Ford Cosworth DF series. Absolutely dominated F1, Indy, and other classes of racing for years. Ducati's desmodromic valve V-twin is another personal favourite.
Automotive? best for what purpose?... my favorites are the L88 427 Chevrolet, L72 427 & ZL1 427... Ford FE 427 side oiler & SOHC (Cammer), Ford 429 SCJ & Boss 9... Mopar 440 Magnum & 6 Brl/Pack, the 426 Hemi was great on the race track (not so much on the street)... i'm a Shiverlay guy, but i gotta' admit the Fords & Mopars were more durable, The FE won Lemans (with Chrysler Hemi connecting rods?), and the 426 Hemi Cleaned Up in NASCAR... and to beat the piss out of on the street, gimme' a 440 magnum or a 429 SCJ anyday!... "Gator Mcklusky" or "Kowalski" anyone ?...
Ford - 427 SOHC, the 5.0L Coyote, the 351 Cleveland, the 428 CJ
Chevy - the original small block in it's highest form, the 350; the 375 horse (actually was the 425 but got derated for insurance purposes) 396
Chrysler - the Hemi(s), especially the 426 & the 440 Six-Pack
Pontiac had some goodies they dropped in the GTOs, like the 389s
These days I like the 5.0 Coyote in my pickup.
There were other great engines, but great for other reasons...such as the VW air-cooled engines once they got past the 40-hp mark; the 1500 pancake that came in the sedans and wagons was a good one. Chrysler's slant-6 was a stone, and so was Ford's 200 & 240 6-banger---and later on the 2.3L EFIs they put in the Ranger pickups. The GMC V-6s were pretty outstanding. None of those were stump pullers, but they powered some pretty reliable transportation.
Actually, now that I think about it...a list of the DOG engines would probably be shorter: I'd put the Chevy 307 and the Ford 5.4L Triton on that list. More if I took time to think about it...
Never had a Mazda, but I've been told the rotary engines run like striped-ass apes...the higher they wind the more they wanna go. I understand overhauls are a problem, though.
The 350 Chevy was stuffed into about every Chevy car imaginable, muscle cars and otherwise once it went into production and became popular. In small block classes it was 10 to 1 the engine of choice in race cars at dirt tracks around the country for I don't know, 30 yrs probably? Be hard pressed to find an engine more used than that one IMO.
found a pair of em in an old Chris Craft boat, owner upgraded to Diesel power... my machinist pal is building the reverse rotation one for his 64 Fairlane "Thunderbolt" project... the other one is on his test run stand... he starts it up when the Ford guys show up... THUNDER!...
When people say side oiler they probably are thinking of the 427 cammer.
Lots of other ford blocks were side oilers.
Nyet, nyet. Scott's right. The original 427s had a different oil flow path through the engine. Ford modified it for racing purposes, and that is the origin of the "side oiler." It gave priority to the main bearings and crank.
When people say side oiler they probably are thinking of the 427 cammer.
Lots of other ford blocks were side oilers.
Nyet, nyet. Scott's right. The original 427s had a different oil flow path through the engine. Ford modified it for racing purposes, and that is the origin of the "side oiler."
Would that be the one that we knew as “Boss”….that had intake valve diameter of 2 1/4”. Pretty much dwarfed the infamous Chevy 2.02’s”! memtb
2.19 intake valve.
I thought that the 4 barrel Cleveland was .2.19” and the Boss was 2.25”……I guess that I remembered wrong! I think I confused it with the port outlet size! ☹️ memtb
Not going to claim it as the best but fords 4.6 v8 pulled some serious duty in hordes of crown Vic’s, mustangs and f-150’s
I’ve got one in a 2009 F-150. 226,000 VERY low maintenance miles. That truck has been outstanding! I can say the same for a 2006 Chevy with a 4.8. It has been just as good.
Working for a competitive make dealer for so many years, it kinda pains me to say that one of the most durable "modern " engines I've seen is the 2.2 chevy 4 cyl. We had a customer with a fleet of a good many 2.2 S-10 service trucks, and I can attest that the people driving them daily didn't give 2 s**** if they blew up or not. They'd drive until they couldn't. Usually the major problem was bad radiators, but I can't comment as to whether it was because of poor design, or the lack of maintenance the fleet had before we took over the work. They usually came in filthy inside and out, and some of the techs didn't want to deal with them because the inside of the cab smelled like they filled them with dirty socks and underwear every night when they were parked. Usually just needed P.M. or tires or a radiator if it had never been replaced
I'm not a Ford guy, never was, but that 300 inline 6 was a good motor.
Not easy on gas, but it was a super tough truck engine.
I knew a man older than me that bought one new in I'm gonna say 85-86, don't quote me on that......he ran it road miles loaded up with saws, and everything else that goes along with a loggers life, then up logging roads to the job site. Put 300,000 on it until the truck itself was wore completely out, but motor still going when the truck was shot.
Ford’s 4.2 liter English diesel engine! No question about it, Had them in Ford 5000, 7000 and 7610. Absolutely bulletproof, economical fuel consumption and minimal maintenance. The “7” series tractors had turbos and easily put out 85 and 100 + hp. Ask anyone who owned one - I never heard any complaints about them.
You are wrong.... again... oh and there is no such engine as a 340 AMC.... a 304 AMC yes , no 340. 340 was Chrysler.... I have noticed a pattern of dumbfucktitude with you... and yes that is a word.. hahahhahahaha
421 SD in a '62 Catalina 71-2 455 H.O. 73-4 455 SD
Any of the Olds V8s, as long as they were gas and not deezil.
LOL. You got that right...the "dieselized" Olds 350 was one of the biggest piles of crap to ever come out of Detroit (or any other part of the world).
Pffft. Ran one of those as a work vehicle for a couple of yrs. Long as you didn't burn up any glow plugs trying to get it fired when it got cold, didn't asphyxiate yourself with exhaust fumes until it got warmed up, and allowed yourself 3 miles to get it wound up to pass a Pacer, there was nothing wrong with them. Lol.
421 SD in a '62 Catalina 71-2 455 H.O. 73-4 455 SD
Any of the Olds V8s, as long as they were gas and not deezil.
LOL. You got that right...the "dieselized" Olds 350 was one of the biggest piles of crap to ever come out of Detroit (or any other part of the world).
Pffft. Ran one of those as a work vehicle for a couple of yrs. Long as you didn't burn up any glow plugs trying to get it fired when it got cold, didn't asphyxiate yourself with exhaust fumes until it got warmed up, and allowed yourself 3 miles to get it wound up to pass a Pacer, there was nothing wrong with them. Lol.
The injection pumps were POSs. Oddly enough it was almost the same injection pump (Roosa Master) Deere was putting in a number of ag tractors powered by six cylinders and they worked well, but I was the unfortunate owner of an '81 Caprice with that 5.7 T-U-R-D. The injection pump failed twice in a year and a half. Starters for those cost about four times what a gas engine starter cost back then. Ask me how I know.
The small outside dimension, versatile, durable & longest running engine format ever, small block Chevy. 45 years.
Surprised it was mentioned, but I've seen 100k H/D Evos. 100K, nothing for a modern engine they say, but it's a lot for a 2 cyl. air cooled unit, a lot.
I'm not a luddite, but my wares might indicate otherwise as I have a last year Small block Chevy & a last year H/D Evo.
The Oldsmobile 403 has a fantastic (over square) Bore & stroke ratio for performance... 4.351 bore, 3.385 stroke... but the blocks and cranks were weaker than schit (typical GM stunt)... i've got one in my 79 Trans am, i upgraded to a nodular "N" crank, main studs and straps and a big oil pump... ported W-31 heads, Hi-rise intake, headers & hot cam... makes 425 ft lbs @ the rear wheels... mid range is fantastic, wants to rev like a 302, Wails like a Banshee... but every time the tach gets above 5500 RPM i get a qweezy feeling in my stomach... it's holding up so far... lol
ironbender; Good evening my cyber friend, I hope that this fine Friday finds you and your wonderful family well.
While I'm cognizant that the initial video and many of the respondents - not all mind you - are answering with performance in mind, I'll go with longevity and putting bugger all in for maintenance.
The mines in the Yukon would run the old 12 Valve 5.9 engines on their gensets, so it'd be running up against the governor in between shutting it down for service and then back up balls to the wall. They ran for next to forever so I hear.
We had 250 I6 from a Canadian Pontiac car - a '71 - that powered a grain conveyor on the farm. So it'd go from dead cold to flat out, run for about a half hour, then off for a couple hours in -40°, rinse and repeat. Again, it just would not die... We didn't really like it either somehow, but it would not die.
The 300 I6 from the mid '80's when they went fuel injected would go for a long time, then needed the timing chain replaced and they'd go again for longer.
As mentioned too the 22R Toyota with the early EFI is very well thought of by the local 4x4 builders here.
All the best to you all this Christmas Season ironbender.
The Oldsmobile 403 has a fantastic (over square) Bore & stroke ratio for performance... 4.351 bore, 3.385 stroke... but the blocks and cranks were weaker than schit (typical GM stunt)... i've got one in my 79 Trans am, i upgraded to a nodular "N" crank, main studs and straps and a big oil pump... ported W-31 heads, Hi-rise intake, headers & hot cam... makes 425 ft lbs @ the rear wheels... mid range is fantastic, wants to rev like a 302, Wails like a Banshee... but every time the tach gets above 5500 RPM i get a qweezy feeling in my stomach... it's holding up so far... lol
IIRC, if the hood scoop decal on a Trans Am said "6.6 L," it had the Olds engine and if the decal on the scoop said "6.6 T/A," it had a Pontiac 400 in it. Am I right?? Just want to stress my memory a bit.
I had a 76 with the Pontiac 400 in it. I drove the everlovin' shit outa that car.
ironbender; Good evening my cyber friend, I hope that this fine Friday finds you and your wonderful family well.
While I'm cognizant that the initial video and many of the respondents - not all mind you - are answering with performance in mind, I'll go with longevity and putting bugger all in for maintenance.
The mines in the Yukon would run the old 12 Valve 5.9 engines on their gensets, so it'd be running up against the governor in between shutting it down for service and then back up balls to the wall. They ran for next to forever so I hear.
We had 250 I6 from a Canadian Pontiac car - a '71 - that powered a grain conveyor on the farm. So it'd go from dead cold to flat out, run for about a half hour, then off for a couple hours in -40°, rinse and repeat. Again, it just would not die... We didn't really like it either somehow, but it would not die.
The 300 I6 from the mid '80's when they went fuel injected would go for a long time, then needed the timing chain replaced and they'd go again for longer.
As mentioned too the 22R Toyota with the early EFI is very well thought of by the local 4x4 builders here.
All the best to you all this Christmas Season ironbender.
The Oldsmobile 403 has a fantastic (over square) Bore & stroke ratio for performance... 4.351 bore, 3.385 stroke... but the blocks and cranks were weaker than schit (typical GM stunt)... i've got one in my 79 Trans am, i upgraded to a nodular "N" crank, main studs and straps and a big oil pump... ported W-31 heads, Hi-rise intake, headers & hot cam... makes 425 ft lbs @ the rear wheels... mid range is fantastic, wants to rev like a 302, Wails like a Banshee... but every time the tach gets above 5500 RPM i get a qweezy feeling in my stomach... it's holding up so far... lol
IIRC, if the hood scoop decal on a Trans Am said "6.6 L," it had the Olds engine and if the decal on the scoop said "6.6 T/A," it had a Pontiac 400 in it. Am I right?? Just want to stress my memory a bit.
I had a 76 with the Pontiac 400 in it. I drove the everlovin' shit outa that car.
I think the 78/79 were olds 403 with an auto and the Pontiac 400 with the manual trans.
The Oldsmobile 403 has a fantastic (over square) Bore & stroke ratio for performance... 4.351 bore, 3.385 stroke... but the blocks and cranks were weaker than schit (typical GM stunt)... i've got one in my 79 Trans am, i upgraded to a nodular "N" crank, main studs and straps and a big oil pump... ported W-31 heads, Hi-rise intake, headers & hot cam... makes 425 ft lbs @ the rear wheels... mid range is fantastic, wants to rev like a 302, Wails like a Banshee... but every time the tach gets above 5500 RPM i get a qweezy feeling in my stomach... it's holding up so far... lol
IIRC, if the hood scoop decal on a Trans Am said "6.6 L," it had the Olds engine and if the decal on the scoop said "6.6 T/A," it had a Pontiac 400 in it. Am I right?? Just want to stress my memory a bit.
I had a 76 with the Pontiac 400 in it. I drove the everlovin' shit outa that car.
yes the 403 T/A's said 6.6 Litre on the Shaker, and the optional 200/220 HP W72 Poncho 400's 77-79 got T/A 6.6 decals... the standard 185 HP Poncho 400's in 77/78 had no shaker callouts at all or some may have had 6.6 Litre callouts as well... mine just has 6.6 on it now... i should add a ? mark just to phuqk with people...
I vote for the Cat 3406B too. K had one in my KW T800 pump truck and I had to actually watch the speedo to keep that thing even close to three speed limit. No need for the splitter with that beast.
I vote for the Cat 3406B too. K had one in my KW T800 pump truck and I had to actually watch the speedo to keep that thing even close to three speed limit. No need for the splitter with that beast.
Would that be the one that we knew as “Boss”….that had intake valve diameter of 2 1/4”. Pretty much dwarfed the infamous Chevy 2.02’s”! memtb
2.19 intake valve.
I thought that the 4 barrel Cleveland was .2.19” and the Boss was 2.25”……I guess that I remembered wrong! I think I confused it with the port outlet size! ☹️ memtb
Some (?) or all of the 1969's had 2.23 intake valves, then 2.19 from then on.
The Oldsmobile 403 has a fantastic (over square) Bore & stroke ratio for performance... 4.351 bore, 3.385 stroke... but the blocks and cranks were weaker than schit (typical GM stunt)... i've got one in my 79 Trans am, i upgraded to a nodular "N" crank, main studs and straps and a big oil pump... ported W-31 heads, Hi-rise intake, headers & hot cam... makes 425 ft lbs @ the rear wheels... mid range is fantastic, wants to rev like a 302, Wails like a Banshee... but every time the tach gets above 5500 RPM i get a qweezy feeling in my stomach... it's holding up so far... lol
IIRC, if the hood scoop decal on a Trans Am said "6.6 L," it had the Olds engine and if the decal on the scoop said "6.6 T/A," it had a Pontiac 400 in it. Am I right?? Just want to stress my memory a bit.
I had a 76 with the Pontiac 400 in it. I drove the everlovin' shit outa that car.
I think the 78/79 were olds 403 with an auto and the Pontiac 400 with the manual trans.
you are partly right... the 403/auto combo was a "California Only" thing until 79 when all automatic equipped 6.6's were 403's... in 77 i think? the 185 HP version of the 400 Poncho were automatic only, while W72 200 HP version were 4 speed only... i know for fact in 78 the 185 HP's were auto only, while the now 220 HP W72 was available with auto or 4 speed... in 79 the W72 400's were only available as 4 speeds, the 185 HP version 400 was gone, (replaced by the 403 Olds)... hope that clears this GM ClusterPhuqk Up, lol
Seems like to be "best" it has to have been in use for a very long time, reliable, and has been upgraded in its basic form for many years . The small block chevy and all its derivatives have met that definition for longer than just about any engine IMO. There have been a lot of great engines named on this thread but none have had the longevity of the small block chevy.
For running forever with minimal maintenance, the Toyota 2UZFE 4.7 V8. They run so smooth you can hardly tell they are running. You wont win any races, but you will win in the long run. I've seen many of them with over 250,000 miles on them that have only had the timing belt changed a couple times, oil/filter changes, and are still going strong.
The Oldsmobile 403 has a fantastic (over square) Bore & stroke ratio for performance... 4.351 bore, 3.385 stroke... but the blocks and cranks were weaker than schit (typical GM stunt)... i've got one in my 79 Trans am, i upgraded to a nodular "N" crank, main studs and straps and a big oil pump... ported W-31 heads, Hi-rise intake, headers & hot cam... makes 425 ft lbs @ the rear wheels... mid range is fantastic, wants to rev like a 302, Wails like a Banshee... but every time the tach gets above 5500 RPM i get a qweezy feeling in my stomach... it's holding up so far... lol
IIRC, if the hood scoop decal on a Trans Am said "6.6 L," it had the Olds engine and if the decal on the scoop said "6.6 T/A," it had a Pontiac 400 in it. Am I right?? Just want to stress my memory a bit.
I had a 76 with the Pontiac 400 in it. I drove the everlovin' shit outa that car.
I think the 78/79 were olds 403 with an auto and the Pontiac 400 with the manual trans.
you are partly right... the 403/auto combo was a "California Only" thing until 79 when all automatic equipped 6.6's were 403's... in 77 i think? the 185 HP version of the 400 Poncho were automatic only, while W72 200 HP version were 4 speed only... i know for fact in 78 the 185 HP's were auto only, while the now 220 HP W72 was available with auto or 4 speed... in 79 the W72 400's were only available as 4 speeds, the 185 HP version 400 was gone, (replaced by the 403 Olds)... hope that clears this GM ClusterPhuqk Up, lol
Brings back memories, had a 78 Formula W72, 4 speed. With headers, true duals, 1.65 rockers, and a tune it was pretty quick for a low compression 400. Clutch was really heavy, but fun car.
Toyota 4.7...nothing can compare, Youtube has documented stories on two 'Million Mile Tundras', both oilfield hotshot trucks.
Diesel? Cat D13000 series, used in gensets, the old D8 2U series dozers, marine engines. I personally maintained at least two that had 30,000 hours on them...that is the equivalent of 1,800,000 miles on them without overhaul.
Never had a Mazda, but I've been told the rotary engines run like striped-ass apes...the higher they wind the more they wanna go. I understand overhauls are a problem, though.
My wife road raced a Mazda with a stock engine but rebuilt to overcome the early rotary overheating problem. The engine builder said that if the over rev buzzer ever went off (in other words quit buzzing) to down shift. Unbelievable rev ability, but incredibly small brakes. She did a complete brake job every Saturday night after the the 1st qualifying session.
Seems like to be "best" it has to have been in use for a very long time, reliable, and has been upgraded in its basic form for many years . The small block chevy and all its derivatives have met that definition for longer than just about any engine IMO. There have been a lot of great engines named on this thread but none have had the longevity of the small block chevy.
yep, seen a show once talkin' bout how many (100 million?) or some such were made... got the original 265 in my 55 Bel Air sport coupe, still runs good... like to build an L79 327 (350 HP) for it... cant bring myself to rip that old mouse outta' there......
Had a lot of trouble cracking precups in those old 2Us.
True enough, invariably number 2 and number 4 and number 6 on the dozers, when pulling hard on a ripper or a can going downhill, an air bubble would form in all three heads and get trapped frying the pre cup.
The Oldsmobile 403 has a fantastic (over square) Bore & stroke ratio for performance... 4.351 bore, 3.385 stroke... but the blocks and cranks were weaker than schit (typical GM stunt)... i've got one in my 79 Trans am, i upgraded to a nodular "N" crank, main studs and straps and a big oil pump... ported W-31 heads, Hi-rise intake, headers & hot cam... makes 425 ft lbs @ the rear wheels... mid range is fantastic, wants to rev like a 302, Wails like a Banshee... but every time the tach gets above 5500 RPM i get a qweezy feeling in my stomach... it's holding up so far... lol
IIRC, if the hood scoop decal on a Trans Am said "6.6 L," it had the Olds engine and if the decal on the scoop said "6.6 T/A," it had a Pontiac 400 in it. Am I right?? Just want to stress my memory a bit.
I had a 76 with the Pontiac 400 in it. I drove the everlovin' shit outa that car.
I think the 78/79 were olds 403 with an auto and the Pontiac 400 with the manual trans.
you are partly right... the 403/auto combo was a "California Only" thing until 79 when all automatic equipped 6.6's were 403's... in 77 i think? the 185 HP version of the 400 Poncho were automatic only, while W72 200 HP version were 4 speed only... i know for fact in 78 the 185 HP's were auto only, while the now 220 HP W72 was available with auto or 4 speed... in 79 the W72 400's were only available as 4 speeds, the 185 HP version 400 was gone, (replaced by the 403 Olds)... hope that clears this GM ClusterPhuqk Up, lol
Brings back memories, had a 78 Formula W72, 4 speed. With headers, true duals, 1.65 rockers, and a tune it was pretty quick for a low compression 400. Clutch was really heavy, but fun car.
Yep... Them W72's actually made 260-270 HP stock as they were tested by the NHRA for stock class drag racing back in the day... didn't take much to bump em over 300
Seems like to be "best" it has to have been in use for a very long time, reliable, and has been upgraded in its basic form for many years . The small block chevy and all its derivatives have met that definition for longer than just about any engine IMO. There have been a lot of great engines named on this thread but none have had the longevity of the small block chevy.
yep, seen a show once talkin' bout how many (100 million?) or some such were made... got the original 265 in my 55 Bel Air sport coupe, still runs good... like to build an L79 327 (350 HP) for it... cant bring myself to rip that old mouse outta' there......
I learned some good stuff about other engines in this thread - and thanks for that - but my thinking runs with these above posts. Have run every production version of the SBs (and the BBs as well) and the 327 seems to have been the best overall. The L79 327/350 that 7mm Loco would like was what came in the 1967 Corvette. I do seem to like it best.
Seems like to be "best" it has to have been in use for a very long time, reliable, and has been upgraded in its basic form for many years . The small block chevy and all its derivatives have met that definition for longer than just about any engine IMO. There have been a lot of great engines named on this thread but none have had the longevity of the small block chevy.
yep, seen a show once talkin' bout how many (100 million?) or some such were made... got the original 265 in my 55 Bel Air sport coupe, still runs good... like to build an L79 327 (350 HP) for it... cant bring myself to rip that old mouse outta' there......
I learned some good stuff about other engines in this thread - and thanks for that - but my thinking runs with these above posts. Have run every production version of the SBs (and the BBs as well) and the 327 seems to have been the best overall. The L79 327/350 that 7mm Loco would like was what came in the 1967 Corvette. I do seem to like it best.
Seems like to be "best" it has to have been in use for a very long time, reliable, and has been upgraded in its basic form for many years . The small block chevy and all its derivatives have met that definition for longer than just about any engine IMO. There have been a lot of great engines named on this thread but none have had the longevity of the small block chevy.
yep, seen a show once talkin' bout how many (100 million?) or some such were made... got the original 265 in my 55 Bel Air sport coupe, still runs good... like to build an L79 327 (350 HP) for it... cant bring myself to rip that old mouse outta' there......
I learned some good stuff about other engines in this thread - and thanks for that - but my thinking runs with these above posts. Have run every production version of the SBs (and the BBs as well) and the 327 seems to have been the best overall. The L79 327/350 that 7mm Loco would like was what came in the 1967 Corvette. I do seem to like it best.
You prefer 327 large or small journal?
I preferred the large journal, but the 327 wasn't available with 4 bolt mains except for a few race engines. Pretty sure that didn't happen until the 350 came along and even then only in the HP versions, the DZ engines, and some prototypes.
Not to diss the small block Ford engines- they were great engines also, but not quite as popular in racing , weren't around as long, and for a long time didn't have nearly the aftermarket the SB Chevy engine had.
My second choice would have been the LS engine family- I think that in time it will be recognized as one of the great engine families every designed- if nothing else just for the incredible modularity of the interchangeable parts available for them and the hot rod aftermarket that has grown up around them.
Hope you're right Jim. Sure could make a case for it given how many are still going, even if it is on their 5th-10th overhaul.
My votes in order. Maybe this isn't "best", but favorite. P-pump 5.9 Cummins. Or ve pump for that matter. Common rail 5.9 Cummins just to group them together. The current 6.7s smoke them for power, but the simplicity and fuel efficiency are gone 20/22r/re Toyota. 3.4 v6 Toyota (5vzfe?) Ford 300 straight 6. Ford (international) 7.3 idi. A good engine, that put out enough power, at the time. As long as you didn't have to ever start it in the cold. Honestly, I just love the sound of them.
Seems like to be "best" it has to have been in use for a very long time, reliable, and has been upgraded in its basic form for many years . The small block chevy and all its derivatives have met that definition for longer than just about any engine IMO. There have been a lot of great engines named on this thread but none have had the longevity of the small block chevy.
yep, seen a show once talkin' bout how many (100 million?) or some such were made... got the original 265 in my 55 Bel Air sport coupe, still runs good... like to build an L79 327 (350 HP) for it... cant bring myself to rip that old mouse outta' there......
I learned some good stuff about other engines in this thread - and thanks for that - but my thinking runs with these above posts. Have run every production version of the SBs (and the BBs as well) and the 327 seems to have been the best overall. The L79 327/350 that 7mm Loco would like was what came in the 1967 Corvette. I do seem to like it best.
You prefer 327 large or small journal?
Question of the ages... some say the small journal (67 & earlier) revs better/easier?, and it's more period correct for my old 55, so i was leaning that way... others say the large journal 68/69 is stronger/more durable and there's a better selection of Hi-Perf parts like bearings & Rods, ect... maybe Cee Cee will weigh in on this?...
Automotive? best for what purpose?... my favorites are the L88 427 Chevrolet, L72 427 & ZL1 427... Ford FE 427 side oiler & SOHC (Cammer), Ford 429 SCJ & Boss 9... Mopar 440 Magnum & 6 Brl/Pack, the 426 Hemi was great on the race track (not so much on the street)... i'm a Shiverlay guy, but i gotta' admit the Fords & Mopars were more durable, The FE won Lemans (with Chrysler Hemi connecting rods?), and the 426 Hemi Cleaned Up in NASCAR... and to beat the piss out of on the street, gimme' a 440 magnum or a 429 SCJ anyday!... "Gator Mcklusky" or "Kowalski" anyone ?...
From red light to red light the 440 in the same bodied car would beat the Hemi. If you got a green light on the second light, the Hemi would run past the 440. If'n you had the same rear end gears.
Having driven nothing but Fords for the last 50 years, I'd give the nod to the 302/5.0 engine, along with the 4.0 that was in so many of the Explorers and Rangers in the 1990 and early 2000 time period. As for the 300 inline that others have mentioned, I bought a new 1979 Ford truck that had one, and it was shot at 70,000 miles.
The Ford 5.0L “Roadrunner” from the 2011-2014 Boss 302 Mustangs was quite the engine. A Coyote with forged components. The compact Chevrolet 7.0L LS7 was an awesome small block from the same time period. Both were high-winding street engines.
"Little GTO, really looking fine Three deuces and a four-speed And a 389..."
I had a great uncle who worked at the local Pontiac dealership, and he bought a new 1963 Catalina with a 389, 3 deuces, and a 4 speed, red and white. My great aunt drove it, and it was a hoot listening to her go through the gears. I got to drive it once, and would that thing run.
Seems like to be "best" it has to have been in use for a very long time, reliable, and has been upgraded in its basic form for many years . The small block chevy and all its derivatives have met that definition for longer than just about any engine IMO. There have been a lot of great engines named on this thread but none have had the longevity of the small block chevy.
yep, seen a show once talkin' bout how many (100 million?) or some such were made... got the original 265 in my 55 Bel Air sport coupe, still runs good... like to build an L79 327 (350 HP) for it... cant bring myself to rip that old mouse outta' there......
I learned some good stuff about other engines in this thread - and thanks for that - but my thinking runs with these above posts. Have run every production version of the SBs (and the BBs as well) and the 327 seems to have been the best overall. The L79 327/350 that 7mm Loco would like was what came in the 1967 Corvette. I do seem to like it best.
You prefer 327 large or small journal?
Question of the ages... some say the small journal (67 & earlier) revs better/easier?, and it's more period correct for my old 55, so i was leaning that way... others say the large journal 68/69 is stronger/more durable and there's a better selection of Hi-Perf parts like bearings & Rods, ect... maybe Cee Cee will weigh in on this?...
You are correct about the smaller journals having a power advantage. There is less bearing surface. It is why we will use "Honda" sized rod journals in our super stock engines also.
If you just want to talk about good motors, Toyota's 2.5 liter 4 cylinder motors have a *lot* to do with Toyota's reputation for reliability. Their latest variant produces 203 HP and gets 32 MPG out on the road,..and they just won't quit running.
My son recently needed a car and I steered him towards a 2018 Camry with 107,000 miles on it and a good maintenance history. The price was knocked down a bit because of the milage. But it looks and runs great.
He took off across country in it and hasn't had a problem yet.
The straight 6 cyl that you find in jeeps started out as what was known as a continental redseal which was produced since the 50's.
I was going to post, lots of good engines mentioned, I always have a soft spot for a straight 6 and the 4.0HO motor in those 90's jeep cherokees seemed to be a rock, and was easy to work on too.
I've had one and I liked the power in that small jeep. I have the 4.7L Toyota now and no complaints.
I had an '82 Mercury that had a 3.3L inline 6 (200ci), it wasn't bad or good, it was just there but that jeep had some punch
Add the Chrysler 318 and the small block Chevy and we have a 4 way tie
Have run all, and no arguments. This - plus that 4 cyl Toyota - seems very good top of a list.
Then again, the comments about applications are cogent.
I have run some big/different vehicles with other purposes - and Contis in welders, etc. - so have some opinions there, but in the main have been thinking of car/light truck applications here.
If you went by aftermarket alone then by far and away it would be the small block Chevy in its many iterations. Purely of how an engine changed the drag racing world back before things were at 11,000 HP it would have to be the HEMI.
Among all the great engines already mentioned, I have to throw the AMC 390 into the mix. Under rated and overlooked IMO.
I had a 390 AMX motor in a 1978 Jeep CJ5, blew it up twice. When I rebuilt it the second time I wanted forged piston as it was piston breakage that shut it down the first time. The only way to get forged pistons was to have them custom made and stupid expensive, I was in my early 20's and pretty broke at the time. So I put new cast pistons in it. The build still cost me about 50% more than a SBC would have cost. And sure enough the first time at the sand dunes it broke a couple pistons.... parted out the jeep and will never have anything to do with an AMC V8 again!
The Buick GS 455 "Stage 1" cleaned house at the pure stock muscle car drags back in the 80's when the cars were actually "stock"... The Hemi guys were Livid... lol
350 interations. When I worked at the V-8 engine plant we manufactured motors for; Corvette Z-28 IROC Camaro ZZ-3 Police Interceptor Marine Regular Passenger Vehicles Light Duty Truck Heavy Duty Truck Bus Industrial; Gen Set, Irrigation Pump Plus a few more...
350 interations. When I worked at the V-8 engine plant we manufactured motors for; Corvette Z-28 IROC Comaro ZZ-3 Police Interceptor Marine Regular Passenger Vehicles Light Duty Truck Heavy Duty Truck Bus Industrial; Gen Set, Irrigation Pump Plus a few more...
i was 7 yrs old in 1970... i rode along to Florida from Wi. with my older sister and her boyfriend in his just delivered 70 AAR Cuda'... Lemon Twist with a 340/6Brl 4 speed... there was a few stop light drag races... i still remember the smell of burnt clutch and oil vapor at 6k...
421 SD in a '62 Catalina 71-2 455 H.O. 73-4 455 SD
"Viva La Round Ports"...
LOL, I guess you know your Pontiacs. I was lusting for a 71 Trans Am 455 HO. Until I saw what they're going for these days.
yea, they cool, but the older i get the less comfortable the "F" body's are... love to get my hands on a 71 Lemans GT-37 455 HO car... maybe build a clone?... we recently rebuilt/restored an M22 for a customers 71 T/A, Lucy blue/white stripe car... doing a 74 SD Q-jet for the same guy, he's got a rack full of HO, SD and RA IV engines in his shop... Pontiac Candy Store!...
The small block Chevy’s were pretty bad ass As far as endurance , the 318’s and slanted six held up pretty good The best I had for endurance was a 2006 Ford Focus station wagon , had 280 some thousand miles when I sold it and and the guy who bought it drove it for a couple more years Kenneth
421 SD in a '62 Catalina 71-2 455 H.O. 73-4 455 SD
"Viva La Round Ports"...
LOL, I guess you know your Pontiacs. I was lusting for a 71 Trans Am 455 HO. Until I saw what they're going for these days.
yea, they cool, but the older i get the less comfortable the "F" body's are... love to get my hands on a 71 Lemans GT-37 455 HO car... maybe build a clone?... we recently rebuilt/restored an M22 for a customers 71 T/A, Lucy blue/white stripe car... doing a 74 SD Q-jet for the same guy, he's got a rack full of HO, SD and RA IV engines in his shop... Pontiac Candy Store!...
350 interations. When I worked at the V-8 engine plant we manufactured motors for; Corvette Z-28 IROC Comaro ZZ-3 Police Interceptor Marine Regular Passenger Vehicles Light Duty Truck Heavy Duty Truck Bus Industrial; Gen Set, Irrigation Pump Plus a few more...
i was 7 yrs old in 1970... i rode along to Florida from Wi. with my older sister and her boyfriend in his just delivered 70 AAR Cuda'... Lemon Twist with a 340/6Brl 4 speed... there was a few stop light drag races... i still remember the smell of burnt clutch and oil vapor at 6k...
One of the got away's that I had forgotten about until now. Thanks for bringing up a painful reminder. Ha. ALMOST had 1 bought in I'm gonna say the yr would've been 87-88. Sitting in amongst a bunch of other cars at a small shop. Yellow/black paint. All original and everything was there. 6 pack with the air cleaner, everything. Just needed to be gone over and restored, but it wasn't rough.
Got to poking around about it and conversing with the shop about buying it. We were in a back and forth dialogue about buying it and the price. Somewhere along the line they realized what it was and that was the end of that. Rare bird. Couldn't believe at the time I ran across it. Still think about it at times.
The 318 seemed to outlast anything it was ever installed in.
That's because Chrysler's bodies were POSs when the 318 was living. It weren't really a bad engine, though...just nothing remarkable.
That’s B.S. had some early 60’s that had excellent bodies in the mid to late 70’s I’ve seen the 318’s run dry of oil and keep on trucking No power house , but definitely durable Kenneth
Love the 70 GTO, my favorite yr... sadly, i muffed an op 3 yrs back... a friend/customer who is a well known parts vendor in the Pontiac world offered me his 70 GTO, RA III, 4 speed, White/Red int., it was striped as a "Judge", Texas car, faded paint & decals, owned since high school (1978)... he shot me a price that was more than fair for it, but then informed me it wasn't a "Real" Judge... asked him to give me some time to sort it out, he said no problem, it hasn't left this spot in 30 yrs... When i delivered a load of parts to him a week later and to seal the deal on the Goat, the car was gone...
The 318 seemed to outlast anything it was ever installed in.
While I'm partial to SB Chevy's - my daughter and SIL got just over 600K miles out of one we gave them. Engine was weak, but still going when they junked the Durango.
The 318 seemed to outlast anything it was ever installed in.
That's because Chrysler's bodies were POSs when the 318 was living. It weren't really a bad engine, though...just nothing remarkable.
That’s B.S. had some early 60’s that had excellent bodies in the mid to late 70’s I’ve seen the 318’s run dry of oil and keep on trucking No power house , but definitely durable Kenneth
Small block Chevy is easily the most prolific. Heck, they put them things in every thing! For longevity and taking abuse, I’d go with the Chrysler slant six though. Oil? That was for sissies! My buddy run one 2 quarts low for thousands of miles. In 20 years of junkyard/salvage sales, we only ever sold one for replacement. If you ran them hot for a lonnng time, you could cook them into locking up, eventually. I don’t know of anybody else ever destroying one. Those things were tough as anvils. Reon
then there was the "Cosworth" Vega... my older brother gave me a wrecked one when i was 13 in the summer of 76... went back home to school in the fall, told everybody bout the cool car i had... went back up to his place at spring break and the Vega was Gon!... he say, this guy just kep stackin' $100 bills till i had to let it go... F---ing Indian Giver...
The Pinto had 3? different engine over it's life... the 1600, the 2000 and the 2300... the 2000 & 2300 were German? design and pretty good engines (carbs sucked tho), the 1600 was English and a POS as i recall...
Vega engines I believe had aluminum cylinders, like no liners, so I was told, they weren't worth tearing apart, a junkyard replacement was like $100 back in the day, I went through a couple...
The Pinto had 3? different engine over it's life... the 1600, the 2000 and the 2300... the 2000 & 2300 were German? design and pretty good engines (carbs sucked tho), the 1600 was English and a POS as i recall...
Originally Posted by irfubar
Vega engines I believe had aluminum cylinders, like no liners, so I was told, they weren't worth tearing apart, a junkyard replacement was like $100 back in the day, I went through a couple...
They both, especially with hindsight, were relatively poor attempts to compete with the Japanese small cars that were becoming popular at the time.
Served enough of a purpose to keep the US automakers in business I guess.
Vega engines I believe had aluminum cylinders, like no liners, so I was told, they weren't worth tearing apart, a junkyard replacement was like $100 back in the day, I went through a couple...
yep, cheap ass GM tried running the piston & rings on an alum bore... the late ones had iron sleeves? (at least the Monza's did) and ran fine... too little too late... it's Rep was ruined by then...
For sheer numbers and durability, the SBC. For HP, the 426 Hemi followed closely, maybe even swapped for the ford 427 cammer then the BBC.
I’m not a Ford guy, but that 5.0 Coyote engine is a good one. The 5.7 hemi I had in my 2019 Ram was really good too. That 5.4 bespoke Corvette engine is supposed to be as well.
Diesels the 3406 is a good one but Cat engines are a PITA when it’s really cold out. Cummins are better in cold weather environments.
My grandfather helped develop the Wasp engines for Pratt & Whitney. Hell of an engine in the Corsair and B29 plus a few others.
What do you guys think of the plasma spray on liners companies are using on the cylinder walls of their aluminum black engines instead of iron liners?
I know find has been going it on their coyote 5.0 in the f150 since 2018 and lots of guys are complaining of excess oil use.
The new Mopar hurricane inline 6 is also a no iron sleave plasma coated aluminum.
For claims it says the 8 pounds weight on a 5.0 but I'm sure they're doing it because it's cheaper. So much for having your block bored out and resleaved I guess.
Maybe they don't want us being like Cuba. After we go full communist they don't want us keeping our cars on the road forever.
I'm not really excited about the spray on liners. Just as i became interested in the coyote they went spray on. I used to be a gm v8 guy and liked the gm 5.3 and 6.2 quite a bit until the last 3 or so years. I know several people that have had major problems with gm V8s the last few years. Lots of valve issues and other things. That's left me liking the hemi 5.7 that was in my 2019 ram even more but those are going away too.
I think they're building obsolescence into the V8s lately. Probably the green commies in the government and the esg push from investors like Blackrock.
I've got friends and family that got over 300,000 miles on 2000-2006 gm 5.3s without any engine troubles. I just don't think they build them like that anymore.
If you just want to talk about good motors, Toyota's 2.5 liter 4 cylinder motors have a *lot* to do with Toyota's reputation for reliability. Their latest variant produces 203 HP and gets 32 MPG out on the road,..and they just won't quit running.
My son recently needed a car and I steered him towards a 2018 Camry with 107,000 miles on it and a good maintenance history. The price was knocked down a bit because of the milage. But it looks and runs great.
He took off across country in it and hasn't had a problem yet.
The Nissan pickup with the 2.4 liter 4 cylinder, same thing. Wonderful engine that just won't die.
If you just want to talk about good motors, Toyota's 2.5 liter 4 cylinder motors have a *lot* to do with Toyota's reputation for reliability. Their latest variant produces 203 HP and gets 32 MPG out on the road,..and they just won't quit running.
My son recently needed a car and I steered him towards a 2018 Camry with 107,000 miles on it and a good maintenance history. The price was knocked down a bit because of the milage. But it looks and runs great.
He took off across country in it and hasn't had a problem yet.
Our family car at the moment is a 23 model Camry XSE with that engine. Really like the car. 8spd, no CVT. Averages 34-35mpg over first 25k miles.
Fburgtx: For the win - you hit it! Hold into the wind VarmintGuy P.S.: But my 1996 one owner Dodge Cummins 12 valve diesel has been knockin at that door (Best Engine Ever!) for some time now!
I am partial to the SOHC straight 4's, probably followed by something similar in a straight 6. But I'm not a motorhead so there's probably much better out there.
Never saw a small block chevy go a million miles, so the 4.7L Toyota v8 is much better. The Ford straight six 4.9L 300 with fuel injection is a close second, however it does not make a ton of power. The slant six dodge/Chrysler engine was damn bullet proof as well. Toyota 22RE is also known for excellent reliability. No, the small block chevy doesn't make the list as far as I'm concerned. Even though I've rebuilt a few of them...
Rotaries (I know very little about them) seem to be the most efficient design of all ICE... but are damn complicated as I understand it.
My only experience was with the RX7, and a first generation one at that. Efficient is not a word I would use for a 2000lb car that couldn't break 20mpg. That said, that car was a riot on twisty backroads of which we had plenty. And even though I thought I was going to die several times in it, I never did. I guess being that fun to drive might have been what kept the mpg so low.
What do you guys think of the plasma spray on liners companies are using on the cylinder walls of their aluminum black engines instead of iron liners?
I know find has been going it on their coyote 5.0 in the f150 since 2018 and lots of guys are complaining of excess oil use.
The new Mopar hurricane inline 6 is also a no iron sleave plasma coated aluminum.
For claims it says the 8 pounds weight on a 5.0 but I'm sure they're doing it because it's cheaper. So much for having your block bored out and resleaved I guess.
Maybe they don't want us being like Cuba. After we go full communist they don't want us keeping our cars on the road forever.
I'm not really excited about the spray on liners. Just as i became interested in the coyote they went spray on. I used to be a gm v8 guy and liked the gm 5.3 and 6.2 quite a bit until the last 3 or so years. I know several people that have had major problems with gm V8s the last few years. Lots of valve issues and other things. That's left me liking the hemi 5.7 that was in my 2019 ram even more but those are going away too.
I think they're building obsolescence into the V8s lately. Probably the green commies in the government and the esg push from investors like Blackrock.
I've got friends and family that got over 300,000 miles on 2000-2006 gm 5.3s without any engine troubles. I just don't think they build them like that anymore.
Bb
I've got a couple of Acuras including a 2010 TL. That series was available with either a 3.5 that makes 280 HP and a 3.7 that makes a bit over 300. Essentially, they're the same engine. But to increase the displacement on the 3.7 they left off the cast iron cylinder liners and chose to coat the aluminum cylinders with some sort of super hard plating. The plating on the 3.7 motors flakes off and fouls the piston rings. Those motors are junk. The 3.5s with the cast iron cylinder liners are bullet proof. My TL has the 3.5.
Also,....Honda's engineers are fairly creative. They've developed a "thing" they call "VTEC" on many motors.
It's a separate intake cam that is activated by oil pressure. Some of the cams are calibrated for efficiency and some are for performance. On the TLs the second intake valve cam is much more radical than the primary cam,...much more lift and duration. At 4000 rpm the second cam is activated and you can really feel it when it happens. It's much like "kicking in the 4 barrel" on an old small block chevy. It comes on all of a sudden.
It's a fun car to play with out on the interstate. But it'll get you a ticket if you're not careful with it.
Rotaries (I know very little about them) seem to be the most efficient design of all ICE... but are damn complicated as I understand it.
My only experience was with the RX7, and a first generation one at that. Efficient is not a word I would use for a 2000lb car that couldn't break 20mpg. That said, that car was a riot on twisty backroads of which we had plenty. And even though I thought I was going to die several times in it, I never did. I guess being that fun to drive might have been what kept the mpg so low.
Yes, they always were thirsty, and apex seals seem a vulnerability. Bugger-all torque, but great top end. They are physically small for their output too. I remember one example to illustrate: a Datsun 260z which had the stock 2.6 I6 replaced with a turbocharged 13B. It left acres of space in the engine compartment.
Driving it was something else too. It had a very lumpy idle, and nothing below 5000 revs. If you got up it, at about 7-8000 revs things just went nuts, and your head would slam back into the headrest. It still had the stock tacho, with a "change now" light added, so I don't entirely know what revs it would pull - the needle was off the scale and it was howling. Huge fun.
A few of my friends owned them, examples including an R100, an Rx3, Rx7 and Rx8. My neighbour currently has an Rx2, just as a weekend toy. It is a rorty sounding little beast too.
no love for the 409 ?... at least it should get the nod for "Best Engine SONG Ever"... nothin' can catch her... nothin' can touch my... giddy up four oh!...
no love for the 409 ?... at least it should get the nod for "Best Engine SONG Ever"... nothin' can catch her... nothin' can touch my... giddy up four oh!...
Someone once said, "Cool song but a 413 Wedge would blow those 409's into the weeds."
Didn't read the whole thing but the engines that have impressed me the most -
300 I6 from Ford The 4.6 Mod motor from Ford in the CVPI - 200k miles AND 5 figure idle time - zero issues Arctic Cat Firecat F7 - very reliable 42 cubic inch twin cylinder that put out 140 horsepower Arctic Cat/Yamaha Thundercat - turbo charged, 60 cubic inch three cylinder putting out 200 horsepower (tuning and work - Turbo Dynamics has one that went 0-60 in 1.1 seconds and 60 feet in 1.03 seconds, off the trailer) Yamaha RZ350 as set up for the Banshee - 2 cylinder, 21 cubic inches - 34 hp but would spin 11,500 rpm
Having driven nothing but Fords for the last 50 years, I'd give the nod to the 302/5.0 engine, along with the 4.0 that was in so many of the Explorers and Rangers in the 1990 and early 2000 time period. As for the 300 inline that others have mentioned, I bought a new 1979 Ford truck that had one, and it was shot at 70,000 miles.
The new 300 inline I had developed piston knock early. The dealer gave me a new short block. After that it was a good engine. Great low end torque, but weak at high speeds.
My vote goes to the Gen 1 or Gen 2 Coyote engines.