What should the 2007 Silverado have?

It needs...

The Vortec 4200 I-6:

4.2 DOHC I-6 has 275 hp at 6,000 rpm and 275 lb-ft of torque at 3,600 rpm.

http://www.gm.com/automotive/gmpowertrain/engines/vortec/images/ll8.jpg

http://www.canadiandriver.com/articles/jk/images/vortec_4200_i6.jpg

http://fourwheeler.com/roadtests/p66328_image_large.jpg

The Vortec 4200 I-6 has been one of Ward's ten best engines since 2002.

see link

4.2 liter I-6 (http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2004/12/15/304690.html)

from chevyhiperformance.com

"To increase casting accuracy and minimize engine weight, the aluminum block and cylinder head of the Vortec 4200 I6 are made using a “lost foam” process. This casting technology provides both improved control of the manufacturing process and allows direct-mounted accessories that reduce vibration and weight. With the exception of the power-steering pump bracket, all engine accessories bolt directly to the engine."

http://chevyhiperformance.com/techarticles/p159132_image_large.jpg

"One of the most interesting aspects of the Vortec 4200 I6 is what’s called variable-valve exhaust timing. This feature adjusts the exhaust camshaft timing within a range of 25 degrees as engine operating conditions change. To do that, an onboard computer first collects several points of data including throttle position, engine load, and vehicle speed. From there, a control valve adds or removes oil from a cavity and piston chamber (see cutaway photo) at the front of the camshaft. Thus, advancing or retarding the exhaust camshaft not only enhances the torque curve, but also improves idle quality and reduces emissions. With the ability to change timing, a more aggressive camshaft profile can also be used."

http://chevyhiperformance.com/techarticles/p159131_image_large.jpg

I read in the November, 2004 issue of Car & Driver that the L92 is a future engine for GM's big 2007 trucks and SUVs. It will have "a bit less power" than the 6.2 liter L92 that was shown in a 2004 Chevrolet Colorado. That Chevy had 420 hp and 420 lb-ft of torque.

I think it needs a nicer interior, a fully-boxed frame, and a 6 speed automatic transmission (the 2006 Cadillac STS-V has a new 6 speed automatic).

What do you think?

The inline 6s torque curves would suck in a truck. I think they need to do something like the new 7 litre vette engines.

How does its torque curve compare with the 4.3 liter V-6?

GM's big 2007 trucks and SUVs will have a powerful new L92 V-8.

I think they definitely need to start putting the I-6 in the Colorado. That was one of a couple of things that kept me out of one of those

As far as a nicer interior goes, I disagree. I think the interior is nice enough for what the Chevy is. If you want a nicer interior get a Denali or a Caddy.

I agree about the interior. I like them the way they are.. not too futuristic or cartoonish... just right, and you can get everything you need in it anyway.

Jaquar, the torque curves in the V6s aren't shit either buddy.. I own one. I like the idea of larger V8s in trucks. Really, fuel mileage in my 6 is worse than a lot of people with ext. cab V8s. If you need fuel mileage get a car. I'd pretty much say when it comes to the low rpm, high torque numbers that a truck should have, there's really no replacement for displacment.

Greetings Jaguar,

Me - I'd think the 2007 should have the LQ9 (6 liter high output engine) with the Z60 suspension and add 5 speed automatic transmission beefed up so Chevy could drop about 25% of the Torque management. Utilize a 3.73 axle ratio.

This combination should give a full size truck with about 24mpg hwy/19 city for a RWD model and about 21 or 22 mpg hwy/17 city for a 4 x 4. It would also provide both a smooth transitional ride and still offer good handling and performance.

then have a Diesel version of the above - and a optional 6 cylinder version of above (like your 4.2) - and drop the 4.8 and 5.3 versions entirely. Nothing wrong with the 4.8 and 5.3 - but the 1500 series has just too many models/engines. No wonder GM struggles with costs. I don't know what the 4.8 opr 5.3 offer that the 6.0 LQ9 doesn't already have?

Then the 2500 series could have the same LQ4 6 liter and a Diesel choice - again - 5 speed automatic transmission but a slightly more modified Torque Management version for the 2500 and above.

White Lightening

Greetings Jaguar,

Me - I'd think the 2007 should have the LQ9 (6 liter high output engine) with the Z60 suspension and add 5 speed automatic transmission beefed up so Chevy could drop about 25% of the Torque management. Utilize a 3.73 axle ratio.

This combination should give a full size truck with about 24mpg hwy/19 city for a RWD model and about 21 or 22 mpg hwy/17 city for a 4 x 4. It would also provide both a smooth transitional ride and still offer good handling and performance.

then have a Diesel version of the above - and a optional 6 cylinder version of above (like your 4.2) - and drop the 4.8 and 5.3 versions entirely. Nothing wrong with the 4.8 and 5.3 - but the 1500 series has just too many models/engines. No wonder GM struggles with costs. I don't know what the 4.8 opr 5.3 offer that the 6.0 LQ9 doesn't already have?

Then the 2500 series could have the same LQ4 6 liter and a Diesel choice - again - 5 speed automatic transmission but a slightly more modified Torque Management version for the 2500 and above.

White Lightening


I disagree about dropping the smaller v8's - GM has always offered a decent engine selection in their trucks. The do need to offer a diesel in the 1500, though.

I would have to say that the 4.8L is a waste to even make and the 4.3L just doesnt have it, and I wouldnt like having a full size truck with a V6. That 4.2L engine would be a great fit for a colorado. Smaller engines in get terrible gas mileage in a fullsize truck, along with not lasting nearly as long. I like the LQ9 but as of now that's really the only solid engine GM offers(no offense but the 5.3 just doesnt have the power) and as usaull i say bring back the 350 to replace a 4.8 or 5.3 because the pontentail hp and tuning is so much higher.

Jaguar- what is the L92?

the ls2 would be nice, a radix and good tune and you could have a nice reliable 600 hp

I get 17-18 Hwy in my 4.8L with 315's. Not too bad IMO.

One other thing for 2007 besides what I previously listed:

In the Extended cab - have the doors open further than 80 or 90 degrees. Titans open to 135 degrees - a real nice and easy-for-Chevy-to-do-feature.

P.S. Regards the selection of engines. I think that new 4.2 six at 275 hp would make a nice choice for "non-tow" type drivers. Though the 4.8 and 5.3 engines might be fine engines - lets face it - GM can't afford to confuse the marketplace any longer. They can't afford to have a nice selection of engines. They need a limited number of excellent choices - nothing to slow down the decision making (other than color of vehicle) LOL.

White Lightening

I'd put that I-6 in a Jeep..that would rock.

In case most did not notice, that is an inline 6 cylinder engine. Inline engines build more torque per HP than a V configured engine will. The direct bolt on options and variable timing have been acomplished in diesel engine for quite a few years.

In case most did not notice, that is an inline 6 cylinder engine. Inline engines build more torque per HP than a V configured engine will. The direct bolt on options and variable timing have been acomplished in diesel engine for quite a few years.

That is an engine in V configuration with the same amount of cylinders. An I-6 will produce more HP and torque than a V6. I-6 is close to the same level as some v8's

The new chevy truck should have the old 350 pre vortech in it with port fuel injection. The base engine should be a inline six as you all have stated, make a good six like the old Ford 300 minus the poor gas mileage. Above all else make the damn parts durible enough to last unlike the 99 up models. We pay a premium price we want a premium truck. Oh yea, did I say bring back the old bullit proof 350? YES I DID!!!!!!!!!

The best thing I like about my 01 Silverado is the interior, and thats the one thing a lot of people complain about,go figure?????

use the bed space like toyota did, add a power port like ford did, retractable rear window and this my be a bit of a reach but maybe a bed that tilts as an option. reinforce the top of the bed so it doesn't flex or bend when you tie shit down. and I also agree with the rear doors opening up more.

Blender, I just can't see the vee in the cylinder block or the valley between the heads? The "I"-6, indicates it is an inline six. Go back to the picture and look at the tip of the head all six ports inline.

The Vortec 4200 is a 4.2-liter, inline six-cylinder, all-aluminum, dual-overhead-cam, four-valves-per-cylinder design engine. Using a range of advanced engine technologies, like variable valve timing, electronic throttle control, and coil-on-plug ignition, the engine delivers 275 hp and 275 lb-ft of torque, providing customers the power of a V-8 with the efficiency of a six-cylinder.

Blender, I just can't see the vee in the cylinder block or the valley between the heads? The "I"-6, indicates it is an inline six. Go back to the picture and look at the tip of the head all six ports inline.

No, i was saying an inline engine would produce more HP and torque than a "v" shaped engine with the same amount of cylinders. I KNOW the I-6 is not a v6. Chevy used to make another inline 6 years ago. There was one in our '78 pickup when we got it, but we yanked it out in favor of a v8

The Vortec 4200 is a 4.2-liter, inline six-cylinder, all-aluminum, dual-overhead-cam, four-valves-per-cylinder design engine. Using a range of advanced engine technologies, like variable valve timing, electronic throttle control, and coil-on-plug ignition, the engine delivers 275 hp and 275 lb-ft of torque, providing customers the power of a V-8 with the efficiency of a six-cylinder.

Question is - put it in a 1500 series Extended cab and what will the city/highway mileage numbers be? If it can't be a considerable improvement over the 5.3 or 6.0 HO then what would be the advantage?

White Lightening

But in an S-10 (I'm not a fan of the Colorado's) it would be pretty impressive..

But in an S-10 (I'm not a fan of the Colorado's) it would be pretty impressive..

True - it would be like Honda, Nissan, and Toyota seem to be able to do - performance from a 6 cylinder. Looking at the Chevy website - the current Colorado larger engine - the 3500 I-5 produces 220 hp and in 2wd gets 23 hwy. Hard to believe my full size truck with 6 liter engine gets about 95% of that on the highway. Bigger engine - bigger truck. These smaller trucks should be able to do better. Maybe the 4200 would be a good choice for the Colorados.

White Lightening

Jaguar- what is the L92?

I read in the November, 2004 issue of Car & Driver that the L92 is a future engine for GM's big 2007 trucks and SUVs. It will have "a bit less power" than the 6.2 liter L92 that was shown in a 2004 Chevrolet Colorado. That Chevy had 420 hp and 420 lb-ft of torque.

The Chevy Astro and GMC Safari will be dropped after 2005. They have a 4.3 liter V-6.

The Chevy Astro and GMC Safari will be dropped after 2005. They have a 4.3 liter V-6.
NOOOO!!!!!!! Man those are the best vans ever. The TrailBlazer I 6 is an improvement only over the 4.3L v6 currently being offfered.

NOOOO!!!!!!! Man those are the best vans ever. The TrailBlazer I 6 is an improvement only over the 4.3L v6 currently being offfered.
I'm assuming you're exagerating. I thanked the lord the day my parents got rid of our old Astro. I hated that thing, especially when I had to drive it.

In all honesty, I'm not a fan of 6-cylinders in fullsize trucks. To me i don't see the point. You don't get any better gas mileage which so many people try and coin off as a plus of having one. My roomate has the v6 in his 01 single cab. I get the same if not better mileage than he does and that's with hot doggin the engine.

As for the 2007 models. I think what chevy needs to be concerned with is fixing all the nic-nac bullshit problems we all have. The biggest ones of course being the off-centered steering wheels(still havent figured that one out), the clunks(all of em), the rattles, damn i guess i could go on and on.

We should really compile a complaint list and email it to GM.

Nope, I was serious. As far as mini vans go, Astro takes the cake, hands down.

I would get 24 mpg at times in my old 91 K1500 (4X4) long bed with the 4.3L V6. Even when I sold it at 143,000 miles, it would get 20 mpg. Now my 4.8L V8 4x4 hardly gets 18 on perfect highway days. I used to tow 5000 lbs. with my V6. Yeah, it was slow, but it worked. Sort of gave you a better appreciation for hills. I'm for any engine that gets better gas mileage in these things.

As for the 2007 models. I think what chevy needs to be concerned with is fixing all the nic-nac bullshit problems we all have. The biggest ones of course being the off-centered steering wheels(still havent figured that one out).

WTF???? I'm very interested in this....

WTF???? I'm very interested in this....
Go drive/sit in your truck, make sure you are positioned exactly in the center of the seat, then look at the location of the wheel, its off. Then go sit in the older style trucks or other model trucks and tell me what you see. Maybe im just picky, but i notice it and it bothers the shit outta me.

Maybe thats why I've noticed myself kinda sittin half assed on the seat.....I just thought it was me

Hey all,
That I6 engine is junk in a full size pickup, look at how high the peak HP is, the reason diesels work better than gas at towing is their peak HP and torque are at low RPM.

The 2007 needs a HEMI killer engine, like their 6.0 with increased HP. Chevy should be able to get 350 HP and 400 torque from a 1/2 ton. I towed 4,500 pounds recently with my 2000 GMC 1500 5.3 V8 and got 8 miles/gallon (I get 16 unloaded with stock engine). That needs to improve for a 1/2 ton whose towing capacity is 8800 pounds.

Maybe thats why I've noticed myself kinda sittin half assed on the seat.....I just thought it was me
See :icon16: Yea, my right thigh is always sitting on the side of the seat not the middle. I try and sit in the middle of the seat and it becomes a little annoying.

Hey all,
That I6 engine is junk in a full size pickup, look at how high the peak HP is, the reason diesels work better than gas at towing is their peak HP and torque are at low RPM.

The 2007 needs a HEMI killer engine, like their 6.0 with increased HP. Chevy should be able to get 350 HP and 400 torque from a 1/2 ton. I towed 4,500 pounds recently with my 2000 GMC 1500 5.3 V8 and got 8 miles/gallon (I get 16 unloaded with stock engine). That needs to improve for a 1/2 ton whose towing capacity is 8800 pounds.

Greetings Knixon71,

Getting 350 HP and 400 torque from a 1/2 ton is already being done. My truck is 345 hp with 385 torque - stock from the factory. I'm told by Nelson Tuning - that simply adding a tuning chip to my truck (no other alterations or modifications) will give me 30 more HP in addition.

White Lightening

Greetings Knixon71,

Getting 350 HP and 400 torque from a 1/2 ton is already being done. My truck is 345 hp with 385 torque - stock from the factory. I'm told by Nelson Tuning - that simply adding a tuning chip to my truck (no other alterations or modifications) will give me 30 more HP in addition.

White Lightening

What engine do you have? I am assuming you have an SS, either the 2wd or awd. The problem with those is they are not geared for towing, but for speed. I believe the towing capacity on those is around 4,000 pounds. They are also an inch lower with a lot less ground clearance, so taking four wheelers deep into the woods is more difficult.

Let me know if I am wrong. :)

What engine do you have? I am assuming you have an SS, either the 2wd or awd. The problem with those is they are not geared for towing, but for speed. I believe the towing capacity on those is around 4,000 pounds. They are also an inch lower with a lot less ground clearance, so taking four wheelers deep into the woods is more difficult.

Let me know if I am wrong. :)

Greetings Knixon71,

I have the 6 liter high output engine (like the SS) except I'm rear wheel drive and several hunderd pounds lighter. The SS has a 4.10 rear axle - but mine has a 3.73 axle. Towing capacity is much higher than you mentioned. My ground clearance is the same as the normal Silverado (I measured it before buying) - but because of the suspension - its climb in height or bed loading height is lower. Also - don't forget that these trucks have the Z60 suspension - so yea - they sit flat from front to rear so towing doesn't drop the back end unneccessarily. As far as going deep into the woods - at least for me - that is what an old truck is for :smile:

White Lightening

Maybe thats why I've noticed myself kinda sittin half assed on the seat.....I just thought it was me

I have noticed that I was developing a bad case of "ghetto lean"

Greetings Knixon71,

I have the 6 liter high output engine (like the SS) except I'm rear wheel drive and several hunderd pounds lighter. The SS has a 4.10 rear axle - but mine has a 3.73 axle. Towing capacity is much higher than you mentioned. My ground clearance is the same as the normal Silverado (I measured it before buying) - but because of the suspension - its climb in height or bed loading height is lower. Also - don't forget that these trucks have the Z60 suspension - so yea - they sit flat from front to rear so towing doesn't drop the back end unneccessarily. As far as going deep into the woods - at least for me - that is what an old truck is for :smile:

White Lightening

Okay, let me rephrase. I want an engine in a 1/2 ton 4x4 pickup with those stats. Us people out here in Montana need a 4x4. Your pickup would be awesome in the south, but not up north. For my use, a 2wd pickup is useless (almost rather have a Honda :)).

I was wrong, the SS AWD with a 4.10 axel has 7600 pounds towing, mine has 7700. Yours with a 3.73 would be less, but I cannot find the numbers on it. I want 10,000 pounds towing in a 1/2 ton (not the HD crew cab)

10000 lbs? Why not get a 2500? I think, realistically, that's gonna be your best option. Pulling 10,000 pounds on a 1500 is gonna wear it out quickly.

10000 lbs? Why not get a 2500? I think, realistically, that's gonna be your best option. Pulling 10,000 pounds on a 1500 is gonna wear it out quickly.

Not that I have 10,000 pounds worth of stuff to haul, just for overhead. A couple of times a year I tow about 6,000 pounds. That is not enough to warrant a 2500, but the 5.3 (2000 year) is not quite powerful enough for 6,000 in the hilly country I live in. I want the efficiency of a 1/2 ton, but be able to tow a couple times a year.

Just picky I guess. :)

With power, you tend to have to give up some efficiency. With efficiency you tend to have to give up some power.