Ward's 10 Best Engines for 2009
#21
***Repost Police***
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/ranks/ls1tech10year.png)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
The LSx engines aren't themselves really all that fuel-efficient... it's the low transmission gearing that makes them so. A .5:1 6th gear (double overdrive) makes a world of an impact. Great engines, but it's the whole drivetrain that makes them so fuel efficient, not the engine itself.
#22
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Cedar Rapids, IA
Posts: 534
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I understand that, I used to have a 99 silverado with a 5.3L and 4:10s. Wasn't exactly a green vehicle. Still when I kept the throttle under control it did pretty well.
I'm really wondering what makes the new hemi's better as an engine overall than any current ls based engine. Also wish they had a separate list without a price cap on it, I'd like to see their opinions on the ls9, along with bugattis w16. Those freaks at bugatti are picasso's of engine design.
I'm really wondering what makes the new hemi's better as an engine overall than any current ls based engine. Also wish they had a separate list without a price cap on it, I'd like to see their opinions on the ls9, along with bugattis w16. Those freaks at bugatti are picasso's of engine design.
#23
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
The LSx engines aren't themselves really all that fuel-efficient... it's the low transmission gearing that makes them so. A .5:1 6th gear (double overdrive) makes a world of an impact. Great engines, but it's the whole drivetrain that makes them so fuel efficient, not the engine itself.
I got over 26+mpg in my automatic Z28 (and that's with 3.23 gears, not the even more fuel efficient 2.73s) on a long trip to St. Louis and back at times averaging up to 75-80mph.
But yes, the 6 speed manuals and, more recently, the 6 speed automatics play a role in the awesome fuel economy numbers delivered by the LSx.
![Nod](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies/LS1Tech/gr_nod.gif)
#24
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
![Nod](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies/LS1Tech/gr_nod.gif)
And if you look closely at the design of the current Chrysler Hemis you will see many similarities between it and the LSx series of motors, they borrowed a lot from the original LS1 design.
![Mr. Cool](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies/LS1Tech/gr_cool.gif)
#26
***Repost Police***
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/ranks/ls1tech10year.png)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I understand that, I used to have a 99 silverado with a 5.3L and 4:10s. Wasn't exactly a green vehicle. Still when I kept the throttle under control it did pretty well.
I'm really wondering what makes the new hemi's better as an engine overall than any current ls based engine. Also wish they had a separate list without a price cap on it, I'd like to see their opinions on the ls9, along with bugattis w16. Those freaks at bugatti are picasso's of engine design.
I'm really wondering what makes the new hemi's better as an engine overall than any current ls based engine. Also wish they had a separate list without a price cap on it, I'd like to see their opinions on the ls9, along with bugattis w16. Those freaks at bugatti are picasso's of engine design.
#27
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Cedar Rapids, IA
Posts: 534
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Not saying the Super Snakes engine isn't good, but what makes it superior in design to previous modulars?
#28
***Repost Police***
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/ranks/ls1tech10year.png)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Oil squirters are nothing revolutionary... Integra GS-Rs had them back in 1994. And the blower is an Eaton unit, not Chevrolet. The 5.4 in the Super Snake has internals that have been proven to handle well over 1,000rwhp, and doesn't require any head/cam changes to do so, which is quite impressive. But both engines are just adaptations to existing motors, using some basically aftermarket parts. Which is why neither are gonna make the list.
#30
TECH Senior Member
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
The problem with the "Ward's best engines" is they select their engines based on irrelevant numbers on paper (like hp/l) instead of real world figures that are actually meaningful (like weight and physical size). I don't think its at all a coincidence that we see so many supercars and kit cars that are using LSx based engines opposed to some more exotic engines out there. Why do you think that is?
#31
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Wards isn't too different from any other magazine. I don't know why anyone gets their shorts in bind over any friggen magazine list. When I sold Nissans I used the fact about their V6. The Mazda Rotary also made Wards list.
Now that I have this information I see it as an excuse to drink another beer tonight, thanks!!
Jakes Dad
Now that I have this information I see it as an excuse to drink another beer tonight, thanks!!
Jakes Dad
#32
***Repost Police***
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/ranks/ls1tech10year.png)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Because its a 440lbs engine(dressed) that makes 505 restricted hp and 470 restricted ft.lbs of torque, and is no bigger than the LS1 (and smaller still than even many V6's on the market).
The problem with the "Ward's best engines" is they select their engines based on irrelevant numbers on paper (like hp/l) instead of real world figures that are actually meaningful (like weight and physical size). I don't think its at all a coincidence that we see so many supercars and kit cars that are using LSx based engines opposed to some more exotic engines out there. Why do you think that is?
The problem with the "Ward's best engines" is they select their engines based on irrelevant numbers on paper (like hp/l) instead of real world figures that are actually meaningful (like weight and physical size). I don't think its at all a coincidence that we see so many supercars and kit cars that are using LSx based engines opposed to some more exotic engines out there. Why do you think that is?
#33
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Cedar Rapids, IA
Posts: 534
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
And you make it sound like I didn't just defend the LSx motors. They are great engines, and have already been honored in '98 and '99 I believe. But honestly the LS9 is an LS3... with a blower. Just like the LS7 is, for all intents and purposes, a bored/stroked LS2. Again, very good motors, just don't fit the criteria. Like the sub-$54,000 entry fee. Not many people are gonna see the benefit of a $70k+ car.
#34
TECH Regular
![Talking](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon10.gif)
What exactly would you say makes the northstar outdated? Odd especially from someone that has lt1 power in their sig. Not trying to dog, but the engines actually have quite the potential, example the sts-v powerplant. You could buy the crate engine blown making 460hp. Compare that to lets say an 03/04 cobra powerplant. The northstar is smaller, but makes more power. I'm sure there are a few other details that could affect that (supercharger size, boost, etc) but in the muscle car world the mod engine seems to be the ohv contender, but the northstar is definitely not out of that league as far as power goes. We all know neither are as fuel efficient as the lsx engines. Please correct me if I'm wrong on any of this.
The list itself makes sense, especially with BMW being on there. The only engine that really stumps me is the new Hemi. Granted, I'm not very well informed in the modern mopar world, but I feel like maybe theres something I'm missing if it made that list...
The list itself makes sense, especially with BMW being on there. The only engine that really stumps me is the new Hemi. Granted, I'm not very well informed in the modern mopar world, but I feel like maybe theres something I'm missing if it made that list...
On paper the Northstar is a great engine, just like 09 gtr. It sounds good but doesn't perform and the quality is poor, ex oil and cooling systems. Yes the sc Northstar is more powerful than the 03/04 mod motors, but the Northstar isnt competing with that motor. However, the dohc Northstar is blown away by the competition as i stated before. Cadillac is slowing becoming the standard of the world again. The Northstar was the standard back in 93. Its a 16 year old engine design, even the ls series engines are not that dated. The Northstar engine has no future replacement for a reason.
Here are some quick facts on premium dohc v8s:
2007– Cadillac 4.6 Northstar dohc v8 320 hp @ 6400 RPM
2007- Lexus 4.6 1UR-FSE dohc V8 380 hp @ 6,400 RPM
2007- Mercedes-Benz 5.5 dohc v8 382 @ 6,000 RPM
Last edited by texas94z; 01-07-2009 at 12:09 AM.
#35
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 1,607
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
And you make it sound like I didn't just defend the LSx motors. They are great engines, and have already been honored in '98 and '99 I believe. But honestly the LS9 is an LS3... with a blower. Just like the LS7 is, for all intents and purposes, a bored/stroked LS2. Again, very good motors, just don't fit the criteria. Like the sub-$54,000 entry fee. Not many people are gonna see the benefit of a $70k+ car.
They are not all the same, you have to be dumb to say that LS7-7.0L displacement (427 cubic inches) makes it the largest LS engine offered in a production car. Unlike LS1/LS6, LS2 and LS3 engines, the LS7 uses a Siamese-bore cylinder block design - required for its big, 4.125-inch bores. Competition-proven heads and lightweight components, such as titanium rods and intake valves. The L99 version is equipped with GM's fuel-saving Active Fuel Management cylinder deactivation system . LS9 is the boost version that uses the strengthened similar 6.2L LS3 block but with a stronger rotating assembly, roto-cast cylinder heads and a sixth-generation 2.3L Roots-type supercharger and lower compression.
It's alot more complex than just slapping on a super charger on an LS3 and calling it a day.
Last edited by GMmexican; 01-07-2009 at 02:19 AM.
#37
***Repost Police***
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/ranks/ls1tech10year.png)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
They are not all the same, you have to be dumb to say that LS7-7.0L displacement (427 cubic inches) makes it the largest LS engine offered in a production car. Unlike LS1/LS6, LS2 and LS3 engines, the LS7 uses a Siamese-bore cylinder block design - required for its big, 4.125-inch bores. Competition-proven heads and lightweight components, such as titanium rods and intake valves. The L99 version is equipped with GM's fuel-saving Active Fuel Management cylinder deactivation system . LS9 is the boost version that uses the strengthened similar 6.2L LS3 block but with a stronger rotating assembly, roto-cast cylinder heads and a sixth-generation 2.3L Roots-type supercharger and lower compression.
It's alot more complex than just slapping on a super charger on an LS3 and calling it a day.
It's alot more complex than just slapping on a super charger on an LS3 and calling it a day.
#38
![Lightbulb](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon3.gif)
None of those other brands were even close to 300hp.
In an ironic turn of events, Cadillac and that Northstar are actually what helped push Toyota, Mercedes and BMW to improve their numbers.
![Grin](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies/LS1Tech/gr_grin.gif)
#40
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 1,607
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
pushrod motors =
are proven 56 year history
easy to maintain
lighter
versitle(marine,towing,flex fuel,hybrid,racing,daily driver, over 25mpg)reliable and they work
I would easily take an Lsx over these motors any day when you compare the massive aftermarket support its not even close
*Audi AG: 2.0L TFSI turbocharged DOHC I-4 (A4 Avant)
* BMW AG: 3.0L turbocharged DOHC I-6 (135i Coupe)
* BMW AG: 3.0L DOHC I-6 Turbodiesel (335d)
* Chrysler LLC: 5.7L Hemi OHV V-8 (Dodge Ram/Challenger R/T)
But im talking to a ford guy that has not driven or owned any of those motors..and wouldnt know anything about long term performance,reliability or cost of owner ship and maintenence
I have owned and driven on a daily basis- sbc,sbf,Gen I tpi,Gen II LT-1,ford 32 valve v-8 cobra,5.7 liter HEMI,Gen III ls-1,GEN IV LS2/LS3,BMW I4,Chrysler DOHC V-6,DSM gen I
Last edited by GMmexican; 01-08-2009 at 02:58 AM.