I sold it after only 10 months. Recently purchased an Expedition with the 3.5L Ecoboost. Needed 3 rows for family vacations. But never had an issue with the 2.7 4cyl Chevy engine. It was an impressive motor.
Zecrid GM shits all over Ford for being the first one to come up with a new idea (turbocharged engines, aluminum body panels, integrated tailgate step) and then a few years later GM copies Ford.
I laugh at the Ecoboost V6 because several turbos on those engines burn up before 50,000 miles. No replacement for displacement. BUT, do I agree this is a good idea for GM to put a 4-cylinder in a full sized pickup? HELL NO! Not a good idea at all. The Ford 4.2L V6 in the F-150s and the GM 4.3L V6 in the base Silverados/Sierras, old S-10s/Blazers/Jimmy’s were great engines. Why wouldn’t Ford or GM upgrade those engines?? They were bulletproof!
Just wait for the countless TSBs on this gem. Software band-aids to get it through warranty, excuses from GM and the service department saying “no problem found”, that startup rattle is “normal”, that one quart per 1100 miles is within “specs”, etc. Then a week after warranty expires the chain slips, water pump fails, thermostat sticks shut and she’s gone
GM has always held their maximum oil consumption spec as 1 quart per 2,000 miles. Any vehicle under warranty that is tested and shown to consume more than will be repaired. No deadlines (a la Toyota "Limited Service Campaigns") or absurdly high 1qt/1,200 mile spec. Yes, Toyota states oil consumption of up to 1 quart every 1,200 miles is normal for their engines. Honda and Subaru also have a "normal" oil consumption spec of 1 quart per 1,200 miles. Toyota used that spec and arbitrary deadline to deny a LOT of customers repair for their oil guzzling 2AZ-FE. Even better, Ford's 5.2 Voodoo developed a thirst for oil so Ford quickly modified the supplementary owners manual for the next year, adding a line that essentially says the 5.2 Voodoo will normally consume up to 2 quarts of oil every 1,000 miles. Car and Driver's GT350 burned 8.5 quarts of 5W50 sythetic oil in just 11,800 miles. Most of those miles were accumulated on LA freeways going to and from work.
@@natehawkins2910 He's obviously talking out of his ass on every claim he tried to make when he tries to say that GM tells you its "normal" for their engines to burn 1 quart every 1,100 miles. There are several GM TSB's out covering ALL their vehicles that states that any vehicle they sell that is using more than 1 quart every 2,000 miles will be repaired under warranty. Not to mention it's FORD that's famous for shit timing chains, legendary for strange knocks and rattles emanating fron their engine on startup. Cheap plastic timing chain tensioners, cheap cam phasers, cheap cam followers, cheap failure prone lash adjusters, cheap valve guides, cheap inverted tooth timing chains, etc. One look at f150ecoboost.net's forums shows just how bad their engines are. Look around the internet and you can see that for as few 5.0 Coyote F-150's are out there, its shocking how many of them develop ticks, rattles, and the famous Coyote Knock.
hochhaul I am familiar with both ford and Chevy common problems but I do believe it will be a fight to try and prove you’re burning a quart per 2000. How exactly would you personally think they’re gonna just take your word and open up an engine on their dime? Just because a tsb says something doesn’t mean they HAVE to repair it. Nor do they have to make it easy. I’ve never found a easy to deal with Chevy or gmc service Dept yet!
don't worry guys this is just the ends of obamas GM. They already killed off the volt, is the bolt next on the chopping block? 7 Liter LS crate motors for errebody!!!!! you get a crate motor you get a crate motor.
I have a good friend that purchased one of these in for his daily work truck. He drives several hundred miles a day on average and his diesel was getting expensive to maintain. He paid nearly half the cost of a new diesel half ton and 1/3 the cost of a 3/4 ton. He has yet to have any problems or complaints with the engine or the truck and he gets roughly the same mileage he did with the F250 he replaced. I had the opportunity to drive this truck a few weeks back and was shocked at the power this thing had. It never felt like it was working hard or did I feel like I had to keep my foot stuffed in the throttle to keep it moving and it was loaded with his usual array of tools and equipment in the bed. If I didn’t know I would have guessed it to be a 5.3 under the hood, which he did consider along with the Ford Ecoboost. But the initial cost and the fuel savings over the life of the truck made more economic sense at the time to go with this platform. As of now it’s paying off with 35k on the odometer. No issues or returns to the dealer for any work other than oil changes and a set of front brakes.
@@brettryan3298 That's probably the market this is meant for; people who would be better served by a midsized truck, yet want the fullsized look at a lower cost.
I just put an overhauled 1996 305 vortec V8 and 700r4 in my 85 Chevy S10 over 2 weeks ago. It has an edelbrock carb and the transmission is controlled by the tried and true factory vacuum switch system. The factory AC,cruise control and instrument cluster still works flawlessly. Shame to say I would trust it more on a cross country trip with it's 20 plus year old reconditioned drive train than if it were fitted with this new computerized reliability disaster in waiting. Strangely enough,I would love to do the new 4 cylinder swap myself just for bragging rights. Thanks for the idea.
That engine is waaay too complex. There are so many failure points that reliability will be very unlikely in my opinion. This engine will be a nightmare.
That's what the 2.7 Ecoboost is. A complex design with some major design problems and too many cheap components. This GM 2.7 will probably have bugs to work out in the first couple years, but GM won't be shoving it down everyone's throat like Ford has with the 2.7eb for the last 4 years. 40 to 50% of F-150's on dealer lot have the 2.7EB. GM said this 2.7t will be in roughly 10% of trucks and only in the mid-level LT trim.
Timothy Isenhart reverse engine? No,,,,it’s an engine that fires both ways so a four banger becomes an eight and no it was designed only as a proof of concept ie to show off their engineering abilities. You should have said check out Nissans new variable combustion turbo engine with its double crank setup in its new infinity engines. Now that’s looks like a problem just waiting to happen.
And I can guarantee that once inside the truck, all this future failure parts will be impossible to get to. Making dealer repair a multi day event....in the end we loose
shite4brains as opposed to what? A motor built in the 80's with no Innovation what so ever ? With that mentality we would be stuck in a horrible place where no engine is made more efficient and powerful and they just keep making the same engine over and over
My father used to tell me the same, " If it ain't broke, don't fix it". I have nothing against improvements and innovation, but there are somethings in life that are what I consider to be a "matured technology", or a technology that has little to no room left for improvement. An example of what I believe is a matured technology is the lug nut, as I believe it has been matured since 1965. Ford decided to improve the lug nut by making it a 2 piece design to make them more "fashionable." Unfortunately, this improvement came at a cost, as the nut would swell from temperature changes and removal of the lug nuts would require a trip ( towed if the vehicle is disabled from a flat tire or such ) to a shop. I take my hat off to Ford to successfully discovering a way to botch a technology that has been perfected over 50 years ago. I wish the best of luck to GM, time will tell if I will be taking my hat off to GM for botching a technology that is now over 80 years old ( I'm talking about the Wax element thermostat ), the one main advantage about the water pump is that the belt ( on mechanical water pumps ) may contribute to bearing failure of the water pump, but with automatic belt tensioners such wear is minimized and water pumps tend to last a very long time. Water pumps used to have short life spans when the tensioners were manually set and people would set them EXTREMELY tight. And as advantageous as the electric water pump may be, the electronics are simply adding additional points of failure. It is in my opinion that these improvemets are nothing more than "solutions that are in search of a problem."
Interesting motor. However, I'll stick with the 4.9L straight 6, 5spd in my 1989 F-150. Plenty of grunt down low, 15 mpg empty or fully loaded. Drove it off the lot, had 2.7 miles on the clock. Next month is 30 yrs of ownership.
@@berjyacoubian6173 I know a few guys that wish they had played test monkey for Ford and its 2.7 experiment. Two of them have had their heads replaced and another needed a long block.
So many things to wrong. Hey let's turn a simple 4 cylinder into a financial nightmare at 50,000 miles! A chain off the back of the engine for the oil pump??! Now I'm off to buy more engine parts for my 4.2 vortec with only 160,000 miles. Never again.
I will have to look deeper into the oil pump location, but I think it might be start/stop system, you know, they shut down at traffic lights, then start up when you touch the gas pedal. I heard the standard starters wore out fast when they first began using that technology, so had to come up with another way.
I have a better idea..........why don't you ride a bike (bicycle) instead. Or better yet, take the bus. Now you have no more nightmares. Well, aside from the bus being late.
I'm all for small engines, as I'm a 4 cylinder engine fan. However, this "turbo everything" mentality means that we should be seeing lots of today's new cars and trucks piling up in junkyards in less than 10 years. Computers? I'm not worried about electronics. Those can and are being made reliable enough in many cars. No matter how simple an engine is built,a turbo application will make it complex even when done correctly. A full size truck with a 4 cylinder (turbo or not) is a fashion statement designed for those who just want a truck for the sake of having one. Great payload and towing capacity on this engine at the expense of long term durability. A V8 can do it for a few hundred thousand miles; you'll be hard pressed to get half of that under the same usage on a 4 cylinder turbo.
I read an article in the journal sentinel on that very thing, people were having trouble with small turbo engines and transmissions with multiple gears. I do agree though. I say they sould just remake the 3800 v6 and put it in.
Turbos make for very good energy efficiency. Good fuel economy with unmatched power. What most buyers dont understand is that with all that extra boost comes extra cylinder pressure. This leads to more and more head gasket failures. Everyone knows dealers charge a butt load to fix them. Its just another way to hose the customer in the end.
it seems to me that GM did some research though. a lot of the areas where turbo engines failed in the 1980s turbo cars appear to be built to diesel truck specs in this engine. this should help reliability a lot.
@@kieffershriner8199 Yeah, the 4.3 may have been a torque monster for a V6 but it's reliabilty was shit. The 3.8 T-Type motors were much more reliable.
@David Laurie I don't know about that. They use the "Duramax" (Isuzu) inline 6 through out the rest of the world and they are pretty tough and reliable.
or just decades of experience watching and repairing all these beta designs that looked good on paper then cost thousands of dollars later to keep the vehicle running.
A truck should have a low revving, under-stressed engine. This engine isn't going to last nearly as long a naturally aspirated V8, and is going have way more problems.
@@billybeemus3929 Yeah but it's not RPM that kills an engine... not at a mere 6K anyway. Lower the RPM and everything else has to bear more stress to compensate.
Americans don’t use their trucks for stressful driving. They use them to drive to and from work. Absolutely ludicrous to give a truck a V8 in today’s market.
@@markofexcellence5209 That's what the midsize trucks are for. I use my colorado about 75% daily commuter and 25% as a truck. A full sized truck should not have these tiny turbo'ed engines as they are meant to be abused. This engine is gonna be a huge waste of R&D for GM as this engine isn't gonna sell for shit, especially since it's tied to high end trims. The base is still the more reliable V6
Eh not really as long as they are cooled properly they will both last. And technically your radiators will balance out the coolant temp throughout the system.
How much gas in dollars have we saved when something goes wrong with the water management system, cam slider or the variable oil pump, by going to the better mileage of a 4 cyl.? Any of those repairs is going to be minimum $3k and a loaner vehicle for a week if you are lucky. So unless gas costs are more that tripling what are we doing? It is not like GM has a good reliability type reputation when manufacturing these type of technical things on engines. Would be interesting to see what the real mileage difference is between the excellent 6.2L and the other motors compared to this turbo 4 cyl. Stick to less technical things that are very expensive to build and repair and have longevity issues - this motor is a disaster waiting to happen and will never be seeing the longevity for owners that is expected with the costs of trucks today.
That thing is going to suck just as much fuel as a V8 when you hammer it, the only reason they did this was A it costs less to manufacture a 4 banger and B it will fail sooner so you have to buy a new truck in 4 years.
I never thought I’d live long enough to see a 4 cyl engine in a vehicle that big & heavy. As a kid I was conditioned in my family to believe 4cyl= 1971 Toyota Corolla; V8= 1968 Ford Galaxie. 21st century & my entire paradigm for rules governing cars, has been completely turned upside down on its ear! Do I even belong in this world anymore?
...and TV was black and white. Phones were corded and the internet wasn’t even a dream. Everyone seems okay with using the rest of the current technologies but when it comes to a pickup without a V8 we’re all closed minded????
Making small, low displacement engines put out more horsepower is all well and fine, but telling owners that oil changes can occur every 10K plus miles is pure insanity. Plus, most owners are lucky if they know where the oil dipstick is located nowadays. Look under the hood of modern cars and they may as well have a sign that says, "Do Not Touch". With variable valve timing and other such complicated systems, there must be a constant flow of clean, high quality oil to keep everything working right. These engines are very expensive to repair or replace and are not nearly as forgiving as the old style motors. And don't forget, the ECM is keeping tabs on when the oil has been changed. Go past it and you void the warranty, even if you do it once.
Troy Dzuricsko Spoken like a true broke guy. Lol Why do so many people try to scare others with “cost.” Especially people who cannot afford to even buy one of these trucks (even a few years old) in the first place!!
@@natehawkins2910 I'm far from being broke and I'm not out to scare anyone. Engines being as complicated as this one is also require highly trained mechanics who know how to properly repair them. Many consumers will be in for a shock should they need repairs or to have one replaced, even those who can afford it. And regular maintenance is an absolute necessity, which is also more costly.
Troy Dzuricsko I getcha just seems like everyone’s on the same page with sky is falling repairs but who really works on their current vehicle? If a guy can afford a $750 payment he can most likely afford after warranty repairs of $1000 too. But most won’t keep them that long anyways.
@@natehawkins2910 Ok, we've both made good points. I'm a guy who keeps vehicles a long time and I've always worked on my own vehicles. But engines such as these can have their own version of "sticker shock" when a repair or replacement costs $5K or more... and that's especially for older guys like me. But, if its the future of engine design, and if it works and proves reliable enough, then manufacturers will go with it. I'm just really not sure if the gain is worth the pain.
Just bought one of these in a 1500 and I’m stoked! Feels way better than my old 5.3, much broader torque curve too. Now I’m just waiting for GM to put this engine in a 2500, fingers crossed PLEASE GM!!
for sale soon: electronic thermostat delete kit with inline regular thermostat,,,, electronic oil pump actuator delete kit with in line pull pump and cooler. also in the kit line, a 350 v8 swap kit, if you don't want to pay $6,000 to fix this abomination when it's electric and oil systems fail and destroy the engine
Iron Man The v8 bares little in common with v8’s from just three years ago. How do you love your Auto Stop Start v8? Lol kinda cuts your big old v8’s nuts right off there and hands them to ya on a pretty pink platter. Lol
Agreed. Way too complex for long term reliability. Not user- serviceable/ friendly. Instead of a " check engine light" ,it should say " return me to the dealership, prepare for big bill( or a lengthy run-, around, if still on warranty!)
The future is VERY BRIGHT INDEED!!! How do I know this??? It's simple: y simply looking at the comments section I can see that EVERYONE is now an expert... and an Engineer!!! I only wish the actual engineers who designed this engine were as smart as the people watching this video!!!
My "engineer" side is blown away by this engine and all the widgetry that goes into it. It's absolutely brilliant... My "mechanic" side is terrified.. what a nightmare of widgetry..
This engine with a 10-speed transmission would be the perfect powertrain for the new Colorado that is supposed to be out in a few years. Maybe an upmarket option for a 48-volt electrical system for even more low-end torque and mpg. The addition of that torque would allow to fit a bigger turbo for more power and not worry about the lag.
pzkpfwiv freak I can’t believe there are some designers out there with a better eye as to what looks good. And power train wise, what’s next a two cylinder with quad turbo’s. It’s like they are engineering in complication. They seem so pleased with themselves, like they’re showing off their science project to mommy.
= Jeff X. yup, i don't know what they are thinking, adding plastic valves in the coolant system, 4 cylinder trucks, etc... your'e right. they are engineering failure. i am a licensed auto tech (30 years) , and all the plastic crap that has been introduced into the high heat, high stress environment that is the combustion engine, is ludicrous! the failure rate, in my observations, of plastic engine parts is staggering,thermostat housings, plastic coolant bypass hoses, intake manifolds,end up failing!plastic valve covers, the list goes on, and i don't think its going to get any better, anytime soon. if you think vehicle systems repair costs money now, wait until your repair estimates start rolling in with more crap engine attachments that need replacement due to failure. cars, i find nowadays, are becoming disposable,more now than in the past. yes some cars were disposable, they've been around, but once the warranty is up, get rid of it. after 5 or 6 years, and 200,000 kms it is going to start getting expensive. there is a saying "there is nothing more expensive than a second hand BMW"yeah, they're cheap when they're used, but the original owner knows better than to hang on to one after a certain point, because the major repairs aren't going to be cheap.i've been driving my 1976 ford f100 truck with the original engine around for the last decade or so, with 178,000 miles on the original drivetrain,rear end, steering gear, alternator, water pump, carb, etc... its easy to fix, parts are cheap, and mileage is around 20 mpg on a bad day, so i think i'll stick with it. and for the price of a new truck, i can keep the old girl running and looking good til the day i die. i'm not saying its the best vehicle to buy, there are lots of good cars and trucks, you just need to research your choices.
I thought things couldn't get any worse putting a v-6 in a full size, but now you put a 4cyl. w/a dangerously hot turbo. Wouldn't get me to buy one, Eever.!No electric water pump either. And No automatic trans. Too much computer controls. I'll keep my '64 Pontiac Grand Prix. 421 Engine. BullyBilly
What have cars become they keep cramming more and more computers and more sensors and this just makes things go bad quicker and I’m going to school for auto mechanics and this makes it much harder to work on and fix the problem. I’ll stick with my good old Chevy 350 small blokc
Andrew Kauffmann imo electric water pumps/ thermostats are simpler and are gonna last longer than mechanical ones. And actually it’s going to be a lot easier to diagnose and fix the problem because when everything’s hooked up to sensors and the ecu all it takes is a scan tool to find out what’s wrong with it. But yes, I would much rather be a mechanic in a time period where cars were a lot more mechanical, if you want to be a mechanic now you have to have electrician skills as well.
I would rather have to occasionally tear down an engine and rebuild it rather than just repeatedly do tedious small electrical jobs, but I don’t think that’s realistic in today’s world with these engines coming out with stronger forged and longer lasting internals.
Andrew Kauffmann Get ready...that's why I decided to forego auto mechanics, it's all getting too complex anymore, so this is what we'd expect every time a new customer walks in.
@@codybigbee2957 Those scan tools you are talking about dont always show the cause of the problem. They are handy at times, but I wouldn't rely on them solely. All these electronics are nonsense. Cars are made to be thrown away nowadays and get another one.
Why can't you just keep things simple. All this complex technology is unncessesary. I have had 94 jeep and 03 jeep with the 4.0 and the later model is a piece of junk because the sensors all over the engine keep failing making it run like crap
Without "technical improvement" we will never see the change we need to get better fuel milege, better air quality, and better build quality. To accomplish that there might be some failed sensors allong the way.
There are 2 reasons: thermodynamic efficiency and lower emissions. Better efficiency means less fuel input for the same amount of output that you get. That output isn't just power, either. It's heat loss from the engine as well, which can be used for different things. Emissions is obvious, so I won't go over that. It's interesting engineering and people seem to buy them, so these companies don't really have a reason to not do this stuff. The returns they're getting are good.
I bought a 2022 Silverado with this engine…. We shall see how it goes! The engine like he says, warms up quick, and power is great….. Will it last forever? No worries , I’ll trade it in well before forever happens!
Just remember all, this is the company who gave you an LS engine with cylinder shutdown that fails on every engine and requires heads to come off, lifters and oil control solinoids changed out. I hope this engines AFM works better.
@@jdrok5026 lol well... Not to completely devalue your opinion, but AFM started in 04 for the 05 model year, but I have seen some 04 envoys with AFM. More failed than did not. It's not an exaggeration but the absolute truth.
Thermal control on this engine is extremely detailed and specific. Cool heads and warm block with electronics. Is this a 12 volt or 48 volt electric system? Excellent video and description of engine details.
How much is Chevy going to charge for that plastic disaster they call the “cooling module”? You know it’s going to fail. Aren’t these the guys that brought us dexcool?
I needed an electric fuel pump for a 4.3 L GM. In a box, on the parts counter, it was over $800. A water pump is bigger - $1500? Also, on my present vehicle, a $5 thermistor, complete with wiring harness, cost me $335.
i was excited about this engine especially if it would be put into the Colorado; however, watching this video I see several weak points on this engine: the electric water pump, and the electric water values. in a few years, these will be the high dollar items that will be replaced frequently. I am calling this now.also I see what looks like some kind of timing chain in the rear of the engine. that looks like a bear to replace when it pops as in remove the whole engine bear just like the Atlas engines were.
I've never had a car that uses fuel to cool the exhaust. Saying you can turn off the electric water pump is better than mechanical water pumps doesn't make sense since a non- positive displacement pump will not pump coolant that's blocked by a closed thermostat, so that allows engine heating, and electric water pumps are more prone to failure than a belt driven pump. If your pump is off the heater core won't warm up. Heater cores don't heat the cabin unless coolant is flowing, How is this any different than it's been since 1925?
Dave B Everyone has driven a car that used fuel to cool the exhaust valves. The computer riches the mixture to do this. By using coolant they can lean the mixture saving fuel. Toyota has been using electric water pumps for years without issue. You need to go back and watch the video again as your understanding on the coolant system is wrong. It not only has electronic water pump but also multiple valves that can direct coolant directly to were it is needed while shutting down flow to areas not needed. It is nothing like the single thermostat systems of old
@@chribrian He didnt' say valves. He said exhaust. And I have had cars in the shop that have toasted their engine from a failed electric water pump and the pump prices? wow!. BMW has had a high failure rate with them, much more than the older types. I've also seen this happen when a plastic impeller has come off of a BMW water pump. But poor quality tends to do that. Each manufacturer is different; I think the Toyota pumps you mention are for the power inverter where the environment may be a little milder and the demand lower than a main engine coolant pump, and these may give a little more heads up and even a shut down if things go awry. I know it can be done reliably, but at what cost? What bothers me most is the technological overkill that engineers scramble toward but it diminishes the economy of repairing a car as it ages. i know not to buy a used space shuttle, cars are getting nearly that complex. But the setting is right for the EV to wipe out the ICE as engineers pile on more layers of the esoteric "technology" to milk every inch out of every drop of gas. Or like VW they can just "say they did" when they didn't. Lying is another approach, when the pinnacle of ICE design is just about milked and no practical options remain. this reminds me of a very expensive film camera.
Not long ago, 6.0 v-8's were less powerful than this 4 cyl, and got 15 highway. We'll see about durability but I bet it does just fine. Considering that most 1/2 tons are used for light work, and customers who work their trucks harder can get the v-8. Good to have options to suit your needs
@@jeffhebbeler5951 sounds like lazy engineering to me, the hilux has a straight 6, in a smaller chassis and plenty of cabin room and plenty of room around the engine to work on it.
Cannons what straight 6 is in a Hilux? All I see on wiki is V6s, and I’m not familiar enough with them being that we get shafted from having them in the US.
@@jeffhebbeler5951 since they are designing a new engine, a V6 would've been a smarter move if they were using a turbo. A V6 is compact enough, more refined and The turbo could've sat in the V, similar design to what the the Italians are doing on some of their sports cars.
I'm actually starting to become a fan of this engine. I applaud all the thought and ingenuity that went into it. For a base engine, the performance specs are really good. And I've been very critical of GM for how shitty they've let Chevy trucks become. I like what they're doing with this.
Of course you left out the big question - why only direct injection and not both direct and port, and what is GM doing to counter the carbon buildup on the intake.
You know as well as I do they're only concerned with getting it through its warranty period .... I think everyone started to take a page out of Audi ,BMW,and Mercedes Benz handbook
Less HP and TQ than the 5.3 without enough mileage difference to make it worth the complexity. My 2017 5.3 is rated the same on the highway. I see this as a total fail in every respect for GM.
Um what? This engine makes peak torque at less then 2k rpm which is most of the 5.3s torque but lower. You could probably tune it get more power and better mpgs then the 5.3
I drove one but went with the 5.3 but I was surprised how quick that 2.7 is. Probably quicker than the 5.3 0 to 60 empty truck. Just couldn't bring myself to buy it, unproven and not enough warrenty. But try one yourself you will be like holy shit.
OK I have had 2016 F150 XLT V6 2.7 Ecoboost since Nov 4 2015; I have now 115 K miles. Live in Miami, Fla where it’s hot and lots of humidity. Listen folks No Issues with my motor. I have had issues with the A/C freezing up on me and my eletric seat and my eletric window. But no engine problems. I don’t tow hard. I tow our boat 5,000 lbs max to the Keys but mostly 3 miles away to a dock and here in South Florida it’s Flat! We tow a camper 4200 lbs dry weight and camper makes trips to Tennessee and NC mountains. Giving this truck to my son In the next few months was considering the Silverado with the Duramax but already issues are showing up with other owners. Now the LT or the RST 2.7 has my attention, not worried about power but break down into the 3rd year or after? I get allot more truck for the money with Chevy & Chevy incentives! Are huge right now! .. I’m having second thoughts. Test road one on Friday an RST 2.7; I was so impressed with the silence of the cab and how nibble the truck maneuvered and cameras even for the rear of your trailer.
Garbage move GM. Not only unimpressed and unenthused but.. Angry. Off to look at what Ram is brewing up since they seem to understand Horsepower these days
Dude not like this is the only engine you can still get the 4.3 two 5.3s a turbo I6 Duramax is in the works and there's still a 6.2. the 2.7 is just a gimmick for those that want it. If it does well they might put it in the 4.3s place but I doubt it. The ecotec3 4.3 is just like it's V8 counterparts. Simple durable and strong.
@@ReidHenderson the 4.3 isn't simple it's actually a really complex engine. This will probably be more reliable if gm works it's issues out this engine also is better for trucks then the 4.3.
@@Over_Taxed_USA Hate to say it, but GM was The Last of the Mohicans. Dodge is crap covered in horsepower; Ford was fine but lost their way. Now GM is following suit. Regardless, don't let Fiat Chrysler woo you with their power numbers. I mean what's the point in big power, when your heads leak, tranny fails, rear differential gives out, and the build quality is crap....all Fiat-Chrysler contributions to the truck world? For better or worse, I would take my chances on this truck over a Ram. As much as I don't like it, I am willing to bet it will still be more reliable
Yeah a computer controlled electric actuator with moving vanes and seals in 220 degree coolant is way smarter than a thermostat. Never going to have trouble with that.
lol my god the camera work dude! Almost unwatchable but im sure it is hard while in the field to adjust your camera. Maybe its new to you as well or a crappy camera? Cool engine though. Exciting!. Will get naysayers just like the ecoboost did until its proven itself.
Brilliant motor. Built like a diesel, v8 torque, 4cyl efficiency. A lot of tech that’s been used for decades. Nice to see a 4cyl specifically designed for the rigors of a light duty pickup. Hope it trickles to the SUVs.
When David and Chevy guy just totally ignores modern maketing and actually explains stuff - chevy finally catching with 90s japanese tech, but it is awesome to see it this way.
I really love this. An engine developed with clear specifications and a well defined purpose. No "traditional values" and "wrong sound" crap, just fuel economy, environment, longevity and the right power.
Longevity? You must not be familiar with ICEs....It would've done better with the hybrid system they used to have combined with a V8. The GM guy mentions that this engine is purpose designed for this truck. Really? A small engine with a high boost turbo? GM once again misses the point. They need to also listen to the consumer. The environment and economy are important, but truck people aren't buying trucks looking for those features. That's why you have cars. A full-sized truck (even a half ton full-sized truck) is purpose designed for commercial use. People might not use them often as such, but they want to know it's there when they need it to tow or haul stuff. I can imagine truck people running to Dodge Rams now.
Yeah it'll look great in a junkyard when the vehicle is scrapped because the engine cost more to fix than the rest was worth. Perfectly environmentally friendly to design things to be throwaway.
@@jdrok5026 How did they get so much power out of that engine? Big turbo or high boost? Big turbo would mean lag at bottom end, which contradicts the purpose of this engine in a truck application. Turbos are spooled up by exhaust flow. A big turbo requires a greater flow...which is why it lags at lower rpms. The only way to get it spooled up would require it running at a higher RPM.. meaning more fuel consumed. A small turbo needs to dish out very high PSI numbers to achieve that much power. It's a truck, so it needs bottom end torque. A smaller turbo would be the solution, but it would need to do it at lower pressures to be reliable. Those power numbers don't equate to lower pressures. No ECM can change that. The ECM be manipulated but those laws still stand. You want it to have the reliability of the 6 or 8 cylinder engines, it wouldn't be putting out that much power. NA motors can run higher compression ratios reliably and dish out good numbers with DOHC and multi valve systems. However, to do it efficiently, they use lighter weight internals. Add a turbo and that engine is toast without stronger forged internals, different piston design and lower compression, before a turbo can even be added. Now tell me, what don't I understand about ICE engines and ECMs?
Lol, the electric water pump “for faster cabin heating”. Yeah, that may be a secondary consequence, but the primary reason is to get the engine up to temp faster for emissions compliance. ...marketing. Lol
An engineer at GM can design and produce whatever they want. The problem is they still have to market it to the public. Not very many people want a 4cyl in a full size truck. This should be a special order option only.
I love your knowledge, and all the yes replies from the engineer. The thing I don't like, and I'm not sure they should have, but there's a lot of plastic valves that may make more mechanics and customers refer to that engine as a pos. If any of those valves fail, the engine is at risk of overheating. And when you gotta diagnose what went wrong, I'm sure the code in the computer is a vague and generic water pump valve failure...or they may go as far as to call it an anomaly lol...but sadly, I'm sure those engines won't make it to 150k miles, and for that reason alone, I'll never buy a Chevy again unless they prove to me that it works and is reliable.
Hey, where's the pop-up telling me to subscribe to your newsletter? This might be the first thing Jalopnik ever made that can be consumed without interruption!
Sure, the turbo 4 cylinder has the same amount of power and torque of a naturally aspirated v6. BUT, does it have the reliability and smoothness of the v6? My v6 tacoma might barely make 200hp but it still runs smooth after 17 years and 200k miles
I can understand the importance of saving fuel. However, if you really want economy in a pick up truck your best bet is a naturally aspirated V6 with a manual transmission. I can guarantee you won’t get 300 horse power but you’ll get the same fuel economy or better than this turbo charged four. You’ll also have an engine that will last just south of 300,000 miles that you can fix in your driveway. I’ve had two trucks with a 4.3 L V6 and these are super easy to service. There are still many of us who use pickups for work and downtime is expensive. Repair costs on this engine will probably negate any fuel savings.
@@super20dan who hasn't owned a 350. .. coming from up here tradepersons perspective. I would agree with you at this 5.3 is great. but there was a time where you could buy a complete long block 350 for like 1200 bucks and replace yourself in a weekend . 350s were not as refined as a 5.3 but they were good for over 200000 miles and could be serviced by the owner / small business owner themselves
Plastic coolant housing and valve is going to break after warranty ran out. Variable oil valve is kind of stupid idle cause the turbo is going to heat up the oil so much and thin it out anyway.
My brand new 2015 Chevy Colorado was a major POS that stalled out at intersections and had numerous other issues. This crapfest will likely be even worse with the turbocharged engine. Say NO to GOVERNMENT MOTORS! Good luck battling them for warranty repair.
I agree with you 100%. I need the fleet of trucks we use as a tradesperson to work everyday. The last trucks we could depend on to go 2-300,000 miles relatively trouble-free was old technology pushrod V8 and straight 6 engines.
bertie perret Why don’t people view their bodies in this way? The amount of things that could go wrong inside us is mind boggling but we look at an insignificant little engine and cry like the sky’s gonna fall if we own one lol
Neo Craft , I work on engines for a living (Marine diesels) I can tell you, that most engines (American made diesels) are just plain bad design. If it looks good on a drawing table, doesn’t mean it will work. Biology of a human body has nothing to do with engine design, I get your comparison. Time will tell if this, in my opinion bad design, will stand the test of time
@@jdrok5026 Except under high duty cycles they don't last. A belt driven component will last until the bearings fail. An electric pump has so many more opportunities for failure, especially given that it's computer controlled.
***Classified*** Toyota has been using electronic water pumps from day 1in the Prius. They are very reliable. Only problem I see is this is government motors so who knows if they get it right
@@chribrian A prius doesn't see the same loads as a silverado will. Also, I've seen the coolant pumps fail in the prius and the battery pack takes a shit as a result. No other way to do it in an electric car but no reason to do it at all in a pickup truck that still struggles to hit 20 mpg.
I actually think the water pump will last. Manufacturers have been using electric motors for power steering for years now with no major issues. I guess only time will tell
Gm powertrains are excellent and undergo a 300k mile validation process. I prefer the 6.2 liter ls or lt engine lineup yet I’m sure this 310 hp turbo four will be indestructible,. This 310 hp motor should be put in the chevy Blazer RS sooner rather than later... Im sure the twin turbo v6 from ford is a great engine as well.
Own an'04 Sierra/ Silverado. 5.3 is just cutting it in that truck, now they've taken half the cylinders out and slapped an exaggerated HP graph and turbo on it? Oh and it gets 5-6 mpg better? And it's unserviceable by the owner? And the company making this truck has no financial morals? Thanks for solidifying my choice to shop elsewhere.
Dan it depends on what you intend to do with it. If not hauling heavy loads, a 5.3 is plenty for it, not "just cutting it". Some people need the payload size more than the density, capacity. That does not mean I feel buyers shouldn't have more powerful options. It's your money at the gas pump.
That motor is already maxed out pretty much it's going to make a lot of power but when you have a small motor like that making so much power pulling such a heavy vehicle especially when towing it won't last too long believe me
I wonder if they made this thing with a cross drilled 6 bolt main like they did the ls family . If they did rest assured this could be a turbo monster .
Its not the number of cylinders that would worry me, its all the electronic solenoids and motors that bother me. Put enough cubes in the motor, regardless of the number of cylinders and it'll be fine, but trying to make a something that size do the job of a full size engine in a heavy truck is just looking for an early failure. That rear timing chain, variable oil and variable cam sets up that would worry me. That plus the likely cost to repair this thing when it fails. It makes me glad I still drive a 1975 model truck with an inline 6.
Just the dumbasses. Most of america will be rebuilting their older pickups instead of buying this carp, then put the tens of thousands of dollars they save, into MOAR GUNS.
Trying to squeeze the same power from somthing half the size, looks good on paper, fucken turbos superchargers it's just expensive non reliable junk, but they don't care if they work or not.
A vtec turbo 4cyl truck.
Knock knock
Who's there?
Piston 2 and 3
Lmfao!
Lol
Obviously the engine takes itself apart to save you the trouble of doing it
And wait for the turbo to do a mess before 100k
I’m a big Ford guy. Been buying Fords my whole life. I recently purchased a 2020 Silverado with this 2.7L turbo engine. I’m impressed!
After a year are you still happy with your buy?
I sold it after only 10 months. Recently purchased an Expedition with the 3.5L Ecoboost. Needed 3 rows for family vacations. But never had an issue with the 2.7 4cyl Chevy engine. It was an impressive motor.
@@13cardenk did you get good mpg with it?
@@dacoldest3896 averaged about 20mpg combined
And chevy fans laugh at the eco boost v6. Whose laughing now?
Zecrid GM shits all over Ford for being the first one to come up with a new idea (turbocharged engines, aluminum body panels, integrated tailgate step) and then a few years later GM copies Ford.
I laugh at the Ecoboost V6 because several turbos on those engines burn up before 50,000 miles. No replacement for displacement. BUT, do I agree this is a good idea for GM to put a 4-cylinder in a full sized pickup? HELL NO! Not a good idea at all. The Ford 4.2L V6 in the F-150s and the GM 4.3L V6 in the base Silverados/Sierras, old S-10s/Blazers/Jimmy’s were great engines. Why wouldn’t Ford or GM upgrade those engines?? They were bulletproof!
Toyota guys with their million mile iForces.
@@checkers7166 There are just as many if not more million mile Chevy's.
@@hochhaul Sure, and how many of then are TGDI 4 cylinder engines?
Just wait for the countless TSBs on this gem. Software band-aids to get it through warranty, excuses from GM and the service department saying “no problem found”, that startup rattle is “normal”, that one quart per 1100 miles is within “specs”, etc. Then a week after warranty expires the chain slips, water pump fails, thermostat sticks shut and she’s gone
GM has always held their maximum oil consumption spec as 1 quart per 2,000 miles. Any vehicle under warranty that is tested and shown to consume more than will be repaired. No deadlines (a la Toyota "Limited Service Campaigns") or absurdly high 1qt/1,200 mile spec. Yes, Toyota states oil consumption of up to 1 quart every 1,200 miles is normal for their engines. Honda and Subaru also have a "normal" oil consumption spec of 1 quart per 1,200 miles. Toyota used that spec and arbitrary deadline to deny a LOT of customers repair for their oil guzzling 2AZ-FE.
Even better, Ford's 5.2 Voodoo developed a thirst for oil so Ford quickly modified the supplementary owners manual for the next year, adding a line that essentially says the 5.2 Voodoo will normally consume up to 2 quarts of oil every 1,000 miles. Car and Driver's GT350 burned 8.5 quarts of 5W50 sythetic oil in just 11,800 miles. Most of those miles were accumulated on LA freeways going to and from work.
hochhaul I don’t think you got his point here. You just went on a 5 minute tangent about oil consumption rates. Lol
John Villeneuve Preach It! I can see it all playing out exactly this way!
@@natehawkins2910 He's obviously talking out of his ass on every claim he tried to make when he tries to say that GM tells you its "normal" for their engines to burn 1 quart every 1,100 miles. There are several GM TSB's out covering ALL their vehicles that states that any vehicle they sell that is using more than 1 quart every 2,000 miles will be repaired under warranty.
Not to mention it's FORD that's famous for shit timing chains, legendary for strange knocks and rattles emanating fron their engine on startup. Cheap plastic timing chain tensioners, cheap cam phasers, cheap cam followers, cheap failure prone lash adjusters, cheap valve guides, cheap inverted tooth timing chains, etc. One look at f150ecoboost.net's forums shows just how bad their engines are. Look around the internet and you can see that for as few 5.0 Coyote F-150's are out there, its shocking how many of them develop ticks, rattles, and the famous Coyote Knock.
hochhaul I am familiar with both ford and Chevy common problems but I do believe it will be a fight to try and prove you’re burning a quart per 2000. How exactly would you personally think they’re gonna just take your word and open up an engine on their dime?
Just because a tsb says something doesn’t mean they HAVE to repair it. Nor do they have to make it easy. I’ve never found a easy to deal with Chevy or gmc service Dept yet!
Coming soon to a junk yard near you in 5 years.
I remember the hype around the 2.4 litre a few years ago. Now they all use oil. I know, I have one. Give me a v8.
Oh wow! You're not kidding. This move by GM could also hurt resale values for this truck too.
Is it me or is the timing chain at the rear behind the flywheel?
don't worry guys this is just the ends of obamas GM. They already killed off the volt, is the bolt next on the chopping block? 7 Liter LS crate motors for errebody!!!!! you get a crate motor you get a crate motor.
Chris Lemaster same as Fords
I have a good friend that purchased one of these in for his daily work truck. He drives several hundred miles a day on average and his diesel was getting expensive to maintain. He paid nearly half the cost of a new diesel half ton and 1/3 the cost of a 3/4 ton. He has yet to have any problems or complaints with the engine or the truck and he gets roughly the same mileage he did with the F250 he replaced. I had the opportunity to drive this truck a few weeks back and was shocked at the power this thing had. It never felt like it was working hard or did I feel like I had to keep my foot stuffed in the throttle to keep it moving and it was loaded with his usual array of tools and equipment in the bed. If I didn’t know I would have guessed it to be a 5.3 under the hood, which he did consider along with the Ford Ecoboost. But the initial cost and the fuel savings over the life of the truck made more economic sense at the time to go with this platform. As of now it’s paying off with 35k on the odometer. No issues or returns to the dealer for any work other than oil changes and a set of front brakes.
I want one as a crate engine. A first gen S10 with one of these and a pair of solid axles would be a riot.
It would be the perfect application for this motor. In a full size truck it is best for those who haul the occasional mattress or washing machine.
@@brettryan3298 That's probably the market this is meant for; people who would be better served by a midsized truck, yet want the fullsized look at a lower cost.
Fiero swap
I just put an overhauled 1996 305 vortec V8 and 700r4 in my 85 Chevy S10 over 2 weeks ago. It has an edelbrock carb and the transmission is controlled by the tried and true factory vacuum switch system. The factory AC,cruise control and instrument cluster still works flawlessly. Shame to say I would trust it more on a cross country trip with it's 20 plus year old reconditioned drive train than if it were fitted with this new computerized reliability disaster in waiting. Strangely enough,I would love to do the new 4 cylinder swap myself just for bragging rights. Thanks for the idea.
@@Vantrise-cg1of Go for it. V8 swapped S10's have become too common.
That engine is waaay too complex. There are so many failure points that reliability will be very unlikely in my opinion. This engine will be a nightmare.
You should see Ford's new reverse piston engine.
"The more they overthink the plumbing, the easier it is to stop up the drain." - Montgomery Scott
That's what the 2.7 Ecoboost is. A complex design with some major design problems and too many cheap components. This GM 2.7 will probably have bugs to work out in the first couple years, but GM won't be shoving it down everyone's throat like Ford has with the 2.7eb for the last 4 years. 40 to 50% of F-150's on dealer lot have the 2.7EB. GM said this 2.7t will be in roughly 10% of trucks and only in the mid-level LT trim.
Timothy Isenhart reverse engine? No,,,,it’s an engine that fires both ways so a four banger becomes an eight and no it was designed only as a proof of concept ie to show off their engineering abilities.
You should have said check out Nissans new variable combustion turbo engine with its double crank setup in its new infinity engines. Now that’s looks like a problem just waiting to happen.
And I can guarantee that once inside the truck, all this future failure parts will be impossible to get to. Making dealer repair a multi day event....in the end we loose
Sounds like a lot to go wrong with it... too many electronic gadgets...
shite4brains as opposed to what? A motor built in the 80's with no Innovation what so ever ? With that mentality we would be stuck in a horrible place where no engine is made more efficient and powerful and they just keep making the same engine over and over
Alexis Marrero If it aint broke, don’t fix it....
My father used to tell me the same, " If it ain't broke, don't fix it". I have nothing against improvements and innovation, but there are somethings in life that are what I consider to be a "matured technology", or a technology that has little to no room left for improvement. An example of what I believe is a matured technology is the lug nut, as I believe it has been matured since 1965. Ford decided to improve the lug nut by making it a 2 piece design to make them more "fashionable." Unfortunately, this improvement came at a cost, as the nut would swell from temperature changes and removal of the lug nuts would require a trip ( towed if the vehicle is disabled from a flat tire or such ) to a shop. I take my hat off to Ford to successfully discovering a way to botch a technology that has been perfected over 50 years ago. I wish the best of luck to GM, time will tell if I will be taking my hat off to GM for botching a technology that is now over 80 years old ( I'm talking about the Wax element thermostat ), the one main advantage about the water pump is that the belt ( on mechanical water pumps ) may contribute to bearing failure of the water pump, but with automatic belt tensioners such wear is minimized and water pumps tend to last a very long time. Water pumps used to have short life spans when the tensioners were manually set and people would set them EXTREMELY tight. And as advantageous as the electric water pump may be, the electronics are simply adding additional points of failure. It is in my opinion that these improvemets are nothing more than "solutions that are in search of a problem."
@@vivillager Very Intelligent answer. I agree with everything you stated.
@@Oldmurray9323 You do realize old engines are very reliable and last a long time compared to this new age garbage
Interesting motor. However, I'll stick with the 4.9L straight 6, 5spd in my 1989 F-150. Plenty of grunt down low, 15 mpg empty or fully loaded. Drove it off the lot, had 2.7 miles on the clock. Next month is 30 yrs of ownership.
DP Reap 300ci straight 6 might be the best engine Ford ever made IMO.
The 300 I6 was a great engine. It's a shame Ford replaced it with decades of unreliable mod motors and overly complex unreliable ecoboosts.
By the time you get another 100000 miles on your f150 this 2.7 Will be just a little experiment GM would like to forget about
@@berjyacoubian6173 I know a few guys that wish they had played test monkey for Ford and its 2.7 experiment. Two of them have had their heads replaced and another needed a long block.
My 89 F-150, had the 302 with a 5 speed manual. Averaged 18 mpg, didn't matter loaded or running empty with a topper.
So many things to wrong. Hey let's turn a simple 4 cylinder into a financial nightmare at 50,000 miles! A chain off the back of the engine for the oil pump??! Now I'm off to buy more engine parts for my 4.2 vortec with only 160,000 miles. Never again.
I will have to look deeper into the oil pump location, but I think it might be start/stop system, you know, they shut down at traffic lights, then start up when you touch the gas pedal. I heard the standard starters wore out fast when they first began using that technology, so had to come up with another way.
Would you prefer a belt running the oil pump? It's a computer controlled system that only provides oil that's needed. Quite brilliant actually
@@angrybadger8136- Maybe brilliant in design, but execution will be garbage when bean counters slim parts down.
I have a better idea..........why don't you ride a bike (bicycle) instead. Or better yet, take the bus. Now you have no more nightmares. Well, aside from the bus being late.
I just bought a 22 trail boss custom with this engine. Its sweet.
I'm all for small engines, as I'm a 4 cylinder engine fan. However, this "turbo everything" mentality means that we should be seeing lots of today's new cars and trucks piling up in junkyards in less than 10 years. Computers? I'm not worried about electronics. Those can and are being made reliable enough in many cars. No matter how simple an engine is built,a turbo application will make it complex even when done correctly. A full size truck with a 4 cylinder (turbo or not) is a fashion statement designed for those who just want a truck for the sake of having one. Great payload and towing capacity on this engine at the expense of long term durability. A V8 can do it for a few hundred thousand miles; you'll be hard pressed to get half of that under the same usage on a 4 cylinder turbo.
I read an article in the journal sentinel on that very thing, people were having trouble with small turbo engines and transmissions with multiple gears. I do agree though. I say they sould just remake the 3800 v6 and put it in.
Hell yeah put that Buick Grand National motor in@@FedoraQuilava87Music
Turbos make for very good energy efficiency. Good fuel economy with unmatched power. What most buyers dont understand is that with all that extra boost comes extra cylinder pressure. This leads to more and more head gasket failures. Everyone knows dealers charge a butt load to fix them. Its just another way to hose the customer in the end.
it seems to me that GM did some research though. a lot of the areas where turbo engines failed in the 1980s turbo cars appear to be built to diesel truck specs in this engine. this should help reliability a lot.
@@kieffershriner8199 Yeah, the 4.3 may have been a torque monster for a V6 but it's reliabilty was shit. The 3.8 T-Type motors were much more reliable.
K thats cool and all but wheres the I6 duramax? THATS what I'm waiting for!
@David Laurie I don't know about that. They use the "Duramax" (Isuzu) inline 6 through out the rest of the world and they are pretty tough and reliable.
The line six has been pushed back to April of 2019
Timothy Isenhart that's right. 3rd world countries abuse them and they last forever. The 6.7L Cummins has a ton of problems.
The I6 duramax is just a 5.9 common rail Cummins
Most people in this comment section must be automotive engineers.
I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night, does that count?
I thught the SAME EXACT THING!!! LOL!!!
or just decades of experience watching and repairing all these beta designs that looked good on paper then cost thousands of dollars later to keep the vehicle running.
That random guy lurking in the comment section ...from 1992
Beat me to it.👍
Never did I think a chevy truck engine would be more complicated than a German luxury car engine
It's really not tho. German luxury car motors can be even more complex.
Not even close. 20 year old Audi 2.7t is much worse
A truck should have a low revving, under-stressed engine. This engine isn't going to last nearly as long a naturally aspirated V8, and is going have way more problems.
These modern turbo motors are the low-revving ones. It is the new V8s that must be revved to 6000 rpm to make peak power.
@@billybeemus3929 Yeah but it's not RPM that kills an engine... not at a mere 6K anyway. Lower the RPM and everything else has to bear more stress to compensate.
This engine is lower reving for torque production the the v8s.
Americans don’t use their trucks for stressful driving. They use them to drive to and from work. Absolutely ludicrous to give a truck a V8 in today’s market.
@@markofexcellence5209 That's what the midsize trucks are for. I use my colorado about 75% daily commuter and 25% as a truck. A full sized truck should not have these tiny turbo'ed engines as they are meant to be abused. This engine is gonna be a huge waste of R&D for GM as this engine isn't gonna sell for shit, especially since it's tied to high end trims. The base is still the more reliable V6
This man does not believe in the product he is selling!
I'm not an engineer, but cooling the block and head at different rates sounds like a sure fire way to wreck head gaskets...
Eh not really as long as they are cooled properly they will both last. And technically your radiators will balance out the coolant temp throughout the system.
How much gas in dollars have we saved when something goes wrong with the water management system, cam slider or the variable oil pump, by going to the better mileage of a 4 cyl.? Any of those repairs is going to be minimum $3k and a loaner vehicle for a week if you are lucky. So unless gas costs are more that tripling what are we doing? It is not like GM has a good reliability type reputation when manufacturing these type of technical things on engines. Would be interesting to see what the real mileage difference is between the excellent 6.2L and the other motors compared to this turbo 4 cyl. Stick to less technical things that are very expensive to build and repair and have longevity issues - this motor is a disaster waiting to happen and will never be seeing the longevity for owners that is expected with the costs of trucks today.
timofsix “less technical things” like variable cylinder displacement in the 6.2? Lol I think you got your pants on backwards there lol
That thing is going to suck just as much fuel as a V8 when you hammer it, the only reason they did this was A it costs less to manufacture a 4 banger and B it will fail sooner so you have to buy a new truck in 4 years.
They did because of emission taxes... They literally have to pay additional taxes on v8s...
Say thank you to the all-knowing all-powerful epa. More engines are designed to be a pos due to epa requirement.
I never thought I’d live long enough to see a 4 cyl engine in a vehicle that big & heavy. As a kid I was conditioned in my family to believe 4cyl= 1971 Toyota Corolla; V8= 1968 Ford Galaxie.
21st century & my entire paradigm for rules governing cars, has been completely turned upside down on its ear!
Do I even belong in this world anymore?
I'm 18 and I think this is beyond ridiculous
Lol, are you serious? The paradigm is still there, they just don't care, because money and EPA.
Um 4 cylinders have been in trucks much heavier.
...and TV was black and white. Phones were corded and the internet wasn’t even a dream. Everyone seems okay with using the rest of the current technologies but when it comes to a pickup without a V8 we’re all closed minded????
It's got a number of modes. What's a mode and are they contagious?
Making small, low displacement engines put out more horsepower is all well and fine, but telling owners that oil changes can occur every 10K plus miles is pure insanity. Plus, most owners are lucky if they know where the oil dipstick is located nowadays. Look under the hood of modern cars and they may as well have a sign that says, "Do Not Touch". With variable valve timing and other such complicated systems, there must be a constant flow of clean, high quality oil to keep everything working right. These engines are very expensive to repair or replace and are not nearly as forgiving as the old style motors. And don't forget, the ECM is keeping tabs on when the oil has been changed. Go past it and you void the warranty, even if you do it once.
Troy Dzuricsko Spoken like a true broke guy. Lol Why do so many people try to scare others with “cost.” Especially people who cannot afford to even buy one of these trucks (even a few years old) in the first place!!
@@natehawkins2910 I'm far from being broke and I'm not out to scare anyone. Engines being as complicated as this one is also require highly trained mechanics who know how to properly repair them. Many consumers will be in for a shock should they need repairs or to have one replaced, even those who can afford it. And regular maintenance is an absolute necessity, which is also more costly.
Troy Dzuricsko I getcha just seems like everyone’s on the same page with sky is falling repairs but who really works on their current vehicle? If a guy can afford a $750 payment he can most likely afford after warranty repairs of $1000 too. But most won’t keep them that long anyways.
@@natehawkins2910 Ok, we've both made good points. I'm a guy who keeps vehicles a long time and I've always worked on my own vehicles. But engines such as these can have their own version of "sticker shock" when a repair or replacement costs $5K or more... and that's especially for older guys like me. But, if its the future of engine design, and if it works and proves reliable enough, then manufacturers will go with it. I'm just really not sure if the gain is worth the pain.
Troy Dzuricsko Cool...the gains are probably not worth the pain I will agree to that!
Just bought one of these in a 1500 and I’m stoked! Feels way better than my old 5.3, much broader torque curve too. Now I’m just waiting for GM to put this engine in a 2500, fingers crossed PLEASE GM!!
Which dealership do you work at?
for sale soon: electronic thermostat delete kit with inline regular thermostat,,,, electronic oil pump actuator delete kit with in line pull pump and cooler. also in the kit line, a 350 v8 swap kit, if you don't want to pay $6,000 to fix this abomination when it's electric and oil systems fail and destroy the engine
I was thinking the exact same thing while laughing my ass off watching.
kyle peterson lol
Iron Man The v8 bares little in common with v8’s from just three years ago. How do you love your Auto Stop Start v8? Lol kinda cuts your big old v8’s nuts right off there and hands them to ya on a pretty pink platter. Lol
Agreed. Way too complex for long term reliability. Not user- serviceable/ friendly. Instead of a " check engine light" ,it should say " return me to the dealership, prepare for big bill( or a lengthy run-, around, if still on warranty!)
The first five people who buy this will be the guinea pigs that the rest of us will look at and laugh
The future is VERY BRIGHT INDEED!!! How do I know this??? It's simple: y simply looking at the comments section I can see that EVERYONE is now an expert... and an Engineer!!! I only wish the actual engineers who designed this engine were as smart as the people watching this video!!!
My "engineer" side is blown away by this engine and all the widgetry that goes into it. It's absolutely brilliant...
My "mechanic" side is terrified.. what a nightmare of widgetry..
😂😂 suprise female dogs😂 the engine is still alive and better
I love my truck ! 2.7 L turbo and love the fuel economy. Great job Chevy! Already 4000 miles on it.
Wow, another way to provide a Vega truck !
Do you even know what a Vega had as a motor it was nowhere near this.
This engine with a 10-speed transmission would be the perfect powertrain for the new Colorado that is supposed to be out in a few years. Maybe an upmarket option for a 48-volt electrical system for even more low-end torque and mpg. The addition of that torque would allow to fit a bigger turbo for more power and not worry about the lag.
Makes a Toyota Tundra a lot more appealing.
the death nell of the north american auto industry is off to a good start...
pzkpfwiv freak I can’t believe there are some designers out there with a better eye as to what looks good. And power train wise, what’s next a two cylinder with quad turbo’s. It’s like they are engineering in complication. They seem so pleased with themselves, like they’re showing off their science project to mommy.
= Jeff X. yup, i don't know what they are thinking, adding plastic valves in the coolant system, 4 cylinder trucks, etc... your'e right. they are engineering failure. i am a licensed auto tech (30 years) , and all the plastic crap that has been introduced into the high heat, high stress environment that is the combustion engine, is ludicrous! the failure rate, in my observations, of plastic engine parts is staggering,thermostat housings, plastic coolant bypass hoses, intake manifolds,end up failing!plastic valve covers, the list goes on, and i don't think its going to get any better, anytime soon. if you think vehicle systems repair costs money now, wait until your repair estimates start rolling in with more crap engine attachments that need replacement due to failure. cars, i find nowadays, are becoming disposable,more now than in the past. yes some cars were disposable, they've been around, but once the warranty is up, get rid of it. after 5 or 6 years, and 200,000 kms it is going to start getting expensive. there is a saying "there is nothing more expensive than a second hand BMW"yeah, they're cheap when they're used, but the original owner knows better than to hang on to one after a certain point, because the major repairs aren't going to be cheap.i've been driving my 1976 ford f100 truck with the original engine around for the last decade or so, with 178,000 miles on the original drivetrain,rear end, steering gear, alternator, water pump, carb, etc... its easy to fix, parts are cheap, and mileage is around 20 mpg on a bad day, so i think i'll stick with it. and for the price of a new truck, i can keep the old girl running and looking good til the day i die. i'm not saying its the best vehicle to buy, there are lots of good cars and trucks, you just need to research your choices.
pzkpfwiv freak Toyota already has this cooling setup on the road in their 4cylinder engines
Way too many failure points. Not knocking the effort but, this will probably fail spectacularly at an early age.
The ls has just as many if not more yet is reliable.
Now, just take this engine, and put it in the Impala or Cruze.
GM just announced there gonna stop making the impala and Cruze. Sorry.
David Laurie Thank heavens! Lol
i think this comment went over everyone's head. I got it...lol.
The best understanding of this power train thus far. Thanks!
I thought things couldn't get any worse putting a v-6 in a full size, but now you put a 4cyl. w/a dangerously hot turbo. Wouldn't get me to buy one, Eever.!No electric water pump either. And No automatic trans. Too much computer controls. I'll keep my '64 Pontiac Grand Prix. 421 Engine. BullyBilly
okay but the Atlas 5 cylinder in the 2000's Colorados and Hummers...
a turbo 5 would have been so nice and unique.
A 5 cyl is off for engineering and 4/6 bangers are just more efficient.
@@Luke357 unless you're Audi. the Atlas 3.7 inline-5 was stout enough for reliable work, it just was never built for boost like the Audi engine.
What have cars become they keep cramming more and more computers and more sensors and this just makes things go bad quicker and I’m going to school for auto mechanics and this makes it much harder to work on and fix the problem. I’ll stick with my good old Chevy 350 small blokc
Andrew Kauffmann imo electric water pumps/ thermostats are simpler and are gonna last longer than mechanical ones. And actually it’s going to be a lot easier to diagnose and fix the problem because when everything’s hooked up to sensors and the ecu all it takes is a scan tool to find out what’s wrong with it. But yes, I would much rather be a mechanic in a time period where cars were a lot more mechanical, if you want to be a mechanic now you have to have electrician skills as well.
I would rather have to occasionally tear down an engine and rebuild it rather than just repeatedly do tedious small electrical jobs, but I don’t think that’s realistic in today’s world with these engines coming out with stronger forged and longer lasting internals.
Andrew Kauffmann Get ready...that's why I decided to forego auto mechanics, it's all getting too complex anymore, so this is what we'd expect every time a new customer walks in.
@@codybigbee2957 electric and mechanical both wear out.
@@codybigbee2957 Those scan tools you are talking about dont always show the cause of the problem. They are handy at times, but I wouldn't rely on them solely. All these electronics are nonsense. Cars are made to be thrown away nowadays and get another one.
Diagnosis of issues will be interesting, especially once it’s about eight years old.
Why can't you just keep things simple. All this complex technology is unncessesary. I have had 94 jeep and 03 jeep with the 4.0 and the later model is a piece of junk because the sensors all over the engine keep failing making it run like crap
Jebediah Gentry emissions, that is the only reason
@@grahamnelson5376 and CAFE regs
Without "technical improvement" we will never see the change we need to get better fuel milege, better air quality, and better build quality. To accomplish that there might be some failed sensors allong the way.
There are 2 reasons: thermodynamic efficiency and lower emissions. Better efficiency means less fuel input for the same amount of output that you get. That output isn't just power, either. It's heat loss from the engine as well, which can be used for different things. Emissions is obvious, so I won't go over that. It's interesting engineering and people seem to buy them, so these companies don't really have a reason to not do this stuff. The returns they're getting are good.
@@anthonyantoine9232 and when that shit breaks, have fun
I bought a 2022 Silverado with this engine…. We shall see how it goes! The engine like he says, warms up quick, and power is great….. Will it last forever? No worries , I’ll trade it in well before forever happens!
Just remember all, this is the company who gave you an LS engine with cylinder shutdown that fails on every engine and requires heads to come off, lifters and oil control solinoids changed out. I hope this engines AFM works better.
@David Laurie yes... It is the LS. From 04 to current.
@@StephenDanielAddeo 04 didn't have afm as far as I've every heard and it doesn't fail on every engine. But keep the over exaggeration going.
@@StephenDanielAddeo also 14 was the switch over to lt.
@@jdrok5026 lol well... Not to completely devalue your opinion, but AFM started in 04 for the 05 model year, but I have seen some 04 envoys with AFM. More failed than did not. It's not an exaggeration but the absolute truth.
@@jdrok5026 the switch over to what? Dude, Google is your friend. Stop being a fanboi and do some research.
Thermal control on this engine is extremely detailed and specific. Cool heads and warm block with electronics. Is this a 12 volt or 48 volt electric system? Excellent video and description of engine details.
Currently just 12. But give them time they will further over complicate with a mild hybrid 48.
How much is Chevy going to charge for that plastic disaster they call the “cooling module”? You know it’s going to fail. Aren’t these the guys that brought us dexcool?
I needed an electric fuel pump for a 4.3 L GM. In a box, on the parts counter, it was over $800. A water pump is bigger - $1500? Also, on my present vehicle, a $5 thermistor, complete with wiring harness, cost me $335.
Have you seen what Dexkill does to the cooling system?
@@drjohnsonhungwell5115 if properly maintained nothing.
When a cooling sensor goes bad "pop goes the whole weasel" lol
Why didn't they just make it electric that way we would have only one thing to complain about.....
i was excited about this engine especially if it would be put into the Colorado; however, watching this video I see several weak points on this engine: the electric water pump, and the electric water values. in a few years, these will be the high dollar items that will be replaced frequently. I am calling this now.also I see what looks like some kind of timing chain in the rear of the engine. that looks like a bear to replace when it pops as in remove the whole engine bear just like the Atlas engines were.
Plus side is there will be plenty of good trucks for ls swaps
I've never had a car that uses fuel to cool the exhaust. Saying you can turn off the electric water pump is better than mechanical water pumps doesn't make sense since a non- positive displacement pump will not pump coolant that's blocked by a closed thermostat, so that allows engine heating, and electric water pumps are more prone to failure than a belt driven pump. If your pump is off the heater core won't warm up. Heater cores don't heat the cabin unless coolant is flowing, How is this any different than it's been since 1925?
Dave B Everyone has driven a car that used fuel to cool the exhaust valves. The computer riches the mixture to do this. By using coolant they can lean the mixture saving fuel. Toyota has been using electric water pumps for years without issue. You need to go back and watch the video again as your understanding on the coolant system is wrong. It not only has electronic water pump but also multiple valves that can direct coolant directly to were it is needed while shutting down flow to areas not needed. It is nothing like the single thermostat systems of old
@@chribrian He didnt' say valves. He said exhaust. And I have had cars in the shop that have toasted their engine from a failed electric water pump and the pump prices? wow!. BMW has had a high failure rate with them, much more than the older types. I've also seen this happen when a plastic impeller has come off of a BMW water pump. But poor quality tends to do that. Each manufacturer is different; I think the Toyota pumps you mention are for the power inverter where the environment may be a little milder and the demand lower than a main engine coolant pump, and these may give a little more heads up and even a shut down if things go awry. I know it can be done reliably, but at what cost? What bothers me most is the technological overkill that engineers scramble toward but it diminishes the economy of repairing a car as it ages. i know not to buy a used space shuttle, cars are getting nearly that complex. But the setting is right for the EV to wipe out the ICE as engineers pile on more layers of the esoteric "technology" to milk every inch out of every drop of gas. Or like VW they can just "say they did" when they didn't. Lying is another approach, when the pinnacle of ICE design is just about milked and no practical options remain. this reminds me of a very expensive film camera.
Not long ago, 6.0 v-8's were less powerful than this 4 cyl, and got 15 highway. We'll see about durability but I bet it does just fine. Considering that most 1/2 tons are used for light work, and customers who work their trucks harder can get the v-8. Good to have options to suit your needs
"Because the wanted the turbo in the middle of the engine hence it's a 4cyl" obviously that's not possible in a straight 6 🤔
Cannons a straight six is too long making it hard to put in a car or truck but a 4 cylinder is a compact engine and it does make really good power
@@jeffhebbeler5951 sounds like lazy engineering to me, the hilux has a straight 6, in a smaller chassis and plenty of cabin room and plenty of room around the engine to work on it.
Cannons what straight 6 is in a Hilux? All I see on wiki is V6s, and I’m not familiar enough with them being that we get shafted from having them in the US.
lol
@@jeffhebbeler5951 since they are designing a new engine, a V6 would've been a smarter move if they were using a turbo. A V6 is compact enough, more refined and The turbo could've sat in the V, similar design to what the the Italians are doing on some of their sports cars.
I'm actually starting to become a fan of this engine. I applaud all the thought and ingenuity that went into it. For a base engine, the performance specs are really good. And I've been very critical of GM for how shitty they've let Chevy trucks become. I like what they're doing with this.
Water leaks....water leaks EVERYWHERE
Of course you left out the big question - why only direct injection and not both direct and port, and what is GM doing to counter the carbon buildup on the intake.
I like how he isn't concerned about reliability... lol
You know as well as I do they're only concerned with getting it through its warranty period .... I think everyone started to take a page out of Audi ,BMW,and Mercedes Benz handbook
Reliability is one thing, while durability is another.
Very cool. Maybe just record the video with your phone or a GoPro next time.
Less HP and TQ than the 5.3 without enough mileage difference to make it worth the complexity. My 2017 5.3 is rated the same on the highway. I see this as a total fail in every respect for GM.
Um what? This engine makes peak torque at less then 2k rpm which is most of the 5.3s torque but lower. You could probably tune it get more power and better mpgs then the 5.3
Also highway is one aspect.
I drove one but went with the 5.3 but I was surprised how quick that 2.7 is. Probably quicker than the 5.3 0 to 60 empty truck. Just couldn't bring myself to buy it, unproven and not enough warrenty. But try one yourself you will be like holy shit.
“THEY ALL DO THAT”. I can here the service managers across the country practicing that line.
Really well done video! The engine breakdown was great. Loved the detail. If it is reliable, which is a big if, then it's very impressive.
So far the busiest issue I have seen was a point on the wiring harness being to short. That was fixed rather quickly.
OK I have had 2016 F150 XLT V6 2.7 Ecoboost since Nov 4 2015; I have now 115 K miles. Live in Miami, Fla where it’s hot and lots of humidity.
Listen folks No Issues with my motor. I have had issues with the A/C freezing up on me and my eletric seat and my eletric window. But no engine problems. I don’t tow hard. I tow our boat 5,000 lbs max to the Keys but mostly 3 miles away to a dock and here in South Florida it’s Flat! We tow a camper 4200 lbs dry weight and camper makes trips to Tennessee and NC mountains. Giving this truck to my son In the next few months was considering the Silverado with the Duramax but already issues are showing up with other owners. Now the LT or the RST 2.7 has my attention, not worried about power but break down into the 3rd year or after?
I get allot more truck for the money with Chevy & Chevy incentives! Are huge right now! .. I’m having second thoughts. Test road one on Friday an RST 2.7; I was so impressed with the silence of the cab and how nibble the truck maneuvered and cameras even for the rear of your trailer.
Garbage move GM. Not only unimpressed and unenthused but.. Angry. Off to look at what Ram is brewing up since they seem to understand Horsepower these days
I can hear a HEMI Ram from a mile away. Tick tick tick go the lifters.
@@Dcc357
Creative comment. Never heard that one before
Dude not like this is the only engine you can still get the 4.3 two 5.3s a turbo I6 Duramax is in the works and there's still a 6.2. the 2.7 is just a gimmick for those that want it. If it does well they might put it in the 4.3s place but I doubt it. The ecotec3 4.3 is just like it's V8 counterparts. Simple durable and strong.
@@ReidHenderson the 4.3 isn't simple it's actually a really complex engine. This will probably be more reliable if gm works it's issues out this engine also is better for trucks then the 4.3.
@@Over_Taxed_USA Hate to say it, but GM was The Last of the Mohicans. Dodge is crap covered in horsepower; Ford was fine but lost their way. Now GM is following suit. Regardless, don't let Fiat Chrysler woo you with their power numbers. I mean what's the point in big power, when your heads leak, tranny fails, rear differential gives out, and the build quality is crap....all Fiat-Chrysler contributions to the truck world? For better or worse, I would take my chances on this truck over a Ram. As much as I don't like it, I am willing to bet it will still be more reliable
Notice how his glasses look like safety glasses. It might just blow up sitting there.. half cut open.. lol
People are gonna miss a single oil change on this thing and thats gonna be the end of it for this motor, its gonna rattle itself to hell
Yeah a computer controlled electric actuator with moving vanes and seals in 220 degree coolant is way smarter than a thermostat. Never going to have trouble with that.
I would rather have a big ol V8.
Congratulations, GM! You have developed another clever way to get customers into your dealerships for repairs. #BRILLIANT
This didn't age well...
lol my god the camera work dude! Almost unwatchable but im sure it is hard while in the field to adjust your camera. Maybe its new to you as well or a crappy camera? Cool engine though. Exciting!. Will get naysayers just like the ecoboost did until its proven itself.
Brilliant motor. Built like a diesel, v8 torque, 4cyl efficiency. A lot of tech that’s been used for decades. Nice to see a 4cyl specifically designed for the rigors of a light duty pickup. Hope it trickles to the SUVs.
When David and Chevy guy just totally ignores modern maketing and actually explains stuff - chevy finally catching with 90s japanese tech, but it is awesome to see it this way.
I know right?
Chevy used to do this long ago a lot.
That thing is gonna be a technician nightmare
I really love this. An engine developed with clear specifications and a well defined purpose. No "traditional values" and "wrong sound" crap, just fuel economy, environment, longevity and the right power.
Longevity? You must not be familiar with ICEs....It would've done better with the hybrid system they used to have combined with a V8. The GM guy mentions that this engine is purpose designed for this truck. Really? A small engine with a high boost turbo? GM once again misses the point. They need to also listen to the consumer. The environment and economy are important, but truck people aren't buying trucks looking for those features. That's why you have cars. A full-sized truck (even a half ton full-sized truck) is purpose designed for commercial use. People might not use them often as such, but they want to know it's there when they need it to tow or haul stuff. I can imagine truck people running to Dodge Rams now.
Yeah it'll look great in a junkyard when the vehicle is scrapped because the engine cost more to fix than the rest was worth. Perfectly environmentally friendly to design things to be throwaway.
@@terbennett you must not be familiar with either ices or electronics.
@@jdrok5026 How did they get so much power out of that engine? Big turbo or high boost? Big turbo would mean lag at bottom end, which contradicts the purpose of this engine in a truck application. Turbos are spooled up by exhaust flow. A big turbo requires a greater flow...which is why it lags at lower rpms. The only way to get it spooled up would require it running at a higher RPM.. meaning more fuel consumed. A small turbo needs to dish out very high PSI numbers to achieve that much power. It's a truck, so it needs bottom end torque. A smaller turbo would be the solution, but it would need to do it at lower pressures to be reliable. Those power numbers don't equate to lower pressures. No ECM can change that. The ECM be manipulated but those laws still stand. You want it to have the reliability of the 6 or 8 cylinder engines, it wouldn't be putting out that much power. NA motors can run higher compression ratios reliably and dish out good numbers with DOHC and multi valve systems. However, to do it efficiently, they use lighter weight internals. Add a turbo and that engine is toast without stronger forged internals, different piston design and lower compression, before a turbo can even be added. Now tell me, what don't I understand about ICE engines and ECMs?
Lol, the electric water pump “for faster cabin heating”. Yeah, that may be a secondary consequence, but the primary reason is to get the engine up to temp faster for emissions compliance. ...marketing. Lol
another nightmare over complex vega motor
Vegas weren't a complex engine it was just using a new aluminum alloy.
An engineer at GM can design and produce whatever they want. The problem is they still have to market it to the public. Not very many people want a 4cyl in a full size truck. This should be a special order option only.
So basically a VTEC turbo
If they would put this much detail into the 5.3 we'd be in business
I love your knowledge, and all the yes replies from the engineer. The thing I don't like, and I'm not sure they should have, but there's a lot of plastic valves that may make more mechanics and customers refer to that engine as a pos. If any of those valves fail, the engine is at risk of overheating. And when you gotta diagnose what went wrong, I'm sure the code in the computer is a vague and generic water pump valve failure...or they may go as far as to call it an anomaly lol...but sadly, I'm sure those engines won't make it to 150k miles, and for that reason alone, I'll never buy a Chevy again unless they prove to me that it works and is reliable.
Hey, where's the pop-up telling me to subscribe to your newsletter? This might be the first thing Jalopnik ever made that can be consumed without interruption!
Hell no.
Sure, the turbo 4 cylinder has the same amount of power and torque of a naturally aspirated v6. BUT, does it have the reliability and smoothness of the v6? My v6 tacoma might barely make 200hp but it still runs smooth after 17 years and 200k miles
B18 Swap?
Nah wankel
I can understand the importance of saving fuel. However, if you really want economy in a pick up truck your best bet is a naturally aspirated V6 with a manual transmission. I can guarantee you won’t get 300 horse power but you’ll get the same fuel economy or better than this turbo charged four. You’ll also have an engine that will last just south of 300,000 miles that you can fix in your driveway. I’ve had two trucks with a 4.3 L V6 and these are super easy to service. There are still many of us who use pickups for work and downtime is expensive. Repair costs on this engine will probably negate any fuel savings.
bring the 350 c i back
the 5.3 in its first gen was WAY better than any 350. I have owned both
@@super20dan who hasn't owned a 350. .. coming from up here tradepersons perspective. I would agree with you at this 5.3 is great. but there was a time where you could buy a complete long block 350 for like 1200 bucks and replace yourself in a weekend . 350s were not as refined as a 5.3 but they were good for over 200000 miles and could be serviced by the owner / small business owner themselves
Plastic coolant housing and valve is going to break after warranty ran out. Variable oil valve is kind of stupid idle cause the turbo is going to heat up the oil so much and thin it out anyway.
My brand new 2015 Chevy Colorado was a major POS that stalled out at intersections and had numerous other issues. This crapfest will likely be even worse with the turbocharged engine. Say NO to GOVERNMENT MOTORS! Good luck battling them for warranty repair.
Stop start Technology gm style
Hmm. That kind of problem never ever has happened at any or every car manufacturer. Only gm. Now stay tuned for the rest of the story
Waiting...
Bropocalypse - No problems with my 2016 Colorado, 2.5l engine.
@@Adventureswithmike1 are you looking for a antidote?
Excellent innovation. No need for a 6 or 8 in most truck applications.
Can only imagine what problems owners will have. ANY new tech from Chevy is ALWAYS garbage!!! You couldn't pay me to own GM junk ever again.
Any new tech from anyone is garbage.
I agree with you 100%. I need the fleet of trucks we use as a tradesperson to work everyday. The last trucks we could depend on to go 2-300,000 miles relatively trouble-free was old technology pushrod V8 and straight 6 engines.
And the spark plugs get energy from tiny solar panels mounted on the roof for efficiency 😂
Lots lots lots of things to go wrong...... complicated!
That's all I could think about when watching this video. I get the reason why they have to build this, but it's so complicated.
bertie perret Why don’t people view their bodies in this way? The amount of things that could go wrong inside us is mind boggling but we look at an insignificant little engine and cry like the sky’s gonna fall if we own one lol
Have you seen the design of a pushrod v8 it's not simple in any way
Neo Craft ,
I work on engines for a living (Marine diesels) I can tell you, that most engines (American made diesels) are just plain bad design. If it looks good on a drawing table, doesn’t mean it will work. Biology of a human body has nothing to do with engine design, I get your comparison. Time will tell if this, in my opinion bad design, will stand the test of time
Lots of comments for an engine that isn't in heavy use yet. How about we wait until there is more data before passing judgment.
Sad about the electronic water pump. These trucks won't last long with that.
Um What? Electric pumps aren't all that hard to make last.
@@jdrok5026 Except under high duty cycles they don't last. A belt driven component will last until the bearings fail. An electric pump has so many more opportunities for failure, especially given that it's computer controlled.
***Classified*** Toyota has been using electronic water pumps from day 1in the Prius. They are very reliable. Only problem I see is this is government motors so who knows if they get it right
@@chribrian A prius doesn't see the same loads as a silverado will. Also, I've seen the coolant pumps fail in the prius and the battery pack takes a shit as a result. No other way to do it in an electric car but no reason to do it at all in a pickup truck that still struggles to hit 20 mpg.
I actually think the water pump will last. Manufacturers have been using electric motors for power steering for years now with no major issues. I guess only time will tell
Gm powertrains are excellent and undergo a 300k mile validation process. I prefer the 6.2 liter ls or lt engine lineup yet I’m sure this 310 hp turbo four will be indestructible,. This 310 hp motor should be put in the chevy Blazer RS sooner rather than later... Im sure the twin turbo v6 from ford is a great engine as well.
Own an'04 Sierra/ Silverado. 5.3 is just cutting it in that truck, now they've taken half the cylinders out and slapped an exaggerated HP graph and turbo on it? Oh and it gets 5-6 mpg better? And it's unserviceable by the owner? And the company making this truck has no financial morals? Thanks for solidifying my choice to shop elsewhere.
Dan it depends on what you intend to do with it. If not hauling heavy loads, a 5.3 is plenty for it, not "just cutting it". Some people need the payload size more than the density, capacity. That does not mean I feel buyers shouldn't have more powerful options. It's your money at the gas pump.
@@stinkycheese804 Well said.
That motor is already maxed out pretty much it's going to make a lot of power but when you have a small motor like that making so much power pulling such a heavy vehicle especially when towing it won't last too long believe me
4CYL CORVETTE ANY ONE ?
i KNOW RIGHT..THAT BULLSHIT ILL BE NEXT....
Remember when they put those pieces of shit 4 cylinders in the mid 1980's Trans Ams and Camaros? Such a joke.....
I wonder if they made this thing with a cross drilled 6 bolt main like they did the ls family . If they did rest assured this could be a turbo monster .
That little 4 cylinder makes more power then our trucks V8 (2012 Nissan Armada with 5.7)
That Armada will likely be still running while this thing stops.
Also, those are 5.6s. Those engines are pretty good and hardly go wrong. But, boy do they slurp gas a lot.
@guy proulx no Nissan doesn't.
Its not the number of cylinders that would worry me, its all the electronic solenoids and motors that bother me. Put enough cubes in the motor, regardless of the number of cylinders and it'll be fine, but trying to make a something that size do the job of a full size engine in a heavy truck is just looking for an early failure. That rear timing chain, variable oil and variable cam sets up that would worry me. That plus the likely cost to repair this thing when it fails. It makes me glad I still drive a 1975 model truck with an inline 6.
That’s the sign America is going down. Stupid idea very bad idea.
Just the dumbasses. Most of america will be rebuilting their older pickups instead of buying this carp, then put the tens of thousands of dollars they save, into MOAR GUNS.
@@stinkycheese804 I like carp it's a good fish to fish with.
And it's not a stupid idea. More options is a stupid idea.. A i4 that makes more torque then a bigger v6 is a dumb idea.
put it in a s=10, would be a great truck.
Trying to squeeze the same power from somthing half the size, looks good on paper, fucken turbos superchargers it's just expensive non reliable junk, but they don't care if they work or not.
Same power!????
Not hardly....
Almost half the power tho... lmao
Turbos don’t die....they are murdered by deferred maintenance.
I should have read this type of comments before purchasing my GMC 2020 elevation 2.7 V4. FYI- I won’t be towing anything if that helps lol