Ward's 10 Best Engines for 2004

[PowerMac4Ever]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
BMW's 3.2L I6 is still the best engine on the list!

The list is in alphabetical order.

 

[Demon-Xanth]

picture of the "high tech" DOHC arrangement...


...In a 75 year old car

 

[boyRacer]

Originally posted by: Skoorb
You know I do love the RX8, but calling its engine one of the 10 best is quite silly. Mazda is the only company that makes a rotary car right now. The technology is quite accesible, but over decades it's just proven that it's inferior (for standard auto applications) to the engine we all have in our cars Price vs power vs weight vs reliability vs gas economy, etc. it doesn't really win out.

Of course it's no surprise that nissan's v6 is on there

Its only inferior because theres basically only one company developing it... I think Ford even tried shutting down the rotary division...

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: boyRacer

Originally posted by: Skoorb
You know I do love the RX8, but calling its engine one of the 10 best is quite silly. Mazda is the only company that makes a rotary car right now. The technology is quite accesible, but over decades it's just proven that it's inferior (for standard auto applications) to the engine we all have in our cars Price vs power vs weight vs reliability vs gas economy, etc. it doesn't really win out.

Of course it's no surprise that nissan's v6 is on there

Its only inferior because theres basically only one company developing it... I think Ford even tried shutting down the rotary division...

Is it inferior because only one is developing - or is only one developing because it's inferior?

 

[LAUST]

Originally posted by: Demon-Xanth
picture of the "high tech" DOHC arrangement...


...In a 75 year old car

LMAO, good call

People need to understand EVERYTHING in life has pros and cons to it. You just have to find what fits better in each situation. OHC's have been around a LONG time, but OHV still has things to offer that OHC doesn't

 

[boyRacer]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: boyRacer

Originally posted by: Skoorb
You know I do love the RX8, but calling its engine one of the 10 best is quite silly. Mazda is the only company that makes a rotary car right now. The technology is quite accesible, but over decades it's just proven that it's inferior (for standard auto applications) to the engine we all have in our cars Price vs power vs weight vs reliability vs gas economy, etc. it doesn't really win out.

Of course it's no surprise that nissan's v6 is on there

Its only inferior because theres basically only one company developing it... I think Ford even tried shutting down the rotary division...

Is it inferior because only one is developing - or is only one developing because it's inferior?

yes... on both of them.

 

[oLLie]

Originally posted by: geno

Originally posted by: oLLie

the Renesis brings significant and exciting new improvements to
the design

Improvements like slightly less horsepower and significantly less torque than the RX-7 rotary engine?

You're comparing a Turbo Rotary from the old RX7's to the NON-Turbo Renesis motor in the RX8?

In the end, for the market that is looking to buy a fast sporty car, do you think they care whether the car is NA or forced induction? If I had an RX-7 I would be laughing too hard after smoking an RX-8 (with my car that is nearly ten years olderand half the cost) to hear him trying to say that his car was in Ward's 10 best engines.

RX-7:
Standard Engine 1.3L 255 hp R0
Horsepower 255
Torque (lb-ft) 217

RX-8:
1.3L 238 hp NA
Horsepower 238 @ 8500 RPM
Torque (lb-ft) 159 @ 5500 RPM

About 60 lb-ft less torque and 17 less hp... hmm. I agree that it's impressive that they can generate that much horsepower from a 1.3L engine and especially naturally-aspirated, so I guess I would say it is a better engine which is what this thread was about, but I would still rather have the RX-7.

:beer:

 

[shabby]

The mazda rotary isnt really a 1.3L, more like a 3.9L.
And when you look at the rx8 hp specs, they're pretty pathetic for a 3.9L engine.

 

[Rent]

Originally posted by: LAUST

Originally posted by: jjessico

Originally posted by: CFster

Originally posted by: jjessico
No 5.7L Chevrolet engine mentioned.

That sure is odd considering it is probably the greatest all around v8 of all time.

Any top 10 engine list that leaves the 350cid Chevy off is plain old wrong.

Jason

Fifties technology.

50s technology still propelling the probably the best price/performance sports car in the world, the corvette.

We went over this in another thread, that block is not the same as the block used in the 283/305/327/350/400 it's now a totally NEW block as of 1997. If you are calling pushrods 50's tech then I call OHC tech even earlier tech.

the new block LS1 (1997 Vette) is not the same as the LT1 (1996 Vette) the physical block itself is about 2 inchest shorter, it's a SIX bolt main vs a FOUR, the heads are totally different and can be seen a mile away by the exhaust ports. distributerless ignition, and lots more. There are ZERO parts that share from the old block with the new block. Trust me I KNOW, not even the fuel injectors are the same.

Don't argue with factual logic LAUST, its FIFTIES TECH and is thus crap.

Anyone who calls a LS1 a boatanchor needs a kick in the nads, hard.

 

[Crappopotamus]

yeah. gotta give the vq some LOVE.

how many cars is it in now?