I'm not as opposed to the 4 cylinders as much as I am the turbos and superchargers they put on them to make them usable. (I'm not a buy a new car and sell it in five years person)

https://chevytrucks.org/gm-l3b-engine-problems/

Nothing too horrible yet vs other modern engines

Super and turbochargers have been used in Internal Combustion Engines since WWII. It's not new and it's not like GM is putting a 1.3L I3 Turbo in a full size truck, and a 2.7 I4 might be the largest 4 cylinder on the market. Most brands stop at 2.4L or 2.5L on I4 engines.

Well, if we are throwing facts and logic into consideration:

From Wikipedia:

In United States in 1860, the Roots Blower Company, patented a lobe based air pump for blast furnaces. The design was later incorporated in a supercharger not coincidentally named the Roots Blower.
In Germany in 1885 some guy named Daimler patented supercharging the internal combustion engine and In France in 1902 some guy Renault patented the centrifugal supercharger.

So the design of the Roots Blower predates the internal combustion engine. Daimler patented supercharging internal combustion engines the same year he built the first ICE powered motorcycle. A year later, Daimler was credited for the world’s first ICE powered automobile.

But yeah, screw all that new fangled shit! Oh but wait, the screw type supercharger was patented in 1878 by a German named Krigar.

Them turbochargers though, them’s bad, bad, bad. Way too new! Patented in 1905, used in airplanes since 1918, and used in trucks since the 1930s.

Must have been sad days when they stopped making wood spoke wheels, came out with pneumatic tires, and added hydraulic brakes.

As long as GM didn’t do something stupid, like make a diesel small block, then I’m sure these engines will be fine.

quote:

Originally posted by DanH:
and a 2.7 I4 might be the largest 4 cylinder on the market. Most brands stop at 2.4L or 2.5L on I4 engines.

To be the pedantic 'car guy'
Removing the 'on the market' category

The first generation Chevrolet Colorado had a non-turbocharged 2.8L & 2.9L I4
Though I think most non WT models were probably equipped with the 3.5/3.7 I5

quote:

Originally posted by trapper189:

But yeah, screw all that new fangled shit!

quote:

Originally posted by DanH:
Super and turbochargers have been used in Internal Combustion Engines since WWII.

Did anyone say they were new?

I just don't want to deal with them, maintaining and more specifically, replacing them.

Shhh. My truck will hear you and think that after 156,000 miles it’s been missing out on turbocharger maintenance and start demanding a new one.

My comments weren’t directed at you personally and I apologize if it came across so.

I’ve owned five turbo charged vehicles for a total of six turbochargers and have yet to replace one. I have blown up two engines though. I broke them. Had I driven them as designed, I have no doubt they would have lasted much longer. I’m sure the Honda motor with 135,000 miles on it would have gone at least another 75,000 miles.

Now my turbo charged vehicles have been driven as designed and seem to be doing well. The truck is going on 10 years old. I don’t know anyone who has replaced a turbocharger. I’ve read stories, but I strongly suspect those were broken by their owners.

GM and reliability are seldom used in the same sentence anymore, in my opinion

4 cyl in a 1/2 ton pickup … why ?

Hell, I’d go in the opposite direction and buy the biggest engine they make in a 1500 while you can still get it.

I’ll chime back in with my impression of the power for driving around loaded. Not the same as plowing. My normal load with cap is heavy enough that it needed helper springs to keep it off of the bump stops. I often add hundreds of pounds to that. The 4 has absolutely no trouble moving the truck around. Easily keeps up with traffic. No crazy rpms required. Smooth and quiet.
As for ride, it’s smooth and a bit wallowy with the heavy load. Like an old land yacht. When it was new and empty it actually felt a bit sporty with good response and nice ride over any road imperfections. It has more truck like seating, height, and forward view than the previous F150.

quote:

Originally posted by x0225095:
4 cyl in a 1/2 ton pickup … why ?

Hell, I’d go in the opposite direction and buy the biggest engine they make in a 1500 while you can still get it.

Unfortunately, for those of us who prefer regular cab short bed configuration, that is now the biggest available engine option as it is the only available engine option... why my GM loyalist self is shopping F150s.

I would spend some time checking specifics. For example how are the camshafts driven, is it gears, chain, or a belt. If it's chain what is the service interval for replacement? If it's Belt what type of belt (wet or dry), what is the cost for replacement and at how many miles. Then you will want to ask how the oil pump is driven.

Note Ford's 3.5 Twin Turbo V6 has a WET belt driving the oil pump that starts to fail at 100K miles and the replacement cost will likely be 2000 t0 3000 dollars or more. Automakers are going full STUPID on engine designs so these questions are rather important. I would not, and will not ever, purchase a Ford truck with that V6.

quote:

Originally posted by Scooter123:
I would spend some time checking specifics. For example how are the camshafts driven, is it gears, chain, or a belt. If it's chain what is the service interval for replacement? If it's Belt what type of belt (wet or dry), what is the cost for replacement and at how many miles. Then you will want to ask how the oil pump is driven.

Note Ford's 3.5 Twin Turbo V6 has a WET belt driving the oil pump that starts to fail at 100K miles and the replacement cost will likely be 2000 t0 3000 dollars or more. Automakers are going full STUPID on engine designs so these questions are rather important. I would not, and will not ever, purchase a Ford truck with that V6.

Also had been a GM fan for many years.
After recommending a friend buy a F150 with the 5.0 in 17 saying it is a proven motor, and probably more reliable than the modern 5.3

It blew up on a 1000 mile trip after an oil change and I look like a fool.
To top it off it was under warranty but, 1 year wait time for a replacement engine.
I no longer recommend anything but a Toyota anymore.
But now they no longer offer the v8, a new turbo 6.

Save some cash and find a lo mile used one

quote:

Originally posted by mike28w:
Just my uninformed opinion but ....I worry about durability when one pushes such a small engine to get an abnormally high horsepower/torque from it.

My imperfect analogy is that no one expects durability from a race engine.....the harder one pushes any machine, the more likely something is going to break.

JMO (yes, it's simplistic)

Actually I believe your gut is completely correct. I have seen complaints generally about smaller turbocharged engines with shorter durability than traditionally sized engines, particularly for trucks. You're right about race car engines, they get rebuilt on a schedule regardless of how they're performing. Nobody that I know purposely buys a truck with the intention of running the equivalent of a turbocharged race car engine, it's apples and oranges. Not my bag of tea.

Just because a manufacturer does this for trucks, doesn't mean it's a good idea. How bout them EVs ?

They've made improvements since, but originally the 4 banger in the real world did not offer any better mileage than the 5.3 V-8.

https://www.caranddriver.com/r...four-cylinder-drive/

The 2019 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 2.7T Four-Cylinder Is Capable but Thirsty
It tows more than you'd expect but also drinks more fuel than you'd expect.

BY JOSH JACQUOTUPDATED: FEB 22, 2019
Land vehicle, Vehicle, Car, Pickup truck, Motor vehicle, Truck, Automotive tire, Tire, Automotive design, Full-size car,
ANDI HEDRICK|CAR AND DRIVER
From the March 2019 issue of Car and Driver.

Secure possession of one’s Man Card is too frequently associated with the overt machismo of one’s truck, a metric closely tied to the size of its tires, the power of its engine, and, of course, its number of cylinders—not necessarily in that order. Which, in the world of presumed stereotypes, puts Chevy’s new four-cylinder Silverado in a tough spot. We discovered, however, that it is indeed a manly and capable thing.


HIGHS: Substantial acceleration and towing performance.
Consider exhibit A: This all-wheel-drive double-cab Silverado, laden with 6080 pounds of trailer, car, and ballast—the same weight we towed in our recent light-duty truck comparo—achieved 60 mph in 12.8 seconds, a paltry 0.9 second slower than the 2019 Ram 1500 4x4 equipped with a 5.7-liter V-8 assisted by a 48-volt motor.

Land vehicle, Vehicle, Car, Automotive tire, Tire, Automotive exterior, Pickup truck, Automotive design, Truck bed part, Bumper, VIEW PHOTOS
ANDI HEDRICK|CAR AND DRIVER
Despite a lengthy 102.0-millimeter stroke, Chevy’s turbocharged 2.7-liter inline-four is among the smoothest four-cylinders in the General’s arsenal. It motivates the unladen Silverado to 60 mph in a very reasonable 7.0 seconds without feeling burdened. And it helps the truck achieve a 65-decibel noise reading at 70 mph, the same as the comparo-winning Ram 1500, an immodestly equipped $69,000 luxury pickup.

The undersquare engine, as you’d expect, is a grunter. Its 348 pound-feet of torque persists between 1500 and 4000 rpm, enough latitude to accommodate all normal driving. The 310-hp peak comes at 5600 rpm, only 100 rpm before redline, but you’ll never need it. Chevy pairs the mill exclusively with its eight-speed auto, and it’s a predictive ’box, giving you immediate torque on demand. The EPA rates this version of the Silverado at 20 mpg combined, but we achieved only 16 in daily use, the same fuel economy we measured from an all-wheel-drive 5.3-liter V-8-powered Silverado crew cab. On our 200-mile highway loop, the four-cylinder made liberal use of its turbocharger and yielded 18 mpg, 3 mpg less than that same Silverado.

ADVERTISEMENT - CONTINUE READING BELOW

Land vehicle, Vehicle, Car, Motor vehicle, Center console, Pickup truck, Chevrolet silverado, Rim, Truck, Vehicle audio, VIEW PHOTOS
ANDI HEDRICK|CAR AND DRIVER
LOWS: Can’t tow as much as its big bro, disappointing fuel economy.
At 4912 pounds, the four-cylinder Silverado is 590 pounds lighter—and thus more wieldy—than the last 6.2-liter High Country model we tested. The RST trim’s 18-inch wheels help calm its ride versus that truck’s, too (the High Country had 22s). And it shares the more costly truck’s highly effective braking system, which stopped it from 70 mph in a properly abrupt 177 feet.

Starting at $43,595, this Silverado costs about $1400 less than the same truck equipped with a 5.3-liter V-8. But a 5.3-liter Silverado can tow substantially more (up to 11,600 pounds versus 7200 pounds max with the turbo four). The four-cylinder might let you keep your Man Card, but the V-8 guarantees it.

quote:

GM pickups with 4cyl ,any good?

I have an instinctive (and, based on observation of some Ford Ecoboost engines, not unfounded) mistrust of the long term reliability of a little engine that has to be huffed up to make it go. The engine must have both its top (especially head gaskets) and bottom ends beefed up to handle the high cylinder pressures.

If you’re looking at a GM truck, I advise caution because of the transmission problems and
GMs typical refusal to recall and correct. Check out Colorado/ Canyon forums and you will see complaints about the transmission failures and the class action lawsuit in the works.

I have a 2018 Colorado and have my fingers crossed. Experienced the transmission “shudder” early on. Flush and new fluid seemed to resolve it at 2000 miles but getting hints of again at 40k. My mechanic says the early flush gets you past the warranty but failure may well happen from 40-60k miles.

The forums will also alert you to the failure of the “entertainment center” center display failure which are notorious. Whole EC display is tied in to all warning systems, radio and gauges. Mine has a mind of its own and switches modes and radio stations constantly.

It has been locked in the french language mode for the last year and is useless to me.

Chevy dealers say they want 200.00 up front for diagnosis fee and replacement unit around 2000.00. Once again Chevy says “screw you”.

Based on frequency of the problem voiced on the Colorado forums, I expect another class action lawsuit. GM will use their lawyers to delay the lawsuit for years until most have dumped their vehicle.

It’s too bad as otherwise it’s a great truck. Mine is a six. Stay away from GM.


As to 4 cylinder engines I’ve always avoided them except in very small cars. A 4 has to operate at higher rpms. Lots more up and down, piston travel etc to get same power. I keep cars a long time. Don’t feel comfortable with a 4 in a larger vehicle.