Wild ass guesses...

clutchdust

Millionaire Playboy
Joined
Mar 27, 2008
Messages
1,728
Location
In transition
Conjecture and shameless opinions welcome.
Just curious what YOU think the single best engine design is? For example, Wankel rotary, V-8, boxer 6, V-12, L6 diesel etc, etc.
I'm just doing this as an exercise to see what the various opinions are, if there is a distinguishable favorite and such. Feel free to throw in whatever specs you feel are pertinent to your selection, such as 427BBC, 'x' stroke by 'x' bore, blah, blah, blah.
For criteria, I suggest we try to keep it normally aspirated (because I don't want to get into a pissing match about, "yeah, but if you turbocharged and put nitrous on engine X, it would outperform engine Y).
Secondly, think about a total package. It's easy to say a top fuel engine makes the most power (duh) but it sucks if the race is a mile or more. So factor in durability and efficiency. So not just that it makes power, but it stays together, and it uses as much of the fuel as it can to make as much power as it can, and still stay in one piece.
Go.
 
I"ll take a olde tyme IRON PONTIAC from the late 60's/early 70's.....400 ci and put 300k on them before the speedo run up the flag...some months later the oil pump run up the RED flag with a definitive FU note on it.....engine was SO loose the poor thing ran another 2 weeks....

then there is the venerable Dodge 318 2bbl......another one still running with over 300k on the clock , my old work van.....'85 3/4 ton....

take your pick....
 
I'd say Wolkswagen's VR6. It's an incredibly compact V6 design (15°)
So compact they could pack 2 V8 version of it side by side in the Bugatti veyron to create this "W16" montruosity.

Also the Honda NR engine, with oval piston that allowed to pack 8 valves per cylinder.

Two pretty cool engineer feats.
 
Any of the LSX engines using the aluminum blocks. Unbeatable hp/lb/$ ratio anywhere on the planet. Simple pushrod valvetrain...7,000 redline. RHS has released a new LSX block that can be built to 502 ci. Damn...How about a 1,000 hp n/a somewhat streetable small-block?
 
I'm guessing that the pinnicle of reciprocating engine design could well be the V12 engines that powered WWII Mustangs and other siimilar engines. For a category of mass produced, practical, reliable engines, these engines created the fastest machines ever powered by a reciprocating engine: close to 450 mph. They were reliable and cold be flown for many hours (albiet at speads less than 450 mph!!) The engines were supercharged, overhead valve, all aluminum.

They were relatively easy to maintain. I mention maintainance because at the end of the war the 3200 hp turbocharged radial engines came into being (B29). These 32 cylinder engines were nightmares to maintain. I'm not aware that any of these radial engines are in operation today. There's a good number of the V12 engines still in operation.

They also used pure ethylene glycol coolant, known in the day as Prestone. There was no water in their cooling system. The reason for avoiding water in aircraft engines is due to water's boiling point at altitude. At 30,000, water boils at about 146 degrees f. Since the Mustang engines operated at about 200 degrees F, a cooling system leak and drop in collant pressure would cause water to turn to steam with explosive force. When these engines were later adapted for use in tanks, the 100 percent glycol specification was maintained. The reason was that for tank use, glycol was used to avoid the corrosive effects of water in aluminum engines. I use pure ethylene glycol in my 68 Corvette and Thunderbird daily driver.
 
Last edited:
The engine that produces the most power and torque with the least amount of fuel and a very usefull powerband. Haven't seen one though.
FYI, the most efficient fuel engines known to this world are those huge diesel behemots :
giant-engine.jpg
 
I always thought the boxer design was probably the best engine design (balance, CG etc.) but it's almost impossible to efficiently package it into a car. But, you asked about engines without regard to what is practical!
 
The engine that produces the most power and torque with the least amount of fuel and a very usefull powerband. Haven't seen one though.
FYI, the most efficient fuel engines known to this world are those huge diesel behemots :
giant-engine.jpg
Now that just doesn't even seem real. Damn!

I always thought the boxer design was probably the best engine design (balance, CG etc.) but it's almost impossible to efficiently package it into a car. But, you asked about engines without regard to what is practical!
That's more along the lines of what I'm asking. Not worried about packaging. I'm just curious about engine designs. Seems to me 'V' designed engines would have some inherent drawbacks since there's a good 90* of crank rotation that is asymetric(?). For instance, think about a Harley v-twin. It may work fine but seriously, you have more than 360* of crank rotation that relies solely on crank inertia to complete. Granted, the more cylinders you have the less of a factor that would be, but there has to be harmonic and frequency issues to V engines you don't have, or are different, in L or boxer engines.
 
The engine that produces the most power and torque with the least amount of fuel and a very usefull powerband. Haven't seen one though.
FYI, the most efficient fuel engines known to this world are those huge diesel behemots :
giant-engine.jpg

I dunno much about them size engines, but here at the Jax Fl. Atlantic Shipyard about 12 years ago a old German RORO was bought by the USMC for a supply vessel, and so it was under contract to be refitted by Atlantic.....

so I got a job there for a couple months....turned out to be WAY more physically demanding than my stupid skeleton could do....but the experience was amazing....learn one hell of a lot in those few weeks...

one of the things was the sheer size of them ship engines....this canoe was a single engine rig....7? cylinders...maybe 5...but a odd count, not 6-8 as would be expected, single screw, phreaking CRAZY how it was built....

I was told that any of the inline cylinders could be taken down while engine running fixed and go back on line....that one sounded like a tall tale to ME, but I got nothing to disagree on....

they cut the top off a Crowley tug....to get at TWO Railroad GM Diesels, in the stern...dual prop, obviously....mother ducker...

:gurney::drink:
 
In my opinion it is impossible to say which one is the best engine...... if not related to a specific application!

For example, for a go-kart, the best engine is a reed valve 125cc two stroke engine!
For a sport car, in my opinion, a big V8 (like my SBC 427 for example.....) will be perfect!
For a city car I would prefer a small two or three cylinder turbocharged for the high fuel efficiency!
For a big sedan.... a 60° V6 is perfect.... smooth and silent!
A V12 is perfect talking about "voice" !

...and so on....:lol:
 
Any of the LSX engines using the aluminum blocks. Unbeatable hp/lb/$ ratio anywhere on the planet. Simple pushrod valvetrain...7,000 redline. RHS has released a new LSX block that can be built to 502 ci. Damn...How about a 1,000 hp n/a somewhat streetable small-block?

absolutely,

compact design, simplicity, cheap to hotrod, and if you want more power just supercharge it. One coil per cylinder allows maximum coil charging time before next fire.

These 4 vavle overhead cam engines are huge to shoehorn in a sports car and are weak at low rpm.
 
In my opinion it is impossible to say which one is the best engine...... if not related to a specific application!

For example, for a go-kart, the best engine is a reed valve 125cc two stroke engine!
For a sport car, in my opinion, a big V8 (like my SBC 427 for example.....) will be perfect!
For a city car I would prefer a small two or three cylinder turbocharged for the high fuel efficiency!
For a big sedan.... a 60° V6 is perfect.... smooth and silent!
A V12 is perfect talking about "voice" !

...and so on....:lol:

Man you got this all wrong. The 250cc engine is a far better choice for a kart!
 
How about the ole 7.3 Turbo in Fords. Good for 600k plus and got 20 mpg in my 1995 Crew Cab, long bed, 4x4. I loved that truck and will buy another someday.
 
Top