Ward's Top 10 Engines of 2005

[///M-Spec]

It's a little old, but worth talking about. Here are the nominees:

Audi AG
3.2L FSI DOHC I-6 (Audi A6)
255 hp/243 lb.-ft.
For: Audi tech again impresses.
Against: Trifling cold-start issues.
Bottom line: Diesel without the baggage?

4.2L DOHC V-8 (Audi S4)
340 hp/302 lb.-ft.
For: Power density; staggeringly refined.
Against: Appetite for high-octane would shame a Hummer.
Bottom line: Totally corrupting.

BMW AG
3L DOHC I-6 (330i Performance Package)
235 hp/222 lb.-ft.
For: Makes V-6s feel like Mix Masters.
Against: We say again: needs more cubes.
Bottom line: Waiting for Valvetronic, DI.

3.2L DOHC I-6 (M3)
333 hp/262 lb.-ft.
For: With 104 hp/L, you have to ask?
Against: Edgy driveability; soon to die.
Bottom line: Technical masterpiece.

DaimlerChrysler AG
2.8L DOHC I-4 turbodiesel (Liberty)
160 hp/295 lb.-ft.
For: Vital economy boost for thirsty Liberty.
Against: Hardly the best diesel in DC bin.
Bottom line: Won’t convince U.S. drivers.

3.2L DOHC I-6 turbodiesel (E320 CDI)
201 hp/369 lb.-ft.
For: Thunderous torque; clatter mitigation.
Against: Exhaust can be a little stinky.
Bottom line: Does everything better than a gasoline equivalent.

3.5L DOHC V-6 (Mercedes SLK)
268 hp/258 lb.-ft.
For: Chesty torque; delicious exhaust.
Against: Heavy flywheel feel; unemotional.
Bottom line: Curiously un-fun.

5.7L OHV Hemi V-8 (Chrysler 300C)
340 hp/390 lb.-ft.
For: Feels totally unstressed at 60 hp/L.
Against: Heavy-handed torque management from tranny.
Bottom line: Indomitable.

5.9L OHV I-6 turbodiesel (Ram HD)
325 hp/600 lb.-ft.
For: 600 lb.-ft. is just stupid.
Against: Really too much for civilian missions.
Bottom line: Give us half of everything for a light vehicle.

Ford Motor Co.
2.3L DOHC I-4 (Focus ST)
151 hp/154 lb.-ft.
For: Good NVH; PZEV rating.
Against: Wheezy at higher rpm.
Bottom line: Chalk up one payoff from Mazda ownership.

2.3L DOHC I-4 (Escape Hybrid)
133 hp/129 lb.-ft.
For: Works well in hybrid duty.
Against: Doesn’t like hills. Even molehills.
Bottom line: We know we’re supposed to love it, but…

4.6L SOHC V-8 (Mustang GT)
300 hp/320 lb.-ft.
For: Beautifully adapted for muscle-car duty.
Against: Low redline; how about 6 gears?
Bottom line: Best $25,000 motor on earth.

5.4L SOHC V-8 (F-150)
300 hp/365 lb.-ft.
For: Ultra-mega refinement.
Against: Hitched to a heavy, heavy truck.
Bottom line: Held back by pudgy platform.

Fuji Heavy Industries Ltd.
2.5L turbo DOHC H-4 (Subaru Legacy GT)
250 hp/250 lb.-ft.
For: Stun-gun jolt when turbo spools.
Against: Boost not subtle; likes to drink.
Bottom line: Do Subaru buyers need this?

2.5L turbocharged DOHC H-4 (Subaru WRX STi)
300 hp/300 lb.-ft.
For: Can talk smack on V-8s.
Against: NVH only the “tuner crowd” could love.
Bottom line: Awesome, dude – for 15 minutes.

General Motors Corp.
3.6L DOHC V-6 (Cadillac CTS)
255 hp/255 lb.-ft.
For: Superb performance balance, NVH.
Against: Ignored by el-cheapo GM brass.
Bottom line: GM, get this in everything. Now.

4.2L DOHC I-6 (Chevrolet TrailBlazer)
275 hp/275 lb.-ft.
For: Intelligent engineering, manufacturing.
Against: Surely time for a few more horses.
Bottom line: See 3.6L V-6 above.

5.3L OHV V-8 (Chevrolet TrailBlazer EXT)
300 hp/330 lb.-ft.
For: Cylinder deactivation, hefty power.
Against: How often are half of those cylinders really gonna go quiet?
Bottom line: Tree-hugger distraction.

6L OHV V-8 (Chevrolet Corvette)
400 hp/400 lb.-ft.
For: Big numbers.
Against: Startlingly loud and ragged; not doing small-block any favors.
Bottom line: Pep Boys bait.

Honda Motor Co. Ltd.
2L DOHC I-4 (Acura RSX Type S)
210 hp/143 lb.-ft.
For: Sweetest 210 hp you’ll find.
Against: Not really an adult torque number.
Bottom line: Nobody does a better 4-cyl.

2.4L DOHC I-4 (Acura TSX)
200 hp/166 lb.-ft.
For: Deserves exhibit in the NVH museum.
Against: Typical Honda torque deprivation.
Bottom line: All anybody really needs.

3L SOHC V-6 (Accord Coupe)
240 hp/212 lb.-ft.
For: The Honda of V-6s.
Against: Not always “on the cam.”
Bottom line: All anybody really needs, V-6 edition.

3L SOHC V-6/IMA (Accord Hybrid)
255 hp/232 lb.-ft.
For: Remarkable technology integration.
Against: Sometimes gets a little busy.
Bottom line: If you’ve got to go hybrid.

3.5L SOHC V-6 (Odyssey Touring)
255 hp/250 lb.-ft.
For: Manly minivan mill; VCM ain’t bad, too.
Against: Give us a minute.
Bottom line: Hey kids, was that a BMW we just passed?

3.5L SOHC V-6 (Acura RL)
300 hp/243 lb.-ft.
For: Sets new power-density standard.
Against: Can be thrashy.
Bottom line: Credible as a surrogate V-8?

Mazda Motor Corp.
1.3L Renesis Rotary (RX-8)
238 hp/159 lb.-ft.
For: Revs forever; sounds like no other.
Against: Torque would embarrass even Honda.
Bottom line: Refreshingly unique.

2.3L DOHC I-4 (Mazda 3s)
160 hp/150 lb.-ft.
For: Solidly engineered.
Against: Not overly ambitious.
Bottom line: Seems so normal.

Nissan Motor Co. Ltd.
3.5L DOHC V-6 (Infiniti G35)
298 hp/260 lb.-ft.
For: Storming power, expressive sounds.
Against: Straying from original qualities.
Bottom line: Possibly best V-6 ever built.

4L DOHC V-6 (Pathfinder)
270 hp/291 lb.-ft.
For: Probably best engine in the class.
Against: VQ dumbed-down for trucks.
Bottom line: ...we’re not amused.

5.6L DOHC V-8 (Titan)
305 hp/379 lb.-ft.
For: Wieldy torque.
Against: Too much designed-in racket.
Bottom line: Good hp, lose the macho.

Toyota Motor Corp.
1.5L DOHC I-4 Hybrid (Prius)
76 hp/82 lb.-ft.
For: Does what it’s supposed to do (mostly).
Against: Soapbox racers have more torque.
Bottom line: Can’t argue with success.

4L DOHC V-6 (Tacoma)
245 hp/282 lb.-ft.
For: Way better than Toyota’s old V-6.
Against: Power still behind the times.
Bottom line: Money in the bank for Toyota.

4.7L DOHC V-8 (Tundra)
282 hp/325 lb.-ft.
For: Serious power hike; premium feel.
Against: Nothing another half-L couldn’t fix.
Bottom line: Excuses no longer required.

Volkswagen AG
2L SOHC I-4 turbodiesel (Passat TDI)
134 hp/247 lb.-ft.
For: No-nonsense fuel economy.
Against: Weak, automatic only.
Bottom line: We want the Euro diesels.

Volvo Cars
2.5L turbocharged DOHC I-5 (S40 T5)
218 hp/236 lb.-ft.
For: Velvety power surge, decent economy.
Against: Light grunt from forced induction.
Bottom line: Not a bad solution.

4.4L DOHC V-8 (XC90)
311 hp/325 lb.-ft.
For: Yamaha engineered it.
Against: Japan and Sweden aren’t yet famous for V-8 work.
Bottom line: Ten percent away from glory.

The winners:

Acura 3.5L DOHC V-6

Audi FSI 3.2L DOHC V-6

Audi 4.2L DOHC V-8

DaimlerChrysler Mercedes 3.2L DOHC I-6 Turbodiesel

DaimlerChrysler 5.7L Hemi Magnum OHV V-8

Ford 4.6L SOHC V-8

General Motors Vortec 4.2L DOHC I-6

Honda 3L SOHC V-6/IMA Hybrid

Mazda 1.3L Renesis Rotary

Nissan 3.5L DOHC V-6

Articles at: http://subscribers.wardsauto.com/Mi...ageid=9608&siteid=26&magazineid=1004&srtype=1


M

 

[G.T]

I agree with most of them, especially Mazda's Rotary engine and FSI engines.

I don't agree too much with Fords 4.6 V8 because there are many engines like it in America and the V8's haven't changed my in my opinion. I don't mean I don't like them, they make a good noise and have lots of torque.

Nissan's V6 is great as well. I heard that it was on of the first cars to have some kind of filter fitted to the exhaust to decrease emissions output. It sounds great but would have been better if it revved more. It hits the limiter at around 6800rpm I think.

 

[Pink_the_Floyd]

The American engines shouldn't be in there since they have absolutely no reliability 👎

 

[Ghost C]

The American engines shouldn't be in there since they have absolutely no reliability 👎

Right on!

 

[Duke]

The American engines shouldn't be in there since they have absolutely no reliability 👎

Grow a brain, learn what it's for, then practice using it. Until that time kindly refrain from posting outright nonsense.

 

[LoudMusic]

Interesting. Honda got quite a few in the list, but the 2.2L from the S2000 didn't make the cut. I guess having the highest HP / L ratio of any current production engine isn't good enough anymore. And it's only second to the 2L version which powers the S2000 in the rest of the world.

*shrug*

Stupid list.

 

[Pink_the_Floyd]

Grow a brain, learn what it's for, then practice using it. Until that time kindly refrain from posting outright nonsense.

Well, that's my opinion on this list or thread, what else should I say?.....Yeah you're right.



Cheers,

 

[Duke]

Well, that's my opinion on this list or thread, what else should I say?.....Yeah you're right.

Considering I've driven several American made engines to nearly 300,000 miles each, two of them getting over 200,000 miles before I ever even had the valve covers off, you can have all the opinion you want but unless you actually think about it and weigh it against facts, it's not going to mean anything.

 

[LoudMusic]

Calm down, Duke, it's not worth the effort (:

 

[Duke]

Calm down, Duke, it's not worth the effort (:

Eh, I'm not fussed. It just wears a little thin.

For what its worth, this analysis is totally spot-on:

Honda Motor Co. Ltd.

2.4L DOHC I-4 (Acura TSX)
200 hp/166 lb.-ft.
For: Deserves exhibit in the NVH museum.
Against: Typical Honda torque deprivation.
Bottom line: All anybody really needs.

That's exactly right. Not earth-shatteringly powerful, but it hustles the car along well enough and it's smooth as silk.

 

[High-Test]

A friend of our Family has a 93 suburban with 280,000 miles - nothing fixed except a/c compressor and transmission, so don't say all American motors are junk.

 

[Joey D]

4.2L DOHC I-6 (Chevrolet TrailBlazer)
275 hp/275 lb.-ft.
For: Intelligent engineering, manufacturing.
Against: Surely time for a few more horses.
Bottom line: See 3.6L V-6 above.

Why would this win? Better yet why did it make the list? I really think GM screwed up on this motor personally. It's so gutless it takes me back to the days of 2.8L V6 Blazers. Bad descision on Ward's part in my best estimate.

4.6L SOHC V-8 (Mustang GT)
300 hp/320 lb.-ft.
For: Beautifully adapted for muscle-car duty.
Against: Low redline; how about 6 gears?
Bottom line: Best $25,000 motor on earth.

Great motor and they are right on the redline, but who the hell wants a high winding annoying V8. They aren't Honda's they are Fords.

5.7L OHV Hemi V-8 (Chrysler 300C)
340 hp/390 lb.-ft.
For: Feels totally unstressed at 60 hp/L.
Against: Heavy-handed torque management from tranny.
Bottom line: Indomitable.

Two words OVER and RATED. Sure it's needlessly fast but the Hemi is a marketing ploy...a good one I might add.

5.4L SOHC V-8 (F-150)
300 hp/365 lb.-ft.
For: Ultra-mega refinement.
Against: Hitched to a heavy, heavy truck.
Bottom line: Held back by pudgy platform.

By far one of the best truck motors I've seen to date. To me the truck didn't feel all that heavy. I'm surprised the F-350's big ass whatever motor (can't think of it ) wasn't on there. Now there is a truck motor.

3L SOHC V-6/IMA (Accord Hybrid)
255 hp/232 lb.-ft.
For: Remarkable technology integration.
Against: Sometimes gets a little busy.
Bottom line: If you’ve got to go hybrid.

Me = Impressed by a Honda

 

[Ev0]

Great motor and they are right on the redline, but who the hell wants a high winding annoying V8. They aren't Honda's they are Fords.

Agreed. Especially when you consider the Mustang costs about as much as a ham sandwich.

Two words OVER and RATED. Sure it's needlessly fast but the Hemi is a marketing ploy...a good one I might add.

True, most of it is marketing, but the Hemi is a pretty good engine. Great power, godlike torque, and it's also got some new technology in it such as the multi displacement system which shuts off half the engine's cylinders under normal driving conditions, with obvious gains in fuel economy.

By far one of the best truck motors I've seen to date. To me the truck didn't feel all that heavy. I'm surprised the F-350's big ass whatever motor (can't think of it ) wasn't on there. Now there is a truck motor.

Are you thinking of the Duratec?


And I've gotta agree with Ward's choice on the VQ35 in the Infiniti G35/Nissan 350Z. Absolutely amazing V-6.

 

[Joey D]

Are you thinking of the Duratec?

Ya I think so, I always get mixed up on these truck engines. I'm not much of an engineer I guess .

 

[Ev0]

Actually, I'm wrong. After checking the Ford website, it's the Triton that powers the F-350. I'm 99% sure the Duratec is in the F-150 (I'd check, but Firefox seems to not like the Ford website very much).

*Edit* Ok, a Wiki search shows that the Duratec is a wide range of engines, mostly I-4s and V-6s in a wide range of vehicles including the Ford Ranger, Mazda3, Mazda6, Ford Mondeo, Jaguar S-Type, and the new Ford Mustang to name a few.

 

[Joey D]

Like I said, I'm stupid when it comes to those thing. Thanks for the info though.

 

[TS1AWD]

Kinda sad that Mitsubishi's 2.0L 4G63 is not in there

 

[Firebird]

Kinda sad that Mitsubishi's 2.0L 4G63 is not in there

It's old. And in Ward's opinion, old = bad.


I wouldn't put up a fuss about it. Ward's are "mag racers" anyway. They don't actually test them, they just pick whatever's new and got lots of whizzbang technology.

Case in point:

Toyota Motor Corp.
1.5L DOHC I-4 Hybrid (Prius)
76 hp/82 lb.-ft.
For: Does what it’s supposed to do (mostly).
Against: Soapbox racers have more torque.
Bottom line: Can’t argue with success.

The gasoline engine make 82ft-lbs, but the electric motor makes 295ft-lbs. Had they tested it they'd have known it's got plenty of torque. But they didn't: they picked some numbers, wrong numbers, off a spec sheet. They didn't have the same problem with, say, the Honda Accord Hybrid, since its power and torque figures include the motor.

 

[JNasty4G63]

Kinda sad that Mitsubishi's 2.0L 4G63 is not in there

It makes good numbers, but its REALLY old and not that technological. Its basically reached its peak with the new MIVEC version in the IX. And even then, its about 15 years behind the rest. While its a great engine, and I see it becoming a "legend" among people our age down the road, its not that great for a current engine. I'm glad its not on the list, because the list would then lose that much credibility in my book.

Hilg

 

[nickmp0wer]

what about the new m5's engine? its better then all of those. And how could someof those POS engines beat the m3's also

 

[JNasty4G63]

what about the new m5's engine? its better then all of those.

Best new Engines of 2005. The new M5 is a 2006 model, and not even out yet. Maybe next year.

.....And how could someof those POS engines beat the m3's also

Well, thats a good engine, but its a bit old. Its been basically the same for a good number of years now. It has great power, good delivery, and one of the best naturally aspirated hp/L ratios available. But, with the new 3-series R6 engine being much higher tech with its magnesium block and new Valvetronic head, its not as powerful as the S54 in the M, but the M3 engine isn't that top-notch anymore when it comes to tech. A good engine, for sure, but not really "GREAT" compared to other engines now available.

Hilg

 

[1X83Z]

Interesting. Honda got quite a few in the list, but the 2.2L from the S2000 didn't make the cut. I guess having the highest HP / L ratio of any current production engine isn't good enough anymore. And it's only second to the 2L version which powers the S2000 in the rest of the world.

*shrug*

Stupid list.

Believe it or not, just because the S2000 isn't on every single list ever created doesn't mean the list is incorrect. Perhaps it means the S2000 isn't really the best vehicle ever, as you would like us to believe. You sound like all those fanboys and the Skyline GT-R sometimes.

 

[DildePer]

The Audi 3.2 FSI is not diesel.

 

[stumpydino]

healthy amount of v8s and the rotary is in there, im happy

 

[Jmac279]

what about the new m5's engine? its better then all of those. And how could someof those POS engines beat the m3's also

"Nominated engines must be available in regular-production vehicles on sale in the U.S. market no later than the first quarter of the new calendar year (in this case, 2005). An eligible engine must be available in a vehicle with a base price no more than $52,500"
"... emphasis on fuel-saving technology"

The "current" M5 was well over $52,500, the new M5 is coming out this month (???) and the M3 certainly isn't fuel efficient ...

 

[Drifting Thunda]

I agree with most of that, I've been test driving several '05 cars recently and I must say I am impressed to hell with the Nissan 3.5L V6. I haven't gotten around to the RX-8 yet but I agree it should be on the list, it's more powerful than earlier turbo rotaries, and if you put a roots supercharger on the RENESIS it's fantastic.

The 4.6L gets better every couple years I'm actually starting to like it. It has the good V8 torque down low and thanks to the shorter stroke it has great high rpm power. Not to mention it sounds exotic for a V8. Though they coulda used the DOHC version since it's in the higher end '05 Panoz Esperantes.

 

[Jmac279]

Ford could've included a lot of things in the new Mustang (Independent Rear Suspension, the DOHC variant of the Modular 4.6 liter V8, etc.), but most of them would've raised the cost significantly ...

Right now, the only thing that offers near the performance for the price of the Mustang is the 350Z ($26,750 MSRP, almost $2,000 more than the Mustang) ...

The SRT-4 starts at $21,195, but it's only 230 hp, front-wheel drive, and is basically a souped-up Neon ...
The S2000 starts at $33,150 ...
The RX-8 starts at $27,435 (for the manual), but is only 238 hp ...
The GTO starts at $32,995 and that doesn't include the $1300 gas-guzzler tax ...
The WRX STi starts at $32,995 ...
The Evo VIII starts at $30,695, but everyone has said you can't find it for anwhere near MSRP (it's not available in Canada, so I wouldn't know) ...

 

[Driftster]

Ok. The Acura 3.5 isn't that new considering the Pilot's not new.

Why no LS2?
Why no 5.4L Supercharged Ford engine?

Didn't the Renesis win best "new engine" like 2 years ago? how is that new?

that's a weird list to say the least, but you can't argue with the old and decrepit

 

[Jmac279]

It's not best NEW engine ... The VQ35DE is old as hell ... It's the best 10 CURRENT engines available in vehicles under $52,500 ...

 

[1X83Z]

I want to know where GM's 3.8 V6 is. You can't tell me that thing isn't efficient - less moving parts and less development means way less wasted resources! And it's in practically fifteen vehicles.