but don't you always want the best for your guys?
I want the best for all three of the guys, and unfortuantely not everyone is doing what needs to be done to get back to where they are supposed to be. Is everyone perfect? Certainly not. Ford still doesn't have a serious V8 program that is able to compete directly with the GM and DCX units, and GM has made the mistake of keeping the 4L60E and its spin-offs for just a bit too long.
They could all do better, but when the others seem to be improving at an impressive rate, you have to wonder why DCX isn't doing the same...
Toronado
Yes, and both companies had put it in a total of around two products each until just recently, with Ford relying on the Duratec 3.0 and even the Vulcan up until quite recently. GM used the 3800 in everything car-related, and will continue to use the 4300 in everything truck related (despite having the far superior Atlas that would also fit in the engine bay).
Meanwhile, Chrysler has offered the 2.7 and 3.5 since 1998 and 1993, respectively.
Point taken, however the Duratec 3.0 and 3800 were more than adequate for quite some time. However it has been made fairly clear by GM that they want to let the 3800 go (although they will still be available in S/C form in the GM High Performance catalog), I believe the last remaining model to use it being the Buick LaCrosse. That I believe will be replaced by the LY7 on all models, but I can't be completely certain. The "High Value" 3500 engine is already making a dent in its updated form, and the 3900 hasn't performed too badly either.
...The Duratec 3.0 will live on, most likely in Mazda-tuned form for quite some time. It too will eventually be phased-out by the Duratec 3.5, which is indeed a good idea, as it is a far-better alternative not only to the American counterparts, but also that of the Germans and Japanese. Well, as long as we don't talk about the 3.6L VR6 from VW...
JCE3000GT
And what's wrong with the 3.0L Duratec V6 that's in the Fusion?
Noting really I suppose. It does a good job doing what it needs to do, and in the updated Mazda-spec form, its obviously a much-better unit than when it was in the old Taurus-spec shape. Compared to the GM 3500, I'd say it is a better engine in the Fusion against the Aura XE, but that may just be me.
---
Each of the various companies obviously have their strengths and weaknesses when it comes to engine building. The General obviously has the formula for building great V8 engines, and Chrysler has certainly caught-up with their HEMI modular formula. The V6 title gets thrown around a bit, depending on what you want and how you want it, and although I would certainly side with GM in most of those circumstances, Ford stands to gain a lot of ground with the Cyclone program. On the subject of four-pots, that one pretty much goes to Ford without a problem. GM only has one stand-out I4, and the same can be said of DCX (although it isn't out yet, SRT-4), while Ford (through Mazda) continues to make rather punchy, fun, and affordable I4 engines. Although on Diesel power I'd call it a solid draw. The Cummins is awesome, the Duramax is by-far the most refined, and the Powerstroke is indeed the most powerful. The only winner there is the consumer, because they have three good choices to make.
That engine is hardly adequate for a car of that mass! It'll be even worse than the Five Hundred. 
Why Chrysler, why??? 
