2.5 turbo replaces the 3.6 V6 in '24 Traverse, Acadia, & '25 Enclave. Horse increases from 310 to 328, & ft-lb torque increases from 266 to 326. Lighter (should handle better, being lighter in the front, as my '23 Silverado 4 cyl turbo does), better mpg. 5 yrs of 2.7 turbo - so good, that gm increased drivetrain warranty (in Sierra & Silverado) from 60k miles to 100k miles,..... TurboMax warranty now matches Duramax.
Chevrolet is messing up on this one, they needed a naturally aspirated version for this family oriented vehicle. Earlier buyers of traverses will soon find out that turbo engines surely are more powerful but require sitricter maintenance. The 3.6 was a good engine, the transmission in it was dog water though. I see a future bad rep for reliability on these, not cause of the engine itself, more so because of the customers not knowing turbo engines require more maintenance. If chevy somehow made reliable turbos that dont require much maintenance as normal then they might have the gold standard here. But.... I heavily doubt it. They're going to have to have a Naturally Aspirated option for the Majority of folks. Turbos are nice and all but not everyone can keep up with them. Like I said either Chevy will grow with these or fall once again with these vehicles.
@@DaBuGzLiFe Not just GM, but all the big3 have gone away from bigger cube naturally aspirated to smaller displacement turbos. Ford began truck turbo (2.7 twin turbo V6) 10 yrs ago. GM 2.7 dual volute I-4 turbo 5 yrs ago, & now Stellantis 3.0 I-6 twin turbo hurricane replacing 5.7 hemi V8. They must meet stricter efficiency & emission standards. Back in the early 70's this resulted in slug engines, losing half of their horse & torque w/ lower compression. Today, no sacrifices are made (other than those who just can't accept change). Turbo's have been in diesel semi's for decades. Cummins I-6 turbo diesel one of the most bulletproof engines ever built. Now, gasoline turbo engines are built like a diesel, but run on 87 octane gasoline. My '16 5.3 V8 maintenance schedule (7500 miles) is the same as my '23 2.7 turbo, but only needs 6 qts vs 8 qts. However, I don't go 7,500 miles - 0% oil life. I change at 6,000 miles - 20% oil life, or 5,625 miles - 25% oil life). Stricter maintenance is required on both turbo engines & large displacement naturally aspirated w/ cylinder deactivation. Pick your poison.
@@DaBuGzLiFe No EV for me until there is a charging network. This past Sunday, 60 minutes aired an episode about China's EV market. 600 mile range, & in under 3 minutes depleted battery is swapped out for fully charged battery. Currently the U.S. has the following energy sources: 41% natural gas, 24% renewables (wind, solar, hydro), 19% nuclear, & 17% coal. Ironically, Texas leads the U.S. in wind power, accounting for 28.6%. That's a good thing. Can't ignore consequences from burning oil, coal, natural gas.
@@ews360 that is probably the wisest choice until the vehicles and manufacturers prove themselves along with a network of power similar to gas stations
Alright sounds good. What about Traverse losing some weight instead of gaining? (Almost impossible for Acadia to lose weight if it is going to grow in size) Rumoured *mini torque monster* will shine if there's less weight to carry around.
Great info. I would so much appreciate an update to the content on the 4 cyl 2.0t LSY engine. This engine has additional vehicle applications which started with Cadillac xt4, ct4 and now Chevy, Buick and GMC. When in the Cadillac, octane “recommendation” is 91 but GM only recommends 87 when in the Buick Envision, Chevy Blazer with GMC Acadia with the same engine with maybe just a few HP difference. I am considering the CT4 with LSY but adding premium is a deal breaker but will consider doing premium fuel in the summer. Would love clarity on this topic of interpreting Octane recommendations vs requirements and reasonable best practices. Thanks Much
If you be just little bid smarter than you are , you realize gm don't developed anything, they just adopt some engines from Europe, nothing more nothing less, this engines are in Europe in decades
To bad every turbo chevy uses only last 50,000 to 60,000 mi and cost $4,500 to replace. Those number are only if your a mechanic and change your oil with better then recomended oil at half the seguested interval. How do i know. Im a machanic and My chevy is on its 3rd turbo at 118,000mi i use mobil 1 extended oil @ every 3,000mi. Ive towed zero times. And can count on 1 hand the times ive pressed the accelerator past 70% throttle.
So basically they took a 2.5L from a Chevy Equinox and slapped a turbo on it and realized it did the same as a 3.6 v6 and 1 mpg better to meet minimum emissions standards. Sounds like lazy engineers.
Wrong. They took the block and basic design from the newly built and designed 2.7L like he said in the video. They shortened the stroke to result in smaller displacement. This is a common practice among auto makers
@@Motrolix they can't help it there Cult has been active since they drank the Japanese Kool-aid and dis anything American. Even though we invented the mass production car.
200 horse power is not weak 4cyd 2.5. I have it in my truck i dont want a turbo...i dont tow..it get good gas mileage...27 mpg on the interstate...its a 2019.
Interesting! I still hope they do a 2.7L DOHC straight 6 turbo and non turbo engine.
fyi - 2.7 turbo in '23 Silverado owner manual states 87 octane
So will have active thermal management?
Any ideas or insight into why GM isn't using the L3B engine in the 2024 Traverse?
2.5 turbo replaces the 3.6 V6 in '24 Traverse, Acadia, & '25 Enclave. Horse increases from 310 to 328, & ft-lb torque increases from 266 to 326. Lighter (should handle better, being lighter in the front, as my '23 Silverado 4 cyl turbo does), better mpg. 5 yrs of 2.7 turbo - so good, that gm increased drivetrain warranty (in Sierra & Silverado) from 60k miles to 100k miles,..... TurboMax warranty now matches Duramax.
Chevrolet is messing up on this one, they needed a naturally aspirated version for this family oriented vehicle. Earlier buyers of traverses will soon find out that turbo engines surely are more powerful but require sitricter maintenance. The 3.6 was a good engine, the transmission in it was dog water though. I see a future bad rep for reliability on these, not cause of the engine itself, more so because of the customers not knowing turbo engines require more maintenance. If chevy somehow made reliable turbos that dont require much maintenance as normal then they might have the gold standard here. But.... I heavily doubt it. They're going to have to have a Naturally Aspirated option for the Majority of folks. Turbos are nice and all but not everyone can keep up with them. Like I said either Chevy will grow with these or fall once again with these vehicles.
@@DaBuGzLiFe Not just GM, but all the big3 have gone away from bigger cube naturally aspirated to smaller displacement turbos. Ford began truck turbo (2.7 twin turbo V6) 10 yrs ago. GM 2.7 dual volute I-4 turbo 5 yrs ago, & now Stellantis 3.0 I-6 twin turbo hurricane replacing 5.7 hemi V8. They must meet stricter efficiency & emission standards. Back in the early 70's this resulted in slug engines, losing half of their horse & torque w/ lower compression. Today, no sacrifices are made (other than those who just can't accept change). Turbo's have been in diesel semi's for decades. Cummins I-6 turbo diesel one of the most bulletproof engines ever built. Now, gasoline turbo engines are built like a diesel, but run on 87 octane gasoline. My '16 5.3 V8 maintenance schedule (7500 miles) is the same as my '23 2.7 turbo, but only needs 6 qts vs 8 qts. However, I don't go 7,500 miles - 0% oil life. I change at 6,000 miles - 20% oil life, or 5,625 miles - 25% oil life). Stricter maintenance is required on both turbo engines & large displacement naturally aspirated w/ cylinder deactivation. Pick your poison.
@@ews360 agreed the epa is pushing towards the EV market. Then its going to be solar then water, if water doesn't arrive before solar.
@@DaBuGzLiFe No EV for me until there is a charging network. This past Sunday, 60 minutes aired an episode about China's EV market. 600 mile range, & in under 3 minutes depleted battery is swapped out for fully charged battery. Currently the U.S. has the following energy sources: 41% natural gas, 24% renewables (wind, solar, hydro), 19% nuclear, & 17% coal. Ironically, Texas leads the U.S. in wind power, accounting for 28.6%. That's a good thing. Can't ignore consequences from burning oil, coal, natural gas.
@@ews360 that is probably the wisest choice until the vehicles and manufacturers prove themselves along with a network of power similar to gas stations
Alright sounds good.
What about Traverse losing some weight instead of gaining? (Almost impossible for Acadia to lose weight if it is going to grow in size)
Rumoured *mini torque monster* will shine if there's less weight to carry around.
Thanks for the information. Any word on if it will require premium? Will it run on 87?
Turbo torque ftw?!
The information is now out, since the 2024 Traverse will have the 2.5L Turbo with 328hp and 326 lb.-ft.
Max Torque.
Great info. I would so much appreciate an update to the content on the 4 cyl 2.0t LSY engine.
This engine has additional vehicle applications which started with Cadillac xt4, ct4 and now Chevy, Buick and GMC.
When in the Cadillac, octane “recommendation” is 91 but GM only recommends 87 when in the Buick Envision, Chevy Blazer with GMC Acadia with the same engine with maybe just a few HP difference. I am considering the CT4 with LSY but adding premium is a deal breaker but will consider doing premium fuel in the summer.
Would love clarity on this topic of interpreting Octane recommendations vs requirements and reasonable best practices. Thanks Much
If you be just little bid smarter than you are , you realize gm don't developed anything, they just adopt some engines from Europe, nothing more nothing less, this engines are in Europe in decades
To bad every turbo chevy uses only last 50,000 to 60,000 mi and cost $4,500 to replace. Those number are only if your a mechanic and change your oil with better then recomended oil at half the seguested interval. How do i know. Im a machanic and My chevy is on its 3rd turbo at 118,000mi i use mobil 1 extended oil @ every 3,000mi. Ive towed zero times. And can count on 1 hand the times ive pressed the accelerator past 70% throttle.
So basically they took a 2.5L from a Chevy Equinox and slapped a turbo on it and realized it did the same as a 3.6 v6 and 1 mpg better to meet minimum emissions standards. Sounds like lazy engineers.
Wrong. They took the block and basic design from the newly built and designed 2.7L like he said in the video. They shortened the stroke to result in smaller displacement. This is a common practice among auto makers
@@nathanmiller8509exactly just like the 2.0/2.3 Ford.
@@nathanmiller8509I think this 2.5/2.7 motor that GM has is a great motor, and will really last a long time.
Correction gm working on their next big recall
Nailed it!!
How hard is the troll life these days? - AL
@Motrolix not trolling just facts
@@Motrolix they can't help it there Cult has been active since they drank the Japanese Kool-aid and dis anything American. Even though we invented the mass production car.
@@Madeupfakerobot Then what's the basis for your comment? The turbo 2.7L L3B upon which this new engine will be based has not had issues. - AL
GM 2.5-liter engine is weak, that's why it needs a turbo. it's still a four cylinder.
Must be why they put them on diesels
200 horse power is not weak 4cyd 2.5. I have it in my truck i dont want a turbo...i dont tow..it get good gas mileage...27 mpg on the interstate...its a 2019.
Better work on reliability, stop trying to profit and cut corners everywhere and work a bit on your dwindling reputation!
So basically a quad four, those worked out real well. No thanks
Well, it's a smaller 2.7L L3B... which has been working out very well for GM. - AL