Rate these engines in order of superiority

[Blue_boost]

Which engine do you rate as superior ? What is your order

1. Big displacement naturally aspirated
2. Small displacement turbocharged
3. Hybrid electric / petrol
4. EV
5. The Wankel engine

I’d say the order above is correct, a big displacement engine means more effortless torque, simpler in design and better longevity, the sound of a big displacement engine can’t be beat.

A small displacement turbo is good but won’t have the instant response of the big displacement engine. Plus more heat related stress issues which impact longevity, not as consistent as a big displacement engine in its delivery

hybrid electric are getting better.. they can boost the bottom end response a bit but clunky in operation with car on off all the time which is silly

EV is a complete basket case, shocker, poor range, catch fire, no charging infrastructure, inconvenient to wait hours and hours to charge, expensive to buy, batteries degrade, heavy and crap to drive .

the Wankel engine was a good design but just too inefficient and made poor torque for its fuel usage

I’d say I’m not sure about position 4 and 5 above, the. Wankel engine could be better than EV

 

[King Gus]

I think the 6 cylinder turbo are superior to all.
Rb’s
VR38Dett
2jz
1jz
Ford Barra

 

[TwinTurbo]

You need to drive a BMW M5, 4.4 litre V8 twin turbo
There is no such thing as lag.


Always a Bulldog

 

[Kung fu man]

You need to drive a BMW M5, 4.4 litre V8 twin turbo
There is no such thing as lag.


Always a Bulldog

I worked at a blokes house in Turra he had a BMW twin turbo 6 it was ffen quick

 

[EL Hefe]

K20 all the way....

 

[Memberberries]

Anything made in Germany is superior!

 

[The DoggFather]

I'm happy with my LS2

 

[Hacky McAxe]

Depends what you're after, what you're using it in, what it's paired with, what you most want.

A 16 litre NA V8 isn't going to go so well in a Golf GTI.

 

[Nano]

As a mechanical engineer with an interest in motorsport and involvement, I'll give my take on modern engines vs older engines plus the technology involved.

Modern engines design wise are great; we are getting lots of power and higher efficiencies with smaller engine displacements and less cylinders, all the furthered developments in engine control and management via the use of mechatronics such as variant valve timings, variable cams, knock and other monitoring sensors, higher atomisation for injectors, transmissions and etc

Then we have improved mechanical design and manufacturing processes with materials, turbos and superchargers for improved flow, heat exchangers, exhausts systems, transmissions, differentials, brakes, better/smaller packaging and etc

The issues then come down to longevity and reliability; higher tolerances expected especially with how many modern engines don't use gaskets (RTV is usually used) or depend on the use of o-rings, the amount of electronics and mechatronics involved, the complex wiring and engine management systems plus the costs involved

Modern engines and system can be seen as not very DIY friendly or even tuner friendly with the complexity of the software or even to interface with transmission control systems, the use of plastic where metal use to be used which can be good and bad (doesn't hold heat but prone to breaking/cracking and becoming brittle from heat cycles) plus how many end up lemons from the odd/economic choices in design and material choices (VAG vehicles using plastic sumps now is a big worry lol)

The older JDM and GM engines which I have a soft spot for do come with simpler and robust designs which incorporate higher tolerances, but they all do have their issues due to the age of the design and manufacturing process at the time; take the RB which is a great motor, but has so much variation on the blocks due to the casting procedures used at the time leading to cracked blocks around the cylinder walls as some are thinner between the walls with castings moving during the procedures (people are paying big money to have these blocks x-rayed and measured to find the best manufactured ones to build), we also see less power and efficiencies with bigger displacements and bigger packaging

It all depends on your need/use, budget and how far you want go for what's best, to me without taking a budget into account it would be a mix of an older engine with the incorporation of new engine management and control systems including the adaptation of more sensors despite the reliability issues as you can really control the whole engine for the best performance, the use of better and newer materials such as MLS or copper gaskets and tool steel head bolts for greater sealing and clamping forces required at higher power (this is the downfall of a lot of older engines being tuned as these refined technologies were not available), newly designed parts which fix the downfall of said older engine such better materials for oil pump gears and etc

Mating a fully built older engine with modern/new technology with how it is assembled and controlled with a modern transmission is the best feeling you can get (you also need to look at handling etc); this is probably the best example I can give with how mixing an older engine with all the modern improvements and technology gave the best driving experience I have come across period:

I drove a R34 GTR that had a fully built engine using all the improved/modern parts, control and engine management systems plus handling mods matted to a M4 dual clutch transmission, the thing was insane and nothing like compared to driving a manual version or modern dual clutch vehicles...

Then you have the extreme cases where older engines are remanufactured completely using modern materials and processes (billet engines and etc) which are just insane lol

I could write pages on pages or even an academic paper that is very technical on this subject, but at the end of the day to say which is superior is a mix of subjective and objective views based on so many factors such as design, performance, use and requirements, budget, personal affect (noise and feel) and bias

 

[Blue_boost]

As a mechanical engineer with an interest in motorsport and involvement, I'll give my take on modern engines vs older engines plus the technology involved.

Modern engines design wise are great; we are getting lots of power and higher efficiencies with smaller engine displacements and less cylinders, all the furthered developments in engine control and management via the use of mechatronics such as variant valve timings, variable cams, knock and other monitoring sensors, higher atomisation for injectors, transmissions and etc

Then we have improved mechanical design and manufacturing processes with materials, turbos and superchargers for improved flow, heat exchangers, exhausts systems, transmissions, differentials, brakes, better/smaller packaging and etc

The issues then come down to longevity and reliability; higher tolerances expected especially with how many modern engines don't use gaskets (RTV is usually used) or depend on the use of o-rings, the amount of electronics and mechatronics involved, the complex wiring and engine management systems plus the costs involved

Modern engines and system can be seen as not very DIY friendly or even tuner friendly with the complexity of the software or even to interface with transmission control systems, the use of plastic where metal use to be used which can be good and bad (doesn't hold heat but prone to breaking/cracking and becoming brittle from heat cycles) plus how many end up lemons from the odd/economic choices in design and material choices (VAG vehicles using plastic sumps now is a big worry lol)

The older JDM and GM engines which I have a soft spot for do come with simpler and robust designs which incorporate higher tolerances, but they all do have their issues due to the age of the design and manufacturing process at the time; take the RB which is a great motor, but has so much variation on the blocks due to the casting procedures used at the time leading to cracked blocks around the cylinder walls as some are thinner between the walls with castings moving during the procedures (people are paying big money to have these blocks x-rayed and measured to find the best manufactured ones to build), we also see less power and efficiencies with bigger displacements and bigger packaging

It all depends on your need/use, budget and how far you want go for what's best, to me without taking a budget into account it would be a mix of an older engine with the incorporation of new engine management and control systems including the adaptation of more sensors despite the reliability issues as you can really control the whole engine for the best performance, the use of better and newer materials such as MLS or copper gaskets and tool steel head bolts for greater sealing and clamping forces required at higher power (this is the downfall of a lot of older engines being tuned as these refined technologies were not available), newly designed parts which fix the downfall of said older engine such better materials for oil pump gears and etc

Mating a fully built older engine with modern/new technology with how it is assembled and controlled with a modern transmission is the best feeling you can get (you also need to look at handling etc); this is probably the best example I can give with how mixing an older engine with all the modern improvements and technology gave the best driving experience I have come across period:

I drove a R34 GTR that had a fully built engine using all the improved/modern parts, control and engine management systems plus handling mods matted to a M4 dual clutch transmission, the thing was insane and nothing like compared to driving a manual version or modern dual clutch vehicles...

Then you have the extreme cases where older engines are remanufactured completely using modern materials and processes (billet engines and etc) which are just insane lol

I could write pages on pages or even an academic paper that is very technical on this subject, but at the end of the day to say which is superior is a mix of subjective and objective views based on so many factors such as design, performance, use and requirements, budget, personal affect (noise and feel) and bias

nice post.. very informative

for a modern engine would you say a bigger displacement N/A would be more reliable than a smaller engine with turbo that makes similar power and torque?

I have two examples to compare for longevity and reliability …

1. Mazda 2.5 n/a skyactive engine (139kw/252nm) vs Hyundai 1.6 turbo 150kw/265nm) both similar power and torque

2. Toyota 1.6 turbo in Yaris GR (200kw/370nm) vs Subaru 2.4 turbo from wrx. (202kw/350nm)

 

[King Gus]

K20 all the way....

K24 bottom end k20 head.

 

[King Gus]

As a mechanical engineer with an interest in motorsport and involvement, I'll give my take on modern engines vs older engines plus the technology involved.

Modern engines design wise are great; we are getting lots of power and higher efficiencies with smaller engine displacements and less cylinders, all the furthered developments in engine control and management via the use of mechatronics such as variant valve timings, variable cams, knock and other monitoring sensors, higher atomisation for injectors, transmissions and etc

Then we have improved mechanical design and manufacturing processes with materials, turbos and superchargers for improved flow, heat exchangers, exhausts systems, transmissions, differentials, brakes, better/smaller packaging and etc

The issues then come down to longevity and reliability; higher tolerances expected especially with how many modern engines don't use gaskets (RTV is usually used) or depend on the use of o-rings, the amount of electronics and mechatronics involved, the complex wiring and engine management systems plus the costs involved

Modern engines and system can be seen as not very DIY friendly or even tuner friendly with the complexity of the software or even to interface with transmission control systems, the use of plastic where metal use to be used which can be good and bad (doesn't hold heat but prone to breaking/cracking and becoming brittle from heat cycles) plus how many end up lemons from the odd/economic choices in design and material choices (VAG vehicles using plastic sumps now is a big worry lol)

The older JDM and GM engines which I have a soft spot for do come with simpler and robust designs which incorporate higher tolerances, but they all do have their issues due to the age of the design and manufacturing process at the time; take the RB which is a great motor, but has so much variation on the blocks due to the casting procedures used at the time leading to cracked blocks around the cylinder walls as some are thinner between the walls with castings moving during the procedures (people are paying big money to have these blocks x-rayed and measured to find the best manufactured ones to build), we also see less power and efficiencies with bigger displacements and bigger packaging

It all depends on your need/use, budget and how far you want go for what's best, to me without taking a budget into account it would be a mix of an older engine with the incorporation of new engine management and control systems including the adaptation of more sensors despite the reliability issues as you can really control the whole engine for the best performance, the use of better and newer materials such as MLS or copper gaskets and tool steel head bolts for greater sealing and clamping forces required at higher power (this is the downfall of a lot of older engines being tuned as these refined technologies were not available), newly designed parts which fix the downfall of said older engine such better materials for oil pump gears and etc

Mating a fully built older engine with modern/new technology with how it is assembled and controlled with a modern transmission is the best feeling you can get (you also need to look at handling etc); this is probably the best example I can give with how mixing an older engine with all the modern improvements and technology gave the best driving experience I have come across period:

I drove a R34 GTR that had a fully built engine using all the improved/modern parts, control and engine management systems plus handling mods matted to a M4 dual clutch transmission, the thing was insane and nothing like compared to driving a manual version or modern dual clutch vehicles...

Then you have the extreme cases where older engines are remanufactured completely using modern materials and processes (billet engines and etc) which are just insane lol

I could write pages on pages or even an academic paper that is very technical on this subject, but at the end of the day to say which is superior is a mix of subjective and objective views based on so many factors such as design, performance, use and requirements, budget, personal affect (noise and feel) and bias

Yes it’s the new trend to put the bmw box in performance cars now .

 

[EL Hefe]

Engines aside.... It's about power / weight ratio

 

[Bulldog1966]

All you guys driving around Sydney and surrounds when do you get to use heaps of power really?
I love my 6 litre ute and even though it's 12 years old nearly it has very low k's(56000), has some go better kit fitted and though I may be biased it looks and sounds great.

I'm also highway all the way living in regional WA so other than occasional shop runs my V8 sits on 120+ 98% of its life.I wind it out to quite high speeds on overtakes sometimes I.e when overtaking triple/quadruple road trains(sometimes 2 of the bastards)and the only sad thing for me is I'm not sitting behind it listening to the pure music it makes as it moves pretty quickly towards redline in 4th.

I'll rot in hell before I'd drive/own an electric shitbox even if I won or was given one i'd sell the p.o.s the next day.
There is nothing wrong with the very zippy 4 cylinder turbos I have been a passenger in a few over the years, their very quick but as a rule sound average at best.
For this old schooler, V8s rule baby.

 

[D0GMATIC]

Pfft, nothing compares to the power and performance a footy card pegged to the frame of your bmx could deliver

 

[Nano]

nice post.. very informative

for a modern engine would you say a bigger displacement N/A would be more reliable than a smaller engine with turbo that makes similar power and torque?

I have two examples to compare for longevity and reliability …

1. Mazda 2.5 n/a skyactive engine (139kw/252nm) vs Hyundai 1.6 turbo 150kw/265nm) both similar power and torque

2. Toyota 1.6 turbo in Yaris GR (200kw/370nm) vs Subaru 2.4 turbo from wrx. (202kw/350nm)

It is hard to say which is more reliable as so many factors need to be taken into account, you have some large displacement N/A engines which are lemons and some boosted smaller displacements engines which are solid

I usually need to look at the stock design of the engine to determine this to come to a conclusion honestly

 

[Bob dog]

The fuel injekshun VN 5.0 engine was a masterpiece, the VN itself well thats a different story.

 

[Blue_boost]

The fuel injekshun VN 5.0 engine was a masterpiece, the VN itself well thats a different story.

they were a fun engine. Great sounding… I had one back in the day in the VS series.. with a set of diff gears, cam, it was a rocket off the line. I would be spinning and pulling away from the wrx of its day

 

[The DoggFather]

Don't know specific engines, but you think Toyota motors would have to be the best overall.

 

[Hacky McAxe]

Don't know specific engines, but you think Toyota motors would have to be the best overall.

Yep. If you're looking purely for quality and engineering, you can't beat Toyota. But if you want a ridiculously over powered sports car with an engine that will probably blow up in 5 years, then you need to look elsewhere.