I read and heard a couple times that the U.S. spec Lancer would be twin turbo. I dismissed it as uninformed rumor. But an associate who of mine who is an MMSA employee (not a dealer employee) recently told me the same thing; twin turbo. I asked if they were going to be sequential or parallel and he didn't know, but said the h.p. rating is supposed to be 257, release is scheduled for 1st quarter of 2003, and the Brembo brakes made the cut. More fire for the rumor-mill!

 

ummmm, no. Its going to be single turbo. That mmsa employee didn't know what he was talking about.

 

You may be right, but I've had a working relationship with this individual for 5 years and he has never misinformed me before. He's not a janitor or a mail clerk, but works in the Parts and Service. If you have official MMSA documentation to the contrary I'd love to see it

 

as would we about this twin turbo.
The JDM and Euro spec are single WTF would a twin turbo with 257hp accomplish?

 

Here are some plausible, if speculative, explainations:

1.It could facillitate two small intercoolers in the fenders in front of the wheel wells that would allow a front bumper that would pass U.S. crash tests.
2.It could be a sequential set up that has a small quick-spool turbo that gives the motor more the low-end torque American buyers want with another larger turbo that takes longer to spool up but gives the top end power needed to meet performance (and marketing) targets. Consider the possibility that all the catylitic converters neccessary to pass CA emissions (all U.S. spec Mitsus are built to CA emissions standards) might restrict boost spoolup on the single large turbo of the JDM/European models causing undesirable boost lag.
3.Speaking of catylitic converters, they need heat to light off. Current U.S. emmissions regulations specify a short warmup period after a cold start before the converters must be "converting." A turbo before the converter absorbs some of the exhaust heat in a cold start and causes a delay in light off. A larger turbo absorbs more heat and delays light off more. Not good when the EPA/CARB butt sniffers are expecting full converter function within 2 minutes of start up. If you put a converter in front of a large, high-boost turbo you restrict exhaust flow and cause boost lag again. Putting two small converters in front of or down-stream of (or both) two modest size turbos is a potential solution to the competing demands of high power and quick catylist light off.
4.Since it looks like at least a year until the EVO gets here its probable the EVO VIII will be out world wide. Maybe there will be twin turbos for everyone? There are only a few people who really know for sure and they're not talking.
5.My guy doesn't really have a friggin clue what he's talking about is a possibility too. But he is a more reliable source to me than some stranger on the internet.

There is not an emmissions legal turbocharged car in this market that puts out the kind of h.p./liter that Mitsubishi is attempting to acheive. If it was as simple as doing here exactly what they are already doing in Japan and Europe you could stroll down to your dealer and take delivery of one today. Getting the Evolution to clear California emissions with anything close to the performance we expect is going to take some unique solutions. Don't dismiss twin turbo's out of hand based on what the car has elsewhere.

 

Very nice reasoning....

I don't know if it's anywhere near true though...

Hooby

 

I could really care less if it has 1 turbo or 4, just as long as it is significantly quicker than the WRX!

 

Nice write up Gary though wouldn't all that extra R&D delay the USDM E7's launch even more? Does Mitsu have this setup somewhere else in the world so that they can just cookie cut this setup from a template? Only time will tell I suppose.

 

I can't imagine that its going to be any more than one turbo. Thats WAAAAAY too much R&D. I mean, its absolutely ludicrous. The possibility simply doesn't exist. That would be like it coming with 6 wheels. Mitsubishi has never made a twin turbo 4g63t, and never will. Its just not gonna happen. THe only twin turbo that mitsu has is the GTO/3kgt, but that car just has two turbos because its a v6, and its easier to do than single turbo because v6s have two cylinder banks. If mitsu had a problem like that in giving us the Evo, they probably just wouldn't give it to us. Its not like they have a problem selling them or anything, and need the US market. It would make no sense at all for mitsu to change the engine that drastically. Its absolutely laughable to me that mitsubishi would do something like that. They would have no experience doing it, not to mention they would probably have come out with a prototype of that kind of engine by now. A setup like that would take MASSIVE modification of the engine bay, not to mention the engine itself. It would require so many different parts, and the setup would be so convoluted that the engine would be barely recognizable as a 4g63t. Seriously, its like this conversation we've been having over at speedoptions.com about twin turbocharging a gsx. check it out if you want. Its just not plausible.

 

The idea of a 278 h.p. turbocharged AWD mirage is ludicrous in its own right. It demanded tremendous R&D and modifications of the existing platform. Somehow Mitsbuishi made that happen.

Outside the plumbing compications (which I grant are significant, especially with a parallel set up), it wouldn't neccesarilly be that difficult to develop a twin turbo model. Nothing inside the motor needs changed.

The "regular" Lancer comes with an entirely different engine than you'll find in any JDM or European model. Specifically designed for our driving environment and emissions standards. There is precident for developing a specific powertrain for our market.

 

It is strange..I keep hearing tt rumors also. I remember reading several posts made by people that have claimed being told the same thing by Mitsubishi reps.

 

I can see they'll also have to change the exhaust manifold, wiring harness, ECU and sensors...on top of that, more parts means more costs = higher sticker price. It would make it even harder to keep it under $30K.

However, if you look at it, almost every overseas Lancer have a "superior" engine compared to the 4G64 in the US Lancer. We don't have MIVEC and GDI in US.

Keep the discussion going...

 

I think your friend probably meant that there would be twin intercoolers, i.e. side mounted twin intercoolers, in order to pass US's pointless 5 mph front bumper crash test. Also the Evo has a single twin scroll turbocharger, which many people mistakenly call a twin turbo. Also, as a few others have already pointed out, the R&D cost would be through the roof for a twin turbo setup on the US Evo.

Emissions shouldn't be much of a problem for Mitsubishi, since the official UK Evo VII is putting out either 280 or 300 HP, depending on which version you get. And from what I understand, the UK has emission standards that are almost as strict as California's emission standards. Or it could be more strict, I dunno It's up there though.

 

I think its a given they're going to have to change the wiring harness, ECU and sensors anyway. I don't know what Evolution sales volume has been over the past 5 years but I suspect they can sell as many in the U.S. as in the rest of the world. If they can double volume, they should be able to make whatever changes are neccesary to certify the car here and still turn a profit while selling at the same price. (i.e. if they can pay for R&D on volume of 5000 a year right now without selling in the U.S., Why can't they pay for R&D for a U.S. specific model with an additional volume of 5000 units a year in the U.S?) There will be a lot more carry-over from the existing Evo VII than new stuff; its not a clean-sheet design like they had for the JDM/Euro Model

Quote:

However, if you look at it, almost every overseas Lancer have a "superior" engine compared to the 4G64 in the US Lancer. We don't have MIVEC and GDI in US.

Keep the discussion going...

I don't claim a twin turbo to be a better set up. What do all the fastest RX-7 drivers do? Chuck the cumbersome sequential turbo set up for a monsterous single turbo. (Actually the ones with really deep pockets get a turbo 3 rotor engine from Peter Farrell Supercars but thats besides the point ). I'm speculating that twin turbos may be the easiest or only way to acheive performance goals while still complying with the difficult CARB emmisions standards.

We don't get GDI here becuase our gasoline formulations are not compatible with the high-pressur fuel injectors..... Too much sulfer I think is the problem. I don't know why we don't get MIVEC here. A 1.6 MIVEC Mirage Cyborg Coupe would have been a nice counterpunch to the Civic Si.

 

I think RaX is right about the twin scroll thing. People have been making that mistake for a while now. I still don't believe they would do a twin turbo set up though. Twin intercoolers maybe, but almost certainly not twin turbo.