Engine of the decade...

166man

Mods I'm not sure if this has been posted before but still..

Last night at the pub myself and a few of my car-mad mates got talking and one of them asked 'what has been the best engine made of the last decade' we managed to agree on the Aston Martin V12 engine in all its different cars. I thought it would be interesting to hear what you fellow car-nuts think?

So go on what has been the best engine made of this last decade?

Mr Benevolent

Fiat Twin Air, probably.

krissovo

1.9 TDI, made diesel cool?

166man

Twin air definitely up there along with the 535d engine now THAT made diesel cool!:D

Henry Ford III

krissovo wrote: »

1.9 TDI, made diesel cool?

No the most recent decade

krissovo

Henry Ford III wrote: »

No the most recent decade

True

ianobrien

166man wrote: »

we managed to agree on the Aston Martin V12 engine in all its different cars.

The Aston Martin V12 is, in design terms, two Mondeo Duratec V6's welded together and breathed on by Cosworth (I think it was Cosworth). Hardly ground breaking.

For engines of the Decade, for different decades

'80's - either the YB (I know that's a pinto with a DOHC head and a turbo strapped on, but it dominated touring cars and can make almost 1000hp with tuning) or the B16 (first 100hp/liter from a normally aspirated motor, in a car we can afford!)
'90's - The Mazda designed Duratec I4 (race car design philosophy in a road car engine - They can make easy over 100hp/liter without taking the rocker cover off with a simple induction change) or the VW 1.9TDi (first engine to break the ol' diesel stigma)
'00's - BMW V10 and common-rail diesels by Fiat
'10's - Twin air - a new design concept for an engine.

With regard to the current "supercar" massive power engines, most are made with either massive capacity and/or strapping on big turbos. Honda were getting 160hp out of a normally aspirated 1.6 engine in the '80's

166man

ianobrien wrote: »

The Aston Martin V12 is, in design terms, two Mondeo Duratec V6's welded together and breathed on by Cosworth (I think it was Cosworth). Hardly ground breaking.

To be honest it doesn't bother me in slightest that it was two mondeo V6's bolted together..Having been in one on a considerably long journey it is fabulous. I'm sure other 'supercars' are faster in a straight line but the engine note from that DB9 V12 is just simply savage. Such a fantastic engine it really is..

So it's the best engine because of the sound?

166man

RoverJames wrote: »

So it's the best engine because of the sound?

No not really just an amazing engine overall.

bmstuff

ianobrien wrote: »

'00's - BMW V10 and common-rail diesels by Fiat

Year 2000? What engine was that?

Nforce

Bugatti Veyron 16 cylinder 1001bhp..

rabbitinlights

It's obvious, but it's obvious for a reason.

bijapos

bmstuff wrote: »

Year 2000? What engine was that?

Its the V10 out of the BMW M5.

For me its the engine/drive system in the Tesla, totally groundbreaking.

bijapos

ianobrien wrote: »

'80's - either the YB (I know that's a pinto with a DOHC head and a turbo strapped on, but it dominated touring cars and can make almost 1000hp with tuning) or the B16 (first 100hp/liter from a normally aspirated motor, in a car we can afford!)

I thought the first 100 bhp/litre car was the 1987 Daihatsu Charade GTti (105 bhp from 993 cc) .

The 88/89 Lotus Esprit had 264 bhp from a 2.2 as well.

ianobrien

bijapos wrote: »

I thought the first 100 bhp/litre car was the 1987 Daihatsu Charade GTti (105 bhp from 993 cc) .

The 88/89 Lotus Esprit had 264 bhp from a 2.2 as well.

The B16 I think was first seen in the '87 Honda CRX, and unlike the Charade GTti and the Esprit, didn't have a turbo hanging off the side to get to the 100hp/litre.

The first turbo car to be sold (to the masses that an ordinary Joe could afford) with 100hp/litre was the YB engined Sierra Cosworth.

blastman

The B16 was actually claimed to give 170BHP in Japanese spec, debate has raged for years as to whether this really was the case though.

I drive one every day and it's a great engine, though!

245

Subaru boxer diesel - not only is it amazingly turbine smooth for a four cylinder, it was designed and built by people who valued design principles over cost. I can't think of another non-specialist manufacturer that would do that.

But then I'm biased

RandomAccess

E60 M5 V10 or Lamborghini Gallardo V10

Both very impressive engines.

Tragedy

M47TU2D20 / N47D20

Showed you could have hyper economy with surprisingly strong performance.

Not particularly interesting, nowhere near as cool as the 535d, but far more important(imo) and has had far more of an effect.

E39MSport

Has to be the BMW M57 for non super motors category. Stick 2 spinners on there and it's a monster.

wiki
"
The BMW M57 is a straight-6 diesel engine produced from 1998. It won the "2.5–3 L" category of the International Engine of the Year award for 1999 through 2002. The downgraded twin-turbocharger version won that same award in 2005 and 2006. Again in 2009 it won the award.
"

Mr.David

The Aston V12 is a bit of a crap engine to be honest, its old as the hills and really doesnt produce anywhere near as much power as it should. Yes it sounds glorious but that doesnt make it a great engine.

I'm on the page with the BMW M5 V10, thats a weapon. Or the new Ferrari V8.

Henry Ford III

245 wrote: »

Subaru boxer diesel - not only is it amazingly turbine smooth for a four cylinder, it was designed and built by people who valued design principles over cost. I can't think of another non-specialist manufacturer that would do that.

But then I'm biased

Bias is fair enough, but......

It's not that smooth. It's not that economical. It's not that powerful either.

Subaru already made flat 4 engines so "principle over cost" notion flies out the window too.

BMW 2.0d for example beats it in every way imho.

166man

Mr.David wrote: »

The Aston V12 is a bit of a crap engine to be honest, its old as the hills and really doesnt produce anywhere near as much power as it should. Yes it sounds glorious but that doesnt make it a great engine.

I'm on the page with the BMW M5 V10, thats a weapon. Or the new Ferrari V8.

Age isn't that important sure look at when the 1.9 TDI VAG unit came into production, same with the straight six beemer engines. In the V12 Vantage it has 510bhp and 0-60 in 4.2 seconds...it's hardly that slow..

I would love to own a Aston some day, has to be the V12 though..

Come to think about it the V8 in the 458 Italia is also a peach of an engine too..

Plug

My choice from the 00's is the S54 engine from the BMW M3. In the CSL it pushed out 360bhp. Thats 111BHP from every litre. I think at the time it had the most power output per litre for a naturally aspirated engine. As for the sound it made, sweet Jesus.....
:cool:

SuprSi

What about the V8 Mercedes use in the C63? Amazing engine, with an unbelievable sound too.

MrFrisp

I'm with Jeremy Clarkeson on this one.....

Has to be the Alfa Romeo v6 engine...

What can I say....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CdNMjhh1Vdk&feature=related




.

MrFrisp

LIGHTNING wrote: »

I might be wrong but that V6 was designed in the 50/60`s so I think its a little old to be included in the Engine of the decade vote :pac:

Awwww....Bummer....... :eek:

Shall I delete the post??





.

166man

Agh so many good engines...:pac:

Tea 1000

Henry Ford III wrote: »

Bias is fair enough, but......

It's not that smooth. It's not that economical. It's not that powerful either.

Subaru already made flat 4 engines so "principle over cost" notion flies out the window too.

BMW 2.0d for example beats it in every way imho.

It is quite smooth, it's power delivery is quite even for a diesel, it starts giving very low, and it's not far off the BMW engine for economy in the real world. On paper the German engines always manage to beat the Euro emissions tests no hassle! It's better than the BMW 2.0d in terms of low centre of gravity, so it's not beaten in "every way"!

Tea 1000

Plug wrote: »

My choice from the 00's is the S54 engine from the BMW M3. In the CSL it pushed out 360bhp. Thats 111BHP from every litre. I think at the time it had the most power output per litre for a naturally aspirated engine. As for the sound it made, sweet Jesus.....
:cool:

Honda's S2000 engine beats it for bhp/litre, and while it's ane excellent engine, I'm not mad on the sound of it. In 6 cylinder terms for sound nothing... NOTHING beats the NSX.

Matt Simis

245 wrote: »

Subaru boxer diesel - not only is it amazingly turbine smooth for a four cylinder, it was designed and built by people who valued design principles over cost. I can't think of another non-specialist manufacturer that would do that.

But then I'm biased

Hard to see what you mean, any company can make a product they value that costs huge amounts.. considering its not their money but their consumers, thats "simple". If you mean pursuing a lofty or flawed goal when an existing and easier option exists, many examples:

Mazda Rotarys - commercially pointless but was a design principle they wanted to pursue (just announced its EOL now though)
VW VR6 - wanted to make a V6 to fit small cars engine bars, a minor market so introduced a weird VR form factor
VW W12 - Again wanted a 12cylinder but wanted to make it inhouse. Unlike a 4pot Diesel boxers, 12cylinders can genuinely be described as turbine smooth!

Every BMW "S" engine fits that category too, when their competition used FI they (used to) push the envelope with high revving but fairly torque-y NA engines.

Plug

Tea 1000 wrote: »

Honda's S2000 engine beats it for bhp/litre, and while it's ane excellent engine, I'm not mad on the sound of it. In 6 cylinder terms for sound nothing... NOTHING beats the NSX.

Your right about the S2000 beating the S54. Should have said it was the most powerful per bhp/litre for a 6+ NA cylinder engine, my bad..
I read on another forum Auto car magazine described the M3 csl as the best sounding car south of the McLaren F1. Heres a video comparison compared to others including an NSX. Turn the speakers up and you will find out its way better than any NSX:p

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=75Tnh4bo-Fw

Tea 1000

Plug wrote: »

Your right about the S2000 beating the S54. Should have said it was the most powerful per bhp/litre for a 6+ NA cylinder engine, my bad..
I read on another forum Auto car magazine described the M3 csl as the best sounding car south of the McLaren F1. Heres a video comparison compared to others including an NSX. Turn the speakers up and you will find out its way better than any NSX:p

Speakers schmeakers... the drivers seat is where I do my listening!! NSX for the win!

166man

Any of the Alfa V6's the 2.5,3.0 and older 3.2 are in my view the best sounding 6 cylinder engine, however I would like to add that I have never been in a Honda NSX or heard one except for a few short videos on Youtube..

Alfa beats all others hands down on noise anyway..

Tea 1000

166man wrote: »

Any of the Alfa V6's the 2.5,3.0 and older 3.2 are in my view the best sounding 6 cylinder engine, however I would like to add that I have never been in a Honda NSX or heard one except for a few short videos on Youtube..

Alfa beats all others hands down on noise anyway..

You need to get a spin in one. And not one where the idiot owner has fitted an aftermarket exhaust.

166man

166man wrote: »

..........

Alfa beats all others hands down on noise anyway..

.............and on snapping belts :pac:

166man

RoverJames wrote: »

.............and on snapping belts :pac:

Yeah this is true unfortunately hasn't happened me yet *crosses fingers..

ShadowHearth

rb26det skyline GTR engine.

great engine with even bigger potential.

impr0v

Cool pic of a disassembled BMW V10 that I think I saw posted here before.

pburns

Henry Ford III wrote: »

Bias is fair enough, but......

It's not that smooth. It's not that economical. It's not that powerful either.

Subaru already made flat 4 engines so "principle over cost" notion flies out the window too.

BMW 2.0d for example beats it in every way imho.

I also was thinking of the Subaru Boxer diesel but was afraid of being accused of bias. Besides, it's a bit prosaic in comparison to Veyrons and Skylines etc.:o

It's a few years ago since I drove a 320d - the Subaru had it licked at that time for smoothness and refinement. Hell it's better than most comparable petrols in that regard. If it's not as economical I think it's more down to the AWD powertrain - not the engine which is what we're talking about here.

As for power...yeah, I think they need to get their finger out at this stage. I'm sure we'll see snortier versions at some stage now Honda, BMW, Mazda et al have 180-190bhp 2.0ds.

But overall, I think the basic design is the best of it's type in the industry - as long as they continue to develop it. Maybe someday they'll put it in something that isn't fugly!

V Eight

245 wrote: »

Subaru boxer diesel - not only is it amazingly turbine smooth for a four cylinder, it was designed and built by people who valued design principles over cost. I can't think of another non-specialist manufacturer that would do that.

But then I'm biased

yeah you got it - thats the one!

Plug

impr0v wrote: »

Cool pic of a disassembled BMW V10 that I think I saw posted here before.

Here's the S54 from the M3.

V Eight

nice

245

Henry Ford III wrote: »

Bias is fair enough, but......

It's not that smooth. It's not that economical. It's not that powerful either.

Subaru already made flat 4 engines so "principle over cost" notion flies out the window too.

BMW 2.0d for example beats it in every way imho.

It is very smooth - simple as. Its configuration suggests as much and real world experience backs that up.

To back up your statement fully, can you provide an example of a similarly sized AWD car with more power output, better fuel economy and lower CO2 output? Even including Haldex which, as you know is normally FWD biased and not really a direct comparison. You only need to compare the similarly powered Legacy 2.0 petrol and diesel engine fuel consumption and CO2 outputs to understand what Subaru have achieved.

My point re principle over cost is that the easy way out would have been for Subaru to buy in a diesel from an existing manufacturer and adapt the drivetrain instead of taking the more expensive option of building a diesel engine that was shorter and as light as its petrol equivalent.

FWIW, my Legacy diesel returns 6.0 l/100 km (measured brim to brim) on mixed driving of Dublin inner city traffic and dual carriage/motorway. I cruise at the speed limit and don't worry about economy.

PrettyBoy

166man wrote: »

we managed to agree on the Aston Martin V12 engine in all its different cars

166man

PrettyBoy wrote: »

I'm not sure the comment was facepalm worthy just an opinion that 3 of us managed to agree on.

Popoutman

I'd put forwards the VAG-group V12 diesel as seen in the Q7 v12 tdi. EURO-5 compliant, 1000Nm torque, hugely efficient for the type of engine.