@King1Street should take a look at some of the earlier internal combustion engines too, if you like that. There's single digit horsepower engines of yesteryear that would take up your whole bedroom 🤣 They're honestly a fascinating part of history. Specifically the hit and miss style.
But don’t forget they also switched the way they measure horsepower from gross to net, which made the numbers look even more ridiculous. The emissions-related things just worsened those numbers
Not when you consider the era, emissions requirements and primitive technology relative to later years and especially today. Technology evolves over time, and the automotive industry had to advance through the malaise era in order to get to where it is today.
@@peterbennett4124as someone who has a v6 6mt honda accord i can tell you its worse without the limited slip the type s has. Still better then my 3.8l buick allure. I cant imagine what the 5.3 was like in it...
Those are such a neat oddity. I'd love to own one and modernize it with some fuel injection. As long as you don't expect it to be superiorly capable off pavement haha
I do miss my 1995 Lincoln Continental with that beefy, rev-happy 4.6L 32-valve Intech V8. Sure it was wrong-wheel drive, and had a transmission made out of glass, but it was a riot 😅
Then there is the Japanese and South Korean examples by way of the Mitsubishi Proudia & Dignity and original Hyundai Equus. BMC Australian meanwhile tested an Austin 1800 V8 prototype featuring a Rover V8, which was deemed too expensive to make it into production despite there being some promise with costings suggesting even the conventional Leyland P76 would have been cheaper to build over the regular four-cylinder Austin 1800.
I am happy the 6th Gen Monte and third Gen Taurus got talked about I mean the third Gen Taurus despite its design was a monster at Nascar events when they was required to use the actual body design as a template for the race car so might be ugly but it's fast and slippery where it counts
I had a 67 toronado, 425 v8 300 hp, fwd... Im in new England, and let me tell you, that car would neither get stuck or fishtail in snow or ice.... on original bias ply tires!
The Taurus SHO - you can *Tell* Yamaha did the heads on that engine purely from the induction sound lol, you can even hear the intake manafold valves open so the sound changes - fauxvtec lol.
I love my 66 oldsmobile toronado everything on it is original i bought mine with 36k original miles for 8500 usd in 2022 and just reached 60k miles such a treat to own and drive
The Cadillac engine power output didn't drop because the rating system changed; the same output was reported as a new value according to the new (more honest) standard. Actual power output did drop later as the manufacturer stumbled through accommodating new emissions standards.
Very few American's are prepared to accept this fact. The majority of US V8's were over-rated by anything from 30% to 50%. There was a handful of exceptions though. Ford, GM and Dodge all had one or two special order homologation engines that had as much as or even more than they claimed.
Have been working on a few Toronados lately. Neat car to drive. A 1968, a 1969 w34 car and another standard model 69 at the shop. Have recently met some people who had helped develop the car in Lansing, Michigan, USA. The standard 455 Toro rated at 385hp, the w34 rated at 400
I remember equating FWD with the tornado and Eldorado. They had a conventionally mounted engine. When they turned v8’s sideways such as in the later Cadillacs and Continentals, they felt a bit rough. I couldn’t always feel the engine vibration through the steering wheel.
awesome video! I would encourage you to check out the line of supercharged Buick Riviera/Pontiac Bonneville SSEI of the early 2000s. They had the normal 3.8 V6, but with a giant blower from the factory. The ultimate factory sleeper.
Wow, very interesting! I knew about at least one of these, but I was surprised by how many different cars were in this unique category! Thanks for presenting this fascinating content!
Ah yes, a recounting of American automotive sins. The one saving grace of it all is the LS4, as it can with minor modifications, be fitted into a DF Goblin kit car to make a ridiculous fun death trap.
Seen the LS4 stuffed into Fieros and Ferrari 308’s. Turning those things into animals. Also seen the Buick 3800 series 2 supercharged done in the same chassis as well as a Toyota MR2. The only decent application for a transverse power plant is rear engine.
@@dmandman9 Yes, that was the point. Americans don't drive on unrestricted autobahns, we have no need for sustained 125 mph performance, we like instant acceleration. And these big engines can do just that when tuned for low RPM torque. Also, the clientele of Cadillac at the time wanted effortless power with NO noise and NO vibration at all, essentially an electric motor that ran on gasoline. A huge V8 engine at low RPM with big torque could give exactly that experience.
I like how the Caddy engine suffered a "power drop" when going from a gross to a net rating. No, no power loss actually occured, only how the engine was tested and the rating system used. It still produced the same horsepower if tested in a gross rating way, just the testing changed, NOT the actual engine horsepower!
I was surprised as heck to learn that these large V8 front wheel drive American cars existed. I was working at an auto auction and one of my co-workers mentioned that some big American car coming through was fwd, and I said "no way". He insisted it was, so we finally bet on it. I had to pay up on our next payday. I hadn't thought there were American fwd cars until the Chrysler K cars of the early 80s (not including the Cord, which I was aware of).
I love my 68 Toronado. Equal length shafts and Torsion bar suspension equals that 510lbft of torque making no torque steer. It floats and is so comfy. Biggest complaint is the all around drums.
i have a monte ss ls4 and man, its a pretty stupid setup, the gm 4T65E trans was actually pretty reliable... when it had a buick 3800 connected to it. However with a 303hp ls4 it is not the happiest, the reliability is still decent IF you leave the motor bone stock, or have a shop build it up for more power. However, id still reccomend it to others simply because its probably the fastest V8 car you can get in really good shape and low miles for under $8K. If you want decent power with higher reliability, the pre facelift 2000-2005 monte ss used a supercharged buick 3800 motor with 240hp instead, the 3800 series engines were probably the closest GM ever got to toyota level unkillable!
I once owned a 2007 Impala SS. Let me tell you - that car was good at NOTHING. It couldn't accelerate without spinning the tires. It couldn't corner. It couldn't stop. It was undrivable for anything outside of daily commuting. Huge disappointment.
I love the 550lb*ft 501CID Eldorado, its just so sad the HP was dropped to under 200 around 5 years later. The HP ratings of the 8.2L cadillac were mostly reduced, not because of the measurement changes, but mostly because of emission requirements hitting at the same time I loved my 1993 Cadillac DeVille 4.9L FWD V8, sure it wasnt the 8.2L, but the way i drove it i could get 30MPG, when that transmission blew from road debris cracking the oil pan on the trans, i bought a 1996 6 door fleedwood, and despite it being almost 2x as long, 40% heavier, and 5.7L corvette based V8, the same driving is able to get 35MPG, despite this limo having ~2x the mileage
I worked at a gm dealer those impala ss were a pain to do any work on no room under the hood. You were better off with the 3.8 supercharged version and upping the boost
i highly doubt that, considering there was already a bmw m5, mercedes amgs and audi quattros, maserati quadroporte at that time. even a late 60s chevelle ss, plymouth fury or ford galaxy would have beaten it
The "Unitized Power Package", or the FWD Toronado/Eldorado engine and transmissions were repurposed for another use... Motor homes! Yes, GM built FWD fiberglass motorhomes in the 1970's using the UPP. I think there was a 26 foot and a 28 foot model, and you can still find them today. The system worked just fine, but some parts for the body and suspension are no longer available. That UPP is still going strong though!
True, except that the GMC Motorhome only had some fiberglass panels (end caps and lower body cladding) - it had a steel chassis frame, aluminum body framing, and aluminum upper body panels.
It’s utilitarian, nothing wrong with it in a car made for utilitarian purposes… which is probably 90% of cars on the road and what 90% of people want and need. FWD’s two main leg pros over RWD is greater interior space and it being easier and safer for novice drivers to handle loss of traction (Understeer vs Oversteer)
Straight from Wikipedia: "The Ford Super High Output (SHO) V8 engine was designed and built by Ford Motor Company in conjunction with Yamaha Motor Corporation for use in the 1996 Ford Taurus SHO. It was based on the successful Ford Duratec engine rather than its predecessor, the compact Ford SHO V6 engine developed by Yamaha for the 1989 Taurus SHO. The engine was retired in 1999 when production of the third-generation Taurus SHO ended"
You missed the Pontiac Bonneville gxp . It is not a 5.3l V8, it's the Northstar 4.6. I have driven one and have to say it's underwhelming. Only 226hp in a very heavy car. They do dive exceptionally well and look great. Unfortunately they are basically unserviceable. If you dropped a dime in the engine compartment it would never touch the ground unless you flipped the car over.. I guess that's why they made so few?
Interesting video. There are a few that were missing: The Oldsmobile Aurora( 4.0 Liter V8) and the Pontiac Bonneville GXP ( Cadillac Northstar V8) and Buick Lucerne Super( Northstar V8) were missing and all were front wheel drive. Thank you for the video and effort. Pontiac Bonneville GXP: ua-cam.com/video/X4jHlD7P058/v-deo.html and Oldsmobile Aurora: ua-cam.com/video/tuPwkXbsroU/v-deo.html
It's not that all these cars weren't great cars because they were front wheel drive, they were great cars, and there are many great front wheel drive cars out there, but in every case they are all great in spite of being front wheel drive. It is inherently bad engineering that goes against physics and is only used because it is cheaper and most buyers don't care.
Those Americans do not know what inertia means and how it is connected to the mass of an object... I cannot imagine how much weight was on those front axles and how unstable those cars would be on corners... I would take a Lotus light weight sports tiny car with a 1.8 liter 4 cylinder engine on the rear or front axle against those inefficient dinosaurs every day at a twisty mountain road. 8,2 liter 190 HP? And how much it weights? Just completely nuts...
That sho could be bored out about 6,8 possibly 10 or 12 mm, and re sleeved, they should be ashamed to put such small pistons in such long block. It could probably gain about 1-1.25 liters. Possibly 2 liters with a stroker crank!
When you excellerate forward the wieght shifts to the rear wheels. Every front drive Pease of junk I ever drove front end slid the opposite direction that you turned the wheel when they spun the wheels@
an 8L engine with roughly 150 HP is mind blowing
Yeah that's like having a 2l with 35hp
@King1Street should take a look at some of the earlier internal combustion engines too, if you like that.
There's single digit horsepower engines of yesteryear that would take up your whole bedroom 🤣
They're honestly a fascinating part of history. Specifically the hit and miss style.
But don’t forget they also switched the way they measure horsepower from gross to net, which made the numbers look even more ridiculous. The emissions-related things just worsened those numbers
Not when you consider the era, emissions requirements and primitive technology relative to later years and especially today. Technology evolves over time, and the automotive industry had to advance through the malaise era in order to get to where it is today.
Typical US efficiency figures...
They must have crazy torque steer. A Saab Viggen scared me once these must be so much worse
Apparently according to motorweek the 2007-2008 Acura TL Type S has the worst torque steer.
Longitudinally mounted engines with equal length drive shafts don't really torque steer that much..
@@peterbennett4124as someone who has a v6 6mt honda accord i can tell you its worse without the limited slip the type s has. Still better then my 3.8l buick allure. I cant imagine what the 5.3 was like in it...
Torque steer is caused by unequal length front drive shafts, idk if these longitudinal engines have a problem with that.
@@memorimusic420 yea they do.
The GMC Motorhome used a oldsmobile 455 and it's front wheel drive directly out of the Oldsmobile Toronado.
Those are such a neat oddity. I'd love to own one and modernize it with some fuel injection.
As long as you don't expect it to be superiorly capable off pavement haha
I do miss my 1995 Lincoln Continental with that beefy, rev-happy 4.6L 32-valve Intech V8. Sure it was wrong-wheel drive, and had a transmission made out of glass, but it was a riot 😅
At least one European example is the Lancia Thema 8.32, plus the Saab 9000 V8 prototype.
Then there is the Japanese and South Korean examples by way of the Mitsubishi Proudia & Dignity and original Hyundai Equus.
BMC Australian meanwhile tested an Austin 1800 V8 prototype featuring a Rover V8, which was deemed too expensive to make it into production despite there being some promise with costings suggesting even the conventional Leyland P76 would have been cheaper to build over the regular four-cylinder Austin 1800.
Volvo XC90 woth yamaha V8 too. Volvo AWD isnt really an awd as it is haldex system, so it is fwd 99% of the time
There was some Audi front drive V8's too
Funny, don't they share the same platform?
@@Kacpa2Even a Volvo S80!
I’ve been watching you for awhile now and I have to say your English has improved exponentially. Hats off to you man, I can tell you’ve worked hard!
Missed the 1st-gen Oldsmobile Aurora, it was quite high-tech
That was basically a Cadillac Northstar with lower displacement. I think it was a standard GM chassis as well.
@@Flies2FLLit had olds steering and suspension
@@devinthierault It had GM corporate steering and suspension. Oldsmobile was a marketing monicker, nothing more.
@@Flies2FLL sure thing
I am happy the 6th Gen Monte and third Gen Taurus got talked about I mean the third Gen Taurus despite its design was a monster at Nascar events when they was required to use the actual body design as a template for the race car so might be ugly but it's fast and slippery where it counts
I had a 67 toronado, 425 v8 300 hp, fwd... Im in new England, and let me tell you, that car would neither get stuck or fishtail in snow or ice.... on original bias ply tires!
The Taurus SHO - you can *Tell* Yamaha did the heads on that engine purely from the induction sound lol, you can even hear the intake manafold valves open so the sound changes - fauxvtec lol.
Super interesting topic! 😎 Can't believe the specific output of some engines!
I love my 66 oldsmobile toronado everything on it is original i bought mine with 36k original miles for 8500 usd in 2022 and just reached 60k miles such a treat to own and drive
The Cadillac engine power output didn't drop because the rating system changed; the same output was reported as a new value according to the new (more honest) standard. Actual power output did drop later as the manufacturer stumbled through accommodating new emissions standards.
Very few American's are prepared to accept this fact. The majority of US V8's were over-rated by anything from 30% to 50%.
There was a handful of exceptions though. Ford, GM and Dodge all had one or two special order homologation engines that had as much as or even more than they claimed.
Cadillac sounds like diesel truck
Stumbled because of the EPA pests!
Have been working on a few Toronados lately. Neat car to drive. A 1968, a 1969 w34 car and another standard model 69 at the shop. Have recently met some people who had helped develop the car in Lansing, Michigan, USA.
The standard 455 Toro rated at 385hp, the w34 rated at 400
Gross horsepower. Subtract 25% or more for equivalent Net horsepower.
@@Flies2FLL I already know this.
I was just listing what oldsmobile "rated" the power at.
I remember equating FWD with the tornado and Eldorado. They had a conventionally mounted engine. When they turned v8’s sideways such as in the later Cadillacs and Continentals, they felt a bit rough. I couldn’t always feel the engine vibration through the steering wheel.
I had a Caddy Seville STS. Very fast and comfortable.
I almost forgot about the Toronado Samuel . Thanks for reminding me again ! Scott 🌵
awesome video! I would encourage you to check out the line of supercharged Buick Riviera/Pontiac Bonneville SSEI of the early 2000s. They had the normal 3.8 V6, but with a giant blower from the factory. The ultimate factory sleeper.
Grand Prix GTP also had the suprcharged 3.8.
Wow, very interesting! I knew about at least one of these, but I was surprised by how many different cars were in this unique category! Thanks for presenting this fascinating content!
I love the toronado in fh5 nobody expects a massive fwd car to corner like that
Ah yes, a recounting of American automotive sins. The one saving grace of it all is the LS4, as it can with minor modifications, be fitted into a DF Goblin kit car to make a ridiculous fun death trap.
Seen the LS4 stuffed into Fieros and Ferrari 308’s. Turning those things into animals. Also seen the Buick 3800 series 2 supercharged done in the same chassis as well as a Toyota MR2. The only decent application for a transverse power plant is rear engine.
always so funny to think about those 8.2 litres producing just 190 hp. What you get only having a 8.5 :1 compression and really little valve opening
It only spun to a little above 3000 RPM.
And really crap fuel economy. The absolute worst of everything.
That's American engineering for ya!
The only saving Grace was that they still had good low end torque. That’s the only way they were able to move those heavy behemoths of the mid 1970’s
@@dmandman9 Yes, that was the point. Americans don't drive on unrestricted autobahns, we have no need for sustained 125 mph performance, we like instant acceleration. And these big engines can do just that when tuned for low RPM torque. Also, the clientele of Cadillac at the time wanted effortless power with NO noise and NO vibration at all, essentially an electric motor that ran on gasoline. A huge V8 engine at low RPM with big torque could give exactly that experience.
the early years of the 500CI/8.2L actually made like 400hp, but as the years progressed it got weaker.
Interesting video. Thank you.
I didn't realize that Ford ever mounted the Modular V8 transversely.
Wow, imagine the disappointment! FWD and automatic and horrendous handling with such mighty engines powering the front wheels.
I like how the Caddy engine suffered a "power drop" when going from a gross to a net rating. No, no power loss actually occured, only how the engine was tested and the rating system used. It still produced the same horsepower if tested in a gross rating way, just the testing changed, NOT the actual engine horsepower!
I was surprised as heck to learn that these large V8 front wheel drive American cars existed. I was working at an auto auction and one of my co-workers mentioned that some big American car coming through was fwd, and I said "no way". He insisted it was, so we finally bet on it. I had to pay up on our next payday. I hadn't thought there were American fwd cars until the Chrysler K cars of the early 80s (not including the Cord, which I was aware of).
That SHO sounded fantastic.
Now i want to put that engine logitudinally and rwd in something
I love my 68 Toronado. Equal length shafts and Torsion bar suspension equals that 510lbft of torque making no torque steer. It floats and is so comfy. Biggest complaint is the all around drums.
Awesome video bro
i have a monte ss ls4 and man, its a pretty stupid setup, the gm 4T65E trans was actually pretty reliable... when it had a buick 3800 connected to it. However with a 303hp ls4 it is not the happiest, the reliability is still decent IF you leave the motor bone stock, or have a shop build it up for more power.
However, id still reccomend it to others simply because its probably the fastest V8 car you can get in really good shape and low miles for under $8K.
If you want decent power with higher reliability, the pre facelift 2000-2005 monte ss used a supercharged buick 3800 motor with 240hp instead, the 3800 series engines were probably the closest GM ever got to toyota level unkillable!
My father had a Bonneville GXP for years and had the engine rebuilt by the local Caddy expert.
I once owned a 2007 Impala SS. Let me tell you - that car was good at NOTHING. It couldn't accelerate without spinning the tires. It couldn't corner. It couldn't stop. It was undrivable for anything outside of daily commuting. Huge disappointment.
That Taurus made me remember they also made a Contour SVT. Thanks for ruining my day 😔
King content.
I love the 550lb*ft 501CID Eldorado, its just so sad the HP was dropped to under 200 around 5 years later.
The HP ratings of the 8.2L cadillac were mostly reduced, not because of the measurement changes, but mostly because of emission requirements hitting at the same time
I loved my 1993 Cadillac DeVille 4.9L FWD V8, sure it wasnt the 8.2L, but the way i drove it i could get 30MPG, when that transmission blew from road debris cracking the oil pan on the trans, i bought a 1996 6 door fleedwood, and despite it being almost 2x as long, 40% heavier, and 5.7L corvette based V8, the same driving is able to get 35MPG, despite this limo having ~2x the mileage
I worked at a gm dealer those impala ss were a pain to do any work on no room under the hood. You were better off with the 3.8 supercharged version and upping the boost
Here's the thing
If you have room for an inline 4cyl, and/or a V6, you probably have room for a v8😅
Emission control was responsible for the power loss.
Forgot the Buick riviera
Imagine out smoking a civic in your fwd toranado or an Eldorado
Output doesn't drop due to changing the units the O/P is measured in.
Just the number changes
Very bad idea, the only redeeming thing is that you can put one in the back too and have AWD twin V8 like DirtEveryDay and Tony Angelo did
You messed up not including the Cadillac Seville sts. Fastest production sedan ever made in it's day. Fwd Northstar v8.
i highly doubt that, considering there was already a bmw m5, mercedes amgs and audi quattros, maserati quadroporte at that time.
even a late 60s chevelle ss, plymouth fury or ford galaxy would have beaten it
The 500 was 400 hp and 550 ft lbs of tq. Not 365. The 472 in my 69 deville was rated at 375hp and 500 ft lbs
Had a 66,,toronadas are there on thing🎉
The "Unitized Power Package", or the FWD Toronado/Eldorado engine and transmissions were repurposed for another use...
Motor homes!
Yes, GM built FWD fiberglass motorhomes in the 1970's using the UPP. I think there was a 26 foot and a 28 foot model, and you can still find them today. The system worked just fine, but some parts for the body and suspension are no longer available. That UPP is still going strong though!
There have been a couple for sale near me more recently. So neat.
True, except that the GMC Motorhome only had some fiberglass panels (end caps and lower body cladding) - it had a steel chassis frame, aluminum body framing, and aluminum upper body panels.
Front wheel drive in a car is ridiculous.
It’s utilitarian, nothing wrong with it in a car made for utilitarian purposes… which is probably 90% of cars on the road and what 90% of people want and need.
FWD’s two main leg pros over RWD is greater interior space and it being easier and safer for novice drivers to handle loss of traction (Understeer vs Oversteer)
Please tell me where is a V8 SHO because everyone I see is a twin turbo 6
Straight from Wikipedia:
"The Ford Super High Output (SHO) V8 engine was designed and built by Ford Motor Company in conjunction with Yamaha Motor Corporation for use in the 1996 Ford Taurus SHO. It was based on the successful Ford Duratec engine rather than its predecessor, the compact Ford SHO V6 engine developed by Yamaha for the 1989 Taurus SHO. The engine was retired in 1999 when production of the third-generation Taurus SHO ended"
I'm sorry, but a V8 having 200hp or less is a waste of resources. A waste putting it together, that is. 300hp or more, now we're talking.
Emission rules..
3:26
That’s not an Eldorado. It’s a Fleetwood.
The buick lucerne super had the northstar.
You missed the Pontiac Bonneville gxp . It is not a 5.3l V8, it's the Northstar 4.6. I have driven one and have to say it's underwhelming. Only 226hp in a very heavy car. They do dive exceptionally well and look great. Unfortunately they are basically unserviceable. If you dropped a dime in the engine compartment it would never touch the ground unless you flipped the car over.. I guess that's why they made so few?
Interesting video. There are a few that were missing: The Oldsmobile Aurora( 4.0 Liter V8) and the Pontiac Bonneville GXP ( Cadillac Northstar V8) and Buick Lucerne Super( Northstar V8) were missing and all were front wheel drive. Thank you for the video and effort. Pontiac Bonneville GXP: ua-cam.com/video/X4jHlD7P058/v-deo.html and Oldsmobile Aurora: ua-cam.com/video/tuPwkXbsroU/v-deo.html
how to turn dino blood into the saddest, slowest miles ever.
Never really understood why fwd v8.
One should ask "why not?" Instead.
I mean sure they have their downsides, but man are they cool
Traction in snow .
And increased interior space
( no hump for driveshaft ).
Damn, Taunus SHO sounds like European V8...
It's not that all these cars weren't great cars because they were front wheel drive, they were great cars, and there are many great front wheel drive cars out there, but in every case they are all great in spite of being front wheel drive. It is inherently bad engineering that goes against physics and is only used because it is cheaper and most buyers don't care.
Those Americans do not know what inertia means and how it is connected to the mass of an object... I cannot imagine how much weight was on those front axles and how unstable those cars would be on corners...
I would take a Lotus light weight sports tiny car with a 1.8 liter 4 cylinder engine on the rear or front axle against those inefficient dinosaurs every day at a twisty mountain road. 8,2 liter 190 HP? And how much it weights? Just completely nuts...
That sho could be bored out about 6,8 possibly 10 or 12 mm, and re sleeved, they should be ashamed to put such small pistons in such long block. It could probably gain about 1-1.25 liters. Possibly 2 liters with a stroker crank!
Its been a month since he posted is he taking a break?
Yoo dude where is your iconic intro?
Talk about v14 engine plisss
Wow! those Lincolns and Cadillac are straight from "The A-team" action serie.
What an ugly dogs😂
Fail wheel drive is standard in Europe...just like many other shitty practices
Bro this guy doesn't know what he's talking about
Without specifying, I have no idea what you are talking about.
When you excellerate forward the wieght shifts to the rear wheels. Every front drive Pease of junk I ever drove front end slid the opposite direction that you turned the wheel when they spun the wheels@
That is the worst accent I've ever heard. It's actually painful to listen to.
I offer myself for continuity to make sure you don't say dumb s*** again