Ward's Top Engines for 2005

[Jay]

The Veyron W16 didnt make it.

 

[Omnis]

I think the VQ has been on there since it was introduced. Lol.

 

[Joey D]

The Veyron W16 didnt make it.

Because it sucks, 16 cylinders, 4 turboes and only 1000hp? What the hell? You can boost a 2.0L 4 cylinder engine with one turbo to 500hp, or you can even take the V10 Viper motor and put twins on it and get well over 1000hp.

 

[Tornado]

Because it sucks, 16 cylinders, 4 turboes and only 1000hp? What the hell? You can boost a 2.0L 4 cylinder engine with one turbo to 500hp, or you can even take the V10 Viper motor and put twins on it and get well over 1000hp.

Well, you know the Viper motor actually a bigger engine than the Veyron's. And why do you need more than 1000BHP anyways? Also, if you gave a 2.0L 500BHP you could eat a sandwhich before the turboes spool up. The main reason the Veyron isn't on the list is that it is about 1.5 million dollars (or so) out of the price range.

 

[Jay]

Because it sucks, 16 cylinders, 4 turboes and only 1000hp? What the hell? You can boost a 2.0L 4 cylinder engine with one turbo to 500hp, or you can even take the V10 Viper motor and put twins on it and get well over 1000hp.

4 turbo's wasnt fitted for outright power but for drivability, they could have fitted one turbo to it and produced the same peak result easy. Theres no doubt some tuner could increase the power and sell them just like is done with Vipers.

and how many factory standard production 500hp 2.0L 4 cyclinders are getting around?

if you gave a 2.0L 500BHP you could eat a sandwhich before the turboes spool up. .

I regularly go for drives in my friends 700hp 2.0l 4 cylinder car and the lag isnt as bad as I expected, but definitely no where near the drivability required for a production car

 

[Joey D]

It's just a for instances saying that 4 turboes were completly un-needed. But I've come to hate the new Bugatti because I think its a big waste of engineering and technology.

 

[niky]

I think the VQ has been on there since it was introduced. Lol.

yup. Nissan's ridiculously proud of the fact.

 

[Wolfe]

yup. Nissan's ridiculously proud of the fact.

Dammit, so that's why Nissan gave up on Inline-sixes...

 

[niky]

, that, plus the fact that the basic block architecture dates back over 30 years...

But those old Nissan turbo blocks are going to be sorely missed... these new, thin-walled, high-tech blocks are so... Honda.

 

[ND4SPD]

Well looks like the RENESIS is gone but atleast the new Mazda Turbo 2.3L is there.

 

[skip0110]

, that, plus the fact that the basic block architecture dates back over 30 years...

But those old Nissan turbo blocks are going to be sorely missed... these new, thin-walled, high-tech blocks are so... Honda.

Yeah, it was so much better when the engineers weren't actually sure how strong to make things, so they just went with overkill...

...so much better for the aftermarket/tuners/rodders.

Thankfully there still are some overengineered engines out there.

 

[YSSMAN]

So does that make the Chevrolet small-block the undesputed longest-running engine design at 51 years?

 

[Plague.Ghost]

It's just a for instances saying that 4 turboes were completly un-needed. But I've come to hate the new Bugatti because I think its a big waste of engineering and technology.

At least they USED engineering and technology, unlike Chevy and Dodge.

 

[Joey D]

At least they USED engineering and technology, unlike Chevy and Dodge.

That's right Chevy doesn't use technology, Dodge motors are all 440 Cuda motors from the 70's, Ford still put Model T engines in there cars. Pull your head outta your bum and see the light. American cars aren't from the 70's.

GM has the DOD technology, E85 fuel systems, they have VVT now, and a 2.0L motor making 205 hp.

DCX has there own DOD technology, and they have a the 2.4L turboed motor making 230hp.

America has evolved since 1976, guess you miss the past 30 years.

 

[Plague.Ghost]

That's right Chevy doesn't use technology, Dodge motors are all 440 Cuda motors from the 70's, Ford still put Model T engines in there cars. Pull your head outta your bum and see the light. American cars aren't from the 70's.

GM has the DOD technology, E85 fuel systems, they have VVT now, and a 2.0L motor making 205 hp.

DCX has there own DOD technology, and they have a the 2.4L turboed motor making 230hp.

America has evolved since 1976, guess you miss the past 30 years.

Oh lets see, Chevy has a 7.1L V8 making 500 horses, and Dodge has a 8.3L V10 making 500 horses. BMW has a 5.0L V10 making 500 horses. Dodge has a 2.4L FORCED INDUCTION engine making LESS THAN 100HP/L.

You call THAT engineering?

Plus, VVT is all over.

 

[Joey D]

Last time I checked the 427 was a 7.0L motor in the Corvette Z06.

But think about it, its marketing, people associate big engines with American sports cars. Plus the BMW M5 is what 80 grand? A Corvette Z06 is 67 grand? Hmmm think about that one, sure they aren't in the same class, but I know which one I would take.

And I might hate the SRT-4 but its fast as hell and if you say other wise you are an idiot. Who cares if its less the 100hp/L, most cars are like that, deal with it. Throw stage 3 on it and you are making like 110hp per L or something.

Yes I call that engineering when you can buy a FWD car that will tear up the track with a factory warrenty.

How is VVT over? Everyone has it now, it's the new thing.

 

[Plague.Ghost]

Last time I checked the 427 was a 7.0L motor in the Corvette Z06.

Which is basically what I just said. . .which still isn't an engineering feat by any stretch. Face it, Chevy and Dodge just resort to massively oversized engines to make average horsepower and then lick-'n'-stick the car together to make as much profit as possible. Chevy is losing value and they know it, and they're getting desperate.

But think about it, its marketing, people associate big engines with American sports cars.

Which is engineering...how?

Plus the BMW M5 is what 80 grand? A Corvette Z06 is 67 grand? Hmmm think about that one, sure they aren't in the same class, but I know which one I would take.

Yah, I'd take the BMW too. It's so much nicer inside, aye?

And I might hate the SRT-4 but its fast as hell and if you say other wise you are an idiot. Who cares if its less the 100hp/L, most cars are like that, deal with it. Throw stage 3 on it and you are making like 110hp per L or something.

Yes I call that engineering when you can buy a FWD car that will tear up the track with a factory warrenty.

Anyone can make a FWD car. And anyone can make a FWD with a turbo. A stage 3 turbo and the car is STILL making only 110hp/L, it's just sad. The BMW M3 CSL has 111hp/litre and it's naturally aspirated. Plus, the SRT-4 torque-steers like a bastard and turns like ass.

 

[Joey D]

Which is basically what I just said. . .which still isn't an engineering feat by any stretch. Face it, Chevy and Dodge just resort to massively oversized engines to make average horsepower and then lick-'n'-stick the car together to make as much profit as possible. Chevy is losing value and they know it, and they're getting desperate.

Wrong you said 7.1L not 7.0L which is different. GM could have easily boosted the LS2 another 100hp to make 500, but then you would just be buying a normal boostes Vette. A Vette with a 427 is special because its the same motor used in the Le Mans car...which wins a lot of races.

Which is engineering...how?

Selling cars based on the engine isn't an engineering feat, but if they sell cars more power to them.

Yah, I'd take the BMW too. It's so much nicer inside, aye?

Of course you would take a BMW, you hate American cars. I would take the Vette because it isn't a BMW. You can't compare the two, they are in two catagories.

Anyone can make a FWD car. And anyone can make a FWD with a turbo. A stage 3 turbo and the car is STILL making only 110hp/L, it's just sad. The BMW M3 CSL has 111hp/litre and it's naturally aspirated. Plus, the SRT-4 torque-steers like a bastard and turns like ass.

You've never driven an SRT-4, they don't torque steer what-so-ever. Proving that you are a moron. Ask anyone who has one. And now you are comparing a 70 grand M3 CSL which is a race car, to a boosted Neon... you are stupid aren't you?

I knew you couldn't read, and you just proved it:

No kidding smartass? I know its all over, its the new thing, hence VVT is an engineering feat...it was just, as of recently, being put into cars.

 

[YSSMAN]

100HP per liter means nothing in the US. If it has 500HP, it has 500HP, period.

Personally, I would much rather have the LS7 V8 under the hood of my car over the M5's 5.0L V10... The Chevy costs less to buy, operate, and fix if anything should go wrong...

In the land of F1, I'm sure the M5 is just the most wonderful automobile ever. But here in the US, where its cubic inches and horsepower that make a difference, not many people care. Sure, the LS7 may be "crude" by European standards... But when I can pick up a $67,000 Corvette and outrun $200,000 Ferraris and Lamborghinis without a problem, I'm sold.

 

[James2097]

I don't think anyone is making a point that American cars aren't good value, or trying to compare specific models against other European models in different catagories per se...

It is an indisputible fact that the level of engineering and technical advancement of US cars is not at the same level as in other parts of the world, price aside. No one is saying US cars and how they are built don't make sense for Americans, but that they really don't make sense from an international perspective. Making them seem very lazily engineered from the world's eyes, which is a valid criticism if America wants to export a lot of cars and have non-Americans buy them in great numbers.

For instance, we have just had some Aussie reviews of the Chrysler 300C, and it gets universally panned. The suspension is terrible and the build quality of the interior isn't too hot at all. It also uses too much fuel for its power, and looks ridiculously un-classy and comically macho (for non-US tastes - ie we HAVE taste).

 

[Plague.Ghost]

Wrong you said 7.1L not 7.0L which is different. GM could have easily boosted the LS2 another 100hp to make 500, but then you would just be buying a normal boostes Vette. A Vette with a 427 is special because its the same motor used in the Le Mans car...which wins a lot of races.

Regardless of how many races it's won, that's entirely dependant upon the person driving the setup of the vehicle. As a car sold to the public however, it offers speed, and not much else. And I suppose that .1 of a litre would have made a world of difference, huh?

Of course you would take a BMW, you hate American cars. I would take the Vette because it isn't a BMW. You can't compare the two, they are in two catagories.

I hate Chevy and Dodge's engines, not American cars. I like Panoz, for example, and Saleen. Are those are American? I think so. Maybe not, but I think so.

You've never driven an SRT-4, they don't torque steer what-so-ever.

You've never had cancer, but you know it sucks ass.

Proving that you are a moron.

Not really, because for one, you don't know if I've ever driven one or not, and two, I'm not the one arguing a forced-induction engine with less than 100hp/l is a great form of "engineering". As opposed to the Veyron which is a "waste of engineering".

Ask anyone who has one.

And I'll meet a dissapointed driver or a fanboy? 50/50 you think?

And now you are comparing a 70 grand M3 CSL which is a race car, to a boosted Neon... you are stupid aren't you?

LOLOL I GUESS I MUST BE DEN HRR?r?1

No kidding smartass? I know its all over, its the new thing, hence VVT is an engineering feat...it was just, as of recently, being put into cars.

Then howcome you gave me a completely incoherent response? It was an engineering feat on the first few cars, but copying an existing design isn't much engineering.

 

[Joey D]

Regardless of how many races it's one, that's entirely dependant upon the person driving the setup of the vehicle. As a car sold to the public however, it offers speed, and not much else. And I suppose that .1 of a litre would have made a world of difference, huh?

Races its won, it has won more then one race. But the Z06 is the road verison of the C6R, they were engineered at the same time with many of the same parts. The Z06 is to the C6R as the STI is to the Subaru Rally car. There isn't a ton different when you look at the Z06 and the C6R.

I hate Chevy and Dodge's engines, not American cars. I like Panoz, for example, and Saleen. Are those are American? I think so. Maybe not, but I think so.

Well Panoz makes like 1 car and they don't really sell them to anyone except people who take them on the track. Saleen tunes Mustangs and makes the S7, which isn't really a normal car. You can't consider Panoz and Saleen manf. they are simply tuners or race car builders in the grand scheme of things.

You've never had cancer, but you know it sucks ass.

Hey smartass, I have has cancer. I had skin cancer a few years ago. But the torque steer on an SRT-4 is almost non-exsistant. I hate the car with a passion, but my buddy has one so I have driven it before. I didn't encounter any torque steer what so ever.

Not really, because for one, you don't know if I've ever driven one or not, and two, I'm not the one arguing a forced-induction engine with less than 100hp/l is a great form of "engineering". As opposed to the Veyron which is a "waste of engineering".

I know you haven't driven an SRT-4 based on the torque steer comment. But you are ragging on huge engines...Jesus look at the Bugatti, a 16 cylinder engine with 4 turbos...by your logic that would be a complete waste.

LOLOL I GUESS I MUST BE DEN HRR?r?1

Um sure, more moron proof.

Then howcome you gave me a completely incoherent response? It was an engineering feat on the first few cars, but copying an existing design isn't much engineering.

Everyone has it, its new, it had to be engineered. There is that clear enough for you?

 

[James2097]

Oh this is hot and spicy

 

[Joey D]

Oh this is hot and spicy

Meh I have the power to end it when I choose, my thread I control the lock...when I get bored or it gets to out of hand I'll just lock it.

 

[Plague.Ghost]

Races its won, it has won more then one race.

It wads a tpyo.

But the Z06 is the road verison of the C6R, they were engineered at the same time with many of the same parts. The Z06 is to the C6R as the STI is to the Subaru Rally car. There isn't a ton different when you look at the Z06 and the C6R.

That's not my point. My point was that the Z06 is sold as a speed box and nothing more.

Well Panoz makes like 1 car and they don't really sell them to anyone except people who take them on the track. Saleen tunes Mustangs and makes the S7, which isn't really a normal car. You can't consider Panoz and Saleen manf. they are simply tuners or race car builders in the grand scheme of things.

They made the GTR1, the Esperante, the roadster thing and probably a couple of others. Saleen tunes mustangs and manufactures the S7. Ergo Saleen and Panoz are manufacturers. Get it?

Hey smartass, I have has cancer.

So have I and so has my dad. I have had cancer and my dad has had cancer. He's had it. Had cancer for a few months. Had it this summer, actually. What he had was melanoma, and what I had was melanoma as well. We both had cancer. But we had cancer at different times.

I had skin cancer a few years ago. But the torque steer on an SRT-4 is almost non-exsistant. I hate the car with a passion, but my buddy has one so I have driven it before. I didn't encounter any torque steer what so ever.

Maybe you didn't recognise the torque steer like you may have not recognised that giant purple and red mole on your back?

I know you haven't driven an SRT-4 based on the torque steer comment.

Well it's written in a magazine of mine, and they test cars for a living so...

But you are ragging on huge engines...Jesus look at the Bugatti, a 16 cylinder engine with 4 turbos...by your logic that would be a complete waste.

The engine isn't large, it has many cylinders. They also happen to be organised in an odd way— two W8's stuck together. Besides that, Bugatti already has a quad-turbo vehicle and I suspect they just did it to continue a new tradition.

Um sure, more moron proof.

Not satire or sarcasm? I love your insight.

Everyone has it, its new, it had to be engineered. There is that clear enough for you?

It was clear enough the first time, thank you, but Chevy including it on a car five years after it was invented by a non-American car company is patently not an engineering feat in any way. It's practically counter-productive actually, to put it off that long.

 

[Joey D]

it wads a tpyo.

Fair enough, so was a bunch of that, but fair enough.

That's not my point. My point was that the Z06 is sold as a speed box and nothing more.

And it takes engineering to do that. Also lets bring up 'Ring times shall we?

Z06 for all intensiver purposes car 7:42 around the ring, the BMW M5 ran 7:52. Hmm so GM can't engineer anything eh? Well same horsepower, the Z06 was faster.

They made the GTR1, the Esperante, the roadster thing and probably a couple of others. Saleen tunes mustangs and manufactures the S7. Ergo Saleen and Panoz are manufacturers. Get it?

They build like 10 cars a year, hardly manf. GM, DCX, Ford all build millions of cars a year.

So have I and so has my dad. I have had cancer and my dad has had cancer. He's had it. Had cancer for a few months. Had it this summer, actually. What he had was melanoma, and what I had was melanoma as well. We both had cancer. But we had cancer at different times.

Sorry to hear that. Maybe you shouldn't bring up medical discussion when talking about cars.

Maybe you didn't recognise the torque steer like you may have not recognised that giant purple and red mole on your back?

Hmmm, guess you don't know how I drive cars then. Trust me I didn't notice it. And I'm not going to bother with the medical stuff...like I said, car discussion.

Well it's written in a magazine of mine, and they test cars for a living so...

Every magazine I've read as in Car and Driver, Road and Track, Motor Trend, AutoWeek, have all said that Dodge did a great job of balancing the front end to make torque steer almost non exsistant. And guess what I did for a living? I tested cars at GM, not any more since I need to go back to school...but its well documented around here what I did at GM.

The engine isn't large, it has many cylinders. They also happen to be organised in an odd way— two W8's stuck together. Besides that, Bugatti already has a quad-turbo vehicle and I suspect they just did it to continue a new tradition.

8.0L isn't big but a 7.0L engine is? Thats not even justifiable logic.

Past Corvettes have had 427's in them, I guess Chevy was following traditions.

Not satire or sarcasm? I love your insight.

I love my insight to, it's quite truthful.

It was clear enough the first time, thank you, but Chevy including it on a car five years after it was invented by a non-American car company is patently not an engineering feat in any way. It's practically counter-productive actually, to put it off that long.

Well this is a moot point, dropped.

 

[Plague.Ghost]

And it takes engineering to do that. Also lets bring up 'Ring times shall we?

Z06 for all intensiver purposes car 7:42 around the ring, the BMW M5 ran 7:52. Hmm so GM can't engineer anything eh? Well same horsepower, the Z06 was faster.

The M5 is a sports tourer, the Z06 is a track car that's tested against the Ford GT and Dodge Viper, yet is only 10 seconds quicker on a 13 miles 'ring? Wouldn't you think the gap would be far wider considering the vast difference in the purpose of the vehicles?

8.0L isn't big but a 7.0L engine is? Thats not even justifiable logic.

It is actually, when you consider the number of cylinders. The Vette's engine has HALF the cylinders, with more than 3/4 the displacement, and less than half the horsepower.

Past Corvettes have had 427's in them, I guess Chevy was following traditions.

And they've come a LOOOONG way, haven't they?

I tested cars at GM, not any more since I need to go back to school...but its well documented around here what I did at GM.

I probably could have gathered all of that just by reading some of your non-car-related posts, but thanks for the reference.


So, have a verdict?

 

[Joey D]

The M5 is a sports tourer, the Z06 is a track car that's tested against the Ford GT and Dodge Viper, yet is only 10 seconds quicker on a 13 miles 'ring? Wouldn't you think the gap would be far wider considering the vast difference in the purpose of the vehicles?

10 seconds is a life time on the race track. But the M5 was purpose built for the Ring, the Z06 was purpose built to run around Le Mans. Two different tracks, yet the Z06 is faster. But we are going to drop this too because its assinine to compare the Z06 to the M5...I was merely just pointing that out to you. You think the 500hp V10 is better then the 500hp V8...I'm merely showing you it isn't.

Also to run a 7:42 around the ring is impressive enough...oh God that means they used suspension technology. Oh God what's the world coming to? American used suspension technology and built a car that can turn. NFW!

It is actually, when you consider the number of cylinders. The Vette's engine has HALF the cylinders, with more than 3/4 the displacement, and less than half the horsepower.

Z06 = N/A
Bugatti = Extreme F/I

nuff said.

And they've come a LOOOONG way, haven't they?

Considering the first 427's didn't have a ton of horsepower...yes.

Bugatti has come a long way huh? They haven't changed there motor either. Once again moot point.

So, have a verdict?

You are blind to facts and sort of an ass for putting that in your sig.

 

[Plague.Ghost]

10 seconds is a life time on the race track.

But not on a 13 MILE track!

But the M5 was purpose built for the Ring, the Z06 was purpose built to run around Le Mans. Two different tracks, yet the Z06 is faster.

How many M5's do you see in racing class? None. The Z06/C6R is the racing duo, whereas the M3/330i is BMW racecar of choice-- and that's for a different series.

But we are going to drop this too because its assinine to compare the Z06 to the M5...I was merely just pointing that out to you. You think the 500hp V10 is better then the 500hp V8...I'm merely showing you it isn't.

It's two different CARS. The engine didn't run the track, the cars did- and they were in seperate classes! You just don't get it, do you!?

Also to run a 7:42 around the ring is impressive enough...oh God that means they used suspension technology. Oh God what's the world coming to? American used suspension technology and built a car that can turn. NFW!

Hardy har har, Mr. I'm-comparing-a-racecar-to-a-luxury-sport-tourer.

Considering the first 427's didn't have a ton of horsepower...yes.

I have a simple explanation for this one: You set low standards for American cars and absurdly high standards for all non-American cars.

Bugatti has come a long way huh? They haven't changed there motor either. Once again moot point.

HA! Are you actually arguing that?! The EB110 had a 3.5L V12, the Bugatti has a 16 cylinder W-W8! They aren't even remotely the same! Even the turbos are different; the EB110's were supplied by IHI, and I'm pretty sure the Veyrons were developed in-house. My god. And you say I'm blind to facts.

You are blind to facts and sort of an ass for putting that in your sig.

...and Chevy sucks at making engines and you don't know what a car class is.

 

[Joey D]

Yes I was wrong to compare the two, but I thought I would show you that American cars don't suck...if I could find the CTS-V time I would show you that and if BMW made a compendent sports car I would show you that.

I have a simple explanation for this one: You set low standards for American cars and absurdly high standards for all non-American cars.

Not really, I set pretty low standards for everything. Except women.

...and Chevy sucks at making engines and you don't know what a car class is.

The small block 350 is probably the best engine ever produced. That's enough from you.