new GM Ecotec 2.0L gas turbo engine

[haven]

Chevrolet has announced a new engine that may well find its way into the redesigned Chevrolet Colorado. The new engine is a turbo 2.0L four cylinder direct injected gasoline engine. It produces 260 hp and 260 ft lb of torque. The torque reaches its maximum at only 1700 rpm, more like a diesel than a traditional gas engine.

The current Colorado uses a 3.7L five cylinder conventional gas engine that produces 240 hp and 240 ft lb. That torque peak arrives at 4600 rpm. The new 4 cylinder Ecotec 2.0 engine would be an improvement in all ways, including mpg.

The 2.0L Ecotec engine is scheduled to appear in the Chevrolet Malibu Eco sedan in a few months.

For comparison, the 4.0L gas engine used in the Toyota Tacoma produces 266 ft lb at 4000 rpm. Toyota's famous D4D 3.0L turbodiesel produces about 250 ft lb of torque in the HiLux pickup. The 2.0L turbodiesel in the VW Amarok pickup was first tuned to produce 240 ft-lbs, but recently has been tuned to about 300 ft-lbs.

 

[Deleted member 9101]

Nice specs, but I would be willing to bet that pulling a heave load the N/a five cylinder would "pull" better. (just my opinion, backed by no scientific data, jus a theory about internal engine mass)

 

[1stDeuce]

I so want a 2.8L diesel Colorado, but I might settle for a 2.0L turbo gas truck if it seems decent. 260hp/lbft is pretty respectable, and I'm sure 300 is just a reflash away, similar to the high HP Eco-boost cals already out for the Fffffford trucks. And it'd use cheaper (at present...) gasoline instead of diesel.

I think the turbo would make up for lack of rotating mass in a towing situation, particularly with an auto trans. Might be a little easy to stall with a manual though, unless they put a 70lb flywheel on it and spend some time with the engine cal to get some decent idle torque, neither of which are likely at all, if it's even offered with a manual, which I'd wager it won't be.
I'll keep my Duramax for the forseeable future, and dream of a 2.8L D-max.
C

 

[haven]

I'm not sure that a direct injection variable valve gas turbo will be cheaper to build than a small diesel. It will be interesting to see what premium GM wants for the new engine.

 

[Larry]

I'm not sure that a direct injection variable valve gas turbo will be cheaper to build than a small diesel. It will be interesting to see what premium GM wants for the new engine.

It may very well not be any cheaper to manufacturer the turbo DI gas engine itself vs. a small diesel engine as the DI turbo gas engine architecture and technology isn’t all that much different between the two. Where the cost comes in that prohibits small diesels in the US is the cost to design and manufacture the diesel after -treatment systems as well as the tens of millions of dollars to obtain EPA certifications for diesel emissions compliance. Auto and diesel engine manufacturers are not willing to invest in that gamble that those that claim they really want/need a small diesel will really put their money where their mouth is when it comes down to actually buying one. Especially, with these new small displacement high torque direct injected turbo gas engines coming to market drives even a harder argument to offer a diesel.

The cost of admission to emissionize a small diesel in the US is why there isn’t (and won’t be) a small Mahindra truck on the market, VW Ararok, diesel Colorado, etc anytime soon. This is also the reason my company does not offer a 3.0L-ish diesel in the US as a gas engine makes more sense every time. Chrysler Group is the only one dipping their toes in the water with the diesel GC and I predict that will be a flash in the pan like the diesel Liberty’s were.

 

[haven]

It's true that many manufacturers with diesel powered small cars and trucks are not importing them to USA. Some say they are waiting until the European and USA diesel emissions standards are closer to each other. Others say they are unsure that diesel is acceptable to the buying public in USA.

That said, some manufacturers are giving small diesels a try. VW and Audi 2.0L diesels are already popular. Chevrolet will add a 2.0L diesel to the Cruze compact sedan in 2013, and Mazda will introduce their SkyActive-D 2.2L diesel to USA in the new 2013 CX-5 compact SUV.

There's no clear evidence that enough USA shoppers really want a small truck, diesel or otherwise. Everyone will be watching the way the new Colorado is accepted by buyers next year.

 

[Buliwyf]

There's no clear evidence that enough USA shoppers really want a small truck, diesel or otherwise. Everyone will be watching the way the new Colorado is accepted by buyers next year.

That's really bad news. You could put a F1 Rocket Engine under the hood of a Colorado and it still wouldn't sell.

That's the problem when GM trys to lead a fresh new market segment. They screw it up and that segment gets a bad rap and fizzles into obscurity. The 350 diesel is a perfect example.

I still think that if people are going to pay extra for an engine. They want performance not fuel economy. It's really silly when you think about it. I haven't used more that 50% throttle in either of my vehicles in the past two months. I wouldn't mind seeing some slower, smaller diesels.