mobile-menu-icon
GM Authority

Updated 2022 Silverado Turbo Torque Officially Higher Than Expected

Last September, General Motors revealed the fully refreshed 2022 Chevy Silverado 1500, ushering in a variety of changes and updates as compared to the 2021 model year and pre-refresh 2022 Chevy Silverado 1500 Limited. One of the powertrain changes for the 2022 Chevy Silverado 1500 refresh was a healthy torque boost for the turbocharged 2.7L I4 L3B gasoline engine, which at the time of the announcement, was uprated to 420 pound-feet of torque at 3,000 rpm. Now, however, General Motors has officially bumped the high-output L3B’s torque rating to 430 pound-feet.

Readers might recall that GM Authority was first to report back in December 2021 that the turbocharged 2.7L I4 L3B gasoline engine in the refreshed 2022 Chevy Silverado 1500 would be an SAE-certified at 430 pound-feet, rather than the 420 pound-feet of torque announced previously. Now, GM’s official peak torque figure has increased to 430 pound-feet of torque, a 10-pound-feet bump compared to the original figure announced with the debut of the 2022 Chevy Silverado 1500 refresh.

Prior to the 2022 model year refresh, the turbocharged 2.7L I4 L3B gasoline engine was rated at 310 horsepower at 5,600 rpm and 348 pound-feet of torque at 1,500 rpm. Moving forward, that horsepower rating remains unchanged at 310 ponies for both the pre-refresh models and refreshed models.

To note, the high-output L3B engine replaces the naturally aspirated 4.3L V6 LV3 gasoline engine and naturally aspirated 5.3L V8 L82 gasoline engine in the Silverado lineup, and is offered as the standard base engine for the refreshed 2022 Silverado 1500 WT, Custom, Custom Trail Boss, LT, RST, and LT Trail Boss trim levels.

In addition to the high output 2.7L L3B gasoline engine, the fully refreshed 2022 Chevy Silverado 1500 is also available with the naturally aspirated 5.3L V8 L84 gasoline engine, the naturally aspirated 6.2L V8 L87 gasoline engine, and the 3.0L I6 LM2 turbodiesel Duramax. Under the skin, the truck rides on the GM T1 platform, with production taking place at the GM Fort Wayne plant in Indiana, the GM Silao plant in Mexico, and the GM Oshawa plant in Canada.

Subscribe to GM Authority for more Chevy Silverado news, Chevy 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. The I4 is a sorry engine for a truck, shame on Chevrolet.

    Reply
    1. I mean 310hp and 430lbft is an incredible base engine. Would you prefer Ram’s 3.6 305hp @ 6400 and 270 @ 4200, or Ford’s 3.3 290hp @ 6500 and 265lbft @ 4000.
      GMs truck makes more torque at 1500rpm than those other two make PEAK torque at 4000+rpm.

      Reply
      1. Some folks are just looking to get bagged on. Stupid comment. In my opinion, unless trailering this is the engine to have over the diesel and 5.3 V8. I’m sure since it’s a turbo, the aftermarket can find some more power if you need it.

        Reply
        1. Yeah, sure thing smart guy, just let us know how your teensy little overstressed 4-holer is doing in your Truck after you use it as a real “truck” after 100k. “Bag” that Mr. no-experience ! Your “opinion” is just that and extremely underinformed even for a typical, discrediting, insulting know-it-all and shows you have zero experience with the demands and care and feeding of a turbo engine when used over the long-run.

          Reply
          1. It’s a BASE engine smart guy. It’s not really meant to tow 10,000lbs daily, just like all the other base truck engines.

            Reply
          2. Most people don’t keep a 1/2T 100K anyway, and like Nissan says about their trashy CVT as long as it makes it through the warranty that’s all that’s important.

            Reply
            1. Did Bob really say most people don’t keep a 1/2T 100k? Lol!

              Reply
          3. Have a 20 yr old F150 lariat in our corral of autos. Get used only for carrying stuff around and no towing. The turbo would have been great. Another stupid comment. Don’t Assume.

            Reply
      2. When faced with spending MY money, I certainly would Prefer” the Ford or the MoPAR non-turbo engines if those 3 were the only choices after decades of experience with turbo and non-turbo engines. Enjoy replacing that 4 cyl turbo after it cokes-up the bearing say at about 45-50K or before. It should only cost you around $3500 (or more) parts and labor !

        Reply
        1. Then don’t buy one.

          Reply
          1. No doubt….lot of anger in the posts today.

            Reply
        2. Turbo replacement, especially on GMs 2.7 is pretty darn easy and I bet can be done for $600-800. Worst case when the engines @ 150k

          EcoBoost turbo replacement is harder and around that price.

          Reply
        3. Real men can change their own turbos, Billy

          Reply
          1. Thank you for something that’s a joke, everyone just can’t stop being negative

            Reply
        4. The 2.7 features oil cooled turbo bearings, like featured on Duramax engines for long life. Expect 150k between turbo swaps. This is a far cry from sabbs turbos that blew every 30-70K miles. These are also way more reliable than the ecoturds that feature two turbos, strapped UNDER a DOHC V6 in a tight engine bay with no bearing cooling, and require complete disassembly to replace.

          I’m a V8 guy, and won’t be buying these, but recognize their place. This will be a fun junk yard motor, and bet with a custom ECU, you can get one of these to exceed 450 HP and 500 tq.

          Reply
        5. Maintenance!

          Reply
        6. That’d get covered under 60k power train, eh?

          Reply
    2. The 2.7 8 speed will perform better than the 5.3 with any speed. Like i have said before, the only way for the smallblock to stay relevant is to keep getting bigger until it’s maxed out. The 1500 needs a light duty version of the 6.6 gas with more hp.

      Reply
      1. Uhmmmmm, better fuel economy,better passing power, better towing up a hill as the 5.3 has 15% more power, better sound. The 5.3 is just a better motor, that’s why it cost more.

        Reply
  2. Nothing says dependable like a high stress 4 cylinder that will be under boost at 65 cruise.

    Reply
    1. This same engine has been in the Silverado the past 2 or 3 years, and it’s got a 10 speed gearbox. The only difference is more torque and power, so the drive train can handle it. What were you concerned about?

      Reply
      1. Clearly, you know nothing about what long-term effects on a gas-fueled, non-Diesel IC engine are under constant “boost”. The comment was about a relatively small, highly-stressed, turbocharged motor under constant boost at highway speeds and came from a person with a heck of a lot more experience and knowledge than you just demonstrated you lack. It was NOT the ability of the ” drive train” to handle it. Go back and take reading comprehension over again.

        Reply
      2. Actually, it is paired with an 8-speed, but your point is correct. This engine was designed to be turbocharged and thus can handle the boost.

        Reply
    2. Fun fact. The Cummins diesel is 6 cylinders and makes 420hp and 1075tq. In a vehicle that weighs about 2500-3000lbs more.

      Maybe you just don’t know anything and you’re spouting your uneducated opinion.

      Reply
      1. The “Cummins” is an HD Diesel and has been designed and built, ever since they raced their turbo-diesel Indy Car at the 500 in 1948, to operate as a turbocharged engine. The block, heads, gaskets, rods, pistons, crank, rings etc., etc.are specifically engineered for that stress of forced induction and the usual Diesel runs about 17 to 18 to one compression ratio. You are comparing apples and oranges and making sure everyone with a shred of knowledge and experience knows it ! With GM’s absolutely horrible track record with light duty diesels ( until they partnered with Izusu ) anyone buying one of these things is going to be sorry in the long run. Take particular notice of and remember the words “long run” please !

        Reply
        1. Your argument is that the i6 Cummins was designed and built to handle that power. Completely ignoring the fact that the 2.7 was too.

          Unsurprisingly the point went way over your head. People are knocking the 2.7 solely because it’s a 4 cylinder. Using you’re incorrect ignorant math, it would be much lower stress than a Cummins which holds up just fine.

          Perhaps think before you speak.

          Reply
    3. Why don’t you think that the engine is built to handle the boost? I’m sure you can find the tech specs somewhere…

      Reply
  3. Seriously Mel? Do you know how many big trucks, ships and airplanes use 4 cylinders? It’s not the number of cylinders it’s the measured output. This engine is designed for trucks and it should be really good. I’ve owned 2 V8 Silverados and I was never impressed with the power. This amount of torque will really move this thing off the line. Very impressive!

    Reply
    1. I’ve owned lots of 5.3s too. Most recent was a 2018 and it was nothing to brag about for power. After the tune it was fine, not fast, not slow. Just fine. A dog before the tune.

      Reply
      1. The 2.7 will be fine no liter issues valve spring dropping of such yet . Let’s give this motor a chance

        Reply
      2. Most of that is the ECU and pedal response. The 5.3 is tuned to float like a caddy, sip fuel and be quiet. The 5.3 also has a very restrictive exhaust. Hemis come standard from the factory with a better breathing muffler and 3″ pipes to the 2.23 on the 5.3. with a performance shift tune, proper pedal programming and a performance TQ converter, the 5.3 is an absolute rocket. I got an older 5.3 with the 4speed. After a Corvette shift kit and agressive converter it is an aggressive motor.

        Reply
  4. Time will tell if it holds up. For me hard no in fullsize but a better engine in the midsize

    Reply
  5. 10 ft lb , big deal, and its a tiny motor. these silverado’s are basically cars with a big storage box as a trunk with a tail gate. GM has become the recall king’s with all there crap. GM wants fuel sippers so Mary can go to Sleepy senile JOE to get brownie points , when Americans want a real motor and a real transmission in there truck, not fake Allison branded transmissions , or crappy 8 speeds that need a fluid change every two weeks. GM cant figure out were to put the bow tie on the grill every year , its up , its down, its in the middle , the truck has fangs, now it dont. NO wow factor at all. , cheap unfinished black plastic wheel lip moldings , bed steps, and mirrors , a multi function tail gate thats takes a college degree to operate , and if you hit the wrong button the tail gates hits the hitch receiver , black wall tires, blown plastic black interiors , no two tone paint, cheap thin seats , stupid door mounted mirrors , most of GM paint colors are dark with 4 shades of gray, and thats so they match the cheap unfinished plastics. now there new dashs look like a car dash in there trucks . disappointing , peroid.

    Reply
    1. dont forget the antenna for AM radio in 2022

      Reply
    2. It’s going from 345 torque to 430, that’s almost 100 ft lbs.

      Reply
    3. After you finish your little rant about the multi-flex/multi-pro tailgates you can take a look at the overcomplicated ford tailgate “step” system, which includes a little folding staircase and an unfolding banister to come with it. They even had to label the components with numbers so people like you could understand it. Or, have a look at the stupid Ram “multifunction” tailgate which looks like someone axed your tailgate in half.

      You can stop talking crap about the little 2.7; it was designed from the ground up to accommodate turbo boost and won’t be breaking any time soon. You WISH that was the case, so you can keep lying to yourself that you need more cylinders to have more power. You’re probably jealous of the hard workers who buy this engine and actually use it for honest work instead of emptying their pockets for the massive engine they “need” to get in and out of the mall parking lot. Let’s be real, most people who need to tow more than this engine can handle will be getting an HD truck anyway.

      If you don’t want a Chevy, then big deal! GM full-size trucks overall outsell the Ford F-Series, so at the end of the day, they’re not crying about your dislike for this engine or GM trucks in general.

      Reply
      1. The company I work for had a Ford Diesel Platinum and I can tell you that there tail gate with that step and hand rail is very spooky to use. The step has a spring in it that changes the angle of the step and flexes back to being level once you step on it.
        Getting in the bed is ok but taking the plunge to step off the tail gate and onto that step is a leap of fail. It totally sucks. But what I have come to expect from the old Ford engineers… And that step system is not new. The new stuff from Ford like the Bronco and the new little pickup is showing new forward thing blood in the company…

        Reply
    4. You’re so basic.

      Reply
  6. Pretty impressive TQ figures for a 4cyl. I would like to see the actual TQ curve graph.

    Reply
    1. The torque curve for the previous engine was flat, almost like a diesel. If i remember correctly….was making over 325 ft-lb+ of torque at 1500rpm through 4500 rpm…..can’t imagine what the new torque curve looks like. I’m impressed by it. The previous engine is going into the 2023 Colorado/Canyon. It will be a great fit in that truck.

      Reply
      1. The torque was artificially suppressed before. Now it won’t just be a flat line, but climb.

        Reply
    2. me too. NOTE: No insulting comments were used in this Reply.

      Reply
  7. Mr MIKE,
    That Cummins 1075lb torque motor with AISIN will yank your silverado down the interstate side ways. that is one pulling ass motor. you hook what ever you want to the back of a Ram with that motor and its going with you , peroid.

    Reply
    1. OTOH, how long did it take Ram to learn that they don’t have the knowledge or expertise to build a (auto) tranny that can handle the Cummins torque? You guys change trannys as often as Duramax owners change glow plugs.

      Reply
    2. Of course or will, that wasn’t the point.

      The point was it’s silly to condemn this motor for being overworked for being a 4 cylinder when that has 50% more cylinders but making about 150% more torque. It’s just an uneducated conclusion that has no value or merit.

      I gave up on GM for now too. I have a F-150 until they pull their heads out of their rears. But I still think this is an awesome engine overall. It’s no 6.2 but it’s not priced or marketed like the top engine. As a base engine it’s a game changer. Makes the 5.3 irrelevant too. wish they put it with the 10 speed as I’m not convinced the 8 is fixed.

      Reply
  8. My first thought is “ugh a 4 cyl.” After looking at these numbers, that’s really impressive. There are people that get caught up in the number of cylinders, but those of us who work with heavy equipment have seen that the number of cylinders don’t really matter anymore.

    Reply
    1. Your “heavy equipment” operates at a constant throttle setting sufficient to power and pressurize the hydraulic pump(s) that operate almost all the systems on that “heavy equipment”. Most of the “heavy equipment” (unless the buyer is a dope) is powered by an Industrial Diesel engineered from the get-go to last thousands of hours without a total re-build……not an undersized gas-fueled 4 banger. Apples and Oranges, showing you have little knowledge but are trying hard to make everyone think you are an expert….!

      Reply
      1. I’m sorry. Does my personal experience and facts bother your inexperience and opinion? That must really suck for you. Open minded people know things that disagree with your close minded opinions. Poor baby.

        Reply
        1. Just let Bill drag his knuckles talking about the good old days. Some people are afraid of progress, change and technology. They don’t like what they don’t understand and I think if this was 120 years ago he would argue how his horse and cart is better than any gasoline powered wiz-bang.

          Reply
    2. They get caught up in number of cylinders and in displacement. I imagine they complained when the 454 went away and was replaced by “only” 366 cu in (6 litre) or “only” 378 ci in, yet, these later engines do just fine.

      As for the comments about stress on this engine, it – like the Cummins – was designed from the ground up with turbocharging. It is not an aftermarket add-on, or the adaptation of an older engine.

      Reply
      1. I’d personally like to see the 454 come back with 5th gen small block tech. The 454 is a relic from pre ls erra where an engine was specialized. Your 350 Chevy could be had as a truck motor making 220 HP or in the vett with 350hp. Same block, different cams, heads and manifold. The 366 (6.0) ls was an engineering marvel when it debuted, and held its own till the L8T came out almost 20 years later.

        Reply
    3. I wanted to test drive a GMC Sierra 2.7L Turbo 4-banger back in 2020 and the GMC salesman informed me that the one they had was in the shop because it BLEW UP! That convinced me to look at the RAM 5.7L V-8 which is what I purchased.

      Reply
      1. Did he also have a bridge in New York City for sale?

        I personally know a service writer at a Chevy agency that does fleet sales. They’ve not had a single solitary one of those turbo 4s go bang.

        And, full disclosure to the Chevy fans here: I have a Ram of my own on the way from the factory; it is expected to be here the week of Feb 26. I ordered it two weeks ago. My options, my color, the heated wheel and seats will be operational when delivered, not through some promise from GM I fully suspect they will not fulfill. My Chevy agency could not get me what I wanted; GMC would not even talk to me. Ford? Who wants mileage measured in miles per recall?

        Reply
  9. I have owned my 2020 2.7 turbo four have about 50,000 miles on it. Use it for hauling my racing gear and my daily driver for my construction business. Before covid I was driving 1600 miles a week. I only use full synthetic oil and mostly fill up with regular using premium fuel once a month.
    I have had no issues. Not one problem with my truck. The truck is solid and I have no regrets especially after having my buddy who owns the LTZ V8 drive my truck and tell me in his opinion engine wise mine pulled strong.

    Reply
  10. My only complaint is the gas mileage. At EPA rated 22 Mike’s for 4WD the towing number and gas mileage of the 3.0 duramax makes so much more sense. Match the MPG of the duramax and this motor option is a winner

    Reply
    1. That’s IF the “duramax” isn’t another cluster F like earlier GM diesels before they partnered with Izusu. Hard to discover what the internals are on that 3L diesel. Darn vehicles are so terribly expensive that I’d want answers on the Duramax before plunking down my money but you couldn’t ever convince me to buy their 4 cyl. gas engine. Another area where they really screwed-up was eliminating the diesel option in next year’s Colorado/Canyon. A buddy I fish with has had one since they were first available and it’s a great engine with good MPG and enough power to tow comfortably. He’s got around 140K on it and feeds it the best Amsoil Diesel Oil available and it is running trouble-free.

      Reply
  11. The complaints here about the base motor, imagine the same guys opinion on the 200hp base 4.3 that was offered a decade ago….

    Reply
    1. We don’t need to talk about something 10 years ago we are talking about this engine right now, try to get with the program you seem slow.

      Reply
      1. So someone who follows me for a few threads that I’d ignore and finally insults me to play with him…..🙂.

        Ok do we need a 500 hp ttv6 for a base engine or something?…

        Reply
        1. You don’t remember me I’m your alter ego.

          Reply
          1. Oh yeah, thanks

            Reply
        2. GM needs to add two cylinders to it to make a proper inline six.

          Reply
    2. Isn’t it true a new V8 is in the works for 2025?

      Reply
    3. Yes. It was “only” a 6, and a V6 at that. I remember all the whining and moaning about the straight six going away.

      The 4.3s in all of their iterations have been amazing motors.

      Reply
      1. I have the 4.3L in my 2017 Silverado and I love it…its a great engine. Its a short bed reg cab and it has plenty of power for what I use it for. I was impressed with the torque curve of the 2.7L when it was released in the 2019 model and with the revised engine, I can only imagine how well it was pull down low.

        Reply
  12. I’ve been driving one for about a week, while my 6.6 gas 2500HD is in the shop for some warranty work.

    I will say it sounds like crap. Crude. Reminds me of the mid eighties Pontiac Sunbird my wife had when we got married. A four cylinder coupled with an automatic isn’t always a pleasant sound.

    However, this thing scoots! Impressive acceleration. And I’m seeing a little over 18 mpg, where my truck gets about 12. The sticker in the door jam has it rated to tow 9000 pounds. And this engine is a $2000 savings over the V8. If I were to step down to a half ton, I would seriously consider this engine.

    Reply
  13. I’m just going to say it’s this GM has went ass backwards I don’t understand the concept of putting a four cylinder in a half ton pickup truck when you got a Chevy Colorado AKA S10 that you can put the four cylinder turbo in and and just leave a V6 for the halftime pickup truck that don’t make sense later down the road it be time to get a new engine for that truck and nobody can’t afford to go out and buy a brand new truck every year so that was just ass backwards somebody in GM really needs to get their foot out of their asses and start listening to the people and quit listening to them little college kids because I’m college kids don’t know nothing about a vehicle

    Reply
  14. I drove one and will NOT own one of those overstressed motors with the problem laden transmission . Cheap piece of crap that probably will be recalled for not lasting much longer than the warranty. Makes a cheap truck that is just that.

    Reply
  15. Don’t know why a huge majority of the people that follow this website even bother, There’s has to be something better they can do with their time than lurk waiting to blast someone’s comments. Someone should hide their keyboards until they can voice their opinions with a little more respect.

    Reply
    1. People can say what they want this is America if you don’t like it go to china or just read the article and not the comments.

      Reply
      1. I blame your parents.

        Reply
  16. This engine will be a beast in the 2023 Colorado/Canyon. I’m sure a Trifecta will put a great tune on it to unlock all the power.

    Reply
  17. There are a lot of critical posts and insults on this thread. Truth is there is a myriad of needs, and for some, this engine and truck combo will work out fine. The girl running GM thought it through.

    Reply
  18. I have a 2018 Colorado 2.8 diesel. It is absolutely amazing to drive. The low end torque is so addictive.
    I tow my toy hauler between 5000-6000 pounds depending what’s inside.
    Without the trailer I get an easy 30 mpg. That is great considering fuel here in Canada is 6.75 a gallon.

    I seriously considered the 2.7 gas, but like others figured that it wouldn’t last.
    When GM upped the torque they also increased the strength of the short block. This was done to prevent flex from the torque.
    So maybe it will be reliable.

    I don’t see this engine raising the overall fleet fuel economy for GM . So not sure what the purpose was.
    The Ford Ranger with the 2.3 Turbo doesn’t get great milage ether. So I bet the 2.7 in a Colorado will not be great ether.
    GMs 4.3 was a very tough engine. I tortured many of those and had no issues.

    The idea is to use a small lighter engine and get better fuel economy. But I don’t see it in todays small gas engines with big power.

    Reply
    1. The updated block uses diesel tech, might even be compacted graphite iron along with strengthened pistons and crank. Using the same basic engine simplifies the supply chain. Towing capacity will be cooling limited much like the ecoboost systems. Most Silverado owners of the earlier 2.7 turbo liked the engine in the 2 wheel drive configuration but also commented it was a bit anemic in the 4×4 trim. I fully expect this powertrain combination to be a design and sales win for GM.

      Motortrend got 26 MPG out of a Silverado 2×4 with this motor. I suspect in the Colorado it will get 27-28 MPG and the 4×4 will get 25-26 MPG depending on height and tires.

      Reply
  19. The trick to keeping a turbocharged engine for the long haul is always using synthetic oil at oilchanges no more then 5000kms between them. Use top tier fuel and if it says premium fuel on your fuel cap use premium fuel. And your good . My experience with small turbo 4 cylinder engines I have a Chevy cruze 1.4 T with over 300,000 kms on it still runs strong following those guidelines.Its a 2012 and my daily driver runs great . I will definitely get another 4 cylinder turbo engine when she goes and that 2.7 turbo sounds sweet

    Reply
    1. Much rather a LV1. My lv3 has been great, 195k mixed avg of 20 mpg ( lows 13 towing TT highs 27 highway 70 mph U.P. trips). No repairs done (fully stock). 285hp 305 lb/ft i am happy. it’s sure ashame the 4.3 is no longer the base engine. But now turbo grab is base. It’s sad some are referring of cheap and easy fords turbos are to replace. Really don’t want to waste my time fixing or repairing

      Reply
  20. Imagine the comments section when they announce the 2032 Silverado comes only with the Twin Turbo 1.35 V2 Engine.

    Reply
  21. Who let this uninformed idiot billj598 in to the conversation with his 1970’s ideology and amsoil ponzi scheme views? Seriously, like this engine wasn’t torture tested (Seriously watch the videos on their testing) for millions of miles both in advanced computer simulations and in real world testing. This was designed (and further redesigned) from the ground up for Truck duties in this size of truck and built for boost, it will no doubt last. Have you even paid any attention to the turbos without reverting to what you heard during the 80’s? It’s oil and liquid cooled, mounted in an easily accessible and top performing spot for longevity and power. Please go back to your flat earth far left vegan reddit forums and leave those that have some knowledge and working experience to discuss with other adults. Thank you from myself and everyone else that last brain cells reading what you wrote.

    Reply
  22. I have buddy that bought a 2019 Silverado down here in Houston Texas with 2.7L Turbo. He has a lawn care service so he carries equipment in the bed and his lawn mowers on a trailer. He currently has about 89,000 miles on it and its been solid. Houston heat is brutal and relentless even as late as December yet no major engine issues. The interior is starting to show signs of wear but nothing too significant. I briefly drove it a few weeks back on the way to Dallas to pick up a 1967 Chevelle project car. I honestly can say that it never felt strained or under powered. I never really had to dig into the throttle to get a response, which is a huge difference from the experience I had with the 5.3l V8 in a 2016 Silverado. I must admit I hate the sound of all 4Cyclinder engines but at least it is quiet and relatively smooth in this application. The gas mileage was kind of iffy though. Don’t expect Honda Civic mpgs but I certainly say it was not bad for a full size truck. I feel like this engine will be a huge upgrade if it is added to the next generation Canyon and Colorado. Everyone is whining about future reliability however the 6.2 and 5.3 has had their fair share of issues (i.e. lifter failure, oil pressure issues, oil consumption, cracked cylinder heads etc.) so they are not as bullet proof as they seem. For the most part I think this engine will be just fine for the majority of people that purchases the truck.

    Reply
  23. You know what I remember growing up as a kid and I used to talk to a lot of old school mechanics and the one thing they always say you don’t never put a small engine in a big body vehicle because later down the road parts is going to be it’s going to be hard to replace and you going to be spending more money fixing it up GM has went ass backwards in the past years with their vehicles and everything else this is it don’t make no sense when you got a Chevy Colorado or a GMC canyon that’s a midsize truck that you can put a force on their turbo in and leave the V6 in the halftime pickup truck and everybody all that’s a no it’s not it’s a piece of junk you going to spending more money for another pickup truck so I don’t know where you’re getting this off about I’m getting good for you consumption the problem is it’s it’s wrong GM knows it and they just want you to spend more money on another vehicle that’s what this is about they’re not listening to the consumers if they really was listening to consumers we wouldn’t have no problems with the Camaros like we do now the problem was with the Camaros is that they did exactly what I thought they was going to do they put a smaller frame instead of keeping the original friend that was on the SS on the SS car kept that frames where they would have been able to outsell the Dodge hellcats but I have had enough of GM’s little logics and it’s three cylinder Mass to wear to the point where I’m thinking about going back to Toyota or or a four just to show that this is this is on like they don’t want to listen to nobody and I’m sick of it

    Reply
    1. Those old-school mechanics were also the ones who “tuned ’em by ear, I don’t need no dayym timing light or shop manual”. I grew up in that era as well.

      Over my 57+ years of vehicle ownership, I learned several important lessons.

      1) Use the grade, and quality, of oil The General, Uncle Henry, or Uncle Walter said to use. Same for whatever Gotlieb calls for, or any other company.

      2) If you are doing your own oil changes, get the filters either at the parts counter of your make of vehicle, or if you KNOW a brand is good, buy it.

      2a) eBay is not the place to search for bargains on “genuine” parts.

      3) Keep STP, Amsoil, and other “miracle” products out of your engine unless there is a specific call for it to cure a problem. Example: I had a 1974 Opel with an engine that tended to pump the lifters up solid and it made a gawdawful noise. At the suggestion of a Buick service writer, I used GM’s own oil treatment ONCE and the problem didn’t recur. He said to add it once every 30,000 miles; it would be more than enough. My circumstances changed and I sold the car before that was needed again.

      I have never lost an engine, but lost two transmissions due to previous owners neglecting maintenance. Until I retired, I drove quite a bit, and owned makes from several countries. Read and follow the manual, and you’ll do fine.

      Reply
  24. The updated block uses diesel tech, might even be compacted graphite iron along with strengthened pistons and crank. Using the same basic engine simplifies the supply chain. Towing capacity will be cooling limited much like the ecoboost systems. Most Silverado owners of the earlier 2.7 turbo liked the engine in the 2 wheel drive configuration but also commented it was a bit anemic in the 4×4 trim. I fully expect this powertrain combination to be a design and sales win for GM.

    Reply
  25. Maybe some one can help the poor weak 2.0 T. Was a great powerful and fun engine at on time. Then years of IMPROVEMENT has left it weak and listless .

    Reply
  26. This kind of power out of a 4 cylinder is nothing new. I got guys with Mitsubishi evolution getting 500HP all day long and pounding on them now 15 years. Most now have over 200k on them with no engine issues. Turbos beat up the piston ring pack, but if you have a robust enough crank and rod set up its going to last. As with any engine designs, its cost of building it to how long its going to last. I do durability test on engines to see if a part that saves us a dime building it is going to effect durability of an engine. 345,000 dimes is a lot of money.

    Reply

Leave a comment

Cancel