The current-generation Chevy Silverado 1500 and GMC Sierra 1500 were introduced for the 2019 model year, with a refresh later introduced for the 2022.5 model year. Looking ahead, The General’s next-generation pickup models are expected to launch during the 2026 calendar year as 2027 model-year vehicles, as GM Authority was the first to report this past August. Now, General Motors is dropping a few more tidbits on what to expect from the next-gen Chevy Silverado and GMC Sierra.
During his recent GM Investor Day presentation, GM President Mark Reuss briefly discussed the automaker’s upcoming next-gen pickups, specifically the internal combustion V8 engine expected under the hood.
“As we refresh these trucks, we continue to make strong improvements in ICE efficiency and performance,” Reuss said. “Our next generation of full-size trucks coming soon will see a four to six [percent] efficiency improvement at launch over the mid-cycle enhancement of 2022, and this is 10 to 12 percent better efficiency-wise over the previous generation which debuted in 2019, so these are big efficiency improvements.”
Fuel economy improvement estimates for the next-generation Chevy Silverado 1500 and GMC Sierra 1500 vs. refreshed 2022.5 models
Fuel economy improvement estimates for the next-generation Chevy Silverado 1500 and GMC Sierra 1500 vs. last-gen 2014 models
Reuss did not specify which V8 engine he was referring to. For reference, the 2024 Chevy Silverado 1500 4WD returns 15 mpg city, 19 mpg highway, and 17 mpg combined when equipped with the naturally aspirated 5.3L V8 L84 gasoline engine; 15 mpg city, 20 mpg highway, and 17 mpg combined when equipped with the naturally aspirated 6.2L V8 L87 gasoline engine; 18 mpg city, 21 mpg highway, and 19 mpg combined when equipped with the turbocharged 2.7L I4 L3B gasoline engine; and 23 mpg city, 27 mpg highway, and 24 mpg combined when equipped with the 3.0L I6 LZ0 turbodiesel Duramax engine.
As GM Authority was the first to report this past August, the next-generation Chevy Silverado 1500 and GMC Sierra 1500 will both ride on the new GM T1-2 platform. The GM T1-2 platform will essentially be an evolution of the GM T1 platform that underpins the current full-size pickup models, rather than a full architectural overhaul.
Comments
2027 model year is when we will see this engine!!! So that is over 13 years with the same HP/TQ numbers!! While their competitive rival Ford continues to update their engines HP/TQ regularly. Pathetic….Shame on GM
They need not change the engine numbers…just FOR people like you. Most people are perfectly fine with them. If you want new after new after new just leasing and wasting money..then go with Ford….
There is a factor that people do need more power/capability. Would you be fine with a 230HP V8 because they decided to keep the output of the 350 EFI? It’s fine, it works, but would that be acceptable in today’s market? A power bump is needed to keep competitive, especially if this engine family will remain for another decade. 355HP in 2035 might be lowest in class.
The funny thing is that the 5.3 produces LESS HP than the Tundra IFORCE V8 or the V6 TT….
@Ramaswamy
You are making my argument for me! The 5.3L is outdated/outmatched in HP/TQ up against the 2.7L eco, 3.5L eco, 5.0L from Ford, the new 3.4L twin turbo engine from Toyota, and the new hurricane 3.0L from Ram…that is pathetic by GM, because you can get all of those engines in BASE trim or volume sales. The 5.3L is GMs volume seller. Even the mighty 6.2L from GM isn’t looking very mighty anymore with only 420hp/460tq…WAKE UP GM
It’s 3 years from now, not 11.
@Ramaswamy
This is an ignorant comment!! We the people want more power, the competition is releasing MORE POWERFUL trucks, so YES, GM needs to do the same, to STAY COMPETATIVE! Geeezzz…
Then go and waste your money elsewhere, if you want more power….
STOP COMPLAINING HERE…
Sorry to tell you that gm’s engines are fine yes some have there problems like the truck 6.2L but why would we change our hp/tq numbers when are engines are fine and run
Have there been newer rod bearing failures with your mechanic? Last I know was MY24s and MOSTLY MY23s suffer the issue. Build dates will give a better idea…
I would like to see gm put lifter failures to bed with the next gen engines.
What will actually be introduced is a new infotainment setup that will follow the BEV vehicles with no ACP or AA integration.
They probably WILL NOT remove AFM/DFM…If they do, CAFE and EPA will FINE THEM HEAVILY….
I actually agree with you on this one, but that is still no reason to have such a weak valvetrain. In fact, it is a reason to improve it just to shed that reputation. GM and Hemi have both damaged the idea of AFM/DFM just as much as Nissan poisoned the idea of CVTs and Subaru swore people off boxer engines.
Well to me, it is basically a maintenance item that needs oil to function (and given how much they produce…30k could possibly fail (NOT SAYING ALL WILL)…. At least we should be thankful that HD trucks do not have them..unlike the case with RAM…
Correct, lifter failure is rare, and was really only present in the LS series with the aluminum blocks during oil loss events. There has been no “lifter” issues with the Gen V engines, though there was a bout of 6.2’s with oversized lifter bores from the factory, which was a warranty defect, not design defect.
On the opposite end of the spectrum, AFM engines show significantly less ring wear or sluge buildup. One thing about a more efficient engines is it’s easier on oil and all moving parts.
if GM removes ACP and AA, their customer base will leave. Corporate stupidity is alive and well.
If they aren’t also adding a significant power increase to go along with it, what’s the point.
They probably will have a power increase. I suspect the 5.3L will have more than 400 horespower this time , and the 6.2 might be just under 500 or a little bit above that….
The 2.7 may get a bump as well to around 330 or so…. Hybrids should have a power generator on board like in MY04 trucks…
That said, I will NOT be buying one anytime soon or in the future…
We can surmise a lot from the planned investments Into their engine factory. 1 billion just for the engine spread across the block, cam and Intake. All those dollars are accounted for with those investments. From there what we can surmise, the mostly likely changes will be as follows
-VVL added like the 2.7,
-active air intake like the LT6, but optimized for low RPM torque, not 9000rpm
-block friction reduction via spray on bores or offset bore centers, possibly variable water pump.
The VVL system will be the big ticket, as when the current VVL system on the 4 cylinders was added, comparable cars got 15% better economy and more power (this fits, as if GM keeps the diesel and 4 cylinder unchanged, and the current 5.3 around for skeptical buyers, then that’s the 4-6% improvement over the whole line, 10% as the other engines are updated/removed) as far as power goes, 400, 450 HP is easily achieved in the 5.3 with a Cam swap. An efficiency and power profile would easily get the current 5.3 to 25 mpg highway, 400HP.
As for mode of operation, the current system in the 4’s uses sliding links. That’s hard in a V configuration. I could see them using the AFM lifters instead of turning off, using a VTEC design. Be easy and cheap.
Also, if they use AFM for VTEC, that means no AFM lifters exhaust side, and a collapsed lifter is simply stuck in economy mode. You could loose a lifter and not notice is out, and will need to loose 2-3 before power is truly effected and you start feeling any vibration.
That would basically mean a bigger disaster. If you know your lifters are ticking (due to neglect or bad maintenance), you can still save the engine…by just replacing the lifters…IF YOU ACT QUICKLY.
But in any case, there should be a misfire code being produced…
No, as a collapsed lifter just has its pins stuck back or are worn down. Its effectively permanently disabled. It sucks oil in the system because the constant vacume in the chamber and an active exhaust valve. If a collapsed condition just means low lift mode permanently, then your still having compression and positive ring seal, still having your lifter opening and closing valves, still oiling everything correctly and still producing power out of that cylinder so there’s no missfire nor vibration issues. Just a little power loss, but you can run that way for 100K easily.
I’m curious about the two slides, they say the exact same thing but reflect two different efficiency improvements. The article claims it is because of the MCE. Plus, why is the capitalization wrong?
Idk, as also the wording leads to believe that’s over the whole truck line, IE including the 2.7 turbo and diesel, which will be unchanged. However the graphic is claiming V8’s only???? Vs the 2019 YM, there were lots of 5.3’s sold with the 6speed, and now they all included the 10 speed makes up for a lot of the difference. Also, no more AFM, just DFM in 2022
If one were to read the article, they’d understand the differences in the two efficiency data slides….
ok great, put it in a Camaro!!
The odd thing is that the 2109 and 2020’s used the same 5.3 DFM engine as they currently use but tied to the 8 speed auto and achieved 16/22 MPG on the volume 4X4 trucks. Currently using the same engine and 10 speed auto they have been downgraded to only 15/19 or 15/20 on the basic WT’s. So with that logic these new engines aren’t really going to be much more efficient than a 2019/2020 version of this truck only the current lower rated versions using the 10 speed trans.
They probably had to modify emissions related numbers/specs/profile throughout its lifetime, slowly dropping the MPG ratings.
GM NEEDS TO STEP UP AND ADDRESS ALL THE LAW SUITS AGAINST THEM FOR ALL THE BROKE DOWN TRUCKS! DO TO LIFTER FAILURE! PLAIN AND SIMPLE! I will NEVER BUY ANOTHER GM TRUCK AGAIN AND I HAVE THREE. ONE STILL IN PIECES DUE TO LIFTER FAILURE. JUNK!!!
DELETION? SCARED OF THE TRUTH!!!
President Reuss needs to pull his head out of his ASS and take action for all these lifter AND transmission issues! People can’t afford to buy a new truck just to have LIFTERS AND TRANSMISSION problems at 30,000 40,000 miles on them! Pure BS!!!
Especially for the insane prices these trucks have crept up to with your average cloth seat LT 4×4 with the 5.3 pushing 60K!
How about doing something about the rust problem on GMC and Chevy trucks.
It is the owner’s issue. We have rust here in those in the Middle East, but not to that extent that you have…