells us the offer “is exclusive to the 2024 Silverado 1500 TurboMax,” and “matches the warranty applied to Duramax-diesel-powered Silverado pickups – including the only light-duty pickup available with a diesel engine, the Silverado 1500 equipped with the 3.0-liter Duramax diesel.”

 

[09W]

To get anything with the 10-speed, you can't get the TurboMax. You can get an LT with leather and keep the TurboMax, but not if you want the LT TrailBoss. Normal GM (and others) packaging restrictions. Want l;eather in the LT TrailBoss? You have to select the 10-speed which then forces you into Advanced Trailering and the Duramax. Geez, Louise!

OK, but now you're working a number of other features in - like you say; every OEM does these things.

GM doesn't pair the 2.7L with the 10-spd, but the 8-spd should be more than fine. The couple of times I've shifted my 10-spd into manual mode on the highway, it's not been higher than 7th (unless that's a design feature).

 

[Myron 65]

It's funny that most of the people saying this are the ones who drove a 150hp 4.3 C1500 back in the 90s.

It's not an issue with the horsepower or torque.
It's about how squeezing so much out of so little stresses all the internals.

 

[Shotgun]

OK, but now you're working a number of other features in - like you say; every OEM does these things.

GM doesn't pair the 2.7L with the 10-spd, but the 8-spd should be more than fine. The couple of times I've shifted my 10-spd into manual mode on the highway, it's not been higher than 7th (unless that's a design feature).

You may be on to something there. The 8-speed has been a colossal turd since inception and hasn't ever been remotely reliable or lauded. Perhaps that's holding back the take rate of the 4-cyl more than number of cylinders. The 6-speeds are regarded as good, as are the 10-speeds, but most stay away from the 8 if they can.

 

[NHRATA01]

It's not an issue with the horsepower or torque.
It's about how squeezing so much out of so little stresses all the internals.

As I've asked before, do we not think engine design and materials strengths have improved since the days of plopping a 2 bolt main iron 305, based on a 1950s block design, with cast pistons and 170hp into a 1/2 ton?

 

[InCogKneeToe]

Ok, it is obvious that this isn't a "Hey let's make a Diesel out of a 5.7L Gas Engine and sell them like Hot Cakes"

This is a "Hey this 2.7L isn't turning as Fast as other options, what can we do about it?"

It started with the "Turbo Max Credit". "Hum, maybe we priced it Too High" and eventually turned to "Well maybe the Public doesn't think it will Hold Up in the long run"

When realistically, it started long ago when Engineers said "Hey that 2.7L EcoBoost is working for Ford, what can We do Better?" Loping 2 cylinders off wasn't the answer, neither was DoD on only 4 holes.

They didn't realise that the 2.7L EcoBoost wasn't a immediate Success, it took some time to grow, and rode on the 3.5L EcoBoost's fame (eventual Fame) There are still Many FS Truck Buyers that believe 2.7L is Too Small for a FS Truck, even more that just can't believe that 4 Cylinders will cut it in a FS Truck.

Give it time to grow on it's own Merit, but it should have had 6 holes to begin with

 

[6cylinder]

Diesels are always a premium choice. But need the turbo squeeze as a hp crutch, and 'throttle with fuel' so don't waste gas.

Maybe it's an accomplishment for Ford - being able to pull off selling their people on a beer can truck with Bud Light power?

 

[gkr778]

Maybe it's an accomplishment for Ford - being able to pull off selling their people on a beer can truck with Bud Light power?

Ford does have very competent marketing dweebs, so it's not surprising that F-150 with the 2.7L V6 Ecoboost engine sells better than T1XX trucks with the 2.7L 4-cylinder L3B engine.

 

[AWHoden]

Then Caddy and Buick went to 4/50 B2B and 6/70 powertrain warranties, until GM quietly dropped Buick back to 3/36 and 5/60. So much for "premium" branding.

As much as I dislike the fact that powertrain warranties have been scaled back, I don't see the connection between the length of a warranty and whether a car is "premium". Premium means having extra features as standard and some options not available below a certain price point (somewhere between entry level and luxury), it has nothing to do with the length of a warranty. Mazda is considered a premium car company and it's cars have a 3 year/36,000 mile & 5 year/60,000 mile warranty, too. Same with Toyota & Honda. Lexus is 4/50 basic & 6/70 powertrain and some of those cost far more than the Silverado. BMW is 4 years/ 50,000 miles for everything, Mercedes is 4 years /50,000 miles for basic & powertrain, Porsche is 4 years, 50,000 miles for basic & powertrain, Ferrari is 3 years / unlimited miles for basic and powertrain. All "premium" or luxury brands with so-so warranties. It seems to be the norm, now.

 

[61BelAir]

It's not an issue with the horsepower or torque.
It's about how squeezing so much out of so little stresses all the internals.

The GM 3.0L Duramax has a 15:1 compression ratio and runs up to a max of 43psi of boot. In comparison, the 2.7L turbo is 10:1 compression ratio and a max of 27psi. The block, crank and pistons have all been beefed up since the engine first came out. Obviously we are talking diesel vs. gas, but it seems they have their bases covered. As far as 4 cyl engines are concerned, 2.7L is actually pretty big and it was designed to be a turbo motor from the get-go. The engineers took their knowledge from the turbo diesel and applied it to the 2.7L and it seems to work, to the point that we probably won't see a diesel application on the Colorado. The previous 2.7L turbo made 340+ ft-lbs of torque at 1500 rpm and carried it to 4500rpm if I remember correctly. The torque curve looked like a diesel torque curve. I've yet to see the torque curve on the new 2.7L but if its anything like the first year model, it should be really impressive.

 

[AWHoden]

It's not an issue with the horsepower or torque.
It's about how squeezing so much out of so little stresses all the internals.

Why would it? It's an engine, not a person. It can only make what it is designed to, and it's designed to make what it does....all the time.

 

[Myron 65]

Why would it? It's an engine, not a person. It can only make what it is designed to, and it's designed to make what it does....all the time.

Designed.
Yet there are still new owners having issues with cams and lifters on tried and true Chevy V8's.

 

[6cylinder]

I've also seen/heard complaints about hot rod parts companies' lifters. Suggests an el cheapo, but fixable approach to quality control. If not, take afm systems back out.