I’ve spent a lot of years behind the wheel of various cars and over that time, a few motors have really stood out. This is completely unscientific and is really a reflection of the cars I have owned in my long driving career. The engines here are not in any special order other than my experience with them.
The Oldsmobile Rocket V-8 was always my favourite V-8 of the cast iron era. I am familiar with the 307, 350 and 403 variants, from 1977-1985. The 350 was by far the best of the lot. I had a 1977 Delta 88 four door sedan stripper I bought for a cab. It had been owned by a priest and it didn’t even have air-conditioning but man-o-man did that thing run good. Lots of low end torque and a surprising top end, too. The 403 wasn’t worth the extra money and fuel since I could never tell the difference from the 350. The much maligned 307 was a workhorse. In all the Oldsmobile taxis my family had, we never saw a 307 wear out. The 307 was ideal for that purpose but I think that on a hilly highway the 350 would be a lot better.
Who doesn’t love the Slant 6? I’ve had a few over the years and I really liked each one. Even the later, strangled, ones were not bad. What I liked about the Slant 6 is the low end torque. I had a Dart Swinger with a non-smog motor, no PS or PB and nary power toy and it ran really well. In fact, if felt quick off the line and around town. With the Torqueflite it was really fun. That said, the party was over at 100 km/h (62 mph).
The Honda J series (60 degree V6 designed and built in the US starting in 1998, in 2.5 to 3.7 L versions) is a real gem. It is smooth, has great low end power and turns into a snarling gem when the tach gets to the upper end. I have had two of them and the both ran really well. Like a lot of Honda motors, a J series is kind of always asking you to push it harder due to all the wonderful sounds it makes. This meant my Acura TL was guzzling premium fuel at the rate of 14.5 L/100 km. Oh well, it was worth it!
The Volkswagen EA888 (1.8 and 2.0 L turbo four) is in my opinion a superb motor. I have one in my Golf and it’s the best gasoline motor I have experienced. My experience isn’t all that broad, but the EA888 is smooth, flexible and very fuel efficient. There is never any waiting for power on an EA888. Push down your foot and you have power NOW! The grey iron block is capable of making some serious power. A stage one performance upgrade is less than C$1000 all in and gives 236 hp and 270 ft/lb. The second the warranty is up on my Golf it’s going in for this!
The Chevrolet “Turbo-Thrift” inline six (from 1962 and up; 194, 230, 250, 292 CID) is the Rodney Dangerfield of motors: it’s just don’t get no respect. Everybody gushes about the Ford 300 or the Slant 6 but the humble Chevy six powered millions of vehicles in many markets. They are smooth, make good low end power and are as reliable as a stump. It takes serious effort to kill one. I saw them come into the garage with oil leaking from every gasket but they ran. I saw them with practically zero maintenance and they ran. In fact, I have never seen one that didn’t run. I could say the same thing about the Ford 300 but I don’t have much experience with them. As for the Slant 6, I didn’t kill one but I was present when my buddy did.
This wraps up my top five engines. Again, it is not in any way scientific or durability tested. It’s just what I like and maybe other CC members can post their top five. I am also thinking of doing a bottom five engines, too.
My Top 5 favorite engines of all time are
Oldsmobile 455 Rocket & Super Rocket V8, great mix of power and durability
3800 Buick V6 built from 1987 to 2008, I thought GM made a big mistake dropping that engine, I wish it was also available on the other W-body cars, it has a good mix of power, durability and efficiency
Chrysler 440 V8, I always loved the big block V8’s, especially during the high compression years, another great engine with a great mix of power and durability
Ford 390 V8, not as powerful or as high performance as the Chevy 396 or Chrysler 383 but it is a strong, durable engine that isn’t too bad on gas, I like that the 390 V8 is more focused on highway cruising rather than high performance.
Chrysler 225 slant six, not the most powerful engine but it’s definitely a robust engine that provides good fuel economy, when it comes to a 60’s/70’s vehicle with a 6 cylinder engine the slant six is tough to beat.
I definitely had the Buick 3800 in mind but I had to limit myself to only five engines.
In my opinion, ending production of the 3800 was a major mistake. When all was said and done, the 3.6 V-6 that replaced it was only 20 kg lighter and turned out to be a reliability nightmare. A new set of aluminum heads would have put the 3800 in the 250 hp range and made up the 20 kg weight advantage of the 3.6.
I was never aware that the 3.6 Liter V6 engine turned out to be a reliability nightmare despite it being more powerful than the durable 3800 V6 engine, I wish they kept making the 3800 V6 with more power since they’re one of the best engines ever built.
Now Buick doesn’t even make family sedans anymore which makes me sad.
The 3.6 vvt had timing chain issues. Frequent oil changes with Dexos rated synthetic oil are a must. Don’t know the cause, whether it’s the chain or small, restrictive oil passages. The GF has 108k on her ’09 Buick. So far, so good!
Agree the 3800 was a better engine that the 3.6 we got em in GMH Holdens.
Excellent choices, all. I’m not going to add this engine, and that, because plenty of other people will. I’m glad you mentioned the Chevy six. My father had a ’64 230 Biscayne wagon, with the Powerglide, and I really liked that car, maybe for it’s pure simplicity.
The Chevy Turbo-Thrift is one engine that don’t get no respect, so I had to include it.
GM, Ford, and Mopar all had great sixes. GM 250, Ford 300, and Mopar 225 all of which I have driven. They also had great small blocks such as 283/307/327, 289/302, and the 318. Less familiar with big blocks but would say the 390, and 440 which I have and have driven.
Have a 3800 in a Buick with low miles so time will tell. Let’s not forget the Ford 4.6 modular in so many Panther based cars. My only experience with foreign engines is through Mazda and that is only the 2.2L in the 626. Since one of mine went 375,000 miles I’d say that was good. Oh, and the OM617 Mercedes engine used for years and has the reputation for extreme longevity but no direct experience other than seeing tons of them.
the true star of small block Mopars was the 340 – a legend
I’d beg to differ. The real LA star of the Mopar line was the humble 318 with 2bbl carb. Millions were built and they gave sterling service. I get that hot motors are cool, and they are. I just think it’s even more important to write up the unsung engine heroes, the Turbo-thrift.
Here are my top five… the very top one belongs in the ICE Hall of Fame (IMO):
Ford’s venerable 302, aka 5.0L V8, in reality 4.9L – The one I had in my ’88 T-Bird was indestructible.
GM’s 3800 Series II Supercharged V6. Yes, this Ford guy loves this engine. I had two of these. My ’97 Grand Prix GTP, and a ’98 Regal GS. Never had one bit o’ trouble. And I know many folks have had issues with the plastic intake manifolds on these. Yeah… no problem here if you opted for the Supercharger. You got a real one made out of metal.
225 Slant Six. I never owned one, but have driven several. I have nothing bad to say about this venerable engine. I think my Dad may’ve had one in his ’60 Dodge Dart Seneca. He had that car for 6 years, which is like a record for him.
SBC – Yes, I said it. These damned things are all over the place. There’s likely a reason for that. My only real experience with one of these was the 305 in my parents’ 1977 Chevy Concours. I don’t recall us ever having an issue with it. From what I understand, the 350 is the one to have though.
My little 1.5L Turbocharged Hamster Wheel of an Engine in my 2016 Civic Coupe. Say what you will about the gas mixing with the oil, I have not experienced such a thing. The engine is so smooth… No NVH here… and it has a pretty good power band, and happily revs to 6K. That little car is fast enough for this old man. And the engine must be pretty decent… Honda is dropping it into just about everything it makes these days. Maybe it’s the new SBC, but it won’t be eligible for the HOF yet, as it’s a long way from being retired.
I seriously considered the SBC. No other motor in history has been this successful. It’s so cheap to buy SBC off if GM you’d be nuts to have on rebuilt.
Here is a new, not reman, 290 hp SBC 250 long block. It’s C$3823. This motor will last forever since it’s four bolt mains. It comes with Vortec heads, manifold and chrome package.
No other motor in history has this kind of aftermarket.
https://www.chevroletperformancestore.ca/product-page/350-290-deluxe
Can’t leave out the GM LS V8’s….The continuation of the Chevy small block and by far the favorite for upgrades and retro mods
The LS is definitely an excellent motor.
Of all the sad words of tongue or pen the saddest are these “It might have been”.
I see that you included two GM engines in your top 5 and commenters so far have added two more. I am sure it long be long before Pontiac and Cadillac get a mention because they both had some wonderful engines.
We have talked about this before but just before but just imagine what the world would be like today if GM had gotten serious and put their immense engineering talent pool to work on building a superb 4 cylinder. Or, possibly even several different great 4 cylinder engines. There is no question that they could have done it if they wanted to. And, with volume they could have gotten the cost down to where they needed. Toyota, Honda, VW, etc. would have had a much more difficult time getting market share in the US. We never would have experience the Vega Deadly Sin either.
Finally, a great GM 4 cylinder would have shown up on many Top Five Engines lists. Oh well…….
Instead GM gave us the Iron Duke. The Duke had very few, if any, redeeming qualities. It was a crude, heavy lump that was painful to the ear at anything above 3500 rpm. Then we got the Quad 4 and in many ways, it was even worse.
Well sir, I think the 2.5 liter in my 2015 Malibu is a very good example of a GM 4 cylinder. I love it’s torque. Smooth, and very trouble free after 110,000 miles. 5 qts. go in, and darn near 5qts comes out every time the change oil soon message comes on. every 4 to 5 thousand miles.
I bought a used Acura MDX a year ago. I must say the J37 is a very nice engine.
I was smart enough to buy a warranty/service contract. It rocks!, after having the pistons, rings, lots of gaskets, $5K and change, covered by said warranty. I added the water pump, timing belt W/tensioner on my dime, the motor was torn apart at the shop after all. My J37 is up to Honda spec again, and ready to go for a long time.
I’d add the VW/Audi inline 4, that was in my AMC Spirit, my first new car many years ago. It was just a shame it was de-tuned, not having the fuel injection, that it was meant to have.
Things have definitely improved in 35 years!
The Spirit was 1979-83, so same time as the Chrysler Omnirizons that came out in 1978 with a VW 4, for the first couple years anyway. That engine got around. I guess VW had extra capacity after putting it in however many actual VW’s and maybe Audi’s they made. Chrysler put their own heads on it for some reason.
By the way: Omnirizons were better than contemporary Golf/Rabbits. I will fight you over this.
Just checking Wikipedia….after the Chrysler 2.2 replaced the VW engine there were a few years of no-AC manual transmission models with Peugeot engines. And Omnirizons were actually built by AMC from 1987 to 1988. What? My last Horizon was a RAMBLER?
I wanted to add to your appreciation of the GM Ecotec 4 cylinders.
I have a 2009 Pontiac G6 with the nat atmo 2.4L, 12 years of service, no real issues. It does get breathless in the higher rev range, but plenty of torque for around town driving.
I had a 2016 Malibu Classic with the 2.5L and that motor is even better. The additonal 35 HP is greatly appreciated over the 160 HP motor that’s in the G6 and it had a better top end, too.
My faves are all workhorses, not a single fancydoodle motor in the lot:
Ford Y-Block- they sound terrific, whip up surprisingly quick and are quite durable.
VW Type 1, either the 40-horse which is rock-solid and burly, and the 1500/1600.
GMC 292 Six. They used these workhorses to set speed records back in the dry-lakes days.
Of course, the Olds Rocket. High nickel content in the block, very strong.
I have one with around 170,000 miles on the clock, and when I went to overhaul it, the bore wear was so minimal I ran a new set of stock-size pistons [four of the ALCOA originals had cracked].
Ford FE. Despite some blocks having the hardness of Gruyere cheese, like the Slant 6 the damn things are unkillable.
Yup, the FE was so durable they were popular marine engines. They are also very heavy and thirsty, however.
The only one I’ve owned (and currently own) is the EA888 Golf motor (ours is 1.8T) and you’re right, it’s pretty amazing. And to top it off, oil filter an drain plug access are the easiest of any car I’ve owned in 45 years. The combination of flexibility, power and (as we’ve learned from ownership) fuel economy is superior to any Japanese four cylinder that I’ve driven. I’d love to see this motor in a CrossTrek type vehicle or a Caddie (Golf pickup) in the US, but I guess they’ll all be electric soon.
1. The Chevy small-block V8. Over 4 decades in production, GM’s most popular engine during GM’s peak years. Come on! The GOLD MEDAL by a country mile!
2. VW’s ubiquitous EA827 four-cylinder. The building block of water-cooled VW. And I’ve have very good luck with them personally. SILVER MEDAL, by a mile
Next
Porsche air-cooled flat six. Almost 3 decades in production, in perhaps the most famous sports car ever, the 911.
BMWs M20 (the 1980s/early 90s) 2.5 six cylinder. I just like it.
Chevy’s 250-six. I like GM, they have a reputation for reliability. and these engines were like unsung heroes, in the shadow of the small block V8.
Honorable mentions:
Chrysler Slant Six. Stalwart, even if it only had four main bearings….
Honda CVCC engine. Not so much for the CVCC….just so reliable
Toyota four cylinders from the 1970s and 1980s….see Honda comment
I definitely considered the EA827 but I could only choose five.
For the mundane: the Chevy sixes and the Chrysler slant sixes.
For the exotic: the Alfa-Romeo dohc fours were venerable and their V6’s gave me many a mile of pleasure.
For the ubiquitous: the SBC.
An excellent topic. Here is my list, and I am going to restrict the list to engines I have either owned or driven a lot. And like you, I am not going to rank them – that would be impossible.
1. Chrysler slant six. Nothing really needs to be said about this one.
2. Chrysler 3.3/3.8 V6 I prize durability in an engine above most things, and fabulous durability will excuse moderate performance. The last Chrysler iron V6 was every bit as unkillable as the slanty, and the 3.8 version had some decent low end grunt.
3. Ford FE V8 – not the most powerful thing, but a very good engine doing what 99% of engines have to do every day. Gobs of low end torque, plus it made really wonderful sounds.
4. Ford Model A 200 cid four – Everyone calls the slant six the gold standard for durability, but the Model A has it beat. The low end torque is unbeatable and it will run almost forever if you keep gas in it.
5. A surprise entry (for me, anyway) the modern Hyundai/Kia Lambda V6. Zero mechanical issues after 90k miles and a hoot to drive – low end torque is acceptable but then comes a top end that is almost limitless. I have always run out of nerve before I have run out of acceleration.
Honorable mention – Miata NA four, the Mopar LA engine, and the Ford 5.8 that saw truck duty in the 90s.
One quick note on the 225 Slant Six. A Youtuber who specializes in old Mopars made an excellent case for the 170 varient being superior to the 225 that we know and love.
The 170 was the original design, and the 225 was a flawed modification. The 170s shorter stroke and better bottom end configuration made for a more rev happy, efficient engine. Here the video, skip forward to the 2 minute mark.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CoFlh1hSt0Y
Why am I not surprised to see Uncle Tony and Uncle Kathy here….
No, sir. That claim about the 170 being the original design and the 225 being a modification (flawed or otherwise) is a myth. It is not correct, not even a little bit; there’s no kernel of truth at its core. Both sizes of the Slant-6 were planned from the start and developed on the same timeline, and that is very well documented. Also, there is no “better bottom end configuration” on the 170; the two are configured exactly alike, top to bottom, except for different-stroke crankshafts and different-length connecting rods and pushrods.
Yes, the 170 is revvier and the 225 is gruntier. That doesn’t make one “better” than the other.
(the Youtube guy you linked is notoriously self-impressed with what he thinks of as his knowledge and expertise, but it doesn’t take much digging on the Slant-6 community websites to find detailed, accurate, well-backed critique of the many things he’s completely wrong about.)
I could only bear to watch that YouTube video long enough to realize why I don’t ever watch guys and shows like this. They all come off half-cocked, at best.
Well, Paul, you can’t separate the wheat from the chaff if you never step into the field. 😉
Scotty Kilmore makes me cringe. Doug Demuro’s videos could half the length. Only Coldwar Motors keeps me interested.
Scotty’s videos are bizarre. I wasn’t sure if he was putting on an act or really behaves like that. In his defense, his videos are very basic and directed at newbie car owners who know nothing. I think CC readers are far above his target viewers.
I like Eric the Car Guy and South Main Auto Repair, for how to videos. For entertainment, Finnigans Garage and DeBoss Garage know what they’re doing.
Uncle Tony’s Garage should be viewed with a grain of salt. He makes interesting points. I enjoy his videos precisely because I don’t always agree with him but he provides me with a well presented alternative point of view.
Doug Demure comes across as being amusingly condescending, describing the wonders of cars that CC readers would know well,as if he’s the first person ever to see a 1977 Eldorado.
Half-cocked: 50 per cent
Half-crocked: the other 50 per cent
Total: 100 per cent
(100 per cent what is left as an exercise)
Daniel, I have the impression you didn’t watch the video.
I’ve got no skin in Uncle Tony’s game but you’re not refuting the points he’s making. For example, his point about bottom end configuration refers to “windage” losses. The 170s shorter stroke means the reciprocating mass encounters less resistance from air and oily fog kicked up by the oil pan, than the 225.
As for Tony being “notoriously self impressed ” it’s easy to knock a guy down who’s created a YouTube channel and significant fan base, self funded from thin air. He’s made many videos with convincing explanations of principles on a wide variety of automotive topics, so he has earned credibility and a listen, imho.
Tony is welcome to his imaginative factoids, and you don’t need anyone’s permission to believe whatever you feel is convincing.
I’m not interested in a squabble based on your guesses about what I haven’t watched. But thanks for the offer, though! 🤓
Daniel, no need to squabble, we’re all friends here.
Telling me is shooting the messenger.
You know more about the Slant Six than me. Ive only owned one example and didn’t work on it much.
If you think Tony’s full of it, contact him directly. I can’t think of anyone more qualified than you to straighten him out.
He runs a 2 hour live stream on YouTube Sunday nights. He wants to hear from people. I bet he’ll happily converse with you because he needs the content. He’s also on Facebook and Instagram.
Put your expertise to use. I’m sure you could write about it on CC, too. Sincerely, I’m sure we’d love to read about the results 🙂 Your writing is excellent and I look forward to your next article.
I can’t speak for Daniel, but Youtube (and the web) are full of these things that are unwatchable/unreadable to me. There’s no way I would waste a Sunday night to try to set him straight. Trying to “set people straight” is an exercise in futility. Ask me how I know. 🙂
I’m not putting him down, and I’m happy for his success. It’s just not my thing. To each their own.
I never see a mention of this but I believe that the Slant Six has four main bearings, a long stroke, and actually the reason it is slanted is because it is an OHV version of the previous flathead six from the 1930’s. Also why it isn’t the newer thin wall casting type engine like the lighter Falcon six that came out at the same time. The slant is so it would fit under the hood of the smaller Valiant.
The slant six was a completely new clean-sheet engine sharing absolutely nada with the ancient flathead sixes dating back to the 1930s. The four main bearings was a choice they made, to improve efficiency by reducing friction, and not uncommon at the time. Clearly, its bottom end was not any the worse for it, in terms of durability. And the long stroke of the 225 was simply because that is what it took to get the extra displacement from a fairly compact engine.
Raising the deck height and having long strokes was also done by Ford (250 six) and Chevy (292 six).
The Falcon six was a bit lighter by virtue of the fact that it was designed to only be used in the smaller cars, as Ford created a totally different “Big Six” (240/300) for their big cars and trucks. Chrysler couldn’t afford that luxury, so they had to create a raised deck, long stroke version from the beginning.
There’s nothing wrong with long strokes per se; almost all modern engines have them again.
I did read an engineers description of the work he did with his colleagues in developing the 225 with its’ much longer stroke and the issues with the crankshaft and vibration. He said it was a lot of work.
I’ll take this in a different direction. This my list of the top 5 diesel engines.
Just my personal opinion after 42 years working in the business.
Detroit 6-71 – the diesel engine that made the bus go and a lot of trucks
Detroit 8V-71 – For years the go to bus engine and a popular truck engine
Cummins 855 – Long life span and put the turbocharger on the map
Cat 3406 – Rugged, powerful, dependable, long life. Its a CAT!
Detroit 60 Series – GM’s builds a 4 stoke(finally) and knocks it out of the park
I’ll throw in one more family of engines.
Two cylinder John Deere tractor engines, gas and diesel, dead nuts reliable.
Great list. I’d throw the International DT466 on the list, too.
I’ve owned two of the listed engines in dump trucks, a 6-71 and a Cummins 855.
The Cummins was particularly awesome. One of my dump trucks had an 855 Big Cam, a converted highway tractor, and subsequently way overpowered for it’s purpose. My employees loved driving it because it was the hot rod of the trucking world, providing ( for a truck) effortless power and easy driving. No load was too great and no hill too steep, to keep up with traffic.
One driver reported 120 km/h, driving up hill with 18 tons in the box, pulling a loaded 10 ton float trailer… maybe something he shouldn’t have shared with the boss!.
All good, but if I was charged with crossing the desert with no chance for rescue, it’d be Mack NA Thermodyne.
I don’t know the more recent, wonderfully efficient powerplants, but wanna nominate two oldies:
1. Ford Flathead: yeah, it had its limitations, and Ford perhaps kept in production too long, but manufacturing efficiencies permitted a whole lot of people of modest means to own a car with a V-8.
2. Chrysler (et al) Hemi—just because of the postwar engineering swagger it represented. And then the many years drag racers were able to get ungodly horsepower out of that same basic block/heads setup…wow:
Ignoring the model in the Jane Russell sweater….but it’s obvious that early fifties Chryslers had a whole lot of vertical space under their hoods.
There’s many excellent selections listed here, most of which I’ve owned and driven. But , I humbly submit that, above them all is the Ford 4.6 V8.
This engine is smooth, quiet, powerful, especially the DOHC varient, efficient and very reliable. It’s a real gem and Ford put a lot of effort into getting it right, at the very start. It’s seen service in millions of vehicles, providing smooth, reliable power for many years. Indeed, the characteristics are worthy of expensive luxury cars, and not the plebeian fleet vehicles in which so many were seen. The minor intake manifold problem the car suffered was Ford foolishly pulling costs out of the original excellent design, years after the initial introduction.
On the opposite end, the 5.4, especially the 3 valve, is not known for its trouble free operation. Weird.
A lot of worthy engines, to be sure, but I’m surprised there’s been no mention of the Nissan VQ series. Loved the 3.0L version in my ’98 Maxima.
My favorite. Had a 99 Maxima; loved the engine and the car. Second favorite is the 3.7 in my G37.
Back in the mid-to-late 60s when the economy was booming and middle class Ford fans in our family and neighborhood were going back to V-8’s the 390 version of the FE big-block was much favored. Smooth power, quiet, and reliable in our Thunderbird and the neighbors’ Galaxies, LTDs, and – by 1967 – Mustangs. The 289/302 was another favorite.
Loved all the engines in my three Beetles – 60, 63, 69. Reliable, fun to drive, and quirky, fun sounds.
I’m also surprised no one mentioned it. With all of the VQ vehicles I’ve driven (Maximas and Muranos) the engine not only powerful and smooth, it was so quiet that I surprised inattentive pedestrians when I stopped at crosswalks.
I hoped for the same experience with Duratec V6s in my Mustang and Flex. They’re not bad, but they’re also no VQ. They’re also saddled with some design issues that make them expensive to repair, so I’ll just enjoy the paid-off goodness until something goes seriously wrong.
Neither my dad nor I could destroy the 322 c.i. nailheads in two Buicks we drove daily. And the prior straights were silent & grenade proof. Agreed on the GM/Olds 350 of the 70s.
I had good luck with the Chrysler 2.2 turbo 4 in an ’88 LeBaron GTS. Never a problem at 236K when I sold it, & it was still going strong several years later.
No love for the Packard straight 8? Obviously it had some issues, but I doubt you could balance a quarter on its side on most of the other engines being called out here.
Another vote for the Buick 3800, especially the later Series II and III versions. There is, I’m told, an explosion of a gasoline/air mix several times every second inside this thing, but you’d be excused for not believing that after hearing how quiet and smooth this thing runs. It’s also impressively efficient and durable.
Another vote for the Chrysler 3.3L and 3.8L V6s. I think they aren’t as popular as the Slant 6 due to the cars they powered not being as well liked. Vintage Darts are cooler than FWD New Yorker Fifth Avenues and minivans for most folks (but not me!).
I hear lots of great things about various Honda fours and BMW inline sixes but have little experience with either.
The Saab turbo 2.3L was finessed into a nice little engine. Nearly everyone eventually had a intercooled turbocharged twin-cam 16V four-cylinder, but Saab got there first and showed the way.
I noticed a few on my list here already, and I saw one of mine mentioned: The Ford 300-6. I’ve had three of them, there are indestructible and will pull anything, albeit not all that quickly on the highway.
Will add the Cummins 6BT 5.9, another un-killable 6 cylinder stump puller.
Out of the engines I’ve personally had experience with:
Ford 240 c.i. straight six (automatic, in ’68 F-100): just a good old workhorse engine that took a licking and kept on ticking. Easy to work on when needed.
Chrysler 3.3l and 3.8l V6 engines (in several minivans): good power, reliable, long-lived engines. The 3.3 in our ’98 GC went 278K miles and was just starting to smoke a little when the transmission killed the vehicle.
Chevrolet LS3 6.2l V8 (in my ’17 SS Sport Sedan); gobs of smooth, instantaneous power in a reliable and well-supported engine platform.
Volkswagen 1200cc boxer 4 cylinder (in my ’64 Beetle); frequent maintenance intervals, but still a simple, reliable mill, perfectly suited to the vehicle.
Volkswagen ALH TDI 1.8l 4 cylinder (in my ’00 New Beetle); while not a barn-burner, it had plenty of power for its host vehicle and returned an easy 45 MPG (hand calculated). Sold the car with over 220K on it, still seen on occasion over five years later with probably another 150K on the clock. Loved, and needed, to be driven hard.
Navistar 7.3l intercooled diesel (in my late ’99 Ford PowerStroke Super Duty 4×4); bottomless wells of grunt, but I was ever afraid of something breaking, as I knew it would be a minimum $4K bill.
I started with a Ford, so I’ll finish with one:
Ford 8N tractor 2.0l gasoline engine; only made 25 HP, but 92 lb-ft torque on tap made it a real workhorse (especially given it was designed to replace work horses). Super-simple engine, and mine is now 71 years young and still running strong 14 years after a complete overhaul.
Oops, just realized I went over my limit. I’d cut the Nav and the 8N engine if I have to keep it at five.
The 8N is a nice little engine. It’s essentially half a Mercury 239 flathead V8. Shouldn’t that be on your list instead?
it’s twice the engine and……. twice as good…. 😉
Never owned a Merc flattie, but either way, I think the 8N got the better half! (c:
I’ll second your 7.3 Intercooled Powerstoke Ed
Great engine.
When I was working at Chrysler, I saw on 3.3 blown up. In 75,000 km of driving, the oil had never been changed.
1. Ford flathead V-8. From the mass produced mono block casting and machining processes it was a leap forward from every one else. It had faults, but in-line 4 and 6 cyls. are much easier to produce than a “V” design.
France used this design in their military vehicles until 1990 or so.
2. Olds Rocket V-8 1949 This helped solidify Olds an innovator. (Along with the earlier Hydro-Matic transmission.)
3. Buick 3800. Despite a literary shaky start, GM kept at it until it was right.
4. 1955 Chevy V-8. It had a few early “bugs” but was quickly the go-to engine for decades.
5. Hemi V-8 Mopars- A winner on just looks alone.
Just 5 engines?
1 – Porsche flat 6, air cooled obviously
2 – Jaguar V12, for the smoothness
3 – Alfa Romeo Busso V6, for the noise
4 – BMC A series, for longevity if nothing else
5 – Cosworth DFV F1 engine – 12 F1 championships must be worth something
Variety is the spice of life….
I have only ever driven one Jag V-12, an XJ12. Pretty amazing.
Have to agree with you on that Cosworth DFV – amazing run
My first car was my dad’s 1963 BelAir; it was basically a stripper with the Turbo-Thrift and three on the tree. I drove it for two years; 1972 to 1974, so it was already nine years old when I got it (ancient for those times).
I did my best to kill it; winding it out way too long and hard in first and second gears. It finally succumbed to rust but not engine failure, and we donated it to my uncle, who was head mechanic at an Arco station. He told us some time later that its engine had gone to a farmer to run some implement or other. For all I know his or her progeny is still running it!
I don’t think anyone’s mentioned the Chevy Mark IV big block. I don’t have any real experience with it, but it’s a platform that is still wildly popular among hot rodders for making a lot of power, and they powered some of the fastest muscle cars of the era.
22R-E, installed in I’m guessing millions of trucks and motorhomes.
I killed one in a 1985 Toyota 4X4. I had the truck loaded to the gills and was pulling a U-Haul trailer, up the Coquihalla Highway. It was the first time I had ever gone up that road. To maintain progress, I kept my foot to the floor to the summit.
Right after that, it began using copious amounts of oil.
I had a 1985 motorhome that weighed in at 5800lbs and made several hikes up to
the Eisenhower/Johnson Tunnels and over Vail Pass. Foot to the floor going uphill and sometimes I had to drop it into second, but nothing bad happened to the engine.
Aside from plastic timing chain guides wearing out, they were tough engines.
I would nominate the BMW S54 3.2 liter inline six (the one in the E46 M3, ca 2000). Yes, it was not built in the millions, and you’d better keep an eye on the oil level and temperature. But I think it is the pinnacle of the non-forced induction six. Buttery smooth, lots of torque from idle up to the 7800 RPM redline, it just want to go and go.
I’m a little biased — I’m going to autocross mine tomorrow and can’t wait!
Let us not forget the Jeep 4.0 engine a basic design that goes back to 1965 starting as the AMC 232 six.
That’s an easy one.
1980s Buick 231V6
1980s Ford 200 I6
1980s Ford 1.6L four
1980s Chevy 1.6L four
1970s Chrysler 318 (w/Lean Burning Technology)
——
(Very late) April Fools!
These are ones I’ve had that failed to impress me or anyone else at the time.
🇺🇸Malaise-Tastic!🇺🇸
I tried to think of a “ferrin’ motor” but mine were all pretty good.
In no particular order:
1. Chevy small block. It showed the way forward in the post-war period.
2. BMW M30. Powerful and beautiful to look at.
3. Dodge 383. It can survive an unbelievable beating and live to run another day.
4. Chevy ‘Stovebolt’ six. Extreme durability.
5. MBZ diesels (old school). The rest of the car will fall apart around it.
Peugeot XUD diesel. Powered a variety of cars from the 80s to the 2000s, some of which could give 50 mpg plus.
And – 500,000 miles was just broken in. How many engines can make those claims?
Citroën 602cc flat twin. Sounds great, managed to pull whole families around despite it’s diminutive size and prehistoric age. Two men can lift it out and rebuild it on the kitchen table in as long as it takes to listen to the classified football results on BBC radio.
Jaguar XK straight six. I love the way they look, and the history – and in the BL era they generally outlasted all the other components of the car.
Aussie Ford Falcon straight six. The durability! The history!
Honda Cub 49cc/72cc/85cc. Moved the world. Rebuild on folding table in the time it takes to listen to one long Bob Dylan track.
I have had the last year of the Chevy stovebolt six, the later Chevy 250 six, a slant six, Pontiac Sprint six as well as Ford 300 six and loved them all. I really used to like American inline OHV sixes, the only one that was a piece of crap were the small Ford sixes they used to put in the compacts. It’s too bad the inline is dead I think BMW is the last company still making them.
Douglas, It is my understanding that the straight six is coming back, though if that continues to be true given the rush towards battery electric is anyones guess. Mercedes has a straight six and Mazda is threatening us with one. I don’t remember anyone else with plans. The reason being cost. One cam drive, 2 cams, 1 head, 1 turbo. The packaging problems haven’t changed, so clearly they won’t be everywhere. If only the GM straight 4, 5, 6 cylinder family had survived…
I’m right onside with you about the Slant-Six.
We’re on completely separate planets about the Honda J-series V6. I’m operating from just one data point, but it’s a car I’ve owned and driven daily for the last five years, an ’07 Accord with the J30A5. It’s a competent engine, and a dependable one, but I surely haven’t found it exceptional in any way. It’s unreasonably thirsty, I don’t hear the music you describe, and I cannot relate to any part of your rhapsody for it. Perhaps it might be different if my Accord had a manual transaxle, but I doubt that would bridge what seems like giant gap between your experience of this engine and mine.
That’s really weird and shows how our opinions may differ. I’ve had two, a 2000 Acura TL 3.2 and a 2003 Accord Coupe. I loved both motors but the fuel consumption is the mean reason I have my VW now.
Pierce Arrow V12. Legendary luxury car smoothness and went on with modifications to power Seagrave fire engines for decades after Pierce Arrow bowed out in 1938.
Ford Modular 4.6 SOHC V8. Get past the fact that they’re not the strongest V8s and their wide packaging isn’t ideal for retrofitting into anything without serious surgery, they’re smooth, torquey, very reliable, return remarkably good mileage for a V8, and sound great(better than the Coyote to me). As much of a negative the wide packaging is they’re very easy engines to work on, spark plugs are accessed right from the top, the integral timing cover accessory drive is easy to change the serpentine belt on, even the intake manifold even factoring in the failure prone plastic crossover is easy to exchange, no sealing of the oil valley necessary with pushrod V8s, the engine is almost more characteristically in common with a slant inline engine with an extra bank. With so many produced in various cars and trucks parts are abundant.
My favourite 5:
Ford 4.6 2-valve – Rugged, smooth, and quiet with good fuel economy.
IH 304 V8 – Tough, torquey, and I love the look of the International script on the valve covers.
Honda 3.5 V6 – It sounds awesome, especially as Len noted above, when it’s pushed. Buttery silky smooth.
VW 2.0 8-valve – Not a ton of power, but quite torquey and revvy – like no other simple 2-valve per cylinder I’ve had.
Caterpillar 3406E/C15 – With a minimum of maintenance they just keep going and going. Good starters in the cold and no major trouble. We have two just about ready to roll 30,000 hours in highway trucks and they’ve never had the head or oil pan off.
I had an IH Scout II 4X4 as a teen, for a while anyway. It had the 304 and it was a huge lump of a thing. I felt like total overkill for a light duty vehicle. I fixed it up a bit and sold it at a profit. Not a lot, since it was a rust bucket, but some.
How about the greatest line of engines from one manufacturer for sale concurrently? Maybe Chrysler circa 1970.
225 Slant Six- of course.
318 V8- Long lived workhorse.
340 V8- One of the greatest muscle car era V8s
383 V8- Made bland family sedans unexpectedly quick.
440 V8- Another muscle car engine, often in ordinary sedans.
426 Hemi V8- Buy your own NASCAR engine!
Great QOTD.
I’m going to shake things up here by nominating the little Suzuki G10 triple, from the 1983-91 (I think) Cultus/Swift. Only 993cc, but heaps of bottom end grunt in the little 610kg ’84 Swift I had, with a nice growly exhaust note. You could just potter around town in fourth – as my aunt did for the 21 years she had it. Or you could cruise at 130km/h as my daughter did when running late for an exam once. That little engine took it all in its stride, and then survived three learner drivers and is still running today. Got to be a good engine.
You guys all missed the Ford Barra 4 litre six over there I guess. This motor is unarguably one of the greatest straight sixes of all time. And extremely tuneable.
Check some of ponies guys getting outta these mills in Australia.
That engine gets my vote as well
+1
I mentioned the Aussie six above, but didn’t limit it to the Barra. I owned a EL Falcon when I was in Australia.
My favourite engines, limited to ones I have owned or had experience with.
Pontiac V8 326/389
Studebaker 289
Detroit 6-71
Minneapolis Moline 206B-4
PSA XUD 1905cc I ran one for 7 years few problems gave it to my daughter she is still driving it,
later 1997cc single cam common rail PSA Turbo diesel brilliant reliable very economical,
Holden red six based on the Chevy 6 and good for the same reasons
265/245/215 Chrysler ‘hemi’ 6
Rootes 4 banger have owned about a dozen one went bang usually the car falls apart around the engine iron head variety not alloy
CAT C12 & C15 pull like trains from very low rpm
another vote for 3800. only GM I ever owned. 96 buick regal, badge engineered lumina. late in its life. that was a fine engine. even in its normally aspirated guise. enough to make me overlook the rubbermaid dash and other shortcomings of that car. frame gave way, but the engine surely had another dozen years of quality service left.
Dont forget the Jaguar AJ16S!
4l of smooth supercharged bottom end torque, and stout as a truck-engine.
It’s a bit big, but that just helps it look good in the engine bay, with its mile long magnesium engine cover and lovely raised red J A G U A R letters…
Also way better built then the v8 that replaced it.
My top 5 automobile engines in no specific order, ratings based on 5 different categories, and rated partially from my 50+ years working as a car restorer & former owner of a restoration shop:
1. [Category of production luxury car] 1940-1950 Packard 356, a magnificent NINE main bearing straight-8. First production engine with fully hydraulic valve adjustment. I had one with a stuck valve that I was still able to make idle so smoothly, that I balanced a nickel on edge on the cylinder head.
2. [Category of reliability in production engines that consistently ran with little or no maintenance] Mopar 170/225 Slant six. What a workhorse. They simply won’t stop running [and running, and running . . . ]
3. [Category of new innovations] Tatra T-87 V8. A rear-engine, air cooled, SOHC on each bank, Magnesium/Aluminum alloy split case, in a radically designed car, starting in 1936.
4. [Category of getting a high horsepower rating out of a production engine] Studebaker R-1 to R-4 series V8 engines in Hawks & Avanti cars, 1963-64.
5. [Category of “cost is no object” in a production vehicle] Rolls-Royce Silver Ghost 6-cylinder.
4. [Category of getting a high horsepower rating out of a production engine] Studebaker R-1 to R-4 series V8 engines in Hawks & Avanti cars, 1963-64.
I approve of your other choices, but this one has me baffled. First off, the R1 had a mere 240 hp from 289 CID (0.83 hp/ci), something that Chevrolet surpassed by a large margin back in 1956.
The R2 was of course supercharged, so that makes it a bit unfair to compare. But the supercharged Ford 312 made 300 hp back in ’57. And the ’57 Golden Hawk made 275 hp from its supercharged 289. The R2’s 290 hp from 289 CID is still exactly the same the ’57 Chevy 283, but without a supercharger!
The R3 and R4 were not “production engines” in the usual sense. They had completely new and unique cylinder heads specially created by Granatelli, and only a couple hundred were ever made. But even if we consider them “production”, their output still is not all that impressive.
The R3 made 280 hp from 304.5 CID, and with a crazy high 12:1 CR. It made 0.92 hp/ci. The ’57 Chevy 283 had that beat easily (270 hp with carbs, 283 hp with FI). And it had a much more reasonable 9:1 CR. And the 270 hp version could even be teamed up with Powerglide.
As to the supercharged R4, it made 1.1 hp/ci. The ’62 Chevy 327 (360 hp) equaled that without a supercharger. And the 375 hp version from ’64 topped that.
The Studebaker’s intrinsically poor-breathing heads were a serious limitation to its ability to make power. Even the specially fabricated R3/4 heads still didn’t breathe as well as a plain-Jane Chevy 283 head made in the millions.
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/automotive-histories/engine-history-the-studebaker-v8/3/
Solely speaking from my experiences:
1. GM SBC/LS/(LT by extension) V8. The all-conquering V8 of the 20th Century and beyond.
2. Chrysler 2.2 Trenton 4 cylinder, particularly the turbo version. In the right chassis, it was a great motor.
3. GM 60 degree V6. I’ve been driving some version of the 60 degree V6 for 20 years in FWD vehicles now and still enjoying them.
4. Ford Windsor V8s. The Cleveland motor got all of the glory, but the Windsor was the workhorse and later, the show horse.
5. The Fiat 1.1/1.3/1.5L 4 cylinder as installed in many of the 70’s Fiats. The cars were biodegradable, but the motor had a lot of brio.
Ask me again in 15 minutes and I’ll have another entirely different list.
Based only on my personal experiences with cars I’ve actually owned arranged in the order I experienced them.
1. LA 318 2bbl. My favourite workhorse engine of all time as they have an excellent balance of power and economy as well as ease of maintenance. Keep the oil changed and replace the timing chain on schedule and they just keep going and going. All of my Mopar V8s have been 318 2 barrels. Cars I’ve had/have with the 318: ’67 Sport Fury, ’80 Cordoba, ’79 St. Regis and ’68 Fury VIP.
2. Slant Six 225. Had one in a Duster and the only change I would have made would have been to go from a 1 to 2bbl carburetor to make getting on the interstate a little easier. My comment about longevity regarding the 318 applies here.
3. Ford 289 V8. Another excellent combination of power and economy. Had one in a ’65 1/2 Galaxie 500. With the aerodynamics of a refrigerator and painted the same shade of white, this car with a Motorcraft 2100 carburetor routinely got into the low 20s mpg on the interstate. If I ever have another Ford, I’d want this combo again.
4. Mopar 2.5 four cylinder. A tough little motor with good torque and fuel economy. I’m on my second one of these engines with my ’89 Dodge Dakota with a 5 speed manual. It has good pep. Comparable to my Slant Six. My first one was in an ’89 LeBaron coupe with the A413 automatic.
5. Mopar 3.2 V6. I had this in a 1999 Concorde Lxi. Fantastic balance of power and economy no doubt helped by all of the computers and multi-port fuel injection. V8 power with the fuel economy of my 2.5 cylinder LeBaron. Only had it for a year and a half before I got T-boned on my way to work one morning. Tried to find another one but ended up with a Concorde with the 3.5 instead. That 3.5 gave me some insight on what it would have been like to do anything to the 3.2 and my gripes would have had little to do with the engine and everything on how tightly it was packaged.
Not in order:
1. “Atlas” DOHC, 4 valve per cylinder inline six-popper, as used in 2002–2009 Chevy Trailblazer, GMC Envoy, and similar Saab, Isuzu, and Buick versions of that chassis. Everything the famous XJ-6 Jaguar engine is, with way more power, better efficiency, lower emissions, greater durability, no overheating or excess oil consumption. Downsides are that GM never put it in a lightweight sporty vehicle; it’s nothing special to look at–covered with Tupperware and heat-shield; and no competition history. The five-cylinder version went into the mid-size GM pickups–Colorado, etc.
2. LS-series V-8. World-class, world-leading pushrod V-8. The Ford Modular had overhead cams, and years of development time ahead of the release of GMs LS, and the LS made it look like an anemic third-grader it’s first year out. Had some problems with cylinder heads made by a contracted supplier. The only thing the LS platform needs is to remove the hateful Displacement-On-Demand “feature”.
3. Ford Flathead (the original, “Medium” block. Not the tiny V8-60, not the larger “Lincoln/Truck” job with the distributor in the rear.) The engine was a crack-prone, poorly-designed prehistoric turd, with no more power in stock form than Ford’s own pushrod six-cylinder. However, the *philosophy* was priceless. V-8s for the masses. Essentially the beginning of the aftermarket performance industry–a low-cost platform that owners could build upon. Given Ford’s lack of development, gains were easy to achieve using off-the-shelf aftermarket parts.
4. Current-generation Hemi. Another kick in the teeth for the Ford Modular. Nearly as good as the LS, but needs twice as many spark plugs, and generally more expensive. Clouded just a bit with Mopar lack of development; but a stellar effort from a company known for excellent basic engineering but not enough corporate resources to provide GM-style refinement.
5. Chevy Small-block. Picked up where the Flathead left off. An inexpensive platform that high-school kids could make power with, using almost-unlimited aftermarket support. The biggest strength of the platform was less about the GM engineering–although it was good but not “world-class” for the mid-50’s timeframe, and got substantial over-the-parts-counter support from GM–and more about the development done by outside suppliers fueled by the enormous production volume of the engine.
Honorable Mentions:
Original Olds Rocket (mass-produced OHV V-8 outside of “luxury” cars)
Buick/Olds Aluminum V-8 (Father of the Buick small-block V-8 and the Buick V-6)
Any Mopar Hemi
Hudson 308 inline 6 (a flathead six that was competitive with early OHV V-8s.)
Packard V-8 (considered, but ultimately rejected for continued production by both GM and Ford after Packard’s demise. Packard had considered a V-12 version that was not produced.)
Specifically NOT mentioned:
Any engine that can’t make enough power to hurt itself. Most Domestic four- and six-poppers before Y2K, for example.
Since motor and engine are interchangeable I have two picks. Frankly while I enjoy a nice gas engine they are inferior to electric motors in many respects.
1. Tesla Electric Motor
2. Wrightspeed microturbine with electric motor Hybrid
Lots of love for in-line 6’s!
So I won’t mention how many in-line 6’s I have swapped out for V8’s.
’87-93 5.0/302 in the Mustang.
’86+ 351 Windsor. Roller cam block only.
2003-07 Dodge/Ram Cummins 5.9L Common rail EFI.
’96+ SBC in GM light trucks. Roller cam, SEFI.
2006-2008 Honda K24 in the Acura TSX.
I waited on commenting, to see how things would go and what criteria people would use. Here are five I am familiar with, that have various merits.
Foreign entries–
Austin/Morris/BMC/BL “A” engine. A nice dose of power, torque, and reliability from a very small engine, that went all over the map on displacement and applications. An interesting combination of design limitations (e.g. siamesed intake ports, and in FWD versions, an oil pan shared with the transmission), along with interesting engineering solutions (e.g. Weslake designing the head porting, the use of brilliantly simple but ancient single and double SU carburetors).
Mazda rotary engines, all of them. An ICE evolutionary dead end, finicky, often unreliable, intolerant of overheating or tuning errors, and some of the major engine parts are “wear parts”, designed to wear out and be replaced over time and mileage. Not what one would call “owner friendly”, but they demonstrated that there was more than one way to go to make ICE power. Also, they provided a unique power curve and sensation of acceleration, very “perky” and yet turbine-like, back in the day when the ICE was entering the pollution control/high mileage necessity elements of the ’70s malaise. A good alternative for the day, even as its fundamental shortcomings, impossible to engineer out, would ultimately do it in.
Domestic entries–
The Chevy 350, for its universal application and unending variation. The core platform for the V8 iteration of the ICE, and an early trendsetter, in its smaller displacement variations, in lightweight and compact packaging of good and dead reliable power.
The Mopar 318/360, as installed in the ’90s Dodge pickups. Torque forever, dead smooth, reliable, sturdy, and only for the low mileage figures can one fault them.
The 134 c.i. Willys flathead “Go-Devil” and F-head “Hurricane” four cylinders. These were low compression, low revving, heavy castings that would start on a dime and created tons of torque. They powered most Jeeps for thirty years, and all sorts of other Willys and Kaiser vehicles, along with generators, welders, and various static rpm engine applications. They have a unique sound and throttle feel, and are really the link between the old flathead fours of the Model T and A era, all the way up to the early seventies.
Admittedly a hodge-podge of nominees, but this is such a subjective topic…
These are all engines I owned or spent a lot of time working on in friends vehicles.
Not in order:
1. Chevy LS.
2. Chevy Small block, not the odd/old smallish ones, the 327 and 350.
3. Mopar LA 340 and 360 “High Performance”. I owned 3 360 powered vehicles, and worked on my friend’s 340 Challenger all the time.
4. Mopar RB and B engines, the later ’60’s 413, 426, 440, and 383, great engines.
5. The 6.4 Hemi. As close to the 440 SixPack as you can get today.
Impossible to narrow it down to 5. I got it down to 15 and that took some work!
in no particular order:
AMC/jeep 242 six (4.0L)
Ford 240/300 six
Toyota 2JZ
Rover 4.0L V8
Cosworth 2.9 V6
Honda K20 series
Ford BOSS 302
GMC 305 V6
VAM 282 six
John Deere early 2 cylinder (johnny popper)
Marine Lugger diesels (essentially worked over john deere diesels)
Honda 49cc cub/super cub and variants
Cummins B series
Lycoming O-series
Detroit Diesel series 71 with turbocharger in addition to blower