Does anyone think Chevrolet will bring back the V6? The 4 banger turbos are having terrible issues.
Bring back V6!
16 reading
PTUser717871
41 - 60 of 62 Posts
2017 Chevy Colorado Z71 Extended Cab 4WD Summit White
Joined
·
17,496 Posts
I like that comparison test
That is true real world comparisons
Joined
·
6 Posts
Ford had issues with turbo engines initially. They have everything worked out now.
Chevy designed the 2.7 from the start to work with turbo's and it's a simpler, more rugged design that what Ford is using.
I've been a loyal Ford and Toyota owner for the last 20 years but don't have blinders on when buying. I'm not particularly brand loyal. I did a lot of research before buying my 2025 Colorado. At this point I'm convinced Colorado is the best of the mid-size trucks and the 2.7 Turbomax is big part of why.
Chevy designed the 2.7 from the start to work with turbo's and it's a simpler, more rugged design that what Ford is using.
I've been a loyal Ford and Toyota owner for the last 20 years but don't have blinders on when buying. I'm not particularly brand loyal. I did a lot of research before buying my 2025 Colorado. At this point I'm convinced Colorado is the best of the mid-size trucks and the 2.7 Turbomax is big part of why.
Ford still hasn't figured out cam phasers on the eco boost. Its better but there are still a lot of newer trucks with issues.
Joined
·
17,758 Posts
The 4.3 had a lot more low to mid-range torque than the 3.6 which is why they have used it in boats for 40 years..
But at 195 hp in truck form, got terrible gas mileage and could not reduce the emmisions for epa approval. earlier versions were some where around 160hp
boats are up to 225hp with the 4.3 in stock form
But at 195 hp in truck form, got terrible gas mileage and could not reduce the emmisions for epa approval. earlier versions were some where around 160hp
boats are up to 225hp with the 4.3 in stock form
Gm switched to the LT based 4.3 for that reason. Couldn't really get it past emissions by 2014. I have one of the SBC based ones in my boat. Surprisingly snappy.
Oh it usee to be certain failure at 35k miles on the early Buicks and other turbo cars.
Even the expensive cars the units failed but syn oils and better bearings help.
But today some systems are built well as is here engine and in other cases cost savings leads to issue and problems. For a number of years the Chevy Diesel tubo intake tubes would blow off. In some cases these new turbo units are good and some are just built to a price and fail like the Cruze.
It is not the fault of the turbo but the cost savings.
I expect the 2.7 to prove it’s self as it is on the way but I will wait till then, Even the 3.6 had issues early on.
So much is complex today that we have many failure points. Development cost are high and they are finding more issues after public release on things,
I do not hate Turbo’s having owned them. I just like to see a bit of a track record. Not all new engines and new Turbos are equal. I like to see a bit of a record.
Note most failures are supplier issues. The Turbo units are brought in from the outside and some do them better than others. Most time price points are required and lead to issues. I sell a lot of replacements in specific applications and none in others.
Seems most people have no idea still of what is possible with modern engines and turbos. Still consistently hear the "but low end torque" argument from the turbo haters. Turns out with variable vain tech and with engines designed from day 1 with boost in mind you don't have many trade offs on a turbo engine.
Only semi valid argument I have seen is the additional complexity of a turbo engine leading to more failure points but honestly any power equivalent NA engine you will have double the cylinders and all the supporting components for those cylinders so I don't even think that argument holds much water.
Only semi valid argument I have seen is the additional complexity of a turbo engine leading to more failure points but honestly any power equivalent NA engine you will have double the cylinders and all the supporting components for those cylinders so I don't even think that argument holds much water.
Joined
·
981 Posts
And just to illustrate that point... I got bored a while ago and overlaid a 350 I built to what burger tuning shows for wheel power with the JB4.
![Image]()
Now mind you... this is an engine I built myself. Spend my money on designing and selecting parts... and had to assemble and install myself. The 4 banger has a warranty and it's as good nearly everywhere, runs on regular, and anyone can plug in and work on it. I'll take the 4 cylinder.
Technology is awesome. Though that 350 has half the moving parts of that 4 cylinder and it has emissions compliant parts on it, it would not meet modern emissions standards. It will pass for it's regulated era though. I want a six speed behind that 4 and to feel how how it would do in a light chassis.
Now mind you... this is an engine I built myself. Spend my money on designing and selecting parts... and had to assemble and install myself. The 4 banger has a warranty and it's as good nearly everywhere, runs on regular, and anyone can plug in and work on it. I'll take the 4 cylinder.
Technology is awesome. Though that 350 has half the moving parts of that 4 cylinder and it has emissions compliant parts on it, it would not meet modern emissions standards. It will pass for it's regulated era though. I want a six speed behind that 4 and to feel how how it would do in a light chassis.
Complexity tends to be more about implementation than fundamental function, sometimes due to space or other constraints, but there's nothing particularly complex about a turbo engine. I've looked under the hood of some EcoBoost Fords and the engine is lost amongst a sea of hoses and harnesses. The complexity is from the ridiculous ways the engineers have decided to implement various functions.
Another example of same principles but different implementation is the 2.8 Duramax vs a 3.0 EcoDiesel (We have both in our garage), comparatively speaking the Duramax is exponentially easier to work on. Some spaces are tight and some decisions GM's engineers made are head-scratchers, but overall it's a pretty simple implementation.
On the flip side, the EcoDiesel is at the shop today for some preventative repairs (turbo coolant line replacement before it actually craps itself). I started on that project a couple of weeks ago and backed out about 1/4 of the way into the job. The turbo coolant line runs under the intake manifold, there's a short piece of coolant hose that connects 2 hard lines and over time this hose dries out and bursts. There's an upgraded replacement that uses stainless braided hose to avoid this. To do the job you have to disconnect and remove the injector tubes, the wiring harness that goes across the engine, the injector rails, the windshield cowl (for better access to the turbo inlet clamp), and a host of other bits. It's a 5-6 hour job for a good tech. It's not hard work, it's just involved and I'm getting too old for that crap.
Another example of same principles but different implementation is the 2.8 Duramax vs a 3.0 EcoDiesel (We have both in our garage), comparatively speaking the Duramax is exponentially easier to work on. Some spaces are tight and some decisions GM's engineers made are head-scratchers, but overall it's a pretty simple implementation.
On the flip side, the EcoDiesel is at the shop today for some preventative repairs (turbo coolant line replacement before it actually craps itself). I started on that project a couple of weeks ago and backed out about 1/4 of the way into the job. The turbo coolant line runs under the intake manifold, there's a short piece of coolant hose that connects 2 hard lines and over time this hose dries out and bursts. There's an upgraded replacement that uses stainless braided hose to avoid this. To do the job you have to disconnect and remove the injector tubes, the wiring harness that goes across the engine, the injector rails, the windshield cowl (for better access to the turbo inlet clamp), and a host of other bits. It's a 5-6 hour job for a good tech. It's not hard work, it's just involved and I'm getting too old for that crap.
* facepalm *
Joined
·
3 Posts
Totally agree. Cylinder count is just one piece of the puzzle—what really matters is how well the engine’s designed and tuned. A smart setup can embarrass a bigger one any day.
Joined
·
1 Posts
Personally, I would like to see the Duramax 2.8 come back.Complexity tends to be more about implementation than fundamental function, sometimes due to space or other constraints, but there's nothing particularly complex about a turbo engine. I've looked under the hood of some EcoBoost Fords and the engine is lost amongst a sea of hoses and harnesses. The complexity is from the ridiculous ways the engineers have decided to implement various functions.
Another example of same principles but different implementation is the 2.8 Duramax vs a 3.0 EcoDiesel (We have both in our garage), comparatively speaking the Duramax is exponentially easier to work on. Some spaces are tight and some decisions GM's engineers made are head-scratchers, but overall it's a pretty simple implementation.
On the flip side, the EcoDiesel is at the shop today for some preventative repairs (turbo coolant line replacement before it actually craps itself). I started on that project a couple of weeks ago and backed out about 1/4 of the way into the job. The turbo coolant line runs under the intake manifold, there's a short piece of coolant hose that connects 2 hard lines and over time this hose dries out and bursts. There's an upgraded replacement that uses stainless braided hose to avoid this. To do the job you have to disconnect and remove the injector tubes, the wiring harness that goes across the engine, the injector rails, the windshield cowl (for better access to the turbo inlet clamp), and a host of other bits. It's a 5-6 hour job for a good tech. It's not hard work, it's just involved and I'm getting too old for that crap.
Honestly it's too bulky a truck to have look good as a sport truck. The hood line needs to get pinched and the bed rails height lowered then maybe.
Joined
·
981 Posts
Listen, if everyone else can dream about things that aren't going to happen like a long bed or a V6, then I can dream about this, ok?
No. Thats how the CIA comes after you.Listen, if everyone else can dream about things that aren't going to happen like a long bed or a V6, then I can dream about this, ok?
41 - 60 of 62 Posts
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
