Ward's Auto World 10 Best Engines

In reply to irish44j:

ahh, I misinterpreted a bit there......has SoA admitted to a design flaw yet pertaining to the ringland issue? That seems to be a pretty well documented OE flaw.

bravenrace wrote:

miatame wrote: And my favorite, wait until you read this gem "Exhaust manifolds are disappearing, replaced by cost-effective cylinder heads that route hot exhaust gases more swiftly to the catalytic converter." There's soo much wrong with that sentence.

What is wrong with that sentence? They are in fact doing that, and in part for the reasons he stated. And I'm sure what he meant about the 4 cyl doing the work of a 6 is that one of the emerging trends is 4 cylinders doing what USED to be done by 6 cylinders. I'm sure you knew that, but let's nit pick anyway.

Look at the cylinder head(s) first, then say you don't think there's anything wrong with the exhaust port configuration of an IEM head. ST's were released in the fall, first miles are all in cool weather, wait until summer time and some trips to the track and then see if the current positive public reaction to that engine stays positive.

i like reading all the magazines mentioned in this thread. you take from them what you want. i feel there are good writers in all of them and bad ones but they all make me think. when ever someone picks the 10 best of something not everyone is going to agree on it and there will be heated debates of the list.

i think a lot of us hate writers for these magazines is because we are jealous of their job... i know i am.

i can see it now getting home and the wife or GF saying how was your day "it was terrible i had to test the new viper agianst the vette all day at the track my neck is stiff from the whiplash"

irish44j wrote:

yamaha wrote: It'd cut down on their warranty claims. Fwiw, SoA refused a ringland failure on a local guy's new sti......grounds for it you might ask? It had a Cobb accessport to try to prevent said known issue......so they claimed the owner must have been driving around on the rev limiter all the time. I don't think I'd mention SoA being welcoming to modifications around him.....

I didn't mean that they welcome modifications and then will cover warranty claims DUE to those modifications. I would expect that ANY car company would deny warranty claims associated with car modifications....that would go without saying. But most Subie dealers SELL SPT/STi performance parts, and many even sell AccessPorts. Doesn't mean they'll cover warrany claims for damage caused by these things. Just means they know that a good chunk of Subaru owners (particularly WRX/STi) are going to mod their cars, so Subaru might as well get in on the action. Hell, my WRX is the "SPT" edition which has port-installed options like the STi short-shifter and SPT stainless dual catback.....which ARE warranteed. btw, SOA replaced my longblock and turbo at 9k miles. And I was in the middle of an autocross when the dreaded rod knock happened.......but it was a known problem. I took the car with a fully modified suspension on it, brake kit, SCCA stickers, and various other things that scream "I drive it hard," and they still took care of me. Driving it in while wearing my "power suit" and government ID badges probably helped matters too

They must like or fear you because the reputation I hear is that Subaru is actively searching the solo rosters for competitors so that they can cancel just about any warranty issue. Started a few years ago when there were a few transmission issues on the WRX. Might still be for all I know since the Transmission in the FRS is not one I would want to take on an autocross track.

Okay, a couple things. One, when I asked what was wrong with the statement about the manifold in head statement, I interpreted the poster as saying that the statement was incorrect. That's because he was originally criticizing the article, not the engine. Maybe that's not what he meant, idunno.
As far as the article itself, I have no real opinion, but would expect that anyone opining about it would take the time to at least read the introduction where they explain how they picked the engines.
So here's my TWO questions:

1 - If Wards is a bad source for automotive information, what source do you trust?

2 - What would be your top 10 engines based on the same requirements that article had?

cutter67 wrote: i like reading all the magazines mentioned in this thread. you take from them what you want. i feel there are good writers in all of them and bad ones but they all make me think. when ever someone picks the 10 best of something not everyone is going to agree on it and there will be heated debates of the list. i think a lot of us hate writers for these magazines is because we are jealous of their job... i know i am.

That's something I've also wondered about, and while I don't always agree with everything I read in any publication, I have to recognize that the people that write about vehicles that they've driven and inspected probably know some things about them that I don't. But on the internet everyone is an expert, right! I often hear on automotive message boards people trying to discredit articles/writers/publications, but what I don't hear is who they do respect for getting that information, aside from GRM of course. I think it's a valid question, and I'd like to know so I can also go to that source and decided for myself.