Outrage

The Range Rover costs $83,545 versus the Ford Taurus which costs $26,700.

FrankReynoldsCPA

The V8 is one of the reasons I have a hard time letting go of my LS400 for anything else. Power delivery is so smooth and easy, it just makes this car such a pleasure to drive(if I can keep my mind away from the gas pump).

mmarshall

What I'm saying is that most Taurus buyers (and buyers of other cars that size, like the Lacrosse) are usually looking for size and room, not necessarily less weight. It's the engineers that are usually concerned with weight, not the buyers.

T0ked

iTrader: (2)

A while back, someone talking about Moore's law stated that if the auto industry advanced at the same pace as the tech industry, we would all be driving 100mpg cars that cost $100, or something like that.

I remember back in the early 90s when all the street supercars boasted <350hp engines (300ZX, 911 Turbo, Supra) and 20mpg was a good thing. Now the V6 Camry has as much power as an early 90s M3. Much of the advancements have been focused on getting more power out of an equivalently sized engine. I think the trend towards making engines smaller and more efficient while pumping out the same amount of power is the right move. I don't think people's car use habits have changed much either so the extra power goes to mostly hauling around portlier cars and portlier people.

Case in point, the 2.4L in the camry pumps out ~150hp. The new ford 1.5L ecoboost will pump out around 160hp. Majority of the car-buying population won't notice the difference and won't care. The V8 in my S550 makes 385hp. The new TT V6 by GM is supposed to push 420hp. If there is fuel savings, I'd give it a shot. Other characteristics can be attenuated by tuning of the trans, exhaust etc.

True enthusiasts and purists will always prefer a NA V8 and that will always remain such, much like V10 and V12 engines are available now, but it will become more of a niche and will likely command a premium, aka dinosaur.

I love V8s as much as the next person, but its inevitable and necessary.

mmarshall

I agree as far as the sheer numbers are concerned, but, in most cases, all else equal, a TT V6 will be more highly stressed while making that kind of power than a NA V8. It will produce more heat, require synthetic or turbo-approved oils, run at a higher manifold pressure, and could possibly have a shorter service-life. Years ago, turbo engines needed special, time-consuming warm-up/cool-down techniques, but today, those requirements have been largely eliminated or lessened.

T0ked

iTrader: (2)

Of course, but todays higher revving, higher compression V8s are under more stress than the languid V8s of yesteryear that pumped out 150hp, but can still be much more reliable. Thats where continued R&D come in. I have no doubts that forced induction engines can be as reliable, it'll just take time and tech. And the lower compression turbos can be just as reliable already.

SteVTEC

Not an issue so long as everything has been properly engineered, and that has more to do with the company behind the engines than it does the technologies themselves.

scgt652

Judging by their sales, it looks like Volvo is the one that is becoming a dinosaur. They used to sell 10-12k units a month. Now they are at less than half that.

Hoovey689

iTrader: (16)

So?

New processes for finding stronger materials and driving down costs are continually improving.

Hoovey689

iTrader: (16)

People would sure thank an automaker if their large car stayed large and got better fuel economy

mmarshall

Diesels and hybrids, of course, can help there. So can a simple change of driving habits....something that a lot of people forget.

I'm all for more American-market diesels, in both small cars and large, but, outside of VW
and a coupe of upmarket German vehicles, getting automakers to do it has been like pulling teeth.

mmarshall

Although it's true that, to some extent, you are simply paying for the Range Rover's premium-nameplate, most of the reason for that price-disparity is obvious when you look at the Range Rover's chassis, drivetrain, of-roading ability, comfort, refinement, interior trim (particularly the beautiful natural wood), equipment-level, and simply the amount of work and materials that go into building it. Although the Taurus is certainly no econobox (it's actually a pretty nice car)....you cannot compare the time, materials, and resources put into the building/assembly of a Taurus that you can a Range Rover.

Of course, we all know (and I admit) that there's one potential fly in the Range Rover's ointment......poor reliability. There, on average, the Taurus clearly wins out.

We've all gotten a little off-topic, though...we were talking about Volvo and how it views V8 engines.

UDel

I agree, that is a big reason that V8's are not as popular as they were is that people are pretty happy with most standard larger or FI 6 cylinder engines now putting out over 280hp, often over 300hp+ and doing 0-60 in less then 7 seconds compared to a decade or less ago when many standard 6 cylinders were only putting out less then 250hp and took over 7 seconds to do 0-60. Stepping up to a V8 in a 5 series or E class costs a lot of money and those options are going to sadly be disappearing soon.

While I like my V8 and V8's in general I would not be too bothered getting a V6 now in a mid or full size lux/sporty car when they are putting out 300 or more hp, back when I was looking at GS's I originally wanted a GS300 but the power/acceleration did not really cut it especially with the poor fuel economy so I just decided to get the V8 GS430. In the third gen GS350, it was quicker then the V8 and got better fuel economy so there were not many takers for the V8 in the GS which is why it was dropped. I would still like the option of a V8 putting out over 380hp and it is a shame they are being taken off the market one by one from lack of sales and strict gov regulations.

These new higher powered FI 4 and 6 cylinders are more likely not built as strong as we may think because car companies are under a lot of pressure to save costs everywhere, they may not last as long or be as reliable as a decent NA V8 or V6. The BMW turbo inline sixes have been having a lot of problems, the supercharged Audi V6 has been having some issues too.

There is still no way these new Volvo turbo 4 cylinders and diesels and going to make modern V8's look like dinosaurs.

Infra

iTrader: (1)

I wouldn't be so sure.

Turbo inline 4's are getting to the point where their torque curve & peak horsepower are very similar to an old-style torquey V8.

Manufacturers are currently using technology that fires a speaker into the headers / exhaust manifold that modifies the sound waves and produces a more aurally pleasing sound. This is completely different than the M5's engine soundtrack, in fact, no different than an automaker tuning the headers or exhaust for a specific sound.

If the experience is imperceptible to the user, does it really matter whether there's a turbo 4 or V8 under the hood?

In 5-10 years we'll not see much advantage to a V8, similar to how we don't see any advantage to a manual transmission TODAY. Of course, there will always be nostalgia for the NA V8, but that's what classic cars are for!