Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Engine Technology International (ETi) issue January 2005: ETi contributors wax lyrical about what they think are the finest engines ever made.

Among the powerplants that graced the minds of them are:

Jaguar V12

Alfa Romeo 2000cc DOHC ca 1960

Chevrolet Smallblock

Ford-Cosworth DFV

Rover V8

Napier Sabre

BMW 4.4L V8 Valvetronic

Ford 427 SOHC

Ducati V-twin

Hillman Imp

Napier Deltic

Graham Johnson, editor of this magazine chose the HONDA 2-Liter (S2000) F20C.

"Why has no-one else selected this engine as the all-time great? Ill educated, soulless bunch (referring to the other contributors). What's not to love about this unit? It's got power: 240bhp to be exact, meaning it has more horses per liter than any other naturally aspirated engine - ever. It's got character too: actually it's got two - one, shy retiring type below 6,000rpm, and a fuel-crazed, raver above and beyond to 9,000rpm.

But there's more - this DOHC powerhouse sounds gorgeous at full flight; like it belongs in the nose of a Touring Car racer or even between the legs of the maddest motorcyclist.

And it's fuel efficient in that one can - 'one' I assume being someone limper of wrist - drive to an average of 13.6L/100km (32mpg). Hell, it even looks good, longitudinally mounted as an engine should be.

You just gotta thrash this one: it wants it; it demands a thorough, daily clear out - make that between each gear change (which, by the way, is another joyful experience because the subby lever is connected to the greatest gearbox of all time - another story).

Faults? Just one: Honda installed it in the S2000, a sports car the rump of which is not always as faithful as the power source.

Dads, grandads, then great grandads... this engine will be a talking point for a long time to come. This is the greatest engine of all time, and, thus far, it's got five International Engine of the Year Awards trophies to prove that fact."

- Graham Johnson, Engine Technology International | January 2005. Page 35.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/63935-the-greatest-engine-of-all-time/
Share on other sites

yeah, that is what I am wondering. Maybe a mix of all them. Are they taking into account price? and price of replacement parts? Working on these engines?

But I would question how "reliable" some of them would be, and power figures are all so relative to the era. Obviously a newer engine will be a bit better on economy and power than an older one. So why not just pick every engine of the last 3 years?

Have they taken an age weighting? i.e. price, performance, and reliability of that time compared to everything else of that time?

Yeah it's a very subjective question, "What do you think is the greatest engine of all time" is. Just a quick glance through the list of the engines and you will immediately see that they range from 4 cylinders right through to 18 cylinder diesel monsters.

I read the entire article and each contributor to the magazine "Engine Technology International (ETi)" gave their opinion. Their experience ranges from motoring journalism, engineering as well as racing among others.

One of the contributors mentioned the Chevy Smallblock because of its economic impact and success for GM. The Rover V8, originally a GM motor, was chosen by another because it was ironically successful in Rovers' hands when it failed in GMs'.

The Jaguar V12 is very intersting because it's known to constantly break down, but at the time, the smooth power delivery amazing as you would expect from a dozen pots! The contributors come from many backgrounds and their age and experience obviously makes a big part of their decision. Some of the engines have become part of their fond memories of working on them or racing them. Like the Chevy motor which was chosen by an American.

This wasn't an award, trophy or accolade to try to determine 'the greatest motor ever', rather it the opinion of a panel of journalists who contribute to "Engine Technology International", a well respected automotive industry magazine that engine developers and car makers worldwide subscribe to.

The engines are not totally isolated to automotive use, the Napier Deltic was a 18 cylinder diesel turbo used in locomotives i believe. The magazine also mentions other engines such as aeroplane engines like the Merlin as SteveL mentioned... one of the most powerful aerial engines of its' era.

Other information of interest included a mention of solid fuel rocket motors used by the Apollo rockets used in the 60s and 70s by NASA, as well as 25,000rpm 125cc Honda racing engines...

If they had based their list on the 'Greatest PERFORMANCE engines of all time' I believe it would have been very very different. Surely more Japanese motors would have been mentioned (RB26 being one of the most successful ones from Japan).

My Favourtie Engines In category Order

4 Cylinder NA

Nissan L16 (the L block had a huge foot print, with the biggest conrods I ever did see.,..)

4 Cylinder Turbo

Nissan SR20DET from S15

Rotary

Mazda 13BTT Sequential setup..

6 Cylinder Inline Turbo This was hard, I own an RB26 and think it is unbeatable but the 2JZ is one awesome engine.. so equal honors...

Nissan RB26DETT from R34

Toyota 2JZ-GTE from RZ Supra

6 Cyliner Inline NA

Chrysler Slant 225 (If it wasn't for the Over and Under head these things would ahve been unstoppable.)

6 Cylinder 'V'

Chrysler 3.9L from 1990

V8 Cylinder Small Block

Chrysler 340ci from E49 Charger (perfect bore to stroke ratio for block.)

V8 Cylinder Big Block

Chrysler 440ci RB Block

V10 Cylinder

Chrysler V10 from Dodge (basically the same engine as 340.. wiht two extra cylinders)

You can probably tell I like Chryslers hey, spent a lot of time building them in my younger days..

Hate to burst his bubble about the S2000 ! Hah ! Piffle and codswallop !

But my favorite is th Alfa Romeo 33/2 (Daytona) 90 degree V8. Capacity 1995cc (Thats under 2Litres people).Twin over head cams. Two spark plugs per cylinder.Fuel injected.

Horsepwer 270 @ 9600rpm And this car was made from 1967 to 1969. Car weighed in at 580kg and had a top speed 298km/h

Read it and weep !

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • It still combines inches with mm, especially when you have .5 inches involved, and mm and inches that can go in either direction. This would give a clear idea on both sides of the rim, right away, with no arithmetic. Even better if somebody gives you the dimensions of the arch of multiple cars. i.e GTR may be 125mm, a A80 Supra may be 117mm, or something along those lines. Yes, you can 'know' that going from a 10in rim to a 10.5in rim with the same offset moves both sides about 6mm, but you still have to 'know' that and do the math. Often it's combined. People are going from 9.5 +27 to 10.5 +15. You may do the math to know it, but if it was going from (I had to go look it up to be sure) 241mm/2 - 27 - 93.5mm from the center line to (more math) 266/2 - 15 (118mm) from the center line. Versus 93mm vs 118mm. It's right there. If you know you have a GTT with 100mm guards you can see right away that one is close to flush and the other absolutely won't work. And when someone says "Oh the GTR is 120mm" suddenly you see that the 10.5 +15 is about perfect. (or you go and buy rims with approximately 118mm outward guard space) I think it's safe to say that given one of the most common questions in all modified cars is "How do offsets work" and "How do I know if wheels will fit on my car" that this would be much simpler... Of course, nothing will really change and nobody is going to remanufacture wheels and ditch inches and offset based on this conversation :p We'll all go "18x9+30 will line up pretty close to the guards for a R34 GTT (84mm)" but 'pretty close' is still not really defined (it is now!) and if you really care you still have go measure. Yes it depends on camber and height and dynamic movement, but so do all wheels no matter what you measure it for.
    • But offsets are simple numbers. 8" wheel? Call it 200mm, near enough. +35 offset? OK, so that means the hub face is that far out from the wheel centreline. Which is 2s of mental arithmetic to get to 65mm to outer edge and 135mm to inner. It's hardly any more effort for any other wheel width or offset. As I said, I just close my eyes and can see a picture of the wheel when given the width and offset. That wouldn't help me trust that a marginal fitment would actually go in and clear everything, any more than the supposedly simple numbers you're talking about. I dunno. Maybe I just automatically do numbers.
    • Sure! But you at least have simple numbers instead of 8.5 inches +/mm, relative to your current rims you do maths with as well, and/or compare with OEM diameter, which you also need to know/research/confirm..
    • Uniclutch install vid, RB Track edition.   Highlight reel is very drive able, not noisy but still heavy with the clutch master he has.      
×
×
  • Create New...