Wards announces "Ten Best Engines" list for 2007
12-13-07, 12:52 PM
#31
Pole Position
The 3.6L CTS engine is 304HP with 273 ft. lbs. torque. It does it on REGULAR GAS. Something that Lexus couldn't do with their 3.5L I'm not saying that's why it's on the list, just something to think about.
12-13-07, 12:59 PM
#32
But I honestly do not believe our cars have 300hp. We were tested under the old SAE standard. The 06 LS430 went from 290hp to 278hp just by switching to the new SAE standard. If the hp drop is consistent, the GS400/430 would realistically have 288hp.
12-13-07, 01:00 PM
#33
Guest
Posts: n/a
One 0-60 time from one magazine doesnt prove that the GS350awd can always make that time. I highly highly doubt that it can be achieved all the time
The fact of the matter is, the 3.7L engine is still an iteration of the VQ. If they didnt feel that the engine was still worthy of being there, then it wouldnt.
The fact of the matter is, the 3.7L engine is still an iteration of the VQ. If they didnt feel that the engine was still worthy of being there, then it wouldnt.
As for the 3.7, yes its on there. Some of us are having discussion on if some engines were excluded or if some should not be on the list.
Amazing how you take the FACT of ONE REVEW from Wards and its okay
but the FACT of the OTHER REVIEW from R&T is disregarded
.
12-13-07, 01:02 PM
#34
Guest
Posts: n/a
It's the combination of the powerband, gearing, and transmission shift speed that makes the GS350 (both regular and AWD) quicker than our cars. Our 1uz/3uz are midrange engines. You run out of steam on the top end, but what can we do about it? The GS350 just has the right number of gears and final drive ratio to obtain a higher torque multiplication to offset the torque deficit.
But I honestly do not believe our cars have 300hp. We were tested under the old SAE standard. The 06 LS430 went from 290hp to 278hp just by switching to the new SAE standard. If the hp drop is consistent, the GS400/430 would realistically have 288hp.
But I honestly do not believe our cars have 300hp. We were tested under the old SAE standard. The 06 LS430 went from 290hp to 278hp just by switching to the new SAE standard. If the hp drop is consistent, the GS400/430 would realistically have 288hp.
I wonder if the engine would perform slightly better with premium fuel, I would think it would.
12-13-07, 01:11 PM
#36
CTS however is almost a full second slower than the IS350, CTS weighs near 4000, IS350 weighs around 3600. 400 lbs alone wont cause a 1 sec disavantage in the 0-60 with both cars having 277ish torque. Something else is causing it, either a weaker powerband, transmission, who knows
12-13-07, 01:12 PM
#37
Guest
Posts: n/a
Direct Injection is that serious. Just look at how the Camry or ES with the same 3.5 without DI is a second slower than the IS, and they all weigh around the same!
Not sure if you have driven a GS or IS with the 3.5 but the engine is just peppy peppy peppy, tons of power. The GS 400/430 has a different feel, more torquey (not a word lol) but less responsive initially.
12-13-07, 01:48 PM
#38
Pole Position
CTS however is almost a full second slower than the IS350, CTS weighs near 4000, IS350 weighs around 3600. 400 lbs alone wont cause a 1 sec disavantage in the 0-60 with both cars having 277ish torque. Something else is causing it, either a weaker powerband, transmission, who knows
12-13-07, 02:05 PM
#39
Lead Lap
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: CA
Posts: 447
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And in any event, I'm not convinced that the Lexus 3.5L is necessarily any better than the Caddy 3.6L. They make similar power. And I'd argue that the Caddy 3.6L is a more efficient engine since the CTS gets 17/26 (both RWD and AWD) despite running on regular gas and being substantially heavier. The IS350 gets 18/25.
12-13-07, 02:26 PM
#41
Guest
Posts: n/a
So the Caddy 3.6L shouldn't be on the list because it doesn't trump the 3.5L GR? This isn't the "Better than Lexus 3.5L GR list". Engines can still be on the list even if others on the list are "better".
And in any event, I'm not convinced that the Lexus 3.5L is necessarily any better than the Caddy 3.6L. They make similar power. And I'd argue that the Caddy 3.6L is a more efficient engine since the CTS gets 17/26 (both RWD and AWD) despite running on regular gas and being substantially heavier. The IS350 gets 18/25.
And in any event, I'm not convinced that the Lexus 3.5L is necessarily any better than the Caddy 3.6L. They make similar power. And I'd argue that the Caddy 3.6L is a more efficient engine since the CTS gets 17/26 (both RWD and AWD) despite running on regular gas and being substantially heavier. The IS350 gets 18/25.
The Lexus 3.5 is used in more applications and in each application the car is speedy. A NON DI Lexus 3.5 in the ES 350 is as fast as a DI 3.5 in the CTS.
I am not talking about weight, or gearing or anything else. From a performance standpoint, it is not as good from the DATA we have.
When you ADD in weight, I showed in a link where a HEAVIER or just as heavy GS 350 AWD smokes ANY CTS.
There are guys in the IS forum doing mid to low 13s in their IS all day at the track and those trying to crack 12s (I believe one did) on PURE POWER and taking out things like the spare, headrests and lighter wheels.
I don't see ANY CTS doing those figures. Again, I am not saying its not a good engine, its one of the best engines GM has made in years. I just don't understand why there are 3 engines in similar cars and with similar outputs on the list.
12-13-07, 04:42 PM
#42
Lead Lap
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: California
Posts: 428
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How exactly are engines "faster" than one another? Engine's don't run by themselves. Personally, I believe the new VQ37VHR is an excellent engine. Great power (note I didn't say "faster", because power delivery is only one part of the equation of speed & acceleration), sounds great & feels great, and has great technology with the addition of Variable Valve Event & Lift (VVEL). The engine has been up there in Wards Top 10 Engines for 13 consecutive years for a reason.
The only reason why the G37 is slightly slower than the IS350 is weight. If they both were to weigh the same, the G37 would easily out accelerate the IS350. Seeing how the lighter G35 Sedan with 306 HP matches the performance of the heavier G37 with 330hp, we can only imagine a G37 with the sedan's lighter weight would perform. As far as the 335i, its definately an under-rated "300hp/300tq". But then again, BMW does have a tradition of under-rating their specified power ratings.
I do agree though, that the VQ has had a bad tradition of gas guzzling for a V6. My 2006 G35 Coupe 6MT gets the same gas milage as my brothers 07 Mustang GT's, and my Dad's Lexus GS430
.
12-13-07, 06:26 PM
#44
Lexus Connoisseur
The 2GR-FSE was a great choice. 2 years in a row. Not bad for a great balance of horsepower and fuel economy.
I think the CTS' motor is pretty phenomenal as it can achieve almost similar numbers to the 2GR-FSE and sip regular unleaded.
I think the CTS' motor is pretty phenomenal as it can achieve almost similar numbers to the 2GR-FSE and sip regular unleaded.
12-13-07, 07:39 PM
#45
Pole Position
Having monitored Ward's list since back in the days of 96-97' when I ran maxima.org, Ward's criteria includes advancement in technology as well as *application*. Think of the vehicles that uses each respective engine when critiqueing the choices. It isn't necessarily the engine only, regardless of how the award is named...
p.s. there's an omission that i thought was bad:
- 4g63 i4 turbo from mitsu and/or h4 turbo from subaru ....affordable fun hp for the masses
p.s. there's an omission that i thought was bad:
- 4g63 i4 turbo from mitsu and/or h4 turbo from subaru ....affordable fun hp for the masses