Chevy Traverse Turbo four cylinder discontinued - Chevy Traverse Forum: Chevrolet Traverse Forum
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 13 (permalink) Old 04-23-2019, 07:45 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,313
Chevy Traverse Turbo four cylinder discontinued

Just ran across this article:

https://www.autoblog.com/2019/04/22/...-discontinued/

2011 2LT FWD replaced by 2017 2LT AWD
greentraverse is offline  
post #2 of 13 (permalink) Old 04-23-2019, 09:18 PM
Senior Member
 
Capucine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Ontario canada
Posts: 1,072
Garage
Not surprised at all. And worse the 4 banger needed premium gasoline .And the mileage was about the same and sometimes worse than the 6 cylinders.

Traverse 2017, chevy Uplander 2009 LT short wheelbase, Impala 2003, jeep cherokee Laredo 1990, chevy citation 1984 2.8 v6, vauxhall Firenza1972, rambler american 1964 model 330, vauxhall velox 1956 rebuilt, NSU Prinz 1961 2 cylinder micro car rebuilt, Renault Dauphine 1960 rebuilt, ford prefect 1952 ( english car with non hydrolic brakes rebuilt. Honda 1986 motorcycle in new condition and 13 travel trailers from a Boler 1300 to a Rockwood mini lite 20 feet.

Last edited by Capucine; 04-23-2019 at 09:21 PM.
Capucine is offline  
post #3 of 13 (permalink) Old 04-24-2019, 07:12 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 111
Good riddance... I don't care for the trend of smaller boosted engines in place of NA engines... they will always be more stressed (and are more complicated) to provide the same amount of performance and mileage, just doesn't sound like a recipe for reliability to me.

Current Vehicles:
-2015 Pilot EX-L AWD
-2014 Traverse LT2 AWD
-1961 Impala 2 Door Sedan 283 3MT

Family Muscle:
-1969 Camaro SS 350 4MT
-1957 210 2 Door Wagon (project)
-1939 Ford 3 Window 2 Door (project)

Past Vehicles:
-2008 Sonata SE V6
-2012 Silverado LS 4.8 4WD EC
-2011 Rogue SL AWD
-2006 Accord Sedan EX-L K24 5MT
-2012 Tacoma DCSB V6 6MT 4WD
-2011 Civic Si Sedan
-2001 Pathfinder VQ35 5MT 4WD
-1997 Pathfinder VG33 4AT 4WD
-1999 ML320 4WD
-1997 Accord LX Sedan F22 4AT
cintocrunch is offline  
post #4 of 13 (permalink) Old 04-24-2019, 09:48 AM
Senior Member
 
Thomcat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,643
Quote:
Originally Posted by cintocrunch View Post
Good riddance... I don't care for the trend of smaller boosted engines in place of NA engines... they will always be more stressed (and are more complicated) to provide the same amount of performance and mileage, just doesn't sound like a recipe for reliability to me.

X2 on performance and reliability



They had no business putting an I4 in there in the first place.....owners paying another .50+ cents a gal for the honor of having less hp than the stock V6 ....those purchasing the RS for a sporty look were better off spending a few more bucks to get the Redline package on a Premiere.



My '16 Malibu had that 2.0T hamster on crack powered engine which is designed to operate for performance on premium gas......it will operate on regular but then runs like a turtle....operating both on regular the 1.5T in my replacement '18 Malibu is just as quick was my 2.0T running detuned on regular.

Current Chevys -'19 Silverado RST;'18 Malibu LT Redline;'18 Traverse Premier Redline<br /><br />Previous&nbsp; Chevys:16 Silverado LT;16 Malibu LT2;'17 Impala;'16 MalibuLT;'15 Camaro LS;'15 Traverse; '13,'12 and '07 Avalanche LTs; '11 Tahoe LT; '13 &'11 Malibu LTs; '08 Trailblazer;'06 Colorado WT..... Chrysler era.....'80 Citation;'75 Impala;'72 Chevelle;'69 Camaro R/T;'65 Impala SS;'62 Nova
Thomcat is offline  
post #5 of 13 (permalink) Old 06-05-2019, 11:26 AM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2019
Posts: 1
I was curious as too why my wife's RS we bought had the V6 and not the IL4 turbo. When we where at the dealership the sales man seemed stumped when I asked him why this RS has the V6.
Challenger01 is offline  
post #6 of 13 (permalink) Old 06-05-2019, 12:42 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 412
There's reasonable applications for a T4 in place of a V6, particularly as they have better low speed torque curves, but it never made sense in a 4800lb Traverse when the performance and EPA rated gas mileage was worse than the 3.6 while hitting the wallet with the need for premium. Always baffled me why they offered it on the FWD only RS trim.

2017 Traverse
2016 Traverse (KIA @ 25k miles)
2010 Traverse (traded at 117k miles)
2016 SS Sedan
2001 Trans Am
nhrata01 is offline  
post #7 of 13 (permalink) Old 06-05-2019, 01:00 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by nhrata01 View Post
There's reasonable applications for a T4 in place of a V6, particularly as they have better low speed torque curves, but it never made sense in a 4800lb Traverse when the performance and EPA rated gas mileage was worse than the 3.6 while hitting the wallet with the need for premium. Always baffled me why they offered it on the FWD only RS trim.
Exactly... so you put the engine that produces more torque in the FWD model only... THAT's gotta be good for the front tires...

I tend to think the 2.7 in the Silverado would be a better T4 for the Traverse, I know the torque of the smaller T4 can help off the line but they just run out of steam too much on the top end, get something with comparable HP to the V6 and better torque and market it as a performance upgrade and it will sell better...

Honestly, it's pretty hard to beat the 6 cylinders that come in most 3 row crossovers, they move way better than they have any reason to and the T4 versions I've driven (CX-9 and Ascent) felt weak after the initial launch...

Current Vehicles:
-2015 Pilot EX-L AWD
-2014 Traverse LT2 AWD
-1961 Impala 2 Door Sedan 283 3MT

Family Muscle:
-1969 Camaro SS 350 4MT
-1957 210 2 Door Wagon (project)
-1939 Ford 3 Window 2 Door (project)

Past Vehicles:
-2008 Sonata SE V6
-2012 Silverado LS 4.8 4WD EC
-2011 Rogue SL AWD
-2006 Accord Sedan EX-L K24 5MT
-2012 Tacoma DCSB V6 6MT 4WD
-2011 Civic Si Sedan
-2001 Pathfinder VQ35 5MT 4WD
-1997 Pathfinder VG33 4AT 4WD
-1999 ML320 4WD
-1997 Accord LX Sedan F22 4AT
cintocrunch is offline  
post #8 of 13 (permalink) Old 06-10-2019, 11:04 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 412
Quote:
Originally Posted by cintocrunch View Post
Exactly... so you put the engine that produces more torque in the FWD model only... THAT's gotta be good for the front tires...

I tend to think the 2.7 in the Silverado would be a better T4 for the Traverse, I know the torque of the smaller T4 can help off the line but they just run out of steam too much on the top end, get something with comparable HP to the V6 and better torque and market it as a performance upgrade and it will sell better...

Honestly, it's pretty hard to beat the 6 cylinders that come in most 3 row crossovers, they move way better than they have any reason to and the T4 versions I've driven (CX-9 and Ascent) felt weak after the initial launch...
Yeah problem is to make beefier torque down low on such small displacement is you then need a smaller turbo to spool quickly, which is why it runs out of breath up top. You also kill your gas mileage since it's always in boost, negating the efficiency benefit. You are right the larger 2.7 (now apparently also showing up in the Caddy CT4) might be a good choice for larger SUVs. Ford's 2.3 Ecoboost makes good torque is not bad in the midsizes. I have the older LLT 281hp 1G Traverse and it's wheezy in my book, the peak torque up in the 4k range really isn't ideal compared to a properly sized boosted 4, but admittedly I am more used to generous power.

2017 Traverse
2016 Traverse (KIA @ 25k miles)
2010 Traverse (traded at 117k miles)
2016 SS Sedan
2001 Trans Am
nhrata01 is offline  
post #9 of 13 (permalink) Old 06-10-2019, 12:14 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 111
L

Quote:
Originally Posted by nhrata01 View Post
Yeah problem is to make beefier torque down low on such small displacement is you then need a smaller turbo to spool quickly, which is why it runs out of breath up top. You also kill your gas mileage since it's always in boost, negating the efficiency benefit. You are right the larger 2.7 (now apparently also showing up in the Caddy CT4) might be a good choice for larger SUVs. Ford's 2.3 Ecoboost makes good torque is not bad in the midsizes. I have the older LLT 281hp 1G Traverse and it's wheezy in my book, the peak torque up in the 4k range really isn't ideal compared to a properly sized boosted 4, but admittedly I am more used to generous power.
Yea I think you have been spoiled... I'm used to a lot of 4 cylinder compact SUVs or 4 cylinder cars (ok, the Si with the K20 screaming at 8,700 RPM wasn't slow) so our Pilot and Traverse feel more than powerful enough to get out of their own way... when I drive my dad's YXLD w/ the 6.2 it feels incredible that something that big and heavy can move that quickly.

I do agree that the Traverse's high torque peak does mean you have to give it some revs but it's also an engine that likes to rev, is smooth and refined while doing it. The Pilot has a stronger low end, the mid range feels about equal and the Traverse has a better top end.

Current Vehicles:
-2015 Pilot EX-L AWD
-2014 Traverse LT2 AWD
-1961 Impala 2 Door Sedan 283 3MT

Family Muscle:
-1969 Camaro SS 350 4MT
-1957 210 2 Door Wagon (project)
-1939 Ford 3 Window 2 Door (project)

Past Vehicles:
-2008 Sonata SE V6
-2012 Silverado LS 4.8 4WD EC
-2011 Rogue SL AWD
-2006 Accord Sedan EX-L K24 5MT
-2012 Tacoma DCSB V6 6MT 4WD
-2011 Civic Si Sedan
-2001 Pathfinder VQ35 5MT 4WD
-1997 Pathfinder VG33 4AT 4WD
-1999 ML320 4WD
-1997 Accord LX Sedan F22 4AT
cintocrunch is offline  
post #10 of 13 (permalink) Old 06-10-2019, 03:12 PM
Senior Member
 
Thomcat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,643
.02



The 2.0T twin scroll was the optional engine in my '16 dual exhaust Malibu LTZ. A premium gas sucking piece of crap.....zippy with lots of torque, but when fully loaded running on regular behaved more like the gas saving 1.5T in my '18 LT, i.e., turned into a dog when fully loaded. So I suspect when you shove overweight Moe Larry and Curly into the back with their luggage the RS turbo will behave like a dog compared to lower line aspirated L/LS/LT w/3.6ls. And Chevys less for more logic is likely why it was discontinued! A race is not judged by who's the first off the line, but the first across the finish.


So Chevy smartens up by the dumping the 4 cyl turbo in the Traverse and then dumbs down with adding a 4 cyl turbo to the new Silverado , worse with AFM mode. And it will likely get good reviews when a featherweight test driver does the performance testing. Holy CAFE! When under load it will switch from 2 cylinders to 4 cylinders for max power. And no GM turbo will ever reach the endpoint on the tach, I tried, because the cutout limiter is set below the max 8K reading on the tach, so it hesitates and then upshifts



Substituting torque for hp may work well in a small city scooter or grocery getter, but load up a full sized work oriented vehicle with 5 full size workers and 2 tons of manure and it will drive just like it smells!

Current Chevys -'19 Silverado RST;'18 Malibu LT Redline;'18 Traverse Premier Redline<br /><br />Previous&nbsp; Chevys:16 Silverado LT;16 Malibu LT2;'17 Impala;'16 MalibuLT;'15 Camaro LS;'15 Traverse; '13,'12 and '07 Avalanche LTs; '11 Tahoe LT; '13 &'11 Malibu LTs; '08 Trailblazer;'06 Colorado WT..... Chrysler era.....'80 Citation;'75 Impala;'72 Chevelle;'69 Camaro R/T;'65 Impala SS;'62 Nova
Thomcat is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Chevy Traverse Forum: Chevrolet Traverse Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome