Here's the Next-Generation 2027 Chevy Silverado Before You're Supposed to See It

People keep saying this but engines aren’t getting more complicated because manufacturers are trying to eke out more mpg - it’s emissions. They are bound by emissions laws. Better fuel mileage is a side effect but what they are chasing is tighter emissions controls. A Geo Metro back in the day used to get over 50mpg without any hybrid tech. The reason it’s so hard to make a modern NA V8 is due to emissions laws - nothing to do with fuel sipping. The only way GM can fix their V8 issues is by abandoning the NA V8 and going to a smaller turbo V6 or even a smaller displacement turbo V8 setup because it’s easier to pass emissions with those. This is why Ford’s 5.0 in truck use is also not for long and they have been making fewer and fewer of those - the higher trim F150s can only be had with Ecoboost or Powerboost now. Again, that’s not some evil conspiracy from some Big Turbo industrial complex. It’s just emissions laws.

[-]

WordWithinTheWord@reddit

I’m using emissions and mpg colloquially in my example. Since fuel consumption is pretty much directly correlated to emissions given that the exhaust system has catalytic converters.

[-]

perennialpurist@reddit

Fuel consumption and emissions are most certainly NOT directly correlated as you imply. Europeans have for decades now driven around in little hatchbacks with small diesel engines that regularly get 50+mpg. The only reason we never got those cars in the US are due to stricter diesel emission laws here. It’s easy to make an engine that is either good on emissions or good on mpg - it’s much harder to do both.

[-]

WordWithinTheWord@reddit

Sure but in the context of GM their addition of the problematic DOD/AFM does nothing to improve combustion efficiency. It just ultimately uses less fuel.

[-]

donnysaysvacuum@reddit

Uh, actually it does. By running the engine on fewer cylinders the throttle is more open and the engine gets more efficient. How else would it use less fuel. Work/energy input = efficiency.

[-]

WordWithinTheWord@reddit

You’re conflating fuel efficiency with combustion efficiency.

Turbocharging, variable cam timing, variable intake lift, variable compression, etc would be strategies of improving efficiency of the combustion cycle.

Turning off 4 of the 8 cylinders is just using less fuel.

[-]

donnysaysvacuum@reddit

Unless your propose there is some efficiency in the power transmission, then your fuel efficnecy is coming from combustion efficiency.

[-]

WordWithinTheWord@reddit

Again you just have a misunderstanding of the terms.

Combustion efficiency is measured by the ratio of fuel input vs energy output.

Using half the cylinders, uses half the input, and produces half the output energy. The efficiency of combustion hasn’t changed. The fuel efficiency has improved however.

[-]

donnysaysvacuum@reddit

No, I'm well aware of what the terms mean. You cant have half the output energy compare fuel economy. When in 4 cylinder mode, the combustions need to produce twice the power than a V8 without displacement on demand. And a small engine running harder is more combustion efficient.

Otto cycle engines are actually not their most efficient when running with a closed throttle.

In the end reducing to less displacement is the same effect as reducing RPMs. Just like your engine is more efficient when running in a higher gear.

Here's a link to explain. https://youtu.be/jagNsS9MxFQ?si=YMx6j58EQ8V99J0C

[-]

WordWithinTheWord@reddit

The engine doesn’t need to produce the same net HP in cylinder deactivation mode.

Running at 800rpm at idle on 4 cylinders is just using less gas than 800rpm at idle on 8 cylinders. It’s the same timing, same valve lifts, same everything else.

[-]

donnysaysvacuum@reddit

Ha, no dude, thats just nonsense. If it produced less power you would slow down.

Hey look, I made my car more efficient by letting off the gas, LOL.

[-]

WordWithinTheWord@reddit

That’s why it only engages in points where it doesn’t need the power delivery of the V8.

Drive one with DOD and it’s almost never actually engaged. That’s why it’s such a bad feature because it increases your risk of engine failure with such minimal benefit.

[-]

NorthFloridaRedneck@reddit

I always go for the work truck trim levels anyway. Can’t stand console shifters & high maintenance turbo engines. I just want a plane jane truck that simply runs. Reason I like the GMT900s. They’re cheap, basic, & have a V8.

[-]

The_Strom784@reddit

I know a guy who swapped the interior on his new truck to that of a higher trim because of that. So he had a work truck exterior and drivetrain but a leather interior with all the creature comforts.

[-]

Looptydude@reddit

The engine's displacement is what holds its emissions back, while it makes good power it's only 10hp/50ft.lbs more than the coyote by being a whole 1.2 liters more in displacement.

As much as people love the compactness of a pushrod V8, it needs to make up the power and efficiency with more displacement.

[-]

Mojave_Idiot@reddit

Horsepower to displacement is a meaningless metric for all except racing organizations and annoying bureaucratic bodies. Maybe those are the same thing.

Regardless if you make more power at less size and weight and hit emissions targets as well, I don’t see the problem.

[-]

Bonerchill@reddit

Can we take a moment to note that idle emissions would be far, far reduced if city planning actually capped city plus suburb occupancy?

The relentless quest for expansion has put enormous pressure on water supplies and tax revenues while decreasing quality of life and increasing local emissions.

This is a societal problem, and cannot or will not be solved by the oily bits ahead of a tailpipe.

[-]

hertzsae@reddit

Smart city planning is pushing density and lessening the need for cars to commute. If you've ever lived in a truly walkable neighborhood, it would change your view.

[-]

Bonerchill@reddit

Smart city planning is still struggling, at least here in America, with getting walking people into the walkable cities- most people want to drive into the walkable cities.

I am looking at losing my house soon, and my wife and I are specifically looking at apartments in walkable areas.

[-]

hertzsae@reddit

As density increases, walkability and public transport becomes better and better. You're not going to solve anything by capping occupancy which will halt increases to density.

Good luck on your search!

[-]

Bonerchill@reddit

I’m mainly looking to reduce useless bullshit subdivisions of land that destroy wetlands and reduce permeable land to almost nothing while heavily impacting existing infrastructure but hey, more votes in the district!

Also, I’m trolling Texans who think owning a quarter acre of reclaimed garbage dump makes them part and parcel of the American dream.

[-]

WordWithinTheWord@reddit

That’s all fine and dandy for those that like high-density housing. I don’t want to live on top of my neighbors.

[-]

Bonerchill@reddit

The costs of administrating suburbs is subsidized by cities.

I also don’t want to live on top of my neighbors; I have both property and a workshop. I despise the sound of transport when I’m trying to relax.

So we have onerous emissions restrictions.

[-]

DodgerBlueRobert1@reddit

Geo Metro back in the day used to get over 50mpg without any hybrid tech.

The Geo Metro weighed like 1800 lbs. and made 55 horsepower. Achieving 50 mpg was not some great feat in that car.

[-]

DocPhilMcGraw@reddit

GM already announced last year that they were investing over a billion into a new V8. Ford’s new generation of the 5.0 was put in for the 2024 Mustang. And the V8 makes up 25% of F-150 sales.

I don’t think the V8 is really going away anytime soon.

[-]

SexyTimeSamet@reddit

Brother, thats a heads off and cam swap, lifter preplacwmnt dod delete affair To be truly done right.

Ive done that 4 times..althkugh not that hard, most do not have the no how nor can afford 4-5k for the job.

[-]

WordWithinTheWord@reddit

I’m not saying the consumer should do it. GM should right their wrongs.

[-]

Drzhivago138@reddit

The 6.6 wasn't designed to pass CAFE, hence why it's only used in HDs (like Ford's 6.8/7.3). CAFE is currently all but cancelled, but OEMs probably are looking further ahead than the next 3 years.

[-]

Mojave_Idiot@reddit

I don’t think any manufacturers are silly enough to walk into this but hey. Maybe we’re wrong.

[-]

mgobla@reddit

If they ever fix the engine they are going to stop its productiona few months later bc GM.

[-]

peakdecline@reddit

Well, the 2027 is going to debut the new generation GM V8s... and I'd have to imagine its a goal. The issues with GM's V8s are definitely starting to impact the bottom line. Both in the cost the recalls, lawsuits, and warranty repairs and in their brand reputation.

I would also hope it gets an updated 10-speed. Which is also just as problematic as the 6.2L issues.

[-]

Lucreth2@reddit

I'm just sitting here waiting for them to carry over the exact same problems to the next Gen small block in 2027 (2028?). If it's been broke for a decade, why fix it!

[-]

Redeemed_Expert9694@reddit (OP)

Ngl, Silverado design peaked 2014-2016. The facelift made the third gen a little worse, but the design was truly ruined with the fourth gen when GM moved away from their historical "lean" pickup design for the more "buff" designs that work well on Rams, Tundras, and Titans but not GM and Ford trucks

[-]

Midwest100@reddit

I love my 2017. I feel like this was nicest look. You couldn’t give me a new one for my 17.

[-]

No-Improvement-3048@reddit

Its a truck. All trucks are ugly if you really look. Proportions are wrong for any with an extended cab. Wheels wells too big. But, my 2025 Siera is the best truck I ever owned, except for the Infotainment system which is the sort I've ever owned.

[-]

TurboBopper@reddit

The k2xx trucks are design wise, the T1xx look much better. Eventually the T1xx got an ok interior, but honestly GM truck interiors have either sucked or been only passable for a very, very long time.

[-]

nissanfan64@reddit

Man I thought the looks have been crashing hard since the cat eye gmt800. After that they just kept getting worse and worse.

[-]

Han-YoLo-@reddit

The market apparently agrees with you. . It’s why clean 800’s are bringing the same money as trucks that are 15 years newer.

[-]

nissanfan64@reddit

Yea I don’t mind the gmt900 overall but I do think they’re a step back in every way. Don’t look good, interior is worse, and you have to avoid the active fuel management. They make good work trucks but they never like, looked good.

Then everything past that I wouldn’t even consider. I think the ‘14 and up ones look atrocious and I wouldn’t touch those new v8s with a ten foot pole.

[-]

NorthFloridaRedneck@reddit

The 900s are good if you find one where someone ripped the fuel management stuff out already, or if it came with a 4.8 which never had it.

[-]

Count_Dongula@reddit

What? You don't like the new edge Cateye Silverado?

I agree. I can't believe GM ruined one of their cleanest designs.

[-]

Redeemed_Expert9694@reddit (OP)

GM loves ruining well received designs

2018 Silverado/Siera - 2019 Silverado/Siera

CTS - CT5

ATS - CT4

Fourth Escalade - Fifth-gen Escalade

The whole 2019/20 Camaro facelift debacle

Just to name a few in recent memory

[-]

donnysaysvacuum@reddit

I'd add the new Buicks to that. They seem like a poor imitation of Lexuss predator grille.

I'd also add:

98 Camaro

2004 Regal vs 2005 Lacrosse

[-]

Aero06@reddit

GMC's brand identity seems to have become making Chevrolet's overdesigned vehicles look palatable now that Chevy, Buick and Cadillac have all intruded onto their once brand-exclusive premium SUV market space.

[-]

bauhausy@reddit

GMC fixes the exterior, then put gigantic vertical tablets on every interior. For balance

[-]

Bassbob46@reddit

Couldn’t agree more. If I could hit an undo button and get my 2015 back I would. I know it’s subjective but I think they were truly some of the best looking trucks.

[-]

dayvieee@reddit

I remember when this new generation was announced and everyone hated it. I had a 2010 Silverado so I was a frequent visitor on gmfullsize. I’m just glad they made the wheel wells more round to fit bigger tires without trimming metal(which I had to do)

[-]

elinyera@reddit

When I was looking for a truck, I aways thought that the Silverado looks fat. It really doesn't work for it.

[-]

PurdontS2k@reddit

Everything’s a matter of subjective taste, but I love the look of my ‘21 RST with the body color matched bumpers.

[-]

WordWithinTheWord@reddit

The GMCs of that generation in Stone Blue was peak exterior pickup design.

Combine it with Ford Sync and the ZF8 from RAM and it would be the perfect pickup.

[-]

Twin_Turbo@reddit

yeah honestly I prefer my dad's 2015 headlights to a lot of the newer ones, the headlights keep getting smaller and smaller, look like korean plastic cars now tbh

[-]

needmoresynths@reddit

Can it just not fucking blind me at night thank you

[-]

CostcoOfficial@reddit

Tbh this is one of my favorite benefits of the split headlight trend. Like in these blueprint sketches, it allows for the DRL's to stay in a nice spot while moving the actual LED / Laser projectors way lower. Compared to the 2025, the projectors look to be at least 6 - 8" lower.

[-]

donnysaysvacuum@reddit

At the current height of these trucks, especially the HD, headlights at the top might be preferred because they would be above the height of my back window.

[-]

DodgerBlueRobert1@reddit

I was driving last night with a 2026 Suburban or Tahoe behind me. It had the new split headlight design, and yet, one of its headlights was blinding me because it wasn’t aim/angled correctly. Point is, headlights sitting lower on the vehicle isn’t a guarantee that it won’t blind you.

[-]

ElbowTight@reddit

The Gen one tundra is the gold standard in lean full size truck design. That body style is still a looker and the 4.7 was an amazing engine. I love how much more room you get in today’s truck but it also appears that they added 20% more body on top of that.

Give me a crew cab with a full size 8’ bed that can fit drywall with the tailgate up. A power train that doesn’t rely on cylinder cut out, an inline 6 with a small turbo, and port injection. A simple egr design that allows for easy maintenance with an integrated catch can and dry filter.

[-]

Drzhivago138@reddit

Give me a crew cab with a full size 8’ bed that can fit drywall with the tailgate up. A power train that doesn’t rely on cylinder cut out, an inline 6 with a small turbo,

Sounds like you want a HD.

[-]

ElbowTight@reddit

Nope don’t need the weight or towing of an HD

[-]

Drzhivago138@reddit

That's the only way you're getting a crew/8', or an engine with no fuel-saving devices like cylinder cut-out or auto start/stop.

[-]

ElbowTight@reddit

I don’t think that’s right. They can absolutely make a small 3L or under inline that is plenty powerful for the application. Can even make a simple hybrid out of it where the ice is a generator. (That obviously makes things more complex) but you can still make simple reliable efficient hybrid systems. It don’t need to go 100mph it needs to last, be efficient and have enough torque and gearing for proper use

[-]

Drzhivago138@reddit

I'm not saying it's physically impossible to make; I'm saying it's unfeasible. They could make something like that, but why would they? Profit margins are higher with the current setup. You're not thinking like an OEM that wants to make money.

For example, Ford used to have a package on the F-150 that allowed it to haul over 3300 lbs. in the bed while still not being a HD model. They discontinued it because very few buyers were actually looking for something like that. The kind of person who wants a lighter, lower pickup that's good for hauling in the bed but not necessarily a towing monster or fast will more often than not look for a 30-year-old OBS F-250 with the 300.

[-]

ElbowTight@reddit

Right I get it but I’m saying it’s what I want. Not anything else other than what I as a potential customer want. Is it realistic in today’s world…. Probably not. But it’s absolutely possible and they have the capability to easily do it.

[-]

Drzhivago138@reddit

OK, so go ahead and make it yourself if you really want it that badly.

[-]

kyletut@reddit

Cleaner imo https://imgur.com/eBVv4E0

[-]

Fish_bob@reddit

Fenders are off.

[-]

CilantroToothpaste@reddit

That truck sure does look like truck

[-]

ProfessorCaptain@reddit

GM bad!!!!

[-]

Lower_Kick268@reddit

Wow, looks exactly like the Suburban

[-]

RiftHunter4@reddit

So Chevy doesn't care about trucks being gigantic. Guess thats to be expected since they don't have a Bronco or Maverick competitor. They're competing with Honda for the "slowest to catch on to a profitable trend" award. Even Hyundai has the Santa Cruz, at least.

[-]

ResEng68@reddit

GM prints money on the Silverado/Sierra. Similarly, GM already has a solid mid-sized offering in the Colorado/Canyon.

They could build a unibody akin to the Maverick / Santa Cruz, but is it really an attractive market? Pricing is heavily discounted (low-mid 30s sales price) and margins likely to be very skinny. It's not much cheaper to build a unibody as compared to a full-sized BOF truck.

[-]

RiftHunter4@reddit

is it really an attractive market

Ford sold 130,000 of them in 2024. There's demand.

[-]

ResEng68@reddit

Of course there's demand for a cheap truck. Drop pricing enough and you can sell a 1,000,000 units.

Commercial attractiveness requires margin. And, there isn't much of margin in a $30k truck in the states.

[-]

BrashHarbor@reddit

So Chevy doesn't care about trucks being gigantic

6% of all new vehicles sold in the US last year were full-size GM trucks.

Why would they care?

[-]

HawtGarbage918@reddit

I dig it, honestly. I hated the current-gen Silverado HD front fascia when it debuted but it's weirdly grown on me over the years to the point that I now prefer it over the 1500, so it's nice to see the half-ton is following in its footsteps.

[-]

InsertBluescreenHere@reddit

thats becaus eits meant to mimmick the look of the 60s trucks with its reverse sloped face.

[-]

gluten_heimer@reddit

Looks way better.

[-]

benjarvus@reddit

Now with even less forward visibility!

Can't wait to see how it stacks up to the outgoing model: https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpreview.redd.it%2Fu7rvytt28m4g1.png%3Fwidth%3D726%26format%3Dpng%26auto%3Dwebp%26s%3Dd94a45c10e02e5f1ba6ba1041ddec016ffbf9991

[-]