Your top 5 worst engines.

nissan 2.0D (as found in primera's of 1995 ilk?) 88bhp... really bad... really bad etc...has to be up there in terms of how bad it was compared to everythign at the time, as opposed to absolute crudiness?
 
The early Vauxhall 2 litre Ecotec engine that replaced the brilliant XE engine in the mid 90's. Not that the Ecotec is terrible but it is prone to far more problems than the XE, costs more to fix and produces less power (as well as being comparitively rubbish for tuning.) I probably wouldn't rate this engine so badly if it wasn't for the fact that it was rubbish compared to the engine it replaced.
 
Mickey_D said:
Completely besides the fact that they STINK!!!!! :p

Anytime I'm in traffic and I see the word "Deisel" anywhere on something I'm following, I very quickly put my ventilation system on recirc before I start gagging on thier fumes!!!

I agree with Rilot here. Deisels running on petroleum products should have been banned from existance at the turn of the last century.
Click to expand...

Maybe in the US...

The Europeans get decent quality diesel and modern engines. Try a VW, BMW or Merc diesel from the last 10 years using properly refined fuel.
 
The Hillman Imp 875cc engine and fiat 126bis 700cc abomination. Very much a case of pass me another head gasket.
 
Dogbreath said:
They are however terribly inefficent engines, and they aren't really 1300cc. After all, you count every cylinder in a normal reciprocating engine. Just because the same combustion chamber is used on the Wankel, you can't ignore the fact that you get one firing cycle per revolution of the crank, just like a two cylinder four stroke.
Click to expand...

OK if we are going to nitpick ;)

But the rest of my statement is true. They produce a lot of power from such a physically small, lightweight package, and are a very clever design (less moving parts etc.) They certainly wouldn't be at home in a 'worst engines' list ;)
 
[TW]Fox said:
Come on Rilot, you are better than comments like that. I'm not expecting you to announce a love for diesels but over-exagerating doesn't really help your case. You know damn well that modern turbodiesels, especially the BMW and Audi 6/8 cylinder ones, sounds NOTHING like the engine in a bus. The only thing they have in common is that they both use the same fuel.

It's like me saying I'd never have a 4.2 V8 like yours, becuase it sounds like a lawnmower.
Click to expand...

OK, not exactlyt like a bus but they certainly don't make a sound that makes you go "cor!".

Compare the sound of the 3.0 petrol 6 with the 3.0 diesel 6 in the 530 for example. The BMW 3 litre petrol engine sounds ace. Same deal with the Audi 4.2 V8 diesel vs the 4.2 V8 petrol. The diesel makes more power and torque than the petrol but sounds like someone banging a metal box of tools against a wall.
 
DreXeL said:
OK if we are going to nitpick ;)

But the rest of my statement is true. They produce a lot of power from such a physically small, lightweight package, and are a very clever design (less moving parts etc.) They certainly wouldn't be at home in a 'worst engines' list ;)
Click to expand...


Fairy Nuff :) It was such a hugely innovative design when NSU plunked one into their Spider, that I certainly don't think it belongs in a "worst engines" thread.

I'm reserving the Daff Variomatic for when we do a "worst gearboxes" thread though ;)
 
Dogbreath said:
Fairy Nuff :)
I'm reserving the Daff Variomatic for when we do a "worst gearboxes" thread though ;)
Click to expand...

Wasn't the Variomatic banned from racing because it was so effective?

However I agree with you it sucked in the Daf due to the weak engines. Volvo took the design and used and still produced poor results.
 
atpbx said:
Talking of horrible engines.........

The one in the RGV250/RS250
It sucked ass, it was a gutless piece of junk, that, when it wasnt being completly awfull in all departments, was blowing itself up.

Ohhh! look it does 130 mph!!
For all of 8 seconds, then your anus is penetrated by a red hot piece of molten **** from the recently exploded engine.
Click to expand...
I used to race an RGV in 1991, when they first come out, as standard the KR1-s had the edge, but I got hold of the factory suzuki tuning manual from a sponsered rider along with his set of Swift silencers.
Whooaa this transformed the bike into a 155mph rocketship, so much more compeditive. around Pembury could leave the big fourstrokes all day long, in practice.
So this thread shows there are good and bad engines in all types.
 
CaneyJ said:
The Hillman Imp 875cc engine and fiat 126bis 700cc abomination. Very much a case of pass me another head gasket.
Click to expand...
I thought the imp engine was supposed to be a pretty decent engine, stupidly revvy I believe. Although any amount of revs won't make up for a complete lack of power (especially if the HG's gone).
 
The IMP engine is based on the Coventry Climax, originaly a fire pump engine, but was hugely succesfull in motorsport due to ultra light weight and high output. A little fragile perhaps, but also not deserving of being mentioned in here IMO.
 
I went out in a SEAT Altea diesel yesterday. Guess what? Modern, efficient diesel that sounded like a van and had a powerband shorter than Mini Me.

Not for me thanks.
 
[TW]Fox said:
Welcome to the world of VAG diesels.

Now try a BMW one :)
Click to expand...

I'd take a petrol over a diesel if money was not an object, even in a straight comparison between the 330i and 330d (for example). The only real reason I'd consider the diesel is down to the improved economy, if it was enough, and the price difference didn't cancel it out, I'd consider making the sacrifice in engine flexibility. I'd also definately take the diesel in favour of petrol if I was going for an autobox.

All diesels have short powerbands and consequentially long gearing (negating the torque advantage by the time it arrives at the wheels), and for the really enthusiastic hard drivers here, that's not a compromise many are prepared to make.

-Dolph
 
they have there place but never in my garage, its funny you get used to the company weasel, then you go out for a drive in your petrol motor and then things get put back into perspective, the fun factors back :)
 
Dolph said:
All diesels have short powerbands and consequentially long gearing (negating the torque advantage by the time it arrives at the wheels), and for the really enthusiastic hard drivers here, that's not a compromise many are prepared to make.

-Dolph
Click to expand...

A 6-speed box helps there though, and while I'll cheerfully admit I don't drive as hard as you youngsters, my current Vectra 1.9 would certainly leave my old 2.0 petrol for dead - 20% more horses, according to the RR day.

Certainly the Mrs has noticed I am overtaking more often, and more safely, in the oilburner.

Alan Woodford
 
Third Opinion said:
4. Suzuki 1000cc SJ410 (25 MPG on average and a lifespan of around 60K before you start burning as much oil as petrol).
Click to expand...

Lies! it's only a dog if you don't have freewheeling front hubs, dragging the second axle around undriven ramps up the juice consumption. If you've got "freewheelers" it oes up to nearly 28 MPG :p

ohh i see your point now :D
 
Dogbreath said:
I'm reserving the Daff Variomatic for when we do a "worst gearboxes" thread though ;)
Click to expand...

Heh, had that in my OLD volvo 345, ran sweet as a nut until somebody told me you couldn't do donuts with that gearbox/diff. So i had to prove them wrong and blew the diff in the process, oops! :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom