GM 2.7 L3B Turbo engine! Characteristics, overview, common problems!

[@ericj810]

216k and counting. No issues.

[@chrisavalos7172]

Nice!

[@andysteward8617]

@@ericj810 question, how many tons do you haul?

[@RK-ds7im]

I own a 2023 2.7T and am really happy with it! Great torque/smooth/quiet/good overall fuel economy. Amazing on highways through the mountains.

[@Adam5Thousand]

May I ask what octane level fuel youre using?

[@RK-ds7im]

@ 87 Octane

[@RK-ds7im]

GM has low key nailed this engine execution. It is powerful/fuel efficient/quiet/light/reliable. Great job GM 👏

[@banditoandy9784]

the new ones have an aluminum oil pan, updated high output version relies on up to 27 psi of boost. AFM system is not an issue in these DOHC motors, GM is only finding issues with that on the 5.3 and 6.2.

[@andysteward8617]

Been a professional mechanic 1987, seen a lot of small displacement, turbo charged GM product’s hit the market over those years, none of them held their value, nor were they reliable past the warranty date/mileage. I expect this to be no different. Laughable thing to me, is this turbo’ed 2.7L, gets worse mileage than the 4.8L, or the 4.3L. What a joke!!!

[@ericj810]

Anything boosted gets lower mileage.

[@philipeli1192]

Turbos=low reliability,direct injection=carbon. GM sucks.

[@johnlittle6711]

I just bought the same gmc reg cab short bed like the one shown and love it! And with the recent 10 speed tranny issue the turbo max with the updated 8 speed is looking like the most dependable option from gm.

[@joew6277]

It makes 430ftlbs of torque now. I think they only gave the original figure. Plus they use an internal baffle, similar to an oil catch can for the pcv to help with carbon. Does it work? I don’t know but I haven’t seen any issues yet.

[@gpd5555]

Would like to see how much carbon is on the valves of these engines after high mileage or hear an explanation on what GM did to mitigate it.

[@organican]

This power train now comes with a 5 year 100,000 mile warranty

[@kevincarder3423]

I have a 24 Colorado zr2.the active fuel management never comes on at highway speed.it will come on at 60- 70 kmph but only for about 10 secs.seems useless to me

[@Ransomeware1]

I would not choose the ford eco boost engine over this gm engine.

[@danielbonner8309]

So far it has better reliability than the Ecoboosts but the 2.7 Ecoboost takes it out in performance.

[@ericj810]

2.7 eco boost may perform a lil better. Lower gear 10 speed transmission then the 8 speed chevy. But the eco boost will blow b4 the turbo max will. Drop a lower gear in the chevy it will run the eco boost. The 8 speed actually tows very well on the chevy 2.7. Wasn't built or geard for break neck acceleration.

[@ArkansasChainsaw]

love mine with the turbomax 2.7l crew cab 4x4 only issue is at 20 mph or below touch gas peddle to hard and lights the back tires up old 5.3 i had would not spin the tires on ice

[@hphillips7425]

I hope government motors is successful because I am sick of my tax dollars going to bailouts

[@amorris1970]

A 4 cylinder engine gets worse mpg then the old 3.6L WTF? Looks like GM is going backwards.

[@Holden-McGroin]

It’s not about efficiency, it’s about emissions compliance.

[@amorris1970]

@@Holden-McGroin So a engine that needs more fuel than a V-8 to go the same distance is efficient?

[@amorris1970]

I just love these people that say like a 4.3L, 4.8L can not be efficent. All the emmisions come from the head and added componnents. So, fixing something that isnt broken is a waste of money.

[@Holden-McGroin]

@@amorris1970 Did you read my comment? I said it IS NOT about efficiency, it’s about emissions compliance. Either engine is still pushing a 5,000lb truck. The turbo engine is loads more fun than the 5.3 V8 if you actually like to get on it.

[@amorris1970]

@@Holden-McGroin Did you read mine? More fuel is not emmissions compliant. The goal s to use less fuel and go farther. Thats emmissions compliant.

[@randycollins6193]

Junk.

[@brianmaloney5430]

Lol

[@waynemangiardi734]

IT'S JUNK! NOT a good ENGINE!!!

[@nedmorales1313]

When did you purchase yours and what made you come up with? It’s junk. The reason I ask is because I’m actually thinking of buying one so I would love your insight on why you think it’s junk.

[@TheJines123]

It's not that bad. My shop works on a company fleet set of these. They are great

[@nedmorales1313]

@@TheJines123 have you found anything that would constitute a red flag at all?

[@nedmorales1313]

@ especially in regards to the fuel injectors being that they’re direct injection

[@TheJines123]

@nedmorales1313 honestly if you buy one make sure it's a 24 and up. The 23 has a plastic pan and are prone to leak. Run very good oil and change it between 4k-5k. If you don't they like to eat the cam phasers. Other than that they have been solid for my client. He has 7 with 200k miles on all of them. We also service a CSX scout truck with a. 2.7 and it's worked everyday all day and has almost 16,000 hours of running time. Not one problem out of it. It's a high tech Inline 4. They have a pretty trick set of cams in them. That's the main reason to keep the oil changed sooner. These engines have billet cams and a full steel forged rotating assembly. They are built to work. They have a longer stroke than a duramax diesel and great low end power. after seeing my clients vehicles i bought a 2024 canyon AT4X AEV and looooove it. GM is killing it with the midsize game right now.