Are We Wrong To Hate 4-Cylinder Performance Cars?

Are We Wrong To Hate 4-Cylinder Performance Cars?

Before this, the Mercedes SL was the proud home to a four-pot in 190 SL form. While the 190 SL lacked the 300 SL’s tubular spaceframe chassis, its engine was directly adapted from the straight-six in the 300, just with two fewer cylinders. More attainable than the 300 SL, it was ideal from a public sales perspective, but it also spent a fair amount of time competing in global motorsports. In its early years, a dedicated sports-racing variant was even sold with a small windshield and lightweight aluminum doors.

Even the Ford Mustang has had four-cylinder options as far back as 1973. While the modern EcoBoost ‘Stangs get a lot of hate, the turbo 2.3-liter configuration has historical significance in the Mustang world, with the Fox body’s similar configuration producing similar outputs to the V8 of the era. But even before the Fox body, the second-gen pony car had a four-cylinder available. It was much-maligned, but its existence still supports that the Mustang wasn’t always a “V8 or bust” proposition.

Those who know their ‘Stang history will know the original Mustang I concept from 1962 was also powered by a four-pot, as the mid-engined Mustang utilized a Taunus V4, which could churn out as much as 109 hp in race tune.

Scroll to Top