GM will drop the 2.8L I-4 LWN Duramax turbodiesel engine from the Chevy Colorado lineup at the conclusion of the 2022 model year, with the next-generation version of the mid-size pickup set to offer only one engine choice: the turbocharged 2.7L I-4 L3B gasoline engine.
GM Authority has now learned when GM will build the last diesel-powered 2022 Chevy Colorado at its Wentzville Assembly plant in Missouri. According to our sources, the last scheduled week of production for the diesel version of the pickup will begin on July 4th. Once the week is over, GM will cease production of the LWN-powered Chevy Colorado models, however gasoline versions of the truck will remain in production for a brief period before the automaker shifts to 2023 Colorado production, as GM Authority reported previously.
The next-generation 2023 Chevy Colorado will have only one engine option: the turbocharged 2.7L I4 L3B. In the Chevy Silverado 1500, this engine is rated at 310 horsepower and an uprated 430 pound-feet of torque and pairs to a GM 10-speed automatic transmission. This is a sizable upgrade over the LWN diesel engine, which is rated at 181 horsepower and 369 pound-feet of torque and connects to a somewhat outdated six-speed automatic transmission. These same powertrain changes will also apply to the next-generation 2023 GMC Canyon, which will continue to be produced alongside the Colorado in Wentzville.
2023 Chevrolet Colorado prototype
The next-generation Chevy Colorado will ride on a heavily revised version of the current model’s 31XX platform and will also adopt the GM Global B electrical architecture, enabling over-the-air updates and other current tech features. The 2023 Colorado, along with the new 2023 GMC Canyon, is expected to make its debut sometime in the first six months of this year – meaning these two trucks’ official debut is imminent.
We’ll have all the official details on the 2023 Chevy Colorado once they become available. For now, be sure to subscribe to GM Authority for more Chevy Colorado news, Chevy news, General Motors production news and around-the-clock GM news coverage.
Comments
What more powerful and torquey, but no more 30+mpg… I guess cost per mile including purchase price should be cheaper on the 2.7
Yes not everyone wants the added expense of a turbocharger and related costs that come with it when they fail. And I’ve heard more stories then not of failures. Could of at least left the 6 cylinder. Gas. I hope I get mine built before they stop production of the good engines. Waiting 5½mo. So far. Ps. I was previously a GM Tech.
Bad move GM. Very disappointed.
Why no pictures or details all this time? As a GM retiree I shouldn’t be surprised.
Hopefully, by 2023 GM will have found a way to get 25MPG out of the 4 cylinder engine.
Likely not EPA rated. But if they have 3.08 axles and you can cruise at 60mph in 10th you’ll be able to get 25avg
That rear axle ratio make a huge difference. Had a 94 4 cyl S-10 with a 3:70 rear axle and a 2000 4cyl S10 with a 4:10 rear axle. Both had the manual tranny, but the 94 with 3:70 got 50% better mileage–Amazing difference!
My 2019 4cyl. Colorado, 6 spd. auto, does not need the 4:10 rear axle as standard. If only 1 rear axle ratio is to be offered in a Colorado, it should not be greater than 3:90. using the existing 6 speed auto tranny. Letting the transmission do the work will improve performance and mileage.
It will certainly help, but the difference isn’t AS huge as it would’ve been in your old trucks because of the 10 speed trans having 3 over drive gears. 7th is 1:1 and 8-9-10 are all overdrive
I thought the 10 speed tranny was in the Silverado? Unless recently announced, I’m thinking the Colorado is still using the same 6 speed my 2019 has.
2.7 will apparently get the 10 speed in the 2023 Colorado-Canyon. It’s paired to the 8 in the Silverado
Big mistake in my opinion. Losing the choice of both the Diesel or the 3.6 V6 for the turbo four?
3.6 is an anemic truck engine
Unless you rev it’s nuts off then it pulls nicely.
A truck engine for me anyway should have lots of torque down low.
I am not interested in a V6 where the HP and Torque are high in the RPM range
That 2.7 has high torque at low rpm and it sure sounds like it would make a great truck engine.
Time will tell.
I don’t like the cam shaft that moves back and forth depending on rpm that changes valve lift ect… and the fact that it has cylinder deactivation. What the hell will cylinder deactivation do on a 4 banger. Just dumb…..
I’m guessing GM is dropping the diesel option, because of low sales figures on that particular option. Why else would they?
GM sold the subsidiary that developed it, and the plant in Thailand it was made in. Funny thing is GM once owned the company that developed the Ram/Jeep 3.0 ecodiesel too.
I have been patiently waiting for the redesign and the availability of the diesel with some updated options. This is a giant disappointment. More torque, maybe, but not the durability, longevity, or economy of the Duramax. Whether I like it or not, guess I will be forced into an F-150 or a Ram 1500. Next will be the all electric Canyon/Colorado with advertised range of 300 miles and real world numbers closer to 200. And wait in line times of 2 hours if you’re charging on the road. GM, where is your head stuck these days??
Is this truck ONLY going to be made in a crew cab ????? No long bed ??
To do a diesel in a mid size is not cheap, or easy and not very profitable with the regulations they face.
If it were cheap, easy and profits able Ford and Toyota would be offering them now.
The truth is mid size trucks are not high profit or super high volume like the full size. There is still money to be made at full size volumes but not at mid size.
Going to one engine is going to make it easier and cheaper to build. I would take issue with it but expect the Turbo 4 will be a step up over the gas V6 just in Torque alone.
It would be nice if GM had kept the options but todays market is not about volume but more about return on investment.
GM went broke trying to offer all to everyone and at high volumes.
If anything GM should be given credit selling a diesel even when the others would not even try.
“To do a diesel in a mid size is not cheap, or easy and not very profitable with the regulations they face.
If it were cheap, easy and profits able Ford and Toyota would be offering them now.”
What regulations they face? What truck engine is “cheap” to make? Those just sound like guesses. The U.S. 2.8L Duramax wasn’t a completely new engine. It was an upgrade of a diesel engine that had good reliability. And all gas/diesel engines should have regulations for pollution. I’ve no problem with my 2017 2.8L Duramax having an emission system. You forget that there are other possibilities for the discontinued production of the diesel engine production such as high diesel fuel costs, Volkswagen’s shady diesel engine antics unfortunately gave diesel engines a bad reputation, current promotion of electric trucks, etc.
What is meant by this statement “The 2023 Colorado, along with the new 2023 GMC Canyon, is expected to make its debut sometime in the first six months of this year – meaning these two trucks’ official debut is imminent.” I read this as the first six months of 2022. 2022 is this year. I would think they would be taking orders by now?
They won’t take orders until the refresh debuts. The debut will happen in the first six months of 2022. Were at month #4. So an “imminent” debut timeline would be within the next 8 weeks. Once it debuts, orders will open shortly after. If you were to try and order today you wouldn’t even know what you’re ordering.
That may be an article editor oops. Likely meant “last” six months.
The right way to get volume and money for midsize trucks is to have GMC h3 and Ht3 out out of these.
Ford is doing good with bronco and FCA with Jeep. There is still a good market for midsize BOF offroad/lifestyle offering
Big Mistake, That lwn engine is awesome. I love my duramax zr2. My favorite gm vehicle ive ever owned. Outstanding mileage, quiet, comfortable, and very capable. I get 18 mpg towing a 4000lb boat at highway speeds. LOVE this truck!!!!!!! Last week I ave 24mpg
Me too
First GM vehicle that I think is absolutely awesome.
Can’t imagine driving a gas truck at these fuel prices.
The little diesel would have been a great seller if GM would have spent a dollar on advertising. As usual GM has screwed up. These little diesels would be a hot seller at these fuel prices. Especially if people knew how capable and efficient they are.
I still run into people that didn’t know GM made a diesel mid sized truck ….
And when you tell them the actual MPG it gets they are blown away…….
Oh well
Can’t wait to see the MPG the 2o23 2.7 gets. The HP and Torque looks great.
Marketing has long been GM’s weak point.
I have a diesel Colorado and even with diesel costing more than gasoline I can save 10 cents a mile. The 3.5 gas full size truck doesn’t get as good of mileage. The Colorado diesel pulls as good and rides better than the full size. If you want something that gets good gas mileage and not a truck get a VW but if you want a truck and save on fuel then get a Colorado or canyon diesel.
Ford’s outgoing edition of the Ranger pickup has won few, if any, comparison tests, mostly because of a design that was already dated at its U.S. launch. But automotive journalists are generally in agreement regarding the Ranger’s only available engine, i.e , the excellent 2.3L EcoBoost 4-cylinder. Clearly, GM planners were paying attention, replacing the 3.6 engine with a beefy “4” that boasts proper truck-like characteristics. For many longtime Canyon/Colorado fans, myself included,
the new, “torque-ier” standard powerplant resolves a problem GM should have addressed years ago.
What is the life of a turbocharger? I am hoping it will last more than a hundred thousand miles. Also wonder at what RPM the boost becomes meaningful.
That is going to make my 2022 diesel canyon, which i love! hold its value!
Hope it does for all of us diesel owners…..