Ward's 10 Best Engines for 2008
12-10-2008, 04:22 PM
#16
Super Moderator
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Okemos, MI
Posts: 9,479
12-10-2008, 04:40 PM
#17
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,943
Premium fuel is a PITA; especially when it's over $4/gal!
However, I paid $1.52 for premium last night...it's too bad I can't stockpile gasoline.
12-10-2008, 05:18 PM
#19
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Roch, NY
Posts: 395
The award is for the new Hemi engine, not the Dodge Challenger.
In the Challenger and Charger with Automatic, it's 370. With manual, it's 375. In the Ram, it's 390. I picked 380 as a median. If I wanted, I could have simply came out with the 390 figure.
It's like a internet remake of the movie "Invasion Of The Body Snatchers" whenever the subject is comparing the LSx engine to another V8, displacement differences seem to be completely overlooked. It's as if simply because an engine has eight cylinders arranged in a "V", it's all that's needed. That's how we end up with 281 engines put up against at 376 ci. engines ignoring 325 engines or even 5.4 engines against 5.3s.
The Chrysler Hemi engine is 345ci.
The GM L99 is 376 cubic inches.
That's 30 cubic inches smaller.
Thats a bigger difference in size than exists between the Impala's LS4 (325ci) and the Camaro's LS1 (20 ci) and the LS1 vs the LS2 (20ci).
There is roughly a 30 horse difference between the LS4 and LS1.
There is a roughly 50 horse difference between the LS1 and LS2.
There is a 13 horse difference between the 376 ci L99 and the 345 Hemi.
Hemi has 12 lbs/ft more torque, despite being 31ci smaller.
Imagine a new revised, LS1 having only 13 less horsepower than the LS3 (about 410hp) despite being 30-40 ci smaller yet still having 12 more lbs/ft of torque and getting slightly better mileage. I suspect we'd both be all over the thing praising it, and there would be no doubt about what was the better engine.
Attach such an engine to a different brand, and everything changes.
The 6.1 Hemi is a the counterpart to the LS3.
::blah blah blah magazine racing::
In the Challenger and Charger with Automatic, it's 370. With manual, it's 375. In the Ram, it's 390. I picked 380 as a median. If I wanted, I could have simply came out with the 390 figure.
It's like a internet remake of the movie "Invasion Of The Body Snatchers" whenever the subject is comparing the LSx engine to another V8, displacement differences seem to be completely overlooked. It's as if simply because an engine has eight cylinders arranged in a "V", it's all that's needed. That's how we end up with 281 engines put up against at 376 ci. engines ignoring 325 engines or even 5.4 engines against 5.3s.
The Chrysler Hemi engine is 345ci.
The GM L99 is 376 cubic inches.
That's 30 cubic inches smaller.
Thats a bigger difference in size than exists between the Impala's LS4 (325ci) and the Camaro's LS1 (20 ci) and the LS1 vs the LS2 (20ci).
There is roughly a 30 horse difference between the LS4 and LS1.
There is a roughly 50 horse difference between the LS1 and LS2.
There is a 13 horse difference between the 376 ci L99 and the 345 Hemi.
Hemi has 12 lbs/ft more torque, despite being 31ci smaller.
Imagine a new revised, LS1 having only 13 less horsepower than the LS3 (about 410hp) despite being 30-40 ci smaller yet still having 12 more lbs/ft of torque and getting slightly better mileage. I suspect we'd both be all over the thing praising it, and there would be no doubt about what was the better engine.
Attach such an engine to a different brand, and everything changes.
The 6.1 Hemi is a the counterpart to the LS3.
::blah blah blah magazine racing::
http://www.dragtimes.com/2008-Dodge-...phs-15527.html
368 RWHP, 337 RWTRQ
We'll give it a 15% loss because it's automatic and that comes out to 432 crank hp, 396 crank tq.
2008 Chevrolet Corvette STOCK Dyno:
http://www.dragtimes.com/Chevrolet-C...lip-12824.html
389 RWHP, 371 RWTRQ
Give the Corvette a 12% loss for the T56 and you get 442 crank hp and 421 torque. Both were run on a dynojet.
The Corvette doesn't even have the NPP exhaust, some dyno over 390 with it but I wanted it to be more fair.
Furthermore I am not impressed with the modern 5.7 hemi numbers. You forget the LS1 came out TWELVE years ago. There are plenty of 500rwhp builds form the lil ol' 346, find me the Hemi counterparts?
Last edited by 93Phoenix; 12-10-2008 at 05:27 PM.
12-10-2008, 06:53 PM
#20
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: SeVa
Posts: 2,977
12-10-2008, 07:02 PM
#21
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: SeVa
Posts: 2,977
12-10-2008, 07:09 PM
#22
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: SeVa
Posts: 2,977
Hot Rod Magazine probably has a few, they get a major stiffy over the hemi, IIRC they did a 500hp with cam, tune and headers awhile back then FI'd the same engine. As for number of mag articles featuring SBC build-ups, go figure, when hasn't an SBC had the majority of engine build-ups.
12-10-2008, 07:43 PM
#24
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,123
By doing an all alloy engine, GM managed to shave 100 lbs from the engine alone - implied, it overcomes the OHV's deficiencies compared to DOHC 'equivalents'. That's a great achievement in any language!
12-10-2008, 08:22 PM
#25
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Ontario
Posts: 2,712
12-11-2008, 12:47 AM
#27
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: USA
Posts: 3,698
I have pretty extensive seat time with a Charger SRT8..and while it is a great motor..it is no LSX. It makes a lot of down low grunt...but does not feel nearly as revable as an LSX. As for being fuel efficant....I have never seen a 6.1L get above 14-15mpg mixed. The 5.7L might be better..but I can't imagine it is that great.
12-11-2008, 08:53 AM
#28
Super Moderator
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Okemos, MI
Posts: 9,479
Oh, come on. The price for premium is pretty much always $0.20 above the price for regular. The higher the prices go, the smaller the percentage penalty for premium!
$3.99 for regular -> $4.19 for premium. That's 5% more.
$1.49 for regular -> $1.69 for premium. That's 13% more.
Apologies -- you're right. And the version in the Commodore doesn't have VVT or AFM.
However, the truck version has both.
$3.99 for regular -> $4.19 for premium. That's 5% more.
$1.49 for regular -> $1.69 for premium. That's 13% more.
Apologies -- you're right. And the version in the Commodore doesn't have VVT or AFM.
However, the truck version has both.
12-11-2008, 11:51 AM
#30
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,943
Oh, come on. The price for premium is pretty much always $0.20 above the price for regular. The higher the prices go, the smaller the percentage penalty for premium!
$3.99 for regular -> $4.19 for premium. That's 5% more.
$1.49 for regular -> $1.69 for premium. That's 13% more.
$3.99 for regular -> $4.19 for premium. That's 5% more.
$1.49 for regular -> $1.69 for premium. That's 13% more.
Let's just say that expensive gasoline is a PITA regardless of what grade you are buying.
