GM crosstown rival Ford Motor Company was reportedly developing a new turbocharged inline six-cylinder engine for use in a variety of pickup and utility vehicle models before the new engine project was ultimately canceled. Interestingly, General Motors was also working on a turbo inline six-cylinder around roughly the same timeframe before The General also decided to can the project. Meanwhile, Stellantis introduced its new Hurricane twin-turbo inline ‘six in March of the 2022 calendar year.
Per an exclusive report from out sister publication, Ford Authority, FoMoCo was previously working on a new straight-six based on the turbo 1.5L I3 EcoBoost engine that currently powers the Ford Escape and Ford Bronco Sport. The exact displacement and output targets for the turbo ‘six are unclear, but Ford Authority reports that the new engine was slated for use in the F-150, Expedition, Lincoln Navigator, and Lincoln Aviator. For the sake of reference, that the Blue Oval brand’s twin-turbocharged 3.5L V6 EcoBoost engine produces upwards of 450 horsepower and 510 pound-feet of torque in high-output guise.
According to Ford Authority, which cites sources familiar with the matter, Ford’s new turbo inline-six engine project was ultimately canceled during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Interestingly, General Motors had similar plans at one time. In May of 2022, GM Authority exclusively reported that The General was in the planning stages for development of a new turbo six-cylinder engine as part of the automaker’s Cylinder Set Strategy (CSS). It’s believed the engine would have been similar to the current turbo 2.7L I4 L3B gasoline engine, plus two extra cylinders, with an output target around 500 horsepower and 500 pound-feet of torque. GM Authority reported in March of 2023 that the project was canceled.
Meanwhile, Stellantis launched its new twin-turbocharged 3.0L I6 engine in March of the 2022 calendar year. Dubbed the “Hurricane”, high-output variants dole out as much as 540 horsepower and 521 pound-feet of torque.
Subscribe to GM Authority for more General Motors competition news, General Motors business news, General Motors technology news, and around-the-clock General Motors news coverage.
Comments
The N/A V8’s have proven to be just as efficient as the turbo 6 cylinder engines. I’m glad GM decided to develop a new generation of V8’s… they can’t come soon enough!
Though it looks like they are taking their sweet time as those turbo sixes are barely competing with their decade old V8’s
Probably because it would last, planned obsolescence is the game
Huge mistake. Ford 6’s were some of the best engines they ever built. Their 300 CI six was probably the best engine I have owned in 49 years of driving. I never had a GM in-line 6 but I assume that they were equally as good.
In Australia we had (and loved) The Barra. Was a brilliant engine, and can be tuned very easily..
I think a turbo I6 is a terrible application for a full size truck. To make that power out of that little motor, pressures have to go through the roof. That will create excessive heat, which creates excessive wear. The bottom end will need to be the same block as a diesel. Plus,.inorder to pull any weight, the turbo is going to force you to keep those rpms unnaturally high. It is going to be a short life motor I won’t buy one
I don’t agree, the Ford 300 CI in-line 6 was a much better truck engine than the 5.0 (302). You could get it in an F-150 -F-600. It was one of the best Ford built and was produced for 31 years.
In-line engines are better than V style engines in some ways. The inlines are better balanced, cool more evenly, have less cylinder wall and ring wear and will therefore typically last longer than a V styled engine. Overall power is determined by bore, stroke, compression, valving, fueling, and gearing. The best engines have the right combinations of all of these variables for the needed application. But there’s a reason that most industrial engines are inlines. In-line 6’s fell out of favor because their length is difficult to fit in today’s crowded compact engine compartments.
The 2.7L makes way more torque than the 5.3 and pulls the same weight with less rpm because of the use of turbos. It doesn’t need rpm to get enough air to make peak torque (383 ft-lb at 4000 rpm for the V8 vs 430 at 3,000 for the 2.7L). So it needs less rpm than a V8 and tows more confidently because of it. I’m not sure why having a stronger bottom end is considered a problem and the 2.7L has proven to be quite trouble free for GM. Theoretically, a 4.0L inline 6 based on the 2.7L bore and stroke would make nearly 650 lb-ft of torque with the same tune.
You are completely wrong. All the industrial grade engines are inline 6 and the advantages are explained by Carl. As for the turbo, it is generating more torque on lower RPM and the max torque curve is flat over larger RPM range.
You couldn’t be more incorrect. The advantage of the inline six configuration is the increased torque due to the longer stroke. This makes it an excellent application for full size pickups that tow heavy loads, especially out here in mountain county. If you take two engines with the same displacement, the inline configuration can do more work with less horsepower than the v block configuration. Now, you’re not taking the inline to the race track. Speed is what kills an inline.
Hmmm. If I remember correctly, over the years Jaguar and BMW had pretty good luck racing with inline 6 powerplants.
The difference is GM is behind on their V8 and their turbo engine is not enough and no one wants it. It serves as a base engine, nothing more. I hope the better v8 is a real fire cracker because the current ones are not and they really need something special. None of this “get the top trim and spend another 2k for an engine that requires premium to compete with (but not surpass) any of Ford’s engines that only require 87.
I know the people who only buy GM won’t agree but it’s true. That and GM’s AFM is garbage. If the new engine is actually a DOHC the AFM can be like Fords, which has had no issues. Do that and 350 cu in.
Problem is Ford does too much stupid crap with their engines. They’ve been using cam phasers since about 2000 and still they install falty cam phasers in new engines and then develop “improved” phasers to replace them with, usually out of warranty.
As an independent mechanic I work on many makes and models. When it comes to anything built in the last ten years, amongst the big three anyway, none of them offer quality. The list of technical service bulletins on a vehicle one year old is longer than the old vehicles had over their lifetime. I run a Cummins pickup for towing and a pre AFM and pre VVT Chevy 5.3 for my family rig. I dread anything newer right now.
That’s why farm equipment had inline 6 bangers. Great low end torque, durable, low maintenance and easy to work on. I ran a Allis Chalmer Gleamer combine back in the late 60s the had a GM 250 cu. During harvest season they ran 10-12 hours (sometimes longer) a day under some of the dustiest conditions you could imagine. These engines are bulletproof. Dodge and Ford also had 6 bangers in farm equipment. Ford had the 300 cu and Dodge had the 225 slant six they are also bulletproof. No reason they can’t be built today with all the power adders we have available and still be as bulletproof as the were back then. Still hate the thought of not having the V-8 available. As much as I respect the bulletproof inline 6 bangers they will never be able to replace that V-8 sound.
If I was a fleet operator i would order the 2.7 for crew only vehicles and the 5.3 /6.2 when i need to regularly tow something. My hope is the 2.7 would cut down on fuel use during extended idling sessions such is if the truck is being used as a mobile office or break room while in the field.
The best use for an in-line 6 turbo is a shrunken one as a base luxury engine – if they would temper 0-0-0 and keep an XT5 for Cadillac. Otherwise, smallish displacement with turbo does not benefit vehicle ownership. What is Ford going with then? Watch Ram lose market share.
A properly balanced V6 is so silky smooth nowadays, I’m not sure what advantages an inline 6 offers? The ones they put in trailblazers, I wasn’t impressed with. I would buy a 4.3 V6 Chevrolet over a 4.2 inline any day. I noticed a bit of a redemption arc in how the 4.2l is remembered, but a trailblazer was the least expensive SUV that could be purchased at the auctions I frequent , and nearly every one always had the hallmarks of being overheated. I think any inherent advantages of a straight 6 over the V6 will never be realized over the 300k+ life expectancy of a modern vehicle, before life ending failures of accessories such as water pumps or timing chains. What made the 300 straight 6 legendary was the simplicity, I don’t buy that new straight senses will be any simpler than an a V6. As it appears from ford’s plans, a new straight 6 will be small displacement short stroke big bore high compression turbocharged dohc engines. That’s a far cry from a single cam 1 barrel 4″ stroke 300 that doesn’t even have a timing chain.
Replace the 5.3 with a big displacement 4.3 The balance shaft being added meant they should’ve ended producing under-cubed V8s. I’d even put an L8T derived transverse 4 in the crossovers. Balance shafts and people won’t care.
The i6 is easy to work on. Ford Australia made the Barra i6 engine, was as good as a v8 and lightweight. Tuners get 1000 hp out of them.