Results 1 to 21 of 21

Thread: 4-cylinder 2019 Chevy Silverado

  1. #1
    Golden Hawk Member BobPalma's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Brownsburg, IN, USA.(NW suburban Indianapolis)
    Posts
    22,564

    4-cylinder 2019 Chevy Silverado

    Some things leave you scratching your head:

    http://www.autonews.com/article/2018...dio%5D=2756246
    We've got to quit saying, "How stupid can you be?" Too many people are taking it as a challenge.

    Ayn Rand:
    "You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality."

    G. K. Chesterton: This triangle of truisms, of father, mother, and child, cannot be destroyed; it can only destroy those civilizations which disregard it.

  2. #2
    President Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    St. Louis, MO, .
    Posts
    1,923
    Speaking of 4 cyl's, any one have the real world skinny on that double turbo'd 4 cylinder Mustang?

  3. #3
    Chief Cat Herder showbizkid's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    San Diego, California, USA.
    Posts
    8,813
    Blog Entries
    3
    Not as bad as the V8-6-4 Caddy engine, but still a pretty dumb idea.
    Clark in San Diego
    '63 Standard (F2) "Barney"
    http://studeblogger.blogspot.com

  4. #4
    President Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    marana, Arizona
    Posts
    702
    I'd rather have a V8 that doesn't have to strain than a small engine that'll thrash it's self to a premature rebuild or destruction. When it comes to my full size pickup I'll take a full size engine to go with it.

  5. #5
    President Member Bordeaux Daytona's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    S. Holland, Illinois, USA.
    Posts
    1,695
    I've told people at work that Ford would do this sooner or later. They already have a 2.7 twin turbo V6. Now that GM has they probably will too.

  6. #6
    Golden Hawk Member DEEPNHOCK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Brooklet, GA, USA. Planet Earth
    Posts
    17,933
    My 'old' 2014 Ram gets between 21 and 23.9 with a 5.7 Hemi.... (Have hit 24, but it is rare)...and will pull 10,000+ pounds...legally.
    Something isn't right there....

  7. #7
    Speedster Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Cape May, NJ
    Posts
    372
    My F-150 3.5ecoboost gets 26 mpg. If I drive the crap out of it she still get 21-22

  8. #8
    Speedster Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Cape May, NJ
    Posts
    372
    Quote Originally Posted by skyway View Post
    Speaking of 4 cyl's, any one have the real world skinny on that double turbo'd 4 cylinder Mustang?
    I don’t own one or driven one but I have seen them hang with their coyote counter part. If I had a choice for a mustang I would still choose the coyote, that engine sounds amazing!!

  9. #9
    President Member Jeff_H's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    S RR Valley, ND, USA.
    Posts
    2,418
    RE: 4 cyl Mustangs. Folks don't buy a Mustang for the fuel economy. Its performance and/or image. Some Mustangs in the 80s had turbo'd 2.3L 4cyl (Turbo GT and SVO) that were in many ways better than V8 offerings but the sales were not there. I drove a '85 Thunderbird turbo-coupe as a winter car for many years. I am sure that same drivetrain in the Mustang was better (less weight) and it was fun to drive but the sales compared to V8 cars was less.

    Do they run the boost on truck engines towing to get the power? Used to be anything car-wise with a turbo gas engine was not rated for towing (see above Tbird turbo) as running on constant boost was too much strain.

    I don't much care for the start/stop stuff that the smaller engine Ford trucks have either. I was riding in the boss's newer one that does that and you could feel it at every stop light. I wonder about the lag when you punch it at a light when there is a narrow window at a turn arrow, etc.

    Jeff in ND

  10. #10
    Speedster Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Woodinville, WA
    Posts
    412
    Speaking of 4 cylinder Mustangs, Anyone remember the Mustang SVO:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Mustang_SVO
    Last edited by dleroux; 10-12-2018 at 07:13 PM.
    "Every man I meet on the street is superior to me in some respect, and from that I can learn."
    R.W. Emerson

  11. #11
    President Member t walgamuth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    lafayette in
    Posts
    4,369
    The guy who wrote the article has condemned the motor but never drove one...right?
    Diesel loving, autocrossing, Coupe express loving, Grandpa Architect.

  12. #12
    Golden Hawk Member Dick Steinkamp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Bellingham, WA, USA.
    Posts
    14,067
    Quote Originally Posted by t walgamuth View Post
    The guy who wrote the article has condemned the motor but never drove one...right?
    Plus, in the article he states...

    "GM says the 2.7-liter turbo, four-cylinder engine develops more torque and horsepower than the 4.3-liter V-6, which is true."

    310 HP and 348 torque (8 speed trans) vs 285 HP and 305 torque (6 speed trans)

    It is going to be tough for us old fogies to get used to electric cars that can smoke any internal combustion production car made and 4 cylinder cars (and trucks) that can skool their V6 and V8 counterparts. We may never get there.
    Dick Steinkamp
    Bellingham, WA

  13. #13
    President Member t walgamuth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    lafayette in
    Posts
    4,369
    Exactly,
    Diesel loving, autocrossing, Coupe express loving, Grandpa Architect.

  14. #14
    President Member 62champ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Kentucky Bluegrass
    Posts
    2,988
    Quote Originally Posted by Dick Steinkamp View Post
    It is going to be tough for us old fogies to get used to electric cars that can smoke any internal combustion production car made and 4 cylinder cars (and trucks) that can skool their V6 and V8 counterparts. We may never get there.
    I continue to be amazed at what they are able to get out of some modern engines - there is a company out of the UK that can take the 1.6 ltr (97 cubic inches) ecoboost and go from 170 whp and transform it into a 350 whp tire cooker with bolt-ons and computer management...

  15. #15
    President Member 62champ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Kentucky Bluegrass
    Posts
    2,988
    V8 lovers don't loose hope - this guy took a 2018 F150 with the 5.0 V8/10 speed automatic and is running mid-10s at 135/140 mph - and including the price of the new truck, he has not spent over 50K to have this kind of fun...


  16. #16
    Golden Hawk Member 8E45E's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    , , Canada.
    Posts
    15,590
    Quote Originally Posted by Dick Steinkamp View Post
    It is going to be tough for us old fogies to get used to electric cars that can smoke any internal combustion production car made and 4 cylinder cars (and trucks) that can skool their V6 and V8 counterparts. We may never get there.
    I experienced that when I used to ride the bus regularly years and years ago. The local transit system's fleet of CCF Brill trolley buses easily outperformed their diesel and gasoline counterparts as far as acceleration, especially on steep hills; even fully loaded at rush-hour.

    Craig

  17. #17
    President Member t walgamuth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    lafayette in
    Posts
    4,369
    My Jetta diesel and my wife's Mazda5 both get up and scoot with four cylinders and get great and reasonable mileage.
    Diesel loving, autocrossing, Coupe express loving, Grandpa Architect.

  18. #18
    President Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    British Columbia & Arizona
    Posts
    2,201
    Bob,
    Re your article, thanks for the post. Can you imagine seeing this in writing in the late sixties and seventies?
    The 2.7-liter has a new eight-speed automatic transmission, while the 4.3-liter V-6 soldiers on with an old six-speed automatic gearbox.
    How things have changed.

    Clark in post # 3,
    Some years ago my wife purchased from an estate a super low mileage1983 cadillac sedan deville d'elegance which was equipped with the aluminum 4.1 Cadillac motor trying to both meet emissions and get decent mileage. It was so pathetic I replaced it with a done-up Oldsmobile W30 455 CID complete with all the usual hot rodding tricks such as Hooker Headers, Holley Intake, Mondello camshaft etc. We keep a log and the mileage did not change one iota but we gained about 200 HP and 265 lbs ft of torque. What a sleeper and we still have it today and it never ceases to amaze me how well it turned out(lots of other mods too). It'll out drive most Mustangs and Camaros on a winding road. As the saying goes, there's no replacement for displacement. But perhaps this should be ammended today to state technology.

    Bill

  19. #19
    President Member tsenecal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Elko NV
    Posts
    698
    In 1999, I bought a 2000 dodge, 8 liter, V10. I still have it, and it has been a total work horse. It has rarley been driven, without a loaded trailer, or large load of cargo, and has never missed a beat. I just got in from the hills yesterday, with a cord and a half of wood on it. I'm sure we'll never see another V10 be mass produced.

  20. #20
    President Member (S)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Ferndale, Washington
    Posts
    1,849
    For 50 grand, I could build two 10 second Larks .

  21. #21
    President Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    British Columbia & Arizona
    Posts
    2,201
    Tom,
    I too own a '96 Dodge V10 stick duallie. Other than the fuel mileage which is always 10-12 it will haul practicality anything. At one point I hauled a 30,000lb ex-US army 10 WD firetruck (Deuce and a half) from the US border to our place in the BC wilderness. I used Mopar camshaft, headers etc and was truly amazed at the torque and HP actually available. Most of the time first and second are not necessary, just start off in third. Can you imagine the SRT version?
    Bill

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •