A little bit of a longer one, but really wanted to showcase this engine working as hard as it did! She held firm the whole way but I would caution anyone needing to tow a similar load at highway speeds and maybe looking at a larger engine. Just my thoughts! let me know what you think.

@karlschauff7989

27 күн бұрын

Looking forward to a towing review with the LZ0 Duramax! Hopefully you can find someone with the LZ0 and 3.73's.

@carlwemple6075

27 күн бұрын

Don’t think these smaller engines have longevity built into them, yeah very torque engines but I can’t see spending 60 to 70k on a throwaway engine

@ericj810

5 күн бұрын

Bad purge pump we noticed a power lagg/loss in the 21 model until it was fixed. Warranty coverd it. But yhe truck wasn't acting the same pulling the tractor untill purge pump was fixed. Gas mileage was worse to.

an i6 version of this engine similar to the vortec 4200 would be pretty neat to see

@TheGettyAdventures

27 күн бұрын

It's rumoured that GM was originally going to introduce this engine and an inline 6 together. but the inline 6 got ditched for some reason. would of been cool to see.

@thejosh0100

27 күн бұрын

@@TheGettyAdventures maybe they had the same thoughts on the i6 that Ford did with theirs

@thejosh0100

27 күн бұрын

@@stingcool9455 a north American barra would have been sick tho

@dawsongranger4940

27 күн бұрын

@@TheGettyAdventuresA 5 or 6 cylinder version of this engine would be a great replacement for the 5.3 and even the 6.2. With ford having great success with turbo 6s Chevys missing out

@firstlast---

26 күн бұрын

​@@stingcool9455unlikely to happen. that would make the lz0 redundant

Iv driven the 1500 with the 2.7 and thought it was decent as I daily drive a 21 1500 with the 6.2l. Just test drove a 24 canyon and it was a blast. I think it will excel in the midsize game, super impressed. Great review!

@TheGettyAdventures

27 күн бұрын

I think GM knocked it out of the park putting this engine in the mid size trucks. those trucks will be awesome to drive. but in terms of the full size. I think it depends on what you use your truck for. just putting around town it will be perfect, but if you tow a camper trailer maybe look at the 6.2L like you have. they tow very well.

@ews360

4 күн бұрын

@@TheGettyAdventures Got a '23 Silverado Custom Crew 4X4 for limited towing. 9k lb capacity vs 7,700 rating in Colorado/Canyon. 16" greater wheelbase stability is key.

Watching this while riding in a Turbomax truck

@TheGettyAdventures

27 күн бұрын

Love it!

Great test! Glad to see these trucks getting worked hard and handling it.

As the owner of the same truck / engine, with 20,000 miles on the odometer, and thousands of miles towing a 7x16 enclosed trailer weighing in on the scales at 6,000 lbs, towing up and down US east coast mountains.... I agree with your test and thoughts... As a daily driver, and mine is daily driven often times 200 plus miles a day it is great! the truck is plenty fast, very comfortable and rides very good and MPGs are 17-21 per tank depending on what I am doing. This truck does very well towing 6,000 lbs long distances through the hills. Surprisingly well. BUT it does drink a lot of gas. GM really should install bigger tanks on these trucks.. If I was going to tow anything more than 6,000lbs, personally, I would step up to a 3/4 ton gasser. However, if I wanted to stay in a half ton , I would not want to do it with the 2.7 OR EVEN the 5.3... I would have to find a 6.2. Overall, I really like the truck and If I could turn back time I would still go with the 2.7 and stay away from the 5.3 lifter eater.... AND if there was a Silver SLT 6.2 crew cab 6.5 bed sitting on the lot,.... That would be hard to pass up.

@FredRTP96

27 күн бұрын

Gm is dumb for only doing 24 gallon tank across the board

@D2O2

27 күн бұрын

Does the 2.7 require 93 octane? My 5.3 only requires 87.

@gregktm8907

27 күн бұрын

@@D2O2 87 is all it calls for

@D2O2

27 күн бұрын

@@gregktm8907 Good to know. I know the 6.2s require 91 minimum.

@prevost8686

26 күн бұрын

Has it started drinking oil yet? It seems like the 2.7 Chevy likes to start drinking oil before 100K miles.

After 9 months & 8,000 miles of troublefree 2023 Silverado Custom Crew 4X4 2.7 turbo ownership, finally pulled our travel trailer. As anticipated, performed awesome. Pulled our old 2009 Rockwood 33' long travel trailer weighing 6,000 lb dry and loaded w/ (guestimate) 1,000 lbs of food/drink/gear/clothing/etc, along w/ (guestimate) 500 lbs of firewood in truck bed. Truck rated to tow 9,000 per doorjamb sticker. Most of 90-mile journey was 55 mph limit 2 lane flat roads where truck was happy @ 60 mph / 2,000 rpm (6th gear in tow/haul mode). 9.6 mpg avg burning 87 octane gasoline. Truck not optioned w/ trailer brake controller. Bought Curt Echo Bluetooth & it worked great. No wiring, or unsightly aftermarket controller knob in dash.

Would certainly like to see how the 2.7 ford 6 cyl compares to the chevy 2.7 4 cyl. towing the same rig.. Enjoying your videos. Keep up the great work!!

Really enjoy your real life videos, Thanks again

Scary with how hard that engine worked on the hill. Redlining that long is definitely worrisome for me.

@murrkem8239

27 күн бұрын

Did you expect a 4 cylinder 2.7 to sit comfortably at 1700rpm towing that much?

@compunerd

27 күн бұрын

@@murrkem8239 well probably not i would guess (not to speak for him) however given that it's in a full size truck application it should have higher gearing as stated by the video poster, which would alleviate alot of this. Problem with high RPM for sustained periods is high oil temperatures, which is something you don't want in any engine for longevity.

@ericj810

27 күн бұрын

​@@murrkem8239Not with that parachute. The 5.3 and 6.2 gonna screem to with that thing on hills. Id go 3/4 ton diesel if I had to pull that around. 1/2 ton trucks skeer me with that setup no matter the engine.

@DragonZer0

27 күн бұрын

​@@compunerd​The higher temps will just break down the oil sooner so increase your oil changes but as long as it in range of what the engine is designed to do it shouldn't decrease the longevity as it is designed to be operated there.

@compunerd

26 күн бұрын

@@DragonZer0 Sure, but if they get too high (the vehicle was at redline for quite a bit) it can reduce the viscosity of the oil past a certain point of being destructive due to lack of lubrication. It's not normal for a vehicle to sit at 5000 rpm unless it has a fantastic cooling solution under the hood, which I highly doubt GM put a racing grade cooling solution under the hood of that thing.

I have this engine in my 2023 Colorado and regularly tow my 4,000 pound camper with it. It does amazing in this use case! For a mid size application like this I think it's perfect! Definitely pushing it when maxing out a full size though. Awesome test nonetheless!

Glad you made it

Great vid! I really like the format you put the results in for the tests, put all of the scores on the screen. I’ve been watching vids on this motor for a while now, being a dieselhead, I wonder if any power adders are available for this motor? I’ve heard so much good about it. 👍🏻

My buddy just bought two of these trucks for his company , i was astonished at the off idle response and torque .

Great info. Your my new motor trend tv. 👍👍

Great real world test. If anyone has pulled a trailer through NB they will know what they have. Edmunston to Moncton will let you know whether you are headed to the dealer when you get home.

Honestly like to see this redone with a truck that doesn’t have a Evap issue. I would like to know how that affects fuel economy especially the way the Turbo max is set up.

Love your videos! I’m from NB too.

Great review! I enjoyed it. Thanks for the info. I was thinking of buying one but, I'll stick with the 5.3

I'm impressed it did that well, that was a heck of a load for a 4cyl

Man, this motor looks better and better every day. I bet those living in the mountains will have a great advantage.

@michaeldemko8522

24 күн бұрын

n/a motors do not like elevation. turbos help out a lot for those that live well above sea level

My Colorado 2.8 diesel pulling 6500 lbs up big hill will rev to 3000 rpm and maintain 100kph but when I pull that load I don’t go over 100 kph and I run it in 5th gear. It’s a 6 speed and 5 th lets it run at 2000 rpm at 100 kph on flat ground. It will not downshift unless the hill is steep. It’s a 2018 and has been very impressive so far. I tow a dual axle toy hauler. I have had a construction duel axle dump trailer loaded with firewood behind it. Running approximately 9000 lbs and it had no issues.

Thanks for the excellent video as always Alex, this definitely answered my question of will the four banger tow my camper and it looks like it would but wouldn't be happy!! Thank you sir!!

@TheGettyAdventures

26 күн бұрын

It's tough for the camera to pick up just how large the front of the trailer is. I imagine with less weight and maybe a more aerodynamic set up you would be much better off.

The added wind resistance of the enclosed trailer really did a number on those MPG numbers. Thanks for getting a more realistic trailer for towing tests.

Highway with frontal area trailer will humble even the best of tow rigs. My 7.3 gas F250 tows noticably better woth an 8300lb car + gear on an open deck, and a 12k excavator in alot of scenarios than with my 6500lb camper setup. Dont gst me wrong it does great will all three, but its amazing how the lightest trailer of the bunch produces some of the worst fuel economy and most need for lower gears. Despite its performance its even impressive a 2.7L engine is even in the running for towing such a heavy load. As you said, keep it off the interstate, or keep lighter trailer s behind it and it really can perform surprisingly well

I am seriously considering this for my next truck.. I basicallh haul 4 people, 2 big dogs, and a boat around 3500lbs. That load happens about 4 times year. Seems like this would be perfect.

@clay282

27 күн бұрын

I think we're in the same boat, so to speak. If prices weren't so crazy I would buy one. I currently have a ram 1500 with the V6 and it works hard but tows gear and boat, about 5000lbs, a few times a year just fine. I think for the majority of us, we don't tow large loads often enough to spend the extra money for the big motors.

Very nice and interesting test. That being said, there is no way I'm giving up my 3.0 Duramax! One of the best engines I've ever had!

@DragonZer0

27 күн бұрын

I think the youtuber I DO Cars just did the Duramax 3.0 tear down today and boy does it look like it had a bad time.

@dw8555

27 күн бұрын

I believe that he came to the conclusion that the driver had put gasoline in the tank, which explains why it wasn’t a “warranty engine.”

@swhalstead

13 күн бұрын

I have the 3.0 duramax with 144k miles. I love the power/torque/mileage. But it’s been the most unreliable motor I’ve ever had. Had to replace the entire cooling system. Radiator/water pump/coolant control valve. And now both front and rear engine seals are leaking oil. Put almost 10k in repairs.

This truck has a market, but towing an 8000lb camper, isn't it. For the average person towing a small boat or small camper and going to Home Depot, it would do well. If you want to tow big, you need bigger. My friend has one in trail boss trim, and he loves it - good all around truck for what he needs.

My Titan sits around 4500rpm when towing 8k up a step grade as well. Cargo trailer.

Neat little engine if you’re not going to regularly tow. Reminder, it purpose was to replace the v6 which was the entry level engine.

I think you nailed it in the conclusion, this engine is being pushed to its max at highway speeds and that's not where I'd want to be. This is the first video that finally makes that very clear to me, so congrats on that lol, been waiting to see how this would do vs my 5.7 since like 2019 when I was researching trucks before making a purchase. Still a great little motor though, especially for a base engine. Drop 2000 pounds, maybe lose a foot of the height and width of the trailer (tow an "rpod") and it might be a nice little tugger at that point.

@TheGettyAdventures

12 күн бұрын

Exactly, Towing in town with this trailer was a very easy going, even at like 50 mph it towed very well. even if you were towing an 8,000lbs boat with less wind resistance you would probably be fine!

Thanks for demonstrating the limits of an engine rated at 310HP 430lbft of torque & what happens when you add the equivalent of a 1-1/2 sheets (more or less) of plywood, full area into a 110km/hr wind. Great videos, truly enjoy. Thanks

@TheGettyAdventures

12 күн бұрын

Makes a huge difference. fuel economy also take a massive hit lol

I would consider adding one of these to my fleet

its crazy how much of a difference some wind resistance can make! I have the same thing happen when I'm towing hay, it just acts like a huge sail.

@TheGettyAdventures

27 күн бұрын

Just like a massive wind brake really. both trailer were 8,000lbs but the enclosed trailer felt twice as heavy at highway speeds.

Hi Alex, I watch all of your truck tests even though I am not interested in that truck. You vids are very informative . You definitely made me think twice about buying a GM v 8. I recently purchased a Ridgeline. The VCM has got me worried about longevity. Cylinder deactivation doesn't seem like a good idea and I'd like to hear your thoughts on VCM. Thank you.

I’d like to see the test results-run without a check engine light. I understand you ran the code but that doesn’t mean the computer wasn’t compensating some how or the performance wasn’t hindered in some way.

I had a 20012 5.3 Chevy, it wasn't happy towing a 7 by 10 single axle enclosed trailer with 5 chest coolers in it. Not much weight at all, maybe 1200/1500lbs. Now I have 3.5 ecoboost....night and day, the thing's a beast for a half ton.

@joshtaylor1416

26 күн бұрын

Till you have to spend $4,000+ when you’re turbos go out.

@grizz474

25 күн бұрын

@@joshtaylor1416 Yeah, That's what some people say. I drove tractor trailer for 44 years, during that time the several different tractors I drove, for well over a million and a half miles, I had 2 turbos go bad. Turbos have been around for a 100 years. I don't have that unfounded fear of turbo chargers. Ford along with most of the other manufactures engineered these modern engines from the ground up to be boosted motors. They didn't just hang a turbo on the side of an off the shelve motor and call it good (Like when GM tried to turn the gas 350 into a diesel and stuck them into Cadillac's back in the day) That was a huge fail. Are they an old school bullet proof Ford 300 6 cylinder or a 350 Chevy, No, but no modern engine is. So change oil every 5K, use a quality synthetic and those scary turbo chargers will be just fine.

@joshtaylor1416

25 күн бұрын

@@grizz474 nah give it til 60,000-80,000 and you’ll need to replace them. 😂

@grizz474

25 күн бұрын

@@joshtaylor1416 85K and still going strong! 🤞

@bradhaines3142

24 күн бұрын

@@grizz474 from what ive seen of them theyre super picky on maintenance. keep the oil fresh as you can, and that turbo should last. problem is turbos burn oil and the heat really kills the life span.

I had a 2014 silverado 5.3 and I would see 27mpg highway. Mine was a single cab long bed with 3.08 gears though, I also had a 30 gallon tank, so it was great.

Very nice test. I still could never bring myself to buy one 😂

I just can’t ever recall saying “ man i really want that 4 cylinder “

@gnd111

10 күн бұрын

...@DH...7lbs boost is like adding 1/2 displacement and 14lbs boost is effective doubling of displacement. So its only a 4cyl (as far as TQ) when not in boost. I do think these will be too much wear for these engines unless it is a simple DD with under 5k towing once in a while..

I had a 5.0 and now the Chevy 2.7, I tow a 7000lb travel trailer and that f150 would scream as well. I actually like the 2.7 better. On flat land it just chugs along at less than 2500rpm while the ford was locked out of 8-10th and the rpm’s was always 33-3500+

I drive a 2024 Chevy Colorado Trail Boss with the TurboMax occasionally towing a two axle open landscaping utility trailer. 60mph I get about 15mpg, 70mph it drops to under 10mpg. It just does not like going over 60mph. I watched your last video and was wandering why the 1500 was doing so much better than the mid sized with the same engine. Short answer, it's not. Great video.

Agreed. I’d go for the 5.3 instead.

You never did a towing test with the f150 2.7

Both the Coyote and the 3.5 EB have much more HP and HP is what you need to fight wind resistance at high speed with a cargo trailer. My guess it that even the 3.0 duramax would have struggle to stay at 110km/h with that trailer.

@bobvance-

26 күн бұрын

The duramax wouldn't struggle as much. Those extra 40 horses would come in handy but my guess is that it would be revving a lot too.

@leanlifter1

11 күн бұрын

HP gets you there and TQ keeps you there. Diesels are king for dealing with heavy loads towing,hauling,crusing down the hiways against the elements like cross winds etc.

@bobvance-

11 күн бұрын

@@leanlifter1 HP gets you there? Lmfao. All horsepower is, is torque x time. You can't have horsepower without torque. Torque doesn't "keep you there". Torque is what gets you there. Horsepower is how fast you are able to go because it's a product of force over time.

@leanlifter1

11 күн бұрын

@@bobvance- TQ is what allows a vehicle to Cruise at a steady state speed on the hiway without dropping gears and increasing rpm to maintain the steady state crusing travel speed. All of the fastest cars on the planet like the corvette do so using high TQ because HP cannot help move things along at high speed like TQ can. It seems you have acceleration and speed mixed up.

@bobvance-

9 күн бұрын

@@leanlifter1 What you're talking about is mostly just a function of gearing. Yes torque helps, but whenever you are figuring out how much power you need, you're going to be looking at how much horsepower you're making at a given RPM. Torque just tells you how much horsepower you have, even at lower RPM. A torquey diesel will make more horsepower at a lower RPM, that's why they're able to tow so well.

My wife has one for a work supplied vehicle. Currently at 221xxx kms. Serviced on time by the oil life counter, as it site the timing chains are a tad noisy on a colder start or after it's been sitting. Performance wise seems ok so far still. No crazy issues up to this point. Towed with it a couple times and it's ok. The 8 speed seems to be the weak point in my opinion, a lower rear end or 2 more gears would do wonders. Or even some fine tuning with a laptop (most stuff works better after you trim the fat). Tranny and rear end seem pretty sloppy considering the truck is 99% a commuter vehicle.

Hi Alex, I was expecting better performance with all that hp and torque. It's still a four cylinder. Have a great week. Greg from a Hot North Carolina. It was 106f at the state capital this week. Bet that truck would run a little hot down here.

@ArnoldsDesign

25 күн бұрын

Yeah if it was built like a Fairbanks Morse inline 4 cylinder, I wouldn't mind, but these little motors don't seem to be cutting it for HD applications.

With heavier weight being towed this engine acted more like a naturally aspirated larger displacement engine with higher rpm’s.

You mentioned in the video that the check engine light came on after you topped off the fuel tank. When the check engine light is on due to evap code the power output of this engine is reduce. I wondered why the slow time in the initial on ramp speed. I think this is what lead to a very slow acceleration test. I set a evap code the other day when I was idling for a extended time and the screen let me know that the power would be reduced. I could feel the reduction until the code cleared itself.

A year ago I was thinking about a tundra sr package truck, but after finding out how much the engine costs to repair and the recent problems, I'm thinking of this chevy custom with the 4 banger. Don't want or need the bells and whistles. I'm over the v8s even though I would like the sound. Just adapting to the future I guess.

@mikesamson1930

3 күн бұрын

Toyota does back their products better than Chevy does. Look to the LS7 in the Corvette. They never admitted to an issue with the drop valve in that engine. What about the LT5 drop cylinder lifter issue. The latest Tundra has had an extensive recall in that engine. They are backing it though. And they backed my 1990 truck for head gasket issues well after the warranty was up. I'm not saying they back everything. Look to the GR86, that they have abandoned some customers for tracking their cars. Yet, they marketed those very same cars as track cars.

Can we do a towing video on fords 2.7 plz

@donreinke5863

26 күн бұрын

Towing with a smaller-than-a -Pinto (2.8) V-6 is inviting trouble. That thing will work itself to death in short order.

Once out of max torque next stop on the tach is 5000 where peak hp lives.

Good one

I wish GM offered a select shift option to hold it in gear and utilize the torque this motor can produce. it doesn't need to shift down and rev to 4k or even 5k or even 5 k to maintain that speed.

I think i wouldn't load more than 7k pounds with this engine and they should offer the Detroit 5.1 diesel engine in the options ,nice vid.

I think that 10-speed would make a big improvement. It is a gamechanger in the new Ford Ranger with its 2.3T vs. the Colorado with more powerful 2.7T and the 8-speed.

I know im a fanboy of this engine as in previous comments, and i still think its better built then several of the rubber belt engines of today (lol,) but after watching some dyno runs of the ford 2.7 vs maybe the chevy 2.7, i believe gm or ford is lying on their dyno numbers. The ford 2.7 seems to be making its 325hp and 400 lbft of torque pretty much to the rear wheels, where the chevys powertrain losses make me believe the engine isnt producing its flywheel dyno power if that makes sense. As a mechanic, i cant help but wonder as well if the evap code is affecting fuel trims or derating the engine to make it do worse on this run (i know the wind resistance is real as well though.) Love the videos as always.

@bobvance-

26 күн бұрын

Nothing wrong with rubber belts at all. In fact, this engine would be considerably quieter if it had one.

@donreinke5863

26 күн бұрын

Thats why carburetors rule. No computer to overrule anything, just basic physics.

@donreinke5863

26 күн бұрын

@@bobvance- I like rubber belts. Ive made a LOT of money when they break and I get to replace all the valves that hit the pistons as well as a timing kit. Cost to customer as high as 4.5K depending on damage done.. Ive even seen broken plastic/aluminum timing sprockets using chains take out valves on OHV engines.

@bobvance-

25 күн бұрын

@@donreinke5863 Yeah. People don't channge them when they should. BMW was infamous for broken chain guides.

@donreinke5863

25 күн бұрын

@@bobvance- GM Quad-4 and Ecotec engines also had that issue, and even the nearly indestructible Toyota 22R and 22RE engines would eventually wear out the timing components, they were one of the only engines using chains while everyone else was still using timing belts. I put new timing chain guides, tensioners and water pump in my wifes 2011 Nissan Frontier 4.0 when she bought it with 110,000 miles on it. Also got complete engine sensor replacement. OHV engines always get a double row roller timing set when I do chain-and-sprocket replacements on them. 1954-64 Ford Y-block engines had a super wide timing chain and Ive seen originals still in relatively good shape when Ive torn them down 60- 70 years after they were made. Unfortunately, those engines had serious top-end lubrication issues. Ive been repairing engines since 1972, and Ive seen a lot.

Why not compare it to ford’s 2.7L

@TheGettyAdventures

27 күн бұрын

I have been trying to get that engine on my towing loop for some time now!! It will be a great comparison.

@GypsyDaenger

27 күн бұрын

​@@TheGettyAdventureswe're waiting! Haha

@HKHolyDiver

27 күн бұрын

2.7 ecoboost will walk all over it. Especially acceleration to 70 mph

@dawsongranger4940

27 күн бұрын

@@HKHolyDiverWhy do you think that? They make almost the same horsepower and the Chevy makes more torque

@blueheelerfriend8450

27 күн бұрын

@@dawsongranger4940 More cylinders and two turbos instead of one. I have the Ford 2.7 and it with no doubt at all will put the Chevy four banger turbo to shame! There will be no contest at all. 😎

@8:41, I take an enclosed trailer up north here in Michigan, similar to yours for snowmobiling and ATV's, not quite as heavy(5000-6500lbs), but still a lot of wind resistance. I tow with a 2009 GMC Sierra 1500 4x4 crew cab with the 5.3 V8. I encounter lots of hills that will definitely cause the downshifting. But I would say the worse culprit is NOT the hills, but a good headwind that effects my set up the most! I've towed the trailer empty (2000 lbs) into a headwind, and it felt like I was towing 8000lbs!! I didn't hear you mention this in the video?? Did you have a headwind? In some of the video it appears you do, based on the tree's branches moving towards you.

My friend- I really like your videos. One suggestion: can you drop the audio level when you yell? It's tough on the listener's ears when you "whooo" or otherwise raise your voice.

My 23 1500 LT w/ the 2.7L caps at 9000# towing. I pull our 6000# loaded TT around Oregon and Washington fairly well with just me, the wife and our in-truck cargo (camp stove and gas, cast iron dutches, kayaks, wood, some food, loaded drink cooler). It tows pretty well on the highway at 65 to 70 MPH and up grades comfortably at around 55 MPH @ 2500 to 3500 RPM ("Off-Road" screen reads, on average, a 3-4° incline). I wouldn't want to tow much more than that though. I feel that an 8000# trailer is starting to get too close to max, especially if that was a travel trailer. TT's tend to result in your truck being loaded up with more gear for the trip, using up more of your truck's cargo capacity which affects your towing capacity, where a cargo trailer might not required a truck full of cargo. Thanks for this vid and the one before it. I like to read the comments.

I have one in my sierra and i pull a 7x14 with it. I see this engine like a gasoline diesel. It has a lot torque, but only 310hp. Transmission tuning is its biggest drawback. Sometimes if you use cruise control, set your speed, go a bit faster then release the gas, it will upshift and keep it there. As a base engine, i'm pretty happy with it. The sound is horrible tho. Also, check your oil often because it uses a lot of oil when you work it hard.

The engine seems fine but I don't think I would want to listen to that engine running at 5k all the time. Probably not the best choice for towing. The LZ0 with the max tow package would be a better fit for that.

@bobvance-

26 күн бұрын

You don't have to drive as fast as he is when towing. Besides, nobody is going to be towing regularly at this weight with a 4 cylinder.

@PitPwny

25 күн бұрын

Mine sits at 1500rmp all the time. Unless you put a huge load (over 3000lbs, on the drivetrain. Under normal 95% of driving conditions, the motor doesn’t even flinch when moving a 1/2 truck around.

@karlschauff7989

25 күн бұрын

@@PitPwny Ah that's good to hear.

Any vehicle I’ve ever owned if it needed more then 4,000 rpm for extended periods pulling a trailer it was gone. The first engine to ever impress me was the 3.5 eco boost which I love, so little gear hunting. The wear on an engine doing more then 3,000 for long periods has to be significant. No modern V8 has the torque, the new hurricane might but till now it’s the ford 3.5

This is how my 5.3 trailboss pulls my utility trailer with my Harley on it through Montana and Wyoming 😂

If this little 4 banger can put out that much torque at that RPM, I'd love to see what an inline 5 or 6 variant would put out. Probably wouldn't even need the Duramax 3.0.

@edwardpate6128

27 күн бұрын

You would not say that if you had the Duramax. An awesome engine!

@iceman45ification1

27 күн бұрын

​@edwardpate6128 not saying that at all. I know the 3.0 Duramax is an awesome engine. Just talking from engine choice perspective.

Ain't the newer H.O. 2.7 only available in newer interior trucks? I tought the models with the old interior had the 350lbs/ft 2.7

I wonder how the long term reliability well be through multiple owners and dozen towing scenarios. 😊 Cool color though.

F150 with 2.7 would likely be similar result. When i tow a 6000 lb camper or my 7x14 cargo trailer, i slow down to 100 kmh and lock it into 7th (1:1 ratio). Pulls better and uses noticeably less fuel just by dropping that extra 10 kmh of speed.

Maybe some help from the aftermarket parts community would help. Maybe Banks could engineer a legitimate cold air intake, turbo inlet, catted downpipe, etc… Should definitely help the 2.7 4 banger breathe a bit better 👍

Have the 2.7turbo GM engineer talk about the high rpms towing in the slightly hill video.?

I would like to see this engine paired with the 10 speed and maybe a hybrid setup with this engine. Oh, port injection and 4wd low :)

@TheGettyAdventures

27 күн бұрын

All of the above!

I’ve had one since February. I’m getting 19.1 mpg per the computer Haven’t done much towing yet just a couple of short trips with a 2 thousand pound trailer So far so good Will it last is my question?

@ArnoldsDesign

25 күн бұрын

I routinely got 22mpg with my 5.7 hemi even with mds shut off, and a 3.92 rear end. I don't see the advantage to these turbo engines, other than they're maybe saving money on material.

About gears. My '23 turbomax truck gets considerably better gas mileage if i keep the tow/haul mode on (when not towing). Cruise control, 70 mph. Normal mode, ~1500 rpm Tow/ haul ~2200 rpm Drive over an overpass bridge, the gas mileage drops to 13 mpg in normal mode and only drops to 16 mpg in tow/haul mode. Using tow/ haul mode, I get better mileage on a 15 mile daily route and i get better mileage on a 1300 mile road trip (I've done the same trip in both modes) The engine seems more efficient at 2200 rpm than 1500 rpm...so, my theory is that 3.55 or 3.73 gears would improve gas mileage (and towing performance).

Finally! A real world towing comparison with turbos vs. V8 engines, exactly what I knew, Turbos are not for towing heavy loads on the Highways, I have a V8 Tundra and will never buy a V6 Turbo.

@ews360

9 күн бұрын

2.7 turbomax 430 lb-ft torque @ 3,000 rpm vs 5.3 383 lb-ft torque @ 4,100 rpm. 12% greater torque @ 27% less rpm.

Not to bad. The 5.3 with that trailer and weight gonna scream at 5000 rpm to on those hills at 70 or so mph. If I had that trailer id go 3/4 ton truck no matter the engine. Thats a parachute! Campers tend to cut better then those. I pulled 8k with a 2.7 on highway 60 to 65 mph never went over 3800 rpms and it was windy. If I tried 70 im sure it would jumo up alot. 8 speed holds well towing real heavy at 65 on flat land and 60 on big hills. I wasn't using tow hual but it never struggled. Big trailer like that skeers me on any 1/2 ton truck.

I wonder how the transmission will hold up. I know With the V8 they don't last. At my work at 60k to 80k miles good by transmission.

Sadly we are in a state of major disappointment across the board with trucks. No one makes a truly solid, high quality end to end truck. I bought a ‘20 Tacoma with the intention of it being another 200k miles truck. I have a 2003 Dodge Dakota with 246k miles. Still runs great. This Tacoma already had a cracked cylinder head at 68k miles. Toyota wouldn’t have covered it. Luckily I bought an extended warranty. Now the newest models of Toyota trucks seem to have a plethora of issues yet they cost 25% more. Sad.

@TheGettyAdventures

26 күн бұрын

I think if all these trucks weren't so darn expensive there would be more allowance for issues but when you are paying 60-70k for a 1500 its tough to swallow that some of these engines just aren't reliable.

@donreinke5863

26 күн бұрын

Toyota isnt all its cracked up to be. After 52 years in automotive repair I know thats a fact. Still light years better than Kia, Hyundai or anything Stellantis though.

@prevost8686

26 күн бұрын

The 2.7 Chevy has been reported to start gulping engine oil before it gets to 100K miles

@donreinke5863

26 күн бұрын

@@prevost8686 Why am I not surprised.

@ProbeGT2

25 күн бұрын

​@@prevost8686Mine has 40 000km and it uses 2 quarts between oil changes. But it tows everyday.

PS - Maybe grab some older model trucks to see how they do in these tests? My vote for the first truck: 2015 Nissan Titan! It would be a fun comparison to see how far (or not) trucks have come.

I have a couple of 2022 full size with the 2.7 turbo max. Don't top off the fuel or you do get the code and will need to have the evap canister replaced under warranty. 100,000 warranty on these engines now. I do find you need to add a quart of oil between oil changes but they have a long interval between changes. When towing you can see the oil pressure gauge dial up as needed.

@fscottgray9784

27 күн бұрын

PS I find my 2.7s tow better than my 5.3 equipped truck.

@TheGettyAdventures

27 күн бұрын

very interesting. because yes I fully topped off this truck (and some) for my fuel economy loop! I would agree that this engine towed my flat deck trailer better then the 5.3L so we'll have to see how the 5.3L does with this enclosed trailer when I get my hands back on that engine.

For what it is I thought it did ok! If I was pulling that ,say in a travel trailer setup,I'd simply lower my speed a bit on those hills to maybe 100km/h,given that is a 2 lane hway.But still not bad,I'd bet that old dog 5.3 wouldnt do much better

@TheGettyAdventures

26 күн бұрын

I'm excited to see how the 5.3L does in comparison. but yes if this was my personal truck I would drop the speed.

What about the eco boost 2.7?

"Super Duty, that's cute", hahaha. Seems like this would be fine trailering a wind buffer in town, but stay away on a long distance trip (if it's more than just a couple times a year).

Nice video, again 🙂 but note you have a nasty gash on your front right wheel rim... 🤨

@TheGettyAdventures

12 күн бұрын

She's a rental 😉

As nice as both tests are showing off the trucks towing capability I don't think anyone who already has an 8,000lb enclosed or flat-deck trailer are going to go for this truck with the 2.7 in it. If they can afford such trailers in the first place they're going to default to something with a v8 or a diesel in it. While it is rated for towing 9,000lbs this thing will be seeing trailers in the 2,000-6,000lb range hooked up to it the most. I have the 2020 model year of this truck with the 2.7 and a small 2,000lb trailer is what we have because it's what we can afford. Even decent basic trailers in the medium duty range are pricey. The trailer is just for when we need to haul more than what the bed is capable of holding. Other than that 95% of the time the bed is loaded up so we don't tow very often. We've gone over the trucks "half-ton" weight limit a few times and it seems to have handled it just fine. But I don't like to exceed the rated weight when possible.

I don't know the dyno chart, but that thing had to rev up to find some horsepower at @7:00. Torque is torque, but that truck and trailer combo probably needs 250-300 HP to make it up the grade at 110 km/h. My 5.3 LMG would probably need 4500-5000 rpm to pull that grade at 110 km/h because thats where it finally hits 300 hp. The max speed you can crest a hill with huge trailers is a HP test, not torque test. Lower speed needs less hp. Higher and higher speeds with that truck/trailer combo need exponentially more HP for every 10 km/h. Torque is nice but its still only 310 HP. A stock12 valve cummins would not hold 110 km/h up that grade at any rpm because the truck/trailer combo needs about 300 HP and that number don't exist anywhere in the dyno chart.

Interesting motor... I'll carry a full bed of lumber sticking over the back and a boat/trailer 2,500lbs... Maybe this is a good option? Seems like a vehicle that should have oil changes every 5,000km.

I think im sticking with my Cummins

As with all vehicle specs....just because you can, doesn't mean you should. I almost wonder if they set these tow ratings with 'on road' use in mind. Max towing with this is ok for shunting farm equipment around your 5000 acre farm maybe, or bringing your hay to the barn.

@TheGettyAdventures

27 күн бұрын

Agreed! I also think revving this engine so high will shorten the life of it.

@bobvance-

26 күн бұрын

That's why it's called max towing. In a pinch you can get away with it but if you want to take care of your engine, you won't be redlining it 50-90% of the time. This is why it's recommended to tow around half of your tow cap.

@brandonstewart7145

26 күн бұрын

Maybe manufacture's should rate trucks with a max tow and a constant tow rating lol!!!

Ford seemed pretty limited on axle options compared to in the past. I had my local dealer working to find a certain configuration and they said I couldn't get a Lariat with 3.5EB, 10-speed, and 3.73's. They said I had to take the 5.0 to get it.

@JROC734

27 күн бұрын

First, I think for 24 you can get a 3.5L with a 3.73. I know you can get a 3.5L Powerboost with a 3.73. Second, you should have taken the 5L/3.73 truck. I own both a GEN2 3.5L/10R80 17 501A, 4x4, 3.31crewcab truck, and a GEN3 5L/10R80 18 302A, FX4, 3.73 Crewcab truck. Both are very good, and both have been very reliable, but I prefer the 5L. It is such an underrated engine in the 1/2 ton segment. When you want to make serious HP easily, and cheaply there is nothing in the 1/2 ton segment that's close to touching a GEN3/GEN4 Coyote. If you don't believe me look up videos of them racing modded Vettes, GTR's, 1K+ WHP 2JZ GTE cars, etc. Lowend torque is overrated. First off the GEN3/GEN4 Coyote in F150 feels as torque down low as any sub-4" bore LS. I find them to feel kind of like a LS2 down low, but with a 4.69 1st gear ratio, and a 2.98 2nd gear ratio, a lot of lowend torque becomes kind of irrelevant, especially with a 3.73 rear gear. With that said, I've been happy with my 3.5L. (Wifes truck, and our family hauler) It's a stout little bastard. It's refined, smooth, and broad. It comes on early, but EB does lag a little bit until about 2K RPM. I will say that my EB gets noticeably better MPG's than my 5L even when I'm not running E85 in my 5L truck, which is rare. The best MPG's I've ever gotten from my 5L is about 18, and that's working to get good MPG's. My 3.5L gets around 18.5 MPG's without even trying hard, but just typical, normal driving.

@bobvance-

26 күн бұрын

Yeah this is true. I'm not sure why this guy didn't take the ten seconds it took to see which ratios went with which motors. Adding 3.15 Non-Limited Slip Axle Ratio also requires the following changes Add 5.0L V8 with Auto Start-Stop Technology Remove 2.7L V6 EcoBoost® with Auto Start-Stop Technology Adding 3.31 Non-Limited Slip Axle Ratio also requires the following changes Add 5.0L V8 with Auto Start-Stop Technology XLT SuperCab™ 4x4 Remove 2.7L V6 EcoBoost® with Auto Start-Stop Technology XLT SuperCab™ 4x2 Adding 3.31 Electronic Locking Axle Ratio also requires the following changes Add 5.0L V8 with Auto Start-Stop Technology Remove 2.7L V6 EcoBoost® with Auto Start-Stop Technology So you can get the 3.73 Electronic Locking Axle Ratio and the 3.55 Electronic Locking Axle Ratio.

LOL.......Check Engine light. That's priceless. It's okay.....GM owners are used to that light being on all the time anyway.

Why is your service engine soon light on?

Time will tell, lets see how they hold up five or ten years down the road. If farmers start buying them left and right year after year you will know they can stand up to heave loads long term.

5:55 thats not the actual turno in that truck... is it?

How times have changed considering a Ford Pinto, had a larger displacement engine than this pickup truck.

Those mpg lol. The future isn't green.

@louisbabycos106

27 күн бұрын

I think it's about making unreasonable carbon emissions goals rather than raw fuel milage goals . Although both are intertwined,the smaller turbo engines despite getting similar if not worse fuel milage tend to get lower carbon emissions. I don't understand all this carbon emissions stuff though as plants love CO2 but that's the goal of these small displacement turbo engines.

@TheGettyAdventures

27 күн бұрын

it is interesting that the only V8 i've tested to this point has the best fuel economy lol

What’s up with the Check Engine Light?

@TheGettyAdventures

12 күн бұрын

overheated the engine.. No lol it was a EVAP code

Its one thing for a NA v8 to rev 5500 up a steep hill but for a FI i4 or v6 to rev 5500 would have more stress on the engine.

I'm fairly certain that Ford lists all those gear ratios but if you choose some of them it changes what kind of motor you get. I'll double check this just to make sure.

@bobvance-

26 күн бұрын

Yes indeed when you choose SOME different axle ratios, it switches your motor. For example to get a 3.15 Non-Limited Slip Axle Ratio you will get switched to a 5.0. Same with the 3.31 Electronic Locking Axle Ratio and the 3.15 Non-Limited Slip Axle Ratio.

@TheGettyAdventures

26 күн бұрын

fair enough, but I just like how ford usually gives 2 or more options for every engine. where GM doesnt for this engine.

@bobvance-

11 күн бұрын

@@TheGettyAdventures Yeah totally I get what you're saying.

anyone got ideas why it was really struggling at the end there? heat soaked turbo/intake system, limp mode?

@TheGettyAdventures

12 күн бұрын

Honestly In was thinking it was getting hot, maybe cutting down on peak boost, that point in the road is basically flat. no need to be revving that high.