Top 10 Cars That Don't Deserve Their Engines
by Jeremy Korzeniewski on Dec 29th 2008 at 7:57PM 
The engine is the crown jewel of any automobile and can make or break a car in the eyes of an automotive enthusiast. No matter how sweet a car's handling or how neutral its balance, a limp-wristed engine can completely kill the machine's ability to put a smile on your face. Conversely, nothing screams buzzkill quite like a glorious engine cooped up in a dowdy package. Such is the case with the ten vehicles that made their way on our Top Ten Cars That Don't Deserve Their Engines list. Unfortunately, the powerplants under the hoods of these ten cars are forever destined to mediocrity. Some may consider these cars sleepers due to their often unassuming wrappers, but we maintain these engines would rather live a life free of their humble trappings; free to ingest the atmosphere with reckless abandon and exhale their burnt offerings to the gods of a good time.
Get a WordPress.com Blog
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 6)
ermax18 8:08PM (12/29/2008)
Great post!
Reply
john 10:29PM (12/29/2008)
Did you guys notice 9/10 of them are all American cars?
Flashpoint 12:22AM (12/30/2008)
john
guess what...
the Japanese, Koreans have typically used I4 engines on most of their passenger cars and in more expensive models, V6's. Only more recently (within 20 years) do you see the asian manufacturers putting V8's in their consumer level passenger cars.
the Germans in many cases have great TDI engines but in some cases (such as the last generation S-class W220 - they get really outrageous with engine choices. This model - the W221 - they only offer one choice in the S550 for example as well as BMW only offering one choice for the 750Li)
america however has a psychotic fixation on Horsepower. The Hemi SRT8 is a perfect example. I think, in regards to Chrysler, they should have never made the 2.7 - they shoulda started with the 3.5 and moved up from there.
naggs 2:30AM (12/30/2008)
"Did you guys notice 9/10 of them are all American cars?"
yep, the best engines are usually american
Mobius_1 8:05AM (12/30/2008)
@ Naggs
F*** yeah, Americans know how to make a big powerful engine, if not quite the suspension to match.
TyWright 8:08PM (12/29/2008)
This is a really cool post. I love when you guys branch out into fun stories!
(Hint: chillax on the annoying Top Gear guy and Detroit blues)
Reply
Kimura 8:14PM (12/29/2008)
I take issue with the SRT4 being on the list. Sure, it wasn't refined, it wasn't plush, and it wasn't fancy or exotic. However it was fast as hell in both straight line performance and around the twisties, and would kick the collective competition's asses right up until it was discontinued. It was a purpose built car, and it fulfilled the purpose very well. If you want plush get s used, slower in every way RSX.
Reply
FThorn 8:36PM (12/29/2008)
I agree. I still want to take one out and flog it around.
De 8:41PM (12/29/2008)
I agree with you wholeheartedly. I love my Neon SRT-4 for what it is. The engine stock was quite nice. I've modified mine to make it a little bit too much for what's necessary, but it's still a fun, quick little car that I didn't buy to have a plush interior.
jcar302 8:59PM (12/29/2008)
I think some you guys miss the point of the article.
"Top 10 Cars That Don't Deserve Their Engines"
The srt neon and caliber engines were good and powerful, but the vehicles they were dropped in, are horrible.
No matter how fast an srt4 neon is, it's still an ugly chick car.
Including the syclone and tyhoon in this list is insanity.
They look good and were quick, i don't really see the problem with that.
Miguel 9:16PM (12/29/2008)
I quote myself commenting on the photo:
Autoblog's own review of the Caliber SRT-4 (click: http://www.autoblog.com/2007/11/29/in-the-autoblog-garage-2008-dodge-caliber-srt-4/) calls it "worth taking a look at" with knocks for the obligatory crappy Chrysler interior and external styling that works for guys with 'roid rage and little else. Meanwhile, it is a "decent corner carver" that has "strong acceleration out of" those corners and "brakes that offer great velocity retardation". Also, the SRT team explained (http://www.autoblog.com/2007/11/29/autoblog-qanda-erich-heuschele-from-srt-answers-why-the-caliber-s/) why they kept it FWD (hint: FWD=lighter car).
So is it a decent corner carver worth taking a look at, or is it not worth its engine? Some integrity, Autoblog, I pray you. The Neon was even better than the Caliber...it was LIGHTER with good gas mileage.
In other words, take the SRT-4 off. Surely you can find a better one...like the 3.0L Duratec V6 in the 1996 Ford Taurus wagons. The same engine that powers the modern Jaguar XF. I know the Yamaha-powered SHO is on there, but who cares?
Kimura 9:19PM (12/29/2008)
jcar302, the Neon SRT4 deserves its engine because it could handle the power and could destroy the competition at the time. Who the hell cares what it looks like when all they see is a blur? If you can't handle the rawness of it, go buy nice, floaty a Camry.
Plus looks are purely subjective.
ASEVENSEE4 9:44PM (12/29/2008)
The Caliber SRT-4 TRAILS the Mazdaspeed3 and WRX, and really almost any other hot hatch you can name in the handling department.
jcar302 10:25PM (12/29/2008)
Kimura,
No offense, but the only people who liked how the srt neon looked, are the kids who own/owned them.
I have no issues with the rawness of a car. I'm not the type of guy that needs a plush interior and cushy ride quality.
What i do need is style.
The styling on a corvette is subjective, the styling on a mustang, again subjective, along with a huge list of other cars.
The styling on a neon, is however not subjective. It's a neon no matter how you dress it up. Regardless what you do to it, it's still a girls car.
A car once marketed with "beep beep hi".
I love a car that runs quick, but it's got to have something going for it visually.
It's likely i ever land up in a 4cyl turbo car, but if i did, likely a wrx or lancer evo.
Kimura 11:13PM (12/29/2008)
jcar302
1.) With all due respect, you fail to realize that the look of any car or any thing is subjective. It may not be to YOUR liking looks wise, but that's you and not everyone, so you shouldn't go making generalizations about it.
2.) Just because a car doesn't appeal to everyone looks wise, don't discount it from being a performance machine, and why it should not be on t hat list. The Caliber I can see because it doesn't clean the competition's clock, but the Neon SRT4 did.
Carlos 8:17AM (12/30/2008)
The only two things the Neon SRT4 didn't have going for it were exterior and interior styling. It redefined the sport compact car in 2003 when it came out, anything that was available at the time was absolutely destroyed by it. Only until recently did Chevy and Mazda surpass the SRT4. So to say it didn't deserve it's engine is a load. Not only did it out accelerate any competition, it also out handled then, and in ACR form nothing at that price range new couldn't touch it.
If you want a fast interior go buy an RSX or a GTI while I blow by you like you're standing still.
Jim 8:26AM (12/30/2008)
jcar302,
I'm happy with my SRT-4, and I'm far too old to be a kid. Your bias is ugly.
TomW 8:22PM (12/29/2008)
I have a 92 Achieva SCX. The car is fast. Had it up to 150mph+ quite a few times in the wilds of Wyoming driving across country. The car definatley doesn't scream sporty, and my insurance is nothing. They think its my fathers Olds, not a psuedo racer. Fine with me... The quad 4 is hell to work on though. EVERYTHING is attached together, take one part out, you might as well dissassemble the whole damn thing...
Reply
Arturo 8:21PM (12/29/2008)
that sho engine would have been a nice addition to the ford probe back in the 90s. A rwd probe with this high revving engine, too bad the probe was fwd.
Reply
Joe K. 8:24PM (12/29/2008)
Is this a negative thing? Most of these made the most fantastic Q-ships ever.
P.S. Where is the Turbo Caravan?
Reply