so many opinions... and they are all intelligent answers. good to know that if I have any questions that a bunch of people with brains will respond, all you guys rock!

all i have to say is...

Look at all the Over seas cars and look at how a lot! of them have smaller motors and are making more power then the US'* bigger motors.

The US auto makers need to start putting a little more thinking into the motors if they want to pull some of the sales back from the over seas cars

Toasted is right...

Honestly, does it really matter where the torque is made? As long as the curve is relatively flat (and making lots of power all the way through it) torque is torque. Yeah, so my little 4 banger DOHC is flat on its face at 2k, its an animal at 3....which is where it cruises on the freeway....and at those engine speeds I get better gas mileage than most cam-in-block engines. Engine speed is irrelevant as long as you have the gearing to go with it.

In a small, light, manual transmission, short geared car, it does not make much difference. However, if you have a large, heavy car, with tall gears, and an automatic, it makes a HUGE difference.
The modded 2.5 V6 in my 5 speed Contour was a blast. After the intake and exhaust were opened up, it made the most awesome wail from 4000 RPM to almost 7000. Pulled like crazy. However, the same engine, behind a 4 speed automatic, was a dog. Took forever to climb into the power band.
Hey, even my L36, pulling a 2.84 gear, is not torquey enough in my 98. Once its moving, it pulls hard, but I sure would love a bunch more torque below 2000 rpm!

exactly...

As far as my VQ motor motor goes, YES, it makes torque a bit higher, but they put super short gears in it..
3.79:1 for automatics
3:81 for manual transmissions.

The gearing makes for more than enough low end grunt to make it move at nearly any RPM

as far as cost is concerned... how about a sub-$20,000 hyundai 3.3L that makes 235hp, and 236tq
its not as impressive, but is is a hyundai

GM needs to bring hte 2.8 Turbo from Saabs, and take off some of the power restricting parts on it..

The 2.0 Turbo SIDI Ecotec from the solstice GXP is an AMAZING motor, but needs to find it'* way into more cars IMO.. When they have a motor like that available, it'* hard to give reasons why there should be an L67/L32.

IMO GM thinks there'* too many markets, and they build too many variations on powertrains, chassis, and design combos. They're doing better aiming divisions at certain niches though. There'* 2.8, 2.8Turbo (saab) 3.5'* a few 3.6 a 3.9, etc.. There'* more but you get the idea. Nissan develops a slightly costlier engine (VQ) and crams it in everything but a Sentra, with some different powerbands based on which chassis it'* going into.

Very similar tactics are being persued by Chrysler, Toyota, and others

Good engines dont need a supercharger or turbo to add power.

Nothing good or bad about adding a super or turbo-charger. Just a different way to get more air into an engine. Same as adding DOHC 4 valve cylinder heads. Could just as easily say "Good engines don't need DOHC'* either". Or any kind of OHC. Just a different means to the same end.

I certainly don't hold it against Porsche or Mercedes for adding turbos to their cars.

I sure don't see what they have to do with an L67 or L32. Those are great running, efficient smooth torquey engines. They produce gobs of torque at low RPM and very smoothly pull big, heavy luxurious cars around with no noise or vibration. Just like they are designed to do.
Just a different tool for a different job.[/b]