Talk Back Tuesday: The 10 Best Engines of All Time
You may have already heard this, but BMW's twin-turbocharged 3.0-liter engine took home the International Engine of the Year award for 2008. If you've experienced this powertrain you know that title is well and properly earned, as the 3.0-liter's combination of horsepower, torque and even fuel efficiency make it one of the best engines in history.
But that got me thinking: What are the best engines in the history of the automobile? There are no internationally recognized test parameters to answer this question, so it's basically a judgement call. With that said, here are the 10 engines I would place in the annals of "Best Engines of All Time."
10. Honda B-Series: While the NSX's V6 introduced the U.S. market to variable valve (VTEC) technology in 1990, it was the B16 and B17 engines that validated the technology as a means to increased performance and fuel efficiency. The Acura Integra was the primary U.S. model to use this powerplant (B17) starting in 1992, but the Honda del Sol also featured a B-series engine (B16).
9. Chevrolet Small Block: Whether you're a fan of Chevy's small block V8 doesn't really matter. What matters is that this powerplant played a larger role in American automotive performance during the second-half of the 20th century than any other internal combustion device. Everything from 1955 Bel Airs to 1995 Corvettes used the same fundamental design, thus it must make the list.
8. BMW M70/S2: Designed and built by BMW's M Division, this 6.1-liter alloy V12 put 627 horsepower at the command of McLaren F1 drivers, making it the fastest (231 mph) street-legal production car for over 11 years. With almost 400 lb-ft of torque available at 1,500 rpm the V12 could fling the 2,500 pound F1 to 60 mph in 3.2 seconds, no super- or turbocharging required.
7. Chevrolet LS6/LS7: In terms of torque and a broad powerband the LS6/LS7 are among the best performance engines I've ever experienced. There's an "always on" aspect that makes other performance engines feel lethargic and limp-wristed. The 7.0-liter LS7 translates to 427 cubic inches, proving modern technology and old-fashioned displament make an excellent paring.
6. Nissan VQ Series: Yeah, yeah -- it keeps making Ward's 10 Best Engines list. But let's talk about this V6 engine's smoothness, rev-happy nature and high power characteristics. It's given everything from the Nissan Altima to the Infiniti G35 a mechanical soul on par with premium European brands, making it a key component of Nissan's 21st century turnaround in the U.S. market.
5. Chrysler 426 Hemi: The original race engine for the street. It was never supposed to be in a production car, but when the NHRA changed the rules to block the Hemi from competition Chrysler decided to put in dealer showrooms. It elevated the brand, the cars and the horsepower wars of the muscle car era. It also became the de facto powerplant for Top Fuel drag racing competition.
4. Chrysler 440: I've dealt with numerous 440s over the past 23 years. All of them were brutally powerful and incredibly durable while requiring minimal maintenance. The 440 in my 1970 GTX was 19 years old with 95,000 miles. I pulled it apart thinking it was time for a rebuild. I was wrong. The internal components were barely used and it could have gone another 200,000 easy.
3. Porsche Flat-6: There are 35 years to pick from when choosing which Porsche flat-6 is the best flat-6, but all of them share the same high-strung personality and addictive exhaust note. I distinctly remember the first time I heard it, bouncing off the canyon walls as I powered a Boxster S up Route 33, north of Ojai, in 1999. I've been afflicted with flat-6 fanaticism ever since.
2. Ford Flathead V8: Ford's flathead put the power and thrill of a V8 engine into the common man's hands. Before its creation in 1932 only wealthy folks had access to more than six cylinders. If the Chevy small block was the most important performance engine in the second half of the 20th century, this powerplant established everyman performance during the Great Depression.
1. BMW 3.0-Liter Twin Turbo: I'm going to go with convention on this one and give BMW's 3.0-liter, twin-turbo 6 full props. Not only does it satisfy the performance junky with 300 seamless horsepower, it does so while using relatively little fuel and in full compliance of 2008 emission standards. Finally, it appears there really is a replacement for displacement.
- Posted by
- Karl Brauer May 20, 2008, 6:00 AM
- Permalink
- Categories:
- Automotive News, BMW, Chevrolet, Chrysler, Ford, Honda, Nissan, Porsche, Vehicle Awards
I agree with 1 and 10. No idea on the other 8
I've got to nominate the Alfa V6. A relatively unique design and a absurdly high character to dollar ratio.
The only engine I think is missing is the Buick 3.8L V6. No other V6 has matched its combination of power, fuel economy, long term reliability (assuming you replace the original plastic intake manifold on mid 90s LeSabres and Bonnevilles,) and longevity. Yes, it is dated and noisy by todays standards, but how many engines being built today are going to be in production for 46+ years and have over 25 million produced?
I also think an honorable mention should be given to the Mazda 13B rotary. It honestly does not deserve to be on this list, but never has so little displacement given such joy to so many.
Personally, I'd ditch the BMW M70/S2. If we're including exotic engines, then none of the other nine would have a chance. In it's place I would put the Mazda Rotary, of any vintage.
Then there's number ten. In a list of engine families, why does a singular engine exist? Also, if this is an "all time" list that engine doesn't have the history to compete, and who's to say in ten years it won't be completely subpar? That's the same reason I wouldn't include Toyota's synnergy drive, history hasn't judged it yet. I'd replace that with BMW's "M/S 50 series" straight 6, which does have everything a BMW straight 6 should have, and had a few decades to prove it. Now that will start a list of BMW 6's, but that's a great topic for another post!
No willys straight 4? Maybe the Chrysler 440 shows a bit of bias, but everything else looks great.
A couple come to mind, in no order.
1. The engine used in the M5/M6, whatever its called, 5.0L V10 with 500hp. I remember that engine has also picked up youra few accolades.
2. The 6.5L V12 used in the S65, SL65 and CL65 AMG cars. With 604hp and 738tq it probably feels like a rocket is strapped to the car.
3. The engine in the new GT-R, 0-60 in 3.2 seconds is incredible.
I think #1 should be changed to "BMW Inline-6", rather than just singling out one particular model. Throughout the last 30 years, the I-6 has been on the cutting edge of technology while offering excellent fuel economy, sublime smoothness, and ample power. My personal favorite is the S54 motor from the E46 M3 (333hp and an 8000rpm redline), but nearly every iteration is awesome in its own right.
Karl,
How about the Cummings TD (oil burner, but transformed the pickup) and the Ford 302?
I love BMWs, and own a 20 year old one with the 'Baby' six (M20), but Karl, you're out of your mind naming the N54 as #1. It has a completely unknown reliability record...putting it in such comany as the Flathead and SBC....geeze.
You're skewing WAY too much towards performance here...the 440 AND the Hemi? The LS* AND SBC?
Where's the slant-6? The VW Aircooled engine?
I'm really surprised not to see Mazda's rotary engine (RX-7) or a Subaru Boxer in the line up.
I vote for SAAB H engine.
The recent trend is to use small turbocharged engines in family cars to achieve excellent fuel economy AND great power on demand. Kind of a split personality of having your cake and eating it, too. SAAB was way ahead of the rest of the automotive world when it introduced its turbocharged 99 and 900 family cars in 1978. That's 30 years ago!
The SAAB H engine is a marvel of an engine. It supplies outstanding flexibily and power, terrific fuel economy and exceptional durability. Even in turbocharged form it requires very little maintenance, with long oil change intervals, no special oil requirements, no valve adjustments starting with the B202 model, a durable timing chain, etc., etc. With normal maintenance and careful operation, it can be expected to offer good performance and reliable service for 300-500 thousand miles. Amazingly, even the highly tuned versions of this engine used in SAAB "Aero" models get outstanding highway fuel economy. Most North American 9000 Aero and 9-5 Aero owners report long trip fuel consumtion figures in the 33-35 mpg range. Keep in mind that these cars are capable of 5.5 sec 0-60 times.
I agree with others that the Mazda Rotary should be represented. Also, what about the Audi V-12 diesel and Ferrari?
That's a good list. But I'm in agreement with others that #8 should be replaced by perhaps the Busso-designed Alfa Romeo V6, the Mazda 13B, Toyota 4A-GE, Toyota 2JZ-GTE, the Columbo-designed Ferrari V12 or something else.
daytona500,
Even though it's given a different designation, the engine VR38DETT in the new GT-R is a development of the VQ series, which already made Karl's list. However, the RB26DETT in the older GT-R's might be worth a mention either honorable or "on the podium".
I'd agree with a majority of the selections. However, I have to mention the Bugatti 16 cylinder quad turbo. I know it's low on the history element that the rest of these entries seem to share, but it is just a masterpiece. It is the most amazing, full-production motor of all time, so I think it should make the cut. 1,000 hp can't be all bad. It's the modern equivalent to the BMW M70/S2 mentioned above. I believe, as that one did, it will stand as the gold standard for supercar-dom for a long time.
The other powerplant I was going to throw out there is the 1.8/2.0 T from VW. I have a splendid 1.8T in my GTI and my best friend has a new 2.0L GTI. Both are willing and happy commuters (at more than 22-25 mpg) while also being entertaining canyon cars. The torque starts down low in the new car, and around 2,000 rpm it starts kicking like a mule. They also get used across several of the model ranges on a global level. I nominate them for their dual personalities, and their wide range of potential application.
Awesome blog, although, I think we now need to see the 10 worst engines of all times.
But what about Chevy's "Iron Duke 4" cyl?
What about VW's 2.0T engine?
I can't disagree with the ten engines listed, although I'd be happier with 15. The most obvious one that didn't make the cut is the Buick/British Leyland/Land Rover aluminum V-8.
I do heartily disagree with the order, primarily giving the top spot to the BMW engine. That's falling for current flavor of the month. Yeah, it's probably the most impressive engine at the moment, but it has absolutely no historical significance since it hasn't been around long enough. Naming this BMW to the top is like claiming Bush is the worst president ever - lots of current passion, a complete ignoring of history.
My pick for the top? A tossup between the flathead Ford and the small block Chevy. Between the two of them, you are defining performance for a 50+ year period, back when BMW was best known for Dixi's or Isetta's, and when the rest of Europe built nothing but pitiful and slow unless you went completely exotic and insanely expensive.
Oops, just wanted to let you know that on the #9 - Chevrolet Small Block entry, I'm sure you meant to say 20th century, not 21st!
Also, I do mostly agree with the entries here, though I would've liked to see smaller displacement engines better represented.
1487 will no doubt complain that 20% of the best engines made are BMW's and BMW is such a small company compared to the Honda's, Toyotas etc of the world.
Maybe that is why BMW's cost more because they are very well engineered. You get what you pay for.
"1487 will no doubt complain that 20% of the best engines made are BMW's and BMW is such a small company compared to the Honda's, Toyotas etc of the world.
Maybe that is why BMW's cost more because they are very well engineered. You get what you pay for."
I have no idea what you're talking about. Then again, niether do you. I would never argue that Honda or Toyota have more impressive credentials than BMW in the engine department. The best engine manufacturers (including complete lineups) are MB, BMW and GM. Period. I don't know much about the smaller engines offered by MB and BMW in Europe but I assume they are as compelling as their engines sold in the US.
This "you get what you pay for" mantra is pure BMW fanboy propopganda. It doesnt cost BMW any more to produce its cars than it costs MB or Lexus to produce comparable cars. All luxury cars use state of the art technology, materials and manufacturing methods. Every damn car sold for over $40k in the US is "well engineered"- please do some research on BMW's competitors before making such ridiculous claims.
BMWs cost more because of the weak dollar and BMWs relatively high profit margins.
I'd say the top 10 engine families (in no particular order) are:
Honda B-series
BMW inline 6
Chevy 350
Honda F-series
Toyota 2JZ
Mazda 20B and 13B
Porsche flat 6
Nissan VQ-series
Bugatti W16
Toyota Hybrid Drive
Keep in mind I was born in 1981, so my choices reflect that. I think these are the most significant engines of my time.
I love #9! And the Subaru H4 is 2/3 of #3 with its own distinct "putt" and "rumble" sounds. :o)
1487 - relatively high profit margins that then allow the company to invest in cutting edge technologies and make their cars even more advanced.
I seriously considered the Mazda rotary engine, but then I remembered three things:
1. Relatively poor fuel mileage for its displacement
2. High oil consumption
3. Questionable long-term durability.
Suddenly it occurred to me: The rotary is cool in that it totally breaks from traditional engine design. But is it actually a GOOD design? The above three traits would suggest...no.
I certainly can't disagree with any of the engines mentioned in Karl's article or in any of the comments. Certainly count me in for the inclusion of Mazda's 13B series of rotary engines, particularly the sequential twin-turbo 13B-REW.
We spent the weekend up at the Monterey Festival of Speed at Mazda Raceway Laguna Seca. We were invited up as part of a Mazda owners event and got awesome special parking just inside turn 5, special access, and free parade laps during the lunch breaks! There were several RX-8s in the Grand Am Rolex Sports Car Series GT class that did extremely well against Porsche 911 GT3 Cups, Corvettes, Pontiac G6s, and a Ferrari. All of the cars sounded awesome (well, except for the Pontiacs), but there was nothing like the sound of the RX-8's rotary engine scream (or the flames shooting out the exhaust on throttle lift... unlike the street-legal rotaries, I guess they don't have to be equipped with anti-afterburn valves).
"Awesome blog, although, I think we now need to see the 10 worst engines of all times."
Excellent idea... a lot more fun then trying to decide which of 20 to 30 great engines are the best 10.
Worst engines? Hm.
Cadillac 8-6-4, Olds diesel, the original Buick 90degree V6 with the uneven firing order, the aluminum-block iron-head Chevy Vega motor.
I 2nd the Toyota 2JZ-GTE. It has become legendary.
given that pretty much every engine on the list is not only a major benchmark/achievement and epic in its own right, but has also withstood the the test of time, #1 is a very interesting choice indeed.
"1487 - relatively high profit margins that then allow the company to invest in cutting edge technologies and make their cars even more advanced."
The same tech is found in Lexus', CAdillacs, Infinitis and MBs. Every luxury brand has a few exclusive gimmicks but for the most part they all offer the same technology.
the best part about the turbo I-6 is its efficiency. There is nothing spectacular about its power or torque in today's world. You can get more hp in a G37 and more torque in a $26k Mustang GT. I'm not sure how it gets on a "best of all time" list after less than 2 years on the market. BMW had to get into the 300hp six cylinder game and they did it with forced induction which of course gives their six more torque than its naturally aspirated counterparts.
10 best of ALL time!
I can't really say... From recent times, I would describe the Audi 2.0T as a superb engine.
I have no faults with BMWs turbo 6. I'd just give the nod to Toyota's 3.5L V6 because of it's versatility. It's available in both transverse and longitudinal configurations to fit a wide product portfolio and gets ridiculous fuel economy for it's power output. You also cannot forget the fact it was the first engine with port & direct injection.
This engine family should eliminate the VQ as it has become rougher with each increase in displacement and employs no hi-tech tricks save for VVEL on the G37.
Ford and GM will also produce direct injection six cylinder engines with turbo chargers in the near feature.
22R series Toyota
Would also agree on the VW 1.8T/2.0T. It may be the most prolific turbo engine in the US, having been sold in the Golf, Jetta, Beetle, Passat, A4, TT, etc. Now 10 years after VW/Audi introduced the engine, many other makers are now designing small turbo engines to replace V6's and V8's. There were certainly other makers with small turbo engines (Saab, Volvo, Subaru, Dodge etc) but none sold in nearly the quantities of the 1.8T/2.0T and many of those others were of the peaky and powerful tune instead of the torquey and flexible tune of the VW turbo.
If we're talking "best engines of all time" then I would have to suggest including the following more historic entries:
Ford Model T 4-cylinder engine - in production from 1908 to 1927, made automobiles feasible for the masses
Duesenberg Model J straight 8 - overhead cams and four valves per cylinder in 1928
Ford 289 - the original pony car V8
Shelby Cobra 427 side-oiler - super snake, anyone?
nice choices but how about the F20C in the S2000? 9,000 rpm and highest NA hp/liter engine
Hate to say this but IMO Toyota's new gen V6 (2GR-series, especially the 2GR-FSE) has Nissan's new gen VQ beat in just about every way possible (FE, torque, smoothness, acceleration, you name it...).
The BMW TT I6 is a magnificent engine but really is not number one all time. Either the VQ or 2GR with 2 low pressure turbos would probably out perform that engine easily with identical, if not better, FE.
Limiting the list to current volume engines:
Small block Chevy (#1 of all time, IMHO)
Porsche 6
BMW 6 (all varieties)
MB 320 diesel (culmination of the line that legitimized passenger diesels in the US
Toyota 2GR-FSE (the best combination of power, economy, and smoothness, the example others should follow)
Chrysler Hemi (the new one, better than the old one in every way except in our memories)
VW/Audi 2l turbo (best 4 cyl I can think of)
I agree! Vw's 1.8T was a great engine! It was mostly the cars built around them that had a few bugs here and there...
Don't forget about Honda's k24 and k20. It comes in many offerings but they can give amazing power for having no turbo-supercharging for a 4cyl engine. And they also give great MPG too!
Worst engines, I nominate Honda's C27.(1995-1997 accord v6). Its un-powerful and un-fuel efficient. It is very refined and reliable IMO. Sometimes I have to check to see if my car is still running. Love the car to death but the engine isn't much better than the 2.2l I4 of the time.
Also, i still find it funny that so few people even knew that honda made a 5cyl throughout most of the 90's. From the Acura Vigor to the 2.5tl. I love that engine! I think its much better than the C27 but it uses premium gas and suffers from NVH as do most 5cyls.
-Cj
"Would also agree on the VW 1.8T/2.0T. It may be the most prolific turbo engine in the US, having been sold in the Golf, Jetta, Beetle, Passat, A4, TT, etc. Now 10 years after VW/Audi introduced the engine, many other makers are now designing small turbo engines to replace V6's and V8's."
This engine has been totally outclassed by the Mazda 2.3 turbo and the GM 2L turbo which produces 60 more hp with the same displacement. I cant believe VW is still using the 200hp version of the 2.0T in 2008 products.
While I think the 1.8/2.0 turbo was good, Honda makes 240hp from 2.0 liters without a turbo in the s2000. And yes, the Mazda 2.3t which sells in volume, and the GM 2.0, so it's output is nothing to brag about. Then reliability.... eh. Well they did sell quite a few, and it was a good engine, but not top ten.
The K20 in the RSX and K24 in the TSX are good, probably the best NA 4cyls, but not best engines of all time material. If they get their act together and get AVTEC in them, then we're talking. But Karl is right, the B16 is the most significant Honda engine of all time.
When one compares the 300 HP 3.5l Toyota in the IS350 to the BMW 3.0TT, the BMW looks (on paper) much less impressive. I agree, Honda, Toyota... anyone! could throw a turbo on their current six and have the same output. Nissan already has, and it's significantly better engine. So, I find it ridiculous that it's Karl's choice for number one engine of all time. Though, I would give the BMW family of inline 6's a spot on the list towards the top.
Good spot on the Deusenburg. I was going to say Packard, but it just didn't have the volume or longevity.
Any way we can get the Vincent Black Shadow on this list? It says best engines, not best car engines.
Yeah I'd have to 2nd the nomination on the Subaru 2.5 Boxer 4 although I might be slightly biased ;-) You cant' match the sound, torque or smoothness with any other 4 cylinder. The simple versatility of the motor from being fuel effecient and plenty powerful in N/A form to totally brutal and ballsy in STi form just speaks wonders of that motor... not to mention the reliability of them also.
I think the new 3.6L DI motor from GM is a big ommission on your list Karl! Granted it's new, but definitely one of the best motors to come from GM.
If you'all start putting in more recent vintage engines, you can't limit the list to 10. You have to nominate engines like the chevy small block and BMW's inline 6s that have withstood the test of time. The ubiquitous 1.8/2.0 VW Turbo may qualify in the next 10 years but not yet! If it hasn't survivied for 20+ years it shouldn't qualify.
"This engine has been totally outclassed by the Mazda 2.3 turbo and the GM 2L turbo which produces 60 more hp with the same displacement. I cant believe VW is still using the 200hp version of the 2.0T in 2008 products."
I disagree on the Mazda motor, as it has significantly worse fuel economy 18/26 vs. 21/29. It's not a huge difference, but enough of one more me that I would consider a 2.0T and not the 2.3T from Mazda.
However, the new Cobalt SS brings a very impressive spec sheet to the table, 22/30 (1 mpg BETTER than the VW 2.0T on both counts) with 260 hp and 260 torque! It also manages this with one fewer cog than the VW. I'm not sure how their real world fuel economy and drivetrain performance compare though. Can anyone comment?
that S2000 engine may produce 237hp, but it also only gives you 167 ft-lbs. I'd rather have the 200/207 from the VW 2.0T FSI which has power everywhere rather than the honda which you have to rev beyond belief . Not to mention the S2000 also is a 2.2L vs. the 2.0
and fuel economy, 18/25 for the honda compared with 22/29 for the VW/Audi engine. the S2000 gets 21 on the combined vs. 25 on the combined for the VW/Audi.
I think we've cleared this up. it's not just about hp from an engine, you have to consider many aspects.
The 1.8T/2.0T wasn't aspiring to be a high-ouput/liter champ like the low-production, no-torque, S2000 engine. It was meant to be a flexible mass-market engine. The relatively new Mazda 2.3T hasn't sold anywhere near the volume that the 1.8T/2.0T has.
The 1.8T/2.0T isn' the "best" or most powerful or most efficient engine out there, but it was/is the engine that led the way for the coming flood of small turbo engines in cross-platform vehicles being used in place of larger, normally aspirated, less efficient engines.
"The 1.8T/2.0T isn' the "best" or most powerful or most efficient engine out there"
Excatly. That's why it doesn't belong on this list!
"Not to mention the S2000 also is a 2.2L vs. the 2.0"
Nope. Originally it was 2.0 liters and still made 240 hp.
The Honda K20/K24 and Subaru 2.5 H4 are both better choices and still don't belong on this list. Honestly, if you're a total VW fanboy, you should be trying to get the W12 or W16 on this list. But like the 2.0t, everyone else is able to do the same thing (same power output and efficiency) with less complexity and more reliability.
I've read that the new BWM twin turbo runs very high oil temps. If true, we need to wait and see before bestowing any awards.
It warms my heart when the VQ still gets accolades, as I have it in my '97 Maxima. I love it, it's been durable with good fuel economy, but the heart wanders... I test drove a MazdaSpeed6, and while it was faster, it firmly confirmed I liked driving my setup better. It has a lot to do with the engine. I've heard the drivetrain in the MazdaSpeed3 is more involving, and I have yet to try that.
that 2.0L S2000 you mention only made 153 ft-lbs and to get even that you had to get it up to 7,500 RPMs. To make matters worse, the fuel economy of it is pretty poor as well. 18/23 in current EPA numbers mean it gets worse mileage than I stated previously. No doubt Honda makes some great engines that'll run forever, not to mention I quite like the S2000, but I don't see how that is a better engine on balance than the 2.0T FSI from VW/Audi.
I'm hardly suggesting it's the most prolific engine ever and not the best, but you can definitely make a case that it belongs in consideration for a spot on the list.
You know when people say "efficiency", most folks think about either fuel mileage purely on its own, or in terms of HP/Liter. But that's not what energy efficiency means though.. think about it: for all other forms of efficiency, it's the ratio between energy-in vs. energy-out. e.g. AC/DC conversion, calories conversion/metabolism, etc.
So in the case of cars/engines, the term actually refers to fuel consumed vs. power output. (also known as brake specific fuel consumption or BSFC, since it's tested by loading or braking the engine at specific RPMS on a dyno, then measuring fuel consumed and torque produced).
This is also the reason why diesels are stated (in any engineering text) to be much more efficient that gas engines of the same displacement, yet have a much worse HP/Liter ratio.
"However, the new Cobalt SS brings a very impressive spec sheet to the table, 22/30 (1 mpg BETTER than the VW 2.0T on both counts) with 260 hp and 260 torque! It also manages this with one fewer cog than the VW. I'm not sure how their real world fuel economy and drivetrain performance compare though. Can anyone comment?"
The Cobalt SS is good for a 5.5sec 0-60 run while the Solstice GXP has been clocked at 5.3 secs with slightly more curb weight. The GM engine is definitely competent. The GTI is typically good for a 0-6o in the low 6 sec range.
jimveta, most people don't know the difference between fuel efficiency and fuel economy. You are right, energy-out vs. energy-in in the case of a car is the work produced vs. the fuel energy used (a unitless parameter). To compare the relative fuel efficiency merit of one engine to another by looking at EPA fuel economy ratings is silly unless the vehicles to which they are attached are doing the exact same work on that test cycle. The indicator of engine efficiency that you mention, BSFC, is what should be compared. Even though it looks like it is not unitless, grams fuel burned per kilowatt-hour, you can see that you really have a ratio of energy (x joules of energy in y grams of fuel) to work (a kilowatt-hour is a unit of work), which is an efficiency. A locomotive is more fuel efficient than a tractor trailer, which is more fuel efficient than a Honda Fit, which is more efficient than a scooter... BTW, modern Diesels are at about 100hp/L, not too dismal.
Yeah the Germans are getting some crazy HP/liter output from recent diesels!
Regarding the F20A, I think the reasons people feel it deserves mention are completely different than the 2.0 FSI (or the GM 2.0 turbo). The turbo motors gain their merit on BSFC, while the F20A on pure fun and hp/liter craziness. It's the closest you'll get to an F1 engine feel this side of $50k.
The F20A is probably not the engine you're intending to refer to. The F20A was used in various Accord models throughout the 90's and max hp was around 160hp (80hp/L).
The F20C, however, was modeled by Honda's F1 R&D division and produced a whopping 240hp (120hp/L). It won spots on Ward's Top 10 4 times (2000-2003). My previous post included the entire F-series lineup because the F engines in the Accords have always been substantial in comparison to the competition. The F20C, while admittedly sharing little architecture with it's cousins, is simply the paramount version; the icing on the cake if you will.
Oops! Yes I meant the F20C! I thought the Accord was always F22, but I guess I'm too young to remember the smaller displacement Accords?!
how bout the Jeep 4.0? It didn't have a 19 year run for nothing... I still have an '88 model now that'll still run with the best of 'em