These days, you don’t need gobs of displacement to make decent power, with things like forced induction and clever tuning making up for the lack of liters. Now, we’re checking out the most power-dense engines that GM currently builds with the following GM Authority tech breakdown.
First off, it bears defining exactly what we mean by the term “power-dense.” Basically, power density refers to peak engine output as it relates to displacement. So, for this particular piece, we’re looking at the GM engine lineup in terms peak horsepower per liter.
At the top of the list, we have GM’s turbocharged 2.0L I4 LTG gasoline engine, which produces a whopping 137.6 horsepower per liter. That equates to a maximum of 275 horsepower at 5,600 rpm and 295 pound-feet of torque at 3,000 rpm.
Currently offered under the hood of the Chevy Camaro, the LTG was previously available for the Chevy Malibu (now built out for the 2022 model year) as well as the now-discontinued Cadillac ATS. That said, we should also mention that the LTG is offered in two different states of tune between the Camaro and the Malibu, with the LTG in the Malibu rated at 250 horsepower at 5,400 rpm and 260 pound-feet of torque at 2,000 rpm, making for a power density of 125.1 horsepower per liter. In this particular state of tune, the LTG equipped by the Malibu is the third most power-dense GM engine in our list.
Unfortunately, although the LTG offers impressive power density, its days appear to be numbered, given the uncertain future for the Chevy Camaro, plus the uncertainty of whether or not the engine will once again be available to order for the 2023 Chevy Malibu.
In second place in our list, we have the twin-turbocharged 3.6L V6 LF4, currently equipped by the Cadillac CT4-V Blackwing and rated at 472 horsepower at 5,750 rpm and 445 pound-feet of torque 3,500 rpm, making for 132.4 horsepower per liter. To note, the LF4 was previously available for the now-discontinued Cadillac ATS-V, where it made 464 horsepower and 445 pound-feet of torque.
Finally, we have to mention the fourth-place 5.5L V8 LT6, the highest-ranked naturally aspirated engine on our list. Equipped by the C8 Chevy Corvette Z06, the high-revving LT6 is rated at 670 horsepower at 8,400 rpm and 460 pound-feet of torque at 6,300 rpm, making for 122.6 horsepower per liter.
Check out the full list of the most power-dense GM engines below:
| Engine | Displacement, CC | HP @ RPM | LB-FT @ RPM | HP/L | Applications |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Turbocharged 2.0L I4 LTG | 1,998 | 275 @ 5,600 | 295 @ 3,000 to 4,500 | 137.6 | Chevy Camaro |
| Twin-Turbocharged 3.6L V6 LF4 | 3,564 | 472 @ 5,750 | 445 @ 3,500 to 5,000 | 132.4 | Cadillac CT4-V Blackwing |
| Turbocharged 2.0L I4 LTG | 1,998 | 250 @ 5,300 | 260 @ 2,000 to 5,000 | 125.1 | Chevy Malibu |
| 5.5L V8 LT6 | 5,463 | 670 @ 8,400 | 460 @ 6,300 | 122.6 | Chevy Corvette Z06 |
| Twin-Turbocharged 3.0L V6 LGY | 2,990 | 360 @ 5,400 | 405 @ 2,350 to 4,000 | 120.4 | Cadillac CT5-V |
| Turbocharged 2.7L I4 L3B | 2,727 | 325 @ 5,500 | 380 @ 2,000 to 4,000 | 119.2 | Cadillac CT4-V |
| Turbocharged 2.0L I4 LSY | 1,998 | 237 @ 5,000 | 258 @ 1,500 to 4,000 | 118.6 | Cadillac CT4, Cadillac CT5 |
| Turbocharged 2.0L I4 LSY | 1,998 | 235 @ 5,000 | 258 @ 1,500 to 4,000 | 117.6 | Cadillac XT4, Cadillac XT5, Cadillac XT6 |
| Turbocharged 1.3L I3 L3T | 1,338 | 155 @ 5,600 | 174 @ 1,600 | 115.8 | Buick Encore GX, Chevy Trailblazer |
| Turbocharged 1.2L I3 LIH | 1,193 | 137 @ 5,000 | 162 @ 2,500 | 114.8 | Buick Encore GX, Chevy Trailblazer |
| Turbocharged 2.0L I4 LSY | 1,998 | 228 @ 5,000 | 258 @ 1,500 to 4,000 | 114.1 | Buick Envision, Chevy Blazer, GMC Acadia |
| Turbocharged 1.5L I4 LYX | 1,490 | 170 @ 5,600 | 203 @ 2,000 to 4,000 | 114.1 | Chevy Equinox, GMC Terrain |
| Turbocharged 2.7L I4 L3B | 2,727 | 310 @ 5,600 | 430 @ 3,000 | 113.7 | Chevy Silverado 1500, GMC Sierra 1500 |
| Turbocharged 2.7L I4 L3B | 2,727 | 310 @ 5,500 | 350 @ 1,500 to 4,000 | 113.7 | Cadillac CT4 |
| Twin-Turbocharged 3.0L V6 LGY | 2,990 | 335 @ 5,400 | 405 @ 2,350 to 4,000 | 112.0 | Cadillac CT5 |
| Turbocharged 1.4L I4 LE2 | 1,399 | 155 @ 5,600 | 177 @ 2,000 to 4,000 | 110.8 | Buick Encore, Chevy Trax |
| Supercharged 6.2L V8 LT4 | 6,162 | 682 @ 6,000 | 653 @ 4,400 | 110.7 | Cadillac Escalade-V |
| Turbocharged 1.5L I4 LFV | 1,490 | 163 @ 5,700 | 184 @ 2,500 to 3,000 | 109.4 | Chevy Malibu |
| Supercharged 6.2L V8 LT4 | 6,162 | 668 @ 6,500 | 659 @ 3,600 | 108.4 | Cadillac CT5-V Blackwing |
| Supercharged 6.2L V8 LT4 | 6,162 | 650 @ 6,400 | 650 @ 3,600 | 105.5 | Chevy Camaro ZL1 |
| Turbo-diesel 3.0L I6 LM2 | 2,993 | 277 @ 3,750 | 460 @ 1,500 | 92.5 | Cadillac Escalade, Chevy Silverado 1500, Chevy Suburban, Chevy Tahoe, GMC Sierra 1500, GMC Yukon, GMC Yukon XL |
| 3.6L V6 LGX | 3,641 | 335 @ 6,800 | 284 @ 5,300 | 92.0 | Chevy Camaro |
| 3.6L V6 LGX | 3,649 | 310 @ 6,800 | 266 @ 2,800 | 85.0 | Buick Enclave, Cadillac XT5, Cadillac XT6, Chevy Traverse |
| 3.6L V6 LGX | 3,649 | 310 @ 6,600 | 271 @ 5,000 | 85.0 | Cadillac XT5, Cadillac XT6, GMC Acadia |
| 3.6L V6 LGX | 3,649 | 308 @ 6,700 | 270 @ 5,000 | 84.4 | Chevy Blazer |
| 3.6L V6 LGX | 3,649 | 308 @ 6,800 | 275 @ 4,000 | 84.4 | Chevy Colorado, GMC Canyon |
| 2.5L I4 LCV | 2,457 | 200 @ 6,300 | 191 @ 4,400 | 81.4 | Chevy Colorado, GMC Canyon |
| 6.2L V8 LT2 w/Performance Exhaust | 6,162 | 495 @ 6,450 | 470 @ 5,150 | 80.3 | Chevy Corvette Stingray |
| 6.2L V8 LT2 | 6,162 | 490 @ 6,450 | 465 @ 5,150 | 76.3 | Chevy Corvette Stingray |
| 6.2L V8 LT1 | 6,162 | 455 @ 6,000 | 455 @ 4,400 | 73.8 | Chevy Camaro |
| 1.4L I4 LV7 | 1,399 | 98 @ 6,200 | 94 @ 4,400 | 70.1 | Chevy Spark |
| 6.2L V8 L87 | 6,162 | 420 @ 5,600 | 460 @ 4,100 | 68.2 | Cadillac Escalade, Chevy Silverado 1500, Chevy Suburban, Chevy Tahoe, GMC Sierra 1500, GMC Yukon, GMC Yukon XL |
| Turbo-diesel 6.6L V8 L5P | 6,599 | 445 @ 2,800 | 910 @ 1,600 | 67.4 | Chevy Silverado HD, Chevy Silverado MD, GMC Sierra HD |
| 5.3L V8 L84 | 5,327 | 355 @ 5,600 | 383 @ 4,100 | 66.6 | Chevy Silverado 1500, Chevy Suburban, Chevy Tahoe, GMC Sierra 1500, GMC Yukon, GMC Yukon XL |
| Turbo-diesel 2.8L I4 LWN | 2,776 | 181 @ 3,400 | 369 @ 2,000 | 65.2 | Chevy Colorado, Chevy Express, GMC Canyon, GMC Savana |
| 4.3L V8 LV1 | 4,300 | 276 @ 5,200 | 298 @ 3,900 | 64.2 | Chevy Express, GMC Savana |
| 6.6L V8 L8T | 6,564 | 401 @ 5,200 | 464 @ 4,000 | 61.1 | Chevy Express, Chevy Silverado HD, GMC Sierra HD, GMC Savana |
Subscribe to GM Authority for more GM technology news and around-the-clock GM news coverage.
Comments
Electric motors are more power dense than any gasoline or Diesel engines. A 400 HP electric motor can be held in one’s arms and fit in the space of a differential on the axle. They also deliver much more torque at low RPM and can run from zero to over 10,000 RPM with no gear shifting. So, all the big gas engines will be as obsolete as the steam engine in a few more years.
And that’s why the Tesla and Hummer/Silverado EV are far heavier than their gas counterparts? That’s why they had to lift the chassis of the Spark to the Bolt to fit the batteries?
If you’re going to compare EV vs gas, you have to compare the entire powertrain, including gas tank/batteries.
Sam – Yeah !
People go GAGA over electric motors but don’t realize the “Prime Mover” function is performed by the gas engine, but in EVs it has to be performed elsewhere….
Gasoline and Diesel vehicles certainly have their place, and are, (in general), very good, and clean at what they do. Modern Society cannot exist without Diesel Engines – which is why their use recently hit an all time record; now even being used for some central stations.
And I only own 3 evs.
Electric cars can be intelligently used, but that implies a maximum of overnight charging at home or during hotel stays, and a MINIMUM of fast charging – which exacerbates any electricity shortage.
Great ICE engines from GM whose peak performance is always 100%. Good this way!
With the electric motors, the peak performance is only available for a short time, because the battery then has to recover.
As far as what is better!
No matter what power plant there is, steam, coal, gas or electric, it takes the same amount of energy to go from point A to B. The big difference is converting the energy source to mechanical energy and electric motors can be 99% efficient as long as the heat generated in the motor is regulated. Stomping on the accelerator pedal in an EV for full power will create a lot of heat in the motor and from battery discharge, therefore, efficiency drops.
What we’re seeing with EV advertising is the same as it was 50 years ago, selling horse power.
I agree.
No they’re not selling horse power. They are no more than a late 19 century Flim Flam Man selling snake oil. We live in a swamp in Louisiana. There many, many places in this state that an EV would not survive one wet winter. They are simply not practical in the real world of the enormous environmental diversity of this country.
LETS GET REAL!
The Hummer EV uses more converted coal-electricity than the Malibu in gas does. A reasonable hp and long battery will win the day. Can not wait for the solid state batteries.. GM is planning for them with changeable cells in most of the new power packs.
Give it some time, and with modifications down the line electric will rule!!!
I’m really not impressed by any of the turbocharged gas engines on this list…and this is largely because Honda made 120/liter back in 1999 (used in the S2000), which is generally known as a reliable motor. Hard to get excited by the 2.0 T putting out 275…when MB has a 2.0 T putting out over 400hp. I can’t speak to the reliability of either of these, but that’s not a factor is a pure power-density conversation.
The 5.5. Z06 motor is a clear #1 in my mind here…but with a big asterisk that it’s not actually in the market yet, so isn’t a production engine yet.
The next NA motor on the list is the 3.6…92 hp/liter is quite respectable, but again, not anything that I would get super-excited about.
This all said, I do like the 6.2 SC engine from the CT5V BW best of the current production engines…or any of the Vette engines really…perhaps not power dense vs displacement/liters, but certainly power dense vs size/packaging…lot of power out of something that can fit just about everywhere.
Most of these GM power plants can be had for 2-3k except the high HP units. The Benz 2.0T probably set you back 20-30k
Yeah, I’m sure the MB engine is a high dollar unit…so fair point…I was simply pointing out (in response to an article about GM’s power density) that the top engine on the list (the 2.0 T, while possibly a perfectly fine engine for what it’s used for) is not really something to write about.
Taking lower cubic inch engines and gleaning all the horsepower you can out of them is no more than Formula One has been doing for years. High reviving and fast. They also don’t last very long.
Someone forgot the LNF 2.0 Turbo in the Cobalt SS.
Power Level:
Stock – 240whp/245wtq (Approx 7% drivetrain loss)
Stage 1 – 290whp/340wtq (Approx 315hp/370tq at the crank)
I’ll keep driving my 2003 lesabre. All paid off many years ago. I could put a new engine transmission and keep driving it and laugh at the people spending all that money on electric cars just to go to point a and b.
The I.C.E. ranks rite next to the invention of the wheel!
I have not been to a magjc carpet show or an electric drag race! Neither if wich will attract a crowd bigger then a tupperware sale at your sister n laws house