Ward's Automotive: 10 Best Engines **2015 Results (page 8)**
06-03-2006, 12:20 AM
#121
Three Wheelin'
heyitsme: you have one big fuckin attitude problem. Dunno what's stuck up your pussy but no need to vent out here bud.... If you have a point fine, but learn how to type without sounding like you have tourettes or something
As dar as the 4.6 goes....whoop-ti-do - 300hp from a 4.6 V8 that like I said ISN"T refined or smooth. Refined and smooth would be the 3.5 in the Lex with DI, and the VQ35 in the G and 350Z. Both make 305 and 300hp (give or take) and do the job in a much smoother fashion. Now obviously some will argue that the "rumble" and "coarseness" of the 4.6 is in keeping with the character of a 'stang, but nonetheless that doesn't make it a "great" motor. Heck as far as V8's go, I'd pick the LS2 or LS7 in the 'vettes. Or the 5.7 or 6.1 Hemi's.
One more thing - I don't give two shits about whether Ford stuck a 4.6 in a sub 25k car, it might make the car a screamin deal, but it sure as hell does nothing to boost the rep of the engine. Toyota can stick the 3.5 unit in IS into a Yaris - does that make the 3.5 a great motor all of a sudden?
06-03-2006, 11:50 AM
#123
Senior Moderator
Originally Posted by cusdaddy
I also don't know why they didn't use the VQ from the Z which makes an even 300hp instead of the 298 in the G35
Originally Posted by vishnus11
EDIT: curious to know - what do YOU guys think is the BEST engine out of them all.
BMW 3-liter in-line 6
Horsepower: 255
Vehicle: 330i
...and
with you regarding the 2.0T motor. On paper it looks like 
but after driving the A3, I found it to be a terrific motor. And as you observed, it has no turbo lag AND a fairly wide powerband.
06-03-2006, 12:19 PM
#124
Burn some dust here
Originally Posted by vishnus11
EDIT: curious to know - what do YOU guys think is the BEST engine out of them all.
Since it is not, I would go with BMW's 3.0 or Toyota's 3.5.
06-03-2006, 02:56 PM
#125
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Age: 45
Posts: 7,083
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by F23A4
They are the exact same Rev Up VQ35DE motor. Do not read too much into the '300hp' and '298hp' numbers.
According to Nissan, the 2hp difference is from the less restrictive intake on the Z, but I'm sure it's the same on a dyno.
06-04-2006, 06:01 PM
#126
Senior Moderator
Originally Posted by unlemming
How did Ford's 4.6L V8 that produces 300 HP get on there?
I had a 4.6 in my last car... it was only a 210hp version (circa 1994), but I thought it was pretty good back then... Got great gas mileage (for a V8), and lots of torque...
Now that I'm thinking about it, the CLS doesn't really get that much better mileage then my Tbird did.... and the tbird weighed about 400lbs more...
I'm sure the 300hp version has improved on the older versions too...
06-04-2006, 09:52 PM
#127
Safety Car
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 4,411
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by vishnus11
Its not terribly refined.
Also wondering how the Chevy Cobalt motor got there. I would have thought that the K series unit in the Si or the TSX would have been a better choice.
EDIT: curious to know - what do YOU guys think is the BEST engine out of them all.
My money is on the 2.0T motor in the newer VW/Audi cars. Very torquey, very flexible, no lag, economical. Too bad it probably won't be very reliable.
06-05-2006, 08:40 AM
#129
Senior Moderator
I will say that Ford's 4.6L V8 probably goes a long way towards keeping costs well below $30k for a 300hp V8 powered sports coupe and, it looks like Ford has been pretty successful with it thus far. (However, I would be willing to pay a little extra and get a discounted LS2 powered GTO.)
Back on topic though and despite improvements to the 4.6L (primarily aluminum block and 3v cylinder head), I do not believe that it is enough to consider it top 10 material. But, that is not to diminish its effective role in the Mustang GT.
Back on topic though and despite improvements to the 4.6L (primarily aluminum block and 3v cylinder head), I do not believe that it is enough to consider it top 10 material. But, that is not to diminish its effective role in the Mustang GT.
06-05-2006, 12:51 PM
#130
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 52
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
Originally Posted by dom
Was Merc's new 6.3L V8 not eligible yet?
And whats so special about the Saab motor?
And whats so special about the Saab motor?
Car must cost $52.5K or less to qualify.
06-05-2006, 12:57 PM
#132
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 52
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
Originally Posted by dom
Keep in mind that Ford's 4.6 makes its 300HP on regular fuel which is kind of impressive.
06-05-2006, 01:06 PM
#133
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 52
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
From the Wards article about the Stang engine and the 2.0 Cobalt engine:
--------------------
Source: http://www.findarticles.com/p/articl...n16084202/pg_4
No Slowing This Mustang Down
Ford Motor Co. 4.6L SOHC V-8
Associating this spectacular engine so closely with the Mustang is both boon and curse. It is an advantage because the Mustang owes its runaway success to its excellent, new-generation V-8.
Without it, enthusiasts would not have bought the 'Stang as the real deal, regardless of the car's brilliant sheet metal. But the engine's close affiliation with the Mustang discounts this outstanding modular V-8's keen work in its other high-volume home, the Explorer/Mercury Mountaineer SUVs.
The lightened flywheel encourages exploring the upper tach range, and the 4,500-rpm torque peak underscores the modular 4.6L SOHC V-8's newfound ability to rev to places the old 4.9L pushrod V-8 never visited.
Plus, this engine is perfectly happy to run on regular unleaded gasoline. No auto maker provides a more power-packed V-8 at a more accessible price than Ford's brilliant 4.6L SOHC V-8.
Engine type: 4.6L SOHC 90[degrees] V-8
Displacement (cc): 4,604
Block/head material: aluminum/aluminum
Bore x stroke (mm): 90.2 x 90
Horsepower (SAE net): 300 @ 5,750 rpm
Torque: 320 lb.-ft. (434 Nm) @ 4,500 rpm
Specific output: 65 hp/L
Compression ratio: 9.8:1
Fuel economy for tested vehicle (EPA city/highway mpg): 17/25
Application tested: Mustang GT
Like Firecracker In Mailbox
Ford Motor Co. 4.6L SOHC V-8
Associating this spectacular engine so closely with the Mustang is both boon and curse. It is an advantage because the Mustang owes its runaway success to its excellent, new-generation V-8.
Without it, enthusiasts would not have bought the 'Stang as the real deal, regardless of the car's brilliant sheet metal. But the engine's close affiliation with the Mustang discounts this outstanding modular V-8's keen work in its other high-volume home, the Explorer/Mercury Mountaineer SUVs.
The lightened flywheel encourages exploring the upper tach range, and the 4,500-rpm torque peak underscores the modular 4.6L SOHC V-8's newfound ability to rev to places the old 4.9L pushrod V-8 never visited.
Plus, this engine is perfectly happy to run on regular unleaded gasoline. No auto maker provides a more power-packed V-8 at a more accessible price than Ford's brilliant 4.6L SOHC V-8.
Engine type: 4.6L SOHC 90[degrees] V-8
Displacement (cc): 4,604
Block/head material: aluminum/aluminum
Bore x stroke (mm): 90.2 x 90
Horsepower (SAE net): 300 @ 5,750 rpm
Torque: 320 lb.-ft. (434 Nm) @ 4,500 rpm
Specific output: 65 hp/L
Compression ratio: 9.8:1
Fuel economy for tested vehicle (EPA city/highway mpg): 17/25
Application tested: Mustang GT
Like Firecracker In Mailbox
General Motors Corp. 2L Supercharged DOHC I-4
By winning a 10 Best Engines award in the first year of production for this engine, General Motors Corp. proves it can play ball in the performance market.
We can think of few options for a sophisticated, forced-induction DOHC 4-cyl. that fronts 100 hp per liter and can be had in a vehicle that starts at less than $22,000.
The 40% horsepower pop over the standard 2.2L mill comes largely from the ministrations of an Eaton Corp. M62 roots-type supercharger sending the intake charge through a unique air-to-water intercooler.
Crack open the throttle of the 2L supercharged Ecotec 4-cyl. and the firecracker-in-a-mailbox fun runs from idle through to the 5,600-rpm power peak.
The punch practically rushes out of this engine. It is the best compact-performance engine at its price and can stand against many engines in much pricier vehicles.
Engine type: 2L supercharged DOHC I-4
Displacement (cc): 1,998
Block/head material: aluminum/aluminum
Bore x stroke (mm): 86 x 86
Horsepower (SAE net): 205 @ 5,600 rpm
Torque: 200 lb.-ft. (271 Nm) @ 4,400 rpm
Specific output: 103 hp/L
Compression ratio: 9.5:1
Fuel economy for tested vehicle (EPA city/highway mpg): 23/29
Application tested: Chevrolet Cobalt SS
No Hope to Cure TME (Too Much Engine) Disease
By Bill Visnic
In addition to my day job, I'm the non-celebrity spokesperson for TME Disease.
By winning a 10 Best Engines award in the first year of production for this engine, General Motors Corp. proves it can play ball in the performance market.
We can think of few options for a sophisticated, forced-induction DOHC 4-cyl. that fronts 100 hp per liter and can be had in a vehicle that starts at less than $22,000.
The 40% horsepower pop over the standard 2.2L mill comes largely from the ministrations of an Eaton Corp. M62 roots-type supercharger sending the intake charge through a unique air-to-water intercooler.
Crack open the throttle of the 2L supercharged Ecotec 4-cyl. and the firecracker-in-a-mailbox fun runs from idle through to the 5,600-rpm power peak.
The punch practically rushes out of this engine. It is the best compact-performance engine at its price and can stand against many engines in much pricier vehicles.
Engine type: 2L supercharged DOHC I-4
Displacement (cc): 1,998
Block/head material: aluminum/aluminum
Bore x stroke (mm): 86 x 86
Horsepower (SAE net): 205 @ 5,600 rpm
Torque: 200 lb.-ft. (271 Nm) @ 4,400 rpm
Specific output: 103 hp/L
Compression ratio: 9.5:1
Fuel economy for tested vehicle (EPA city/highway mpg): 23/29
Application tested: Chevrolet Cobalt SS
No Hope to Cure TME (Too Much Engine) Disease
By Bill Visnic
In addition to my day job, I'm the non-celebrity spokesperson for TME Disease.
06-05-2006, 07:49 PM
#134
Three Wheelin'
Originally Posted by titan
The reason the Cobalt SS's motor "got there" was the exact same reason you'd put your money on Audi's 2.0T motor. Both are picked because they're very torquey, very flexible, no lag, and economical. Both are 2.0L; the Audi's make 200HP, the Cobalt's, 205.
06-05-2006, 07:51 PM
#135
Three Wheelin'
Originally Posted by gavriil
I disagree about the engine in the S4. I drove it and was completely turned off by the car and its engine.
06-05-2006, 10:33 PM
#136
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Age: 45
Posts: 7,083
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by vishnus11
Any particular reason as to why? Reason I ask is that I took an S4 vert for a spin a while back, and thought that the engine was pretty neat, with strong pull from as low as 1000rpm in 4th while slogging along at 20ish mph, a nice 7000rpm (i think) top end, very good refinement and smoothness, and an awesome throaty sound.
06-06-2006, 08:08 AM
#137
Senior Moderator
I drove the 4.2L V8 but in the A8 and it felt adequate. However, that is a fairly large vehicle (read: heavy). I need to try the S4. Specifically, I would like to see how it feels versus BMW's N62B44 (545i).
06-06-2006, 08:12 AM
#138
Senior Moderator
Originally Posted by gavriil
Car must cost $52.5K or less to qualify.
That kind of makes no sense. They are rewarding an engine, not the car. Most of these engines can be found in different models. So limiting the models listed to 1 car is really doing a dis-service to these winning engines.
06-06-2006, 12:36 PM
#139
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 52
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
Originally Posted by vishnus11
Any particular reason as to why? Reason I ask is that I took an S4 vert for a spin a while back, and thought that the engine was pretty neat, with strong pull from as low as 1000rpm in 4th while slogging along at 20ish mph, a nice 7000rpm (i think) top end, very good refinement and smoothness, and an awesome throaty sound.
https://acurazine.com/forums/showthr...39#post4151139
06-06-2006, 02:03 PM
#140
These ratings are retarded. Everybody knows Honda should be on this list. I mean come on. Honda makes the most reliable and most efficient engines in the world. They have engines that will put out 100hp/liter. That's superefficient!!! But I know what it is, if its not turbocharged or supercharged or has a large displacement instead of beign normally aspirated then they dont even consider it. What a load of garbage!!! Im glad I dont rely on other people's opinions alone.........
06-06-2006, 02:21 PM
#141
Senior Moderator
For 2006, Ward's 10 Best Engines judges nominated and tested 31 engines that must be available in regular-production vehicles on sale in the U.S. market no later than the first quarter of 2006. To be eligible, the engine also must be available in a vehicle with a base price of no more than $52,500.
During a 2-month testing period, Ward's editors evaluate each engine according to a number of objective and subjective criteria in everyday driving situations – there is no instrumented testing. Each engine competes against all others.
Ward's believes this process recognizes engines used in a wide range of vehicle segments, while the head-to-head format generates just 10 clearcut winners free of the “categories” that could dilute such a competition.
Meanwhile, the price cap eliminates expensive, exotic engines that by their nature should be superior engineering efforts.
By limiting the competition to volume-market considerations, the annual 10 Best Engines awards have a high degree of relevance, we believe, to the majority of the industry's powertrain developers, as well as consumers.
During a 2-month testing period, Ward's editors evaluate each engine according to a number of objective and subjective criteria in everyday driving situations – there is no instrumented testing. Each engine competes against all others.
Ward's believes this process recognizes engines used in a wide range of vehicle segments, while the head-to-head format generates just 10 clearcut winners free of the “categories” that could dilute such a competition.
Meanwhile, the price cap eliminates expensive, exotic engines that by their nature should be superior engineering efforts.
By limiting the competition to volume-market considerations, the annual 10 Best Engines awards have a high degree of relevance, we believe, to the majority of the industry's powertrain developers, as well as consumers.
12-07-2006, 02:31 PM
#142
That was uncalled for...
Ward's Top 10 engines - 2007
Audi AG 2L turbocharged DOHC I-4 (Audi A3)
BMW AG 3L DOHC I-6 (Z4 3.0si)
BMW AG 3L turbocharged DOHC I-6 (335i)
DaimlerChrysler AG 3L DOHC V-6 turbodiesel (Mercedes-Benz E320 Bluetec/Jeep Grand Cherokee CRD)
DaimlerChrysler AG Hemi 5.7L OHV V-8 (Chrysler 300C)
Ford Motor Co. Duratec 35 3.5L DOHC V-6 (Ford Edge/Lincoln MKX)
Ford Motor Co. 4.6L SOHC V-8 (Mustang GT/Mustang Shelby GT)
Mazda Motor Corp. 2.3L DISI turbocharged DOHC I-4 (Mazdaspeed3)
Nissan Motor Co. Ltd. 3.5L DOHC V-6 (Infiniti G35)
Toyota Motor Corp. 3.5L DOHC V-6 (Lexus IS 350)
http://wardsauto.com/home/best_engines_winners/
Not 1 GM
BMW AG 3L DOHC I-6 (Z4 3.0si)
BMW AG 3L turbocharged DOHC I-6 (335i)
DaimlerChrysler AG 3L DOHC V-6 turbodiesel (Mercedes-Benz E320 Bluetec/Jeep Grand Cherokee CRD)
DaimlerChrysler AG Hemi 5.7L OHV V-8 (Chrysler 300C)
Ford Motor Co. Duratec 35 3.5L DOHC V-6 (Ford Edge/Lincoln MKX)
Ford Motor Co. 4.6L SOHC V-8 (Mustang GT/Mustang Shelby GT)
Mazda Motor Corp. 2.3L DISI turbocharged DOHC I-4 (Mazdaspeed3)
Nissan Motor Co. Ltd. 3.5L DOHC V-6 (Infiniti G35)
Toyota Motor Corp. 3.5L DOHC V-6 (Lexus IS 350)
http://wardsauto.com/home/best_engines_winners/
Not 1 GM
12-07-2006, 03:37 PM
#143
Moderator Alumnus
Originally Posted by S A CHO
Audi AG 2L turbocharged DOHC I-4 (Audi A3)
BMW AG 3L DOHC I-6 (Z4 3.0si)
BMW AG 3L turbocharged DOHC I-6 (335i)
DaimlerChrysler AG 3L DOHC V-6 turbodiesel (Mercedes-Benz E320 Bluetec/Jeep Grand Cherokee CRD)
DaimlerChrysler AG Hemi 5.7L OHV V-8 (Chrysler 300C)
Ford Motor Co. Duratec 35 3.5L DOHC V-6 (Ford Edge/Lincoln MKX)
Ford Motor Co. 4.6L SOHC V-8 (Mustang GT/Mustang Shelby GT)
Mazda Motor Corp. 2.3L DISI turbocharged DOHC I-4 (Mazdaspeed3)
Nissan Motor Co. Ltd. 3.5L DOHC V-6 (Infiniti G35)
Toyota Motor Corp. 3.5L DOHC V-6 (Lexus IS 350)
http://wardsauto.com/home/best_engines_winners/
Not 1 GM
BMW AG 3L DOHC I-6 (Z4 3.0si)
BMW AG 3L turbocharged DOHC I-6 (335i)
DaimlerChrysler AG 3L DOHC V-6 turbodiesel (Mercedes-Benz E320 Bluetec/Jeep Grand Cherokee CRD)
DaimlerChrysler AG Hemi 5.7L OHV V-8 (Chrysler 300C)
Ford Motor Co. Duratec 35 3.5L DOHC V-6 (Ford Edge/Lincoln MKX)
Ford Motor Co. 4.6L SOHC V-8 (Mustang GT/Mustang Shelby GT)
Mazda Motor Corp. 2.3L DISI turbocharged DOHC I-4 (Mazdaspeed3)
Nissan Motor Co. Ltd. 3.5L DOHC V-6 (Infiniti G35)
Toyota Motor Corp. 3.5L DOHC V-6 (Lexus IS 350)
http://wardsauto.com/home/best_engines_winners/
Not 1 GM
Or Honda...
I don't understand why GM isn't on there. They make some awesome engines that get great fuel economy.
12-07-2006, 06:05 PM
#147
The sizzle in the Steak
^^
12-07-2006, 09:22 PM
#148
Senior Moderator
The VQ seems to have taken up permanent residence on that list.
12-07-2006, 10:28 PM
#149
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 52
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
Originally Posted by biker
Wasn't the 3.6 in the CTS supposed to get direct injection - that should make the list.
12-07-2006, 11:04 PM
#150
Originally Posted by dom
I've read nothing but bad things about Fords new 3.5. 
Most say its thrashy.
Most say its thrashy.How are they evaluating these things? What makes one engine better than another? How many editors did Ford fellate to get their new V6 on the list?
(Not trying to be an ass here. I see the reason for awarding the other 9 engines on the list, but this one just seems really pedestrian to me.)
12-07-2006, 11:04 PM
#151
Three Wheelin'
still don't get why the rustang 4.6 is on there. Nothing spectacular about that powerplant. Standard C6 LS2 or the Z06 LS7 would better represent american muscle. 
12-08-2006, 09:24 PM
#153
Originally Posted by SpeedyV6
And this engine is remarkable because.... the specs look pretty good.
12-08-2006, 09:46 PM
#155
Safety Car
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: philly
Posts: 4,426
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by SpeedyV6
And this engine is remarkable because....
12-08-2006, 10:32 PM
#156
Suzuka Master
Originally Posted by heyitsme
#1 It uses regular octane which I don't think any of the Japanese 3 were able to pull off at that power level. # 2 I don't think people know what any other engine on this list has as far as engineering specs all of of sudden to begin challenging Ford.
12-08-2006, 11:28 PM
#158
Three Wheelin'
Originally Posted by SpeedyV6
A 3.0L Accord V6 puts out 144 hp on 87 octane and ten more hp on premium. I'd be surprised if the Ford V6 was a smooth as Honda's too.
12-08-2006, 11:40 PM
#159
Suzuka Master
Originally Posted by TheAcAvenger
^^ He meant 244...for those of you who were as confused as I was
You're right. I meant 244 hp on regular; 254 hp on 91 octane gas.