I think you're probably right. The people who actually design these engines - the big 3 engineers - are all wrong. The european and japanese engineers are wrong, the government researchers are wrong, the universities are wrong, all the engine textbooks are wrong, all the SAE papers are wrong, and the DOE is wrong. But you're right on this point. Because... well, because you read the MPG on window stickers. That is AWESOME. I wish I were that bold about everything I 'know.' Ha ha.
I don't see anything 'american' or unamerican, or national history about it this question. Americans have done 4V as long as they've been done.
They have all this information and GM and Chrysler still chooses the 2 valve OHV path. That must say something about that design.
It's no secret that Chrysler fancies itself the low cost producer.
Tell you what, I gave you a quote from the Department of Energy, and UC Irvine, saying 4V has a larger valve area, and therefore lower
pumping losses and better fuel economy. If you can find me a quote from anybody (reputable) saying that 2V gives better fuel efficiency, I'll concede the point. While you're looking, get the Heywood text and read up on what
pumping losses are.
