Anybody got one? What do you think? Sure seems small to put in a full size truck. Do they have any towing capacity?

High tech motor but I'd get the 5.3 if it were my $.

Uh....no.

I know 3 people who have this setup. 1 towed his car hauler from Michigan to Florida and said it did good.

Personally, I'm not for squeezing a little engine so hard. Heck, I'm not even a fan of the new trend of 6 cylinder turbo engines in ½ tons.

Had a rental for a few weeks while our 6.2l gmc at4(with 6400 miles on it)oil pump [bleep] the bed....that's a long story.

Anyhow took it on a trip to Kansas and back, 1300 miles. I kinda enjoyed it. Ok power and decent mileage. Not sure how it would do towing anything.

A 2.7 is enough engine for a Toyota Taco.

New, High Tech and Chevy doesn't sound promising

Can be said for any of the Big 3 in the last 25sh years.

No thanks. Between 3-5.3’s I have over a million miles so I’m happy so far.

Not my thing but a good amount of torque and hp.

Far more than non turbo V-8 of just a few years ago.

Or a lawnmower.

At what rpm does it develop acceptable torque?

“No replacement for displacement!”

Tell that to the government.

I used to think the same thing but the fact is that these newer smaller engines produce so much free horsepower compared to older larger engines it isn't even a contest.

I have a 23 Silverado, with a 6.2 L. It’s the third one of that motor. Great power and decent mileage. No way I’d get a 2.7L.

So I just got one with the 3.0 Duramax diesel. I was a little leery on it but my buddy who sells them swears by the diesel and I read nothing but good reviews. So far I love it. Being a diesel it is very torquey and feels like it has better acceleration than the 5.3. I don’t think it actually does officially, but it is close and it is plenty. I’ve had a 6.2 for more than ten years and that is a great bullet proof engine. But the diesel sold me when I went on a little 150 mile trip and averaged a no schit 29.8 mpg. Thats dramatically better than the 6.2 ever got. The 6.2 would do alright on a trip but around town you wouldn’t do any better than 14 or 15 mpg at best.

So so far, I would recommend that little diesel. It seems to be nice engine and it is quiet for a diesel.

pretty sure the 2.7 turbo has more torque than the 5.3

I don't have a Chevy but will just give my thoughts. I have 2 Ram trucks. Both 4x4, one with the 3.6 Pentastar, the other with the Hemi. ( I know the Pentastar isn't a turbo)

The Pentastar is a great daily driver. It is responsive and drives "easier" than the Hemi. Mileage is about 3 to 4 mpg better in town. It will pull, but has to rev higher and work harder. Downshifts a lot on hills at highway speeds

For highway driving and or pulling anything substantial, Hemi all day. Around town, daily driving, light towing the little motor does fine.

Everything I have heard about the 2.7 Turbo has been positive, including lots of guys pulling trailers, boats, and hauling loads . Turbos are an excellent way to increase low end torque substantially. If I remember correctly, I think the 2.7 has more torque below 2500 rpm than the 5.3 and almost the same horsepower rating. Mileage is supposed to be a bit better than the other engines except the 3.0 Baby Duramax...

Everything is going turbo. The new Chrysler Hurrican I-6 puts down some stout numbers. Just a plain 3.5L EcoBoost Ford now makes 400hp/500tq, and the torque rolls in from low RPM. That little 2.7L Chevy is impressive at 430tq.

Get a Toyota Hi Lux

Lol

A 2.7 in a half ton that doesn't pull much isn't a whole lot different than an old 5.9 Cummins that could/can/will pull a schittload more than anybody will pull with a half ton.

Yes it's a diesel bit the engineering and tech that goes into these new engines makes a lot of power easy.

Look at a 5.3, in 1968 if you wanted 300 hp in a 327 you had to work a bit. Now a 300hp engine is an everyday thing and gets far better fuel mileage.

Granted they don't have a nice choppy idle but if you vetthat in today's V-8 they are putting out a good bit more than an old choppy small block.

Right, I strongly agree.

A friend has a Colorado with that engine, says he wished he'd gotten a bigger engine.

If 310 hp and over 400 lb of torque isn't enough for a Colorado a guy wouldn't be happy with anything.

I have a new Chevy work truck on order. I ordered the truck with the 5.3 but was told it may not happen. There is a shortage of 5.3 blocks and parts. I ordered a tow package on the truck. If I have to settle for the 2.7 I see no need for a tow package.

kwg

Guess it depends on what one wants to tow with a 1/2 ton truck?

This 2001, 2.7L non-turbo tows a trailer with well over 500lbs in it, not counting trailer weight while the bed is loaded with at least another 500lbs (reloading stuff, tools, a goodly number of firearms, camping gear, and a 100 lb boat up top probably made it closer to 700lb). And it tows that stuff up White Bird Hill in ID and the long, steep grades on 395 from Pendleton OR to central Cali. Not to mention getting out of the Snake River Canyon in E WA on a 9% grade.

But, if one is going to do that, one best have a standard 5 speed and be ready to downshift.

Geno carries a boat with him now at all times........hahahahaha!


Sorry Geno.

Nobody worried about towing reasonable loads with a 302/305 in a half ton in the 80s. Talk about real drag ass power.

Never fails, as soon as someone starts talking about 1/2’s the Tacoma pics come out lol.

4 banger in a half ton? Lol. I’d take my chances on the used market.

For two summers me and my dad towed a 30 horse 4wd tractor and brush hog on a 16’ steel trailer all over the state when he had a contract to mow well locations for Kerr McGee. What kind of awesome tow rig did we use? A 1993 F150 extended cab 4wd with the mighty 302 and an automatic. No trailer brakes either. I think that EFI 302 made 185hp.

We took the same truck to CO every summer to escape the heat in the mountains and trout fish. Made the journey with an IdleTime slide in camper mounted in the bed. Following my uncle in his 81 F150 with the same camper and pulling a trailer with 3 wheelers and the canoe on it, his truck was a carbed 302/C6 auto. Before dad bought the new 93 we made the same trip in his 88 regular cab shortbed with the EFI 300/6 and 5sp.

Everyone these days acts like they haul freight for a living or run a hotshot service.

Grandpa used to haul logs in a '65 C-60, 292 inline 6 was the power plant. Yeah it was geared differently for sure but it would get from wherever to the sawmill just fine.

Pre EFI was okay for its time but they way these things make power now is far ahead of old designs.

I don't recall guys belly aching when a 6.0 gas Chevrolet came out and replaced the sick 454. Ford has the 6.2 and it will pull better than any stock 460.

Now Ford has the 7.3 which is still quite a few cubic inches shy of the old 460.

that little 4 is gonna' be workin' it's balls off to pull that half ton and it's loads... even if it works ok when new, it aint' gonna' be a long liver IMO...

They're building obsolescence into the newer gas motors. They don't want them sticking around like a 50s car in Cuba.

The new ford v8 and ram straight 6 both have plasma deposited cylinder liners in the aluminum blocks. No steel sleeves just basically a spray on liner. No rebuilding those engines. Probably being pushed to do it through the esg movement.

Even chevys recent 5.3s and 6.2s have had a lot of problems. They were both great motors for years until the ladies at GM decided to change them a bit.

The 2023 3.0 Duramax has steel liners in its cylinders and a belt that isn’t set for service until 200k miles. I’ve also run two 6.2s one for over ten years and one for the last five with absolutely no issues.

A lot of people here have no idea but they feel the need to post anyway. I traded a 2011 Silverado 5.3 in on a 2020 Silverado 2.7. The 2.7 had more guts. It was a faster truck and towed as well or better. Problem was my 2.7 always used a quart of oil every 3,000 miles so I recently traded it in on the 2.7 F-150 which is my most powerful truck yet

Would not touch that combo.
And the Fords have some issues .

4.9 Litre motor which was also used in heavy industrial equipment.

Dude!

I never thought of that.

Probably would have kept that little Matrix afloat and I could have just gone with the flow down to my Dr appointment!

A quart every 3k isn't the worst thing. Old timers said burning a little oil just meant you were getting good lubrication.

My '06 1500 with a 5.3 would burn that 1 quart about every 1500 miles but would burn no more.

Seemed 5 quarts was just right and that 6th was too much. My current '08 Sierra burns none in 6k.

Okay, but did the 2.7 ever tow 12,000 lbs?

Throw some airbags under that 2.7, set a 9 foot over head camper on top of it, and tell us how it handles the air resistance at 80 mph on the freeway. Then hook an 8000 lb boat on behind, and tell us how she pulls the hills.

Anybody pulling 12k with a half ton is an idiot.

+1

The 2.7 requires High Octane fuel. The 5.3 recommended to use regular. So any potential MPG improvement is burned up by the more expensive fuel.

The point was made that the 2.7 would pull with or better than the V8. I contend that it will not.

I will be VERY surprised to see any of them hit 300,000 miles if they routinely have anything hitched to the rear bumper.

There is a Dodge 5.7 in the garage with over 250K that runs as well today as the day it left the factory. The engine has never been touched. I did boost the pressures on the tranny.

The 2.7 is a great engine in a Toyota, Nissan, or Mitsubishi mini truck.

My cousin has sold gm for years and is a huge fan. He doesn't like the 2.7 and says real world it's no more efficient than the 5.3. He said gm is really pushing the 2.7 for some reason. He's actually most positive about the small diesel. Problem with the diesel is getting one.

I really think it's this esg movement stopping us from getting what we actually want. My F150 hybrid has a ton of power but only gets about 19 mpg tops when it was rated at 24mpg. It's way more powerful than the gm 5.3s or ram 5.7 hemis I've had in the past. It's very easy to speed in. It has a twin turbo 3.5 v6 but also has an electric motor that assists. It's 430 horse and 579 pounds torque in a half ton. It's rated to tow 11,000 but I'd never attempt that with a half ton. About the most I'd tow with it is 8,000 max.

Bb

Daughter has had a 2.7 turbo Ford F150 full size pick up for last few years Has a heck of a lot more power than my old standard V-6 3.7 did. I mean a LOT more.

Would pick it to haul my camper any day over my old 3.7.

I now inherited my Dad's Eco boost 3.5 and boy howdy.....a big change from my last two pickups.

I love power and don't want to change but if looking new a 2.7 would suit me fine and YES I am surprised.

LOL.....It would flat blow your mind to know what and where we towed with an '84 K5 Blazer.

I did a ride and drive comparison at a GM event when the new 2.7L came out. It was redesigned for 2022. Compared 2.7L to 5.3L towing enclosed trailers with 6700 LBS. Both trucks very similar. 2.7L has a bit more grunt low end. Towing acceleration is near identicle. Only major difference I noticed is the lower front end weight of the 2.7L which made the truck feel less planted in corners.

GM states this is one of two engines that have never failed during their 1 million mile durability test where engines are ran low on oil, low on coolant, extreme heat, cold etc. something to be said.

I think it is a solid engine but I understand the preference for a V8. GM is pushing this motor because it enables them to build more Tahoe Suburban and HD trucks under the CAFE standards.

So this^^^ Plus replacing the turbos[we know they'll fail before the engine] really adds up to GREAT savings all the way around for the consumer.

Doubt it. Been there and seen it and done it.

Doesn't mean it is/was smart.

Probably and old dog 305 or 350 that if factory wasn't squeaking 200hp.

Same thing step dad used to do with an 83 or so GMC 1500 4wd. Usually had an early '80s Bobcat hooked to it.

Pulling isn't so much of the problem as getting stopped quick, fast and in a hurry.

I see a bunch of guys around here, mostly firewood cutters, with 1/2T American vehicles (and even the odd Tacoma, or T-100), with hog wire panels or wood sides on the bed, hauling way over the 1/2 ton the vehicle was designed for. Same goes for seeing some of the scheidt folks tow with vehicles rated for a lot less than the load they're pulling.

When one sees them with the ass end sagging, springs on the bumpers underneath (assuming they're still there) , headlights pointing to the tree tops, trailers swaying as they go down the road, one gets the meaning of the old saying.....................


Just because one can do it.....................doesn't mean one should.


For true 1/2T duty modern 2.7L should do fine, especially given the HP and torque ratings of engines in the past. The old Chevy 235/250 inline sixes worked great, with the right gears, in trucks back in the day and they had less HP than my '01 Tacoma. Not to mention changing plugs every 15K miles, points, condensors, etc. And I never saw one last 250K + miles without having the head come off for a valve job.

I'm not sure about the new Chevy being a turbo, as that adds a whole 'nother can of worms to open. But if people don't use it as a 3/4 or 1 ton truck, it will probably serve well. Reliability is an unknown for a few years

Actually I had transplanted a '71 9.5/1 compression 350, with a Blue Racer cam rated from 500 to 3200 RPM in ahead of the four speed manual. But it had 2.72 gear sets, so it spent a lot of time in low range with the hubs unlocked. Shift points were about 2200 RPM and it was hell on U-joints.


And yes, you made sure to keep lots of room between you and anything you needed to stop for.

Geno, not even the factory claims a 1/2 ton is limited to 1000 lbs.

Then we are no longer discussing a 1/2 ton truck by definition, eh?

I suppose you could take that up with the manufacturers.

Heck, my 82 Toyota Long bed had 3/4T stenciled on the tail gate. I am not sure that designation was appropriate either. I think it had one more leaf in the rear spring pack than normal.

I would almost bet it was still less than 250 hp, if more good on you.

I had a "built" 350 in a 74 Blazer. Header, Edelbrock intake, tuned Quadrajet and a factory replacement cam for a 300hp 327 which I believe was an L74/75 designation. 33x12.5 Super Swampers and 3.73 gears. A real dog compared to today's engines.

Step dad had a 79 Blazer with those taller 2.73, ran it in the low side alot just running around town. Did surprisingly well on gas when in the high side out on the highway.

That, and the writing on the back, made it so!

Got a 2001 Acura RDX for my wife to drive that has a twin turbo 2 liter four cylinder that makes 272 HP and 280 ft lbs of torque.

Yes, you are probably correct. Probably about 250 hp. But it did it at 2000 RPM, where I needed it. It pulled at 500 RPM like a tractor.

I never dynoed it, but it felt like 70% more HP than the 305 it replaced, double the torque, at least, and 15% better fuel economy. 12 mpg vs 14 on the freeway.

I no longer needed the secondaries on the quadrajet 650 and third gear to get over every hill on the interstate with just Me, Momma, and two kids in the rig.

The damned thing would do 60 in low range.

No it doesn't. Chevy recommends 87 octane and that's all I ran in mine

He's wrong about the efficiency. My 5.3 averaged 17 mpg but my 2.7 Chevy averaged 22 mpg

I think the half ton capacity for any recent production pick up is just a suggestion. My old long bed 2005 F-150 will haul about anything you can fit in the bed without squatting. I guess the biggest load I ever hauled in it was a carefully stacked load of green oak firewood. It never made the bed squat but the rear tires were looking a bit funny. I hauled it about 25 miles,....slow.

Hard to estimate. But I'd say it was at least a 1500 pound load. Maybe more.

Good info in this thread!

This makes sense to me. I wouldn't think a 2.7 turbo would cost less than a 5.3.

Probably doesn't but if it's cleaner the greenies will be happy.

I guess time will tell on the 2.7 turbo but, I know several guys with 5.3 LS and 6.0 LS motors with over 300,000 miles and still going strong.

All the small diesel guys seem happy for now, until they develop all the same big diesel problems (NOx sensors, DEF system failures, EGR issues, DPF issues, etc). A smaller turbo gas makes more sense to me than a small diesel, especially with the price difference in fuel. It’ll be interesting to see how the small turbo gassers do over time.

guy in my hunt club has one. he tows a 14ft aluminum trailer with 2 600lb atvs on it accross a mountain during hunting season 3-4 days a week. he says it does great. personally i think he will blow it up soon.

I drove one yesterday to bring back to the dealership. It runs smooth at a 70 mph cruise but I have some doubts about pulling anything larger than a trailer hauling a SXS or a couple of ATV's. If you have a 12' fishing boat you might be Ok but not your 18 foot cruiser.

kwg

Funny. An engine half the size and more powerful and still people criticizing.

In one sentence it isn't enough truck and the next reply- we pulled with less. TFF

The 2.7 in the Cadillac is a high performance engine. The same block but somehow with added HP. It does require premium fuel. The GM/Chevrolet engine is not set up the same. It takes the lower 87 octane fuel.

kwg

Half the size and more powerful ?

I'm not ready to accept that yet.

kwg

I'm at a little over 412,000 miles on the 6.0. I'm wishing I'd took a little better care of it. I think a little over a thousand in parts, mostly front end and brakes would get me to 500k.

I don't have that much faith in the 2.7.

The advanced design/material elements are worth attention, and the 2.7 very well may be a superior design. But, it has to work at higher rpm and with added strain to produce relative torque. So a critical factor - durability - is yet to be determined.

Engine stuff is one thing, but hardly the total essence of a truck. The strength/ability of the remainder of the vehicle mated with that engine is another matter.

I would venture that for most guys experienced with using a truck for true truck work, that vehicle is not much of a truck.

Small gas engine uses premium. There is no cost difference between that and diesel around here. Those problems you’re talking about won’t show up for 200k or more. My truck will be down the road by then. 6.2 uses premium too.

And guys experienced with using a truck for true truck work aren't using a half ton.

Yes, a half ton will work for quite a few applications but if really working a truck and pulling heavier loads they will be using a 3/4 ton at minimum.

I like hearing that. I have an '01 with less than 150K. I had it in the shop for an EGR and a couple incidentals last week, and noticed it was two years since the last oil change, but was still 1500 miles shy of the number written on the sticker. It got a new filter and filled with Mobil 1. This truck should last me as long as I need a truck.

Just broken in.


Sold my '06 in October. 1500 with the 5.3, I think he has just over 250k on it right now. Somewhere between 240 and where it is now it finally puked the factory water pump and then the alternator about 3k miles later.

He loves it and I still look at it every day wondering why I didn't keep money and not buy the GMC and just kept driving the '06.

Chevy's 2.7 does not need premium. It said right in my owners manual to use 87 octane or higher. I ran it 70,000 miles on regular with no issues

This.

Would love to say my 5.3 hits17...on highway maybe, but l got lead foot. Around home and work best is 13.4...all hills. Limit it to 5th gear helps some. Not much. 192k and still purring tho so theres that. Cant see buying any truck in any config with these prices tho....got a gm rebate in the mail for $1500 🤣🤣🤣 give me 5 more and make em stackable or🖕

I don't blame anybody for not paying these prices. My 2020 Silverado I bought new for $30K. I just traded it in on a $50K F-150. And that was the cheapest F-150 on the lot. Most of them were in the $70K range. Prices have gone insane since Covid

My '11 was 26.7k out the door(38k msrp), same options on a '23 Trailboss is 67k msrp when I build it on the site. I found one on a lot last month at Criswells in Thurmont, 71k....screw em!

Updated turbo version?

2.7 has iron liners.

According to one article it was meant to replace the 4.3 V-6. Seems to me if it's durable and lasts 300k it will be just fine for the trucks it is meant to be used in.

I just went to the GMC "build a truck" website.

$65,000 MSRP for a truck equivalent to the 6.0m in the driveway. I bet the dealer could figure out a way to jack that up at least another $5K. Add 6% Id sales tax onto the total, then license/registration.


Yep, I would much rather spend $1000 per year at the mechanic than $1500/month on a car loan.

At least until the Obama/Biden crowd force us to put an electric motor under the hood.

Wouldn't that be a kick. An 8600 lb GVW truck with a 4000 lb battery sitting in the bed. And towing a 10,000 watt gen-set to keep the battery charged. LOL

Isn't the 4.3 basically a 350/SB less 2 cylinders?

What they say. Still an antiquated design by today's standards.

As good as the "small blocks" were these LS V-8s are far better designs.

He is a car salesman and known to lie frequently. I'll have to compare them on fuelly.com.

Bb

I don't know about that one. The higher output version was new for 2022

Yes the 4.3 was basically a 350 minus two cylinders...
GM announced a new V8 small block engine is in the works, I have no idea of its displacement at this time. Probably won't see it for a few more years.
The battery in a Silverado EV weighs 1700lbs.

My work truck is a '19 Silverado with the 4.3. Not a bad motor but they want to put a snow plow on it and I told them that isn't the right engine for plowing snow plus they should have a 3/4 ton

We drove a 99 S series Blazer for about ten years.

The 4.3 Vor-Tech is a hell of a great engine. The car had well over 200,000 on it when we let it go ten years ago. I still see it on the road as one of my SIL's employees owns it. The engine and tranny have never been touched, though I did put a tranny cooler on it for towing the boat.

The rest of the S series vehicle was a total POS. Something was always wrong, New front axles twice, new front driveline twice, rebuild the transfer case or R&R three times, new fuel pump four times, rebuild the rear differential once (hint: it only looks like a GM 10 bolt from the outside) with a replacement of one rear axle. (no inner race on the axle bearing), new shocks at 100K, etc, etc.

But the engine and tranny were bullet proof.

Ls motors are bullet proof. Great design. Extremely reliable. One of the best engines ever made

The last two GM trucks I’ve had basically wore out the truck before I did the engine. Stupid schit in the interior started breaking like knobs and handles, dashes cracked, and so on and so forth. Mechanically they were in good shape, but all the other stuff started breaking and they started looking like schit. I’m hard on a truck that way.

I had an '88 ½ton Silverado with a 4.3L engine it. I made roughly 15~20 trips with it towing a 23' glass boat (aprox 3000lbs) 400 miles round trip with it every summer, it was also my daily drive vehicle (100 miles round trip) to work. IIRC it had 167k miles on it when I got rid of it. My only gripe was that it wouldn't accelerate going up hill while towing, you better get your speed up going downhill anticipating the next rise. The only trouble I had with it, it had a factory engine oil cooler installed. The rubber gasket between the adapter and the block plasticized causing it to crack, I lost three quarts of oil in 50 miles.

I have over 60,000 miles on two 3.0 Duramax trucks, great engine. Fuel economy between 24-28 mpg on the highway, depending on wind/speed

I talked to the local dealer today to see if my diesel suburban would ever show up. They said they were on manufacture restriction not supplier restriction. They said the manufacturer is choosing not to make many diesel suburban or 6.2 liter models.

They said gm is really pushing the 2.7 in the pickups too. They felt like it is now political maybe part of the esg movement. It seems like GM has gone woke and is trying to limit things until their electric vehicles take over. All part of the leftist Marxist de-industrialization plan I guess.

They did say the 2.7 has been very reliable but that in the real world it only gets about 1 mpg over the 5.3. They did say that tge 2.7 is quite a bit cheaper and that the best rebates are only on 2.7s. The left has decided what we need in our trucks. Even if it's barely more efficient they get to feel better on principle. What do you expect from a part where less is always more.

Bb

No, it does not require high octane. The manual clearly states 87 octane.

For sure.

Nobody's talking about schitting the lower end of a tiny engine that pulls heavy loads. Small cranks/small bearings-big torque/big loads = BANG!

Diesel Suburban sitting on the lot here in the Twin Cities. Come and get it!

https://www.mauerchev.com/inventory...-suv-1gnskekt8pr398059/#modal__main-form

I don't own one I have a 5.3 but when I was shopping last year the literature I read said high octane was required for the 2.7 recommended for the 6.2 and regular was recommended for the 5.3. I have had trucks with the small engine that you had to hold to the floor pulling a trailer in the hills. And the up front price savings up front isn't worth it to me. I wouldn't buy a 2.7 for a 1/2 ton truck. I would buy one with the 5.3 or 6.2. When you get ready to sell the truck with the 2.7 nobody that uses a truck like a truck will want it. Not where I live anyway.

Why can't the journals be just as large on a 4 cylinder versus a V8

He just likes telling the internet about it. LOL

I'll just say this: I've owned/put plenty of miles on most of the HD trucks with diesel engines since the '86 Ford 6.9. That includes the 7.3 IDI, 7.3 turbo, 7.3 Powerstroke, 6.0 Powerstroke, 1990 Dodge Cummins, 2003 Dodge Cummins, '99 Dodge Cummins, 2013 Ram Cummins, and put 100K on a 2001 Chevy Duramax. I've also owned misc. gasser trucks in there, including Chevy trucks/burbs with the 5.3 and 6.0, and an F-150 with the 3.5 Ecoboost.

I currently have a '22 Silverado 1500 CC 4X4 with the 2.7. Put 15K miles on it so far. Lifetime mileage is 19.8 MPG. It drives/behaves very much like a small diesel engine. It is lightyears away from the 4-bangers you guys are talking about. It tows my 25' travel trailer just like a small diesel would; hardly ever goes over 3K RPM and has excellent torque from 1500 RPM and up. Do some research on the engine...or just keep spouting opinions based on absolutely nothing.

Time will Tell... Tic Toc, Tic Toc, Tic Toc...

I am sorry you bought it too.

I have an 06 CTD. Not interested on one of the newer models with DEF and the plethora of emissions BS they have on them. Nobody makes what I want for a run around truck so I will just make my own. I’ve a 81 Short bed single cab 4x4 that I’m going to drop a modern powertrain into. 6.0 LS with a 6 speed automatic. Screw the new stuff. Even with $1500 in body panels, paint, interior refresh, etc. I’ll still be way less than these new rigs and will weigh about 2000# less too. It should last me til I no longer drive.

Not arguing but bet an 81 SBSC will be heavier than a newer SBSC. Wont be much but heavier front suspension, differential and heavier sheetmetal for sure.

A 6.0 should make an awesome power plant. Going to do any performance upgrades??

No one is saying bigger doesn't have benefits and if really using the truck as a work vehicle one may make sense. I would say far less than half of truck owners don't use their vehicles as daily\regular tow-haulers. For that huge group of people a smaller more powerful engine is pretty awesome. The bass boat owner type guys would find one great. I seldom haul any trailer or my camper but I know I could with a 2.7l.

I could certainly use it to get around the lease and haul gear or feed or wood or anything I might need for home projects. It isn't like they stopped making larger alternatives.

One thing I've noticed for a while is that the guys with the big trucks drive a LOT less than I do in my little econo trucklet. At 30 plus mpg, the cost of fuel is not much of a consideration when the urge for a road trip hits. I hear a lot of guys talking about not going somewhere because of the cost of fuel.

If I need a bigger truck, they rent them for $70 a day, or if it really needs a truck, I'll send one of the Kenworths...

Dutch - fair point. I don't know why anyone would disparage a smaller more powerful and efficient engine in any vehicle especially in a daily use vehicle.
I inherited Dads 3.5 eco boost and just wow.... It is more than I need which of course, I love!!!! I also have an older Infiniti G37 and it may barely get better mileage than the truck. It is just easier to park in town and allows me to keep miles off both.

Truth is that the F150 is so comfortable the wife and I like taking it on long trips even (sometimes) over her Acura RDX. Saving 7-8 mpg over the 3.5l ( by having a 2.7 instead) would be welcome and we wouldn't miss the power as the 2.7 eco boost still blows away my old 2013 standard 3.7.