Lou ... the A6 4.2L (which is a V8) puts out about the same power/torque as your Hemi (350hp/330ft-lbs at 3000rpms)....

Yeah D Rod it does...but can you do a tune up on it yourself...I'm a Mopar man so while I like the German cars because of their great driving qualities the high cost of parts and difficult repairability keeps me with the domestic products...my younger brother has a number of German cars (2 Porche 911s...a Cayenne...and an Audi All Road that one of his daughters drives) and he likes them but he doesn't do any work on them himself...but now and then he will call me with a repair estimate to see if it's fair or not...

The All Road only came with the 2.7T i beleive which really wasn't an engine that Audi heralded itself over.
The nice thing about the Hemi over the Audi is the cylinder de-activation. I don't know if that is in the SUVs like the cars, but for whatever reason it seems to work decently.
I actually looked at a Challenger R/T. While it would suit me nicely, it really wouldn't fit my needs.

I was provided with some interesting numbers by someone in respects to the Audi 4.2 vs 3.2. Not as much difference in performance as you'd think, on paper anyway.

Nope. Which is exact why the Cadallic CTS (3.6L), Camaro, Ford 3.5L engines in the Taurus, Edge and soon to be F150, etc are going to mid-3 liter V6 engines. Less loss (pumping, friction, rotating mass), plenty of power, cheaper, and lighter weight which does effect handling.

Any car that can jet to 60mph in less than 7 seconds is about as fast as general everyday streets can handle. It’s not like we have autobans in America were we can run up to the 120/130mph limits of the vehicles were more than 270hp is needed.

What's your nope to, the deactivation? I guess i should have qualified my statement of working decently to being a seemless operation. I have no experience in whether it does what it is supposed to do for efficiency.
The only problem I see with newer engines coming out is not many using Turbo chargers. That is the best way available, IMO, to make efficient hp. Why even have a 3.5 v6 when you can get the same power out of a low 2 liter 4cyl turbo.

Cost. Material strength needed on the little 4 is much higher than a mid-size V6.

A lot has been done with continuous varying intake and exhaust valves coupled with direct injection to better control the combustion for max efficiency at most throttle conditions but turning it up hot (power wise) when pushed. The bore/stroke setup in these mid-size V6 is optimal. And face it. These engines produce a legit 270-300hp (that’s a lot of power folks) with good torque. Put the right CVT or 6-speed auto with the right gearing setup and you have dam efficient (compared to a couple years ago), power, but CHEAP engine. No/little forged parts. Only a small amount of parts have to deal with high temperature tolerances (exhaust) compared to turbos, and no expensive, tight tolerance turbo (with lag) to use. Twin-turbos completely defeat the point of a turbo. Variable vane works but is a bit limited in how much it can vary without crazy cost and efficiency loss.

I'll take more than 270 hp. One of my cars has a straight 6 making around 475HP (411 to the wheels), which is about adequate in my book.

Why do you say twin turbos defeat the point of a turbo? If you have a V configuration motor, you really need to go the twin route. Intake and exhaust plumbing get messy and complicated if you don't.

A twin turbo is like running a supercharger, no real benefit to overall economy.
You're telling me a VVT engine is not as complex as a standard engine with a Turbo? C'mon. And how much does VVT really give you in varying the torque curve? I know I use this example, but it is the best i know off hand. My 2.3liter turbo hits its peak torque of 258ftlbs at 1900 rpm and holds that till around 4500. Hp peaks at 250 around 5200 i beleive it is.
And the bore/stroke ratio is optimal for what? high end hp, low end torque?
I just see a smaller 4 with a turbo being more efficient with less rotating mass, less overall weight, and in general a higher operating efficiency, especially when you add an after/intercooler.
And turbo lag/spool up is not as bad a problem as it used to be. Does it exist? yes, but once the turbo boosts, that little bit of lag is made up pretty quickly.

We'll just have to disagree on that one.

Why would twin turbos have lower fuel economy than a single turbo?

Turbo lag really is a non-issue these days. A BMW 335 feels very much like a normally aspirated car. To accomplish it, the turbos are undersized IMO, and run out of breath at high rpms, but 99% of buyers probably don't care.

I love the low end torque of a V8. The sixes ar fine but the 8 is better.
Why did BMW move away from the twin turbo in their 2010 line up?
The new 35 engine is a single turbo one.

h

power - I'm not sure about the move to the single turbo. As successful as the twin turbo motor has been, I'm surprised they changed it. My guess would be cost savings. BMW should have probably figured out a way to build fuel pumps that don't fail instead of redesigning the turbo(s).

Ironically, the 335 motor has more torque than the V8 available in the M3. The turbo 6 is actually the better motor for day to day driving, although the V8 is fun to wind out past 8K rpms. Both are great motors though.

There is nothing like the low end torque of a V-8 but I have to say these new high tech V-6s are very impressive...for what it's worth...the MDS (cylinder deactivation) works GREAT on the Hemis...you can't feel it...and if you drive conservatively...our 07 Grand with the Hemi gets close to the same fuel economy as our 98 with the six....both get about 13 around town and 18 on the highway...but naturally if you USE the power of the Hemi all the time you can get down to 9 mpg without any trouble!!
I don't think the fuel consumption on this engine is bad for a vehicle that weights close to 4600 lbs and can tow 7200 lbs....and has a 4x4 system second to none....yes the Diesel would be nice with close to 30 per cent better fuel economy...but for fun I checked some of the parts prices for the diesel specific stuff....and it's way way more than for the gas engine...if fuel was as expensive as in Europe...yes then it would make sense....

and there is one more thing about these new Hemis...if you hear a vid of an original 426 Hemi idling...there is certain hard to describe sound...and the new ones also have that sound...quieter...smoother...but the same sound...most modern vehicles are too refined to be fun to me...the modern Hemis have a bit of the musclecar past...which people my age love because when we were growing up...the street Hemi was the ultimate....sold only because Mr.Bill France (boss of NASCAR) said ChryCO had to sell it to run it in NASCAR...and the original Hemi design...still dominates drag racing in top fuel and funny car...

Well, pretty much sealed the deal last night. Found something that is a great deal and they gave me book on my car (seems to be rare these days).
I let my emotional side get a say, but left the major decision making to my sensible side.
So, the new MuttRide looks like it will be an 08 Saab 9-3 Aero SportCombi (special way of saying wagon) 6-spd. I wanted a wagon for the dog and the kid's stuff when we travel and such. This fits the bill. I haven't had a four wheeled manual in a few years, and found this one a little hard to get used to as it is difficult to hear the engine. Still holds the factory warranty of 5yr100k powertrain, 4yr50k b-to-b, and 3yr36k maint.

Not quite the power of the Dodge Magnum Hemi I looked at, but handles better and does a lot better on fuel. The only other vehicle I found that comes close to this is the Passat wagon, but they are a bit rare, and you need the v-6 to get the same power, and then they are mostly awd and that seems to kill the fuel mileage as well, and then there's the VW req'd maint. All in all, this car suits me pretty well. Now if Saab just doesn't go under...

Nice choice. I fondly remember owning two SAABs, a 900T and a 900SPG - fun cars to drive (after I learned to left-foot brake to build boost).

Do they still put the ignition key in a stupid place?

No, no, this one is on the console where everything falls into it and a keychain any larger than a paperclip rattles.

They still insist on providing only one cup holder in the front as well. A little inconvenient, but not for the driver.

Yes, they're quirky, but I have found nothing i like better...