If you’re into GM vehicles, and we suspect you are, then you’re probably somewhat familiar with the various GM engine RPO codes, or at least the big ones. You know, like LT1, the naturally aspirated 6.2L V8 equipped by performance models like the Chevy Camaro SS and C7-generation Corvette Stingray, or LT4, the supercharged 6.2L V8 equipped by models like the Cadillac CT5-V Blackwing and Cadillac Escalade-V. However, for the average consumer, these engine RPO codes could be somewhat obscure. Luckily, GM’s new TurboMax branding finally gives The General the recognizability it needs.
With regard to the competition, Stellantis offers the Hemi, while Ford has EcoBoost, both of which hold weight in the minds of consumers. Meanwhile, GM does offer the Ecotec engine branding, but it’s a bit too generic to mean much to consumers.
Compared to Ecotec, the GM TurboMax name conveys muscle and maximum output, which is what you want from an engine brand. For the moment, the new TurboMax name is applied to the high-output variant of the turbocharged 2.7L I4 L3B gasoline engine equipped by the 2024 Chevy Silverado 1500 and 2024 GMC Sierra 1500, but could also be part of an entire engine “family.”
The GM TurboMax name also draws similarities to the Duramax name, which is already well-recognized as a strong diesel engine brand for GM. A few noteworthy Duramax engines include the 3.0L I6 LM2 and 3.0L I6 LZ0, the 2.8L I4 LWN, the 2.8L I4 XLD28 offered in South America, and the 6.6L V8 L5P, all of which could be considered part of the same engine “family.”
So far, the TurboMax name has only been announced as branding for the L3B in the 2024 Chevy Silverado 1500 and 2024 GMC Sierra 1500, but could very well find its way to the 2024 Chevy Colorado and 2024 GMC Canyon as well. At the moment, it’s unclear if the branding will apply to both the Turbo Plus and the Turbo High-Output variants of the L3B engine in the midsize pickups.
Either way, we’ll be there every step of the way to obsess over everything GM, so stay tuned. In the meantime, remember to subscribe to GM Authority for more GM business news, GM technology news, and around-the-clock GM news coverage.
Comments
Ok cool TurboMax, great. How about stop being cheap assed and put distinctive brand specific engine covers on them?
Should also add an * to the engine name:
Warning this Turbo 4 cylinder engine will get worse fuel economy than a naturally aspirated V8 and won’t have the reliability or longevity of a V8
We’ve got them coming in at work with over 100k miles on them. Never been opened up for anything, not even a turbo replacement. Meanwhile in V8 land, we’ve had low mile 5.3s and 6.2s opened up for lifters left and right, and our sister store had 2 low mile 6.2s have total bottom end failure with under 10k mi on them. Was 6 months to get engines for them as well. One customer traded out of theirs for a 2023.
As for fuel economy, “your results may vary”. I’ve got 15,600mi on my 2022 2.7 HO. I’ve consistently averaged 18-19mpg per tank in the winter, 20-22mpg per tank summer, can get low to mid 20s on long drives. My 2018 5.3 I replaced however would get 14mpg in the winter per tank, 17-18mpg in the summer per tank. So in my use case, a strong improvement over a 5.3.
If this is the case then heads should roll at GM where these engines are designed. There is no excuse for a failing lifter, a component which has been around for a long long time. Heads should roll and customers should be refunded their money as well as compensated for time lost waiting for repairs. I’d bet this crap would stop then.
Especially when it lives it’s life under 2000 rpm’s.
This is another subject and I’m sorry for changing it. I’m assuming that you are a GM Tech? I have a 21 2500 6.2 engine that will not crank no start intermittently the instrument panel states low battery charge and no accessories work door locks Etc. The vehicle has been doing this since new. The GM dealer acknowledges there are problems with this and don’t know the fix. They tell me to get the vehicle started just disconnect the battery for 20 seconds reconnect and the vehicle restarts. Do you know a fix for this.
I had this issue on my 22 1500 5.3 and the dealer had to reprogram one of the control modules with new software from GM. No problems in the four months since then.
And we don’t even want to talk about when that turbo goes out how much that’s going to run people to get fixed or replaced they want to stick you in these four cylinder turbos for all the money they can make on the back end of it first place you got to be an idiot to go buy anything this newer than a 2013
These engines were not just cooked up in the middle of the night by idiots, GM engineers purposely built and tested this engine to preform under real world conditions. I can’t imagine GM letting a subpar engine into their best selling trucks without some kind of expectation of it being profitable for them and the customer. Shareholders would probably abandon GM in a heartbeat if they started selling the type junk engine you just described.
No, this engine is going to be a big deal for GM. Ford did a similar thing with their 2.7 and 3.5 turbo engines, and they are doing just fine. Do your maintenance and they will be fine.
It is nice to see that GM has FINALLY done their homework on an engine – 4 cyl 2700 cc engine with 100,000 miles on it that has little wear on it is JUST what prospective customers want to hear..
I suspect some customers have been waiting to see if this really is a reliable engine, given the problems with that 5 cyl Colorado engine that even dealers could not get re-started…
Does this engine require 3,000 mile oil changes due to the turbo?
I could not imagine GM producing and letting trucks into the market that rusted through in 2 years iether. But from 73-80 thats exactly what they did! Millions of them..With no compensation to the consumers that payed thier hard earned money for them. They lost alot of loyal customers over that one.
Let’s also not forget about the tabokle diesel engines of the late 70’s. Or the notoris Oldsmbile Quad 4 that constantly blew head gaskets in the late 80’s and early 90’s. Believe me GM’s R&D has alot to be desired..
Wait, that sounds like a description of the Toyota T100s, that were worse than rust buckets. The bodies didn’t rust but holes could be poked in the frames. The engines were durable until the frames broke in half. Or remember poorly designed floor mats, or carpeting or accel pedals that required the recall of 10 million Toyota vehicles for unintended acceleration. Or the Toyota and Lexus engines produced between 1997 and 2002 that were prone to sludging. Or the fuel & coolant dilution in recent Honda 1.5L Turbos. Tell me it wasn’t so…
It has 15 more HP and 30 less ft lbs. The GM 2.7 has Iron liners, plenty strong and diesel like to be overly robust and extremely hard to kill. And where as the ecoboost 2.7 is notorious for not meeting its mpg numbers (both in testing and real world) the GM matches and many times exceeds its numbers. Care to argue anything else?
In real life (forums, fuelly, magazine tests, etc) this gets better mpg which is exactly what it is rated. Though I am sure you will pull the one or two articles that stated otherwise.
This engine has been noted by the design and test engineers to be one of the most durable and hardest to kill in torture testing. Combine that with the pretty much zero complaints with issues with this engine (it has been out since late 2018 for 2019 model year and most fleets have them, they are well north of 100k and even 200k with no issues. Nice try to troll without doing any research. You bring up historical engines like that is any apples to apples comparison and the reason you have zero credibility with your post. But please, tell us how awesome a V8 is for your image…
Two things about it GM has never been able to build a diesel that was worth the crap and they’ve never built a 4 cylinder it was worth the crap
I sure hope you’re wrong about the diesels. I bought one 4 months ago, and get close to 26 MPG. Hauling a 6000 pound trailer, 14+ MPG, and I have the Max Tow package. I expect to put a ton of miles on the 3.0 LZ0 before kicking it to the curb. So far it’s been the best Chevy truck ever- my 8th Chevy truck so far.
I a had a 2500 hd 6.2l and the lower mains burned up and destroyed the engine took 3 months to get a new block the engine had under 50000 miles well maintained everytime I changed the oil there would be more metal shavings I brought it to the dealership wasn’t happy with there ridiculous price to replace the engine 100 miles over warranty so being a mechanic I plucked the engine out and have all flaw with there specs were corrected now has over 200000 miles still a work horse and over sized trans cooler has keeped my trans ln great working order
getting 19,5 / 23 mpg on 87 octane, and 19.0 / 21.4 mpg on 87 octane w/ 10% ethanol. This is in a ’24 sierra 1500.
Never had a FULL SIZE truck get that mpg for me.
I think you are greatly misinformed or a troll. Come back and make some real comments after you have actually OWNED a few F150’s, 3 Tundras, a couple of Chevys (V8s & V6s) and even an old 318cu.in. Ram.
I am of the opinion you do not even have a truck you have paid for out of your own pocket.
GM V8’s are its legacy in my opinion. GM to design their next V8 engine to not suffer the lifter issues that the currrent 5.3 and 6.2 have. My 6.6 gas V8 in my GMC HD is a great engine as it does not have afm, as was the 6.0 Vortec before it.
A friend of mine has a Ford turbo in his F150. I believe he told me it’s a 6 cylinder. Not sure. But his experience towing a 20 foot rv has made to decide to go back to a diesel engine. So far that’s the only experience I have seen personally. Hoping for more out of the gm engine
I think GM has done catastrophic damage to thier reputation, this or any other power train will have to be 3 – times better than ANYONE else, before they earn trust. Customers don’t “hand out trust’ it’s accomplished one day at a time over many, many years.
Care to elaborate on this “catastrophic trust”? Just saying it means nothing. A a small less than 1% failure rate of the lifters (that includes the bad batch for many of them) is nothing worth a recall. Many other manufacturers have had more or worse issues to need a recall or borderline one.
Thast’s as silly as it gets. Had GM stepped up to the plate and handled your less than 1% there wouldn’t be any class action lawsuit.
Gm will will continue to be the leader
What about the Vortec engines they had in the 90s, those were some mean babies there!
I would take a 96-99 Vortec any day of the week. I don’t care for all of this cheapening of GM product at the same time they have raised the prices by 10%-20% over the last few years. When they come crying for a bailout again, I say let them eat $hit!!
GM has not been the same since the bankruptcy. Quality and dependability are nothing that they use to be. I had to quit buying them after so many engine and other problems with my personal trucks and my company trucks.
Yes I agree with you totally. What type of trucks are you using for your work trucks now?
I have four 5.3’s and two 6.2’s and after they’re gone no more Chevrolets! Way too expensive to keep running in the real work World.
The whole article, and all the comments, and no one mentions the marketing names for the SBC and BBC?
Turbo Fire for the SBC and Turbo Jet for the BBC?
Less not forget, EcoTec. I know I am saving the polar bears every time I fire it up!! Meh, they should have hung on to Vortec. It sounds better and less like a Ford EcoBoost.
Crying for a bailout? Let’s no forgot back in 80’s Ronald bailed out Ford which was and still is the biggest bailout in history! And yet furd still producing pure garbage! They should have died just like their customers driving their junk they produced. But what do I know? As for the quad 4 (Oldsmobile) engine there is nor was anything wrong with it. I had many with 200k miles and they screamed! Only real problem was water pump bearing going out and jumping time which is the owners fault for ignoring the noise and continue to drive it! Pure and simple!
GM and Ford appear lost. After years of creating new engines with various problems you would think they would learn from Honda and Toyota who constantly make improvements to the same engines they have been building for years. A good philosophy to avoid endless recalls and pissed off customers.
Biggest problem with Toyota is the cost but it’s my go to when I look for my future vehicles. Plus the new Camry is looking more sporty as well as the Hondas. I might have to get a Tundra when my Chevys finally die.
I always found it funny when ppl who drive foreign vehicles say they never break as their vehicle is being dropped at my shop! Yeah sure! And find many of copy of bills in car for work that was done. Keep telling yourself they are superior.
When are the car company’s going to realize not all the consumers want junk turbo engines? They don’t make the 5.7 or 6.0 anymore because they last too long! If you make junk, then you have to buy a new vehicle every couple years!
In my opinion, the movement to turbo charged four-cylinder engines is purely a ploy to meet the EPA mandated fleet averages. They build four-cylinder engines with turbos that get better mileage however, the testing is done with premium fuel and no ethanol. I have a Cadillac XT5 with a six cylinder, engine. The standard turbo version gets better mileage, but if you figure the added cost of premium fuel, which is required to obtain optimal performance and prevent knocking the cost per mile is the same or less. Every salesman will tell you it runs on regular, but they don’t tell you it won’t work as well. Many real world tests of turbos show when they are run on regular fuel that their mileage is degraded, their horsepower is less, and the engines may knock at altitude or in hilly terrain. In my opinion, a turbo charged engine with components that are spinning over a 10,000 RPM just are not going to have the same longevity and will be much more sensitive to improper care. There are two ways to boost performance of a four-cylinder; one is to turbo, and the other is to use Toyotas parallel hybrid system, both add complexity, but the latter system gets significantly better mileage and off the line performance without turbo lag. Only time will tell how these new four-cylinder turbo’s will fare after a decade of use. Remember that turbos can be repaired but when you have a 10 year old car, the expense of it may just send it to the junk heap.
I will stick to old school Silverado and GMC, my 2000 Silverado 5.3 has 245,000 miles and has had nothing done to it but oil changes other than a new transmission. I’m about to do the first tuneup and brake job to bring back some lost power and get some minor things fixed like A/C etc. Plus I bought it from a family friend for just $150 so no money lost. It’s got dents and dings but it’s a solid work truck.
My 2001 Sierra 1500HD Crew 6.2 has been flawless through 150k. Trans cooler and a radiator the only things under the hood that’ve been replaced. The motor has simply been dependable has the day is long.
6.2 in an 01?
TurboMax, ok, wow does that ever solve the problem! Let’s see how these things actually work. I’ve given up on modern ‘domestic’ vehicles both car and truck lines. I’ve found that buying 45 year olds and older cars and trucks on marketplaces like Hemmings. True, no warranty but I can get a great family car or useful work truck for under $20,000 that won’t require special software to diagnose and I can buy parts for at NAPA and fix myself. I think GM and Stellantis are the worst when it comes to problems that are downright embarrassing but I’m done paying $50,000 for a crappy truck or car. Screw you GM, you suck, I paid $30,000 for a new 2007 Silverado and paid another $20,000 in non warranty repairs plus maintenance in addition to maintenance in 99,200 miles. I sold it and bought a 1970 Chevy C20, best move I ever made.
GM will go bankruptcy once again and I’m a GM guy
But when they start doing messed up junk like stopping the Camero production to bring back a 700hp Chevelle and it’s starting at 80k or higher come on GM your not a overpriced company who is in dept…are you??
Oh great hope it doesn’t have pistons lifters nor cams because all GM engine with those parts blows up.
Don’t worry, they’ll mess electric cars up too…
They had a name…Vortec. Then they decided to scrap that name and go with Ecotec to make it sound like they cared about the clouds in the sky. Vortec is a name everybody associated with GM. Turbomax?? Lol
Love my 2.8 duramax in my Colorado, 35.5 mpg in last 50 miles, towes better than my gmc 1500. Very upset you can’t get that engine anymore.
Love ecotecI have two Hhr’s one has 156000 the other one 129000 no problems I have a 60 2500 no problems I will admit that olds gas engine they turned in to a diesel was a piece of crap
My ’07 2500HD with manual transmission and 6.0 had a great engine, it was the entire rest of the truck that was terrible. 5 front bearing assemblies, 1 front differential, clutch slave cylinder, brake lines from the master cylinder to the ABS module rusted, all 4 brake rotors rusted beyond use 3 times, leaking rear axle seals which soaked my emergency brake shoes, replaced the dashboard gauge assembly twice, upper control arm bushings constantly failing along with loosening hardware in the cab all the time then the rockers rusted completely along with the bottoms off both front doors, rear bumper and bed. Also of this in only 9 years and 99,000 miles… Other than that the 6.0 was a good engine in search of a good truck…
The problem withy GM vehicle is their love for cheap Chicom components. They’ll fail you every time.
Ask me how I know. Some of the components fail time after time after time.
Max,
Exactly and it was especially irritating with the dashboard gauge assemblies because though I could easily replace it I had to go back to and pay the dealer to use their Tech 2 machine to get it connected to work. I bought a new one the first time and it failed in 14 months so I bought a remanufactured one the second time. The original one lasted almost three years.
72 yrs old and retired fro GM after close to 43 yrs. I have never had any trouble with failing motors from GM.
My biggest gripe is rust. Body and frames rust out far too fast.
Next week I will be taking delivery of a 2024 Silverado with the 2.7 4 banger. I usually keep my vehicles 10 or more years so I will be thinking this will be my last vehicle purchase. I hope it is a good as they claim.
I had leased a 2015 Silverado, I liked the V8 that it had (5.3L I think), If GM would have not “pissed” me off I would have purchased it. It had less than 30K mile on it, it ran fine, and when it came time to return it they (GM) wanted an extra $700.00 for new tires… the original tire had only about 10,000 miles on them because I used snow tires for about two thirds of the time, I ran it primarily in the Winter because of the 4-wheel drive. When it came time to turn it in it was around November and I had the snow tires mounted on it and the other set was in the bed…two sets of tires back with the truck and they wanted $700.00 more.
I would have bought the truck if they would have been half way decent. So, I’m not surprised about the problems with GM.
I leased a 2019 RAM and I liked it so much that I purchased it at the end of the lease. However, It seamed that everything that broke on the RAM would cost $1000.00, so, after a few repairs/replacements I traded the RAM in for approx. $33K, it had about 40K mile on it, I liked it but the up-keep got to be too expensive so I traded it in for a 2024 Colorado. I like the turbo four cylinder so far, I wish they would have used a 10 speed transmission but I’ll live with 8 speeds (it has a “mean” down-shift when it is cold…do not know why, but the trans. temp. must reach 60 degrees plus before it gets rid of the hard down-shift).
I call my 2024 Colorado my Tonka Toy made by Mattel because everything is made from plastic. I’ve got 3,500 mile on it and like I said, I like it… I can pull up to 7,000 lbs., I do not know why the Silverado can pull an extra 2,000 lbs. but 7K is all the pulling power I need. We will see how this goes, like I said, it has only 3,500 mile on it.