Silverado may get the i6 twin turbo charge

Silverado4x4 · May 31, 2022

Next Chevy Silverado Just Might Get a Straight-Six Gas Engine (msn.com)

TNTSierra · June 1, 2022

GM authority had same article. I say hell no. GMs small blocks get just as good gas mileage as the turbo V6s and doesn’t strain them as much. Have had Fords with Ecoboost in the family. They don’t get claimed gas mileage. Give me an updated version of old LS motor without any DFM or AFM junk.

John813 · June 1, 2022

Sure, the 2.7L TT only makes 30 less torque than the 6.2L but IMO the 6.2L could be tweaked to get close to 500 torque by GM easily. It may knock down the MPG by 0.5 so they won't do it.

I've had a few ecoboost trucks. They are peppy and easy to tune, but also had the most issues out of those engines compared to DOHC or OHV V8 engines.

One of the driving factors for me buying a 22 Silveradonew was that I was wondering when Chevy may drop the 6.2L in favor of a v6TT.

I know that was a reason for me to buy the wife a 22 Wagoneer with the 5.7L over the 23 with the 3.0L TT.

Edited June 1, 2022 by John813

f8l vnm · June 1, 2022

Just a matter of time . The 6.2 is and will always be my favorite but i could see it going away for a 500/500 Turbo 6 motor.

With Ford and Stallantis going this route , i think its just a matter of time.

Low Elevation · June 1, 2022

How about a twin turbo V8 instead

4banger · June 9, 2022

GM has some legendary engines, they are good at raising them. One of the most legendary pick up engines of all time however is an inline 6 with a single spin whistle...the original 5.9 cummins put in dodges starting in 1989. A long stroke torque monster with an unbreakable bottom end and million mile rebuild interval and KISS principle in most ways possible. Copying that formula is not a bad thing. Those motors came out with 160/170 hp and 400/410 ft/lbs torque. There was a 4 cylinder version of this motor as well but powering everything from forklifts to bread trucks that is equally as legendary and parts between them interchangeable. So the inline 4/6 combo is a good one to hit different power level needs.

Fast forward 30 years now and GM basically built a gas powered cummins 4 cylinder with that 2.7t, it's long stroke, single turbo and about as simple a configuration one can find in a modern engine these days, initially rated at 310 hp and 348 ft/lbs (from 1500-4000 rpm), now it's rated at 310 hp and 430 ft/lbs at 3000 rpm. So for the power obsessed (future 6.2 converts) they would do very well to add 2 cylinders to this exact engine which seems to be proving itself nicely the past 3 years since release in 2019.

Since I started obsessing over the 2.7t, which appears to be an engine for mid-size/half-ton plucked right from my subconscious, and learning about the benefits of boost in terms of retaining it's power over wide ranges of elevation as compared to the naturally aspirated engines it becomes clear why the cummins did so well despite it's anemic numbers and why boost really is the future.

If any of you are into excel and building some charts I urge you to compare the 2.7t to the 5.3 and 6.2. Naturally aspirated loses 3% power every 1000' elevation gain, turbo only loses 0.05%. You've got 14.7 psi atmospheric pressure at sea level and about 10.1 psi at 10,000' and when boosted up to 22 psi and that's regulated by a blow off valve this means you stay at 22 psi over atmosphere regardless of elevation....it makes the power loss of turbo motors hardly measurable. The naturally aspirated motors are stuck being dependent on the atmospheric pressures available.

I live at 4000' and the 5.3 loses 41/44 hp/tq and the 6.2 loses 48/53 while the 2.7t loses only 1 of each. In looking at my chart up to 10,000' the 2.7t matches the 5.3's hp at 4500' elevation but the torque advantage for the 2.7t is 95 ft/lbs. The 2.7t starts at sea level with a 47 ft/lb torque advantage over the 5.3 and a 45 hp deficit...basically equal power levels and one engine displacement is almost exactly half of the other. But as you get away from sea level the 2.7t numbers just keep walking away from the 5.3.

It actually gets more interesting comparing the 2.7t to the 6.2. 310/430 vs 420/460 hp/tq ratings. By 2500' elevation the torque is the same and this gap just grows as you go higher. At 4000' where I live the 2.7t has a 22 ft/lbs torque advantage with a 62 hp deficit. The hp equals on them at about 10,000' but the torque advantage for the 2.7t by that point is 89 ft/lbs.

So there's lots to be said with GM's direction on this 2.7t, I think they crystal balled the future very well and may have possibly built another legend. In my mind this is the best 'truck' direction to go, I don't like the way ford approached with the twin turbo v6, and dodge group is getting it more right with it's 3.0 inline twin turbo with what appears to be one smaller turbo for each 3 cylinders so there shouldn't be much lag etc. but big jug long stroke single turbo from gm still screams the most truck worthy in design and numbers. On fuelly.com averages of the ford 2.7tt and gm 2.7t they are very close with the gm besting the ford by only .1 l/100 km so there's no significant economy advantages, just enough to show 4 vs 6 cylinders being fed at idle and low rpm perhaps but these engines can produce v8 power so will suck v8 gas when asked to do so...they shine when you're not asking for those power levels and especially so at idle.

So longevity...well...yes bigger block v8's naturally aspirated are maybe 1000 psi cylinder pressures and the turbo gas will be around 2000 psi (the ford 2.7tt is 18 psi and about 2000 psi) and for comparison sake the turbo diesels run around 2600 psi and they were able to make 30 year old cummins diesels go a million miles without rebuilds so as long as these engines are designed for these pressures from the get go it shouldn't be a big deal to see long miles out of them much as the v8's do. We know the v8's can handle gobs of boost and hp and stay reliable so I'm predicting that since gm built this 2.7t from the ground up as a truck engine around that turbo that the bottom ends will be up to the task. They know how to build legends and we may be witnessing the birth of another here. I think this thing will be crated and swapped in the future much like the LS and small blocks have been for ages.

Which brings up another point, weight. This 2.7t weighs about 375 lbs from what I could find, 160 less than the 5.3. There's quite a few wins due to this. Nimbler street handling, less apt to get stuck off-road, more tow capacity, more bed capacity...and again ability to stuff into project rides down the road. This is no small 4banger...it's the largest currently offered 4 cylinder in a production auto...it's a big block 4 banger, 2720 ccs or 166 cubic inches of pure fury lol.

There's certainly a stigma in the truck world that v8 or nothing but times change. If one can objectively look at things and really dig into the subject then the only win I see to the v8 is sound and that's a subjective win...as we get older the subjective stuff matters less and less. I do agree with many thoughts here around that 6.2 being simplified without the afm/dfm crap and that would likely run for million miles no prob, you just pay penalty in fuel, and you've got enough power there to combat elevation losses and still run strong...but the efficiency overall just can't match when you double your atmospheric air pressures on the intake which eliminate elevation losses completely.

Bring on the turbo's period, I'll be all about this 2.7t though, I think it's the best gas engine available in half ton trucks with the 6.2 right behind it and it would make an ideal mid-size truck engine also and understand the Colorado will see it in 2023.

Just for some additional info of interest as I initially compared the 2.7t most heavily against the 5.3 as it's the legendary 1/2 ton motor imo and I've had one before, so much respect. The 5.3 is 5328 cc, 325 cubic inch and 666 cc per cylinder, and short stroke motor. The 2.7t is 2720 cc, 166 cubic inch with 680 cc jugs in long stroke with 22 psi boost so it does more with half the cylinders. Half of the 5.3 is 2664 cc so the 2.7t is just a littler larger than half of the 5.3. One of these screams 'truck' duty more than the other imo. For reference the 5.9 cummins had 735 cc jugs extra long stroke and the 6.2 is 376 ci with 770 cc jugs (short stroke again), the ford 2.7tt has equal bore/stroke and 449 cc jugs and the new 3.0 inline 6 from the dodge crew will be around 500 cc per jug but not sure if short or long stroke, likely pretty even like the ford as they push it to 500 hp in the h.o. trim so leaning to short stroke.

I think the future in truck motors will reward those brave enough to bring back simple long stroke configurations with modern tech/build quality.

Edited June 10, 2022 by 4banger

4banger · June 9, 2022

And if they just add a couple cylinders to the 2.7t and really do a modern cummins knock off on gas then it would be 4080 cc (4.1 litre) and with the existing 77.5 hp per cylinder they are getting it would be 465 hp and torque at existing 107.5 ft/lbs per cylinder would make the 6 cylinder version 645 ft/lbs and probably still weigh less 60-80 lbs less than the 5.3. Um...yes please gm...yes please.

Edited June 9, 2022 by 4banger

Big_Kahuna · June 9, 2022

RAM is getting i6 turbo

OnTheReel · June 10, 2022

GM sent me an oddly specific survey like two years ago about my feelings on an I6 turbo in a pickup. I wouldn’t be surprised if this is already in development since many of the other questions in the survey are now in the refresh trucks.

Engine bay obviously has the room since the 3.0 fits. Add two cylinders to the 2.7, done deal. I would pick it over the Ecoboost for sure but V8 is still king. Unfortunately GM seems content to let the current ones rot on the vine and these fuel prices ain’t gonna help motivate them!

4banger · June 10, 2022

11 minutes ago, OnTheReel said:

GM sent me an oddly specific survey like two years ago about my feelings on an I6 turbo in a pickup. I wouldn’t be surprised if this is already in development since many of the other questions in the survey are now in the refresh trucks.

Engine bay obviously has the room since the 3.0 fits. Add two cylinders to the 2.7, done deal. I would pick it over the Ecoboost for sure but V8 is still king. Unfortunately GM seems content to let the current ones rot on the vine and these fuel prices ain’t gonna help motivate them!

the problem with turbo charging a v8 is a half ton truck won't handle it, with the efficiency levels of turbo charging and modern tech on gas...you'll be into hp and torque levels that only the super duties drivetrains could handle, I can see why the 2.7t is the size and number of cylinders it is...it already looks to embarrass the 5.3 keep up to the 6.2 in half the continent and taking the 2.7t numbers and adding 2 cylinders already pushes the transmission and drivetrain components of a half ton I'm sure (465 hp and 645 ft/lbs torque would be a 6 cylinder version of the 2.7t)...that's 2500/3500 series torque numbers, heavy axles/transmissions etc.

gm nailed it with that 2.7t for half tons....the v8's would be way too powerful if turbo'd and once you see the benefits of high pressure air inlet for efficiency and flattening hills/mountains...it's obvious that has to be the direction of the future, spin whistles for the win

KARNUT · June 10, 2022

1 hour ago, 4banger said:

the problem with turbo charging a v8 is a half ton truck won't handle it, with the efficiency levels of turbo charging and modern tech on gas...you'll be into hp and torque levels that only the super duties drivetrains could handle, I can see why the 2.7t is the size and number of cylinders it is...it already looks to embarrass the 5.3 keep up to the 6.2 in half the continent and taking the 2.7t numbers and adding 2 cylinders already pushes the transmission and drivetrain components of a half ton I'm sure (465 hp and 645 ft/lbs torque would be a 6 cylinder version of the 2.7t)...that's 2500/3500 series torque numbers, heavy axles/transmissions etc.

gm nailed it with that 2.7t for half tons....the v8's would be way too powerful if turbo'd and once you see the benefits of high pressure air inlet for efficiency and flattening hills/mountains...it's obvious that has to be the direction of the future, spin whistles for the win

They could handle it. I never left anything stock gas or diesel. My whole family did the same. There’s aftermarket companies even dealers that did the same. Toyota just recently quit adding Super Chargers. With the nannies on vehicles just removing those makes a difference. Fuel mileage is the driver especially now not endurance.

OnTheReel · June 10, 2022

I wasn’t suggesting turbo-ing the V8. Although that would be fine by me.

Either way, GM is going to have to do something. The Powerboost F150 is at 430HP and 570TQ. The Chrysler I6 makes 510hp and 500TQ in the Wagoneer with no hybrid assist. If they stick that in the Ram, the GM 6.2 is playing third fiddle and it won’t even be close. A strong turbo I6 might best fill the hole for GM.

pokismoki · June 11, 2022

430hp in the F150, all that power requires large amounts of fuel. i thought the car makers where going Green ..

I miss the 80-90's when cars had 50-80 hp and 3-4 speed transmissions, everything was much calmer when driving on the roads. there was no Infotainment screen to distract you from the driving experience. Now little old grandmas are driving 400-600 Hp cars and blowing me off the roads, lol ahh technology is no way progressing humanity in the correct direction

today i realize I'm an Old Fart

4banger · June 11, 2022

15 hours ago, KARNUT said:

They could handle it. I never left anything stock gas or diesel. My whole family did the same. There’s aftermarket companies even dealers that did the same. Toyota just recently quit adding Super Chargers. With the nannies on vehicles just removing those makes a difference. Fuel mileage is the driver especially now not endurance.

Yes I agree they can handle it but would 600 hp and 8-900 ft/lbs in the half tons survive the durability testing? There wouldn't be a point of the 2500/3500 trucks once you boost the v8's...the engine is a rockstar (minus the dfm stuff) and it can handle the power but can the transmission, driveline, axles, brakes etc? They still need to keep the two segments of half tons and the super duty stuff. And we consumers need the lighter duty better mileage options also.

I do see the shift away from NA V8's though and once you boost you don't need that many cylinders anymore so it's going to be 4's and 6's. There will be a need for the base engines and high power engines...just as we've always had but gm is early to the game with one helluva a base engine which looks to make the 5.3 irrelevant so they need a boosted 6 to do the same to the 6.2 and surely it will be coming. Then one good diesel option and you're all set for your half ton motors. The average guy motor, the Tim the toolman Taylor motor for those who eat their wheaties, and the diesel....all of them will be boosted.

We have to keep in mind the masses not the enthusiasts in these discussions, plus the durability testing that the manufacturers need things to pass so they know they don't release a dud to market.

Edited June 11, 2022 by 4banger

4banger · June 11, 2022

14 hours ago, OnTheReel said:

I wasn’t suggesting turbo-ing the V8. Although that would be fine by me.

Either way, GM is going to have to do something. The Powerboost F150 is at 430HP and 570TQ. The Chrysler I6 makes 510hp and 500TQ in the Wagoneer with no hybrid assist. If they stick that in the Ram, the GM 6.2 is playing third fiddle and it won’t even be close. A strong turbo I6 might best fill the hole for GM.

I agree that's likely the direction they will go. I hope they follow the 2.7t formula with the inline long stroke single turbo but yes they need a boosted power house option for the hairier chested segment of half ton buyers. Looks like dodge is going to try and do it with one motor and two outputs, the SO (standard output) said to be 400 hp, 450 ft/lbs. Interesting approach, Ford already doing the 2.7tt and 3.5tt, gm has the 2.7t which is HO already so I agree a 6 will be coming...let it be a 4.1 liter version of the 2.7t with a slightly bigger spin whistle to feed two more cylinders and it would be amazing for output and torque would drown out the competition easily...these are trucks which are meant for work and efficiency so the long stroke makes more sense than the other manufacturer options imo.

Edited June 11, 2022 by 4banger