GM new 2.7 turbo pick up motor

Status
Not open for further replies.
I absolutely love turbocharged performance vehicles. Gobs of midrange pull.

But between my 5.4L V8 F150 SuperCrew and my 3.5L Ecoboost F150 Supercrew, it's the V8 that wins the contest. So much so, it's not even close.

I can't imagine this 2.7L 4 cyl being a pleasing truck engine.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Danno

Fuelly.com would indicate otherwise.
3.5L Ford Ecoboost returns similar fuel economy to the Chevrolet 6.2L at 16-17 MPG in real world use.

I see the Ford ecoboost as an EPA play in that lighter throttle work for EPA numbers vs real world MPG improvement where heavier throttle application is used by drivers.

Can you break it down loaded and unloaded, work truck and non work truck? The variables increase vastly with a commercial vehicle that has a much greater chance of multiple people driving it playing old harry with the ECM learning driving styles. But yeah, the 3.5 gets similar mileage to the 6.2

I was just looking at the 2.7 10spd 19/24 v the 5.3 8spd 15/20.
It gets even more interesting when you compare the former with a 4.3 sierra: 17/22
All examples are 4x4, I assume the most common config.

3.5 = V8 replacement
2.7 = engine for what most of these trucks are used for, as a DD.

If you want a fuel efficient full size truck as a DD, you are not going to buy a GM. You are going to get a 2.7 F150.


Originally Posted By: dlundblad


I'm still not sure why people are so scared of turbos.

The turbo'd European unreliable money pit (as it's been called here) in my signature has been extremely hassle free. No turbo related issues whatsoever aside from it's complex PCV system needing replaced, which IMO partially stems from PO neglect.


Too many people buy euro cars because they want something more sophisticated than a Corolla. Then they whine when they are most sophisticated and costly to maintain than a Corolla, then they start skipping the maintenance because they are too cheap or know better. Then their car breaks and it is easier to blame it on the manufacturer than it is to admit they skipped a service or put the wrong fluids in. The engine in my car is responsible for VW's bad reputation, but that is why I got a good deal on it.

I always suggest euro cars if you can wrench, because you can get good ones for cheap from someone who's coworker's BIL knew someone who had an unreliable VW. The labour is the expensive part, the parts are the same as any other car but quality parts seem to be more available.
 
Originally Posted By: Cujet
I absolutely love turbocharged performance vehicles. Gobs of midrange pull.

But between my 5.4L V8 F150 SuperCrew and my 3.5L Ecoboost F150 Supercrew, it's the V8 that wins the contest. So much so, it's not even close.

I can't imagine this 2.7L 4 cyl being a pleasing truck engine.


I can see it doing well if it pulls well. They are putting it behind an 8 speed so it should do well.

One thing I love about my EB is that it pulls no matter what. Hook up 9k lbs to it and no issues holding the speed limit on the highway. Take it off and it's a rocket ship, with 0-60 times faster than most cars. Go high in the mountains and same power as down below. The gearing of the 6 speed could use work but from what I've heard the 10 speed makes it much better. No V8 rumble but that's OK - it's why they make the Mustang.
smile.gif
 
I went from the 4.7L V8 Tundra to the 2.7 V6 EB. The EB has more torque available at 1400 rpm than the V8 did. As far as usable power, the Ford so far has been more elegant. I'm looking forward to dragging the camper out with it soon.

That said, the toyota had a much more direct feel, which doesn't have as much usefulness in a truck but throttle modulation, say if you were driving aggressively was considerably more connected. Turbo lag doesn't aid here, and there is a little, and the truck's propensity to need to stay in one of its most optimum 10 gears, with defueling during shifts, means you are very aware of the DBW shennanigans going on in front of the firewall. Most folks will not notice this.

on topic, I'd have to drive the turbo 4 before laying out judgement. done right, it could be a perfectly good and welcome motor.

In a truck application, the only thing I've really noted with my smaller displacement high-boost engine is that there is no engine braking. It is laughable. you can hit the manual gear selection and barely feel it shift as you force the rpms higher and higher, unloaded. With a 5,000 lb trailer behind it, 98% of downhill passes will be on the brakes, including the trailer's.

-m
 
If it is anything like the 2.7 Ford Ecoboost it will be awesome. My 2.7 is a daily driver and How I drive it and of course where,I drive it I have averaged between 21 and 25 mpgs doing the math. It will tow 7.600 lbs if the F250 it broke down . Every one that has driven it has had a smile on their faces.
 
that original article was not written by someone who understands engines.

-missed the boat on the whole hot-air, intercooler thing.

-defies logic explaining active thermal management and cabin heat.

-m
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top