While part of the mystique around classic V8 engines from GM and other automakers sometimes includes the assumption they were more powerful than today’s “weak” four-cylinder powerplants, actual specs reveal advancing technology has made modern inline-fours the equals of older V8s.
According to the data analyzed by Experian, today’s average four-pot generates about the same horsepower as the average V8 available in 2001, developing 233 horsepower compared to the 238 average horsepower an eight-cylinder cranked out 23 years ago.
Via Experian
While V8 engines are now averaging 440 horsepower of output, the data still shows how far four-cylinder engine design has come over the past two decades. Like those of other carmakers, GM has developed powerful I4 engines that are the equals or near-equals of the V8s it used to motivate some of its models back in 2021.
The following table shows three GM inline-four engines compared to six of its V8 engines from 2021, including the peak horsepower and pound-feet of torque together with the rpms at which this output is achieved:
GM 2024 I4 Engine Output vs 2001 V8 Engine Output
| Model Year | 2024 | 2024 | 2024 | 2001 | 2001 | 2001 | 2001 | 2001 | 2001 |
| Engine | Turbo 2.0L I4 | Turbo 2.5L I4 | Turbo 2.7L I4 TurboMax | 5.7L V8 | 5.7L V8 | 4.8L V8 | 5.3L V8 | 6.0L V8 | 8.1L V8 |
| RPO | LSY | LK0 | L3B | LS1 | LS6 | LR4 | LM7 | LQ4 | L18 |
| Power (hp @ rpm) | 237 @ 5,000 | 328 @ 5,500 | 310 @ 5,600 | 350 @ 5,600 | 385 @ 6,000 | 270 @ 5,200 | 285 @ 5,200 | 320 @ 4,400 | 340 @ 4,200 |
| Torque (lb-ft @ rpm) | 258 @ 1,500 to 4,000 | 326 @ 3,500 | 430 @ 3,000 | 375 @ 4,400 | 385 @ 4,800 | 285 @ 4,000 | 325 @ 4,000 | 360 @ 4,000 | 455 @ 3,200 |
Among the three 2024 engines from GM, the turbocharged 2.0L I4 LSY gasoline engine is equipped in the Buick Envision and Chevy Blazer, where it develops 228 horsepower and 258 pound-feet of torque. Used in the Cadillac XT4, Cadillac XT5 and Cadillac XT6 crossovers, it offers 235 horsepower, while in the Cadillac CT4 and Cadillac CT5 it produces 237 horsepower and 258 pound-feet of torque.
Meanwhile, the newly introduced turbocharged 2.5L I4 LK0 gasoline engine is found in the 2024 Chevy Traverse and 2024 GMC Acadia crossovers and will also make its way into the 2025 Buick Enclave.
The turbocharged 2.7L I4 L3B gasoline engine supplies motivation to the Chevy Colorado, Chevy Silverado 1500, GMC Canyon and GMC Sierra 1500. It’s optional on the Cadillac CT4 Premium Luxury where it cranks out 310 horsepower and 350 pound-feet, while in the Cadillac CT4-V, it develops 325 horsepower and 380 pound-feet of torque.
As for the V8 engines from 2001, the naturally aspirated 5.7L V8 LS1 gasoline engine was available in both the Chevy Camaro SS and the Chevy Corvette for the 2001 model year, developing 325 horsepower and 350 pound-feet in the Camaro SS and 350 horsepower and 375 pound-feet in the Corvette.
The atmospheric 5.7L V8 LS6 gasoline engine was standard in the Chevy Corvette Z06 for the 2001 model year, while the 4.8L V8 LR4 engine was available in the Chevy Silverado 1500 and GMC Sierra 1500 and the 5.3L V8 LM7 engine was offered in the Chevy Silverado 1500, Chevy Tahoe, Chevy Suburban, Chevy Avalanche, GMC Sierra 1500 and Yukon.
The 6.0L V8 LQ4 engine was available in the Chevy Silverado 1500, Chevy Silverado HD, GMC Sierra 1500 and Sierra HD, where it produced 300 horsepower and 360 pound-feet of torque. When equipped on the Chevy Tahoe, Chevy Suburban and GMC Yukon it produced 320 horsepower and 360 pound-feet of torque.
Finally, the 8.1L V8 L18 engine was offered in the Chevy Silverado HD, Chevy Tahoe, Chevy Suburban, Chevy Avalanche, GMC Sierra 1500 and Sierra HD.
As The General and other automakers have improved the output of their four-cylinder engines these powerplants have won ever-greater market share over the years. Back in 2001, four-pots were equipped in 21.4 percent of vehicles while V8s were found in 37.6 percent.
Today in 2024, the V8 engine share has shrunken to less than 11 percent, under a third of its former prevalence, while V6 engines are also far less common than in 2001. Meanwhile, the more powerful modern four-cylinder engines are found in a whopping 64.2 percent of vehicles.
Subscribe to GM Authority for more GM engine news, GM technology news, and around-the-clock GM news coverage.
Comments
And they’ll last half as long. Good for the automakers. More moolah.
Besides routine oil changes always allow a the engine to reach operating temperature which is about °115 ! And not above °220 ! And let the turbo cool down at idle to cool down a bit
Are they as durable as the V8’s. Warranty Claims should lend an insight.
Many would argue that the current generation V8’s GM has are not reliable – ask the ones who’ve had their 6.2 engine replaced at 10k miles.
There was a bad batch that caused this in 2021 and in 2022. Other than that, it is either abuse or owner misuse or being part of the 3% that eventually fail .
No, not when compared to cast-iron block pushrod V8’s at least. The fuel economy of these Turbo Charged overworked 4-bangers leaves a lot to be desired as well. 25 mpg in a Buick Roadmaster with a 5.7L V8 was not out of the question in 1996, you’d be lucky to get that in your 2024 silverado 2.7L… I have 298,000 miles on my ’99 5.7L Suburban, and beyond a couple of oil seals and spark plug changes, everything is riginal and running fine. I’ve yet to see a turbo 4 make it to 200K miles without major issues or turbo replacement…
Ok, watch this you tube video and then try to explain to me why the 2.7 will not last..go to you tube search box and type in: 2023-2024 Chevrolet Colorado 2.7 turbo engine: what you need to know. In the video the engineers tore down a 2.7 and go through everything about the way this engine was built like a diesel that runs on gas.if you have enough the video then close your pie hole untill you get the true FACTS
Why would they last “half as long?” I have the LSY (the engine pictured on the top) in my XT5 and at no point does the engine feel stressed or overworked as if I have to punch it just to get the car moving. Its a smaller engine in a larger vehicle than my Rav4 and yet its peppier and smoother than my Ravs AR-2FE. It’s a fantastic engine and so far has been reliable. Granted I wouldn’t tow with it but what do I care? I have nothing to tow beyond a trip to Costco and unlike Tesla owners, don’t plan on blowing people away at red lights.
You’ve never owned a Northstar, have you?
I have a CT4 and as mentioned it produces 237 hp. My first new Cadillac was a 92 Seville and the 4.9 V8 in it produced 200.
I have to say the 92 sounded better.
agreed they need to make the 4 cylinder sounds, not like a friggin sewing machine when its running
Agreed. Not sure what Ford did right, but I was downright impressed when I was “stuck” with a Mustang with a 2.3 L Turbo 4 when renting a car one time (maybe during 2022?). It had (old time) V-8 level guts and actually SOUNDED good too. Meanwhile the 2.0 Turbo 4 Camaro sounded very raspy when I test drove one, and resolved I would never do a Pony Car if it were a Turbo 4. The Mustang would not be bad to live with – save the general reservations of owning a turbo with the unnecessary additional things to go wrong and/or need to be babied.
Probably more reliable than the Northstar too.
And the LS V8s in those trucks, suvs, and some sedans are still running today! My 98 C/K vortec 350 that my son drives to school, just turned over 251k!! Let’s see those little 4 cylinder turbos do that…..
When did the last 5.7 block crack. The turbomax should be renamed TurboCrax
We have a 2019 Equinox Premier AWD with a 1.5l tubo 4 , and 6 speed auto it now has 240,000k and has been absolutely trouble free.
The secret to long life is to change the oil every 8,000k and do the maintenance .
These small 4’s have enough power and are trouble free.
The issue on the turbo max with blocks cracking is fake news.
The recall only affected 12 engines , compared to Ford, Toyota or Ram , GM is a gold standard !!
Thats barely 140,000 miles.
Come back when your near 400k miles.
Oh, why not make it a million, Mr “my engine lasts forever”.
Thanks for setting the record straight. There are still alot of dinosaurs out there who still think a 2 speed automatic were enough gears too.
To be fair. That was pre interstate. They were competing with 3 and 4 speed manuals. When your max speed was only 55mph, what’s wrong with 2 gears? Even with 80MPH interstates, 4speeds are “sufficient” 6&up mostly are there for an extra 10% fuel economy. Many dragsters still prefer the dynaglide 2 speeds.
There were only 12 engines involved in the cracking blocks manufacturing defect, all will be completely replaced free of charge under warranty. Please do your research 1st before posting hysteria based comments.
We have a 2019 Equinox Premier AWD with a 1.5l tubo 4 , and 6 speed auto it now has 240,000k and has been absolutely trouble free.
The secret to long life is to change the oil every 8,000k and do the maintenance .
These small 4’s have enough power and are trouble free.
Agreed. The same can be said about the 1980’s 350 V8 vs the 2.2 ecotech of 2001. Both made 130HP, but there are still square body chevys driving around, while most ecotec 4’s have given up the ghost.
No 350 Chevy V8 ever made 130 HP. Even the emissions stangled 305 in it’s worse year in 1982 made 145, 150 thereafter and was bumped up to 165 in 1985 and 170 thereafter. The 350 Chevy Small block was usually at 170 until they fuel injected it when it got up to 200 and then 260-300 for trucks and Corvettes during the 90’s in LT1 guise. A few early 80’s California emissions squeezed engines were detuned slightly but never below 160 horses.
v8 torque vs stressed out turbo 4 banger…
choose wisely, buyer! repair shops are salivating
Guess you didn’t read the chart above. The L3B is making more torque than all the V8’s except the 8.1L and does it at lower RPMs to boot.
Even the LK0 is putting out a respectable number in comparison and again at a lower RPM.
And those 4 banger turbo glassoline engines will be in the junkyard by 150,000 miles.
Planned obsolescence at its finest.
Opinions are like… You know the rest.
I once worked with a fellow engineer whose motto was, “He who has the data wins.”
Not talking about BMW’S, imported pieces of junk with all their problems !. Hope you enjoyed your 3009 Cooper’s tranny problems they all had, or are you going to try and lie about that too? What about your oil pressure genius ? Did your little imported toy have an oil pump that ran after car is turned off too ? Oh wait, I forgot that miniature engine in that miniature Circus Clown Car didn’t produce enough heat to worry about Bwa-ha-ha.
betting you’re neither any kind of engineer ” I once worked with a fellow engineer” Typical line of malarkey to try and build yourself up. See this bunk every day and it automatically means you are irrelevant.
As an owner of a 2005 v8 I would be interested in real data about longevity of these turbo 4 cylinders. My gut says that if it burns bright, it doesn’t burn long. I keep cars a minimum of ten years. Will those 4 bangers last?
The engine might, with a lot of repairs, but the turbo won’t since no one builds a T-motor with proper shut-down and cool-down technology as OEM for the hot, still spinning turbo at shut down time. The other issue experienced is ” blow-by” on the Piston rings after high mileage wear. Even Honda had massive problems, that they should have known better about due to all their race-engine experience, when they brought out their 15L Turbo engine a few years ago and suffered blow-by issues on every one of them when brand new diluting the oil with gasoline from forced induction.
Please do research before making claims nobody has cool down technology. I had a 3009 Mini Cooper S that has a turbo coolant pump that runs after car is turned off. Please fact check
Once again, “He who has the data wins.”
Not talking about BMW’s, imported pieces of junk with all their problems!. Hope you enjoyed your 3009 Cooper’s tranny problems they all had, or are you going to try and lie about that too? What about your oil pressure genius? Did your little imported toy have an oil pump that ran after car is turned off too ? Oh wait, I forgot that miniature engine in that miniature Circus Clown Car didn’t produce enough heat to worry about Bwa-ha-ha.
Actually I bought it running bad and built the engine with an external oil cooler so it ran better than stock. And it might be import, but it is way easier to work on than American 4 bangers.. Not a single issue with the trans, and if they are so bad why does consumer reports have BMW as one of the top brands this year? And yes. I work on all makes and models.. so I speak from actual experience..
I already have my Sonic 10 years. Turbo run strong and never serviced in 300000 miles.
Excellent! Proper maintenance and paying attention to it, especially cooling and pcv.
I purchased a 2024 Buick Enclave Avenir AWD because this is the last year for the six cylinder. One can not or should not pull a 18′ + boat or cargo trailer with a four cylinder engine, turbo or not. The engine and especially the transmission will not handle it. GM does not need any more transmission class action law suits.
Bill K: Totally agree. I work at a Volvo and Mazda dealership. Not one vehicle we sell has anything bigger than a 2.5L 4 cyl. I don’t work in direct sales any more, but once in a while I end up speaking with clients from our brokers. If anyone ever asked me about a hitch on either the Mazda or Volvo (especially the Mazda), I ask them up front why they want a hitch. If it’s for anything more than a bike rack, I tell them to go buy something from GM, Ford or Dodge where they have a more robust frame and at least a 6 cyl.
I wouldn’t be caught dead towing with a Mazda or Volvo. People need to understand it’s not just about pulling something and getting up to speed. It’s also about what they can truly handle and stopping power. None of the vehicles we sell offer a true towing package which is a huge pass.
It’s important to keep the oil changed in turbocharged direct fuel injection engines (not just GM), especially if most of your driving is short trips. Those engines have a big problem with fuel diluting the oil, which causes a lot of engine wear.
Turbo 4’s producing the horsepower referenced in the article are by necessity much more complex with added electronic control systems, turbochargers, VVT, etc.
GMA, any chance at doing a story regarding the inflation-adjusted cost per horsepower between the turbo 4’s and the 2000 era V8’s?
Larger displacement engines rotate less for the same torque and HP. They may be gas guzzlers but will last longer. My 1984 Olds Ciera with a Buick V6 ran for 26 years with not even an oil leak. I rather buy a hybrid Ford before buying a turbocharged I4.
This isn’t the case. The old larger non-turbo engines rotated much more to create the same power as a modern turbo 4…as the data above clearly shows. Not suggesting this means the turbo will last as long as a low hp non-turbo (I doubt it), but the new smaller 4’s actually make more power at lower rpm than the old 8’s.
Incorrect. Not4one, actually understands the difference.
As a GM tech since 1980, I finally walked away from having to experience the common 5.3LV8 issues with lifters, 6.2L valve springs and now crank bearings (all supplier related issues).
The best years for the base 5.3L engine in the trucks were around 2003-2004. They were pretty decent, save for the occasional oil seal failure at the pickup to block interface and of course exhaust manifolds that cracked.
I drove several and my “V8 only” mindset changed, based on driving experiences and those who who know in the real world.
My 2023 GMC Sierra Elevation 2.7L Crew Cab makes notably more torque than the 5.3L, has better fuel mileage and zero issues since new.
The 2.7L never needs to rev anything close to the 5.3L RPM to make torque and typically runs at 1500 RPM to 2000 RPM in normal driving unless accelerating hard. Why?
Simply because boosted engines, whether turbocharged or supercharged, have over 100% VE (Volumetric Efficiency), in comparison to naturally aspirated engines that don’t even come close to 100% under any conditions unless you’re dreaming.
Now, to put this into perspective, I was never a fan of turbocharged engines going back to the ’80s when we frequently repaired those highly overrated pieces of junk, the Buick Grand National Turbo 3.8L, that people salivate over today.
Modern turbocharging is very different in function to turbos of even 10 years ago and way more reliable.
FWIW, I still own my ’71 GMC C2500 350/350 pickup that I bought used from our dealership lube tech. While that old beast hauled around my camper and race car on the trailer for many years, it’s akin to one step up from a horse and buggy in ride and lacks any form of comfort.
With a “whopping” 255 HP from the original LS9 (worn out at 167,000 miles and replaced with my ’75 Chevelle 350 engine), TH350 and 4:10 final drive, it will virtually climb walls, but the fuel economy is ~1/3 of the 2023 4 banger, which weighs in at 300 lbs more and does everything better in every way.
FWIW, I grew up with 4 bangers and moved to V8s many years ago. While waiting for the 5.3L lifter and cam issues to be straightened out, before making my final vehicle purchase, I listened to the guys currently working in the service bays daily and the 2.7L has glowing recommendations.
The fact that a handful of bad castings happened isn’t something unusual in manufacturing.
It’s easy to forget the piston issues of the 307 ci V8, cam failures on 305s, Northstar oil leaks, HT4100.4.5L and 4.9L engine issues with leaks and bearing knock problems, that paid off my mortgage, along with diesel issues.
Every manufacturer has had and still has similar production and supply chain issues. That’s life.
The issue is that trolls and wanna be bench racers often clearly with little to no technical experience, frequently theorize and do the puffy chest strut, but actually know little about the actual functions of modern propulsion systems. Just ‘cuz it ain’t for everyone’s taste, doesn’t mean that it’s bad.
The torque curve (real world usable power) is very flat on the 2.7L engine, extremely close when plotting the graph to the old 8/1L V8. The 2.7L has very few issues compared to most any other engine that GM ever produced that are revered, but mouthpieces continue to do their best to denounce it as junk, without any real level of knowledge.
FWIW, when driving, the 2.7L 4 cylinder engine emits a tuned intake roar under load, no silly sewing machine noises.
Hopefully the turbos are better than the junk they’ve been putting on the 1.4 four cylinder. My grandson’s 2 Cruzes both puked after warranty .
Not mine.
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, well, you know how it goes.
MartinS:
Is there any repair history information regarding high-pressure injectors, or other life-reducing aspects of pressurizing the cylinder? I would imagine that in time, most engines will end up being turbo – 3 cylinders…
In that case I would ignore the owner’s manual regarding a first oil change at 7,500 miles. To allow these precision engines to break in properly, I’d do initial oil and filter changes at 1,000, then wait 3,000 miles, and then every 6,000 after that.
Gasoline Direct Injection has been around for several years now and the typical failures have been well-known. For some manufacturers, GDI intake valve and port de-carbonizing has been a necessary periodic requirement.
Nothing so far, regarding boosted cylinder pressures. The L3B engine was designed as a long stroke engine with turbocharging integral to the design.
The crankshaft is forged and offset from the centerline of the cylinder bores. The offset significantly reduces thrust on the cylinder walls during the power stroke.
It was engineered and designed with diesel type construction and components, around being turbocharged from the outset.
Therein is a difference between engines that have a turbocharger added on and engines with the integrated design.
My wife’s ’15 Terrain 2.4L LEA has GDI and no valve carboning issues or pump issues to date at close to 60 K miles.
The key with all modern gasoline propulsion systems, is to use only Top Tier gasoline and high quality full synthetic engine lubricants, with frequent service intervals.
On the L3B I changed the engine oil and filter at 3900km/2400 mi and 5000km/3000mi.
I frequently checked the condition and oil level before the first engine oil change and it barely even discoloured at all by 2400mi when I changed it for the first time. I checked the drained oil for contaminants from wear components and machining debris. There were no alarm bells.
My routine for many years on the Terrain has been to do oil and filter changes at a maximum of 5000km/~3000mi, since my wife is retired and does relatively short trips, except when I drive when it gets a good wringing out. The first oil change on that was at ~1000 miles.
I still have my 2003 Cavalier Z24 4 dr sedan, that was used as my daily commuter until 2023. It has covered 370,000km/~230,00 mi and has been trouble free. Again, frequent oil and filter changes are the reason for it’s longevity without any issues.
The same was true for our ’99 Venture Van, no issues and frequent services.
Frequent maintenance with high quality products is cheap insurance in the long run.
Extended service intervals are only designed for light vehicle use. If anyone cares to review what the meaning of what is considered light use, they will soon follow a more rigorous frequent maintenance program.
Interesting info. seen nowhere else about that off-center Crank/main-bearing design. Now if only they would address how to properly cool those still- spinning turbos at hot shut-down time when they lose oil pressure. We ran 10-12 HD Diesel pick-ups for over a decade on a nationwide “hot-shot” transportation business and no matter which truck we bought, the first thing we did was get the ISSPRO Turbo Temp monitor thermocouple installed in the downpipes so our drivers wouldn’t forget and COKE the oil on the extremely hot turbo bearings at shut-down when they pulled into the Pickle Parks to relieve their bladders.
Modern lubricants and turbocharger cooling circuits make a huge difference over those from yesteryear that I remember so well.
The cooling system on the 2.7L L3B engine uses an electric pump and thermal management control valve system, that directs coolant to the block and turbocharger.
That’s a lot different cooling system strategy from older turbocharged engines, which either were only lubricant cooled, or where coolant was only circulated by an accessory drive coolant pump. Idling was necessary for continued cooling.
Yeah, I well recall the days of letting turbos spool down to idle for a minute or so before shutting down. There were also no sensors on earlier engines other than coolant temp and oil pressure.
In contrast, the L3B has a total of 10 temperature and position sensors, monitoring cooling system functions.
Engine Block Coolant Temperature Sensor
Engine Cylinder Head Coolant Temperature Sensor
Engine Inlet Coolant Temperature Sensor
Engine Outlet Coolant Temperature Sensor
Engine Oil Temperature Sensor 1 and 2
Transmission Oil Temperature Sensor
Radiator Outlet Coolant Temperature Sensor
Heater Core Inlet Coolant Temperature Sensor
Heater Core Outlet Coolant Temperature Sensor
Control Valve Sensors
Wow! 10 sensors that could fail and result in a repair. Guess cooling is very important to this engine.
Martin S.
Thank you for this information. I gather you mean that if the truck is suddenly stopped after hard driving that the electric water pump, and radiator fan will cool things down a bit before shutting down themselves.
Thanks MartinS,
Your post was very informative. It changed my mind about the NEW 4 cylinder turbos, especially the 2.7L. My complaint about the older versions was about how in order to experience any feeling of power you had to drive it like your mad at it, staying in the high rev range to keep the turbo spooled up, while by comparison a V8 could be driven leisurely and make on demand power with a light touch of the throttle. Sounds like things have changed.
Thanks Joe.
The 4 cylinder may not be to everyone’s taste and that is absolutely fine.
I will readily admit that was my mind set prior to really doing the research and testing. It’s hard to let go of the V8!
There are plenty of video testimonials comparing these trucks, worth viewing from the driver’s seat perspective and instrument panel gauges.
It took me some soul-searching, to remain completely open-minded and objective, when buying a new truck and focus on my real needs more than my historical desires.
FWIW, the L3B engine torque is plenty strong enough that it is not constantly busy upshifting and downshifting to stay in the optimal RPM range like the 10 speed trucks.
That was a pleasant surprise, since my first thought was that it might be a bit busy with the 4 cylinder engine and me living and commuting in hilly terrain, but it has not been the case.
There are videos online of comparisons of 1500 series truck with 2.7L and 5.3L trucks pulling trailers with heavy equipment and travel trailers (pushing wind), on circuits up to 9000′.
Quite honestly, if the 2.7L L3B was “junk” like some seem to believe, I’d be the first to agree. It fits my needs for performance and fuel economy. Others may have a different ownership experience and that’s fine too.
I don’t plan on trailering race cars around like I used to with my old 3/4 ton truck, but I do frequently load my truck with heavy stuff.
A couple of things of note for those not technically aware, the rear axle on the 1500 series trucks is the 9.5″ unit, whereas 8.6″ used to be standard, with 9.5″ as the heavier option.
Front and rear axles, depending on the selected ratios, can be both AAM or GMCH manufactured, or a mix. Beware that the different manufacturers also specify different axle lubricants.
Be careful if having axle lube services at “Bubba’s” where one axle lube fits all!
The 2.7L has very few issues but the lifter failures/main bearing issues on the V8s are blown out of proportion except for the 2021MY.
In the Middle East, ONLY the V8s are and were available.
The engines sitting waiting for parts or engines, prove otherwise on the lifters, cams and bearing issues on 5.3L and 6.2L V8.
I saw a YouTube video where the 2.7 designers and engineers explained that the 2
7 was designed as a diesel that runs on gasoline and the cooling systems were not necessarily dependent on the engine crank for cooling. Infact, the cooling systems would continue to function after the vehicle was turned off or at a stop, continuing to cool down the turbo or engine was reliant on thermostatic controls and various electrical pumps that don’t rely on older technologies. Also the engines were way over built compared to older 4 bangers.
Correct John.
Controlling the electronic cooling pump and directing coolant where desired to both heat it up quickly for cabin comfort and cool specific areas of the engine, while maintaining optimal temperatures for emissions are important.
The 2.7L engine does not have a traditional thermostat. It uses a manifold with valves to direct coolant to where it is needed
And again, “He who has the data wins.”
Was that the Buick carbureted 3 liter V6 or the 3.8 MFI engine that was introduced during 1984 and used extensively in the 1985 downsized C-body 98 and Park Ave cars? Just curious
No replacement for displacement…..
Can only speak of my own experience. Dealership gave me a Sierra with the 2.7 as a loaner. Couldn’t wait to get my 5.3 back. Still can’t figure out why that engine is in a full size truck. Don’t want to criticize anyone’s choice of vehicle or engine it’s just not for me.
Well this should get some interesting comments. Think I’ll pop some popcorn and sit back on this rainy day.
Bill K. You are right ,Look and see towing rate for the 4 banger compared to the 4.8 or 5.3. You won’t get the power .Your foot is going to be in it all the time with a trailer,let alone the life of the engine!! More up keep on 4 banger also !! & the corvette always had more hp.than the Cameron. !!!! For the difference in Price !!
Nobody who has reviewed a Colorado or Canyon in a towing test to the limits, has validated anything you have said about over taxing the 2.7 while towing them. Nice try though.
To the contrary, all “honest” towing tests of GM and Ford turbo equipped vehicles have revealed the MPG advantage of a smaller displacement, forced induction motor disappear when pushed to tow anything. They guzzle gas just like a V8 does when pushed hard. 3.5 Ecoboost FOMOCO forums with comments coming from “actual owners” have stated this fact for years now. Nice try but you’re wrong.
THE Fast Lane Truck video on YouTube did a towing test where the tow weight was around 7k lbs of trailer weight and there were no over heating issues what so ever and towing up a mountain that was over 10k feet and the angle of assent was significant. Nice try again.
Oh how I wish GM would bring back the 2.0 LTG four-cylinder in the Equinox ICE. They claim they dropped it because there wasn’t enough complaints about the 1.5 engine not being big enough. So guess what? They decided “Let’s see if we can drop the 2.0 and save money”. I think I’ll just hang on to my V6 Blazer ICE. ☹️
GM dropped the 2.0 from the Equinox because only 7% of buyers were opting for it.
That is a very misleading figure and one used in this engines last year of production in these vehicles right after the pandemic. Also lets remember the LTG 2.0T was being replaced with the LSY due to emissions and mileage requirements and this new engine was set to be offered on the Nox and Terrain moving forward. Lets see those figures for 2018, 2019 and 2020 where there are loads of LTG equipped Noxes and Terrains especially SLT and Denali’s.
Hmm. In 2001, the LS engine was in full swing in the F bodies and Corvette, making anywhere from a rated 305 to 385 HP. The 305 HP LS1s in the f bodies were also underrated to give the Vette its bragging rights, routinely making close to their crank HP ratings at the wheels.
Just borrowed a friend’s new Chevy 1500 2.7. We pulled a dump trailer of gravel. Most noticeable was the higher rpms needed to sustain 65 MPH. I also noticed that much more throttle was needed to get moving.
Our ranch truck, a 2006 GMC 6.0 liter 2500 was loaned to an employee at the time. It has 160K and drives with much less throttle and is quieter. It does burn more fuel. It has been back to our dealer one time to repair an electronic glitch in the HVAC system.
Personally, I would not be a buyer for any 4 cylinder turbo pickup truck.
I think that the Canyon with a 430 ft. Lbs of torque and lesser weight than a 1500 would do much better towing than the scenario you just posted.
Does anyone know what V8 engines from 2001 are dragging the HP average all the way down to 238? From memory of the time and doing some quick searches, I keep seeing high 2xx to mid-high 3xxx HP ratings. That would imply a lot of 1xx HP V8s that were in a lot of vehicles at the time? 238HP sounds more like 80s or early 90s V8s.
I tried looking at pickups, the Firebird, the Impala, and they are all over 250hp. I think I finally found one candidate – the 2001 Chevrolet Express. The G2500 reportedly came with a 220-hp, 5.0-liter V-8.
Net horsepower ratings versus the previous Gross horsepower ratings have long been the advertised numbers that get mixed understandings.
Net horsepower includes accessories and all other friction loss components or restrictions.
Gross horsepower includes no accessories, drive systems or restrictive exhaust.
There are many ways that these statistics can be played out with a middle ground Real horsepower in between and Rear Wheel Horsepower.
With motorcycles, horsepower has long been measured at the crankshaft counter shaft drive.
It’s all just numbers. How well a vehicle pulls is the most important factor.
I remember when the ls first came around and people called it junk because it wasn’t a small block Chevy . They were called too small too weak .
I wish people would stop saying these 4 pot engines are stressed . The L3B is stout . The turbo Max makes 27 lb of boost . Designed as a truck motor first . Cast in iron sleeves forged bottom end cross bolted mains improved block rigidity on gen 2 , heavy duty crank 3 phase cam heavy duty timing chain . I have a L3B in my 2024 Silverado and it far out pulls my old 2005 5.3 . The torque comes fast and It is not the least bit stressed . Somebody’s going to crank one of those new four cylinders up to 40 + lb of boost and it’s going to be insane and going to be the hot new engine of some racing scene because of its small size light weight and huge power .
Thank you. It’s true the often failed 1.4 turbo was a converted Opel, perhaps not really up to the task, but produced more hp/liter than the old Ford FE 390. We know what GM is capable of, making great engines for 100+ years with very few failures. Have total faith in my 12yo 1.8 NA. But the reputation of the 1.4 casts a long shadow on their turbo fours.
The details you share cast a bright and promising light. Are all the new turbo fours getting the same attention? That’s what we all need to know. Again, thank you.
Isn’t it curious that a Credit Rating Company is producing a comparison study or chart about engine horsepower and torque ? What’s up with that ?
Ford 4.6 from that era had 220 hp, and the last year 2001 Dodge Ram 1500 with the 5.2 had 230, while the ‘new’ 4.7 V8 in the same era Dakota had 238.
For diesels, the first year Duramax ran as low as 235, while the same vintage 5.9L 24V Cummins (I know, its an L-6) also had the same power output. And lastly, the Detroit Diesel 6.5 last used in the G-series van and GMT400 C3500HD had 215 hp.
Man, 2008-2013 was a bad stretch for 4-cyclinders. They actually got worse.
I’m with most of the other folks that commented on not wanting a turbo four in their full-size or mid-size GM truck. I want to see what the long term durability is going to look like. So far, it isn’t looking great, with cracked blocks, as so many of us have commented on before. Going back further, the 1st generation Cruze and the Sonic are notorious for multiple issues with their 1.4L turbo four. Issues with the turbocharger, oil cooling, and coolant components. It will be interesting to see what the long term durability is like for the smaller displacement version of the TurboMax is for the full-size FWD-based SUVs (Traverse, etc.) will be, as well. We all know that manufacturers are essentially being forced into these smaller displacement engines with turbos, to meet ever increasingly stringent fuel economy and emissions regulations (thanks Biden and company, thanks for nothing!). The turbo is used to try to compensate for the loss of power associated with these four bangers if they were just naturally aspirated. But, the durability over 100k miles isn’t there, in some cases, far less than 100k miles! Ford has had similar issues with turbo fours, too. All these little turbo engines just can’t hold a candle to a big pushrod V8 for longevity.
Yeah but I have a 98 suburban with 200k miles on it.
Going back to Chrysler 80’s technology, 2.2 engine in K car, put it in larger car 2.2 with turbo. 4 cylinders are great for compact, mid size cars, but not for full size trucks. I would buy a Camry with a 4 cylinder, but not a F-150 or Silverado. That’s just me, I am sure there are plenty who disagree and that is a personal preference which I resoect.
Here goes GM again to justify putting a cheaper weaker engine that will not last into products like the GMC Acadia, Chevy Traverse, and Buick Enclave. When will the company ever listen to buyers? Maybe when their market share shrinks below 10% which is not that far off. I will keep my Chevy traverse with the V-6 3.6 liter that runs smooth and never screams or squeaks on a highway or up a hill. I will never buy an suv or crossover that is powered by a 4 cylinder engine. This is so sad the executives of GM decide without input to put these 4 cylinders on the road in a large vehicle. It is no different than shoving EV’s down the throats of buyers who want nothing to do with them at this time!!
Just another in a long line of mistakes by gm management. I’ll keep my 99 Silverado, she’s only got 325,000 on her. 4 cylinder turbos are a huge mistake in the Lambdas. Enclave sales will drop by 50%. Can’t wait to hear the excuses from the 14th floor.
Advancing technologies = Turbo
🤣
A few months ago I read an article, it might have been on GMA, at a GM meeting when a decision was made to go with a four cylinder turbo, one engineer stated we need to strengthen the engine.
These four cylinder turbos coming out are not the same as a naturally aspirated of the past. Comments that they won’t last has not been proven unless you’re pulling a trailer every day. Too many people like Scotty make comments based on past crappy 4 cylinders.
Let’s compare apples to apples if we’re going to do this. All the fours are forced induction. I’m gonna bet they don’t have the longevity of the V8’s or the towing capacity.
A diabolical plan to get customers disgusted with ICE so they’ll gravitate to an EV.
If they think they have issues with 4 cyl forced induction motors, wait until they try towing something with an EV and discover, the hard way, what happens to their “Range” ! Like anything relatively new, let “the other guy” buy them first and then see what the new adopter experiences. GM has produced far too many “White Elephants” in their past to trust them.
Perhaps the customers who have had issues are using the vehicle the WRONG way then? I am sure.
Many people cannot stand change can they?
The comments about maintenance of 4 cylinders is hilarious. These people obviously never owned one. I’ve owned nothing but fours since the 70s and nothing but turbo fours since the 90s. Even tracked them. And put hundreds of thousands of miles on them. Never tore a single engine apart.
Statistically GM says that 64.2% of their vehicles have 4 cyl engines… It’s no wonder since there are so many of their products that can’t be had with anything else. When you don’t give people a choice the 4 bangers will naturally look like the engine of choice.
Just a brief observation, – putting a turbo in a heavy duty diesel like those Cummins engines that were built like a bank vault, can easily handle the added strain of turbocharging….. I have a big question mark regarding doing so in cost reduced GM products.
Please. Today’s 2.0t makes less power than their own 2.0t from 20 years ago. The 2.0t is a joke.
Fortunately, I have the atmospheric 1.8 acquired from Opel. It’s only as powerful as V8s from the 70s, but after 12 years and 101k it’s 100% reliable and hasn’t even blown a cam cover gasket. Moves a 3000# vehicle with authority.
Since the recent 1.4T disaster, they conveniently forgot, I’ll never trust a GM TURBO 4.
True statement.
If 4 cyl can power a full size pickup like Silverado/Sierra, then it can power all light duty vehicles.
The best case is the older Toyota Landcruiser with V8 being replaced by 4 cylinder hybrid for MY-2024.
2023 data seems to be wrong with the total of 49.9% + 25.4% + 10.9% comes to only 86.2.
Did the 3 cyl, 5 cyl, V10, V12 + BEV take take the remaining 13.8%. Doubtful.
And did the 4 cyl share jump to 64.3% the very next year in 2024. Time for experian to check their #.
Ideally automakers should create more 4 cylinder flex fuel hybrid vehicles which can run on 100% ethanol.
That will save the ICE from BEV.
I bought a New Camaro 2023 at very end of that year with 2.0L Turbo, & then they quit making in the Short 2024 model. It says 275 HP, that’s the same as my 93 Indy Pace Car with the reverse flow Lt-1. Have had 18 Camaros & Never Towed with any of them. That’s what the Trucks are for, 3500HD Duramax tows real well. Think the new 4 banger will last long. Bought a 74 Vega & was waiting for it to blow up but wouldn’t, wanted to put a V8 conversion kit in it, finally found another 74 Vega with blown up motor, dropped a 283, Th400 in it. Like my new Camaro & the other Chevy’s.
Cast iron block and head 350 could many miles with no antifreeze. I did it 17 miles with no problems. Those engines could run with maintenance 50 years! Try doing that in one these 4 cylinders.
joe G. This Basically is an Article about the Advancement in Horse Power for 4 cylinder engines. The Late Model 2.0L Turbo puts out more HP per Cubic Inch than any Gm motor built. I have Chevy motors up to a 509cu in, & a 476 in a Boat, Thought I would give the new 4 banger a shot, runs great. Vegas are ancient history.
I have the 2.0L Turbo (LSY) in my XT5. I find it to be a pleasant engine. Certainly not as peppy as the High Feature V6 but its quieter, seems reliable (if the Buick Envision is anything to go by) and has enough pep to make the XT5 faster and lighter on its feet than my 2.5L Rav4 which is a smaller and lighter vehicle. It also gets better fuel economy than my Rav though I do give it premium gas. The engine doesn’t feel stressed out when driving but I certainly would not tow with it. I definitely think if I tow with it, it will then feel stressed.
I have the 2.0L Turbo in my XT5. I find it to be a pleasant engine. Certainly not as peppy as the High Feature V6 but its quieter, seems reliable (if the Buick Envision is anything to go by) and has enough pep to make the XT5 faster and lighter on its feet than my 2.5L Rav4 which is a smaller and lighter vehicle. The engine doesn’t feel stressed out when driving but I certainly would not tow with it. I definitely think if I tow with it, it will then feel stressed.
Today’s materials and tolerances are why they can get the horse power and torque out of smaller engines and could you imagine what you could have gotten out of the old 5.7 and 7.4 back in the day. Tolerances are held so tight now that if you ran straight w30 you would affect performance. Tighter tolerances, better materials and a turbo on a 5.7 or 7.4 and hang on! Ask the guys at the drag strip.
I’ve bought a lot of new vehicles since 1980, I buy a new one every 4 years or so and the wife gets a new one every 6 years or so(she gets more attached than I do) Out of all those we have had only 2 V8’s, a 305 in a 91 Caprice and a LT2 in my C8. I love turbo powerplants and have had some strong 2.0L 4 cyl’s and a real strong twin turbo V6 in a Genesis. I would be just as happy with a turbo V6 in the vette at a comparable HP. I also have a 2021 Silverado with the 2.7, does a great job towing my snowmobiles and anyone that rides in it can’t believe it’s a 4 Cyl, I actually had to prove it to one guy and open the hood…lol. I believe the 2.7T is going to be one of the best power plants GM ever made. My Neighbor has had 2 Silverado’s over the decade to tow his 26′ camper, both had a 5.3. He just bought a new LT last summer w/2.7t, says the 2.7 tows in a more relaxed manner. He does say it is a bit thirstier than the V8’s when towing, but he also admits he finds himself towing faster with the 2.7. GM did good on the 2.7.
GM technology my foot, sounds like the Saab technology that they didn’t sell when they shut down Saab. 230hp in 2001, 29 mpg and still going strong.
I am coming around to Turbo motors in the last 10 years or so. 1st was a Terex Backhoe, then a Silverado 3500HD Z/71, & now a new Camaro 2.0L. Have had 4 Blowers (Superchargers), 1st one on a 72 355 SS Camaro motor with a B&M in a 76 Square body, 4×4 Lifted, huge tires. Built to get the boat to lake. 2nd was 671BDS on a built 468 because I didn’t have a Pro Street Camaro. 3rd is for 2002 5.3L Z/71, wanted more power, Whipple. Like Some Boost! Love my new 4 Banger!
Notice how the 4 pots are highly stressed boosted motors while the v8s are n/a low stress motors?
Now chuck some boost on those 8s and have a fair comparison. Like an Lsa for example.
Im old school and will stay with my 2017 f150 bad ass 385 HP 5 liter V8 engine any day. I’d rather have the two or four extra cylinders than the cracker jack turbo engines any day. I know of some that do have the eco boost and already have plenty of in the shop issues with them down the road and have had not any with 130k miles on my V8. Manufactures, just stay with the tried and true V8 engines rather than the cracker jack turbos for what very little if any gains we will get out of them for the cost and tell the EPA to shove it up their worthless ass and the true Americans will back you.
The difference is that the 4 cylinders of today are ridiculously complicated, and have a turbo which puts incredible stress on the internal components of the engines. Internal components that have not been strengthened sufficiently to handle those strains in order to save weight and maximize fuel economy. They will not still be on the road in 20 years, while we have v8s from 70 years ago still going strong.
Billj aren’t you talking about every manufacturer?
Seems to be Many 4 cylinder & GM & Turbo Haters. I Like all the cars & trucks I have & had before. Normally Aspirated, Blown, Turbo, Like them all. I Lost one Blower, Somebody Stole It off my motor. Have mostly Chevy but have a 65 Olds, and some Old Fords. Have had Some Pontiacs, Mopars and a VW also. Do not Like Toyotas, some Old Woman ran into my Z71 sitting in my driveway!
The I4 engines of today are modern marvels compared to anything from the past. My 1.8 makes 74 hp/liter. The question is which ones are the most durable. So far it’s the naturally aspirated version that is properly maintained.
If you’re unaware of how a “boosted ” engine’s Piston rings and head gaskets are “stressed” far more than a normally aspirated engine you don’t know much about IC engine’s.
That’s why I’ll never buy another new GM vehicle.