Ward’s Names 10 Best Engines for 2006
Ward’s Names 10 Best Engines for 2006
SOUTHFIELD, MI – The winners of Ward’s 10 Best Engines awards for 2006 demonstrate U.S. auto consumers still can have it all: Many of the winning engines highlight sophisticated new technology that generates exhilarating performance – but also improves fuel economy.
The 2006 list marks the 12th year for the Ward’s 10 Best Engines program, the auto industry’s highly anticipated annual barometer of powertrain prowess.
This year’s winners, as well as the vehicles tested, include:
Audi AG: 2L FSI turbocharged DOHC I-4 (Audi A3)
Audi AG: 4.2L DOHC V-8 (Audi S4)
BMW AG: 3L DOHC I-6 (330i)
DaimlerChrysler AG:5.7L Hemi Magnum OHV V-8 (Dodge Charger R/T)
Ford Motor Co.: 4.6L SOHC V-8 (Mustang GT)
General Motors Corp.: 2L supercharged DOHC I-4 (Chevrolet Cobalt SS)
General Motors Corp.: 2.8L turbocharged DOHC V-6 (Saab 9-3 Aero)
Mazda Motor Corp.: 2.3L DISI turbocharged DOHC I-4 (Mazdaspeed 6)
Nissan Motor Co. Ltd.: 3.5L DOHC V-6 (Infiniti G35 6MT)
Toyota Motor Corp.: 3.5L DOHC V-6 (Lexus IS 350)
Source: Wards
The 2006 list marks the 12th year for the Ward’s 10 Best Engines program, the auto industry’s highly anticipated annual barometer of powertrain prowess.
This year’s winners, as well as the vehicles tested, include:
Audi AG: 2L FSI turbocharged DOHC I-4 (Audi A3)
Audi AG: 4.2L DOHC V-8 (Audi S4)
BMW AG: 3L DOHC I-6 (330i)
DaimlerChrysler AG:5.7L Hemi Magnum OHV V-8 (Dodge Charger R/T)
Ford Motor Co.: 4.6L SOHC V-8 (Mustang GT)
General Motors Corp.: 2L supercharged DOHC I-4 (Chevrolet Cobalt SS)
General Motors Corp.: 2.8L turbocharged DOHC V-6 (Saab 9-3 Aero)
Mazda Motor Corp.: 2.3L DISI turbocharged DOHC I-4 (Mazdaspeed 6)
Nissan Motor Co. Ltd.: 3.5L DOHC V-6 (Infiniti G35 6MT)
Toyota Motor Corp.: 3.5L DOHC V-6 (Lexus IS 350)
Source: Wards
http://wardsauto.com/ar/auto_wards_names_best/index.htm
GM has 2 entries. Still no ls2, Ls4 or an LsX series motor for that matter, which surprises me. Nothing against the Ford's 4.6 3valver or Chrysler's Hemi cause both are good motors, but i don't see how either of these v8's are superior.
I could see how the ls7 wasn't included (engine has to be in vehicle costing under 52k), but the Ls2 should have made the list.
Last edited by Gold_Rush; Dec 10, 2005 at 03:22 PM.
Re: Ward’s Names 10 Best Engines for 2006
Yeah, I don't see how the 5.7L Hemi is better than LS2... but perhaps Wards thought the MDS technology on Hemi was a fundamental fuel saving feature...
As for the Ford 4.6 DOHC... That's inexcusable!
As for the Ford 4.6 DOHC... That's inexcusable!
Re: Ward’s Names 10 Best Engines for 2006
"Audi AG: 2L FSI turbocharged DOHC I-4 (Audi A3)"
That's what I've got in my A4. It's a decently powerful motor... nothing amazing though. Somewhat rough around the edges IMO, though for a 4-cyl I guess that's to be expected to an extent. Gas milage is amazing, though... I've at 1500 miles and got 31mpg with 95% city driving and not exactly being easy on the car, either.:eel:
That 3.5 from Toyota Lexus is a heck of a motor. The 3.0/3.3 was never that great... I'm glad it's gone. It was the worst thing about the Toyota/Lexus lineup.
They quote it being in the IS350 but in reality it's the same motor that is in or going in almost all of the Toyota and Lexus V6 models, albeit with some technologies and tweaks not available on all models. It's in our 4runner w/ a 4.0L displacement, in the IS250 w/ a 2.5L displacement, it's in the Avalon w/ 3.5Ls but without direct injection (thus why it makes less power than the IS350), etc, etc. Heck... I even saw the all new Rav4 in premium trim will be getting a powered down 3.5L varient of it and will be doing 0-60 in around 6.5 second.
Talk about unnecessary.
That's what I've got in my A4. It's a decently powerful motor... nothing amazing though. Somewhat rough around the edges IMO, though for a 4-cyl I guess that's to be expected to an extent. Gas milage is amazing, though... I've at 1500 miles and got 31mpg with 95% city driving and not exactly being easy on the car, either.:eel:
That 3.5 from Toyota Lexus is a heck of a motor. The 3.0/3.3 was never that great... I'm glad it's gone. It was the worst thing about the Toyota/Lexus lineup.
They quote it being in the IS350 but in reality it's the same motor that is in or going in almost all of the Toyota and Lexus V6 models, albeit with some technologies and tweaks not available on all models. It's in our 4runner w/ a 4.0L displacement, in the IS250 w/ a 2.5L displacement, it's in the Avalon w/ 3.5Ls but without direct injection (thus why it makes less power than the IS350), etc, etc. Heck... I even saw the all new Rav4 in premium trim will be getting a powered down 3.5L varient of it and will be doing 0-60 in around 6.5 second.
Talk about unnecessary.
Re: Ward’s Names 10 Best Engines for 2006
Originally Posted by SSbaby
Yeah, I don't see how the 5.7L Hemi is better than LS2... but perhaps Wards thought the MDS technology on Hemi was a fundamental fuel saving feature...
As for the Ford 4.6 DOHC... That's inexcusable!
As for the Ford 4.6 DOHC... That's inexcusable!
I'm sure that MDS tech was a factor in chosing the hemi, but the Ls2 without it STILL gets just as good fuel economy.
Re: Ward’s Names 10 Best Engines for 2006
Figured the 2.0t would be up there as it's the first turbo direct injection out there in the wild (I think).
But the GM engines, the V8's... not even on the list. I feel that's BS too.
HEMI hype has a lot of steam apparently.
But the GM engines, the V8's... not even on the list. I feel that's BS too.
HEMI hype has a lot of steam apparently.
Re: Ward’s Names 10 Best Engines for 2006
Originally Posted by Gold_Rush
Mustang GT's 4.6 is not a Dohc. It's a Sohc with 3valve/cyl heads with VVT.
I'm sure that MDS tech was a factor in chosing the hemi, but the Ls2 without it STILL gets just as good fuel economy.
I'm sure that MDS tech was a factor in chosing the hemi, but the Ls2 without it STILL gets just as good fuel economy.
If I were judging, I'd pose the question "is the 4.6L Ford donk truly capable of delivering performance, economy, smoothness and practicality better than other V8s around?". The answer is a definite NO! Hemi and LS2 are ahead everywhere... with the possible exception of refinement.
Re: Ward’s Names 10 Best Engines for 2006
Originally Posted by SSbaby
Well now... the award is even more a puzzle than I originally thought.
If I were judging, I'd pose the question "is the 4.6L Ford donk truly capable of delivering performance, economy, smoothness and practicality better than other V8s around?". The answer is a definite NO! Hemi and LS2 are ahead everywhere... with the possible exception of refinement.
If I were judging, I'd pose the question "is the 4.6L Ford donk truly capable of delivering performance, economy, smoothness and practicality better than other V8s around?". The answer is a definite NO! Hemi and LS2 are ahead everywhere... with the possible exception of refinement.
Ford 4.6 Sohc is clearly no competition for the Hemi and Ls2 output wise and it gets the same fuel economy as both despite the lower output and smaller displacement. As for the Hemi, it is said to be an imitation of the LsX engines...and it still falls short imo. I don't know why DCX decided to stick the Hemi with a heavy *** iron block. Just the little things like that paints it as inferior to the LsX's. And last i recalled, hemi engine wasn't exactly aftermarket friendly, and i've yet to see a high-hp heavily modified (700+hp) version yet.
Re: Ward’s Names 10 Best Engines for 2006
Eh, if I had information on all of the engines that could potentially win the award I would be in a better position to comment. I will however say that it is odd that the SOHC 4.6 is there. They must have liked the VVT and overlooked the weight, power, and size disadvantages of the motor.
Re: Ward’s Names 10 Best Engines for 2006
Originally Posted by HAZ-Matt
Eh, if I had information on all of the engines that could potentially win the award I would be in a better position to comment. I will however say that it is odd that the SOHC 4.6 is there. They must have liked the VVT and overlooked the weight, power, and size disadvantages of the motor.
I still don't understand why the LS2 isn't up there. The LS1 made it before didn't it??? Or is my memory failing me?
Re: Ward’s Names 10 Best Engines for 2006
Aha...found it...In 1998...
General Motors LS1 5.7L OHV V-8
Bill Visnic
Ward's Auto World, Jan 1, 1998
Brought to you by:
Print-friendly format
E-mail this information
The winning formula for General Motors Corp.'s entirely new LS1 OHV V-8: It's the most horse-power that can be had for less than $40,000. By a long stretch.
The GM V-8 price-to-horsepower ratio is legendary, though. What makes the LS1 different is that although it's tied genetically to Ed Cole's original 1955 small-block V-8 - the bore centers are the same hallmark 4.4 ins. (11 cm) apart and its valvetrain continues to be activated by pushrods - the LS1 is most convincingly redesigned for a new millennium.
Start with basic construction, now fully of alloy. The LS1's new aluminum block, at 108 lbs. (49 kg), is a substantial 48% lighter than the iron-block of the LT1/LT4 V-8 it replaces. You'll find bottom-end durability enhancers such as a deep-skirt block, five cross-bolted, powder-metal main bearing caps, powder-metal connecting rods and a cast-iron crankshaft.
At the top end, engineers optimized the two-valve-per-cylinder design by aligning all the major valvetrain components in a single plane. John Juriga, GM Powertrain's lead engineer for the LS1, says this configuration reduces valvegear stress and, coincidentally, allowed his team to specify lighter weight, smaller pushrods and valve stems which - combined with pistons, shaved by 3.5 oz. (100 grams) - have been no small help in extending the LS1's usable rpm range.
The LS1 inlet and exhaust ports are now all symmetrical; The old 5.7L V-8 was sort of notorious for cylinder-to-cylinder flow variations. It's all topped by GM's first composite intake manifold for an OHV
V-8. The new manifold also incorporates the engine's fully electronic throttle, an item that vastly enhances the interface with traction control and stability control functions. There's no physical connection between your right foot and the LS1, and it works gorgeously.
Yes, the LS1 still employs what most regard as an antiquated valvetrain design, but considering what the LS1 is all about - propelling the Corvette - Ward's editors found it immensely more rewarding when compared with most competing overhead- cam V-8s. After all, tire-trashing torque is what you want in a world-class sports/GT car, and the LS1 delivers - RIGHT NOW - when overhead cammers are still spooling up. That such torque and horsepower comes with more refinement than one has a right to expect from nearly six liters of thumping V-8 proves how effectively the old small-block has been redesigned.
Don't think the LS1 is just for the 'Vette, either. All the great work on the LS1's innards will be carried over for iron-block versions powering GM's new range of 1999 full-size pickups and the sport/utility vehicles that will be derived from the new GMT-800 pickup platform.
Bill Visnic
Ward's Auto World, Jan 1, 1998
Brought to you by:
Print-friendly format
E-mail this information
The winning formula for General Motors Corp.'s entirely new LS1 OHV V-8: It's the most horse-power that can be had for less than $40,000. By a long stretch.
The GM V-8 price-to-horsepower ratio is legendary, though. What makes the LS1 different is that although it's tied genetically to Ed Cole's original 1955 small-block V-8 - the bore centers are the same hallmark 4.4 ins. (11 cm) apart and its valvetrain continues to be activated by pushrods - the LS1 is most convincingly redesigned for a new millennium.
Start with basic construction, now fully of alloy. The LS1's new aluminum block, at 108 lbs. (49 kg), is a substantial 48% lighter than the iron-block of the LT1/LT4 V-8 it replaces. You'll find bottom-end durability enhancers such as a deep-skirt block, five cross-bolted, powder-metal main bearing caps, powder-metal connecting rods and a cast-iron crankshaft.
At the top end, engineers optimized the two-valve-per-cylinder design by aligning all the major valvetrain components in a single plane. John Juriga, GM Powertrain's lead engineer for the LS1, says this configuration reduces valvegear stress and, coincidentally, allowed his team to specify lighter weight, smaller pushrods and valve stems which - combined with pistons, shaved by 3.5 oz. (100 grams) - have been no small help in extending the LS1's usable rpm range.
The LS1 inlet and exhaust ports are now all symmetrical; The old 5.7L V-8 was sort of notorious for cylinder-to-cylinder flow variations. It's all topped by GM's first composite intake manifold for an OHV
V-8. The new manifold also incorporates the engine's fully electronic throttle, an item that vastly enhances the interface with traction control and stability control functions. There's no physical connection between your right foot and the LS1, and it works gorgeously.
Yes, the LS1 still employs what most regard as an antiquated valvetrain design, but considering what the LS1 is all about - propelling the Corvette - Ward's editors found it immensely more rewarding when compared with most competing overhead- cam V-8s. After all, tire-trashing torque is what you want in a world-class sports/GT car, and the LS1 delivers - RIGHT NOW - when overhead cammers are still spooling up. That such torque and horsepower comes with more refinement than one has a right to expect from nearly six liters of thumping V-8 proves how effectively the old small-block has been redesigned.
Don't think the LS1 is just for the 'Vette, either. All the great work on the LS1's innards will be carried over for iron-block versions powering GM's new range of 1999 full-size pickups and the sport/utility vehicles that will be derived from the new GMT-800 pickup platform.
Re: Ward’s Names 10 Best Engines for 2006
They consider the OHV V8, old tech, regardless the efficiency or power output...they want, inovative, new tech...the "Hemi" made it on nastalgic popularity, and the "MDS" version of "DOD", they claim 5 to 20% increase in economy..pretty vague.
Re: Ward’s Names 10 Best Engines for 2006
I can see the Hemi being on the list. It was the 1st OHV V8 with DOD, has superior breathing capability, and has been marketed extremely well.
I can see the new Mustang 4.6 is another easy one. It now has 3 valves per cylinder, is the only OHC V8 available in a car that price (by a long shot), revs very smoothly, and packs a serious punch for it's size.
To an extent, I can see why the LS2 didn't make the list.
But I don't see why the LS7 didn't. Large displacement in a small block. 500 horses. Many features you'd only find on a race engine. I haven't seen any MPG figures yet, but I imagine they are much better than would be expected.
At least GM got some recognition. IMO, I think GM powertrain is the absolute best part of GM. What they have done with not just the LSx engines, but the 3800 V6s, the LT1 (my favorite engine behind the H.O.5.0 Ford) & the Northstar & Shortstar engines is nothing short of impressive!
I can see the new Mustang 4.6 is another easy one. It now has 3 valves per cylinder, is the only OHC V8 available in a car that price (by a long shot), revs very smoothly, and packs a serious punch for it's size.
To an extent, I can see why the LS2 didn't make the list.
But I don't see why the LS7 didn't. Large displacement in a small block. 500 horses. Many features you'd only find on a race engine. I haven't seen any MPG figures yet, but I imagine they are much better than would be expected.
At least GM got some recognition. IMO, I think GM powertrain is the absolute best part of GM. What they have done with not just the LSx engines, but the 3800 V6s, the LT1 (my favorite engine behind the H.O.5.0 Ford) & the Northstar & Shortstar engines is nothing short of impressive!
Re: Ward’s Names 10 Best Engines for 2006
Originally Posted by guionM
But I don't see why the LS7 didn't. Large displacement in a small block. 500 horses. Many features you'd only find on a race engine. I haven't seen any MPG figures yet, but I imagine they are much better than would be expected.
Re: Ward’s Names 10 Best Engines for 2006
Originally Posted by 90rocz
They consider the OHV V8, old tech, regardless the efficiency or power output...they want, inovative, new tech...the "Hemi" made it on nastalgic popularity, and the "MDS" version of "DOD", they claim 5 to 20% increase in economy..pretty vague.


