With Mitsubishi claiming 273 foot pounds of torque at 3500 rpms, I don't really see the need to produce a larger engine just to top Subaru's figures. Where exactly is the 4g63 lacking as far as power is concerned? I ask those of you that think we need more displacement, have you ever been behind the wheel of a 4G63T equipped car, or one that's been moderately tuned? I still think it is best to be using a motor that HKS, Apex'i, GReddy, Bozz, and countless other tuners have known for years. The inherent qualties of a smaller higher revving engine is part of what makes these cars so great, look at what Honda did for so many years with less then 2.0 liters, and what Mitsu did with their MIVEC 1.6L. I've heard how SCC has not been so happy with the new Spec V because it doesn't have the same high end capabality that the old SR20DE did. The tuners may overcome this with time, and Mitsu may not have the same issues if they were to produce a larger turbo motor, but it is still something to consider. I hear Subaru is dumping a 3.0L 6 cylinder twin turbo in an STi Legacy. Should have crazy power and cost well over forty grand, and I don't want that either. But I'm sure all the Subie fans will be in here explaining why its better then the EVO too and that Mitsu is too scared to introduced their Galant VR-4, or an uberEVO to counter it. But it doesn't matter either, it all comes down to real world specs and driving what you want to drive.

 

Not gonna be possible BECAUSE...4G64 is not as refined as the 4G63 in the Evo. It's a strong motor, but the evo motor is stronger mainly because the 4G64 was not designed to be such a load bearing motor. It did great in the Galant and some eclipses, some DSMers have taken it and turboed and it's worked great for them. But for now I suggest just putting in the AYC/ACD and putting in a wider and straigther exhaust. It should add a significant amount of power due to the fact that the current USDM Exhaust has more twists and turns than... laguna seca. So anyway, It will be an impressive package: Tried, tested and proven as an extremely reliable engine: 4G63, AYC, ACD and 280+ HP to kick around. And bingo you got a STi beater.
People will choose it over STi because the 2.5 in the STi doesn't have a lot of expirience, the ease of working on a simple inline vs a boxer...etc...

 

Yes, I currently have a 4g63 and it is "moderately" tuned!

I want more. That is why I want a larger discplacement motor... I may end up just having to satisfy my craving by droping a 2.4 in my DSM instead of getting one from the factory

 

The 4G64 does not have the 11 year evolution of the 4G63, but it does have a racing pedigree (not as successful as the 4G63...)
The two years that the 4G64T was used for the Paris Dakar prototype Pajero/Montero proved that the engine could take heavy boost and be reliable.

 

That is very interesting stuff guys.
Now i have a question for all of you who are technically inclined...how easy would it be to drop a 4g64 or 4g64t (if they come tc from the factory, correct me if i'm wrong) into a DSM?
What is the cost of a used 4g64 these days?

 

4g64 unfortunately don't come factory fitted with a T/C.
What some people have done (i think a search will bring up some results) is take the 4g63 DOHC header and popped it on a 4G64 and then used a 4G63 turbo kit
Have fun

 

I see...damn i never thought of that...probably cause it would be a lot less hassle to just get a DSM 4g63T...but the thing that i would hate to run into is Crankwalk...

 

4G64 doesn't get crankwalk.

 

I know that...i meant the DSM (2nd gen eclipse) 4g63T get crankwalk...

 

The engine head isn't the part that walks... Besideds, people would be using the 1G head, as it flows better.

 

Hmm, I was under the impression that the 2G head flowed better. At least it serves as the basis for Extreme Motorsports racing head that they used on their 8 second 1G Talon. Maybe the 1g flows better in stock form, but the 2G is best for heavy porting and modification?

 

I say bring on the 2.4. The 2.5 in the STI isn't hard to mod. That's a myth. They are going to be in the low 12's easy soon if not already and the car has just been out a couple weeks. Evo obviously has the superior chassis/handling, so bring on the 2.4 so we can make more power with less lag.

 

No one in here has mentioned weight... wont the weight distribution on the car be different with the larger engine? I heard that's one of the problems with the STi. They were in a hurry to make it so they stuck the bigger engine in but didnt change anything about the suspension (still made for the 2.0). I would think sticking a bigger engine will make the evo a lot like the STi actually.....very powerful but not as balanced and precise.

 

well here is alil info on you as far as kits avalible for this engine http://www.magnusmotorsports.com/cat...ne-compare.htm stage 3 looks like it will work out the best for most crazy people like me

 

The only real complaint I have about my new EVO is the lack of torque on the bottom end. The turbo lag is really bad and the increase in displacment to 2.4l would help to correct this problem. There is no disadvantage to increasing the displacement other than slightly worse fuel economy and maybe production costs. I vote a resounding YES to increase the displacment to 2.4l...