mobile-menu-icon
GM Authority

One Engine Will Power The Next-Gen Chevrolet Colorado, GMC Canyon

Just yesterday, GM Authority was the first to report that the Chevrolet Colorado diesel and GMC Canyon diesel were in danger of disappearing following the sale of GM’s production facilities in Rayong, Thailand. Now, we have another exclusive report on the two midsize pickups. With the introduction of the next-gen models in 2023 for the 2024 model year, the Colorado and Canyon will offer just one engine option, namely a turbocharged 2.7L inline four-cylinder gas unit.

The decision is based on a number of factors, but is primarily motivated by pressure to remove complexity and consolidate vehicle builds.

It’s currently unclear which turbocharged 2.7L inline four-cylinder gas engine will be offered with the next-gen Chevrolet Colorado and GMC Canyon. For now, General Motors offers the turbocharged 2.7L I-4 L3B engine with the 2019 and newer Chevrolet Silverado 1500 and GMC Sierra 1500, where it produces 310 horsepower and 348 pound-feet of torque.

The turbo 2.7L L3B in the Chevy Silverado

While some may decry the move as limiting buyer options, the new 2.7L unit certainly has the potential to outperform the current Chevrolet Colorado and GMC Canyon engine lineup. For example, the atmospheric 2.5L I-4 LCV is really only selected for its low price or fleet applications, and in general, buyers would much rather have the 3.6L V6 LGZ gas unit or the 2.8L I-4 LWN diesel.

Meanwhile, the new 2.7L unit headed to the next-gen Chevrolet Colorado and GMC Canyon will likely strike a balance between fuel economy, power, and torque, as evidenced by the L3B offered in the Silverado and Sierra.

Aspiration Fuel Horsepower @ RPM Torque @ RPM
2.5L LCV Atmospheric Gasoline 200 @ 6300 191 @ 4400
3.6L LGZ Atmospheric Gasoline 308 @ 6800 275 @ 4000
2.8L LWN Turbo Diesel 181 @ 3400 369 @ 2000
2.7L L3B* Turbo Gasoline 310 @ 5600 348 @ 1500

* Note: specs listed from Chevrolet Silverado 1500, GMC Sierra 1500

As we can see, the L3B offers more power than the 3.6L LGZ gas unit and nearly as much torque as the 2.8L LWN diesel (at a lower engine rpm, as well). The new 2.7L is also expected to deliver better fuel economy than the three engines currently on offer. To note, the 2021 Chevrolet Colorado and GMC Canyon post a maximum of 22 mpg combined with the 2.5L gas engine, 2WD, and automatic six-speed, according to fueleconomy.gov. Fuel returns for the diesel are currently unavailable.

It’s also worth noting the much maligned eight-speed automatic, a transmission that has resulted in multiple lawsuits against GM, will not return with the next-gen Chevrolet Colorado and GMC Canyon.

For now, the new 2.7L gas unit looks like a good fit for these next-gen trucks. After all, rival products like the new Ford Ranger only offer a single powertrain as well.

What are your thoughts on the move to a single powertrain option with the next-gen Chevrolet Colorado and GMC Canyon? Let us know in the comments, and make sure to subscribe to GM Authority for more Chevrolet Colorado news, Chevrolet news, GMC Canyon news, GMC news, and around-the-clock GM news coverage.

Jonathan is an automotive journalist based out of Southern California. He loves anything and everything on four wheels.

Subscribe to GM Authority

For around-the-clock GM news coverage

We'll send you one email per day with the latest GM news. It's totally free.

Comments

  1. Don’t neuter the 2.7, keep same specs as in Silverado.

    Reply
    1. Exactly, the article states they want to “remove complexity and consolidate vehicle builds” and your suggestion sounds like a great way to achieve that!

      Reply
    2. Lol, the Silverado specs are neutered! The real power is in the CT4. 320 hp and 380 lb-ft of torque. This is the engine the Colorado/Canyon needs. Also, is the Express/Savana gonna get the 2.7 to replace the 4.3 and is the Colorado/Canyon and Express/Savana gonna get the 3.0 Duramax? And when are the HD trucks and the Vans gonna get the 10 speed behind the 6.6 gas engine?

      Reply
      1. Got mine, 2020 Allison Duramax 6.6 3500HD Silverado 4×4 Crew

        Reply
  2. Better engine all around.

    Reply
  3. Fake news. The V6 isn’t going anywhere.

    Reply
    1. Why the downvoted? DAN is being saterical after all.

      Reply
  4. Article states ” unclear which 2.7 will be used”, then lists one in GMs line up. Did I miss something?

    Reply
    1. That’s just Jonathan, he doesn’t dig up facts. He just diggs at GM.

      Reply
      1. You both outta read before commenting. Clearly says that it will be a 2.7L and the figures shown are from the Silverado/Sierra 1500. Yall need some glasses or contact lenses?

        Reply
    2. So GM actually produces two variations of the 2.7 liter turbocharged I-4 engine. The first 2.7 liter engine is used in the 2020 Cadillac AT4 as an available engine choice for the Premium Luxury Trim and is rated at 310 hp and 325 lb ft of torque and the second 2.7 liter engine is considered a high output option that is standard on the 2020 Cadillac CT4 V series and is rated at 350 hp and 380 lb ft of torque, but requires premium gasoline as that engine is tuned for maximum performance.

      Reply
  5. Yes more public-works, Orkin and Roto-Rooter drivers to terrorize the streets and roll-over with “Mhorr Powwaah!!” standard, fortunately speed limiter is set at 99mph…

    Still Billys will ask can the 6.2 be optional…..

    Reply
  6. This sucks if there is any truth to it but as we all know this could change overnight.

    Reply
    1. Why? Do you mean that towing would be worse?

      Reply
  7. Glad I got the diesel in my 2020 ZR2

    Reply
    1. …. love the torque of my 2.8 turbo diesel, impossible that a turbo gas 2.7 gets better fuel economy…

      Reply
  8. Hopefully the ZR2 will have some sort of power increase over the standard offering….whatever it might be.

    Reply
    1. Does it need more power? If so, what for?

      The 2.7L in L3B tune is a perfect engine for a midsize truck.

      Reply
    2. Look for a possible GM tune like the 2.0 had.

      It would retain the warranty but would make it Premium Required. But like my 2.0 it gained 60 HP with a flash and two maps.

      I will miss the V6 but I hold interest in the Turbo as I loved my 2.0 and all the torque it had even below 2000 RPM.

      Reply
  9. I am all for it , But why wait till 2023 , It should be already in the Colorado for 2021 ! The 2.7 already can pull a 7000 Travel trailer with the Silverado, So the 2.7 in the Colorado should be able to pull at 8500 LB ! GM just give the 2.7 a little more HP and TQ say 335 HP / 370 TQ !

    Reply
    1. I’m guessing that GM did not want to spend resources to re-certify the platform for crash worthiness. The new one will be out soon enough.

      Reply
    2. CAuse thats not necessary, if GM wants to offer a super hd towing package for the colorado the smart play and
      resumably were talking the truck having the 10 spd automatic which has a .67 10th gear ,
      ok did a little calculation , with 4.56 to 1 gears and 31 inch tires you’d have plenty of extra grunt through
      mechanical reduction , and still have a 3.05 top ratio ,, which means at 60 mph your turning under 2000
      rpm.

      Reply
  10. Best in Class Torque. This is exactly what trucks need.

    Reply
  11. The diesel really has a good following. I would hope they keep it around – even without updates.

    The 2.7L is a good unit though. Good choice.

    Reply
    1. Clearly your handle is a perfect fit. Article states its unclear which 2.7 will be used for next gen. As in there are multiple (more than the singular) choices of 2.7s. Then lists one (1/singular) 2.7 in engine line up. You can pay for school, but you can’t buy class.

      Reply
      1. GM produces a 2.7 liter I-4 turbo engine that is used in the Sierra & Silverado and also in the 2020 Cadillac CT4. The second 2.7 liter I-4 turbo engine is used in the Cadillac CT4 V series and has a higher output at 350 hp and 380 lb ft of torque. It would make sense for GM to use the 1st variation of that engine since it is already being produced for the Sierra/Silverado and for the CT4.

        Reply
  12. Will the next gen Colorado be on the new global truck architecture?

    I can’t remember. I know it’s getting a full redesign earlier than expected, but I don’t remember the game plan on the chassis.

    Reply
    1. It will be an updated version of the current 31XX platform. Global model, though some international markets (primarily South America) will get a different cab.

      Reply
  13. Bet the price will go up, anyway. No cost savings passed along to consumer.

    Reply
    1. What cost savings are you referring to? This is already a premium engine in the Silverado, and it surely costs more than the 2.5L or 3.6L.
      A redesign isn’t going to be done for free either, and you know they have to upgrade everything with a redesign if they want to stay competitive.

      Reply
      1. Note to offer one engine and not selling multiple engines is cheaper. Less crash testing, less inventory, less special parts, less emissions testing, less design time, etc.

        Reply
  14. Many of us who posted on this site in the past Re the Colorado suggested dropping the 3.6 liter V6 and replacing it with the 2.7 turbo with 73 pounds feet more torque than the V6. GM could offer two different turbo engines for the next generation Colorado, or even this generation as a place holder, use the 2.0 liter turbo gasser instead of the non-turbo 2.5 liter gasser. It has 104 pounds feet more torque than the base 2.5 liter 4 cylinder with 191 lbs feet, and the 2.0 liter has 295 pounds feet. It has 275 HP, but GM could offer this car engine with a slight drop in HP to give better low end torque for a truck and lower the price for a base model 2 door. with 2 wheel drive. There is no reason that a base WT Colorado should be selling for over $24,000 and this will make it much more competitive with Nissan, Toyota and Honda small pickups. We all know that bean counters rule at GM and the smaller turbo as a base engine on a base WT model will fit in with their ideals. Running either turbo engine on cheap 104 octane propane will boost power another 10 to 15 percent. Municipal trucks have ready access to the very high octane CNG, cheap natural gas, so they too will benefit from the turbo engines.

    Reply
    1. This makes perfect sense, but GM should replace all non-FWD 4-cylinder and V6 engines with the 2.7L. If it can make more torque than the other turbocharged or even diesel engines but with more power than the V6’s, while also getting better fuel mileage, why not produce as many of them as possible to make them cheaper?
      Base Camaro – replace v6/2.0t
      Colorado/Canyon – only option
      Base Silverado/Sierra – standard to replace v6
      Base Tahoe/Yukon non-XL – standard to slot under V8
      Base Work vans – standard to replace V6
      CT4-V – already there

      I don’t see why they can’t make a transverse version and shove it into the Traverse, Blazer, Acadia, Enclave, XT6, and an XT4-V/XT5-V. They’d save so much money and improve on so many engine offerings, and GM could then pump R&D money back into it.

      Reply
  15. is there anywhere to complain about the lack of the diesel? I will be looking at a new truck in about 3 years, but dont want the huge size of the 1500’s, and want the diesel capability for the range and torque.

    Reply
  16. Ted, I have been complaining of lack of S10 (my previous truck)since 2012 and had to settle for 2014 Silverado. To quote Sonny from ,’A Bronx Tale’, nobody cares. Now they don’t sell reg short box (like I have) so don’t know what next truck will be.

    Reply
  17. Too bad for the Colorado. Was really interested in getting a ZR2 Duramax as an overland rig. Not any more. Without the Duramax there is no reason to consider it. It’s back to the Tacoma for me.

    Reply
    1. If you are actually really interested in a ZR2 Duramax, then go buy one! You have until 2022. Or are you here to complain?

      Reply
    2. Tacos are ok if you like the go kart seating position.

      Reply
      1. YES YES YES! XD. laughing my but off right now! I drove one of these when they had their last powertrain and chassis update (my have the years flown!) at one of my prior jobs. It was a nice truck, but my current daily driver (04 pontiac sunfire, still wont kick the bucket) had about the same headroom and more or less the same seat position. Tacos are nice trucks, just why does toyota expect me to pay as much for them as a Colorado when they dont have the power, fuel economy, space or even features of the chevy. Id buy one it it was priced right in a heartbeat!

        Reply
  18. GM and Ford need to outsource their transmissions from ZF as Chrysler and other manufacturers done. Why continue wasting millions of dollars on engineering BS in house while losing loyal consumers just to keep a few people working! I like the idea of using one engine in the trucks as long as its a damn good reliable long lasting engine. One thing I would do is to offer the 2.7 in turbo and non turbo. Therefore people that don’t like turbocharged engines in a vehicle that they’ll own for 10- 15 years have a piece of mind. Ford is already screwing up by putting all of their money on ecoboost engines. All im saying is I’ve lost damn near all respect for the way GM does business. GM used to build cars that people could trust and adore, but now mostly everything GM builds is a bunch of BS disguised under new paint.

    Reply
    1. That 9 speed ZF transaxle has really worked out great for Chrysler, NOT!

      Reply
    2. Agreed bernard, and then increase the compression ratio of the 2.7 back to 11.8 like it is in the 5.3. The 2.7 looses at least 5% efficiency due to compression ratios alone over the 5.3 before looking at turbo losses. It should still be good for 225HP and 220 ftlb, more than enough for a Colorado or even an equinox.

      Reply
  19. More Power then a Syclone, had back in the day. BUT>>>> 4 banger turbo. Wondering if GM goes back in the parts bin for this new truck and bring back the Syclone!

    Reply
    1. Well, for that I wouldn’t mind “Mhorr Powwaah!” with a 6.2…😉

      Reply
    2. Maybe this time they will spell it correctly.

      Reply
  20. So I’m guessing that the 2.7T engine family is about to expand in the full size segment. When will the 3.4T I5 and the 4.1T I6 gas engines debut? Will there be a new V8 based on these as well? Just sad that the Colorado is loosing the 2.8 Duramax. Hopefully there are plans to introduce something based on the 3.0TD that will fit in the Colorado!

    Reply
    1. I think you are close, the new 5.3 will probably include an electric water pump, variable cooling zones and variable valve lift to be a “triPower” motor. while they are at it, it would be nice to have a 48V system.

      Reply
  21. The little Dmax will be missed. As mentioned, it has a pretty loyal following. Many, including me, have been asking for the 2.7 in the next Colorado. Nice to see that taking place. I would still like to see the 3.0 Dmax be an option at its current power rate. A Colorado with 277 hp and 460 pound feet! That to me would be quite a midsize engine package. Personally I would not be sad to see the 3.6 go. I have it in an ’18 ZR2. The way that the engine makes its power all at higher rpm doesn’t suit the truck like that engine does in other applications (like the Camaro). There will be a lot of complaints over lack of a diesel, and FCA will be offering one soon in their midsize truck.

    Reply
    1. the 3.0 duramax is a fully electronically regulated engine, power output could be easily retuned for a lighter
      chassis application , not the issue , will a longer inline six fit in the smaller truck .
      The 2.7 turbo sounds like a good choice , if GM needs to power up the colorado at some time in the future
      they have a 3.0L twin v6 making 360 bhp and 400 ft-lbs of torque in the cadillac XT5 .
      Another commenter mentioned a CNG version of the 2.7 turbo , eeeh NOT ,,, CNG has virtually no easily
      accessible refueling stations , propane would be a better choice, many more refueling outfits , however propane has one negative characteristic, I saw a youtube video where a fellow was winter camping in a van and he had a ventless portable propane heater, ok it was minus 30 outside and the propane froze up and
      wouldn’t flow right. Took some time for the propane to defrost inside the van before he could fire up the heater , so forget about using propane in Alaska in the winter or even the Dakotas cause it’ll freeze up.
      Tell you one , will GM get off their backside and make every single one of thier gas engines flex fuel E-85 compatable
      so we stop these ethanol plants from being idled and the workers being furloughed . Please support made in the bloody USA American ethanol. The so called nightly network newsdoesn’t even mention this tragic story.

      Reply
      1. At normal atmospheric pressure Propane Melts at -306°F. Propane boils at -44°F. Sounds like your info is from the fake news media.

        Reply
        1. -306 F? You must have never Wintered in North Dakota. That is T-shirt weather in Jan.

          Reply
  22. The reason I drive a Colorado is the availability of the Crew Cab long bed with the Duramax. To my knowledge, no other mid sized truck offers this combination.

    Reply
  23. If GM can put the 2.7 in next generation and keep the current fuel mileage that would be great, GM will have to increase the MPG over the Silverado with the same 2.7 engine, just find away to do it.

    Reply
  24. better leave well enough alone…..dropping the v6 is a bad mistake….4cyl…will never take the place of the v6…better watch toyota they will slip in a v6

    Reply
    1. What Toyota will “slip in” is a smaller-displacement, turbo-charged engine in the medium-term future. They were behind this initiative and their engines have become outdated. Dropping displacement and adding a turbo is the natural progression for almost every automaker.

      The 2.7L engine in question is a gem of a motor and is better than any of the three engines currently offered in the Colorado and Canyon.

      Reply
      1. The 2.7 turbo is a cool engine and its got alot of untapped power potential . GM has no shortfall of higher
        output engine they can fit in the coiorado , theres a 3L 360bhp twin turbo v6 in a cadillac and a
        twin turboi 3.6 L v6 also , ah hell , at one time GM shoehorned the 5.3L v8 in the colorado of the generation previous to this current one .
        perhaps that can be done again and that engine is 355 hp and naturally aspirated for those turbo haters .
        Toyotas been very slow to adapt turbocharging , its jsut insane on thier part , they could shit can the
        3.5L v6 as thier top engine in the Tacoma and replace it with a reworked version of the 2.7 L 4 they’ve got now , it’d have to be high pressure direct injection of course and otherwise suitably modified but basically were talkng using the same proven engine block with a new top end , that sort of engine could match the
        current v6 easily . the only big rub is the 2.7L used in the Tacoma , is the bottem end and crankshaft
        up it , if not they’d have to go to a forged crankshaft .

        Reply
      2. Interesting that a rumor has just popped up that Toyota is dropping the V8 in the Tundra for a TTV6 Hybrid (TFL Trucks)

        Reply
  25. I had an inline 5 Colorado. Nice truck but you couldn’t pull anything. It was a car in a truck’s body, absolutely worthless as a hauler and should have never been built. GM is in the business of building high profit vehicles. They don’t care about quality or reputation. No V6 in the Colorado?
    Toyota Tacoma here I come.

    Reply
    1. The 2.7L Turbo is a whole different animal than the gutless inline 5 you’re referring to. It’s also much more powerful and has more torque than the V6 in the Tacoma. But if you want the V6, you have three years to get one.

      Reply
  26. having the 2.7 as a only gas option and dropping the 3.6 would be a big mistake for gm. as there is a lot of people like me that DONT WANT TO OWN A VEHICLE WITH A TURBO … i dont want a vehicle where i know i will have to spend like someone i know a 2ltr. turbo ford escape ,120 plus km. on aprox. $8,000 to replace a turbo, and besides i am sure gm could do more with that 3.6 ….fact being i get the extra torque with the 4cyl. what is going to be the actual difference in mpg in the real world in everyday driving… .. i guess myself and lots of other people will be looking at other brands….. sorry gm you just lost a customer

    Reply
    1. The 3.6L V6 has been around in its current format since ~2012. If GM could do more, they probably would have by now. Besides, shouldn’t a truck have an engine with a better torque curve?
      The days of turbochargers being unreliable are in the past. Can they go wrong? Sure. Most diesel engines incorporate turbos and no one complains about those.

      Reply
  27. More proof that GM is losing the battle for the mid size market.
    If they would bring the tech and class from the full size to the mid size, they could pass the Tacoma in sales.

    Reply
  28. There sure is a lot of estrogen flowing here.

    I am a present 3.6 owner and hate to see the engine go but I fully expected this when the 2.7 arrived.

    Now I grew up in an era of horrible Turbo engines like the original 3.8, 301, Chrysler Turbo and the Ford Turbo. All were build on slightly to non modified engines with no water cooled Turbo housings or intercoolers. Back then VVT and DI were not even imagined.

    Oils were horrible and would coke up lines with many failures.

    I hated Turbo 4 engines.

    But then I owned an LNF 2.0 that had the GM tune in it. I was 300 hp and 315 ft lbs on a fwd that would run 13’s. That is if you could get the tires to bite. The Solstice got 340 ft lbs.

    I drove it ten years with no issues at 23 psi of boost. It got 25 – 27 mpg.

    That thing would spin the tires at will the torque started at 1400 and held to 4800 rpm.

    I set off the traction control at 55 mph once on a dry road.

    Turbo engines today are built much different. They are much stronger and durable. The synthetic oils are also much better and heat resistant.

    I hope GM does the tune for this truck as the LNF as 40-60 hp are an easy gain.

    Toyota will follow soon as they have no plans for a V8. Toyota’s trouble us they are behind on investing in Turbo engines while most of the market is building millions of them.

    So far GM appears to have the 2.7 right and it should shine in the smaller lighter mid size truck.

    As for comparisons to other engines or even the 5 cylinder this is a whole different animal.

    Reply
  29. ok guys help us figure this out if this 2.7 is such a great engine why are MPG numbers almost identical from what i read in a fullsize gm pickup with a 5.3 and a 2.7 ….. you would think there would be a least a 2mpg. gain with the 2.7 … furthermore IF GM and thats a big if ….. had that colorado 3.6 engine was setup properly (gearing etc.) was in a fullsize i think there would be a significant MPG. advantage over the 5.3…. i am only using this scenario as a comparison only

    Reply
  30. I’m in my second Colorado, the first was a 2016, Ext Cab Z71,4×4, V6, that my wife used daily to commute, getting 17-20 mpg locally in traffic depending upon how it was moving. Now the second, a 2019 Crew Cab 4×4, V6 WT, because the Z71 is not worth the extra $5,000! To me! So I got a loaded WT, that came with everything I needed an nothing I did not, lime heated seats. I did get the towing package, G80 auto locking differential, 16” alloy wheels that are actually best size for off road an ride quality, cruise control, all paint matching bumpers, mirrors and door handles. Bright window trim and most importantly a great working 7” touch screen with OnStar 4G LTE WIFI!! Plus had the dealer install all the same skid plates the ZR2 gets, except the rear differential one. All out the door for under 34K! Then had the Bilstien 5100 RHA strut and shock setup at a 1.9” front lift. All together I use as daily trans an a monthly camping trip with our 2020 Grey Wolf 24 JS! All with ease. I like the 3.6/8 speed having no issues!

    Reply

Leave a comment

Cancel