2024 Ford F150 2.7L Turbo V6 VS Chevy Silverado 2.7L Turbomax MPG & 0-60 Test: Is Chevy Better?

Ford just refreshed their Ford F150 for 2024 but how does it compare to the Chevy Silverado Turbomax??? || Like || Subscribe || Share || #chevysilverado #fordf150
Special thanks to Jerry Seiner Chevrolet in Salt Lake City Utah:
www.seinerchevy.com
www.chevrolet.com
Special Thanks to: Larry H Miller Super Ford SLC
Address: 1340 South 500 West Salt Lake City, UT 84115
Sales | 888.380.4756
Check out these great products on Amazon:
UnderCover SwingCase Truck Bed Storage Box
amzn.to/3JzCMwf
ZAP IT! Bug Zapper Rechargeable Bug Zapper Racket
amzn.to/3oKuibG
GEN-Y Executive Torsion-Flex 5th Wheel to Gooseneck
amzn.to/3zGRii5
Hitch Tightener Anti-Rattle Clamp
amzn.to/3PXuTTm
GEARWRENCH 44 Piece 3/8inch Drive 6 Point Impact Socket
amzn.to/3c07Oka
DEWALT 20V MAX* XR Compact Hammer Drill Kit
amzn.to/3NS0PqK
AMP Research 76236-01A PowerStep Running Boards
amzn.to/3yXZAlR
B&W Trailer Hitches Tow & Stow - Fits 2.5" Receiver, Tri-Ball
amzn.to/3lBEgL9
BFGoodrich Mud-Terrain T/A KM3 Tire 35x12.50R20
amzn.to/3LFqlhy
AstroAI Digital Tire Inflator with Pressure Gauge
amzn.to/3Pp0X2E
10.2-inch iPad (Wi-Fi + Cellular, 64GB) -
amzn.to/3wvm1gB
Low Profile Folding Chair for Camping, Beach, Picnic, Barbeques, Sporting Event with Carry Bag
amzn.to/3xqSVy4
BLUETTI Portable Power Station AC200MAX
amzn.to/3N3xA3E

[@jesserevilla992]

I have had the GMC 2.7 HO "Elevation" and now owner of the F150 XLT 2.7. The GM 2.7 better Hwy mpg's but lacked in the city in comparison to the F150 2.7. But Hwy I managed at 75 mph to capture 22.5 Mpg . And with the GM 23.5 at 75 MPG's . My city driving in Miami, FLA goes to F150 17.5-18.2 where as for GM 2.7 hovers 15.8 to 16.5 MPG's. I believe the 10speed in the F150 makes the difference for City mpg's. Towing the same TT with both trucks. Better MPG's with the GM 2.7 by a say 1 mile per gallon. Yet feel better comfort in the F150 and quietness. Love the large front side windows on the F150 makes for better towing when parking and view when turning etc. Now for the Drum Roll. I have managed 28 mpg's with the GM 2.7 from Key Largo, FLA to Big Pine Key, FLA with an average speed of 48 mpg in dead calm wind. Done the trip plenty of times with the F150 cannot get past 23.8 mpg. (4 feet above sea -level)

[@Montana270]

The mpg range on the 2.7 L3B is wild, it can be so thirsty or so efficient lol

[@rwh_]

I have gotten 28mpg in my ford 2.7. Maybe your rear axle ratio is different

[@edwardstroko4665]

Dang bro!! I like your post, u got into it with mpg and speed!! U should start your own channel!!!😎💪🙏🇺🇸🇺🇸

[@fit4ya1975]

I got 27 mpg going on a 65 mile trip at 55mph average in my 2020 Silverado with the 5.3. Average 18 city/hwy.

[@fit4ya1975]

Also the Chevy seats suck, they are super firm. I bet your Ford seats are way better.

[@cpftank09]

One thing to note is seat comfort. I’ve always found the F150 seats to be more comfortable than the Silverado on long trips.

[@jimtheedcguy4313]

I drive a 22 Chevy 2500 for work and those seats are so uncomfortable so you're not wrong there! And they're not even fleet seats, it's an LT with lumbar support and they're still uncomfortable.

[@jorbar7726]

The 2.7 on the Ford has both DI and Port Injection while the Chevy is DI only.

[@fullspeedfordbronco]

Yup, and with a tune can run full E85.

[@mddunlap03]

Also with di only it's not when the intake valves need cleaned but when

[@dankean8319]

That is good to know, the Chevy will probably have intake issues ( carbon deposit ) ford had this problem and fixed it by adding intake injection.

[@abrahamreyes3340]

@@dankean8319 i fixed my issue by spraying the intake every oil change and redlining it a couple of times daily port injection does not fix dirty valves they will get gunk regardless while iddling or traffic

[@leemorgan9670]

In the ford,I think if you press the + button for the manual shift function, it’ll display the gears. At last that the way the older one’s worked. Great job entertaining and informative video Jb!

[@user-rp3ev5kz2o]

My 2019 shows the gears all the time

[@spyder000069]

At 6:51 you can see he figured it out because its showing the 10 gears along the bottom left.

[@82mattlopez]

​@@spyder000069you are correct

[@Adjust-Fire-jy3dy]

I bought the Chevy 2.7L and am not happy with it. I would be much happier with the 5.3L V8.

[@Sunandstar_official]

Chevy’s engine literally suck! From the 1.4l to the 6.2 and everything in between could leave you walking at any moment. Chevy used to stand for reliability and affordability, it has neither these days

[@jamesorr2832]

@@Sunandstar_official A good friend of mine bought a 2024 Tahoe with the 5.3 and after 8000 miles it had lifter problems that wiped out the Cam and Metal went through the motor so bad that the Dealer just put a new motor in it, He is scared to drive it now that it left him and his family stranded in the Mojave Desert and it was 112 degrees and he had to rent a car to get home!! Still fighting with GM over expenses it cost him out of Pocket.

[@ericj810]

2 friends of mines 3.5 eco boost and 2.7 eco boost broke under 50k miles.

[@a29s12]

​@@ericj810 I had both with no issues.

[@ericj810]

@a29s12 lucky draw. Seen 6 lay down over the last 5 years

[@carrier102]

You would have got closer to 6 seconds in sport mode. Wouldn’t even be a close competition in sport mode on the F150.

[@pharettface]

Not at 5k feet above sea level you loose a fair bit up at high elevation. Ford doesn't allow much over boost for elevation on the 2.7L. That said I do think sport, 4x4 and brake torque would have helped. I also have a feeling they may be using 85-86 oct fuel up there. That hurts too.

[@efrainlopez1260]

Amen!!!!! Mines 2018 2.7 Ecobeast SC F150. Sport Mode + Sporttrak Mode and a pedal commander and a Hypertech Spectrum tune on 91 Octane not your little Chevy GMC Rams or Toyota Tundra can touch my truck SEEE YAAAAAAA!!!!! 💨 0-60mph < 5 secs

[@pharettface]

I love my 15 2.7L. Probably been on of my favorite engines I've owned. Both our shop 2.7 F150s have been great over the years.

[@android-ud2nf]

The ford looks so much better with the simplistic front end. I love the ninja mask that brings in both headlights. My father had a Silverado and sadly his 5.3 had to be replaced at 63k miles. The shop unfortunately they’ve been replacing a lot of the 5.3s latley. He had a lifter issue that caused cam damage and sent metal fragments throughout the engine. He was still able to drive it but it was toast.

[@ryanmoyes2079]

Happened to 4 of my friends as well. All 2019+ Silverado/Sierras with under 75k miles

[@pmisen]

I've heard it has to do with the cylinder deactivation feature. A lot of people disable that function. Those motors should go to 300k no problem

[@tdotw77]

DOD\AFM to the 'rescue'! If you have one of these with the DOD cylinder deactivation, disable it, remove it, or get rid of the truck cause it's going to fail at some point for sure! 🤦🏻‍♂️🤔😅🤷🏻‍♂️👍🏻👌🏻

[@terryhook5518]

Lmao your gay

[@BC08]

5.3s has been complete 💩 since 2007.

[@tonyroyalty3120]

Very detailed video excellent job

[@Derham43]

I can't speak for the Ford, but I'll offer a mini long term review on my 23 Silverado Double Cab Custom. I purchased this truck for my delivery service business. I spend lots of time on the highway, but I needed something with more bed and payload capacity. I also do a limited amount of towing but haven't towed with this rig. So for I have put 37,000 miles on this truck in seven months of ownership having only performed routine maintenance (oil change and tire rotations) so far. I was very leery of purchasing this truck having owned a 2007 Toyota Tundra 5.7 crew max (lost in the 2016 flood) and 2016 Chevy Colorado traded in towards the Silverado. My mileage around the city averages 16 to 18 mpg while my hwy mileage varies between 19 to 22 mpg. At 75 mph I can obtain 22mpg only if I keep out of boost and stay with the flow of traffic. Other wise my mileage will plummet to 19 or 20 mpg. My Tundra before its demise would only manage 17 in these conditions while my Colorado would manage to get 22 to 23 tops. I have rented Rams (5.7) and (3.6) and Chevy's Silverado 5.3 in the past with similar results or worst. Performance wise the V8's will trump 2.7 at the top end but just barely. That 430 ft lbs of torque is nothing to sneeze at as this 2.7 set up can more than hold its own in getting the job done. In conclusion, don't let someone who haven't owned, much less driven Chevy's 2.7 TurboMax sway you from making this purchase.

[@db3837]

To know what gear the Ford is in, just push up on the +/- button. Then the gear you're in will be displayed.

[@jerrywagner7346]

I really like my 2019 F-150 with the 2.7. My biggest (really only) complaint would be the clunky shifting on the 10R80 transmission that you noted. It's better shifting in sport or tow/haul but there's no good reason for the funky shifts in normal mode.

[@MrTonaluv]

Do you service the transmission?

[@JCVACCARO]

These engines are impressive but their exhaust notes are not.

[@danielbonner8309]

Always owned Chevys. I have that same Silverado but to be honest I love the look of the new front end of the f150s. Those blacked out headlights look 🔥

[@OBAS21666]

Ford for me

[@BC08]

I almost can’t believe anyone still buys Silverados. The 4.8/5.3 is laughably unreliable and doggy, bodies aren’t great…

[@AoiGP]

@@BC08 still lasts longer than a Ford today.

[@BC08]

@@AoiGP No, they don’t 😂😂🤡

[@andyd5492]

Did you use Sport Mode for 0-60 runs?

[@richardmayberry6209]

I have owned lots of trucks ford and Chevy. What I’ve noticed is the fuel reading on the fords are fairly accurate and the chevys are off a fair amount.

[@michaeldilorenzo8464]

I would say the correct way to judge true performance between the 4cyl and 6cyl, the rear gears should be the same in both trucks. The Chevy with the higher gears would not have the same takeoff, off the line like the Ford did.

[@robertlane4432]

They don’t offer the same rear gear ratios genius.

[@Travisj9935]

Let's remember on premium the Eb 2.7 makes it's rated power on the dyno. It's under rated. Makes 475whp on just a E85 tune. My 2022 F-150 2.7 on 35's runs 13.1 on a 91 LM tune. Massive 4 wheel spin off the line. (Brake boosting in sport mode)

[@southfloridanick]

Enjoy the junk 10-speed. I’ll never buy another one.

[@tedschmitt178]

@@southfloridanickI have enjoyed my 10-speed F-150.

[@user-hh7no3pf2w]

I just bought a new f150 and i agree with you on the mirrors. My brother has the tow mirrors on his and they're way better.

[@michaelpopp6340]

I feel like the half ton trucks should have 3.0 liter v6 turbo engines. That is the sweet spot, and Ram got that right. I love my 2023 modded 3.5 v6 ecoboost, and it's a rocket for a pickup.

[@scarletboa]

I agree, as long as there is a bigger option offered as well for speed freaks and/or people that tow 10k lbs with a 1/2 ton occasionally. I love my 2019 3.5 ecoboost f150. (Edit: I re-read and saw that you're already modded) Gotta love a lightweight 500hp+ sleeper truck

[@BeeReady247]

I've put 55k miles on my work truck, it's 2022 f150 2.7, I've been really impressed with it. The truck is so comfortable and fun to drive I just ordered a 24 but with the v8. I think the 2.7 is a very under-rated motor. I average 20mpg at 80mpg. If I keep it under 65 I can get 24mpg.

[@TalkingHands308]

If the trucks are brand new, sometimes the transmissions would shift weird in the beginning while it's "learning" but should stabilize once you start daily driving it.

[@CrookedlegGreg]

Especially when you smash that go pedal and beat on it a little break it in like you stole it 😂

[@poppyneese1811]

The Chevy you’ll need a new bed in about 5 years when it’s eat up with rust if you live where they salt the roads, Also both trucks have the same transmission, codeveloped by GM and Ford. My 23 F150 has the 10 speed, love the 2.7 Ecoboost but much preferred the 6 speed in my 2017 F150. I think Ford softened the acceleration the 23 seems like it’s not as fast, not by much though and gets better MPG’s than my 2015 Tacoma did which was rusting underneath badly after just 2 years, but I got a heck of a trade in, exactly what I bought it for.

[@camonly849]

The other chevys have the 10spd this has the 8spd.

[@jeremybroderick9465]

my 16 sierra 300k miles in the salt belt still not rusted, you just need to do better and not be lazy cleaning out the salt works! all vehicles I have seen other GM with allot of rust though but the same with other manufacturers to even the aluminum ones

[@erictownsend4236]

I live in NH, roads are salted. I am driving a 2004 GMC Sierra, no rust in the bed, fenders? Not so well! If you live in an area where salt is applied to the roads?, Yearly undercoat!

[@PatrickAllison-zz2gj]

I was reading all the comments and fuel milage.i had a 2019 Silverado 5.3 I got the same or better that most of the comments. I disabled the start stop junk .

[@Tealmoney8571]

Guy I work with has a 2019 F150. He had the trans tuned and it doesnt make any funky shifting or clunking.

[@9663mu]

That Old GM interior hurts my eye balls it’s so ugly

[@BC08]

@alexanderkennedy2969 Chevy loses across the board

[@BC08]

@alexanderkennedy2969 …who duped you?

[@BC08]

@alexanderkennedy2969 What about the Silverado is better than F150? Who is “everybody”? Is that your attempt to appeal to the masses? Thats a logical fallacy, btw.

[@user-wu8op5km2u]

6 cylinder has a difference torque curve. That Chevy truck is gold with the 5.3 good review jb😊

[@_E_B_]

The 6 cylinder from GM makes higher peak torque then the 5.3L v8 and has more torque at all rpms. It's turbocharged. The 5.3L only has a horsepower advantage but not by much. The 5.3 has 383 torque at 4400 rpm then it drops. The 2.7 turbo has 430 torque at 1500 rpm to 4000 but still has more available torque after 4000 rpm then the 5.3L It's why the 2.7L gets better fuel economy while empty or towing. The 5.3L is slightly quicker from 0-60 though.

[@crspcritter]

V-8 has more engine braking that the 4cyl or v6 will never have . Runaway on grades -

[@kens97sto171]

One advantage on the 4 cyl in the Chevy.... it will probably be easier to service than the V6 in the Ford.. more room on the side of the engine.

[@Derham43]

Besides the freak show under the hood. (Sliding cam shafts to name a few) The straight line configuration was a consideration in the purchase of my Custom 2.7 Double Cab..

[@Jay-me7gw]

What will you need to do on the side of the engine that's so difficult?

[@kens97sto171]

@@Jay-me7gw I have no idea, but having more room around the engine bay generally makes it much easier. Even if the thing you're working on is not directly right there. There will be tubing and hoses and other things that will be on the sides rather than on the front in your way because there is room to put stuff there. I'm just telling you my experience is that it's much easier to work on an engine that is narrow and long versus wider. Or for that matter any engine that is dimensionally smaller, for example working on an LS based engine in a truck is a lot easier than a double overhead cam engine in the same size truck. Chevy versus Ford is a good example. There's just a lot more shit going on with the Ford. Where is the Chevy is much easier to get to everything because it's a more compact engine.

[@Jay-me7gw]

@@kens97sto171 I dont know. I had a Jeep Liberty CRD, which was a 2.8L inline 4 turbo diesel, configured exactly like this 2.7L, and that thing was a complete pain in the ass to work on.

[@kens97sto171]

@@Jay-me7gw Diesel adds a lot of complexity. And each engine bay is different... And I certainly have not worked on every single vehicle in the world. Just my general experience that inline configuration of engines whether it's an inline transverse four or inline longitudinal tend to be easier to work on. Take the four liter in line 6 in a Wrangler back in the old days. They were super easy to work on.

[@hotratz69]

The type of comparisons I'd like to see between vehicles would be AFTER you put 100K miles on them and then evaluate the reliability of the platform. I don't care how fast they are or what the interior looks like. I buy a truck to work it not daily drive it.

[@JsGarage]

Man it must be a lower trim level thing. My XLT Powerboost drives and tracks super straight. Feels very confident with a trailer too.

[@TheBostonstapler]

48 psi in the fords tires ?

[@Mudbeaver1]

You have to hit the + on the shifter for the gears

[@user-bv3wo2qh1d]

Not comparing but my F350 V10 gets way better gas mileage with ethanol free fuel as its a big block 6.8l but I would guess a turbo charged vehicle would also benefit greatly if you ran ethanol free fuel. I would love to see the test because I go from 9.5mpg to 14.3 that's a big jump for a dully crewcab anyways. I hit my 0 to 60 in 6.4 seconds unloaded but it has a 4:30 ratio and I don't race it I use it to pull 24k pounds

[@Bediasman]

Just picked up my 2024 Silverado 1500 with the Turbo Max Engine. The Window Sticker states: • 5 YEAR / 100,000 MILE* POWERTRAIN LIMITED WARRANTY, ROADSIDE ASSISTANCE & COURTESY TRANSPORTATION. Nice suprise for me.

[@stephengalvan7722]

I love the simplicity of the gauges on the Chevy

[@gwendolynbrown9386]

Great demonstration with the two trucks, great Chevy.

[@Jay-me7gw]

GM seems to tune these 2.7L's very conservatively and reduces power significantly with elevation whereas the Ecoboosts tend to maintain HP better. I have looked at the Ecoboost tuning with HPTuners on the 2.7L and they dont cut power below ~5000'. I also live in UT and test drove a 2.7L Colorado ZR2 and was pretty disappointed by the motor. This was after owning a 6400 lbs 2014 F150 Ecoboost on 35's for the last 9 years which should have had its ass whooped by the ZR2. But it was actually the opposite in my experience. Despite moving an extra 1400 lbs and larger tires, the F150 was MUCH stronger. For me, part of the reason you get a turbo'd engine like this is so that it performs well in any environment so the Chevy motor detuning as much as it does at elevation makes it significantly less interesting to me. 4500' of elevation in SLC isnt even that high. My living room is 6500' and in WY you are towing up near 7-8000' in some places while still on 65-70mph roads.

[@williampetsch1244]

Does either truck have the ability toto check the transmission fluid level? My 2010 Ford Explorer Sport Trac has a closed system so there’s no way to check the transmission fluid

[@MrTonaluv]

If it's not leaking...the level cannot go down. Just service the transmission regularly. Yes the oil does get dirty over time. Yes transmissions do need servicing.

[@sean2148]

The comment about how the Chevy handled better than the Ford is pretty accurate. My Ram rides great but my previous GM trucks have always felt way more planted to the road and seemed to have better handling.

[@cantbsdave]

Mine did not- my Ram feels much more sure footed than my Denali, both on 22’s

[@spikekavalench]

IS that sub 30psi oil pressure acceptable in that Chevy?

[@GTsGarageTech]

Yes. They have variable oil pumps. They will run lower oil pressure when a lot isn’t needed to save on gas mileage. They’ve been doing it for a decade now.

[@michaelmurphy6869]

You probably know this, as for transmission temps the normal operating range is between 180° - 220°. Both those pickups were operating within normal parameters.

[@jeffnic3116]

My understanding is the power loss from altitude was with naturally aspirated engine? Turbo can make up for the air pressure loss?

[@Jay-me7gw]

If the turbos are large enough, yes. Turbos can move a certain volume of air, if you increase/decrease the density of that volume, then your mass flow rate increases/decrease. If the manufacturer puts a large enough turbo on the vehicle to maintain the required mass air flow with the reduced air density at high elevation, then the engine will maintain its power. Chevy does not does this that well with the 2.7L. It seems to cut power at even low elevations. If you watch most of the TFLTruck videos with the 2.7L Colorado, you can see what I mean. It seems to only have as much power/torque as the 2.3L Ranger. Ford does not actively reduce power until they reach the turbo flow limits, which happens around 6500' for the 2.7L Ecoboost. The turbos are good for 41 lb/min at sea level while the engine only needs about 32 lb/min of air. Ford's 3.5L turbos are huge starting in 2018 and can flow ~62 lbs/min at sea level while the engine only needs ~38 lbs/min to make its rated power. That means the 3.5L can go all the way up to 11000' without reducing power.

[@egregiousblunder5395]

@@Jay-me7gw My 22 3.5L is a beast climbing the mountain ranges. It simply just builds boost and moves, passing anything around me with ease and this is with a 2.5 inch level and 35's. There have been times where I was pacing newer Rams and GM's and you can hear them constantly searching for gears while we sail on by lol. Most of my driving is around 6800-10k feet, zero issues. Tuned, it just gets more fun!

[@Jay-me7gw]

@@egregiousblunder5395 Absolutely. I have a 2014 3.5L EB on 35's and live at 6500'. It didnt care at all. It just cruised around like it was no big deal.

[@jjcastleberry3662]

I prefer the analog instrumentation of Chevrolet over Ford's digital instruments. When will you be testing RAM's Hurricane engine? Chevy's are known for their front independent coil spring suspension which rides smoother. I'm a 200,000 - 500,000 mile/20-year vehicle owner. My 2000 Ford E150 Conversion Van (5.4L Triton V8, 2-valve) has 199,425 miles. This morning, the driveway had no engine oil leaks or trans fluid. I have replaced the radiator OEM (cracked plastic) twice. I have spent roughly 16,000 dollars on tires, brakes, tuning, A/C, rear differential leaks (twice) oil changes, and radiator flushing. However, I'm looking for a truck to haul gravel, soil, and dirt/tow utility trailer under 10K lbs. Seems to be an F150 XL 305 CID V8 engine or RAM's 1500 Tradesmen 220 CID V6 engine as they are non-turbo.

[@twins4life274]

I have a '23 Camaro and my twin has a '24 Mustang. I don't like how her Mustang has a screen for the odometer. It's a bit much. Camaro's interior gets a lot of hate, but I love the simplicity. Also myChevrolet OnStar is better than Ford Connect in my opinion.

[@whambodius]

That Silverado had no chance after it got hit with his spiderweb in the beginning 😂

[@CamoShirt]

i think the chevy has a wider track width, probably helps stability

[@thomasbordi8726]

Convex you mentioned kee up the good video s

[@Jackmerius_Tacktheretrix]

In the ford hit the + button while in drive, and it will show you the gears you are in.

[@GrandCamino6]

@jbreviews If you put it in manual mode it displays which gear you are in. If you hold it in 3rd & lightly roll into it from about 20mph it surges to 60mph quicker than a full size pick up with a 4cyl should. One thing to note is that valve body for the 8spd transmission is on national back order. Funny thing about that 430lb/ft of torque from that 2.7L 4cyl. It’s actually more than a Mustang GT. The 468hp will spank the heck out of that 2.7L but that’s impressive torque from a 4cyl.

[@MrJEEPJT]

Excellent Video 👍👍 !!! 👎👎👎👎 to Ford for their “WET-BELT” Rubber belt inside the Engine to drive the oil pump a tremendous bad idea !!! Not to thrilled on lack of 4WD-Low on the silverados

[@jimmyaber5920]

You have to get the extra cost 3.0 Duramaxcin a chevyvto get a toothed belt driving the oil pump

[@MrJEEPJT]

@@jimmyaber5920 that was a brain damaged GM engineer that came up with that idea

[@nm-qt2hb]

The wet belt is on the 5.0 V8. Not sure the 2.7 has it.

[@MrJEEPJT]

@@nm-qt2hb Yes wet belt is in 2.7 2018 and on you tuber I do cars dismantles a current generation “2.7” and shows it off and he is not impressed….

[@mred3660]

You found a 2.7 ford I thought ford had paused it when I didn’t see it on the build form the earlier this week

[@poppyneese1811]

Yea Ford is doing away with the engine that does 53% of their sales😂🤣😂🤣

[@dmandman9]

It has NOT been discontinued. In fact, it’s now the BASE engine in the Ford F150. They discontinued the previous base engine which was the 3.3 normally aspirated V6.

[@steveparlier7059]

4cyl uses almost same barely better mpg then the ford to move that heavy Chevy !!! JS v6 turbo the better bet for sure !!! The Ford wins my vote

[@user-uz3hq3vb7b]

Have to push the plus for the gear display

[@brianmiller3626]

What is the trim level on the chevy, I have an LT for a company car and it is far better than the 1 you are showing. Hands down a better driving truck than the F150 that I previously had that completely fell apart at 100K.

[@rozzbourn3653]

i had a 2015 f150 with the 2.7L and now i have a 2023 colorado with the 2.7l. the ford had better power in the top end for sure, but i would average 20-21mpg with 93 octane. the colorado is averaging 24-25 mpg with 87 octane. i know some of that is the weight difference (about 200-220 lbs), amd my colorado is 2wd vs the ford being a 4x4. i drove from ohio to florida in the colorado and hit an average high of 31mpg. the only thing i dont like is the throttle response and how the power falls off at higher rpm's.

[@patriot1754]

Why are you in the passing lane? Sorry that's my pet peev; people should be in the right Lanes when traveling. The left lane aka passing lane aka the fast lane should be kept clear.

[@tdotw77]

😮Back seat drive much!? It's ok, he's doing 'testing' and needs open space for it. Stick to (backseat)couch driving in GTA, let the professionals do their jobs. 🤦🏻‍♂️🤔🤷🏻‍♂️👍🏻🚫😎🚧🛑⛔⚠️🚦🚗🚛🚚🚙

[@patriot1754]

@tdotw77 For one, I am a professional driver. Im a first responder, and it is crucial that the left lane be clear at all times for emergency responders. The fact that you don't know that; or that you don't care is concerning. Perhaps you need to be off the streets since you don't know how to drive!

[@scottyellis3442]

I agree 100%, stay out of the left lane unless you're passing, & then get over.

[@outlawet3fan483]

Neither Ford or Chevy are worth what dealers are asking

[@williamsmith5288]

None of them are worth what dealers charge

[@chriscampbell499]

Trucks these days have all the bells and whistles they have because of all of the little dicked surbanites that buy them, but will NEVER use them as actual trucks.

[@dougkahler7152]

No way would I get the 2.7 it makes no sense not getting the 3.5 liter turbo charged.

[@ericj810]

The rumored chevy v8 twin turbo is a neck jerker so they say.. 💪

[@overbuiltautomotive1299]

i got 18.3 or so average MPG in a 2004 f150 4 x4 crew cab 3v 5.4l fx4

[@rodneyhirsch2340]

I had the 6 speed ford 2.7. Even in Boise. The 0 to 60 was just over 6 seconds. Rated 5.7. It was blazing quick. Have they de tuned?? 26 mpg normal under 70. 80 the speed limit , lousy. 18. Maybe.

[@MADAmechanical]

He was at high elevation doing the test. You lose hp with the thinner air density and get slower 0-60 times compared to sea level.

[@spyder000069]

Also I think he said he has the 3.55 rear end gears. I believe you can option 3.73s. That will get you quicker off the line.

[@freedomisntfree_44]

He just floored it I believe and didn’t boost it

[@jackfishcampbell6745]

I've never seen a video that slow , not even close .

[@camonly849]

I got 16.3 mpg towing my 5500 lb trailer in a 2016 f150 2.7. I was going 65mph most of the time.

[@christianrosas3188]

Sport mode and you will see a difference.

[@JsGarage]

If you go up in trim level on Chevy you don’t get that older interior. I’d have to get an RST or something for that nicer interior. Both nice trucks.

[@justinsalazar9070]

It’s the same 💩

[@JsGarage]

@@justinsalazar9070 No it’s not. Custom gets the 2019 interior and RST, LT and up get the updated 22’ interior.

[@Bronco2Cj]

Chevy did a mid year refresh in 2022.. All LTs and above gets the 2 big digital screens standard, leaving out the WT and the Custom... almost 2 years later, Ford one upped them by making the 2 digital screens standard on all trim levels.. Smart move on Ford and dumb move on Chevy for still having 24 gallon tanks and using analog guage clusters in 2022, 2023 and 2024..

[@agentcarder]

I personally hate digital gauges, hate how ford made standard.

[@spyder000069]

If you tend to keep your tank above half full then you are always driving with extra weight in the 36 gallon tank. So I can see for many people the extended fuel tank isn't needed but if you tow its a necessity. I prefer the looks of the digital screens but if you have ever had a cell phone or tablet fail now think that could possible disable the use of your vehicle. Not to mention the OTA's that left colorado owners with a dead battery. Its a balance between more new tech and old tech reliability.

[@larrysutton925]

I know I'm in the minority here but I did not have a problem with the analog gauges or the way the dash looked on these Silverado's even before the refresh...I'm just old school, I guess.

[@shawngitlin4811]

I like the smaller gas tank. Paying $120 to fill up sucks

[@agentcarder]

@@shawngitlin4811 I mean your paying the same, just have to fill up more often

[@bigcartoonyIIV]

Im not sure why im getting so many high numbers but with my GMc 2.7 on the HWY im getting 27mpg even got to 28 and ont he city i get 21. When I get down on it , it gets 17 mpg city.

[@johnandrews3049]

Run the higher quality fuel the turbos get better go go with it.. I can spin all 4 at 60 in the rain with the 97 over the regular..

[@matthewanderson9912]

No surprise on the performance. That simply boils down to the V engine design compared to an Inline engine design. Towing, I’d say it would flip since their power is so similar. The 8L90 is interesting. It was designed to replace the 6L90 but it had some torque converter issues from the start. So it developed a bad reputation. It also seems to run a lot hotter than the 6L90 (especially the 6L90) and even the 6L80 that use to come in the 1500s. So that’s interesting. Probably has something to do with why GM never actually replaced the 6L90 with it in the HDs.

[@jackfishcampbell6745]

I'm not sure of what you mean . The Ford is a v6 turbo . This is the first video , that I've seen where it didn't seem quite quick . Turbo engines are supposedly less affected by altitude . They both under performed as far as acceleration .

[@matthewanderson9912]

@@jackfishcampbell6745 by design V engines (V6, V8) typically are under square, which means they have a larger bore than they do stroke. So they will rev quicker, and higher than an inline engine. Inline engines by design are usually over square which is just the opposite (longer stroke than bore size) which is really good for low speed power but not much for higher rpms. As for the performance in this particular test, JB didn’t brake boost the trucks which is probably what you’re use to seeing in other test. That’s not realistic for daily driving. You’re not going to be setting at a stop light brake torquing your turbo engine to build boost to make it launch quicker. Nor will you be doing that merging into traffic. So my point is the further up the rpm range you go the 2.7 I4 is going to run out of power where as the 2.7 V6 will continue to build power right up to redline. Towing will change things. The 2.7 V6 still might be quicker but the gap will narrow significantly and more than likely the 2.7 I4 will require less rpm to do the same speed. Now I’ve not looked at the specs of these engines. I’m just talking in general of how Inline engines compare to V engines.

[@jackfishcampbell6745]

@@matthewanderson9912 That's a good point , I don't live at elevation , but that would annoy me . The big rigs have inline sixes with turbos , lots of torque .

[@matthewanderson9912]

@@jackfishcampbell6745 elevation does affect things, even forced induction engines. Just not as much as naturally aspirated ones. But even at sea level the turbo engine needs to be brake boosted to achieve its best performance. You get in a turbo and just mash the gas there will be a big lag before the turbo can spool and build boost. That’s a problem with these small displacement engines in relatively big heavy trucks. Until the boost comes in you got a tiny engine trying to accelerate. This same thing is true for NA engines (needing to be brake boosted) to achieve their best performance. However you just mash the gas on something like a 6.2 V8 and it will get going a lot faster than a turbo V6 or I4 will. The much larger displacement is just making power a lot sooner what time the small displacement is waiting on a turbo to spool. There truly is no replacement for displacement.

[@paulhunter9613]

@@matthewanderson9912 there is no “big lag” waiting for the turbo to spool, but whatever

[@HIDHIFDB]

To be honest i dont care about 0 to 60 i want a reliable truck

[@rangerdanger88]

Forced induction shouldn't be as affected by elevation as NA.

[@joshc606]

I disagree, they do have the inline 6. And the turbo 4 took the place of the old 4.3 na v6. So I think they did step up the games.

[@marcmo7138]

The inline 6 is a diesel. but should have been mentioned.

[@CrookedlegGreg]

I really like the 1950’s gauge cluster in the Chevy😂 oh yeah

[@0to100_RealQuick]

Chevy trucks should only have the L83 or L86 in them. My opinion. Of course im talking about the 2017 body style. I have no idea whats in the new stuff.

[@steveparlier7059]

And I’d like to see that pulling up an incline w trailer and see who wins lol 😂 bet the v6 is better then an I4 is why is Chevy putting a head gasket blower engine ? 😂

[@BeanoNoir]

The real reason the Fords are quicker, is that on a chassis dyno, there is almost no difference between the 2.7l in the F-150 and the 3.0 ecoboost in the Explorer ST at about 310-311hp and 374-379lb/ft at the rear wheels (the 3.0l actually has less). It is supremely under-rated from Ford. For the GM 2.7, but There is one tune being tested that ups wheel torque to 414lb/ft (appx 475lb/ft at crank) from a tested 336lb/ft at the wheels (~ 380lb/ft at crank). They didn't publish whether it's for the gen 1 or HO, so it's an unreliable source. 5 star has an 87 octane tow tune that has identical 414lb/ft for the 2.7ecoboost, and their 93 tune is up to 480ft/lbs at the wheels (550 lb/ft at the crank!). Realistically from the crank, the ecoboost puts out about 435-440lb/ft of torque stock. 5 Star has dyno'd the 5.3 and 6.2l gm V8s, and they are dynoing far lower than what they are rated. About 316lb/ft at the wheels for the 5.3, which is about 360-365lb/ft at the crank(rated 383). There is a reason it feels weak compared to the competition, because it is. For reference, Ford's 5.0l pulls 366lb/ft at the wheels stock or approximately 420lb/ft at crank (albeit at 4300rpm). Again, real world SAE chassis dyno numbers seem to agree with the seat test.

[@BeanoNoir]

Additional note, as a Service advisor, I see A LOT of issues with the GM 8 speed transmission failing prematurely. Many times it is happening under warranty, but sometimes it isn't. Also, don't listen to the maintenance interval on the Ford transmission either. Change that fluid at least every 50k miles. The ten speeds don't have many real issues in my experience, unless you run them to death without maintenance. They are quirky though, which happens with that many clutches. They really don't like being run cold under 40 degrees outside temp, and are very hurky jerky. They also like to run very warm, between 200-220 degrees when at operating temp. Of note, the GM and Ford 10 speeds are physically the same units, and take the same fluid. They are tuned differently as they back up different powertrains.

[@coolazguy15]

I just bought the Chevy one and love it . Don’t let the old heads tell you trucks have to have V8 . My truck is awesome got balls ! Love the Chevy 2.7 L

[@acethomason4057]

It’s crazy that the 5.3 v8 Chevy has only 25 more hp than the four cylinder Chevy

[@robertmeese6545]

I would take that 4 cylinder just for the fact it is a strong built engine and 430 fpt

[@robertlane4432]

If you pay attention to torque numbers, they include @3,400rpm or whatever point they achieve that torque. Duh! It’s not there all the time! Also a turbo is manufacturing more air which should change all of the elevation power numbers. I love my F-150! It’s 15 years old! 300 hp when I want it. 20 mpg when I don’t!

[@olbluetundra881]

As the owner of a 2020 chevy 2500 gasser and a driver of a 2020 7.3 godzilla 2500. Both crew cab 4x4. I can honestly say the chevy beats the Ford. The chevy feels like it looks. Big and heavy. The Ford has serious bounce issues. Hitting the same bump on the same curve for 4 years now. The Ford feels like tha ass end is trying to pass up the front end. Yes it bounces that bad. The chevy hops and plants ready for more. Now as for fuel. I drive all back roads to work. Top speed of about 50mph. The Ford gets about 1 mpg better than the chevy. The difference though. 3.42 10 speed vs 3.73 six speed and the chevy is about 900lbs heavier with my heavy duty bumpers. Highway driving though. The chevy hands down. I've gotten 19.2 running 80mph in the chevy with a friend in the truck with me. The Ford best I've got was 18.1. Now. As for towing. I've got a 5vr that is 10.6k. The 3.42 on flat ground gets about 1.5 mpg better than the chevy at 70mph. When it comes to hills. They both suck. And get the same mpg. I will say this though. Being the same trim level and 4x4. The Ford feels better on smooth roads. When I go off pavement the chevy wins hands down and feels more capable than the Ford. Neither truck is over 40k miles yet and the Ford has been in the shop 3 times for warranty issues. The chevy. Nothing. Just waiting for the next trip. Oh. And the Ford battery has also had to be replaced 18 months in. The chevy just sits and stairs at the Ford. Its heaver. It's taller. And just plain feels bigger all around. And for those thinking I'm a Ford hater. Think again. I have 11 that range from 1965 to 2020. All running and all sizes. I've got 4 chevy's. From 77 to 2020. All original except alternators and and rubber and still running. The ford's can't say that. I just had to replace the waterpump on my 2017 expedition with 126k on it. My 77 chevy hasn't had any major components replaced and it has almost 290k miles on it. Had 99k when I bought it at 16 from my neighbor. It's a heavy half. To those that say ford's last longer. Maybe. But they cost more to own. The longest running Ford I've had. 99 f250 7.3 dB cab. 489k when I sold it and it had 199k when I bought it. Bought it as a work truck from my boss who kept immaculatecare of it. Total cost of ownership in the 9 years I had. 37k including purchase. The total cost of my 77 including purchase. 8900 bucks. And it's done just about as much as that Ford over the years. The difference. I don't have the that truck anymore. It just flat needed to much work. The chevy is still there when I need it. I won't purchase a dodge after 85. I've had 2 after that date. The truck falls apart around the motor if you use for something. If you just go back and fourth to work on pavement. They look good. That about it. Toyota. The older models just don't die. My 08 tundra 6 cylinder has 301k and is all original other than tires and batteries. And it has carried around almost 1600 lbs of sound system since 210k miles. Look at my post Pic.

[@donaldhill1401]

I’ll stick with my 5.0 running on eco fuel.

[@jackfishcampbell6745]

8 seconds sucks for a turbo . The 3.3 is quicker , at low elevation . The turbo is supposed to mitigate the elevation hit .

[@camonly849]

Ya I've seen the 2.7 get into the 6s...so maybe it's the fuel? Can put 91 in it for more power.

[@freedomisntfree_44]

He didn’t boost them

[@jackfishcampbell6745]

@@camonly849 That's an interesting point . I'm an old guy , so 8 seconds is still quick to me , but with that much rated power , it should do better . I live at 760 feet elevation , and would not be interested in any more vehicles requiring higher grade gas . I drive a Kia Niro hybrid that does 0 to 60 In 10 seconds but gets great gas mileage , but it has 139 horsepower .

[@camonly849]

@jackfishcampbell6745 well ford recommends 91 when you're towing. So I would imagine it would feel even peppier. My dad's 2016 2.7 is crazy quick. So much down low tq. Great motor. But I understand where you're coming from.

[@paulhunter9613]

Something was off in his 0-60 times, my 2018 , 2.7, 3:55 , supercrew will do it in 6.2 sec

[@roger.g1535]

I have the 2.7 Ford I'm impressed with it specially if I set the sport mode , when I put it in that mode runs like crazy, really fast I been beating small sports cars with sport mode

[@299charles]

The GMC and the Ford both have a 10 speed automatic transmission

[@vortecmacs]

…I don’t think the number of cylinders is the reason why the Ford was a tick quicker. Especially at the same displacement.

[@fishonalbertaoutdoors9761]

That chevy instrumentation cluster is from 1985? The coboost will out perform that gm in every way. Tow more more payload looks better and safer. The ford is on another level of quality

[@erikthegladiator]

My old 12v set up at 400+whp got better mileage than that, now it's like 17 but hp is 800+ now

[@markcole6475]

I bet maintenance is much more on your diesel than a gas engine? 😅

[@jpike53]

Are they 2wd or 4wd?

[@MrTonaluv]

They would be both 4wd

[@michaelcameron1733]

Am I the only one who noticed the low ish oil pressure of the Chevy?

[@brianhdueck3372]

I suppose GM should have the better engine. They’ve had all these years to finally build a 2.7 too.

[@MrTonaluv]

They did build a 2.7 dude. That's what he's drivin'

[@kellycrawford1346]

Yes, put a nicer interior in the Chevy and jack the price up 5 grand. That's how trucks got so damned expensive to begin with. The custom is an entry level truck. If you want a nicer interior, buy an RST or something. But it isn't free.

[@freeman5891]

I got some rust on my Chevy but it's ready to roll I got a rhinestone sky and a song in my soul It ain't a smooth ride, life, it's a winding road Yeah, it might be Chevy, but it feels like FORD Yeah, it feels like FORD (yeah, it does) Yeah, it feels like FORD It ain't a smooth ride, life, it's a winding road Yeah, it might be Chevy, but it feels like FORD 🛻

[@gpmike02]

I’ll take my 3.0 duramax over both those. So far lifetime avg is 25 mpg. Recently drove from Texas to Daytona and hit 28 mpg when I pulled through Jacksonville. Towing my boat is like it’s not even back there and I get between 15-17 towing. Trans temp 180-185 empty all day long, 190-193 so far towing

[@Derham43]

I would also if I could afford it ! (lol)

[@gpmike02]

@@Derham43 I don’t think it’s that much difference in price. They have f150 eco boosts on the lot for what I paid for my truck. I paid 45k for my truck

[@richardmiller4657]

As a mechanic both manufacturers are not smart. We have two race engines that should never be put in a truck. This video proves my point. The test they do is race test.

[@joeblow4888]

Ford should have stuck with the 6 speed tranny. More simplistic, less problematic. The 6R80 was much better than the 10R80.

[@79random]

Yes and no. My 16 6spd was a great overall driver but my 20 with the 10spd tows the same trailer so much nicer. Same engine and gearing in both.

[@superdave2832]

fords do show what gear your in and you found it at 6:36

[@rayhofmeister6693]

General motors is silly for using 4cyl in a full size silverado

[@stephenmartin1480]

I wouldn't buy either one ! I can get 500 hp out of a weed eater but , how long is it going to last ? Junk !

[@joer5057]

Dude is reviewing 2 turbocharged trucks, and right away talking about power loss at elevation like they're N/A. Lol, ok

[@davedobson5869]

Like your video, I like seeing honest comparisons of vechiles they do a true comparsion and not just trying to make one look better then the other. Being just a four cylinder and having almost the same numbers as the six cylinder is very impressive. But I think I would stick with the six if I was to do any hauling. That would be a good comparison to see if there is any difference in mileage/performance.

[@philllsxga.7737]

21 MPG 🤣🤣🤣 I had a 2014 nearly fully loaded z71 Silverado 5.3. With the cruise control set at 70 MPH it would average 26 MPG. With the cruise control set at 74 I would average 24 mpg. Yes a 2014 Silverado with a 6 speed...