2019 Silverado Turbo I-4

5,030 Views | 39 Replies | Last: 5 yr ago by aggieforester05
ag09
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Truck Trend 2019 Silverado Turbo I-4

Thoughts? Silvy, LS swap?
Silvy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Yes, LS swap everything. AFM on a 4 cylinder sounds like a bad time.
AgEng06
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
hatchback
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
That's a f*ing ugly truck.
The Lost
How long do you want to ignore this user?
hatchback said:

That's a f*ing ugly truck.
That tailgate is beyond terrible with the way they imprinted chevorlet on it
MouthBQ98
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I don't mind the Chevrolet embossed in the tailgate, but I hate how and where they did it. What the hell is that big long narrow rectangle panel jutting out so far for?
MouthBQ98
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Also, valve/cylinder deactivation on an I4? WTF? How pointless.

Aside from that, I wouldn't mind having the engine dropped into my nissan. It's got plenty of power and torque by the numbers.
Picard
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Wait a minute....I thought GM was dogging on turbo boosted engines???

Goose
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
silverado_lover said:

Yes, LS swap everything. AFM on a 4 cylinder sounds like a bad time.
Wow, I sort of assumed it'd be one or the other. But nope:

Quote:

In order to achieve these goals, engine designers incorporated a variety of technologies, including a tri-mode valvetrain: high valve lift for maximum power, low valve lift for low-demand cruising, and a no-lift profile that shuts down the second and third cylinders for improved fuel efficiency.

I'm assuming that would really only occur at idle, right? Maybe I'm just set in my old ways but 4 cylinders seems like about half as many as a full sized truck should have, but then only using half of that just seems absurd.
CanyonAg77
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Maybe they can set up the two cylinders to fire "bang bang rest" and sound like an old John Deere Tractor
ag09
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
MouthBQ98 said:

I don't mind the Chevrolet embossed in the tailgate, but I hate how and where they did it. What the hell is that big long narrow rectangle panel jutting out so far for?
i think it's the new hi-fangled tailgate. which doesn't seem like it'll have any problems at all with a ball hitch installed.

new tailgate
locogringo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The Lost said:

hatchback said:

That's a f*ing ugly truck.
That tailgate is beyond terrible with the way they imprinted chevorlet on it

Tailgate is a bit awkward. Looks like something that would be on the new Fords.
CanyonAg77
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
So 22psi boost? Wow. Isn't normal for the street 10-12psi?
sts7049
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
agree, but ford is doing the same thing on theirs basically
Dill-Ag13
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Not in 2018. That was normal 10 years ago
sts7049
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
the thing i hate the most is this front corner design. it looks like they just gave up connecting the sheet metal

CanyonAg77
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Thanks. Don't follow it that closely
The Lost
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sts7049 said:

agree, but ford is doing the same thing on theirs basically



I wouldn't mind it done the way ford does it, it's the fact they made a huge rectangle stick out to do it. Ford's at least flows with the back of the truck. I don't get it at all. Get rid of the box it's in jetting out and i doubt i would have commented.
1agswitchin4lanes
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
sts7049 said:

the thing i hate the most is this front corner design. it looks like they just gave up connecting the sheet metal


We see who the champion is at hiding gaps....
The Wonderer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Picard said:

Wait a minute....I thought GM was dogging on turbo boosted engines???


Just like that dogged on aluminum beds two years before they made the switch.
Waltonloads08
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I hate embossed anything
AgResearch
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
4 banger in a truck??? LOL
clarythedrill
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Goose said:

silverado_lover said:

Yes, LS swap everything. AFM on a 4 cylinder sounds like a bad time.
Wow, I sort of assumed it'd be one or the other. But nope:

Quote:

In order to achieve these goals, engine designers incorporated a variety of technologies, including a tri-mode valvetrain: high valve lift for maximum power, low valve lift for low-demand cruising, and a no-lift profile that shuts down the second and third cylinders for improved fuel efficiency.

I'm assuming that would really only occur at idle, right? Maybe I'm just set in my old ways but 4 cylinders seems like about half as many as a full sized truck should have, but then only using half of that just seems absurd.
would have to be at idle or coasting. No way that small of an engine could provide enough power to propel the vehicle at any decent speed. The last 5.3 I had with AFM would rarely go into 4 cylinder mode. You could set the instrument cluster to show when on 8 or 4 cylinders, and only once in a blue moon would it shift to 4 cylinders.
The Wonderer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I hear a lot of talk about full-size trucks needing V8s. If an I4 is pumping out more power than V8s of old, then what's the problem? Is it just the fact that it's an I4 and not a V8?

For reference:

2019 Chevy 2.7 I4: 310hp/348tq
2010 Ford 5.4 V8: 292hp/320tq

Chevy's smallest offering today is outpowering Ford's largest offering 8 years ago (and an engine that was used for another 3 years).
Waltonloads08
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I think the concern is more about the reliablility of the hard-worked turbo 4 versus a naturally aspirated 8 for long term ownership.

MouthBQ98
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
That will depend a lot on the drivetrain.
80085
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
WaltonLoads08 said:

I think the concern is more about the reliablility of the hard-worked turbo 4 versus a naturally aspirated 8 for long term ownership.




Concern? They arent exactly strangers to under warranty drivetrain component failures.

Waltonloads08
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
MouthBQ98 said:

That will depend a lot on the drivetrain.


Your point is right, it's only one piece of the puzzle. I personally hope it ends up being an unfounded fear, the technology is very impressive.
clarythedrill
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I would think that this new engine would be absolutely perfect for the Colorado. Offer the I4 gasser and the I4 diesel and call it a day as far as drivelines are concerned.

Actually, if it performs as expected, why even have the diesel?
Drewmeister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The Wonderer said:

Picard said:

Wait a minute....I thought GM was dogging on turbo boosted engines???


Just like that dogged on aluminum beds two years before they made the switch.
I thought the beds were still steel, except for the optional carbon-fiber bed in one of the GMC trim lines?

Power numbers are impressive, fuel economy pending. I expect mpg to be pretty good, but not as good as the new diesel (especially in real-world driving -- like how on the F-150, you can have "Eco" or "Boost", but not both at the same time; diesel tends to deliver better real-world fuel economy). Reliability is a concern given all that valve train complexity -- I expect you'll need regular changes with synthetic oil, even if longer intervals and/or dino oil are "allowed" by the manual. And buying a first-year model is risky -- remember the first year EcoBoost (2011?) had several issues that were later ironed out. I hope GM designed their charge air cooler better than Ford, so as to avoid suddenly ingesting slugs of condensate...

Interesting that it's a large 4-cylinder (in terms of per-cylinder displacement) rather than a small 5- or 6-cylinder -- at 2.7L, it's the same displacement as the smaller V6 EcoBoost. An inline design is definitely simpler and more compact than a V-engine, but I wonder why not an I-5 or I-6, since it's supposedly a whole new design? Those would run smoother than a 4-cylinder. The new diesel is a 3.0L straight-6, after all...
Street Fighter
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The Wonderer said:

I hear a lot of talk about full-size trucks needing V8s. If an I4 is pumping out more power than V8s of old, then what's the problem? Is it just the fact that it's an I4 and not a V8?

For reference:

2019 Chevy 2.7 I4: 310hp/348tq
2010 Ford 5.4 V8: 292hp/320tq

Chevy's smallest offering today is outpowering Ford's largest offering 8 years ago (and an engine that was used for another 3 years).
It's WHEN that torque is available not necessarily max .
80085
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Street Fighter said:

It's WHEN that torque is available not necessarily max .


That dodge etorque deal seems like a great work around for lack of low rpm torque
1agswitchin4lanes
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
GM announced the numbers.

310hp/348 tq.

I hope they left them low on purpose so they can tune up every year some and Im sure they tuned it for efficiency, driveability and NVH.

2.7L V6 Boost is 325/400

2.3L I-4 Boost in the Mustang is 310/350...
MouthBQ98
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Wonder what the torque band looks like. If it comes on fast to mid range RPM it could be fairly nice.
1agswitchin4lanes
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
MouthBQ98 said:

Wonder what the torque band looks like. If it comes on fast to mid range RPM it could be fairly nice.
1,500 to 4,000 rpm
Page 1 of 2
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.