This article is part of the GM Authority Mailbag, where the GM Authority editors reply to your questions, comments, and observations.
John C. writes in to ask:
I love my 2021 Chevy Colorado and love the gen 3 styling. Is there any chance that we will see a v6 turbo or supercharged to compete horsepower wise with the Ranger Raptor? I am not sold on the turbomax.
John – thanks for the question; I know many are wondering the same thing.
You are correct – the L3B, with 310 horsepower and 430 pound-feet of torque, is down on power compared to the 3.0L V6 EcoBoost (405 horsepower / 430 pound-feet of torque) found in the Ranger Raptor. The torque is equal for both engines.
GM planned the third-gen Chevy Colorado (and GMC Canyon) from the very beginning to exclusively use the turbocharged 2.7L I-4 L3B engine. So the answer to your question is no – there won’t be a V6 in these trucks as far as we know.
Now, I understand you have a 2021 Colorado with (I imagine) the atmospheric 3.6L V6, but have you driven the new ones with the L3B? The engine, especially in TurboMax (high-output) form, is very good – making good power and torque on paper that translates to solid real world performance.
With a flat powerband that helps in spirited driving and towing, the L3B is a modern engine that features a potent dual-volute turbocharger with electronic boost control and tri-port exhaust, plus a high-tech TriPower valvetrain. Plus, the noticeable turbo whistle is a nice bonus reminiscent of the big boy Duramax diesels. I think that you’ll be convinced once you drive one of these… but if it’s a six cylinder you’re after, then don’t hold your breath.
An added benefit is that the high-output TurboMax version becomes the only engine in the 2025 Chevy Colorado, removing the lower-output version (RPO Code L2R). And for what it’s worth, the video above shows me ringing out a 2023 Canyon with the TurboMax engine for a couple of 0-60 runs on mountain roads around Asheville that were pretty healthy. I could have probably shaved off half a second at sea level.
Comments
The V6 is nearly out of production. It will die soon.
I’m someone that has owned a 2016 V6 Colorado LT a 2018 V6 Canyon SLT and a 2022 4 cylinder SR5 Tacoma (not turbo) and now a turbo 2024 4 Cylinder Colorado Z71.
Now doubt GM did the right thing putting 4 turbo in this truck. Anyone that says different simply has not had experience in driving others for long term. This engine is great, it gets slightly better mileage than I got with both V6 powered Colorado & Canyon (they where both 2WD, new Colorado is 4WD) Tacoma was non turbo 2WD and it was a complete dog no power and fuel mileage was not as good as you would expect. I find that most people that complain about no V6 are just clueless.
What about the I-6 that was under development?
Finish that and get it into the twins.
I6 Will not fit.
2M6,
Proof?
GM; We don’t give the customer what they want, we give them what they will tolerate.
Huh, the customer wanted more power, more torque and better mpg. They gave them it all. It has sold the most since 2019. What more do you want? Other than getting rid of the long bed which is understandable based on sales numbers, the combined the best of the V6, 2.8 diesel and 2.5 four in to one potent package. It doesn’t need a V6, it has the right motor for the class. Next step is hybrid power ideally. Let that car based V6 dies, it served its time and purpose.
Apparently you’ve never spent much time in a car with a small engine and turbo and learned to hate it’s lack of power at low RPM. Personally I’m not buying a 4 cylinder turbo anything ever again. The V6 was at least throwing me a bone, the 4 cylinder turbo is an insult. It belongs in a Mini Cooper, not a truck.
Have you drove anything with that 2.7L? Its fast. Much more so then the 3.6 ever was. It pulls better, I average better mpg, and cost a hell of a lot less then the ranger raptor. The new hybrid tacoma i-max is the only other small truck ive driven that maybe better $1 for $1.
Its not that dramatic Jim. I have a 3.6 now and had a 2.0 that was 300 HP and had a lot more flat torque than the 3.6. Drove it hard for 10 years never broke anything but traction.
Have you Jim? That is the EXACT OPPOSITE of what a smaller turbo is known for. Part of the reason they went that route is for the big jump in torque and way down low. Do you even look at the numbers before spouting off? We have a 3.6, I have test driven multiple 2.7’s, it is night and day how much better the 2.7 is. The 3.6 makes 270ftlbs at like 4k rpm, where the 2.7 peaks with 430 at 3k rpms but makes nearly 400 at 2k RPM. Tell me where the lack of power down low comes? Man it is not fun explaining stuff to non car people. Smaller turbo motors are awesome is most ways, and this coming from a modded NA LS guy.
Actually, I have. One of my best friends has a 2.7 Silverado (same motor), and we have test driven a few new gen Canyons to possibly replace our 2016, though without the long bed it is hard to switch as we have a CCLB. Have rented PLENTY of smaller turbo motor fours, they are impressive! Having come from driving a wifes old NA four in her Rav4, a smaller turbo is a huge welcome. A big torque bump down low, it is one of the characteristics of a smaller turbo motor. Look at what the Ecoboost accomplished or the new turbo 6 in the Rams. Give me a smaller displacement turbo motor over a bigger cube NA motor any day of the week, it horribly will out perform the NA motor in torque down low while keeping high rpm HP. I just don’t understand your guys dated ways of thinking, do you even test anything or research before spouting off dated info? Any acceleration tests, any reviews, any pulling tests just constantly shows why adding turbos and reducing displacement is the way to go, hence why EVERYONE is doing it. The 2.7 has been shining in the trucks getting great reviews and is the most reliable of the motors. Not sure what more you want, if you want to try and mislead people with false info, go ahead, but anyone who spends more than 3 seconds researching will know. The 2.5 in the Traverse is case in point. Other than the sound, it does everything the old motor does but better…
I wanted instant power (no wind up and waiting), quiter (non-whiney), No Lag (unsafe and annoying), and reliability (turbos will break down faster than other parts). Unfortunately, Spec chasing turbo’s dont’ provide any of that. Instead turbo’s provide an inferior driving experience for the sake of chasing misleading numbers.
Throttle response matters. Turbos are terrible at this.
Unsafe? You lost any for of credibility with that saying.
No wind up? What do you think the 3.6 needs to do to make power at 5k rpms? We have one, you want any mid level power, it has to wait and wind up. With the turbo 2.7, there is a half second delay and it is fully spooled making more torque at 2k rpms than the 3.6 makes at full tilt. Seriously, why is this place full of non car guys that have zero clue how things work? Your saying might have applied in 1980, but since variable vane and staggered turbos came about the lag is gone.
Time to torque is a big measure of turbo power, it is one of the fastest. Basically they measure how long it takes to go from no throttle at 1500rpm to 90% torque, less than two seconds, how long do you think it takes an NA motor to go from 1500rpm to 90%? Much longer with the torque way up in the rpm band. Again, just uneducated people talking with dated ideas…
That is why I now own a Nissan Frontier with a V6!
They have just not moved on yet. Nissan is broke and can’t develop a more efficient engine.
GM does not care about the customer , they build what they want.
GM does care as they need to sell cars but it is Washington and Carb that prevents you from having what you want.
Then how does Ford get away building a 400hp TTV6 Ranger Raptor?
The Ranger is cold Globally the twins are just sold here.
The charger a lot more overseas for the Raptor and they don’t sell many of them.
Most rangers are 4 cylinder Turbos just like the GM twins.
They have to get more MPG to sell more large trucks where the money is based on the EPA law. The election was just a couple months ago and they can plan on who will win as one side will reinstate the draconian EPA regulations.
It is up to the people to remove the people putting these laws in and keeping them out.
Bring back the LS engines and drop one in.
The LS engine is simply folk lore. It had a terrible oiling system and is mostly popular because of the multitude of parts available. I’m not saying it’s not awesome in it’s way, but the LT is a way better engine and the LS GM crate motor probably ought to be sent out to pasture. Just get an LT.
Actually the LS is a great engine but it will not solve the MPG and Emission numbers GM has to meet.
Bring back the 302 from the Z28.
Your comment about driving at sea level doesn’t apply to a turbocharged motor. The turbos pump air as opposed to normal aspiration.
You are correct, except for the time before the turbo actually kicks in – which is crucial when it comes to a 0-60 run.
I’m not sure how long it takes for the exhaust gasses to spool up the turbo in the L3B or how much the brake stand accomplishes this, hence the comment.
The L3B does have decent power but it also loves to stop at the gas station for a fill up. Love the truck but the gas mileage is horrible, maybe someone can come up with a solution for that other than buying a different brand.
Seems like ALL these “turbo” motors suck fuel way more than you’d expect given their smaller displacement. Ford’s 3.5 twin turbo V6 in their trucks is infamous for it, especially if it is being used as a truck to haul a load or as a tow-vehicle. Shorter Longevity of ANY “boosted” gas engine is going to upset a lot of owners eventually.
Not true. Just depends on how you drive. My Corvette can get 20 MPG if driven normal and 14 MPG if driven hard.
The driver controls this. My 300 HP 2.0 got 26 MPG around town and 32 highway.
Alex I think the web site need to address education of the Auto industry and the challenges they are faced with as well the realties.
This is not the good old days where you can do just what you like. Also the regulation are to the point they change ever election term. the states are more divided now than ever too. It may change soon but then we have elections in 4 years.
The Auto industry is in trouble and it will get worse. Making money is not enough anymore but the highest ROI is what matters. Sadly the fun cars make less money than most average cars. GM is working hard with things like the Trax to keep the prices down and the profits up.
Either way many here just do not grasp all that is in play in the real world and workings of an automaker.
Too big to fail, too big to compete.
Adam,
I have a 22 Colorado Z71 V6 i really like but my Lease is up. I just drove a 25 Colorado Z71
and that turbo 4 is LOUD ( tick tick at idle and that supposed turbo whistle is annoying to me!
Not quite sure it is the turbo making that noise after reading various articles on the turbomax..
some say it is a gearing noise at low RPM?
Anyways, I was not impressed so far with the turbomax which stinks because I love my wife’s 21 GMC terrain with the 1.5 turbo, fun to drive with NO Noise! great mileage too.
The Colorado falls Short in my opinion, noisey and Poor Mileage.
We have a 2025 colorado 4×4, agree engine is loud when cold, better when comes up to temp. mileage on this one is better than v6 was, just over 3,000 on it . Surprised how loud engine is compared to fullsize silverado with 2.7 , which is quiet! Wonder what the difference is? exhaust?
I think GM should start listening to consumers. They would be surprised ( I believe) how many more vehicles they would sell if they gave people what they wanted and not what GM wants to give them.
Not the government Regulators need to listen We have some now but we also have another election in 4 years. The automakers are in the middle.
The last company truck I had (retired 03-2023) was a 4-dr Silverado with the 2.7L TurboMax in it. I was impressed! Same basic power as the old 396/325, 383/325, and 390/320 V-8s of old. With the 8-spd, in some situations, it really needs a G80 PTrac as standard equipment. I liked it better than the prior 5.3s I’ve had.
0-60mph is the former territory of big-block V-8 cars of the earlier 1960s. Very similar to the 3.8L v6 Regals of the later 1990s, too. There are other YT vids of the new TMax 4wd Silverados on the drag strip. Still, impressive.
NOW, to order a Colorado WT, TMax 2.7L, and normal tires in 2wd, with the needed G80 option, forget the Raptor and all of that. Put some sticky tires on it and go “a hunting” on the streets and drag strips of the nation. A sleeper if there ever was one in modern times!
The 3.6L High-Feature V6 is at the end of its design life. Tooling is getting to be worn out, so might as well spend the same money on something newer and better, which is the 2.7L TMax.
As to the “turbo lag”, by the time you got the rpms to 2k, the turbo should already be spooled-up, as the torque curve starts at 1500rpm. What you are feeling is the weight of the truck, the tire size of the truck, not the turbo not being spooled-up. I could notice about 1second in normal use, if that much, myself.
Now, I never had an occasion to “see what it’ll do” with the Silverado. I’d already watched the YT drag strip runs at that time. It did just fine at part-throttle, or less, positions. I was more concerned about mpg rather than tire smoke. So no WOT use needed.
I just liked the way the engine drove in normal use. Plus the better mpg than a former 4.3L V-6 Silverado or 4.8L V-8 Silverado, I had both over the later years.
You hit it right on the head. I have a 2wd WT L3B Turbomax with G80 (comes with HD trailer PKG). The thing is a hot rod. Torque out the wazoo that really throws you back in the seat and pulls all the way up.
And hey, I get 23mpg all day every day with it…..
Add a v6 for the ZR2 and a long bed version. The v6 6 speed in my 2016 gets 24 mpg highway all day long. Q
I do like the new safety systems and that is a definite step up.
gm is not listening to its customers. I wanted a full size “powerful” pickup truck and gm offers nothing. Ended up buying a Shelby F150 with 775hp and it is CARB legal here in California. No way to get that power legally in a gm product. They have abandoned the performance market except for Corvette.
Oh now wait just a minute (sarcasm) you are going to be able to order an EV SS Blazer like what just “paced” the recent NASCAR Daytona 500…. there’s your “performance” Bwa-ha-ha-ha…..
Haha, that is AFTERMARKET. Plenty of huge aftermarket companies offering big power with warranties for GM there too bud…
Not your bud.. The artermarket in California (CARB State) makes it impossible to make a gm truck as powerful as the Shelby. You can buy performance trucks from both Ford and Stellantis, but they are lifted 4×4’s. I wanted a low to the ground street azz hauler and the F150 based Shelby fits the bill. Cannot do that here either Chevrolet or GMC legally.
Couldn’t give two chits how the 4 is better than the 6! All the comparison is on flat land no load! I had a GMC 1500 with a v6 and it was underpowered and in the mountains it was in passing gear most of the time! So with the colorado let’s take away the V6, install a 4 with turbo, wind the living dog chit out of it, put a 5th wheel behind it run it back n forth over the mountain range every other day and see how long it will last
Atruck should sound like a truck! Not sound like a Honda!
Why would you put a 5th wheel on a midsize or 1/2 base truck?. Get an 2500 at the least….
Chuck has zero clue what he is talking about. With big torque down low that is part of the reason is DOESN’T need to be wind out. It can stay in the middle RPM’s. As far as longevity, it sucks talking to people who don’t understand how engines and vehicles work to explain to them YOU CAN BUILD AN ENGINE AS TOUGH OR WEAK AS YOU WANT. If they want to built a smaller motor to last a few hundred thousand miles they easily can and they can build big cube NA motors to not last nearly as long, it is all how you build it. With the 2.7, it is build STOUT, lasting is not a question with these motors and so far they seem to be trending in that direction. The engineers have stated how it was one of the hardest to kill in torture testing. It was built to almost diesel like strength. People who aren’t car people with dated ways of thinking have zero clue on this stuff. I would put money that a 2.7 will outlast a 3.6 with anything on the hitch and do it better.
Either the 4.3 or/and 5.3 should be offered on Bison and ZR2. The weight , price and use of those trucks can benefit from bigger displacement…
4.3 is a boat anchor.
Really wanted to stay with GM but got a 2024 Nissan Pro4X with its smooth , proven V6. I guess I’m old school but I love that the truck is also. Hydraulic steering, real knobs and buttons within easy reach without taking eyes off the road and a really decent price. And yes, it’s North American made.
And your money goes back to Japan, congrats on that! Do people not realize how corporations work? The money doesn’t stay where it is built, it all goes up through the line to corporate and allocated down.
GM needs to put a V6 (or even a small V8) in their midsize. I have a 2018 Canyon V6 and I’m very happy with it, but there’s no way I’m buying a 4 cylinder truck. I know the 2.7 has lots of power, but it sounds terrible. This, for me, is a deal breaker. I will ultimately probably buy a Nissan or Ford in the future since GM doesn’t want to give customers engine options in there mid size. I also own a 5.3 Silverado and 5.3 Yukon. Love the sound from both.
So basically, you don’t need a truck, you are just buying for sound. WHO DOES THAT? That is laughable. Oh, this truck has everything I want, great price compared to the others, drives the best, but I don’t like a sound so I am going to go with a worse choice. The old fogies really need to update their way of thinking, welcome to the new age boomers. Turbo 4 > V6
It won’t be happening as that goes against GM’s losing with mediocrity philosophy.
12K on my ZR2 and I can’t say enough how much I LOVE the 2.7. I’ve had V6 engines in the past and this motor walks all over any of them . It’s amazing the amount of low rpm torque it has,. My guess, everyone complaining hasn’t spent 10 minutes with it. Again, I can’t say enough about what s perfect match it is to the mid size truck.. You can have your old V6 engines, I’m keeping the 2.7.
If the General would give us a diesel in the twins, I’d consider one for a replacement of my 2020 Collie… AFTER I wear it out !
r that titl inglesh?
“Will GM Ever Put The New Chevy Colorado A V6 Engine?”
I had a 22 ZR2 and it guzzled gas, didn’t seem all that impressive power wise. While the same 3.6 V6 DOHC had 335hp with manual trans in my 1LE Camaro was a thrill to drive while getting better mileage. I drove a 2.7 in 2019 in a Sierra ext cab and it ran better than a lighter smaller V6 Canyon, especially the torque. It sure seemed like the turbo 2.7 was an improvement in the pickup truck application, turbo reliability might be the main concern long term. EPA and Government regulations force manufacturers to reduce choices depending on fleet requirements for each company. The EV mandates forced manufacturers to spend billions on EV development, even though consumers aren’t completely sold on the trade offs. Many EV companies like Canoo are going bankrupt trying to start up from scratch. It puts legacy manufacturing in a tough spot financially trying to balance consumer demand while keeping up with government regulations. I like EV’s, but I wouldn’t want to give up my ICE vehicle either.
Replaced my v6 Colorado V6 Z71 with a 24 ZR2. Besides the noise, the 4 cylinder turbo is much better. MPG has been better than expected but about the same as my Z71. It really does have V8 like torque feel but the whistles of the turbo and rough sounding 4 give it away. But even with all that happy I made the switch.
Reading many of these post I see many people not considering all that is in play.
Would GM love to install a V6 or V8 yes. They know people would like to have that and they would sell.
What makes all the money full size trucks. How Does GM sell more full size trucks they have to sell more smaller 4 cylinder and now 3 cylinder vehicles.
It is the people you vote for that set the emission and economy regulations. These determin what they can sell.
How does Nissan sell a V6. They sell no real V8 engines or full size trucks that make money. They also are broke. They likely can afford a new engine at this time while they beg for a partner to merge with.
The new turbo 4 has much better torque range than my 3.6. The 3.6 make little torque till it gets over 3000 RPM.
Look I’m disappointed in the lack of a V6 but I’m more disappointed in the price increase in the trucks.
The auto industry is going to be in tight conditions for a while. If the EPA can remain stable for a while it can give them a break and they can economically recover. But that will take 8-12 years. Till then we will see more struggle like Nissan and others looking to Merge.
GM is holding steady compared to most. Companies like Ford are heading to real trouble as they quality dropped and sales have slowed.
You look at the Colorado forums, most are getting better MPG than the V6 and meeting or exceeding the epa ratings with the 2.7. Other than sound, it is superior. No one cares what size engine you have, it doesn’t impress anyone at your kids soccer game. Stop with the dated thinking and the concern about image, you are over 40 with kids…
Put a bigger bed on the truck, I don’t want a full size. Gm could at least give us an option. I don’t want to buy a Toyota just to be able to get the bigger bed but it might happen. Life long Gm owner
I own a 2016 Colorado Diesel. 204000 miles, more than adequate Power and torque than I require. No major problems other than DEF maintenance. Will have to consider the 1500 6 cyl Diesel for next truck. They are still exporting the Colorado Diesel in other countries. We need them also.
Surprisingly the Colorado is as big as the GMT800 Silverado. I don’t understand why GM put the 3.6 in the trucks instead of the 4.3. The 4.3 is cheaper, lighter, and more torque. The 5.3 makes sense as well.
What these “enthusiasts” are missing when they say the 2.7T is “better” on paper than the V6 is that dyno tests are at Wide Open Throttle. If you’re going up a slight grade, the high compression V6 has more torque at part throttle than the 2.7. When the 2.7 gets into boost it uses more fuel than the V6. Modern engines are made to game the EPA tests. That’s why turbo engines struggle to meet their EPA ratings in real life, and the ratings have been clawed back twice in the last 20 years.
Correct. And not all turbo charged engines can compensate for elevation loss as some have stated; the turbo must be able to spin faster than at lower elevation. Not all can do that. And if they do, you can expect a shorter life expectancy. The ZR2 has an awesome suspension/differentials let down by a mediocre engine.
No V6.
EV is more likely.
4.3 would be great. SDPC turbo charged a stock 4.3 to over 600 HP & 700 lb ft of torque.
The 2.7 isn’t perfect by any means but it is a lot of fun and dramatically more fun to wind out than the v6 ever was. Take it from someone who daily drove a 2019 zr2 v6 for four years and took delivery of one of the first next gen zr2s in their state. Would I like more power, oh hell yes. Would more power take the truck from fun-to-drive, fun-to-throw-around-corners to oh-shit-this-truck-is-gonna-kill-me? As far as fuel economy, again this is coming from a zr2 owner, a truck that corners and rips off the line like this thing does is gonna be really tough to want to drive in an economical way.
I have the NA 2.9 I-4 in my 2010 GMC Canyon. It’s all of 180 hp.
But the truck follows my 1-2-3 rule of trucks:
1 row of seats
2 doors
3 pedals
I use it as a truck. My snowblower fits in the 6-foot box inside the bed cap. The lawnmower fits back there just fine as well.
I wish GM would make a new regular-cab, manual transmission pickup, as I don’t know what I’ll do once this truck rusts to the point where the structure becomes compromised. Maybe in 2028 I’ll import a Chevrolet Tornado (Montana) from Mexico. That looks like a fun truck.
I have been buying GMCs, Chevys and Pontiacs since the 1960s. Trucks and cars alike. Now I am looking for a smaller truck. GMC or Chevy. But I will not buy a 4 banger or a foreign one. So I looks like a Ford.
I’ve looked at the new Rangers and they have a lot of pluses. The Lariat/Raptor trims have a much more functional interior than the new Collies (except no a/c seat option).
GM needs to revamp the 2.8L diesel and offer it as an option. Good engine, but a major slouch. I have 2.
The 3.0 L Duramax is absolute perfection. I miss that truck.
No , they will make ev colorado soon enough. For better or for worst