Thoughts on the Silverado 2.7 turbo engine

[Orangepeel]

I am contemplating buying a 2020 Silverado with the 2.7 turbo engine and the 8l90 transmission. What’s the overall consensus of this powertrain?
My current truck is a 2016 Silverado with the 4.3 and it struggles with our pontoon on hills. It does the job but you definitely feel it and the temperature gauge on hill makes me nervous. Thank you everyone!

 

[DCDG]

You can make that final decision it gets the job done but not ideally. it seems very stressed while doing so

 

[tblt44]

My old 2003 5.3 towes my #4200 TT but I use 3rd.
From my reading the 2.7 will do better than my old V8 and your V6.
The 5.3 would do better but they have there own issues with AFM/DFM what ever GM calls it now
There transmissions can be another problem in the newer trucks

 

[MrHorspwer]

The 2.7L/8-speed combo is worlds better than 4.3L/6-speed.

The 2.7L is proving out to be the least troublesome engine in the T1xx trucks. With 5.3L still eating lifters, 6.2L outright failing, and thrust bearing issues in the 3.0L diesel (along with normal increased operational and maintenance cost of diesel the diesel), the 2.7L is a compelling option.

Also, the 8Lxx are living a much better life behind the 2.7L. A big contributor to the 8Lxx being troublesome is the near-constant TCC slip on the V8s as a means of dampening engine vibration during DFM operation. This plays hell on the fluid and stresses the torque convertor, leading to shudder. The 2.7L doesn't run this strategy, leading to far fewer complaints on the trasnmission side.

I've never owned a 2.7L (my T1xx have all be V8s). My FIL tows a ~6,000 lb travel trailer on the regular though. He first pulled it with a 4.3L and he did not find it impressive. He likes the 2.7L though: He's on his second lease of one.

 

[Lawnman23]

An alternative for your current truck would be a lower gear in the diff(s). Depending on how much you tow, this would make a noticeable difference, albeit with higher cruising RPM's even in OD.

 

[dogememe]

Best modern engine GM makes and probably the best across all brands of half tons (edit: or even mid size). If I needed a truck it would be a GM with a two 2.7.

 

[BrendanC]

we have 4 of them, seem to do alright until you start towing. they drink fuel and work hard. 100K mile warranty is hard to scoff at though.

 

[JTK]

We have them as utility trucks at my plant. They are surprisingly powerful for a 4cyl in a full sized truck. We don't use them for towing as we have larger trucks for that.

They're a bit more complicated of an engine, with the cam tower setup, the super narrow cam lobes for the cylinder management, etc. It's an engine I wouldn't skimp on oil changes with.

 

[grasscutter]

It's the cylinder deactivation that would give me pause for concern. Being that it's already a 4cyl, I don't know why GM thought it was necessary to add the complexity of cylinder deactivation.

 

[hemioiler]

Around town it's more than adequate, but shows its lack of HP quickly when towing. Don't be fooled by the 430 lb/ft of torque, it can't tow better than the 5.3 or any v8 though it will probably do better than the NA v6s from the past.

The Ford 2.7 is a big upgrade over the GM 2.7, despite the identical displacement, though both Ford and GM have transmissions issues (especially with that particular 8 speed, the newer GM 8 speeds are supposed to be quite improved).

You could consider a 2020 Ram Classic with the 5.7 for a proven/reliable drivetrain in a cheap-to-purchase truck, or the tundra 5.7 for one of the most reliable half tons in the 2020 year market though it is a very old truck and it shows. Just depends on your priorities.

Also keep in mind that all half tons sell like crazy, so horror stories go up as well just due to volume of trucks sold. No matter which truck you research you can find scary stories, unfortunately. And the amount of scary stories goes up directly with how well the truck has sold.

 

[edyvw]

You can make that final decision it gets the job done but not ideally. it seems very stressed while doing so

On that particular route, it will out do most naturally aspirated V8’s. Ike peaks out at above 11,000ft. Rule of thumb is that in naturally aspirated engine you will lose 3% of power for every 1,000ft.
Turbo engines don’t lose nearly as much. Maybe 1% for every 1,000ft.
Also, they are leaving ECU to determine where to keep rpm’s. Spinning engine like that so high is already out of peak torque. Manually shifting would probably do better, but I get why they are doing it for test purposes.

 

[hemioiler]

On that particular route, it will out do most naturally aspirated V8’s. Ike peaks out at above 11,000ft.

Narrator's note: it doesn't.

 

[edyvw]

Narrator's note: it doesn't.

Ah, that is the part where weight gets scared by number of cylinders.
Forgot about that.

 

[dfarr67]

We have them at work, mileage is crap and on top of that the manual calls for premium. Hard pass.

 

[thunderfog]

2.7 Turbomax is built like a diesel. I love it, but I have it in a Colorado.

What's the weight of your boat and trailer?

 

[thunderfog]

We have them at work, mileage is crap and on top of that the manual calls for premium. Hard pass.

Not true on the premium part. Maybe better to use 91 if you're doing serious towing, but otherwise, 87 is fine for daily driving. Is your truck fleet the Colorado work truck? That's a really detuned version of the engine.

 

[Orangepeel]

2.7 Turbomax is built like a diesel. I love it, but I have it in a Colorado.

What's the weight of your boat and trailer?

Loaded probably close to 5k or so

 

[hemioiler]

Ah, that is the part where weight gets scared by number of cylinders.
Forgot about that.

You don't come back from an 80+ deficit in HP.

5.3 = 355 hp
5.7 = 395 hp
5.0 = 400 hp
6.2 = 420 hp

2.7 = 310 hp

There are other reviews which show the 2.7 getting wrung out and sitting at 4000+ rpms where the v8s are about 2000 to 3000.

That 2.7 is getting seriously stressed pulling the same load as a v8 which is just comfortably cruising. It's a v6 replacement, but it still can't win against the v8's, and that's something you'd know if you actually towed with them.

The 5.7 is of course an iron block, simple push rod v8, and it did many years of abuse as the base engine in the 2500; IMHO its the strongest (durability, not power) of the v8s in the half tons. Power aside, towing up the ike all the time will kill that turbo 4 way before the hemi, and the other v8's are stronger than the turbo as well. It's the wrong choice for a guy who is towing a lot.

 

[CKN]

It's the cylinder deactivation that would give me pause for concern. Being that it's already a 4cyl, I don't know why GM thought it was necessary to add the complexity of cylinder deactivation.

IT's a different system than whats on the 5.3....FYI.

 

[edyvw]

You don't come back from an 80+ deficit in HP.

5.3 = 355 hp
5.7 = 395 hp
5.0 = 400 hp
6.2 = 420 hp

2.7 = 310 hp

There are other reviews which show the 2.7 getting wrung out and sitting at 4000+ rpms where the v8s are about 2000 to 3000.

That 2.7 is getting seriously stressed pulling the same load as a v8 which is just comfortably cruising. It's a v6 replacement, but it still can't win against the v8's, and that's something you'd know if you actually towed with them.

The 5.7 is of course an iron block, simple push rod v8, and it did many years of abuse as the base engine in the 2500; IMHO its the strongest (durability, not power) of the v8s in the half tons. Power aside, towing up the ike all the time will kill that turbo 4 way before the hemi, and the other v8's are stronger than the turbo as well. It's the wrong choice for a guy who is towing a lot.

On that particular route, it will out do most naturally aspirated V8’s. Ike peaks out at above 11,000ft. Rule of thumb is that in naturally aspirated engine you will lose 3% of power for every 1,000ft.

6.2? Maybe.
Same like my Tiguan can dance around my Sequoia on that particular route, 2.7 will do to those you listed.
Altitude? Always boost over displacement regardless of number of cylinders.
Lower altitudes, different story.