Clearly, the Ford web page author made a mistake. However , OHV = over
head valves and you don't have to have push rods to have over head
valves. So while the usage is misleading, it is not false. The 4.6L
V-8 most definitely has a over head valves. It also has a single
overhead camshaft. So while it is an SOHC engine, it is also a OHV
Especially when you measure the horsepower with special intakes and
Not true. You might be able to claim that push rod valve trains have
more reciprocating mass, but not necessarily the whole engine (and
even then you might be on shaky ground). You should check out NASCAR
push rod engines (even the Toyota NASCAR V-8). They spin those 6 liter
V-8s to over 10,000 rpm with push rods. If valve train reciprocating
mass was the main deterring factor in engine performance, race cars
would all be running flat head engines.
People get fixated on maximum horsepower numbers. What I want is a car
that drives properly. I've had 240 HP cars that were a pain to drive
in traffic, and 140 HP cars that were a joy to drive in traffic. The
V-6 Camry I test droive a was a POS. If you floored it, it accelerated
briskly, but in around town driving it was hopeless. Unresponsive, the
transmission constantly hunted for the right gear, and unless you
floored it, it lagged like heck. My SO's 4 cylinder automatic
transmission RAV4 drove much better in traffic. Toyota can publish all
the big numbers they want for horsepower, but if it drives like a POS,
it is a POS.
That is a common fault among manufactures who want to advertise high HP, but
must spin their engines at high RPMs to attain that HP.. Torque is what
gets you doing and keep you at speed on the grades. High winding engines
develop their torque at too low an RPM. That is fine for an engine driving
a manual tranny with lots of gears that take less HP
to run than an automatic tranny. With a high winder engine one must rely on
the torque converter and longer times in lower gears to get the lower end HP
to the wheels.
If you thought the V6 was a dog, you would never want to drive a Camry in
that has the four. The V6 does a better job than their underpowered 4cy,
for a car that size. Lack of torque at the proper RPM becomes evident when
one hits a grade, more so than when starting out, because the gearing and
the torque converter does the job. At speed, if the driver does not floor
the throttle soon enough to keep up the RPMs, the lack of torque will always
leave him falling behind the pack.
Truck drivers call Camry drivers 'flatlanders.' People that live in flat
country, that get in the trucks way on the grades, because the driver does
not to know how to drive when they get in hilly country ;)
I sold my '00 Maxima 5 speed b/c it had such pitiful torque at low
revs. Compared to other manuals I've owned (and I've only nearly all
manuals until recently) it was dog to drive and it was very easy to
kill the motor. Wife and I both killed the motor from stop more than
any car we ever drove. It would go like stink if you drove it like
you were mad at it and revved it way up, and up hills ok, b/c the
gearing was keeping the motor about 3k rpms, but fuel economy was not
stellar. What did we replace it with? Sit down for this one, a '00
Olds Intrigue with the 3.5 DOHC (that was a painful discussion to a
few uninformed and stubborns wasn't it?). The Olds 3.5 auto motor
goes up hills like they are not even there! And I have yet to have it
kick down a gear on a hill, and at moderate highway speeds 60-65 I got
33 - 32 mpg. Who needs a Camry? Oh yea, resale value. So I got my
Olds for dirt cheap b/c of poor resale, poor me.
That torquey, smooth and rev happy 3.5 motor would have been DYNAMITE
in the minivan and small truck, SUVs. Of course GM developed it for
"Olds" only and then "discovered" it cost too much to produce. That
my friends is pitiful project management and a waste of money. How
many engines has GM designed and then dropped? (the Dual Twin Cam v6,
Quad 4, 2.8, etc). Now they have the 3.6 DOHC, but its 7 years later
and maybe too late.
> How many engines has GM designed and then dropped? (the Dual Twin Cam
GM seems to have a hard time developing a game plan which will renew their
credibility. "Chasing rabbits", we might call it.
No doubt that GM could put out a stellar product line that people would
They just have a lot of problems to solve.
However the statement, that GM is not offering vehicle that buyer want to
buy, is obviously not true based on its sales figure vis a v all other
manufactures, foreign or domestic
Don't confuse profit with cost. GM makes a profit on every vehicle it
sells, simply not enough to meet the current cost of doing business. It is
costing GM billion to introduce all of it newest, and planed, vehicles. GM
did make a profit in the fourth quarter and likely will in the first quarter
as well. ;)
Don't confuse wages with cost.
I get wages every month
, simply not enough to meet the current cost of running the
costing me a lot to introduce my youngest wife to the pleasures of
I did make a good profit in the fourth quarter but my wife just spent
a little more ;)
Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.