Is it the MIVEC or Turbo????
Originally Posted by TrinaBabe
I havent seen a Mitsubishi F1 yet either 
No offense to our own company.. I love my Mitsu, but the MiVec is junk. Yes its better than nothing but it doesnt seem that great to me. I mean for the autocrosser types, sure... it nice. But for power... no, it will not give you any more peak power, nor hold it any longer. In power cars with thier only goal of making and holding power, are going to use the gearing advance that gives them the most power and holds it the longest. If they dont gain the 20 horses at 3k then so be it... who races at 3k anyways
Again, not trying to be too mean about it but I dont like it. And as for Shiv finding huge power there... whats his fastest Evo? I know Shiv knows alot about the ECUs and such but doesnt seem like he gets into the real power cars much. Hes more of the tinkerer with stockish turbos trying to get that 12hp edge... Id rather get a bigger turbo and get another 100 Even if I only use half its potential I still got his 12 smoked.
No offense to our own company.. I love my Mitsu, but the MiVec is junk. Yes its better than nothing but it doesnt seem that great to me. I mean for the autocrosser types, sure... it nice. But for power... no, it will not give you any more peak power, nor hold it any longer. In power cars with thier only goal of making and holding power, are going to use the gearing advance that gives them the most power and holds it the longest. If they dont gain the 20 horses at 3k then so be it... who races at 3k anyways
Again, not trying to be too mean about it but I dont like it. And as for Shiv finding huge power there... whats his fastest Evo? I know Shiv knows alot about the ECUs and such but doesnt seem like he gets into the real power cars much. Hes more of the tinkerer with stockish turbos trying to get that 12hp edge... Id rather get a bigger turbo and get another 100
Even if I only use half its potential I still got his 12 smoked.What are you talking about? Have you been to the track? Not the QM crap but a real track?
"who races at 3k anyways" coming out from a corner at summit point or VIR at 3~4 K RPM with a lot of trq is very important.
Bigger turbos will have lag between shifts no matter what you do. On the track you need crisp throttle response you can't have a car that hits boost like a hammer. You need smoothness. that’s why racers prefer naturally aspirated cars (smoothens in power delivery). That’s why Porsche is trying to make a 911 turbo that has no lag and you cant feel the boost at all.
Do you know how much my 3071 hurt me on the track? and its not even a big turbo.
Originally Posted by Evo_Kid
MIVES is not junk and Shiv isn't the only gettin great gains from MIVEC tuning. If you've read any of Al's new case studies, he been messin with the MIVEC tuning and getin' great gain.
Also, if drag racing is your game, MostedWanted did a 12.0 with only a TBE, intake, MBC @ 20lbs and a dynoflash on 93 oct. If that doesn't prove MIVEC and the IXs are the ****, then I dont know what does.
PS. I've also been seeing way better MPG on the IX.
Also, if drag racing is your game, MostedWanted did a 12.0 with only a TBE, intake, MBC @ 20lbs and a dynoflash on 93 oct. If that doesn't prove MIVEC and the IXs are the ****, then I dont know what does.
PS. I've also been seeing way better MPG on the IX.
Im not saying it is all bad... its just not worth much to me. It CAN not give you anymore top end or peak power... all it could do is smooth out the power delivery and give you a little more low end... both of which I dont care about, nor does anyone planning to upgrade thier turbo. I think we already demolished the 1/4 mile statement considering my friend did the same pass with less parts on an earlier model. About running at a real track, yes, I run my car at a real track quite often... its a real 1/4 mile track. Sorry if you dont like that sort of track but I do. You go spend the extra money for the MiVEC crap and Ill spend it on a stroker... we will see who comes out on top
Im not trying to bash this... Im just saying it isnt anything to get excited about. And talk about Mitsu dominating the Rally world.... when was the last time they raced competitivly.. I know it wasnt that last year or two or so. And building an F1 or a Rally car.... If you honestly think you could come close to comparing
Again, not bashing... just trying to put into real perspective of the two.
Way up here in Colorado, my brother and I dyno'd both our Evos to determine if there was a big difference. There has been many claims, our 05 pulls harder than our 06 MR. Driving or riding shotgun. I personally dont feel a difference but we shall let the dyno tell us the truth. Unfortunately, I cant post up the dyno sheets... no scanner.
First up was the 06 MR. With a peak of 17.5 psi, it blasted out a 253whp - 254wtq. Ran it 3 times to make sure it was consistent and each time it posted within 2whp and 1wtq.
Next the 05. With a peak of 18.4 psi, it spun the rollers to a 251whp - 268wtq. Again, ran 3 times for consistentcy.
Both runs on a SuperFlow AWD dyno. It was altitude corrected. Both cars are stock except they both have the Ingalls Stiffy. On the highway (short bursts.. nothing overly illegal
) the 05 pulls on the 06 slightly. Maybe a bumper length (2 feet at the most).
Both cars drive the same to me, except in the 06 Im banging through the gears faster.
First up was the 06 MR. With a peak of 17.5 psi, it blasted out a 253whp - 254wtq. Ran it 3 times to make sure it was consistent and each time it posted within 2whp and 1wtq.
Next the 05. With a peak of 18.4 psi, it spun the rollers to a 251whp - 268wtq. Again, ran 3 times for consistentcy.
Both runs on a SuperFlow AWD dyno. It was altitude corrected. Both cars are stock except they both have the Ingalls Stiffy. On the highway (short bursts.. nothing overly illegal
) the 05 pulls on the 06 slightly. Maybe a bumper length (2 feet at the most).Both cars drive the same to me, except in the 06 Im banging through the gears faster.
Oh, I also didnt mention the cars' mileage at the time of dyno... nor the amb temp.
It was a calm 64 degrees in the shop and the 05 had 2200mi and the 06 had 2400mi. Both had their oil changed right about 1500 (more like 1700 for the 06 cause my brother was slacking..).
It was a calm 64 degrees in the shop and the 05 had 2200mi and the 06 had 2400mi. Both had their oil changed right about 1500 (more like 1700 for the 06 cause my brother was slacking..).
Originally Posted by TrinaBabe
After that dyno comparison I should trade in mine for an 06 
I need that MiVEC to give me the ultimate advantage
I need that MiVEC to give me the ultimate advantage
Its both the MIVEC and the turbo.
However, I think trading in your 2005 for a 2006 is just plain ridiculous. Its fact you WILL LOSE at least $3-5k in doing the deal. Trading in or selling your (for example) stock 2005, you will lose money. Then buy a new 2006 and pay taxes on it AGAIN... with all that money you can do a stroker, turbo upgrade, etc.
Ill keep my 2005 Thanks. The only way Id get a 2006 is if my car was totalled or stolen!
However, I think trading in your 2005 for a 2006 is just plain ridiculous. Its fact you WILL LOSE at least $3-5k in doing the deal. Trading in or selling your (for example) stock 2005, you will lose money. Then buy a new 2006 and pay taxes on it AGAIN... with all that money you can do a stroker, turbo upgrade, etc.
Ill keep my 2005 Thanks. The only way Id get a 2006 is if my car was totalled or stolen!
Originally Posted by anjapower
Seriously one sample in each set....there's way too many variables to draw any real conclusion. Fact remains though, as far as the stock turbo is concerned, the IX destroys all other Evos.
Originally Posted by TrinaBabe
After that dyno comparison I should trade in mine for an 06
I need that MiVEC to give me the ultimate advantage
I need that MiVEC to give me the ultimate advantage
I even posted in a thread like this earlier, saying almost all the gains are from the 9 turbo. The
engineers themselves said in Best Motoring that the turbo has a larger diffuser and revised design, which supposedly causes quicker spool. They also said MIVEC was added to increase fuel efficiency and improve emissions.
Ah, I did forget to mention, the 06 did have a little better midrange power/torque, but not much.
Definately a stupid move to trade in an 05 for an 06. Unless you have a buddy that will take it off your hands, free and clear.
Personally, I dont like the front end look of the 9. The bumper looks good in general, but the little oval thingies dont look good to me. I thought about buying a 9 bumper and shaving those off.
Definately a stupid move to trade in an 05 for an 06. Unless you have a buddy that will take it off your hands, free and clear.
Personally, I dont like the front end look of the 9. The bumper looks good in general, but the little oval thingies dont look good to me. I thought about buying a 9 bumper and shaving those off.
I think also the Evo 9's ECU has a bit more to work with in terms of tuning (high resolution maps) or at least I remembered Al talking about. And I believe the actual block has more coolant passages so there is more knock resistance.
Originally Posted by fuzzychi
I think also the Evo 9's ECU has a bit more to work with in terms of tuning (high resolution maps) or at least I remembered Al talking about. And I believe the actual block has more coolant passages so there is more knock resistance.
Just the ability to read higher airflow values in the base maping. More resolution would mean that the load and rpm blocks would increase but not the end set of parameters. Meaning that if the rpm scale started at 0 and ended at 7500 with 10 rpm sites it would be a base scale. If it had more resolution they would still end and begin with the same values but, they would have more that 10 blocks of rpm sites.
The block also does not have any revised or reconfigured coolant passages. The head passages were made a bit more unrestrictive to allow the coolant to flow with less restriction. There by not allowing the heat to soak into the head and surounding areas.
http://media.mitsubishicars.com/deta...60523&mime=ASC
The Lancer Evolution 's 4G63 engine is also fed intercooled air by an updated turbocharger that is more responsive than previous designs, achieving 5 percent faster boost. The shape of the TD05HR-16G6C-10.5T turbocharger's compressor cover has been enhanced to optimize responsiveness and durability. The result is more torque in the 1800-5000 rpm range, as well as higher output from the peak output speed of 6500 rpm all the way to the 7000 rpm limit. The turbocharger's wastegate valve is now more circular in shape, and lighter in weight. Turbo boost is 139kPA (20psi) at 3500 rpm and 111 kPA (16 psi) at 6500 rpm. The 2.0-liter power plant generates class-leading torque of 289 lb-ft at 3500 rpm, and 286 horsepower at 6500 rpm.
Several mechanical revisions help the Lancer Evolution attain its level of performance and improve durability. The use of MIVEC system on the engine necessitated a revised cylinder head casting. The casting's cooling passages have been revised for improved durability and the tempering process was also improved. The cylinder head uses longer-reach sparkplugs that help control combustion chamber temperatures. A five-layer metal head gasket design with revised coolant passage holes replaces the three-layer metal unit to better withstand the engine's elevated, forced induction fed cylinder pressures. The pistons in the Lancer Evolution are made of a stronger alloy and are sealed to the cylinder wall using a more efficient two-piece ring package, replacing the previous three-piece ringset. This revised ring arrangement helps reduce the engine's oil consumption by 10 percent. A new bell housing cover made of a vibration dampening steel was employed to help reduce exterior noise. A new design cast magnesium valve cover highlighting the engine's MIVEC feature is also new for 2006. A revised fuel pump with 7 percent higher capacity also appears in the Lancer Evolution along with a redesigned muffler that enhances the exhaust note at low to mid-range engine speeds.
Several mechanical revisions help the Lancer Evolution attain its level of performance and improve durability. The use of MIVEC system on the engine necessitated a revised cylinder head casting. The casting's cooling passages have been revised for improved durability and the tempering process was also improved. The cylinder head uses longer-reach sparkplugs that help control combustion chamber temperatures. A five-layer metal head gasket design with revised coolant passage holes replaces the three-layer metal unit to better withstand the engine's elevated, forced induction fed cylinder pressures. The pistons in the Lancer Evolution are made of a stronger alloy and are sealed to the cylinder wall using a more efficient two-piece ring package, replacing the previous three-piece ringset. This revised ring arrangement helps reduce the engine's oil consumption by 10 percent. A new bell housing cover made of a vibration dampening steel was employed to help reduce exterior noise. A new design cast magnesium valve cover highlighting the engine's MIVEC feature is also new for 2006. A revised fuel pump with 7 percent higher capacity also appears in the Lancer Evolution along with a redesigned muffler that enhances the exhaust note at low to mid-range engine speeds.
Originally Posted by adx
Way up here in Colorado, my brother and I dyno'd both our Evos to determine if there was a big difference. There has been many claims, our 05 pulls harder than our 06 MR. Driving or riding shotgun. I personally dont feel a difference but we shall let the dyno tell us the truth. Unfortunately, I cant post up the dyno sheets... no scanner.
First up was the 06 MR. With a peak of 17.5 psi, it blasted out a 253whp - 254wtq. Ran it 3 times to make sure it was consistent and each time it posted within 2whp and 1wtq.
Next the 05. With a peak of 18.4 psi, it spun the rollers to a 251whp - 268wtq. Again, ran 3 times for consistentcy.
Both runs on a SuperFlow AWD dyno. It was altitude corrected. Both cars are stock except they both have the Ingalls Stiffy. On the highway (short bursts.. nothing overly illegal) the 05 pulls on the 06 slightly. Maybe a bumper length (2 feet at the most).
Both cars drive the same to me, except in the 06 Im banging through the gears faster.
First up was the 06 MR. With a peak of 17.5 psi, it blasted out a 253whp - 254wtq. Ran it 3 times to make sure it was consistent and each time it posted within 2whp and 1wtq.
Next the 05. With a peak of 18.4 psi, it spun the rollers to a 251whp - 268wtq. Again, ran 3 times for consistentcy.
Both runs on a SuperFlow AWD dyno. It was altitude corrected. Both cars are stock except they both have the Ingalls Stiffy. On the highway (short bursts.. nothing overly illegal
) the 05 pulls on the 06 slightly. Maybe a bumper length (2 feet at the most).Both cars drive the same to me, except in the 06 Im banging through the gears faster.
You peak should be around 20psi.