Next-Gen, 2023 GMC Canyon Spied For The First Time71
Just last month, GM Authority brought you the very first spy shots of the upcoming, next-generation Chevy Colorado. Now, our spies have captured a prototype of the Colorado’s corporate cousin – the 2023 GMC Canyon – for the very first time as it was undergoing testing.
Much like the Colorado prototype, the Canyon seen here is a Crew Cab, Short Box model. The model seen here also appears to be the range-topping Canyon Denali, judging by the 20-inch chrome wheels and chrome running boards.
Interestingly, the front fascia of this 2023 GMC Canyon prototype has quite the steep rake. That means that either the truck is missing various trim bits or that it’s not the Denali, and is instead the off-road-oriented Canyon AT4 trim. That said, those low-hanging running boards certainly don’t scream “off-road vehicle” to us, though the Bridgestone Dueller A/T tire on the prototype is certainly more rugged than needed for the Denali. It’s possible that the 2023 GMC Canyon Denali will simply wear more off-road-oriented tires from the factory.
The front end of this prototype also features a different arrangement of its placeholder headlights compared to the 2023 Colorado. While the Chevy features high-mounted, horizontally-oriented lights that are consistent with the general arrangement seen on the Chevy Silverado, this 2023 GMC Canyon prototype has an LED signature at the top, with vertically-oriented light sources running down the front-fascia. The treatment seems to be consistent with the facelifted 2023 GMC Sierra HD prototypes that we’ve seen previously.
Though the prototype is wearing quite a bit of vinyl camo, we can still make out that the 2023 Canyon will feature more aggressive body surface development than the current model. For instance, the fender flares appear to be bolder, the sheetmetal treatment on the doors appears to be more intricate, and the front fascia has quite the stubby, upright appearance.
The camo covers up most of the box, which is similarly wearing a set of placeholder tail lights. A single-exit exhaust can be seen on the passenger-side of the truck, and we can just barely see what seems to be the CornerStep rear bumper.
The 2023 GMC Canyon will ride on an updated version of GM’s current GMT-31XX midsize body-on-frame architecture, which will be dubbed 31XX-2. The vehicle will get an all-new exterior and interior, along with an all-new powerplant in the form of the turbocharged 2.7L I-4 L3B gasoline motor currently offered in the Sierra 1500. In that application, the boosted four-pot is rated at a healthy 310 horsepower and 348 pound-feet of torque. GM’s 10-speed automatic transmission will handle shifting duty. The current model’s atmospheric 2.5L I-4 LCV and 3.6L V-6 LGZ, along with the 2.8L I-4 LWN turbo-diesel baby Duramax will not be offered.
GMC’s midsize pickup truck will also adopt GM’s new Global B electrical architecture – otherwise known as Vehicle Intelligence Platform, or VIP. Besides allowing for over-the-air (OTA) updates to all vehicle systems, Global B also allows for the latest in infotainment and active safety technologies.
The current Canyon consistently resides at the bottom of its segment from a raw sales volume standpoint, though that is more of a factor of limited production capacity and pricing that’s higher than the segment average.
The 2023 GMC Canyon will continue to be built at the GM Wentzville plant in Missouri alongside its corporate cousin, the 2023 Chevy Colorado. GM invested $1 billion into the facility specifically for the new midsize pickups.
The Canyon will continue being sold in the three North American countries of the United States, Canada, and Mexico. It’s also possible that the next-gen model will make its way to the Middle East – the only remaining market outside North America where GMC does business.
Subscribe to GM Authority for more GMC Canyon news, GMC news and a constant flow of GM news coverage.
- Sweepstakes Of The Month: Win a 2023 Corvette Z06 Convertible. Details here.
Please no floor shifter and keep the crew cab long bed. Otherwise this thing is shaping up to be pretty sweet. Like how they were able to better level the spare tire. If they can find another inch of rear legroom with thinner seats that would be great and keep the under seat storage though open it up all the way as that little side pouch can have stuff fall out. Keep the lay flat rear seat as well as using it as a shelf or storing stuff like tow straps behind it is great.
I’m optimistic about this. Hoping for more effort on the Denali.
Stop it with all this inline four crap. I want a big V6 with good capacity to tow. If any 4 cylinder should be offered, it should be the duramax.
I’m afraid you’re living in the past.
Be thankful that it isn’t being released as a BEV only.
Yet the 4 cylinder will hands down out perform that V6. Times are changing, I always thought I would be a solely V8 guy but I am open to others. The performance from some of these V6 engines (especially with turbos) and the turbo fours are impressive. Shoot you have turbo four family sedans running 11 second 1/4 miles stock. So a detuned for truck use engine can easily do some work. I am all for the 2.7 move, as it been praised pretty well in the heavier full size trucks so the midsizers should really make use of it.
He has legitimate grievances. Boosted engines especially turbos do not last as long. One has to be careful with that train of thought as one will take what they are told with that line of thinking. Turbo 4s are more common because recent laws make that solution easier for automakers. So they boost them to the moon. Granted a V8 with the same thing done will outperform a i4 boosted to the moon. It is the same argument with the Ford fan base whom loves the V6 ecoboosts now. Add two turbos to the previous V8s with less bar then people would praise that too. At the end of the day most people will accept what companies or governments dish out at them.
I hear you hillbilly. I’m ok with inline 4’s, but I love V8’s. Honestly, I’m not a fan of V6’s and how they feel. They are doing this because of cost. An inline 4 has 2 less main bearings, half as many camshafts, 2 less pistons, wrist bearings, connecting rods…. and only one head. It’s cheaper to slap on a turbo. I want to see the 5.3 dropped in these as the Colorado’s equivalent of the Silverado’s 6.2. V8’s really are the best engines for noise, performance and feel.
Agreed! Long term I would much rather have an NA V6 rather than a little four banger with a turbo. Diesel being an exception.
V8 is the past. GM used to make large Sedans for Cadillac. Then comes their almost gone out of business and now they don’t make them because the gas tank is too much to fill up. Also people saw a sedan as a midsize idea. If someone is too short then they got no business in buying large trucks. This canyon is a good size. It can fit in parking spaces. Much of what GM builds for trucks you can’t fit a truck in a parking space. Many avoid parking next to their large trucks
I expect a better truck with more options but it will still have much of the feel and look of the present truck.
As we cab see the frame that is exposed is very similar to what we have not and that is a good thing as it has a great chassis. Shocks have been relocated to not hang down as they have.
I expect a fully new interior and the nose will be similar to what we have but with all LED lighting and camera for the adaptive cruise.
This truck will be an evolution and not a total revolution of change.
I expect much of the complaints will be addressed with more safety tech and advanced things like LED and Adaptive Cruise. But I expect the there still may be no sun roof and I wish we would get but I would be shocked if we see the HUD on this like the full size.
Pricing in the mid class is difficult as sales tank once you get over $40K and are nearly gone over $50K here.
It looks like the brakes are the same 4 piston units up front and disc in the rear. The wheels are not chrome just polished and that is fine as the Chrome are warranty issues on the full size and never were offered on the mid size.
They still have the best truck in class and the Turbo will transform this truck. If they upgrade the materials in side it will be for sure best in class. It is not worse than most others just if it were better inside it would make a key selling point vs the others.
It already is the best stopping, handling and riding in Classe.
Yeah, this truck will be an improvement over the current generation in almost every way. But I don’t think it will sell as well as the current version did when it was new.
The base price is going to go up considerably, especially with that engine in it, and it was already a questionable choice compared to the full size trucks based on the cost alone. But now, there are going to be actual small trucks available as well.
It will do ok, but nothing spectacular. Hopefully they don’t cancel it too soon as a result.
The new standalone engine will help keep costs down. They don’t have to develop and test multiple engines. I have a feeling the cost will go up but only a little bit, mostly due to the added tech and features, it has to be spread out across the line for all those that want every option available (massaging seats anyone…) and makes the price for those the need and use a truck harder to swallow for their work.
Nate here is the reality of this. #1 This truck is facing more competition now. So to increase sales in a limited segment would be difficult.
#2 The engine will be fine and it was really an engine intended for this truck more so than a full size. A gas engine with Diesel torque. Some people just haver to get over piston envy as today’s turbo engines are not what the old ones used to be. I used to be a V8 till I die and I have to admit the Turbo I owned opened my eyes and I really miss it. The 2.0 was just a much more fun engine than my present 3.6.
This truck is for people like my self that are not buying With price as a priority vs size. I just do not want a full size truck and this one was just the perfect size. Yes the temptation for the larger truck that was only a couple thousand more appealed to my financial side but I would never have been as happy as I am with what I have.
Like the new Maverick the mid size trucks are not for everyone.
Also the California regs are coming and it is going to kill many of the larger non turbo engines as most MFGs will not meet the CARB regs. The harsh truth is less size creates less emissions and the addition of boot makes for as cleaner burn. The MFG’s are not doing all this work to be cool it is to survive.
Heck it would be much easier to drop a V8 in everything as they did for decades but that formula no longer works with the many regulations today. This is also what is driving MFGs to not fight BEV anymore.
The number one car mfg is HONDA and guess what engine they have in their cars……ridge line truck? 6 banger. My 2018 Chevy Silverado with a 6.2 in it, got 22 mpg city 24-28 on autobahn. So if you don’t know or haven’t experienced the 6.2 …..you get my point
Better interior is a must. Either more lux or sporty but no cheap and dull. All features including pushbutton start and safety tech available to compete. Engine would be upgrade over 3.6 which has been a GM dog of an engine family since day 1. The 2021 Canyon looks great in elevation trim with flat paint colors. Just fix inside, engine bay and don’t overprice it otherwise Taco, Ranger and new Frontier will toast it.
That was hard to read… The 3.6 was far from a dog of an engine, not sure where you got that information from. GM doesn’t have any flat (matte) paint colors on their trucks, so you already lose some cred there. And if you think the truck looks good in all black with black wheels then the rest of your credibility just left this conversation.
The 3.6 is better suited for cars, It made decent power, but it was at 6800 rpm.
Had a 2013 on a 39 month lease. Spent 6 months in shop with “internal oil leaks’. Common issue from day 1. It has indeed been a problematic engine for many for years. As has been the 5.3. And the 1.4T. Had them all and none made close to 100k without major repairs multiple times
Not true. The 3.6 V6 has turned into one of the better motors in the class with VERY good output and performance. It’s actually been pretty reliable since the timing chain issues were resolved a few years back.
I think it’s on par or better than the Toyota 3.5, Chrysler 3.6, or the Nissan 3.5. I do think the Honda 3.5L VTEC is a little better though.
Turned is key word. Only took a decade of GM polishing the turd to make it an average engine for durability power and fuel economy.
The truth is you have to learn how to drive a 3.6. The engine is made to rev and power is nor really starting till 3,000. You have to step down on this engine to make it move. As vs a V8 that will do the same at 1500 RPM.
Now those who dislike the 3.6 higher rev ban will love the Turbo as it will make power starting at a lower RPM than most V8 engines and carry the flat torque curve much farther than the V8 would. The last 2.0 I had could set off the traction control at 50 MPH. My big block never did that.
Having to “step down” to make it move means it is weak down low. I know what you mean, I test drove a Colorado, went with a 17 Silverado instead. Didn’t even think of one when I got my 20 Sierra. I will definitely consider one with the 2.7 Turbo.
Non turbo 4 valve engines need air velocity to make power. They can and need to draw air in and RPM does this.
Turbo engine have 4 valves but the boost pushed the air in and will do so today at low RPM along with VVT it. An make for a flat torque curve from. 1200 to 5600 RPM like my 2.0 did with 315 ft lbs. if the tranny was stronger it could do 340 ft lbs.
GM has a lot of work to do on these trucks. Bring the LED light signatures over from the bigger trucks and make the interior a little more tech-y. As mush as I like GM, they should really be focusing on a compact truck to compete with the new Maverick. With a Lariat Maverick topping out around $30K. it is a pretty attractive option instead of looking at these trucks that are only 3/4 the size of a Silverado and prices in the $40K range.
The Maverick is going to scoop up some of the low end fleet sales from the current gen base model Colorado 4 cylinder.
I think the next gen Chevy Colorado will need a base, entry level engine to maintain that appeal to cost-conscious fleet buyers, municipalities, exterminators, surveyors, etc. They sell a lot of them to those types of buyers.
The only compact truck GM should work on is a Bolt EUT. Way better option then any Maverick.
A Bolt EUT is a great idea, but wouldn’t be a substitute for a gas engine unless you aren’t driving very far. Or you just enjoy taking a lot of long breaks when driving.
In any case, it would be in yet another completely different segment than the Maverick.
I don’t see the Maverick as being a long haul vehicle. It’s way too basic for that. It’ll be a run about vehicle with light load requirements. This, a Bolt EUT would be perfect. Make it a bit longer and maybe they could add a second motor for awd. Or maybe a bigger battery.
The Bolt platform is not particularly flexible. That’s why the EUV is only slightly larger than the EV model.
I can see the Ultium platform eventually spawning a smaller pick up though.
This looks promising.
I like that there is no front air dam. The size looks good. You can see a glimpse of a large center touchscreen.
I don’t understand why gm is still pushing and offering the big 6.2 OHV V8 in many offerings and the engine has many fans here, yet if someone says they’d prefer a V6 in a mid-sized truck like the Canyon, they’re labeled as a relic of the past. Consider me a relic; I too would prefer to have engine choices and a V6 would be among the choices I’d like.
How can the 6.2 be sacred and beyond criticism but a more contemporary DOHC V6 is for those living in the past.
You don’t think the V8 is going away too? I’m going to bet it does except in heavy duty or at least very expensive trucks.
Not going away but will become more expensive and more limited.
Note too heavy trucks vs 1500 tricks face different emission and fuel regulations for now.
I think most here (like myself) really like the 3.6 V6. I think it’s a great engine, especially when tuned correctly and paired to a responsive transmission…it does really well. I’ve owned two of them. But up against the 2.7 with the same HP and a huge amount of more torque, well I’d have to go with the 2.7. It’s not like the 3.6 sounds good (it can sound decent with the right exhaust) whereas at least with a V8 you can have engine music to your ears.
Regarding the 6.2, it’s another great engine. But if GM where to release a turbo 3.6 for the FS trucks with 450 HP and 525TQ where do you think the engine preference is going to go to? Look at the F150. It’s already made the switch, but at least the 5.0 is still there for the V8 die hards.
If I could get the same 6.2 engine from my 2016 Camaro SS into one of these midsize trucks from the factory you know I’d do it in a heartbeat. But alas…not gonna happen!
The stance on this truck looks amazing. Love those wheels already. I’m really hoping this ends up replacing my 2015 Colorado eventually.
I’m liking the overall proportions from what can be seen. Unless my eyes are playing with me it also appears to be rolling on a taller tire than the current model. ( that’s a good thing ). Not a fan of the low hanging running boards but I do like that a few key areas of the undercarriage are better tucked. From the small glimpse of the interior it already gives off the impression of being sportier and more modern. Headlights appear to be below the turn signal/daytime running lights, that could either be good or bad depending on the execution. Looking forward to seeing these, also looking forward to seeing the ’22 full-size refresh.
The best advantage of a turbo engine is that you get an instant HP and torque boost by using mid grade 89 octane or 91 high octane premium gasoline. Expect a power increase of about 5 to 7 percent with 89 octane and a bit over 10 percent increase with 91 octane. Expect about 400 lbs feet of torque with 91 octane gas. Not sure of the power increase with super premium 93 or 94 octane gas, but it’s a nice advantage. GM uprated the towing ability of the 2.7 liter engine by an extra 2,000 over the first year tow rating. Expect a tow rating of 7,000 pounds at a minimum with the 2.7 liter.
Not necessarily. The manufacturer needs to have calibrated/tuned the engine for the higher fuel and included the maps or allowed adaptation. For example, if timing advance is limited to 87 octane levels, then you will not get any benefit from premium. It’s additional engineering and validation work. One could also do this intentionally so they can charge more for sport models.
Honda’s turbocharged mainstream small engines are an example of ones that exhibit no difference.
Sam that is not true on premium recommended engines. I have had supercharged and turbo engines with this and regular vs premium fuel is about 25-30 Hp difference.
The computer reads the knock and runs the boost up dependent on the fuel being used.
Now if listed Premium only they can get more aggressive with timing and boost. I used the GM tune on my turbo that made it Premium required. It could run up the 23 pounds of boost and added 55 hp.
Note what Honda does is not what GM does. This goes back to the series 3 SC3800.
Mark doesn’t mention that, only saying on turbo engines. Since this article is about the Canyon and the GM 2.7 that runs on regular, it doesn’t get a magical 10% boost with premium. Most engines don’t, just those that as you note recommend premium but can run on regular or specifically mention a power gain (Ford). Sam is right in this case but you are right when it calls or mentions it and premium fuels.
Unless it has multiple fuel maps and you don’t magically get more power running a hgher octane. The 2.7 runs on regular, so filling it with premium won’t give you a magical 10% power gain. There are many independent tests that clearly show this with multiple vehicles. Some have said it gets more power like Ford depending on fuel, but not a regular run of the mill turbo the just needs regular.
The difference is if the engine says regular no there is no gain.
If it is listed as premium recommended it will gain power on premium.
If it is Premium required it has just the higher rating with no options.
If GM wants my money, the next Colorado/ Canyon better have a DIESEL!
did anybody notice that this one shows very faintly a sunroof???
I hope it does! More techy, LED lights (very needed), push button start, 8 way power seats, and sunroof!
Too little too late.
How’s that? The current gens are easily competitive with anything else out there. What makes you feel like these new trucks will be any different?
The upcoming new Nissan Frontier will give the Toyota Tacoma a run for the money. The Colorado/Canyon will sell to GM loyalist.
According to a January article here on gmauthority nearly 50% of Chevy’s sales in 2020 were conquest customers. It didn’t break down each models conquest sales (clearly the C8 would be high on that list) but I think you would be surprised how many former non-GM owners are behind the wheel of a model like the Colorado ZR2. The Frontier looks like a nice effort but will never catch the Tacoma in sales. As a result of blind Toyota loyalty it’s not likely the that any mid-size competitor ever will.
The new Frontier, while a decent truck, has basically just caught up to where the other mid size trucks are, and then maybe passed them (in a few ways…like tech) just enough. Once the new generation of Ranger, Colorado/Canyon, and Tacoma hit the scene, the Tacoma will be behind once again.
Dang this has potential, looks so very promising, but I have to say no to a 4cyl in a truck. Now I am not looking to use this for hauling or pulling, I have a 2001 Silverado that is still in great shape. But what I am looking is at something that I can take off roading in the mountains and deserts here in Utah, and I just dont know if a 4 cyl is up to the job. The truck would be so easy to modify. As I looked into the Tacoma for 2023 for 2023 it will still maintain its 3.5. The Frontier also looks like a posssibility with its 3.8 option. Decisions do I buy a 2021 Colorado with a 3.6, or wait for the 2023 Tacoma with its 3.5, or the 2023 Nissan Frontier with its 3.8. This could be interesting.
There is a time I would have thought the same about a 4cyl but the 2.7L I-4 is going to be awesome in this truck. I also live in Utah and think the the fact this has equal hp 2.7 @ 310 vs 3.6 @ 308, and far more torque 2.7 @ 348 vs 3.6 @ 275, combined with the fact this has a turbo and a 10 speed will make it perfect for our high elevation mountain passes. The Tacoma won’t know what hit it when these are lined up lol.
Truckz: we are so fortunate to have the ultimate backyard here in Utah. Great off roading adventures being able to go to destiantions that many people and in mnay cases no people have seen before. I am very cautious when I purchase any vehicle, I buy them with intention that they will hold up and be able to handle there intended purpose. I never go into debt for an automobile, I always budget and plan ahead and pay cash for what I purchase. THis purchase I am looking for something for something smaller than a full size truck, I am planning on modifying it for trips through some of Utahs most remote and toughest country both in Northern and Southern Utah, plus an excursion on the Rubicon trail, and I think this might be what I am looking for. It is incredible what can be done with four cylinder engines and boosting, my concern is the friction and heat from turbo, am I going to pay more for preventive maintenance, and finding someone besides a dealer that I could trust with a boosted engine. The other is the engine going to be taxed with a modified off road suspension, tires, a wynch? and roll bar for trucks. Maybe I will see you on the open trails or road I will be the raven haired woman driving a Grey 2001 Z71 Silverado. Also I dont mind 4 cylinders in cerain applications my city car is a 2007 Black Pontiac Vibe I got several years ago it has a 1.8 in it and that car is durable and solid. I am sold though on the 3.6 as I have a 2010 Opulent blue Cadillac CTS wagon. IF you see me just beam and honk. oR maybe will meet up on one of many awesome backcountry trails.
That is a pretty old school train of thought. The 2.7 will be much less taxed than the 3.6 with larger tires, heavier gear and a WINCH. No special dealer is needed as turbos have been around for a very long time. The heat is well taken care of with todays engineering and computer simulations and they are extremely well tested. Have zero worries, it won’t be any less reliable than a NA engine. Plus it has been hauling around 9k in a silverado for years prior to going to the lighter truck. You can keep in your ways with the old school thinking but times change and I would much rather follow them then get left behind.
Just more common nonsense.
The 2.7 L has proven potential, but gm really needs something more powerful primarily for the SLT and certainly for the Denali Trim levels, I just can’t get excited over a 1 engine option for the entire lineup especially for the Mid-Sizer with a Denali Badge on the sheet-metal, I just hope I’m wrong about that reality.
I don’t know about any more options for the standard trims, but I’d keep your eyes open for the possibility of a turbo charged V6 for the ZR2 model. I have a hard time thinking GM wouldn’t drop a more powerful engine in the ZR2 this time around, given that it sounds nearly confirmed at this point that Ford is going to use a turbo V6 in the Ranger Raptor.
I for one, would LOVE for GM to offer up a more powerful option in multiple trims than just the ZR2. I think the 2.7 would be fantastic, don’t get me wrong, but if I can get more power, then good! lol
Might not be anything to it, but there is a person on one of the Colorado forums that claims these trucks have been testing near him where he lives in Colorado, near some place where they do altitude and hill testing. He says he’s seen one plugged into a charging station, leading him to think there could be a hybrid version in the works. I’m not putting any stock in that, but the person sounds credible enough, so that would be interesting.
Turbo V6 is not going to happen.
I saw the report of a Hybrid by this person as well as a Diesel. I will not say he is lying but till I see it in production it could be a lot of things. The plug in could be a number of things.
As cool as a Turbo six would be it is just not going to happen as there is not enough money in it. These trucks struggle to sell over $40K and that would drive the price to a place where it would never make back the ROI. The Bison is a good example where GM shared the cost with the outside company to keep cost down and even then they refused to touch the driver line do to high development cost.
While the Raptor is cool it is not a profit center. Unfortunately the boring cars pay the bills.
I could see a tune on the 2.7 that could make it premium only and increase the power to 370 HP and the torque over 400 FT LBS. That actually would make a nice ride if it won’t break axles.
That is just a flash away.
I don’t disagree with you for the most part, but I think it’s possible. A V8…no way at all. But a small turbo V6? Sure. GM already has a 3.0 turbo V6 with 360HP and 400TQ used in the CT5-V and then the 3.6 turbo also. They had a 3.0 turbo V6 before that made 400/400…not sure what happened to that one though. I’m not sure if the 3.6 turbo is used anymore or not…maybe in the CT6? Niche vehicles are not always about making profit, but getting customers interested in the product and in the door. The ZR2 is a good seller. If it makes sense logistically, and if GM wants to compete directly with Raptor I think they could justify a turbo V6. It would be pricey sure, but this would be a specialty vehicle. It’s not the same as comparing a typical trim Colorado model against a Silverado.
A tune on the 2.7 would be fantastic. I’d be all for it. It makes 325HP and 380TQ in the CT4-V.
Can you edit you comment?would have given you a thumbs up if you hadn’t put in the last sentence/paragraph hence a thumbs down if you leave it- thanks!
The 2.7 is a good deal more powerful and will be in the SLT and Denali trims. Or you mean you want a special engine because you checked all the boxes at the dealer? Why shouldn’t that engine be available to those with a WT that actually use their trucks to tow and haul and not as an image purchase for commuting everyday? Going to 1 engine keeps the costs down on the truck and the fact it is more powerful than the top engine option currently is fantastic and that means those that buy the base trucks for work and business can have plenty of power to haul their trailers and supplies. A ZR2 and Raptor are a niche vehicle with low sales, a special engine for those unless it is already developed is expensive and not needed. GM may surprise us like the Z28 but I doubt it, they will probably just fast track a 600hp electric version that will lay waste to the raptor or anything else in the class.
Doesn’t one of the Cadillac cars have a higher hp 2.7?
Yes it does. CT4V. 325HP and 380TQ. I’d take that tune!
Looks good. I will take a crewcab shortbed.
Make the V6 the base engine and the 2.7L as a premium choice. Keeping the 2.7 in 2 cars/trucks isn’t enough to sway the public.
People need to judge not by the number of cylinders but the resulting output.
My only issue on my turbo 4 was the lack of traction,.