How BAD is the GM 4 Cylinder at Towing? | Fuel Economy & Experience

[@astro54541]

The fact that you get 14mpg with a trailer in a 4cyl for me is impressive. I get a consistent 13.2 with nothing in my truck and no trailer … Tundra Crewmax 5.7 😂

[@ritosilerio6180]

I get 11 mpg I do have a camper shell though.

[@browndogstt8546]

I get much better than that with my 18 tundra. Last month I bought a caterpillar dozer at an auction and had to get it home. Total weight of my trailer and dozer was 14.5k. I only towed it 58 miles but got 11.2. I only towed about 50mph since the trailer was overloaded. I was surprised how well the tundra towed 5k over it's rated capacity. Unladen my truck averages 16.2. My last long trip I got 18 average for the 1300 mile trip averaging 67mph. I have found that the meeter in my truck is not exactly accurate so I figure mileage at the pump. I have also found that my truck gets the best mileage with cheap gas. It will drop 2mpg if I run premium.

[@Back_door_bandit_98]

@@browndogstt8546 towing 14500 and getting 11.2 while others are saying they get 11-13 unloaded pretty hard to believe.

[@Back_door_bandit_98]

14 mpg while towing is pretty decent the weight of the trailer is under 5k tho so not that much weight. My 2020 dually gets 14-16 unloaded and loaded with 10k it drops 2 mpg the only time mpg drops hard is when I’m towing heavy around 24k

[@browndogstt8546]

@@Back_door_bandit_98 so is getting 16 in a dually. All I can say is my truck averages 16.2. The best tank I have gotten is 21. That mileage is figured at the pump, not the truck computer. I keep a log of every mile and tank so I know my numbers are accurate... But everyone says tundras get bad mileage. It is more about how you drive. If you drive like your in a nascar race your mileage will suck. One of the guys I work with gets 32mpg out of his 2006 Cummins. He never exceeds 55mph. I am not that patient😉

[@atricks6418]

The truck bros got their panties in a twist over this one, my god. He is doing an informative video on MPG for truck people who plan to buy this not as a work truck, but a daily driver/weekend warrior truck for projects/towing uhauls and home project materials, take the video for what it is.

[@terryduncan31]

Absolutely!

[@NoName-tz5ji]

Please excuse us for wanting a vehicle sold as a truck to actually be a truck.

[@clayzr4716]

@@NoName-tz5ji just buy a base model truck with a v8

[@smiller225]

@@NoName-tz5ji this is a truck while it might not be a conventional engine platform we must remember this truck will absolutely do everything better than an old school 350 chevrolet truck.

[@NoName-tz5ji]

@@smiller225 ROFLMFAO

[@shannonsisk]

If I bought this truck I would not be surprised if it performed. However I just don’t see these lasting like the older 99-06 trucks do. That much load on a small engine equals heavy wear and tear. But only time will tell.

[@JattAnmoli]

These engines are actually built much stronger than those engines. The 2.7L ford ecoboost is one of their mosy relaible engines. They are built like diesels.

[@shannonsisk]

@@JattAnmoli they aren’t 20 years old yet with 300k, that’s what I’m saying. I realize they have forged internals and all that.

[@johnriley7053]

Engine internals are seldom the problem, it is all the external support systems. And EVERYTHING on the outside of the engine block is plastic now... even on your beloved Diesels.

[@shannonsisk]

@@johnriley7053 exactly

[@zezoo2107]

@@shannonsisk a lot have 300k miles for mist 1st gen 2.7L and the 3.5L and are still out there kicking strong

[@mikerobinson3672]

My dad has a Chevy Silverado with this engine. He doesn't tow very often but when he does he is at max towing weight. All he says is it will do it, it doesn't like it but it will do it. This is a lease truck. He leased the 4 cylinder instead of the 8 because they gave him a ridiculously good deal on it, and it checked off all the boxes for capabilities. The drivetrain is under warranty for the entire lease. He hasn't had to use after 3 years. He said if they give him a really good deal on a 4 cylinder on his next lease he said he will probably get another one. Hope this helps

[@inspectorjavert5563]

I would never, ever buy a general motors vehicle. All they make is junk.

[@jrwstl02]

@@inspectorjavert5563 Wow, you’re missing out! We’ve been running new GMC and Chevrolet since 1994. Run them 7-9 years, which puts them at 150,000-190,000 mi when we trade. Always have 2, a Tahoe or Yukon and a Sierra or Silverado. Out of all those GM vehicles, we replaced a A/C compressor on a ‘09 Silverado at 85,000 mi, and we put a new transmission in a ‘16 Tahoe at 127,000 mi. Other than that, its only been oil changes and brakes. Even the brakes are great, always get over 100,000 mi on the factory pads.

[@inspectorjavert5563]

@@jrwstl02 I think you may be looking at things through rose tinted goggles. GM transmissions are the absolute worst, worse than Dodge, They engineer them so they fail after 100,000 miles, which really isn't many miles for a "well-built" vehicle. I had to replace the transmission in a 2014 Impala, not even a ten year old vehicle, right at 100,000 miles. Meanwhile, Ford, Mitsubishi, and VW transmissions will last well over 250,000 miles if you keep up on the drain and fills. The fact that General Motors is a mouthpiece for cultural Marxism is the cherry on top. And people keep throwing their money at them.

[@juniorthird7952]

@@inspectorjavert5563 you know Ford and Chevy share the 10 speed automatic transmission and I've never heard of Ford people complaining about transmission failures.

[@inspectorjavert5563]

@@juniorthird7952 Although the transmission was created through a joint venture, the two transmissions have their own tweaks and software from either company. They're not the exact same transmission. I would avoid the 10 speed on either one to be honest with you, as I hear of failures on Fords, but moreso on the Chevys. Ford's previous 6 speed used on their trucks was pretty much bulletproof. Neither company is the best, but Ford clearly has more respect for their customers than Chevy does.

[@kross1261]

Pretty impressive. What would really be interesting is to make the same run with a new 5.3 and compare.

[@bigbeef8935]

towing my 21ft vexus bass boat in my Trail boss with a 6.2 I get around 14.9

[@mrutan6055]

My 6.2 3/4 ton gets 12 mpg with a 2400 lb truck camper 2 passengers and a bunch of camping gear. A F250 with a payload of 3300lbs 14mpg empty

[@ianhacker9594]

2020 5.3 gmc 4x4got 18 with same trailer max load averages 20

[@mrutan6055]

The new 5.3 with Active fuel management would probably bend a push rod

[@scrappy7571]

@@mrutan6055 or spit out a lifter

[@ATLOffroad]

Thanks for posting. I like seeing the 28mpg best on you MPG screen there. Perfect for my use. 90% of the time my truck is just my daily driver. The other 10% is for towing my 6500lb boat. I think this truck would be perfect for my driving habits.

[@Torch4Life]

That 28.3 is pretty neet.

[@TheGenerationX894]

That 2.7 highway rated fuel economy is rated at 20mpg. So 14-15 towing a boat anchor trailer is not bad. It's rated to pull 9000 lbs. So I don't think that's all that bad.

[@ironmike7339]

And my RAM Hemi gets 24 on the highway and 18 city with 395 hp and balls. GM went the wrong way with there engine program. I bet these motors never make 200,000 miles.

[@JaimieB.DogJack]

My 2005 F-150 has almost identical stats. I don't understand what was really gained with these engines

[@thsarethbreaks]

@@ironmike7339I bet u they will too.

[@travisolson9190]

The low engine rpms really impressed me!

[@wallacegrommet9343]

Right! Crazy low revs at 70!

[@godw1ll99]

seriously. my car revs at damn near 3k at 80mph... my car also averages 24mpg. the low revs at highway speeds is key here. on the other hand my gas guzzling 6.4l hemi revs low at 80mph and averages 14mph highway when empty but it also weighs 7k lbs.

[@marioruiz3394]

I’ve had two of these 2.7 L years 2022. The first one I had for six months around 12,000 miles and the turbo went out. The second one I had for less than a month with the check engine lights. I now drive a V-8 5.3

[@mgreenl24550]

Pretty impressive. Definitely better than my old 2011 5.3 setup. With almost same HP rating and mine had LESS torque.

[@Senerian]

Properly maintained, I bet your 5.3 will out last the 4 cylinder.

[@gabrielgalaxygh]

No shit its 10 years newer. The difference is 10 later this chevy motor will be broken

[@The1mybuddy1]

I have a 20 and we have a 30' travel trailer that weighs 7,880 and it tows it without a problem. 65mph on freeway. 10.1 mpg. Has no issues getting to speed from a dead stop either. Have towed it 300 miles as longest trip so far. All I've done is added air lift bags to rear and blue ox distribution hitch. Have not used the distribution hitch and found almost no significant difference.

[@gabrielgalaxygh]

Just wait 5 years and you won't be bragging about that truck anymore

[@stevekveton4326]

That’s amazing fuel mileage considering the box (parachute) you pulled. Awesome engine!

[@shanetaggart6060]

Just came from California to Colorado, 1500 miles. with a crew cab 1500 5.3. full back seat, loaded bed, and stuffed U-Haul trailer. Lowest I got to was 10.5 pulling through the valleys. Damn impressive for a 4 cyl to get that good of gas mileage. No idea the weight comparison between what you towed and I towed but that's a decent little engine there

[@Contreras-z4e]

I’m sure you would’ve got better if you would be driving his route

[@number1pappy]

Thanks for confirming that there is absolutely no point whatsoever in buying a full size 4 cylinder truck! Common sense of course told me this already but it nice to have it confirmed for sure! Thanks man!!

[@frankammirati3385]

Indeed , I’ve got a 1 ton diesel dually with a lot of add ons and upgrades and I’m right at an average of 13 mpg hauling 10k lbs and the truck weighs 10.5 , yeah I spent a lot to get my mileage up but it was worth it especially on the power end of it . Not too mention I can switch tunes on the fly and add or take away power as needed .

[@privilegedwhitemale306]

Its got a turbo. Towing isnt your friend with this setup

[@number1pappy]

@@frankammirati3385 absolutely! I also can't imagine this 4 cylinder with a turbo lasting 300000 miles! Granted ,only time will tell but come on! I had a 1997 gmc Sierra go 310 thousand miles when I finally justvgot tired of it and sold it. I have a 2005 gmc 1500 that has 253 thousand miles that I would still trust to drive cross country in! My 2014 only has 113 thousand miles so time will tell but considering now how much more money manufacturers want for their trucks its baffling why they are now putting crap engines in them. It's going to interesting to watch how these 4 cylinder trucks do on the used auto market in a few years. I will also be keeping my current trucks as there in no way in hell I'm paying what they want for new ones currently and that goes for the used market as well! It's ridiculous! In the current market it would be better to just install new engines and trannys than buying new. Anyways just my 2 cents in a crazy effed up world! Lol!

[@number1pappy]

@@privilegedwhitemale306 yeah! All I cab do is laugh at it because it was constantly "in boost" the whole time ,from pulling a you haul trailer! 😂 lol!! Seriously it's messed up!!

[@frankammirati3385]

@@number1pappy manufacturers run and operated by the tree hugging left and that’s that . Think about it we went from GM to gm . Operated by men too operated by gender neutral . 🤷‍♂️

[@rand49er]

As an engineer who specialized in internal combustion engines, it never ceases to amaze me how people think that somehow a smaller engine will miraculously get substantially better fuel economy than a bigger engine when doing the same amount of work, e.g. pushing a big vehicle through the air while hauling a blunt object also through the air at over 70 MPH. It defies physics. It takes tractive force to do this which is derived from burning gasoline, a chemical reaction with a fixed amount of energy in it per unit volume. Unless there's divine intervention going on, it ain't gonna happen. Again, I'm amazed. (For full disclosure, I couldn't watch the entire video after seeing comments on the 13.4 MPG and 14.0 MPG observations. I knew where it was going.)

[@rdaugherty52]

I have a new 2022 Silverado with the 4 cylinder turbo I leased to own and I don't regret it at all. I just pulled a car hauler from Louisville to Lexington the trailer weighs around 2800 lbs and my biggest problem was trying not to drive 85 mph once I was on the interstate I cut the trailer haul mode off and at 80 mph it was running 1800 rpm. In 2 wheel drive without the trailer leaving a stop light quickly it will squeal the tires. When it comes to towing and I have a farm tractor to pull its not a 2500 but I am not pulling something all the time. With just the truck going down the interstate at 70 mph 1500 rpm at 80 mph 1800 rpm the thing is barely working yes I love it.

[@jonathan7744]

that is really interesting and impressive for sure, the 6x12 trailer is pretty big. I just moved 1200 miles from texas with my 2000 s10 2.2 manual towing a 5x8 trailer, averaged 19mpg doing between 60-70. The 2.2 was nearly always 40-50% throttle, a 2.7 would have made it so much better.

[@jonathan7744]

@leglamps it is a pretty big trailer, I also work around semi truck, yes those are a lot bigger then that.

[@ericpilger2217]

I never thought I'd see the day they put 4 bangers in a fullsize.

[@92clintonr]

Leave it to Chevy. They've always been gutless so I'm not surprised they were first with a 4 banger.

[@mikecarmean1676]

Really good results! For reference I towed a 5x8 U-Haul trailer across the country with my old 2008 Titan 4x4 and averaged mostly between 10-11(12 one tank) driving at 68 to 78 mph. Super impressed with this motor 🍻

[@JrsGasolineAlley]

Very cool!

[@Captn_Cor]

I have the 2.7 4CYL Chevy, when I need to tow or just want better performance in general I use higher octane fuel. For daily driving I use lower Octane and average around 18- 20 mpg. Difference between a V8 and 4CYL cost was far more than stopping at the gas station a few times..

[@stevenstair1068]

Changing octane does absolutely nothing to performance if it doesn't require it,, , read the studies on it , save your money and use what's recommended for your engine

[@-x21-]

@@stevenstair1068 turbocharged engines generally require higher octane fuel for optimal performance. I'm fairly certain that they will recommend higher octane fuels in the manual.

[@josephbaker4319]

How did if feel when you turned in your man card? No replacement for displacement cheif. Turbo bullshit. Lets see how that is doing 20 years from now. Good luck

[@Captn_Cor]

@@josephbaker4319 brother man.. I’ve never owned a truck for 20 years.. this stuff isn’t that serious to me. I admire your passion on the topic though. Have a good day.

[@Captn_Cor]

@@josephbaker4319 Also a man isn’t defined by the type of truck he drives.. if that is how you define your self then I think you need to do some soul searching and find some purpose in life rather then jumping to the comments section and trying to degrade other men..

[@Derham43]

Read many comments about this engine in this size truck, so I decided to add this caveat. Actually I think the mileage is indeed impressive towing with this set up. A lot of posters are saying this engine is better suited in the Colorado, perhaps so. I occasionally find myself towing this same size trailer and load (weight) on Interstates at the same speeds as the OP. With a Chevy Colorado 3.6 Crew Cab, I am getting around 14 to 16 MPG. If I had the money, I'd buy the refreshed (H.O) of this engine in the full size Silverado or GMC in a heart beat. Great job on the video!!!!!!

[@Drew-C-]

Just got the 22 Silverado with the HO refresh 2.7L. I am really impressed with the amount of power this thing has.

[@jermboomin]

The "good ol" Carolina squat 😂😂😂 Curious to see how the reliability will be. I'd like to see a head to head comparison of this 2.7 vs Fords 2.7.

[@rdsii64]

I drive a 2018 F150 with the 2.7L ecoboost. If I were willing to buy a GM Truck, The 2.7L turbo would be my choice. Trucks and turbos go together like peanut butter and jelly. I'll never go back to a NA V8.

[@derrickforeal4739]

My 2023 2.7 turbo, 310 hp 430 ft-lb torque, 2,020 lb payload and 9,000 lb trailering is great. Its not bad at all, its good.

[@jameshoots8302]

Did anyone else notice the 55mph notification on the u haul trailer?

[@gregrowe1168]

I think they all say that, nobody follows that recommendation.

[@MrBeard-ig5zc]

I am sure the 4 banger has the power. The question. How long before the intake needs sand blasting and the turbo takes a dump. My 2006 Silverado. 5.3 pushrod does not get much worse mileage. I bet mine will still be running when this one doesn't.

[@jakejonesy9275]

And it’s only like 3 mpg difference…

[@justintime8095]

Basically said what I was gonna post. My 17 ltz z71 gets 23-25 on the highway and when I’m towing a trailer I’m getting 14-15 so not sure where the appeal is for the 4 cylinder turbo.

[@Daimxn]

@@justintime8095 cheaper

[@ryanmichalak4596]

I have an 05 and was thinking the same thing. My issue isn't mechanical it's all rust up here in MA

[@mikerobinson3672]

@@justintime8095 cost. My dad has a Silverado with this engine. He leases trucks now. The lease on the 4 cylinder compared to the 8 was substantially lower. The 4 cylinder checked all the boxes on what he was going to do with it. 3 years and it hasn't given him any issues. He said if they give him a deal on the next one he will probably lease another one. If they price is closer to the V8 he will lease the V8.

[@jasonbosworth8549]

Keep in mind that this test is NOT wt the current newly redesigned 2.7 turbo with 93 ft lbs MORE of torque!

[@jmartineztrades]

I have an at4 6.2 v8 and honestly its a work horse! Im a contractor so I loaded it with 30 sheets of 5/8 drywall, tiles, concrete, ive towed dump trailers with 6k payload of trash uphill! When it comes to buying a truck, imo, be very decisive on what you get if its for looks or work or both. I have a swiss army knife that has power, luxury, off-road, towing, and looks

[@woodysrockspyro6436]

That's crazy good on the flatlands. Try that around here... game over man.

[@Forestdawg1791]

Not bad overall. I’ve towed the same trailer with my 6.2 Yukon and get around 12mpg. Honestly getting 15 plus mpg towing is very good.

[@JrsGasolineAlley]

Yeah, not too bad.

[@vikingtractor6065]

Great video. My favorite part was you calling out that ridiculous Ram. 😂

[@jakleo337]

I get that mileage in my 2004 suburban with a 8.1 liter engine ( 496 c. i. ) towing a similar trailer in Colorado.

[@Darkmatter833]

Welcome to Mass. It will be interesting to see how my 5.3 does towing the same trailer from MA to AK. Great vid.

[@richmoo3125]

Gotta comment back with your average mileage, at least with the first 1000 miles

[@MisterMikeTexas]

I wouldn't have a Four on steroids in any full-size truck of mine. Probably won't last more than 100K miles.

[@johnnyjet3.1412]

For every 15 mph in speed your wind resistance doubles

[@doddgarger6806]

Not that simple it's based on v squared so the increase from 50 to 65 is waaayy more than from 15 to 30

[@Texassince1836]

Doubling speed quadruples wind resistance.

[@wolfpackflt670]

Here's the problem, a small aluminum block with a turbo is going to shorten the engine's life quite a bit then add towing to the mix.....

[@dan43213]

the 2nd generation 2.7 )22 amd newer) was more than just an update in stats. They changed the crank and a few other things. Same horsepower, but about 70 more ft/lbs of torque.

[@user-tb7rn1il3q]

That’s the mpg a 21 Tundra gets without the trailer.

[@zackthompson7537]

That's impressive for what it is. I recently towed a 2200lb trailer for 2.5 hours about 40% back country roads, 60% highway in an 08 ltz 4x4 sliverado 5.3 4L60e and averaged 16.2 mpgs on non-ethanol 91. Return trip was with a 3500lb car on the 2200lb trailer, same route but in reverse and I averaged 15.6 mpgs. Only slight advantage I see to the 4 cylinder is the mpg while empty but even then it's not much more than a 5.3, less than .5 mpg difference in real world driving empty.

[@ronlindley5215]

Not very good toeing low profile. I averaged 17.3 towing 4500 lb tent trailer over 2,00 mile road trip in a 2016 F150 2.7 and average 20 towing a steel tilt car trailer with 800 lb lathe on it!

[@zackthompson7537]

@ronlindley5215 when you consider I only have a 4 speed trans, the mileage is actually good. Keep in mind there is 8 years between our trucks

[@lshssprings]

Co worker of mine has a ‘22 Silverado with the 5.3 and I have a ‘22 with the 2.7 (not high output version) and I average about 8 mpg higher than him in daily driving. I’m around 27.5 and he’s just under 20. Daily driving the 4cyl is definitely the more efficient route.

[@bradhaines3142]

dont look at it as 5 mpg, 5mpg better than 20 is a 25% improvement, which is pretty huge. and unloaded these get more like 40% better

[@jkahne9]

I towed that same trailer, fully packed , from Long Island, NY TO Richmond, Texas with my 2017 Chevy equinox 4 cylinder. No problem

[@curte7739]

I was transferred up to New Hampshire for a job and when that job ran out we decided to move back south and we just chose Kentucky randomly. (well mainly because I love the deer hunting in Kentucky) I have four cars so I had to decide how to get all four down there the choice was to tow two with the other two. Towed 99 Celica convertible with my 98 Isuzu rodeo 6cyl and my son's 89 Civic wagon with our 2012 Ford escape 4 cylinder all wheel drive. We used tow dollies to cut down on the weight we knew trailers weren't going to work. it actually went pretty good until we got to West Virginia and hit those mountains those long mountain grades. we made it but one thing it showed me neither one of those vehicles were made to tow anything over about a thousand pounds.

[@josephfortuna3326]

I’d be curious at the longevity of the 2.7.

[@ram89572]

Can't be worse than the other truck engines GM is running that all need a rebuild at 100k miles from the AFM

[@chadbullock6326]

@@ram89572 Here is a wild concept, dont buy new trucks or just delete the AFM.... I will stick with my 99-07 gm trucks until they are unobtainable.

[@ram89572]

@@chadbullock6326 Ok but that wasn't my point. I'm well aware of how famously reliable that generation Vortec is. I have had my 2004 Silverado 1500 with the 4.8 for 18 years now. But talking about 20 year old vehicles is not the point here. The point was that the reliability of this little turbo 4 at the least can't be worse than the giant crap sandwiches GM has been putting out for years at this point. Their trucks have been nothing but rebuild machines ever since they introduced their cylinder deactivation mess. And doing a delete on a vehicle isn't all that viable until it is out of warranty at which point damage has already been done.

[@ericrichards8939]

For comparison, another youtuber did a cross country road trip (WA-GA) towing roughly 5k lbs. The vehicle he was driving was a Honda Ridgeline AWD. N/A 3.5l V6. I want to say that his average fuel economy for the entire trip was roughly 15mpg. Keep in mind that his truck was maxed out as far as towing goes, and it has full time AWD and falls into the mid-size truck category. I know the Colorado with the Duramax does really good when towing as far as mpg too. All I'm saying, is that at least you have options. Not everyone wants or needs a diesel or v8 truck.

[@eastcoastr]

I must be magic because when I rented a U-Haul Silverado with a 5.3 with a two axle trailer pulling my golf r down to southern VA from Harrisburg PA I got 17.2 mpg going down and 16 coming back up

[@patmcbride9853]

It's interesting that the speed limits for a truck towing a trailer are all the same along the east coast, and much higher than in Kalifornistan (55mph).

[@NewTestamentDoc]

Save 3 mpg now, pay thousands in engine rebuilds later.... is is really worth it in the long run?

[@JrsGasolineAlley]

I guess you were unaware of the lifter failures that are going through all the AFM v8s and GM's lineup? There's no free lunch anywhere my friend

[@foch3]

These will definitely be the trucks to avoid second hand.

[@strawhatgarage2517]

I'll stick to my 5.9 12v or 7.3 power stroke/idi

[@freedom6919741]

That’s not bad. Been hearing great things about the 3.0 diesel getting in the mid 20s for mpg.

[@rightwingsafetysquad9872]

The I6 Duramax looks like a fantastic engine. Too bad diesel makes 0 sense financially if you're not towing heavy all the time.

[@TheElderOne2003]

@@rightwingsafetysquad9872 been daily driving a diesel since 99 and wouldn't have it any other way. I constantly get about 16mpg in my 22 Ram 6.7L with 35s trolling around town unloaded.

[@williamwheaton8117]

The 3L Duramax with the 10 speed auto is so smooth. If diesel wasn’t so expensive I’d certainly be getting the new LZ0 3L Duramax. Not sure if my company’s Homesteader trailer is comparable but I was getting about 18mpg at 70. But it excels in mild 55mph traffic and I’ve gotten 38mpg at those speeds without the trailer, if I’m remembering correctly as I have to hit the road in a sec.

[@rightwingsafetysquad9872]

@@TheElderOne2003 That’s pretty bad mileage. The Ford 6.8L gas gets similar, costs a hell of a lot less upfront, and fuel is $2.10 cheaper per gallon.

[@TheElderOne2003]

@@rightwingsafetysquad9872 16mpg in the city with stop and go traffic is not bad at all in a Crew Cab Long Bed. It is far from Prius mpg but when I have my trailer loaded down and I am just shy of 20K towing, that expensive motor is amazing compared to a gasser.

[@cookiedough5374]

Speed is everything when towing with a gasser. EVERYTHING! I tow RVs for a living and have considerable experience with half ton gassers to one ton diesels. Diesel will do better at the higher speeds. Weight is not as big an issue unless you are running too hard up mountains. The frontal area of the trailer matters the most.

[@kennyhallam]

Thank you sooooooooo much for the awesome video!!!! I am looking at getting this exact truck in 2WD and you have confirmed it is exactly what I am looking for in a truck to get better gas mileage. I live in Florida and I drive equally on interstate and city during the week. I drive an average of 1500 miles a month pulling a 6x10 enclosed trailer weighing about 3100lbs total and only get 8-9 mpg with my 2010 Chevy Silverado with the 4.8L V8. You were the first real video I found with the 4cyl Chevy Silverado pulling a trailer my size in Florida ( And beyond lol) Thank you again for the awesome detailed video!!

[@JrsGasolineAlley]

Glad to help. Enjoy your new truck.

[@DvinAziz]

If you use 91 minimum you’ll see a significant gain in mpg, boosted or high comp engine needs 91 at least.

[@VicReinz52]

Exactly, I quit buying anything except for whatever is the highest grade available after I learned how important octane is for towing. I went from 91 to 90 by mixing in some 89 to half my tank & I was swearing at myself when the truck literally lost a very noticeable amount of torque after the fuel in the supply line switched over to the new mix a few miles down the road. The money you save buying anything other than premium gets lost in the lower mpg & vehicle wear & tear. Just do yourself a favor & buy premium only… My $.02 🤐

[@yankeedoodle7693]

I'm sure the engineers thought of that

[@slalomkayaker1]

If it’s tuned for regular you’re just throwing money away

[@VicReinz52]

@@slalomkayaker1 You're right -- but just about every modern car, and some that still have an old-fashioned distributor, will increase timing when the ECM notices via the knock sensor that the motor is no longer on the edge of pre-detonation. Even if the min. requirement is 87, that just means the computer will accommodate down to 87 -- but the higher octane you put it, the more timing the ECM will add. Want a simple experiment? Mix E-85 into your next fuel tank so you're running around 20-25% Ethanol in your fuel. Your octane should be around 97-98 if you mix the E-85 into 91.

[@Jasmurray87]

Great review, my 18 Canyon with the V6 pulled the same trailer loaded from texas to NY did around the same speed 70-73 max and the mpg was roughly the same 14-16 range was quite impressed. Where you using tow mode any? Once I hit areas with lots of hills up north I used it because it’s better for shifting in those areas.

[@RossMalagarie]

we'll see next year when this is the only engine option for the 2023 Canyon and Colorado, with 3 power tunes, one with 240hp, one with 310hp, and one with 310hp and 430ft ibs of torque. And we will see how it the mpg is, the towing mpg is and how the off roading will be.

[@frankmartin1325]

The worst part of the truck is the ridiculous small 24-gallon fuel tank, when the others offer 36, 33 & 32 gallon tanks.

[@jimmysgarage9068]

Nice video man. I would have loved to film something like this with my 2000 Ranger XL with the 2.5 I4 and see what kind of gas mileage a naturally aspirated 4-cylinder would get while towing a loaded UHAUL. Great content!

[@mrutan6055]

can do mcb3 72-75

[@iwouldrathernot4274]

I think I averaged 23 unloaded with my 2000 2.5, but I dont think I could even calculate the mileage accurately because I live in the mountains. I know with about 3500lbs I was having to shift to 3rd to pull hills lol Definitely not power houses but theyll do anything so long as you have patience.

[@jasonlarsen3515]

Rangers have unlimited tow capacity

[@jimmysgarage9068]

@@jasonlarsen3515 🇺🇸🤘

[@mikecarmean1676]

That would be interesting! I bet she would struggle though I had a 2009 with the 2.3 and 5 speed AT, and even with the smallest trailer (not boxed) she struggled! Didn't do the fuel economy on that because it was such a short run but empty could get up to 25 on the highway

[@jobu9224]

The reason these engines are finding their way into GM's full size trucks is because their V8 production line is maxed out. With 3 factories pumping out trucks over two shifts each. Boosted small dispacement motors are popular with young drivers. I would not trade my 6.0 or my 6.2 for one of these but I think it is great to give buyers some choice. I think it will be a great fit with the new mid-size trucks and the targetted audience. (Tacoma, man-bun demo).

[@masonlynch1793]

I probably wouldn’t get one of these either. I’d much rather get something older with a 5.3. If I had to or ideally a 6.0.

[@imabebebebe2496]

so by extension the 4.3 v6 production must be maxed out too?

[@chadbullock6326]

@@imabebebebe2496 They stopped production of the 4.3.

[@Project_Low_Expectations]

Soooo, they designed, tested and certifies a new engine unlike anything else they have, because they can’t make enough LS engines. It had nothing to do with smog, or CAFE. 👍🏻👌🏻

[@hungryhungryhummer]

I don’t think people comprehend really how impressive this is.

[@nathaniel6286]

I made a similar trip. Texas -> Florida (1200 miles) with a new ranger (2.3L turbo) and the same trailer loaded up similarly. Towed like a dream and avg'd about 12-13mpg the whole way.

[@msg63bretired82]

No different than v6 or v8 Silverado towing. I’ve had both. Smaller engine was for increased payload capacity through lower curb weight. Great experiment and hopefully turbo will not get hot and limp like the ford v6 did a few years ago. Done a bit of towing while moving in the Army and usually drove 60-65 (5 under posted limit) and found its a much easier and stress free drive. Seldom had to worry about passing and helped 1.5-2 mpg more. At the end of the day you only lose about 20-30 miles so it’s a trade off for some. Thanks for posting this!

[@63DW89A]

The I-4 is a mechanically stouter engine than a V6 by a considerable margin. The I-4 will also make the same torque at lower peak RPM than the V6. In an I-4 and V6 of equal displacement, the I-4 has larger pistons, which give the I-4 a faster torque rise. The mechanical stoutness of the I-4 is due to having 5 main bearings vs the V6 4 main bearings. The inline configuration of the I-4 creates a simpler, more efficient valve train, and simpler, far more efficient intake and exhaust manifolds which also help make the I-4 easier to keep cool than the V6. Another plus of I-4's is fewer moving parts meaning greater reliability and less friction for greater efficiency. A 2.7 L I-4 is the much better choice for turbocharging over a 2.7 L V6 (as Ford is discovering!), because the 2.7 L I-4 has the same individual piston displacement (just 4 fewer!), and the exact same stout crankshaft and bearing layout as a 5.8 L V8. Lots of positives for the I-4 over the V6. The only negative for the I-4, is the I-4 suffers from 2nd Harmonic vibrations, making it a buzzier engine, than 6 or 8 cylinder configurations, unless dual balance shafts are added to reduce the problem, as GM has done for the 2.7 L I-4.

[@gabrielgalaxygh]

@@63DW89A yeah thats not how it works. If thats the case why not run single piston turbo supercharged motors? Exactly, because its stupid. They're not putting smaller engines in trucks because its better they're doing it because its cheaper. Mark my words these 4 cylinders will not last

[@63DW89A]

@@gabrielgalaxygh In a 4 cycle piston engine, 4 cylinders are needed to keep the crankshaft turning under a power stroke, ensuring maximum power for a given displacement. The Chevy 2.7 turbo 4 has the exact same bottom end, bearing layout and crankshaft strength as a 5.4 L V8. Actually the 2.7 L 4 cylinder crankshaft will be stouter than the 5.4 L V8 crankshaft because the addition of 4 more cylinders for the V8 will thin and weaken the crankshaft over the 4 cylinder crankshaft. The 4 cylinder turbo will make higher torque at lower RPM than the V8, and the turbo 4 will maintain max power and torque to high altitude elevations, where the V8 power and torque will weaken as elevation increases. Also the turbo 4 will have a much higher power to weight ratio compared to the V8. The longest lasting trouble free engines I have ever run have been Toyota inline 4 cylinders; the Toyota 4's kept on going long after American V8's had quit!

[@gabrielgalaxygh]

@@63DW89A toyota inline 4s and mist American v8s don't have turbos that's why they are reliable. Turbo 4 gets vetter gas mileage of course but it isn't more reliable and the4 cylinders do not make more horse power or torque than the new vision what are you talking about?

[@63DW89A]

@@gabrielgalaxygh If the engine is designed for turbo use, it will be just as reliable and long lasting as a naturally aspirated engine. In the U.S. and Canada, large 13 and 15 liter inline 6-cylinder turbo-diesel engines are boosted to 30 psi or more and reliably run one million miles or more. A 2.7 liter 4 cylinder turbo engine. designed from the outset for turbo use will outlast a 5.4 liter V8, because the stouter forged pistons and rods that are used at the start, the stouter head gasket will last longer and the 4 cylinder having less than half the moving parts of a V8, will be far less trouble prone.

[@ericginpa]

Leave it to GM to get V8 fuel economy from a 4 cylinder without the by-product of that added horsepower

[@brettryan3298]

proves that you can't cheat physics

[@snipersam204]

Ya but compare peak torque rpm. For the 4 cylender turbo its 1500 rpm. Thats insane! Very interesting turbo setup on these. Peak torque on both v8s comes at 4000 rpm.

[@doddgarger6806]

Nope

[@anthonybiancone3780]

Ran a 2015 Ford 2.7 eco boost 1200 miles from SD to CA with the same trailer. 14mpg.

[@rudygeorgiamulesandcountry1594]

I've been successfully towing an extra tall, enclosed 6x12 "Carmate" trailer with my normally aspirated 2.7 L T0Y0TA Tacoma for 15 years and average 18 MPG. I can get 25 MPG on relatively flat terrain.

[@wes326]

Thanks for sharing. These trailers have a pretty low profile compared to a travel trailer. I got about 13 mpg pulling the same U Haul trailer with my 2016 V6 Colorado at about 65 mph. Looking at getting a '23 Canyon with the HO 2.7 Turbo to pull our 4500 lb travel trailer. Thanks for sharing.

[@johngriffith7032]

When I had my Fusion with the 2.0 turbo, I did a little experiment on a trip to Florida. I don't put a lot of stock in the car's calculation for mileage as I have yet to see it match to the actual calculation. However, on a section of I81, I set my cruise at 75, then 70, and lastly 65 just to see what the car showed on the guage. At a steady 75, it showed 27-28 mpg. At 70, the gauge showed 30, and at 65, it showed 32-33. So speed does matter. I don't recall now what my actual average mpg was for the entire trip, but I think it was 30 mpg.

[@litogucci2224]

Just note, It has more to do with your RPM than MPH.

[@AtomicReverend]

@@litogucci2224 its both, actually it's a combination of things obviously cubic inch displacement and RPMs come into play because it takes a certain amount of fuel just to keep the engine spinning so to speak but a more important factor is wind resistance and aerodynamics, if you're doing 20 miles an hour there is little to no drag at 40 miles an hour there's about eight times the drag there is at 20 mph. Generally you want the minimum RPMs when you are in high gear to get maximum fuel mileage in most passenger vehicles set up for the US roadways it is generally 55-60MPH. It's been years but there's actually math problems I cannot remember how to do them anymore because it was probably 20 years ago when I was taking automotive engineering classes in college... Since then I've probably had 150 vehicles in my life and I can't think of one that gets it's best mileage after about 60 miles an hour, I even made one years ago for fuel mileage with a 2.43 rear gear set at a 2.3 ford (it was a 1981 ford Fairmont), it would hit about 65 and you really had to burry the pedal, that being said at 55 it got about 31 miles a gallon which is killer for a midsize sedan from 1980, that being said it couldn't get out of its own way around town or on the freeway and it hated hills, but it was perfect for Southern California freeways where it's pretty rare that you see above 55 mph in the daylight.

[@Outofbox11]

Wow, 22 gallons and only $75.00, 3 months ago. Filled up 21 gallons and costed me $125.00 today. I need a loan to drive my truck now. /cry

[@albertwayenberg9140]

My 2002 F 350 dually 7.3 towed 32 ft 5th wheel Glendale Titanium 11000 lbs,Toronto to Calgary and back average 13.9 mpg@ 60mph.

[@robbalinski1606]

My 02 ram 2500 diesel averages 19.8 mpg with 11000lbs behind it. Gas towing has become more viable since the newer diesels get less mileage then my 20 year old diesel. Emissions systems...stupidity at its finest.

[@sammyo4962]

Stupidity at its finest??? "newer diesels get less mileage THEN my 20 year old diesel." Btw, 19.8 mpg pulling 11,000 lbs,...sure pal!

[@thefix2573]

@@sammyo4962 I get 18 towing a mini excavator "pal". 23-24 empty, 2002 Cummins shortbed 4x4 . Don't confuse your ignorance with someone lying. Just because you drive a wasteful gas rig.

[@mungaloyd1]

Exactly.I’m selling my 2022 duramax because of the 14 average it gets empty,it doesn’t get as good as my 2000 cummins did pulling a car trailer with the ac on and that was a solid 17.5 and that was about the worst I got.I’m putting a school bus dt360 in a 2006 dodge with a blown hemi and will drive that til armegeddon

[@AtomicReverend]

@@sammyo4962 he isn't lieing. My buddy has a first gen (1989) 12 valve 5.9 Cummins he gets about 24 miles a gallon on the highway it has absolutely zero emissions and smells absolutely filthy but it runs like a champ all day long it just isn't real fast with its gearing being real happy at 65mph. What nobody understands is that DEF (Diesel exhaust fluid), EGR (exhaust gas recirculation) may lower emissions and not stink to your nose when you are behind one but they definitely have a major effect on fuel efficiency on a diesel engine and they effect how long an engine last and cause more pain to your pocketbook. This goes with all modern diesels no matter the brand. The 12 valve and 24 valve Dodge Cummins engines made from 1989 until about 2002 are killer engines especially when they have a five or six speed manual transmission. The real early ones with the 3 spd Torqueflite automatics, get a bit worse for mileage averaging about 18 or 19 mi a gallon but still great when compared to a same size displacement gasoline truck of any era. The real reality is the old 12 valve 5.9 Cummins in the Dodge and the 24 valve 5.9 Cummins and the 7.3 Powerstroke Ford, all made excellent tow vehicles and all of them get exceptional gas mileage especially at highway speeds and will tow more then your class C license will legally allow you to. I say all this and I absolutely love my gasoline V8 truck because it is quiet it is cheap on maintenance and it hauls ass for what it is but I'm no idiot there's a reason why the 1980s and '90s and early 2000s Dodge Cummins trucks are pulling 15 to $20,000 for a clean one, it isn't because they are sexy but it's because they are a great engine with absolutely no emissions and routinely have been known to go a million miles all you got to do is watch Hoovies Garage here on KZbin to see I am not lieing as he has an early 3rd gen truck with 994,000+ miles and on this trip from Utah to eastern Kansas he averaged 19.5 miles a gallon at 70 mph that's just amazing in my opinion. I think the key is maintaining the vehicle to see that longevity but regardless they definitely get good gas mileage if they are what we would now consider a vintage diesel, if you want to really trip out look up an early 2000s Volkswagen TDI economy car diesel they got around 55 miles a gallon on the highway just insane for what it is

[@thebigd6249]

I'm not dissing you or your truck. I know Rams and just bought a new one. Great trucks that are made to work. I'm just not seeing the claim of 18 to 19 mpg's while towing 11000. Is this flat terrain, instant mileage? Or hilly averages? I live out west with grades everywhere and I don't get that out here. I pulled a Bayliner from Idaho to Nevada (Lake Mead) with an 04 Ram 2500 manual trans. and only got 14 on average. And thats about what the new dually gets pulling its fair share. Anyway, I agree with you on emissions controls. Hate'em. But having said that, don't downplay the aggressive power these new Rams have even with the emissions controls. Those old Rams don't come close in power that these new trucks have. Before you say it, there's a bit of an issue with reliability, I understand. But realize its the emissions controls. Not the engines. Its still a good ol Cummins and they're packed with two times the power of the '02 and thats likely the reason for not getting quite as good MPG's. But hey, anyone that buys a 9000 pound truck (14000 GVRW) worrying about MPG's ain't all there anyway. And I'll just say they've come a long way with the emissions part. Not near as bad as they used to be. Much more reliable now AND the exhaust brake makes a world of difference. Happy Ram-ing!

[@the305hauler]

I would be interested to see what your truck could do with a 4 or 5 k travel trailer behind it. Maybe a 25 to 28 foot standard unit.🤔

[@HopeStreetWoodworks]

I have the 2.7L turbo on my 2021 silverado. I tow a 6500# 30 foot camper and get about 10-12 mpg

[@rudygeorgiamulesandcountry1594]

I have a 2008 2.7 T0Y0TA Tacoma Base Model, single cab & 6foot box. I've towed about 4,500 # that included a 17 foot camper trailer. A 5 speed standard shift tyranny and watching the tach and vac gauge made it possible. It wasn't as simple as just cruising with an automatic transmission.

[@the305hauler]

@@rudygeorgiamulesandcountry1594 Rudy I dare say it wasn't easy. However your truck was probably at or near its maximum capacity while towing. The difference with your truck is, I would dare say the 2.7L you had was bullet proof. I also dare say the truck is probably still on the road moving and grooving. Let's also point out that your Tacoma was a midsized truck doing the darn thing. Booyah 👊😁👍.

[@lawrencebecht660]

The low trailer catches no wind makes it much easier to pull basically no wind

[@smotpoker15]

Love how people think small displacement and induction equates to shorter lasting engine life .

[@toddc.4749]

Great video, appreciate it. We have a 2022 Custom Trail Boss 2.7 turbo on order. We pull a toy hauler about 6700 lbs fully loaded about 12 times a year maybe 100-250 miles each trip. Can’t wait to see how it does.

[@Pabloperes675]

Great it’ll do great

[@omardevonlittle3817]

@@Pabloperes675 right up until catostrophic failure

[@thefix2573]

There's no replacement for displacement. See you in the slow lane getting 13 mpg. I'd rather get 13 AND have power to pass. Cummins is the only way to go.

[@omardevonlittle3817]

@@thefix2573

[@donaldalderman2424]

@@omardevonlittle3817 🙄

[@thebigd6249]

The real test would be taking that thing out west and performing the same test with the same set up. Out here we have real grades for real distances. Would really like to see how the ol 4 banger holds up to rabbit ears or the grapevine. Only, instead of just tracking mileage, also track how far it has to downshift to maintain speed and track engine and tranny Temps. Please also track if she can sustain highway or near highway speeds on these grades. My guess will be a big NO on the speed and will sustain high temps trying. Also....and this is a biggie.....track how she does going down. Track rotor shudder and her ability to downshift and keep speed down minimizing brake use, if that's possible. If she can do all that, you might have a winner there.

[@Meme-zc4cw]

I agree. Flat terrain doesnt tell you much of anything. Also, gas mileage is a useless measure when you tow. When you tow, you generally arent worried about gas mileage.

[@JrsGasolineAlley]

This was a real world situation of what most people would experience. Also an opportunity since I was driving it. Anyways. Not like it would make any sense to drive somewhere to go test the truck. You've got TFL truck along with others that are way better at making those videos so go there

[@ronbrock6153]

3:50 That is what you call Carolina Squat, is actually illegal in North Carolina.

[@JS-kh5ls]

I just clicked on this video right after wtching the TFL channel do the Ike Gauntlet and get 3.7mpg, I like the flat towing, 15 is as much as I get now with nothing hooked up to my current truck

[@jasonsliger5430]

I think that I'll keep my 2011 Silverado with the 4.8.

[@danieltaylor4819]

Those are great trucks. Have a 2011 with 5.3 with about 100,000 on it. New brakes, new tires, new battery is all I've ever done to it. Starting to rust though, so I've been looking around a little.

[@jasonsliger5430]

That's all that I've ever done to mine is put a new battery in it and replace the front brakes and of course change the oil and filter. It's got about 150 thousand miles so I might start looking probably for a jeep Wrangler. The Silverado was my deceased father's so do I plan on keeping it until I die.

[@gregrowe1168]

Got an 03 with the 4.8. 165k and runs like new after recent tune up. Yes it doesn’t get 22 mpg unloaded, even though it’s just an ext cab 2wd. More like in the 16 mpg range. I tow a small aluma trailer with an atv on it, very light towing around 1200 lbs. fuel economy is basically the same. Rust will probably kill the truck before the engine wears out.

[@TDub_ADV]

I guarantee that my Ram Hemi would have been significantly worse on the fuel economy and probably not towed that trailer any better.... I have a similar box trailer and even unloaded i get ~11 on the freeway, single digits if i go up over 70. Weight does not seem to matter as much as the aero.

[@JrsGasolineAlley]

Agreed. At highway speeds aero is the biggest challenge

[@MidWestJigga]

15 mpg towing 5k is real nice I have the Chevy 2.7 2022 and looking into getting a travel trailer and this put my mind at ease with it becusse it will be lighter weight that you just towed

[@jayfishman7694]

Our regular drive from Ohio to SW Florida is flat as a pancake. We now live out West. Try this 4 banger on a series of 6-10% grades with a real trailer. But make sure your wingman is a tow truck cause you’re gonna need one.

[@jesserevilla992]

have the same Truck but a CrewCab 2X4 and have 11 mths left on lease. I tow a travel trailer 6,040 lbs this includes gear & passengers @ 62-64 mph and get 10.5 MPG but actually get better MPG's In the hills of Tennessee & GA, the low end torque is awesome. My numbers are referencing here in Florida

[@JrsGasolineAlley]

Hey gets a bit hilly in between Florida and mid Coast

[@jesserevilla992]

@@JrsGasolineAlley No I'm talking big long hills; But you were getting 13 mpg's at 70+ mph that's great. And 15 mpg's at 70 wow that's really good. Regardless small trailer. There are trucks that get only 17-18mpg's at 70 mph towing nothing.

[@josephg41]

When a 20 year old V8 truck can do exactly the same thing at about the same gas milage, you begin to question what is even the point of an i4 turbo in a full size truck. Not to mention these are not near as reliable with all the stress and forced injection. Big stupid cubic inch muscle wins again. More simplistic designs usually do in the long run.

[@yankeedoodle7693]

This truck gets 28 when he's not hauling- so there's a point of an I4 turbo in a truck.

[@doddgarger6806]

@Bass N Brass no they don't

[@calebniederhofer6529]

This is not accurate, or true. A 20 year old V8 is a broad spectrum. However, a 20 year old GM 1500 5.3 would be around get that unloaded, and with significantly less torque, across the rpm range. You could not be more wrong.

[@josephg41]

@@calebniederhofer6529 I'm not talking out of my ass. I have several 15-20 old V8 trucks and know many more people that do. And I do get about the same mpg this 4 banger does when it's loaded. Unloaded 4 banger vs V8 is the only scenario where the 4 banger gets better mpg. And the V8 has the same if not more practical useable torque. It's bigger than pure torque numbers too, the torque curve spectrum massively favors the V8, which relates to the real world. What are you smoking? A V8 inherently specializes at low end torque when compared to an inline 4, even a turbo inline 4. And let's not even begin to talk about long term longevity or reliability of a Turbo inline 4 vs a NA V8

[@calebniederhofer6529]

@@josephg41 That’s exactly, what you are doing. It could not be more wrong. The N/A V8 produces power at a much higher rpm range, it is the opposite actually, and peak torque at 4k and higher. My 2.7 will hit 80% peak torque around 2450 rpm. I know, I have owned both, including diesels, and now a Ford second gen 2.7. Who said that they are not reliable? Do you own one! I highly doubt it. You are just talking, and not educated on the topic, at all. These smaller displacement engines are built similar to diesel motors. My Ford 2.7 is more reliable, then GM 6.2, 5.3 motors, and the lifter issues. I have almost a 100k and zero issues. In fact, the block is the same graphite composite as the power stroke motors. My 2.7 is internally stronger to handle the higher compression. Gm improved the 2.7 also. I would argue GM 2.7 is more reliable right now, then there crap 6.2, 5.3 motors. The mileage of these engines, transmission, is in a different league, then older v8 motors 20 years ago, that got awful mileage. Both have pros and cons, and depend on towing needs, etc. You could not be more wrong about the motors though.

[@poppyneese1811]

My Ecoboost Ford is same way, especially towing, 70 seems to be the sweet spot, I also found that weight on the trailer didn’t seem to matter the flat front you haul are pushing a lot of air. hate to he tail dragger rigs, we get a ton of them out of North Carolina, they come here to ride 4 wheelers. Great Video and I’m pulling for that lil Turbo!

[@JrsGasolineAlley]

Yeah with the turbos you got to be cautious of where you're in boost simply for fuel economy

[@RichieCat4223]

2:51 I haven't passed this place in many years. It sure has grown.

[@vg3430]

News flash: Driving at a slower speed increases fuel economy…go figure

[@JrsGasolineAlley]

Lol 😂

[@twiggywebber8817]

good vid B'y I'd be interested to see a tow test like this with a travel trailer weighing about 6500lbs and that would be loaded too empty it would be bout 4500lbs, but really how often are trailers empty when people are going camping

[@sydecarnutz972]

Just for comparison's sake, my new Maverick with a 4 banger and turbo and trailer tow package with AWD. 26 to 27 city. 32 to 36 out on the road depending on speed and terrain. Last year I hauled a bike on a trailer on a trip and got over 27 mpg for the trip. I was very happy with that. A few months later I hauled our little pop up tent trailer on a trip out to the mountains and came home with a 32 mpg average. Was super happy with that trip. The tent trailer was lower and more aerodynamic than the bike on the flat bed trailer was. I believe that had a lot to do with efficiency. I know its apples to oranges with your big GM. But it does make me feel that the ICE drivetrains are hitting a real high efficiency before the government phases them out for us. Thanks for the review on this! It makes me more likely to settle for the big 4 if I trade up someday.

[@mattd19902010]

Yeah right

[@jadd6810]

No one buys a full size truck because of the fuel economy, but I would say this video is more about why you should opt for the larger fuel tank when available. There were parts out west where towing near max capacity and payload, we wouldn't have made it to the next town without the 36 gallon fuel tank.

[@Smasher-Devourer]

a NA V8 will tow a heavy trailer under its own power. A 4 Cyl Turbo will pull a trailer while under constant boost. This means the longer you pull the trailer, the closer you get to grenading the engine.

[@CACressida]

If the engine is designed to be under boost at all times then its fine. Then again, it is GM so who knows?

[@Terror1Void]

Yeah, that's why semi engines are blowing their engines left and right from being under boost their whole duty cycle.

[@Smasher-Devourer]

@@Terror1Void Semi engines are designed to haul heavy loads non stop. A 4 Cyl turbo is not. How much horsepower/torque is a semi engine compared to a 4 cyl turbo? I'll guarantee there is a pretty big difference.

[@Terror1Void]

@@Smasher-Devourer Semi engines these days are rated at 425 hp, from a straight 6. They're not as high as you think.

[@CACressida]

@@Terror1Void dude, just get out of here. You can spec Cummins engines with over 600hp and 2050tq from the factory in America and over 700hp in Europe.

[@poonbandit9924]

If I wanted a truck with a small fuel efficient engine that will tow 7000ish pounds maxed out I would buy a Colorado. They should have put a 2.7 or larger turbo straight six and detuned it for fuel economy, and set it up to tow 9000 lbs.

[@JrsGasolineAlley]

Good thing you could just buy a Sierra with that engine installed. That can also tow 9000 lb. Oh my god they make the truck that you're asking for. Wow

[@poonbandit9924]

@@JrsGasolineAlley you can’t buy a sierra with a turbo gas straight six… you can buy the Chevy or gmc with the 3.0 duramax straight 6 but not a gasser

[@chrisholt445]

The 2.7 is rated to tow 9000

[@poonbandit9924]

@@chrisholt445 the 2022 is rated for 9k yes, but for 2020 model year like the truck in the video, a lot of them in crew the crew cab configuration were only rated at 6600-7500 for towing. Hence why I say the 2.7 is better suited for the colorado, and an I6 would have been a better engine to use in this application based on torque delivery, and space in the engine bay. You can fit. 3.0 diesel I6, what’s the point of a 2.7 4 cylinder if you can get a Colorado that will tow more or at least the same and get better mpg while loaded or unloaded. I do understand that you can NOW tow 9k with it which makes the configuration make more sense

[@JrsGasolineAlley]

2021 is the same mechanically as the 2020. They upped the rating after having had enough miles on the production trucks to certify the higher tow capacity. First two years were conservatively rated as it was a new engine/platform

[@Kingswood7189]

While I can't fathom the idea of owning a 4 cylinder full size truck, I'd say that is pretty impressive for towing numbers. I'd be more on board if the 2.7l turbo was made for the canyon/Colorado. That said, the smaller the engine and fewer the cylinders, the bigger gap you'll see when towing vs. not towing. I've towed about 4k lbs. with my '10 Dakota (3.7l v6, rwd (we sold her though to afford our move to AZ)) and the family '04 Durango (5.7l V8, 4wd) and both achieved ~15 mpg @ 60-65 mph. The Dakota could get 22 highway, the Durango could get maybe 18, lol. This is my experience. :)

[@doddgarger6806]

Look at the 23 Colorado all 2.7s

[@oscarwinner2034]

GM has squeezed down the 6s and the 8s with deactivation and other tricks to improve mileage. The turbo 4 is kinda the opposite in an attempt to get a similar result. You can easily average over 22 mph if you drive it right. For a full size truck, that's impressive.

[@Ciqaeda]

thanks for the Richmond footage, love seeing some representation!

[@michaelH0000]

My ford focus gets 72.22mpg at 99mph with a 50,000 pound trailer. Its a dully

[@samusaran7317]

Nice 🤣

[@INVERTEDBUKAKI]

same 👍

[@jessealday8225]

Glad I wasn't still sipping coffee.

[@janaburritt6939]

Hahaha 🤣

[@hdrider2071]

Bullshit....71 mpgs tops.

[@davidryder5082]

Not too bad at all. I know many people who would love to get that while not towing anything. Thanks for posting

[@isaakwelch3451]

All the speculation about the engine suddenly exploding is amusing. It's hard to truly know how reliable these will be long-term but I'll be interested to see. Not really interested in new trucks but I like this engine so if they're good enough I might think about a used stripped down base model one day

[@arturovilla1642]

The 2.7L turbo is best engine GM ever put in a Silverado. PERIOD.

[@tomjohnson8737]

Why not put it to the test and pull like 9,000lbs. See if the eninge explode. If not then it's a killer engine.

[@Crazysnake212]

I have a 21 Sierra with the 2.7 and I have towed 7 to 8 thousand pounds many times now and it doesn’t mind. I have put 2000 pounds in the bed and have just at 13k miles and haven’t had any problems. It’s a great engine as long as it lasts

[@tomjohnson8737]

@@Crazysnake212 won't last long. If u r truly towing that much, it's gonna pop.

[@Resistance_is_Futile01]

@@tomjohnson8737 ok professor whatever pfft

[@mdubz101]

Wow, my 2019 Silverado LD 5.3 6 spd averages 17mpg at 72, with 4,000 lbs behind it.

[@ALMX5DP]

Weight is less important than aerodynamics for that kind of speed. A car on a flatbed I can see, anything with a flat/boxy profile and I’m gonna say that is being very generous.

[@samusaran7317]

Someone doesn't know how to drive. 👀

[@erickricharson5196]

V8s do not have to work as hard as 4 bangers to hull the weight. 4cyls in a truck is just a royaly stupid idea. Even my suburban or my v8 Silverado does better pulling weight

[@samusaran7317]

@@erickricharson5196 4 cylinder trucks have a place but not really meant for towing. So weird how people go on and on about v8s... Might as well get something decent like a V10 or why bother going through the trouble.

[@snipersam204]

@@erickricharson5196 did you notice is was pulling that at 1500 rpm? It makes peak torque at 1500 rpm. Your v8 is 4000 or heigher.

[@Markdc94]

My 1996 F250 4x2 300 six in a row ready to tow got 14-17 MPG going from Va. to Dawsonville Ga. on I-77- I-85 with a large empty car hauling trailer. Picked up a 96 Suburban on the trailer and came back home with a average of 13-14 MPG. Came up Fancy Gap mountain on I-77 at 45 MPH. You need to take the new truck and try and tow that up and down the foothills on I-77-I-85, that would be the true test of how much that 4 banger and it's little turbo can handle!! For me, i'll keep my six in a row ready to tow over a overworked 4 banger any day!!! BTW, I'll bet that 4 banger could not tow that much weight on flat ground, much less tow it up Fancy Gap Mtn. at even 25 MPH. 4 banger in a full size pickup will never see 100,000 miles before blowing up doing a real towing job.

[@mikehaske1900]

I have a Shasta oasis 25 ft bunk house 2018 4700lbs pulled by 2010 suburban K1500 LTZ .60mph 13 mpg.

[@Noslime]

I would like to see how long it will last. There’s no way that it’s going to hold up as well as a 5.3.

[@Cody_Austin]

You better hope the lifters don’t fail on the 5.3 Ask me how I know

[@justinmartin8887]

Considering almost all heavy trucks and machinery have 6 cylinders in them, I see no reason a 4 wouldn’t hold up

[@rightwingsafetysquad9872]

The 5.3 became a terrible engine when they started putting cylinder deactivation on it. They fail early and often now. Dad and uncle both had 5.3, neither ever towed anything and rarely hauled more than 1,200lbs. One failed at 40,000 miles, the other at 72,000. Both were rightfully replaced under warranty. Then immediately traded in. One got traded in on a RAM and the other on a 6.2L, neither have had any issues.

[@cowsgonemadd3]

The same 5.3 due for a class action lawsuit due to tons of lifter failures?

[@matthewreed5705]

I'm curious if you have tried NO ETHANOL gas comparisons. My experience with the 5.3L shows fuel economy suffers greatly with E10 or E15. 150k on my current W/T and typically see 550 miles per tank HWY. (NOT TOWING) Lately with the price of fuel am forced to put in E10 or E15 and hitting 460 miles per tank HWY. (again, NOT TOWING) Got the word last week that my next W/T will be the 2.7 Turbo. Hence my question. Need a CENTS PER MILE figure these days. Thanks Joe.

[@bradhaines3142]

my issue with no ethanol is the price difference is rarely worth it, way more expensive for a little better experience

[@guardrail2897]

My son-in-laws dad gets 8-9 mpg towing a 5500lb RV. I get 10-12 towing a 9000lb 5th wheel RV with my 6.4 Hemi.

[@SeattlePioneer]

I used to use my Plymouth Reliant to tow my 17 foot power boat. I could eventually get up to speed on the interstate, but when I encountered a hill, I would s-l-o-w down gradually to 40 MPH with the gas peddle floored. I really worked that engine HARD, but it did adequately. I was more worried about adequate braking capacity....

[@juliogonzo2718]

Heavy haulin with a dirty old k car🤣 if I was in Seattle I'd buy you a beer