Chevy 1500 2.7 turbo worse MPG than 5.3 V8

[CJ1]

Just got confirmation ... SMWBO says “Displacement is Key”.
Now toss those pansy motors and get a real engine.
And she highly recommends RAM trucks, it’s a theme lately.

And then bolt a turbo or 2 on it. Or just get on that has been designed that way to begin with. Way more advantages than disadvantages. CJ

[CJ1]

edit.

[Machine Concepts]

Yes it got its feelings hurt by the 2.7 Ecoboost.

[grayline]

The Mfgs can get the MPG lower I don't understand why they don't.. I just went to Bay county Florida last week drove my RAM 2500 Cummins unloaded and kept it at 70 the whole way The Evic said 20.3 mpg and hand calculation was at 19.8 for a lifted 6.7 L on 35s that's pretty good in my opinion. It should be a crime and a loss of Man card points to buy a full sized truck with a 4 banger turbo or not..

[n2ratfishin]

Who remembers the GMC Syclone?




Everyone talks like strapping a turbo on a truck is something new. Jay's comments about the interior are hilarious.

[Gsmith223]

Etorque is a great design Ram has really hit it out of the park, as long as it stays reliable long term. My next one will be an Etorque

[Bassin Bob71]

Etorque is a great design Ram has really hit it out of the park, as long as it stays reliable long term. My next one will be an Etorque

Any test I've read about etorque says no one can detect any benefit in terms of power, mileage, or driveability.

As for for the 2.7, I think it's probably a fine engine but I don't understand the application in a full size truck. Probably would be great in a Colorado or Traverse.

[basscat tyler]

Any test I've read about etorque says no one can detect any benefit in terms of power, mileage, or driveability.

As for for the 2.7, I think it's probably a fine engine but I don't understand the application in a full size truck. Probably would be great in a Colorado or Traverse.

The tests I've seen with the etorque said that the low end power from a stop is where the could see the difference. Pretty sure that was the intended purpose.

[billnorman1]

My neighbor enjoyed big horsepower in many forms, rode a Harley, his son had a Turbo GN Buick and other toys. He himself drove a Syclone. The owners manual recommended not putting anything weighing over 50 pounds in the bed, he said.

[Al from Canada]

The tests I've seen with the etorque said that the low end power from a stop is where the could see the difference. Pretty sure that was the intended purpose.

I'm a Ram fan but I don't see the point of the Etorque and why you'd need more hp/torque on the low end, I guess maybe if you were towing a very heavy load but other than that I don't see the need.

[berudd]

So, the article is talking about a 200mile test at a steady 75mph. If that’s how you spend 100% of your time in the truck, then you’ll get better mileage. Most don’t though. Most of us, unfortunately, spend a large percentage of our time putzing around town, going to work, sitting at stop lights, etc. With that use case, the turbo 4 probably looks a lot better. So, while this test may be factual, it may not be completely relevant to everyone. That said, I’m sticking with the 8. Like someone else said, who buys a 1/2 ton truck to get good gas mileage?