Media | Articles
According To You: Cars That Never Got the Engines They Deserved
We heard you loud and clear. Last week’s question asking about cars that deserved better engines provided us with page after page of fantastic responses. So many vehicles got a raw deal before they rolled off the assembly line, a lot of which resonated deeply with members of the Hagerty Community. The Pontiac Fiero and Plymouth Prowler should come as no surprise, as they were sporty vehicles that needed a heart of gold.
But what other vehicles deserved better? Read below to see what vehicles the Hagerty Community wished were born with a different soul under their hoods.
The Modern Dart
World24: The modern Dart. It really should’ve gotten the 1.75T that Alfa used for the 4C. Not only was it used in the Giulietta, but it was bolted up to Fiat’s C635 DDCT. You know what else used that transmission? The Dart, for the 1.4T as an automatic, and for the entire engine range as a manual. 238hp, 250ft-lbs of torque would’ve been a riot in the modern Dart!
Rider79: So true – the Dart of this century never received an engine suitable for its good looks and decent chassis.
The 454 Nova…or not?
Robert P: The Chevy Nova should have had the 454 big block at 450 horsepower.
Joel: Robert, I couldn’t agree more! A lot of Chevys of that era got one, but not the Nova, and it would have been great to have as an option.
Marketplace
Buy and sell classics with confidence
Rider79: Would have been a waste, at least on street tires. If one reads the period tests of the SS396 Nova, it was not nearly as quick as it S/H/B – presumably due to nose-heaviness, and the lack of traction made worse by that nose-heaviness. I had a 1973 Nova two-door with the 350, and it had enough trouble getting traction on dry pavement. A limited-slip would have helped, but I do not believe that would have been sufficient to put a 454’s torque down, even the somewhat-diminished torque of the 1973 454; what would it have been like with a 1970-year 454, even the base 360 HP version?
DUB6: Plus the Novas were famously almost impossible to fit big tires under, so most of the ways to increase traction were off the table or darned difficult (expensive).
Pontiac Fiero
Stephe L: The Fiero should have had the 3.8 Turbo (or Supercharged, as that’s a common swap – SM).
Bill D: If V8 Archie could cram a Cadillac Northstar engine in that engine bay, they certainly could have put that bulletproof 3800 in there, turbo or not. I had the 2.8L V6, and although no real slouch, it could have been so much better. The base four-cylinder Iron Duke was a true paperweight.
Glen: Absolutely correct. A great car lacking a great motor.
Bob M: I know a retired GM engineer who swapped the Fiero’s stock Iron Duke cast-iron 4 for the all-aluminum Oldsmobile 225 C.I. V-8. Lighter, smoother, much more powerful, and vertically shorter so it fit better. GM had already sold the rights to the engine to Rover, so it was no longer available.
Keith K: Pontiac Fiero should have had the 150hp Olds Quad 4.
Jack D: Or ANY 3.8- like from the Beretta.
Glenn L: Agreed. The Fiero is the first car I thought of when this question was posed.
Thomas M: I found one in a junkyard with a 3.8 turbo. They wouldn’t let me buy the whole car and didn’t have time or tools to pull the engine out.
Howard: That would have been phenomenal. I was thinking more along the lines of the Olds Quad 4. More revs, more power, and already had a 5-speed transmission that had gone through EPA certification.
David S: I agree, the Fiero was shortchanged and needed a better engine.
MarineBob: Bingo on the Fiero. Irrelevant but wouldn’t it be nice to have today’s 2-liter turbo engines available in those small cars? I’ll buy the no substitute for cubes, but light, little high-revving screamers are neat engines. Who knows how long they will last, but they are interesting.
Jaguar XJ220
Marco: The XJ220 needed a V-12, not a turbo V-6. Maybe it was ahead of its time.
Chad J: The XJ220 never lived up to its potential for one reason.
Plymouth Prowler
Sderby: The Plymouth Prowler is an obvious answer here. Something as attention-grabbing as a Prowler, they couldn’t have found a way to cram a V-8 in there? Or turbocharge that V-6?
Anything! Even the turbo 4 from the SRT4 would have been more exciting!
exc911ence: I came here to say this exact thing. Cheers!
Bill B: I agree. The Prowler failed sales-wise due to the lack of a V-8. Mopar should have sold a retrofit V-8 swap kit for the Prowler to get around any regulatory issues.
John Z: I agree the Plymouth Prowler needed a V-8, a build 318 or a 340 and it would have been great.
James L: Yep, I think the Prowler takes the win here.
Tom M: I’m sure the Plymouth Prowler is #1 on many lists! For sure an outrageous presence, and to power it with a ho-hum drivetrain was such a disappointment.
Dean C: Plymouth / Chrysler Prowlers could have had the 4.7 HO V-8 from the Jeep Grand Cherokee, and a manual tranny as well!
billyt: I seem to recall that back in the day, some custom shop was installing the Viper V-10 engines into the Prowlers and renamed them “Howlers.” I can only imagine what the acceleration must’ve been like in that beast.
Don: The Prowler needed a small block Mopar V-8, for sure. Even a standard 318 would have been preferable to that poochie V-6 they stuck in it.
Larry V: Chrysler Prowler needed a 426 HEMI!
Richard M: Plymouth Prowler with a V-8? That would’ve been epic.
Binksman: My first thought is Plymouth Prowler. I realize that packaging anything other than what it had would have been an issue, but they probably could have squeezed in the SRT4 engine. I think the old-school hot rod with the fast and furious-style tuner engine would have been accepted in that time period.
Citroën DS
KrazyKommando: The Citroën DS. Amazing in every other way, but that motor is an absolute relic of the past.
Slow Joe Crow: The Citroën DS deserved a more modern engine than the Traction Avant mill it was stuck with.
DuckCanuck: Came here to add the DS. Originally, it was planned to have a flat opposed six-cylinder engine, but the development budget ran out after the amazing suspension/brakes/steering. The end result was that their existing and aging four-cylinder was adapted. Oh, what could have been!
George B: I was waiting for someone to mention the DS19 Citroën! Such an advanced car to have such a pedestrian motor.
OlyOop: My number one answer! The DS with a proper, smooth six would have been a damn near perfect car. It might have saved the SM, too. The Traction Avant had a powerplant that was less impressive than the rest of the car, too. Here, too, they would have had an absolute world-beater.
Cadillac Allanté
TG: My Allanté comes to mind, but I wouldn’t necessarily say it never got the engine it deserved. It just didn’t get it oriented in the correct direction. For the 1990s price though, it probably should have gotten a Cadillac variant of the LT5.
SRT8dan: Agree! The last year in production it got the Northstar V-8, but it was too late. And at that, 300HP was still a bit on the short side of being a performance car.
Fiat X1/9
ParaboTech: Agreed about the Fiero. The Fiat X1/9 should’ve gotten something different also. I’d almost add the Mazda Miata, but it’s already good enough. All of these would probably be too much of a handful if they had much more power anyway. Maybe some lives were saved. 🙂
OlyOop: I agree about the X/19; It would have been a squeeze–maybe impossibly so–but Fiat had the Lampredi twin-cam right there in their lineup!
Rev. Timothy M: The twin cam swap has been done. This guy did a lot of work finding and adapting the right parts, but it fit without major fabrication needed. Should be a blast to drive!
Ford’s Panther Chassis
Matthew L: The 90s to the 2000s Town Car should have had the DOHC 4.6 available. The Mark VIII had it, the Continental has it, why not the Town Car? Plus it would have challenged the LT1 and Northstar Cadillac was offering with none of the quirks. A missed opportunity!
Richard S: 2003-04 Mercury Marauder really needed a little more oomph to go along with its looks and sound; 5.4 32V would have suited it well.
paul m: This one is for you Sajeev: the never-produced ’05+ continuation model of the Mercury Marauder with the supercharged 5.4 Triton from the F-150 Lightning. Transplant time?
Sajeev Mehta: I woulda been happy with it getting the 3-valve V-8 + five-speed automatic from the S197 Mustang GT!
DeLorean
Howard H: One of the most unique cars with an underrated Renault engine. And it made it big in the Back to The Future movies. Can you say DeLorean?
hyperv6: DeLorean needed anything better.
John: The French managed to tune and turbo it for a lot more power.
hyperv6: Still a French V-6. 3800 SC or even now the Northstar-converted cars are much better.
Sherman S: I agree that Delorean deserved better than a Renault engine. It was like putting a Timex works in an Omega case and selling it as a premium product.
Peter W: The DeLorean was futuristic but was underpowered by an anemic V-6 engine.
James L: DeLorean while it never really got a chance with only 9000 units built was just crying for more power.
AMC Pacer
Jim: The AMC Pacer with the Wankel that it was designed for.
Mark B: While perhaps historically interesting, the Wankel got the chop before it ruined the reputation of even more carmakers. Citroen offered a Wankel GS, but they wisely bought almost all of them back.
hyperv6: Same for the Chevy Monza. They were going to get it first and then sell it to AMC for the Pacer. It is just as well as it would have never met emissions and they still have seal issues.
Randy Z: “Pacer and Monza,” said the Rotary Nut!
Peter R: The AMC Pacer was first designed to get a rotary engine but that never worked out.
Chevy Vega
Porter H: And it’s the same issue with the Chevy Vega.
PJM: The Chevy Cosworth Vega (never hear anything about them anymore). A turbo would have given it a kick in the butt. In its day it was a very interesting car compared to a regular Vega. A few more horses would have made it a lot more interesting.
Don: The Chevy Vega would have benefited with just about any other engine than the aluminum block it came with. The rest of the car wasn’t that bad. I see a lot at shows with a 350 swapped in.
George T: The Chevrolet Vega should have had a Small Block V-8 option for the GT. Along with five-lug wheels, a TH350, and a stronger rear differential.
William B: The Vega should have had a better engine (for the base model)—even the Iron Duke or a V-6 would have been a great improvement.
Volkswagen CC
Donnie T: The VW CC should have had a six-cylinder. the cars looked good and were really nice, but just way underpowered. Then VW didn’t learn their lesson with the Arteon. Again, a nice car that just didn’t have the engine to make it a great car. It needs a six- or eight-cylinder. VW and Audi have plenty of good engines they could have put in these cars.
Greg S: The CC Executive model had the VR6 & it’s the only CC I would buy. I do love the looks of that sedan.
Malaise-ish Era
Sean: What about just about any 1980s-era Camaro or Mustang?
MotownSox: Any sporty car post-muscle car era, and before the Renaissance starting in the mid-1980s. The 1981 and 1982 Corvettes are great-looking cars straddled with sub 200 HP low-compression V-8 engines.
Martin D: I’m old, so bear with me. I’ve always considered my first sports car to have been my 1971 Ford Pinto two-door coupe. I’m 75 now so, no, I didn’t blow up.
The transmission was superb to my 20-year-old self and the handling was more than adequate for the day. As I recall, mine had the 1600 cc engine so it wasn’t exactly overpowered. It would have been great with a Cosworth BD series engine. Sure, it would have been more expensive, but what fun it would have been to drive!
David W: All the eighties cars deserved more muscle. I’d like to own one, but recently bought a 1983 Supra. Slow car, I had one in the nineties and it seemed fast back then.
55Guy: Third-gen Camaro/Firebird. My ’82 Firebird with the Crossfire 305 V-8 was underpowered. And when the 350 TPI finally arrived it was automatic only.
william v: The 1974 to 1978 Vettes (and beyond actually) were woefully underpowered and would have benefitted greatly from a more powerful engine. Simply a victim of their times.
Dean C: 1972 -74 Cudas and challengers. The 400 + 440 was still available, although detuned, it still fit between the fenders.
Muscle Car Grab Bag:
Timothy T: I’m an older Mopar man and I always thought that the ’70 and ’71 A bodies should have had a 426 Hemi option. My brother put a 426 in a ’70 Duster and it looks factory-made. Mother Mopar put 383s and 440s in Darts and Barracudas and they had an aftermarket company put Hemis in 68 A-bodies, so I believe they could have done it to the second-gen A-bodies, too.
Tom: The 1970 Oldsmobile 442 with the Oldsmobile hemi engine.
8Pakcat: The 1970 GTO should have gotten a Ram Air IV round port cylinder head 455 at least.
Mike: The GTO should have gotten the Super Duty 421. Would have reigned as the real GOAT until the one-hit-wonder 1970 Chevelle 454 LS6 arrived.
Jerry D: My loaded white/white 1973 GTO had a 455 CID but there wasn’t even the option of the 455 SD engine, on a GTO! What the hell were they thinking? Only 544 1973 GTOs were produced in 1973 with the 455. I wish I still had it.
Scott B: I think the SD455 should have been available in Pontiac’s full line of cars in ’73/74. If the ’74 GTO had come with the SD, maybe they’d actually get some respect.
Eric H: The 1969 Firebird Trans Am was one car that really deserved to get the small block that Pontiac was developing at the time. If only it had made it to production. Consider what they were able to do with SD 455.
ssterry: If the 454 LS7 hadn’t been killed for the street perhaps we would have seen it in Corvettes and Chevelles. This could be an idea for another article. What would the big three have produced if smog and insurance regulations hadn’t killed the first golden age of muscle?
Ray L: I wish Pontiac kept the 405hp super-duty 421 or even the 385hp super-duty 389 going one more year and put in the ’64 GTO. Then I could still enter the original / restored class at car shows.
Pat P: How about the first-generation Camaros with either the L79 350 HP 327, or the L76 365 HP 327
mike w: 1970 GTO should have got a Ram Air V. It would have been competitive with the 1970 Chevelle LS6 454.
John HG: Second-generation Firebirds got the 455, why did the Camaro not get a 454?
JLW: Ford should have built 427 SOHC Mustangs and Fairlanes. This would have allowed more development for that engine.
Stevie B: Since Ford had to homologate the Boss 429 motor for NASCAR, I always thought the Torino Talladega and the Mercury Cyclone Spoiler should have gotten the Boss 429, at least as an option.
Merkur XR4ti
BryanW: The 1985 to 1989 Merkur XR4Ti—it had an anemic 2.3-liter four-cylinder Ford SOHC turbocharged engine, which had a very narrow power band. In Europe, these babies at least had a Ford Cologne V-6.
What this car really needed was the 5.0 V-8 from the Mustang GT—that power plus the Merkur’s handling prowess reconfigured to handle the extra V-8 weight, and the unique Euro design would have resulted in a lot more sales! At the very least, Ford should have put the intercooled version of the 2.3-liter turbocharged four-cylinder from the SVO Mustang in the XR4Ti as standard equipment…it would’ve added 20% more hp!
Rick C: In Europe, the Ford Sierra came with the Cologne V-6. It was a fast and reliable little car. When the XR4Ti got here, it had the Turbo four. Too much under-hood heat, peaky and unreliable. It coulda been a contender.
Rich M: Merkur XR4ti with Cologne V-6 as the engineering gods intended.
G-Body Monte Carlo SS
Fred B: The ’84-88 Monte Carlo SS never had the bite to match the bark. The 305 HO was the only engine, and HO means Hardly Operable.
Jody F: The 80’s Monte Carlo SS. A 305? PFFFT. Terrible.
Ed: The G-Body Monte SS should have gotten the TPI engine.
DWood: The mid-to-late ’80s Monte Carlo SS. Great looking aesthetics, but that weak 305 V-8 did not go with that car. At a minimum, it needed a 350, if not even more cubic inches. Oh, and did I mention how much it deserved a Muncie four-speed?
Terry C: Can’t believe no one has brought up the anemic 305 ci they put in the ’83 through 88 Monte Carlo SS. I had an ’86 and an ’88. A tuned port 350ci and a manual trans in those things would have been just what the doctor ordered (they never hired that doctor). That platform had SO much potential. These days, a nice LS swap is what most are getting now.
Eric: 1980s Monte Carlo Super Sports. They should have had the tuned port 350 that the IROC Z’s had.
The Final Thunderbird
Don A: One that needed a more powerful engine was the Retro-Bird series. As I recall, 252 and 280 HP were not enough to get enthusiasts’ attention. (Additionally, the styling was too mundane and did not carry over any of the classic lines of the ’55-57 Thunderbirds)
Glenn H: The 2002 – 2005 Thunderbirds. Would have been a great car with a better engine and a five-speed. Never understood why this didn’t happen.
Bruce C: The 2002-2006 Ford “retro” Thunderbird was underpowered and overpriced. It should have had at least the Taurus SHO Yamaha engine in it with a five-speed and the price point should have been in the low $30,000s. Looks nice but that’s where it all stops. I’m not a Ford guy but I think Ford really blew it. Maybe that’s why this T-Bird was only produced for three years.
Steve P: The ’02-05 Thunderbird never got the high-performance V-8 it deserved. The engine available near the time of its production that I would have liked to see it have was the 4.6-liter DOHC, 302hp V-8 like the one from a mid-’90s Mercury Marauder. I believe that car with a motor like that would have been a good seller and a fun collector car.
Bob: The final years of the Thunderbird should have had a 5.0 engine with a five-speed option. I’ve seen rumors the bird might be back, saw online looked like a Mustang.
WES A: The resurrected T-Bird would have been awesome with a “Boss” 302.
83ragtop50: The modern-day two-seat Thunderbird of the early 2000’s. It was a complete dud.
Triumph Stag
Tom: The Triumph Stag. Beautiful car with a terrible engine that often had sand in it from its mold.
Gerry U: The Stag should have used the Buick-designed aluminum V-8 that Rover was designing at the same time for their “less worthy” sedans. Company politics precluded such a collaboration before they were forced into a single company. Michelotti’s design would have been a sales “Triumph” with an engine such as this.
Paul: The Triumph Stag, a great car, but it should have had the 3.5-liter Rover motor, rather than the Triumph V-8 that overheated.
Grab Bag
JohnB: To keep the Porsche snobs happy, the 928 should have come with an air-cooled six.
David S: How about the Porsche 924 with its tepid 95 HP VW engine? Certainly upgraded by 944 and 968 models, both of which I have owned.
Dave: They should have put a V-6 in the Chrysler PT Cruiser.
Jim M: The MGB. Its engine bay was designed to take a modern V-4 that BMC intended to make but ran out of money to develop. Instead, we got a 1947 vintage I-4. Rugged engine but limited power. On the bright side that wide engine bay has been a new home to many varieties of V-6s and V8s.
Jim F: BMW E36 – way underpowered
Buddy: The Honda Fit’s popularity in grassroots motorsports everywhere proves it should have gotten the K20C in its second generation and the L1.5B7 turbo in its third and fourth generation. While most hatchback manufacturers cashed in on the hot hatch market Honda just produced the Civic Type R and only captured the buyer with a lot more money. Definitely a missed opportunity for both revenue and a cool hot hatch.
Danno: The 1994/95 SN95 GT Mustangs should have gotten the 5.8-liter Windsor engine, and not just the limited-production 1995 Cobra R.
John K: The Solstice looks like a fast car so it deserves more power. It’s a great-looking car but fails when it comes to performance.
JJC: The NA and NB Miatas deserved to get a Mazda K series V-6. They were compact enough to easily fit in the engine bay and would likely have shifted the weight even farther back to make them a little more tail-heavy. A 45/65 FR Miata with a little more power and a characterful engine would have been a great option.
MIKE: The Chevrolet S-10 needed a small V-8.
Tom: Ford should have offered the supercharged 5.4 that came in the Lightning and Harley editions available in the extended cab truck, especially the King Ranch and other “special” editions.
Jack: My response can still be done by Ford: I would like to see Ford make a short bed regular cab Lightning with electric motors. It would be a true replacement for the original Lightning. The electric power would make a Lightning that is faster and more powerful than the current edition of the Lightning and the original Lightning. I owned a 2003 Lightning for 17 years and would love to have an EV replacement.
Sweder: How about the anemic MB 190SL? Would have been a great car with the 2.8 V-6 of its successor, the 280 SL.
MarineBob: I am sure it does not fit with the desired audience, but I always wanted Toyota to put the Tundra V-8 in a special version of the Tacoma. Would have made a crazy smallish screamer I think.
Clifferd: For those of us who mainly drive/use SUVs, the biggest “miss” was when Toyota failed to put some flavor of their UZ-class V-8 engine in the 1993-1997 80-series Land Cruiser! The 80 is such an outstanding, capable platform, and it’s a shame they only offered it in the U.S. with the 4.5L 1FZ-FE six-cylinder engine. While competent in low-range off-road, and long-lived regardless, the 1FZ is also sorely lacking in power on the road. However, an 80-series with either a Toyota 1UZ, 2UZ or 3UZ V-8 would likely be the best Land Cruiser Toyota ever made! (and one that would probably rival the Land Rover Defender in desirability and price).
MoparMarq: As Clifferd mentioned, the Toyota 1UZ-FE engine would have been good in the Land Cruiser. But even better, since it first appeared in the ’92 model year Lexus cars, imagine what would have been if it had been an option in the last year of the third-gen Supra with an R154 (only) behind it. Or even an option in the MkIV Supra. More power and torque than the 2JZ-GE, not as much as the 2JZ-GTE, but so much simpler than the turbo model and lighter—by 50 pounds—than either of them.
James M: The Triumph TR7 deserved to have a V-8 engine right from the beginning of production. The car was designed for the Rover V-8—aka the Buick aluminum 215 CI engine. When the car came out with a four-banger, the Triumph community wasn’t happy, for that and other reasons. But if British Leyland could have pulled it off they would have had a winner. They eventually did make the TR8 with the Rover V8 around 1981, but only a few thousand were built—too late though—the entire British Auto industry imploded to be no more. So sad.
Don: The Volvo 1800 series would have been taken a bit more seriously if it had more horsepower. The engines were bulletproof but never produced more than 130 hp in their later years.
Corey S: ’80s Cadillac RWD vehicles. I understand why the HT4100 happened and how it ended up in those cars but I don’t think anything sold more BMWs and Mercedes than that combination. Why not let the engineers finish developing that engine for the FWD downsized Cadillacs that were coming in ’85 and so on and give those D-body cars something like a crossfire 305 Chevy engine instead? GM had it at their disposal already, and it would’ve been so much better.
JohnW: How about a sixties-era Mini with a Honda VTEC twin cam?
Richard S: The Triumph TR7 should have had the 16-valve engine from the Dolomite Sprint, but British Leyland were probably frightened by the insurance company premiums that would have resulted.
wingus d: The AC Aceca got the (UK Ford Zephyr) straight-six and Bristol straight-six, but never got the chance to be a true AC Cobra Coupe. (Instead Ford designed their own.)
RallyRaid: So many, but the obvious one to me was always the Toyota MR2 Spyder missing out on the 2ZZ. It needed it to be the more raw alternative to the MX5 Miata that the rest of the design intimated. A bit of an insult that no modifications to any other component would have been required for it to slot in, yet if you wanted a mid-engined, 2ZZ-powered sports car, you had to pay considerably more for a Lotus!
Bills B: On the import side MGB with a 2.6 Ford Capri-type V-6 would have changed it into a real sports car.
Frank S: The last of the AMC Eagles. They had the 258 with carb, and should have gotten the 4.0L EFI and AW4 auto (or five-speed manual) as used in the Jeep XJ in 1987. At least in the 2306 that were made in 1988. I know a few people who have swapped the 4.0L/AW4 drivetrain into them. It really wakes the car up! If it hadn’t been for the requirement to EPA test every drivetrain in every chassis it may have happened. Couldn’t expect AMC/Renault or Chrysler to spend that money on a chassis that was so outdated and on its way out.
John S: 2000s-era Dodge Caravan with SRT4 turbo engine or ’90s through 2000s Quest or Villager with Nissan Skyline all-wheel drive drivetrain and engine combo would have been sick! Imagine being a Mustang, Camaro, or even Corvette owner and getting your doors blown off by a minivan! I am still trying to figure out how to go about my “Z”illager project going!
John B: The 1954 Corvette should have got the (New) 261 six.
winguy: A Chrysler 300 with a Hellcat!
John K: AMC should have put their 401 V-8 as an option in the Gremlin. I know Randall (AMC dealer) made them, but AMC should have done it from the factory, with a four-speed option.
Rider79: The Dodge Rampage and Plymouth Scamp would have been a blast with the Chrysler H.O. turbo-four engine of that era.
BMW E36 M3 was only underpowered in the US. But if BMW had stuck to the full fat M3 or nothing, BMW NA would have taken nothing. Remember the E30 M3 didn’t sell well at all in the US. So yeah, underpowered, but without it, M as a brand probably takes much longer to establish a foothold in the US.
Don’t Forget the BMW E21, they really needed the 6 that was never allowed to be imported
The E 21 and E 30 were available in Europe as a 323 They were little German Hotrods,,,I did import a few 5 year old ones..
where is the OPEL GT in this article?…..
You have it all wrong on the Delorean
First it was designed as a safe car not a fast car. It got classified as an “ exotic” because of its design
Second,
There are stage 2 and Stage 3 engines still available , 299 and 349 HP respectively
Especially the E36 318ti…came to the US as their “entry level” car with only a twin cam 4. A nice peppy engine, but it would have sold much better if available with the six, as it was in Europe. And that drive train was already EPA certified so no extra work on BMW’s part. They should have remembered the 1600 of the late 60s; when they dropped in the 2 liter engine, creating the 2002, it outsold the 1600 seven to one, and established BMW in the US market.
TBH, what the Vega needed was an aluminum cylinder head. That would have solved the vibration and head gasket issues alone. Otherwise the engine was perfectly fine for the application.
The Aluminum block was a very big problem. That was solved by iron sleaves. That’s what I did to my 72 hatchback. Never did solve the rust problem
I eventually put a 327 in mine. Turned it into a real red light sleeper. Rode a lot better with a little weight on the front end.
Two of my good friends put the Buick/Olds 215c.i. in their Vegas. Weighed a little over 50 pounds more than the stock lump, but WOW, what a difference! We were into parking-lot slaloms (sanctioned) and the addition of the V8 created a beast that could be steered with the gas pedal! What an amazing ride. The one I spent time in still ran on its 13″ wheels with BR60 BFG’s. It had custom chambered pipes that exited just behind the rear wheels on both sides. A real sleeper, as one guy in a 225HP Fairlane found out when we had a run and I squeaked in front of him after over a 1/4 mile. Demanded to know what was under the hood. Had to tell him. What an amazing car!
I think “Jack” with his EV Lightning S/C comment should have had his comment dumped!! With the Lightning and Mach-E Ford has, and they still can hardly sell, either one!! Plus, everyone was talking about real engines not electric motors!!
It’s a joke the Vega is even in this article. Assuming an all-new engine doesn’t make up for the poor quality throughout. Some good innovation but poor execution. GM ruined the chance at market share and solidified doom ahead for the company with this one car. Shame on the General.
Holy cow, People had a lot to say on that topic😂. Might be the longest article I’ve ever seen on Hagerty.
Would have been significantly shorter if someone had edited out the comments containing blatantly incorrect info. As is, I only got half way through before I couldn’t take it any more so same effect, I guess.
Agreed! Bailed out too and looked for your comment as I know there are knowledgeable people here!
I read a lot of nonsense..
Where is one of these mid-90s Mercury Marauders with the 4.6 DOHC 32V V8? How can you get the 2003-2004 Marauder screwed up with mid-90s? Then, the half-wit talking about a 5.4 DOHC in the Marauder? Only if had the aluminum block 5.4 DOHC!! Sajeev talking about he would rather have the 3V 4.6 and 5-speed form the S-197? A 5-speed option in a Marauder, OK! A 3V V8 versus a 4V DOHC V8? Put the “crack” down, please!!
Actually the Vega issue was no iron sleeves in the cylinders. The cylinders were treated with a silicone aluminum combo that failed and they used oil. If they had sleeves they would have been fine.
That too
Also, Vegas had a stamped steel x-brace in the front end that allowed the lower control arms to slowly spread apart until you couldn’t align it anymore. I loved big block Novas; they were great burnout machines, just no good for racing. Speaking of big blocks, I think that Pacer would look sweet sporting a solid-lifter 427 with a tunnel ram and dual quads (with a bug catcher scoop) sticking out of the hood!
58-63 Rambler Americans have the same spreading chassis issue due to the same reason — just a stamped steel brace under the engine between the suspension mounts. On the Rambler the brace mounts are on the lower control arm pivot bars, which are moved with shims for camber alignment. The braces have slotted holes to allow for movement. I typically weld a piece to the body for a hardened 3/8″ rod to go through and prevent spreading. I’ve pulled a body in as much as an inch this way! I run the rod through a pipe cut for the factory measurement. The pipe/rod doesn’t move when aligning.
NO need for a GM engine in the Pacer. The 304 V8 option came out in 78. The 401 is physically identical and makes it a drop in. The 401 makes nearly 500 HP with minimal bolt ons. Cut open the hood and add induction if you please.
Indy Cylinder makes an aluminum block American Motors based engine at 500 cubic inches if more power is needed.
Why they picked the Pacer for the theoretical upgrade is beyond me. The Hornet was a much better choice,My brother and I built a 390 and stuck it in. Absolute blast.
My biggest issue is that they were designed to have a rotary, which, yes would’ve made a lot more noise, but if they had committed to that, we could’ve had an economy that was an absolute riot. Almost like a Miata of the gas crunch.
Or near exactly like an RX3…
Porsche and Mercedes were able to make that technology work.
Emissions and lack of economy killed the Rotory. Mazda made it work for a sports car but it just never had what automakers needed mpg and emissions.
The Vega engine had an open deck design. once it overheated one time, the cylinders moved around and didn’t line up with the head and they got “Oval”. My Vega GT was a stone, and it rusted through the front fenders in 2 years. By the way, the Monza was a Vega with a swoopy body, and the Monza came with a 262 CI small block Chevy already in it.
My 76 Monza had a 400. what a sleeper!
I had a friend who had a Vega panel he used as a work truck. He did the steel sleeves and a few other changes, but it was still underpowered. One weekend we put a Buick V6 and automatic in it. He later told me someone acted like they wanted to race their mustang. He said he blew the doors off and was asked what was under the hood. Answer, stock as sin. PS, a 396 fits and the hood will close, but needs suspension updates.
The 1976 Vegas had the iron lined cylinders. I bought a used wagon w/50Km for $1K. My friends laughed at me for that purchase. I drove it 50Kmiles, it worked good. Lost a timing belt, but it’s not an interference engine… easy fix in an adjacent parking lot.. I sold the car for $500, now who had the last laugh?? It had the 2bbl carb, saginaw 4 spd, 3.50:1 1st gear, Absolutely not a powerhouse, but entirely adequate for a daily, and fun to drive.
The Vega rusted, it used oil but they ran forever. They were the choice car in winter gor high school kids. Cheap yo buy and just dump used oil in. It was hard to kill one.
This one hit a little bit better than the drink one 😉
Two more: BMW M1 and BMW Z1.
Saab 96 needed a quieter, more powerful and easy-revving 4-stroke engine than the Ford V4 lump. It also needed a 5-speed overdrive transaxle. Then it could have been a real competitor to the BMW 2002 in a hot market for small, sporty coupes and sedans.
What car got it right? Jaguar F Type. Amazing Supercharged V6 or an absolute flame thrower 500+ supercharged V8
Mike, I have a 2016 F type R. It performs better than the car magazines will tell you. Everyone loves it. Very few on the road, even in the Chicago area. One day the powers that be will discover the F type and prices will go parabolic like air cooled 911s. I might buy a low mile SVR and store it.
I owned a Fiero, I put over 150,000 miles on a Fiero, and I am here to tell you that anyone that says that the Fiero needed a V8 never drove a Fiero around a tight turn on dry pavement let alone in any condition of reduced traction. Yeah they were great in the snow in a straight line, but if the back end got loose it took a lot more skill and some luck to get the car back under control than most drivers have. The Fiero was fine as is and a fun car to drive, please find another excuse for why you really wanted a Fiero but didn’t buy one.
If you don’t believe that the Fiero was a good car as is try to find a 3, or more, owner one with low mileage, these cars were either driven over 200,000 miles and worn out by two owners, or lost control and crashed by a driver that thought the car didn’t have enough power.
As a 40 year owner they needed more power and the LS is an easy fit. Even a 3800 SC would have done the job. The 2.8 just runs out of steam.
As for handling the understeer was a problem in early cars but sway bars fixed that. The car wanted to go straight or over steer due to the rear weight and short wheel base. I did 3 winters.
For sure gun to drive otherwise I would still not have mine. In fact the bump steer makes you work at lower speeds where better cars make driving slower a bore.
Ford should have made ’67-68 Mustangs with the 427, like they did Cougars. Ford should have ALSO offered the 400 with a 4V carburetor as well as keeping the “dual pattern” bellhousing flange throughout production, plus a dual-pattern engine mount boss (All but the first year or two of production used the 385-series bellhousing flange and engine mount boss meaning it was hard to swap a 400 into a SBF chassis. The FOX Mustang/Capri and Thunderbird/Cougar should have been available with a 351W. Pontiac should have NEVER made a 301 T/A. lol. Ford should have never made a 255 V8 (well, except for the INDY engine).
Performance world changed the April 1st, 1968 WinterNationals
454 Novas: Maybe if you’re a drifter. Rider 79 has it right. With just a subframe, you’d twist off the back half…no place for the HP/torque to hook up and worse front nose down. Even the Camero’s had hook up/straight line issues with the HiPo 396/375. Nice built small block is plenty.
Jim: I would definitely agree with you. In 1970 my mom got a ‘plain Jane’ Nova coupe with a 307 for her everyday car. I was just getting my license back then. That car had plenty of power. You could spin the rear tires with the automatic trans and the rear end could fishtail if you weren’t careful. It wasn’t a good winter car. I can’t imagine one of those with a 454! At that point, it is all ego!! If you can’t put the power to the road, what good is a big motor!!
Regarding the comments on the SD-455…the high premium for the upgrade ($521 in 1973-74, equivalent to around $3900 today) pretty much killed the demand for it. After the initial rush of pre-orders, its sales languished. Fantastic engine for sure, but beyond the means of most Pontiac buyers at the time. It would have been an awesome option for the GTO and Grand Am for sure!
Concerning the Chevy Vega. I had three of these .The first was the little wagon and I liked the car . It had low milage on it so I never had the oil problems that were associated with the car at higher mileages. The second one I rebuilt and had the machine shop install sleeves in the cylinders which made the little car reliable. The third ,I dropped in a 283CI motor and it was really fun to drive.
People are complaining about the price of fuel and most of these vehicles are gas guzzlers. Let’s do the reverse of this story and highlight vehicles that have shockingly great fuel mileage.
I always felt the 93-97 Probe GTs would have been smoking’ hot with a small block V8. I still own my ‘94 and it is quick the way it is- but a V8 would be amazing
I don’t know what engine would have been right for the Probe GT, but that Mazda engine was garbage…the car was otherwise great-looking for it’s day and decently quick. I had a ‘93 and then the slightly restyled ‘95…my ‘95 engine blew with less than 50k miles. I ultimately stopped buying Fords because I had so many engine OR transmission issues over several years and models.
Thats why I stopped buying gm.