• If you log in, the ads disappear in the forum and gallery. If you need help logging in or getting registered, send request to: webmaster@southernairboat.com

4cyl Ecoturd now in Silverado

OneBFC

Well-known member
Oh man, looks like the ole Ecoturd is moving in on your V8 turf! No surprise to me, have said it for years these little motors can easily do the job of modest truck duty. :D

Certainly handles Airboat duty just fine! :stirpot: :salute:

Chevrolet says the new 2.7-liter engine is more powerful and efficient than the 4.3-liter V6 it replaces, delivering 310 horsepower and 348 pound-feet of torque. It's also 380 pounds lighter and includes fuel-saving cylinder deactivation, allowing it to shut off two cylinders at cruising speeds.


https://www.forbes.com/sites/joannmuller/2018/05/18/chevy-surprise-its-2019-silverado-pickup-will-get-a-4-cylinder-turbo-engine/#7713bb6161d3
 
Swamphunter45 and ladyblackwater need to get one and pull their airboatss at 80 MPH in overdrive. Lets see how much load these engines can take.
 
OneBFC said:
Oh man, looks like the ole Ecoturd is moving in on your V8 turf! :stirpot: :salute:

It's also 380 pounds lighter

Holey crap! 380 pound lighter :shock:

I wish I had known Ecoturds float :drunken: , but Duhh, Ecoturd, of course they float.

I guess I'm just an amateur plumber and I miss stuff sometimes.:violent1: (Cue Caddy Shack).


Just got done putting a new Vortec 4.3 into the buggy, I could have really used that flotation up front!

4.3-Buggy-Motor-800x600.jpg



I was just about to put the gears in, but now I'm wondering if I Helium dumpster charged my vent system would my gearing float too?

Gears-800x600.jpg
 
Yes... saw it just the other day... that 2.7 looks promising... but

Delete the DFM
the 10:1 is a bit high so may not have much to gain over stock boost levels.
 
CarMotorBarge said:
Swamphunter45 and ladyblackwater need to get one and pull their airboatss at 80 MPH in overdrive. Lets see how much load these engines can take.


DISPOSABLE powertrain

Like a empty beer can you just crush it and throw them away
 
This engine is going to be so important. It's going to be an absolute perfect airboat power plant for anything in the 300 to 600hp range. Which happens to cover just about everyone's needs nicely. Add to the fact it will cost next to nothing in the secondary market and you have the perfect scenario. It will absolutely produce 1600+ lbs of thrust, get 6+ mpg in a decent hull, last for 1000+hrs easy. All for sub $2000.00 cost and over time that will drop to sub $1000.00. Very cost effective to rebuild too and if you want to add performance parts, you buy half the number of rods and pistons.

HOME RUN. You will see...

The following is from: https://www.gm-trucks.com/forums/topic/212209-will-gm%E2%80%99s-new-27-liter-turbo-gas-engine-pull-stronger-than-its-28-liter-duramax-diesel/

John Goreham
Contributing Writer, GM-Trucks.com
5-22-2018

5b04360ab2102_2.7fourgmenginegasimage.jpg.9d947cfb1b02e5450f6b68bc294c9834.jpg



The recent news that GM will be introducing a new four-cylinder 2.7-liter turbocharged gasoline engine tuned specifically for truck duty is exciting news for those seeking a new entry-level, affordable, and fuel-efficient option. Coupled with the many technological advances the new engine brings, the 2.7-Liter gas turbo caught our eye for its unusually low torque peak coupled with such an unusually high torque value. As Zane Merva already pointed out in his detailed technical overview of the new engine , it does have comparable specs to some not-so-old Chevy V8 engines installed in Silverados. We wondered if it might, in fact, be more capable than the Duramax diesel engine GM produces in partnership with Isuzu and makes optional in the Colorado and Canyon midsize trucks.

5b0435ae8486c_2.8duramaxdieselcurve.png.4d18094f6258b15e941f118425cb29e0.png


GM’s original press release materials didn’t include detailed torque curves for the new engine, but when asked by GM-Trucks.com, quickly responded with the curves so we could check out the torque and compare it to the Duramax 2.8.
Above is the curve for the Duramax first. The 2.8-liter Duramax has a peak torque rating of 369 lb-ft of torque. As you can see from the curve above, it hits that peak at about 2,000 RPM (and that is what GM confirms). The peak torque is maintained for roughly five or six hundred RPM and it then drops off pretty steeply at about 2,500 RPM. It is still at 300 lb-ft as the engine’s speed hits about 3,500 RPM. Not bad at all.

5b0435c64643e_2.7tchevycurvewhitebackground.thumb.png.6f8a2e060eeeb308ea1d5bf6a4dadcd0.png


However, the new 2.7-liter gas turbo engine has a different profile, and one folks who tow might want to look closely at. Notice that the new gasoline turbocharged engine hits its peak torque sooner than the Duramax Diesel does. Peak torque of 348 lb-ft comes at just 1,500 RPMs in this new engine. Practically right off of idle. Torque is then maintained at that peak for a full 2,500 RPM (five times longer than the diesel’s peak is maintained) all the way up to 4,000 RPM.
Although the Duramax diesel does have a slight edge in peak torque (369 vs. 348) of about 6%, that advantage only occurs from roughly 1,900 RPM to about 2,700 RPM. The 2.7-liter gasoline engine has a broader peak torque curve that is much more constant over a significantly wider range of engine speeds.


The gasoline engine also produces dramatically more horsepower than does the Duramax diesel. And that power appears to be much lower in the rev band than the power of the diesel. Few of us rev our trucks to redline, but we all use the 3,000 RPM range pretty frequently. Looking at the curves, the new 2.7-liter engine produces about 200 hp at this point, and the Duramax produces about 170 hp by our reading of the curve. (note that the diesel curve shows hp along the right side of the graph, the gas engine uses the left for both torque and power.) Chevy is promising a sub-7-second run to 60 mph. That is quicker than the smaller Colorado can sprint to 60 mph with the Duramax.


GM has not yet released fuel efficiency ratings for the new 2.7-liter gasoline engine. Even after it does, it may be hard to draw a perfect comparison of the fuel efficiency and fuel economy between the two engines if they appear in different trucks and have different transmissions. However, with gasoline’s national average cost per gallon substantially lower than the average cost for diesel, GM’s new 2.7-liter engine may not only have more pulling power in real-world use, it may also prove to be more fuel economical in real-world operation.

Here's a gen 5 5.3 Ecotec dyno...the 2.7 makes more power than the 5.3 from 1500 to a smidge over 3000 rpm. Where do you run your engine RPM wise again most of the time? Oh...right.......this is junk though. I get it... :toothy7: :D

6a00d83451b3c669e2017c38424a95970b-pi


Keep in mind that the 2.7 specs are on 87 octane too...tune it to run specifically on 93 and you will pick up a good bit of power for free. Add a flex fuel sensor and some E85 and now your into low/mid 4xx range hp wise.

Figure if we are getting 450hp or so out of the little 2.0 Eco, then that same power per liter applied to this engine puts it just over 600hp with a proper supporting Turbo.

Future looks bright to me!
 
You need to read the article. The article was comparing the 2.8 liter Duramax vs the 2.7 liter EcoTurd. It didn't reference the 6.6 liter Duramax.
 
ladyblackwater said:
Swamphunter you are correct. Unfortunately vehicles are disposable know of days. We pay $50,000+ for new vehicles just to throw them away in less than 10 years. The new age is pay more get less. This motor will probably be fine for someone that buys a truck just to say they have a truck but not for a person that buys a truck to use it for what it was designed for. There is only 1 V6 motor I will ever own and that's a Cummins V6 that's built to last.

This is completely bad advice. The auto manufacturers have majorly stepped up their game over the last 20 years when it comes to engines. You have the LS, LT, EcoTec, EcoBoost, Duramax, etc. The motors manufactured by GM today are far superior to the cast iron A/C motors that GM put in the Cadillac 40 years ago.

The motors today consistently get over 200K miles without any major issues, get far better gas mileage, make far more HSP and torque per cubic inch, and are far lighter. Also the motors that have an all aluminum construction cool much better.

You can definitely argue that many consumer products today are disposable, but the motors being built today are no where close to being disposable.
 
I highly suspect this motor will become the fleet vehicle motor of choice vs the v6. So availability in the aftermarket come 2020 or 2021 will be surprising. I am an EcoTurd fan though and share Russ's opinions bc I know what these motora are capable of doing. I can turn props designed for twice the HP of my motor bc of the lower RPM HP levels available. With a few adjustments (bc GM seriously detunes their turbos) the stock motor will push near 500hp and this motor will need a cam conversion to remove the variable valve lift and cylinder turn off functions, but maintain vvt

I do find it funny the people who build opinions on something and have no true experience on the subject. You need to get behind the wheel or get some stick time on a 4cyl EcoTurd boat before you say its a complete shitty concept GM is pursuing. Obviously before they spent half millions in engineering and new plant tooling they saw a market. They are not out to be broke again like the govt bail out years ago.
 
Gen 4 5.3 V8 Dyno

2012_Vortec_53L_LC9_Silverado.jpg


2.7 Dyno

5b0435c64643e_2.7tchevycurvewhitebackground.thumb.png.6f8a2e060eeeb308ea1d5bf6a4dadcd0.png


Hrm....no way that little 4cyl can be suitable as a V8 replacement, right? I mean...it doesn't have any tor...oh, wait.. never mind. Well, it doesn't make the same pow...er...wth? Guess if all you Gen 4 5.3 owners thought you had enough to do what you needed to do, then the new 2.7 will only give you the same torque, only 3000!!! RPM sooner, and similar power....all on 87 octane and bone stock. Junk motor though...no way anyone will want that kind of performance.

Seriously, the number of boats that need a big block are miniscule compared to the number of boats that need 600hp and below so, the 2.7 is going to be a game changer IMNSHO!
 
The problem is they are so freaking complex and one glitch in the field and most guys are screwed.

Make it simple for the end user and provide adapters, harness and support and you will promote your platform.

Be the Buddy Branch of the Eco and maybe I will buy in !


I'm the guy running 50 year old iron blocks but the power I get is monstrous, real and it is reliable.
 
2.7T will swing bigger prop than Gen 4 or Gen 5 5.3L... just saying... under the curve 2.7L makes more HP.

at 3000 its only about 50HP lower than stock Gen 5 6.2L L86... lots of potential
 
hey ladyblackwater... can you read... it makes more TQ than the 5.3 Gen 4 and Gen 5 on 87... put 93 or E85 and you will even surpass it more.

Also I agree with you to a point... if all you can work on is a carburetor and you have to bring your vehicle to a dealer just to diagnose an issue they maybe these new fangled contraptions are not for you. But anyone that understands basic analog singles and wiring diagrams can easily figure out these motors and diagnose issues. The wiring is very easy to access vs in a car, just takes the ability to understand how the ECU controls or reads the sensor voltage. Honestly once wired correctly the issue a Code is thrown for is normally mechanical alert or safety protection. In all truth Powertrain warranties are crap... motors are $1000+/- low mileage from the junk yard... blow it or run it hot then go buy another. I will not spend 5-10k on a new motor with warranty... not worth it when my pocket book and cash saved can buy another engine and must make the swap. After the ECU and wiring are set up right its easy to diagnose issues and easy to work on if you understand what to look for when a particular code is thrown.

These motors are not that different other than DOHC, VVT, and turbo with the sensors to monitor/control that aspect. I have never had a sensor go bad. I have sank a boat, got it back up, pickled the motor, put a bit of dielectric grease on all the sensor, changed fuel and oil out then fired it off...

Also if you can work on a V8 motor mechanically and internally these motors are not much more difficult, but do require some special tools so on that side they are a bit of an investment, but like i said just go buy a good used one with good compression and make the swap vs going inside.
 
lol... ive been a member of this site about 8yrs more than you for a total of 13yrs now. but what does that have to do with it. and i dont work on my own truck either, no time to deal with it since thats not my day job. yes i live in the world today and obviously you do too. i can change a tire and understand how DCS systems work from wiring diagrams which its nothing 5v, mA signals that control these engines.

once you pull all the excess crap outta the system and its only ecu, wiring, and engine management sensors its not difficult and everything is easily accessible vs under the hood working which is why i dont work on my truck. accessibility sucks.

and i didnt say it was a wiring issue when a code is thrown, i said if wiring is done right a code is usually engine protection or engine damage related since the only things that can throw a code are engine management related. these motors are very reliable and set up right dont have BS issues related to loose gas caps, emissions related codes, etc. your HP/CI can run above 2:1 and approach 3:1 on a hot tune. your HP/weight is .75 to .5. Since they are turbo motors with dual scroll or small wheel diameter the power comes on much quick than a NA. the usable horsepower (3000-5000) when comparing to an equivalent V8 that has near the same peak HP the Ecotec will spin the bigger prop and have more thrust bc it acutually makes more HP in the lower rpms vs the NA. by the time the NA peaks TQ the Ecotec is on the falling side and has made its power. yes a gearbox solves some of it, but pound for pound thrust wise the Ecotec will make more push thru the entire RPM band when set up right.

though these motors are not fully equal but its only like 40hp and what youll gain down low with the Ecotec will be felt... but like i said i like these motors and also the ecoboost from Ford.
 
When you really sit and think about it, it really isn't economical for the everyday airboats. The simple motors that most people can work on are the way to go.

Isn't this the same argument when people started using the LS motors?
I really considered the eco motor. My personal problem is a radiator. I'm in the woods a lot at night by myself. My aircraft engine is as simple as they come, but there is a whole lot of HP in them little engines with little weight.
 
Back
Top