Yes, as a matter of fact there still are. Ford still makes a 2 valve version of the Modular engine, not to mention the 2 valve versions I have already made a reference to are still related. I know there are 4 valve pushrods, but that is mostly in the diesel market. These pushrod models are 2 valve, not to mention the long list of 2 valve OHC models I have listed. Every single one had better fuel efficiency than 4 valve engines

There is a simple problem with trying to say that the Europeans know how to favor fuel economy when all the ones offered over here have much worse fuel economy no matter what the engine size is. I don't care whether or not the Japanese and Europeans make 2 valve vehicles or not. That's their decision.

My point with the 6 liter engine reference is that there is simply not an 4 valve V8 with a displacement anywhere close to that engine's that can match its fuel economy; therefore, the 2 valve design is more fuel efficient.

The problem with those references is that there is no real-world evidence that this is infact true. Just because a book says it does not prove that it is infact accurate. I have looked all over the place and there is no evidence that when a switch over is done that the fuel economy increases unless the engine did not breathe well in the first place. Sometimes the efficiency could be a reference to getting better engine output per displacement, but then the question comes up, why bother using 4 valves per cylinder when it costs a lot more, has a more peaky power characteristics, and gets worse fuel economy? When I'm buying a V8, I'll get a nice large displacement engine which costs less and take the better fuel economy any day over smaller displacement, higher cost, and worse fuel economy, and you know what, a good portion of the American public agrees with my point of view. The Hemi has been a major success, as has the LS line; meanwhile, Ford has to supercharge the Modular to get it to compete.