Graybeard Outdoors banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

Chevy or Ford turbo 4 cylinder

7K views 88 replies 15 participants last post by  lloyd smale 
#1 · (Edited)
This seems to be the direction all the full size pickups are going. First Ford and now Chevy.

Anyone have one or know someone who does? Is it as good as their 6 or 8 cylinder motors?

They are currently selling these at a discount that seems to be a good value. I'm seeing 2020 Chevy Silverado full crew cab pickups with good options like 4 wheel drive, locking rear differential, towing and heated seats for $35k. May test drive one next week. This is even less than the little trucks like the Colorado, Ranger or Tacoma. Seems like a better value to me.

Anybody have one?
 
#2 · (Edited)
near 300hp so should have power. Id just be Leary about the long term holding up of that little motor if its actually worked. I only know one guy that has one. He said he gets 24 on the highway with it. Doesn't seem like much of a savings as my 5.3 will get an easy 22 and 23 if I baby it. Im guessing like you said the savings will come from the fact nobody wants them and the lots will be full of them this time next year. If there already selling 20s cheap wait till the 21s are coming out and there going to have to about give them away.
 
#3 ·
Personally, I wouldn't buy anything with a turbo on it. Super expensive if anything goes wrong with it - and it will eventually.

That goes double for a tiny turbocharged engine in a big vehicle! Sure, there's plenty of horsepower, but it's really straining that little engine and no way will it last as long as a motor in the 5 liter class.

There's a reason why they're trying to dump them off cheap - not enough people want them, and they still won't when it's time to sell it used. You might save some money now, but will take a hit when it's time to get rid of it.
 
#4 ·
I guess I will agree and argue with you at the same time. Back even 10 years ago I wouldn't walk away from a turbo id run. But today these motors aren't NA motors that someone sticks a turbo on there motors build from the git go to be turboed. Most have much stronger pistons rods and cranks and stronger bottom ends to take that additional power. Look at an indy car that puts out mega power out of a little 4 cyl that runs wide open at over 10k for 500 miles. It can be done properly. Problem is these motors that are supposedly done right are relatively new. Guess the only ones that have any kind of a track record are the eco boost fords. First year or two they had some teething problmes but seem to be pretty much trouble free. I remember back in 87 when I bought my grand national. Turbo tech wasn't great then and you about knew that before a 100k youd have to buy a new turbo. Good thing is they weren't that expensive and on the gn were easy to change. Today we have much better turbos. Most ever over the road truck on the road has a turbo as do the diesel pickups from the big three and they have proven to be pretty reliable. Now all that said would I buy a full sized chev with a 4 cyl turbo?? NOPE but then I wouldn't have bought one with the 4.3 6 cyl either. Why? The 5.3 makes more power and gets very little less fuel economy and the resale value it carrys more then makes up for 4 years of a small gas savings and 3k less sticker price. Bottom line is ill buy a v8 until they don't put one in a full sized truck anymore. If chev stops ill buy a ram. I usually get a new truck every 3 to 5 years so long term 200k milage isn't a big concern but I keep saying the next truck will be the last and ill run it into the ground and one things for sure if the only thing on the lot is 4 cyls and 6 cyls I will keep my v8 and run it into the ground. I could except a turbo 4 in my jeep but a full sized truck? no way.
 
#5 ·
Gm has the turbo four cylinder in their full size pickups, Ford uses a six. I bought a Chevy RST double cab 4x4 turbo 4 cyl back in September and I love it. The engine doesn't lack for power and gets great gas mileage. It has 310 hp and 348 foot pounds of torque on regular gasoline. those were big block numbers not so long ago. So I dont understand why many say its not good for a full size truck. I get high 23 to 24 mpg for all around driving , hot rodding a lil less. The engine is built for a truck with diesel like components such as heavy forged crank, rods and pistons. The pistons even have cast iron ring groves to handle the high combustion pressures. Max engine torque starts at 1500 rpm and goes through 4000 rpm, so to get great mileage watch your tachometer and keep the rpms low and let the tranny shift up and the truck will scoot along well.
 
#7 ·
My 17 5.3 extended cab 4x4 gets 22 most tanks on the road and ive seen 23 quite a few times. So fuel economy advantage is about nill. Id bet if you actually worked it or towed the v8 would do better and it would be a wash in the end. Down side is not many want the 4 so resale value is going to not be great. Its why there dumping them so cheap right now. Now if it got 5 mpg better mileage I might take a look. right now im thinking of replacing my 17 next summer. Im going the other way. Im waiting for a trail boss with a 6.2. bottom line is as long as chev will make a v8 for the Silverado ill buy one. Even the 6s had power. That's not a problem. Biggest problem is there was so many of them sitting on lots that dealers didn't even want them as trades. But lacking in power? Nah! I bought a new 79 chev. It had the biggest motor a 350. Matter of fact it was the biggest you could get even in a 3/4 ton that year. Put out 195 hp! We would have gone nuts for a 310 hp motor that got over 20mpg back then. Heck in 79 id of loved a corvette or camaro with 300 hp!!! It would have been king of the road!
 
#22 ·
yup but it does it with much higher cylinder pressures and combustion heat it has to get rid of. That is why it needs a beefed up block forged pistons rods and cranks. Like was said it just puts more strain on things. Which in your opinion would be under more strain. A 5.3 that makes it power down below 2000 rpm and might turn 5500 if you hammer it or a 4 cyl turbo that needs to spin at 3000 to make its best torque and at full spin is turning 7-8k. that v8 is loafing down the road even with a decent sized trailer on the back and that little turbo is like the little train saying "I think I can, I think I can" Thing is hooked to something like a trailer its going to work so much harder then a v8 that its going to get much worse fuel economy. What it does for chev is allows them to test full sized trucks without even a pillow in the box and get maybe a mile to the gallon or two better mileage so they can meet there corporate government mandated fuel economy. THAT is why they are built PERIOD END OF STORY.


Hopefully it was build by designers that wanted I to live to 300k like a v8 will. But that hasn't been proven out yet. Ford had many teething problems with there eco boost motors. It took a good 5 years to get them straightened out. I personaly wouldn't buy a 4 cyl turbo chev full sized truck till they started showing up on the used lots still running well with a 200 k on them. id also like to see what dealers will give you on trade for one at a 100k. My guess is any savings you had in fuel costs or initial cost of buying it will go out the door the day you try to trade it.


Heck as to power. you can make a 2 liter 4 cyl put out a 1000 hp relatively easy. Enough boost or nitrous and your there. But how long will it make that power? My guess is it would be measured in hours not years. Thing chev has got going for them is probably 75 percent of the trucks sold today (and that's every manufacture) are used as nothing but a glorified car. Id like to see how one holds up pulling a camper all around the country or plowing snow. What I do know now is the 5.3 is a bullet proof motor that gets just about the same fuel economy as the 4s and 6s. Ive owned 6 of them and have had absolutely 0 motor problems. I just bought a new truck and am kind of a trader. Its a ram 1/2 ton hemi. Love the power. Makes the 5.3 look lame and that's saying a lot because the 5.3 will get down the road. Only complain so far is gas mileage is a good 6mpg less then the 5.3. Not a huge deal because im retired and don't drive all that much anymore but that is a BIG difference.
 
#9 ·
With less mass and fewer parts, the engine does not have to work so hard to overcome weight of moving parts and their friction.







You have a valid point there. Look at what Mazda was doing with its rotary engine decades ago. A non-turboed 1 or 1 1/2 liter engine putting out the power of a piston engine at least twice as big.
 
#10 ·
If the smaller engine makes 350 fp of torque at 1500 rpm with less cylinders and displacement than a engine that needs to be spinning 4000 rpm to do roughly the same that engine will be more efficient. I had a 5.3 2016 gmc that I traded for this and my all around driving in summer was 19mpg and babied it to get that. In winter it was more like 16. My new truck I'm driving it with a 700 lb snow plow on it that is a big air brake and still getting 21mpg. GM's big trick is their tri power cams with variable valve lift. Also a plus for the turbo engine is at high altitudes the power wont drop of like naturally aspirated engine will.
 
#12 ·
funny thing is my 5.3 gets 22mpg real world highway driving. My neighbors 3.5 eco boost ford get 23. two different drivers could easily swap those numbers. So where is the advantage? Fact is it takes much more extream cylinder pressures (static compression) to get that ford to make the same power. It takes a turbo to create those pressures. So the motor is under more strain and it has added mechanical things that can go wrong. As to high alititude there is a drop off but its very little. Fact is that lack of oxegen made vehicles run rich at higher altitudes and that's where most of the power loss was. todays computer controlled engines compensate for oxegen levels barometric pressure and air temp. Pretty much solves the high altitude power thing. But that said a turbo engine has a slight advantage if it is actually computer controlled to up the boost levels do to atmospheric pressure and oxegen levels. Most have set boost levels and just adjust fuel ratios like a normal fuel injected car. But even turbo cars make more power at sea level.
 
#11 ·
If the PU will be used as a DD or grocery getter, the 4 will work fine. Where it will struggle is when you start towing large/heavy loads. It would tow an aluminum boat all day long, but I don't think it'll tow a big 'ol Ranger glass bass boat with a 250 hanging out back all day long. The mpg's will drop like a rock when you start towing the bigger items.

Most people want a large vehicle, so it you don't plan on towing much or just the lawn mower, small/light boat, and it's a DD, it'll work. I have a F150 with 3.5EB, and get low 20's, good comfort, and it will tow my 3500# BMT or 7400 GVWR TT w/o issues.

It all depends on what you will use the PU for.
 
#13 ·
yup Jim. Get by is the key word. I can honestly say in the 40 some years ive owned trucks cars and even muscle cars I never thought to myself "boy this has to much power" I have on many occasions thought "boy I wish this pig had more power" This is the golden years of trucks muscle cars and day to day cars. In the 70s 200hp trucks got 10mpg today 350 hp trucks get over 20. Muscle cars back then with there inflated hp ratings acutally were rare to put out 300 hp and very rare to put out 300 to the wheels Today a standard ss camaro or gt mustang of 5.7 challenger easily put down what a 454 or hemi did in the 70s and get 3 times the fuel economy. Cars? Same thing. Do you know a Toyota corolla is quicker in the quarter mile and 0-60 then a 389 gto or an ss396 Chevelle!! and get 30-40mpg cruising down the road. Me? Ill take the most hp I can buy that will give me 20mpg in a full sized truck. Like I said my next one will be a step up to a 6.2 instead of a 5.3 and as long as an American truck manufacture makes a v8 I will drive one. Heck I say turbo charge a 6.2 and give me a 500 hp truck that gets 20 mpg and id be all over it.
If the PU will be used as a DD or grocery getter, the 4 will work fine. Where it will struggle is when you start towing large/heavy loads. It would tow an aluminum boat all day long, but I don't think it'll tow a big 'ol Ranger glass bass boat with a 250 hanging out back all day long. The mpg's will drop like a rock when you start towing the bigger items.

Most people want a large vehicle, so it you don't plan on towing much or just the lawn mower, small/light boat, and it's a DD, it'll work. I have a F150 with 3.5EB, and get low 20's, good comfort, and it will tow my 3500# BMT or 7400 GVWR TT w/o issues.

It all depends on what you will use the PU for.
 
#17 · (Edited)
Thanks to all who have added their experience and knowledge about the new turbo 4 cylinder motors. I am still debating which motor. I've had the Chevy 5.3 since 2004 and the Ford 351 since 1991 and a 302 Bronco back around '89. They were dependable and both lasted 200k with no issues. The deals are getting a little better and some good choices for me are below. Let me know what you think:

https://www.autotrader.com/cars-for...de1=GMC&modelCode1=15SIPU4WD&dealerId=1153744

https://www.autotrader.com/cars-for...de1=CHEV&modelCode1=CHEV150&dealerId=31023518
 
#19 ·
The key here is lubricants. Long ago, you were supposed to let a turbo or super charged engine idle for 3-5 minutes before you shut it off to cool off so the heat wouldn't burn the oil. Commercial drivers learned quick. Rich, spoilt bought a number of turbos. With today's oils and if they are designed from the ground up, unbelieveable. As said, the bigger engine will put our more power but has to use more fuel. Give thanks and enjoy.
 
#20 · (Edited)
your a bit off with this one. The first turbo motors had turbos that were fed oil by the motor and the bearings were not water cooled and some were even bushings not bearings. When you drove on boost with the turbo spinning at full rpm Let of quickly came to stop and shut your motor off the turbo would still be spinning. With lubrication that relied on the engine oil pump that was off and no cooling the turbo would spin creating heat and there was nothing to carry it away. So the bearings "coaked" or basically cooked and got burned on deposits. Later turbos had better bearings, more efficient cooling and better lube systems. that problem is history today. matter of fact my son in laws cummins ram just had the turbo replaced with a rebuilt one at 280,000 miles. That's a pretty respectable life span for any mechanical part on a truck.


My grand national was probably the car that started that theory. What we had to do with them is add an electric oil pump and a timer that would keep the oil pump pumping for 3 minutes after you shut the motor down. Normal driving where your not up on boost all the time and the probably didn't exist anyway. It was more a thing for guys who raced.


As to fuel economy with a turbo ill say this. Going down the road you need X amount of hp to maintain highway speed and displace the wind on your truck or car. If its 40hp then a 4 cyl motor with less mechanical friction putting that 40 hp out is going to get better economy. But with a boxy truck not a whole lot. Seems that gas mileage peaks in a full sized 4x4 pickup at around 24mpg and the difference between the best ford, ram, chev is only about 2mpg from the worse. Now Toyotas full sized trucks are about 3mpg behind the domestics.


But there seems to be some kind of wall at about 24-25 mpg that cant be penetrated buy a gas powered pickup. Even the 4x4 midsize 4s and 6s cant see to break through very often, diesels do but that's probably because at low rpm going down the highway they still product tons of torque that can beat the wind pressure.
 
#24 · (Edited)
.
Consider engineering and materials advancements over the last several decades.. Back years ago, if the big engines Chevy 350 & 409, Ford 289 & 300-6,

or Chrysler's huge Hemis, lasted 100,000 miles, they were doing good. Now, a 1600cc in almost any brand will easily top 200,000 miles..

If you are as old as I, you can recall when Pontiac had a slogan.. "Built to last 100,000 miles"..

These little 4s may work out well, but if you can, give them a couple years.

.
 

Attachments

#28 ·
i side with you ironglow. I know its the future because of higher and higher corporate fuel economy standards but myself, ill wait. Right now I can still get a v8 that gets near as good fuel economy and if you factored in hp vs mpg it probably does better then the 4. Its also a proven 300 k motor and resale is just vastly better if a guy trades them in every 3-5 years like I do. Theres no economic gain over the life of the vehicle if you factor in depreciation and the lower resale value. So you pay now at the pump or you pay the day you trade it in. Your choice. If 5 years down the line its PROVEN to be a 300k motor too maybe that will change but the kid I deal with at the chev lot told me he has trouble even selling them new. Even the people that would settle for the 6cyl don't want a four. Especially a turbo 4. But then I remember guys saying fuel injection is just a flash in the pan. its to expensive and complicated and carbs would be here for ever. Heck I might have been one of them.


Heck even I am kind of a hypocrite. I allways tell people that probably the most favorite car I ever had was my 87 grand national buick. It was one of the first computer controlled fuel injected intercooled turbo motors made in America. At the time it was amazing. Out accelerate a corvette and most of the muscle cars from the 70s and got 25 mpg! Did they last 300k? Nope. Most went between a 100-150k and turbos rarely lasted that long because they weren't bearing turbos. But at that time they were no less reliable then any other American car. So im not completely closed minded on this. I do know theres turbo car motors that have good longevity. Turbo diesels that about run forever. But a tiny turbo squirrel cage in a full sized truck will have to be proven before I buy. I
 
#29 ·
Technology is the future. If gm made this a six cylinder they would have a 4 liter engine with 465hp and 522ft lb of torque @ 1500 thru 4000 rpm all with 87 octane regular fuel. A gm engineer wrote it was simple to make the 2.7 with the power it has with race fuel but lots of time and effort went into designing the combustion chambers to do it with regular gasoline. I think this engine will hold up over time or I wouldn't have bought it. My dealer is selling the 2.7 as fast as they can get them and my neighbor a truck driver liked my truck so much he bought the gm 2.7 4X4 a few weeks ago.
 
#35 ·
yup bump the boost a bit and get it in the 350 hp range and it would be a rocket in that little truck. We had one for a loner with the v6 in it for a couple weeks and I think it would have beat my 5.3 full size in a race. Like you said a zr2 with 350hp and some decent fuel economy might even get this guy to look smaller.
 
#36 ·
Chevy also offers a 3.0 L turbo diesel motor for the Silverado. It reportedly gets 29 mpg highway and 23 mpg city for their 4wd trucks. Considering that diesel is going for 50% more than regular gas that would compare to getting 19.5 mpg using regular for highway mileage and 15.5 mpg for city driving.

The high cost of diesel makes the gas motors look like the better option.
 
#37 ·
yup with higher fuel price, maintance cost, and initial sticker shock gas pickups are a no brainer unless your pulling a tractor around. With 400 fps of torque a gas v8 today will pull any camper on earth! Hear it all the time. "ya but I can get 20mpg pulling it" again factor in the cost of fuel and upkeep and cost of your truck and then factor in how many miles are actually pulling something when empty the fuel mileage is about the same and again most pulling campers with them are wanabe truckers. See it all the time up here in this tourist area. You see three groups driving diesel trucks. Farmers and loggers that actually need them. Early 20s guys with them all jacked up and chipped and the majority are some little old 70 year old city boy pulling a 20 foot camper that any 1/2 full sized truck with a 300hp v6 would easily pull. Most go and spend 70k on a truck they don't need just to impress the other "City folk" campers in the camp ground. Half of them don't even know it doesn't have spark plugs!
 
#40 ·
They tried to sell me one of those 4 bangers, I wouldn't take one in a full size if they paid me! Let alone me paying them!


I easily get 22 mpg with my 5.3 V8 and it has great power, and when I'm pulling a trailer, it just isn't working as hard as a smaller engine.


DM
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top