Chevy Silverado 2.7L 4 cylinder

Hey shg!

I Think it's true!:D

2.7.jpg
 
Just like a lot of things in life. Just because you can does not mean you should. It’s amazes me what people tow trailers with today. Hell, I see a lot of trailers that are over weight just based on the tires.
 
towing 9.000 pound trailer on a flat highway might be one thing, but on mountain grades I would worry that you would overwork that small of a engine and end up getting towed by a tow truck.:confused: RELH
 
What does it get empty on the highway ? I've seen what hills do to trucks pulling my trailers and ATVs. I have a hard time believing this.
 
In a car and driver review, the 5.3 V-8 actually got better highway mileage than the 2.7 engine. They suspected it was because the turbo was spooling just to maintain enough power for highway speeds.
That doesn’t surprise me….at all
 
No, sold the '65. now I'm finishing a Tiger Gold '66 with the original 398 tri power 4spd. I always like the 66-67 better.
 
No, sold the '65. now I'm finishing a Tiger Gold '66 with the original 398 tri power 4spd. I always like the 66-67 better.
1966 was the last year of the 389, so you got the best one, IMO. Tri-power, so much the better. Good luck with it.
 
Correct 389. Actually, it's bored .060 over so it will take 400 pistons. we sonic checked it to be sure it would work , 389 pistons are pretty much only custom made anymore.

As far as the pickup goes why not just put a snowmobile engine in it pretty much the same thing. lots of RPM good HP and no torque. I'd rather just have more cubes and less BS to deal with.

Technology can work wonders but so far it hasn't proven it can defy physics.
 
Correct 389. Actually, it's bored .060 over so it will take 400 pistons. we sonic checked it to be sure it would work , 389 pistons are pretty much only custom made anymore.

As far as the pickup goes why not just put a snowmobile engine in it pretty much the same thing. lots of RPM good HP and no torque. I'd rather just have more cubes and less BS to deal with.

Technology can work wonders but so far it hasn't proven it can defy physics.
so....420 lb ft at 3000 rpm is what you consider no torque from a 2.7 liter?

Here's your GTO motor....

1965 - 1966 with 3 x 2 Barrel Carbs (Tri-Power Option)​

Max Brake Horsepower: 360 @ 5200 rpm
Max Torque: 424 @ 3600 rpm
Stroke: 3.75
Bore: 4.0625
Compression: 10.75
Firing Order: 18436572
 
There was a '65 GTO for sale here that had a Pontiac 421 tri-power. He wanted $6000 for it, and I didn't buy it. wtf was wrong with me?
 
It's a 56 year old car it was a fireball in it's day . not so much now days my new power joke has 1050 lbs of torque. that's
torque.

Of course a little twin turbo or blown Briggs and Stratton will pull a trailer. I saw a 2 horse Miley behind a Pinto one time so why not.

It's all about what you're towing, how often you tow it and what your time a frustration limits are. we're all spoiled with todays vehicles , and I like it that way.

If it was a real GTO not a clone and if it wasn't a rust bucket yeah you probably should have.
 
Electric makes sense in some cases. if you don't tow or haul much and you don't go very far I can see it. that describes at least half the people that drive a pickup.

The way most people around here use pickups you'd need a couple Onan's running wide open all the time in back to get you between charging stations. I don't see that ever changing .
 
Well!

As Long as You're Only Hauling a Taco or a Burrito You Should be able to make a Quiet Quick Trip to & From the Taco Shack!



Mine is going to be for the trip to Lino's Mexican Cuisine on Saturday nights......3/4 miles away.....
 
Got a Friend That Ordered a New DURA-MAX Almost a Year Ago & Still hasn't Got it!

Maybe It'll Be a 2023 Rather than a 2022 When He Gets It!:D
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos
Back
Top Bottom