Our Two Cents: Vehicles That Never Got the Engine They Deserved
What vehicle never got the engine it deserved? That’s the question we asked the staff here at Hagerty Media. Our love of cars goes back decades, or centuries if you combined us into one superhero of an automotive journalist, and we’ve all wondered how much better certain cars would be if they had a different engine …
… Or a better engine, something that truly spoke to the rest of the car. Let’s see what alternate realities we have created!
A Standard V-8 for Every Cadillac
For me, it’s the fact that all Cadillac cars (cars—Escalade excluded) from the last 20 or so years lack a standard V-8 engine. GM has an excellent LS motor, and a baby Caddy with a modest 4.8-liter small-block would give buyers more reason to avoid a thirsty BMW for a slightly more thirsty Caddy.
As the Caddy becomes larger, the V-8 engine follows suit (5.3-liter CTS, 6.2-liter CT-6, etc.) with increased displacement, and forced induction for the V-series examples. The inherent torque and simplicity of a pushrod V-8 complements the minimalist architecture of GM’s new EV powertrains, and exclusively pairing those two in a luxury car brand will make Cadillac more appealing than any of its competition. — Sajeev Mehta
As under-the-radar-good (and as mod-friendly) as the ATS-V’s LF4 V-6 is, I agree. After having spent over ten thousand miles with the smaller of the Alpha-chassis Caddys, the ATS should have gotten the 455-horse LT1 from the Camaro, and the ATS-V should have gotten the LT4. — Eddy Eckart
V-8 Bronco Raptor/ Ford GT
Ford Bronco Raptor. Lack of a V-8 is … yeaaaaah. For the record, I am fully aware that you can’t easily fit that V-8 into Ford’s T-6 frame. Actually, here’s the same opinion again: This also applies to the most recent Ford GT. — Matt Tuccillo
For sure, the Ford GT shoulda had a V-8. — Larry Webster
I think I’ll also jump on the Ford GT bandwagon, as I don’t care for the reasoning of why it got the EcoBoost V-6. That car deserved a V-8 based on heritage alone. – Greg Ingold
Yes, please! Kill the flying buttress, make room for a 900+ horsepower Coyote with a twin-screw supercharger. — Sajeev Mehta
V-8 Prowler
The Plymouth Prowler comes to mind. Chrysler Corporation came up with a car that was a modern nod to the classic hot rod but forgot the one factor that people want from a hot rod: A V-8 engine. You have to actively try to miss that detail. I don’t think anyone would’ve minded seeing a 318 Magnum out of a Ram pickup in the Prowler, as long as it came with eight cylinders. — Greg Ingold
Honda Motors in a Modern Lotus
Any modern-day Lotus fits in this category. They make do with Toyota engines but the chassis deserves the character of a Honda motor. — Larry Webster
Having a Lotus with a K-Series would be excellent! Totally agree with that take. — Greg Ingold
A Straight-Six SLK
Let’s not overlook the original Mercedes SLK. This folding-roof roadster needed Mercedes’ juicy and punchy 2.8-liter straight six. That supercharged four-cylinder engine was disappointing, and the manual gearbox was even worse. — Larry Webster
SHO-inental, If Only
I only thought of this car/engine combo since I yanked my 1989 Continental Signature Series out of storage. Turns out it needed new rubber, and tires from a 1989 Ford Taurus SHO are a smidge wider on the same-sized wheel. Getting a set of those and slapping a set of 1/4-inch spacers on the rear gave it a stance that I can’t stop looking at. And now, curiously, it’s getting a lot more compliments. Even the manager of a local burger joint stopped me from giving my order so he could compliment me on it.
He thought it was a Town Car, but that’s not the point. These moments get this Lincoln-restomodding fool thinking about one thing: Ford needed an automatic transmission ready for the Taurus SHO sooner, and should have slapped it all into the 1989 Continental. Such a tragedy! — Sajeev Mehta
Citroën DS
The Citroën DS was so unconventional and interesting that it’s easy to forget there was only ever an old-fashioned, underwhelming OHV four under the hood. The later SM got a Maserati V-6, but the DS was never so lucky. — Andrew Newton
The Sky Shoulda Been the Limit
GM flogged its Ecotec four-banger, and I know they made crazy power for drag racing. But I thought the Pontiac Solstice and Saturn Sky deserved a more refined motor. — Larry Webster
They needed an LS, maybe just a small-displacement 4.8-liter, to keep Chevrolet appeased with their Corvette’s dominance. But I am sure that was discussed in some conference room at GM, and it was quickly shot down. — Sajeev Mehta
Triumph Stag. They used a defective boat anchor for an engine and killed US sales and support. There was an apparent supply problem with the 215 aluminum block engine that would have put this car on the map.
I always wished that Ford had a bigger engine in it’s T-bird s of 1958-1966 than the 390 V-8. The car was so heavy it needed more power to really be considered more than a cruiser.
’60 ‘Bird had the 430 Lincoln available. It was too heavy, the handling sucked, and no appreciable power gain.
I had a 63 Bird and I loved that car. It was very aerodynamic. The faster you drove ir the more it held the road. Ask my wife who would crawl on the floor and plead me to slow down on a 4 lane highway at night. 120 speedo was way past the the pin with more to come. That 390 would burn the tires through low, and drive 1 until it drive II. I loved that engine. Wish I had her today. (Sniff sniff, tear drop)
I always wished that the Ford T-birds of 1961-66 had a bigger engine than the 390 V-8. These cars were pretty heavy and needed more power to be more than just considered a road cruiser.
I think the moral of the story here is V8 everything! :^) I absolutely agree on Caddy and the V8 in the ATS. No ATS V8 so I went Lexus IS 500 for the V8 fun. Not that I am complaining. Prowler, yes should of had a V8. Bronco/GT V9 yep. Solstice/Sky, I agree V8 would be fun, Mallet did it but I would have liked to have seen a second generation of that car. I think it had potential to be a really great small coupe/convertible.
I always thought the Skye was ADORABLE! Like a mini-Corvette! It just wasn’t hot enough.
You forgot the biggest faux pa of all time the HT 4100 motor that was put in all Cadillacs from 1982 to 1985. Not only was it woefully under-powered it was a disaster for GM. The cars in that era were beautiful especially the Eldorado and wonderfully appointed but the lack of power and torque ruined the experience. Even today the bad reputation of these motors blowing head gaskets with no warning makes buyers shy away. Then from 1986- 1990 the used the underwhelming carburetored 5.0 Oldsmobile motor causing many buyers to complain they didn’t want to spend Cadillac money for an Olds. The 1st generation Northstars were also problematic. I don’t think Cadillac’s reputation has ever recovered.
My daily driver for years was a Fiero sporting a 4.9 Caddy V8 (with an Allante intake). The 4.9 doubled the horsepower (290) and was a torque beast (300ftlb) compared to the 2.8 that it replaced. It was a simple swap that bolted directly to the stock Getrag 5 speed, the most difficult part of the swap was that it required some exotic exhaust work. With full dress including a/c it weighed just 40 pounds more than the stock 2.8 V6.
I put a tweaked Olds 455 in my ’92 Olds Custom Cruiser to replace the anemic 305SBC. Now I can haul butt and stuff at the same time.
Just casually tossing V8s into everything is not the solution. As the owner of Pontiacs most of my life until more recently, I had a few 3rd gens. You know what was a let down? The V8 in my Formula, gta and the base Bird I had. Gutless, all low end torque due to TPI and less hp than a new V6 Camry. There’s a reason the best 3rd gen is the 89 Turbo besides the 91 Firehawk. GM just didn’t have their shit together then. Which is why the 5.0 Foxbody was so popular. I still love the 3rd gen birds but lets be honest here. Some cars definitely needed the V8 treatment but some didn’t. The 3800 SC series 2/3 swapped into a Fiero is a pretty nice car to drive, drove one with a 3.8 turbo even. It doesn’t necessarily need a massive V8 stuffed in there imo.
When production ended for the 1967 Austin Healey 3000, both Donald Healey and BMC considered using the V8 for a new model. I’m not sure but it’s my understanding that they were interested in the small block American V8’s but we’re not able to get them. Enthusiasts who made the then popular V8 swap and put them in their own cars affectionately called the Healeys “nasty boys.“ Because the Healey is light and the V8 weighs less than the original six cylinder engine, they were very fast. Had Donald and BMC succeeded, the Healey V-8 would have been quite a car!
I agree about the Prowler. If they would have offered a V8 I would own one
1980 – 1991 Volkswagen Vanagon: the 3,500 – 5,000 pound brick was first assigned an ancient 4 cylinder air-cooled horizontally opposed 67 hp motor which was eventually changed to a 90 hp water-cooled version of the same ancient motor. VW was producing modern inline 4s that could have been used but chose not to (probably for at least a few good reasons). While many owners nurse the old motors along with good results, engine conversions (VW 1.8T, inline Fords, Hondas and GMs and the popular Subaru) show the potential reliability and performance that could have been stock had VW built the Vanagon with a better motor.
Many times when I was driving my ’90 Olds Trofeo, I wished it had a turbocharger so it could go as fast as it looked – as good as the 3800 was, a car like that needed more oomph than the 160 hp it had.
IMHO- the Fiat X19 was just plain (politely), “not good looking”.
The early 70s 124 were good looking cars .
CHRYSLER did build sort of a Prowler with a 4.7V8 and a manual transmission. It was a pickup version called the Howler and it made a few car shows as a concept and was what the Prowler should have been.