"how many evos will be running 91 octane?"

good point. people have gone out of their way to get this car...so you can go out of the way to get 93 octane.

most people who own this car will be enthusiasts. and we're ****.

 

Are all the USDM Evo 8's Cali emmisions legal, or are some just Fed legal?

hmmmmm.....

 

Questions for discussion:

1. Is it possible that CA Evos' are different than the rest of the US Evos? I know, that in the '80s and '90s, VW shipped differently tuned cars to CA that made about 5% less power than the rest of the US/Canada cars. I am not sure if this is still the case with VW, but is it possible that this is a case with CA Evos? Could potentially explain the SCC Evo and CA comparison... Shiv, have you dynoed any non-CA Evos, just out of curiosity?

2. Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that there is a huge difference between how DynoDynamics (Shiv's) and a DynoJet (others) work? Does DynoJet not have a constant weight that it has to spin up and the DynoDynamics has a more constant and controllable resistnce? More resistnace from the DD should yield lower numbers but simulate more realistic driving strains on the engine. Once you get the DynoJet's rollers going, it is not too tough to keep them spinning with a high boost car. Again, correct me if I am wrong.

 

If im not mistaken, GSR's and Type R's were in production before California switched to 91 octane.

 

xtnct-
As to your first question...
I know Toyota does this currently too. If you buy a car, you will notice that the HP rating on it will mention a lowernumber once equiped with California Emmission stuff. However, there is nothing like this on the Mitsubishi website about a lower HP rating for California Evos. It is to the best of my knowledge that all Evos are the same, however I could be wrong.

 

dunno dude
I don't live in cali.

 

I think Mazda did it too.

 

Yes it was October or December of 2001. California and because California supplies 90% of Navada Gas, Navada too.

California is the by far the largest car maket in the US.

Erik

 

Shiv do the world a favor and leave and come back to the dark side of the force.

In regards to everyone on this forum seems like there are some people who have there stuff together and can grasp what shiv attempting to commuinicate to you guys. The SCC car looks like a Ringer. What does this mean? Not much other then that fact that it is one of the most blindingly obvious marketing scams that has been brought to attention from a motor co in recent times. Arent any of you bothered that the literature that you guys ate up and drooled over isnt the truth of what is sitting in your garages now? I personaly would be some what irriated on ethics alone.


For the guy who commented on the drag strip having less varaibles then a dyno.. This is very true when your dragging KIA's, when you start getting a little faster this is nothing but a pile of *fill in blank here with favorite flavor of animal manure*

For the guy who couldnt grasp the concept that shivs dyno doesnt ADD any correction off the bat, and that most other dyno's do add some correction to the numbers that are DISPLAYED. Dude its simple
Shivs dyno = No correction+conservitive settings= lower WHP figures
others = Builtin correction figures (15% for dynojet) + f00fed settings to make the tuners look better = HIGHER WHP #'s

I personaly think the latter aproach is bunk, as people think that WHOAA!!! my SRT4 IS L33torz!!! its puttin out like 300 whorsepower at teh crakN!!! IM FAST0rz!!!!!

um and yes i am a vishnu customer who couldnt be happier with my 500+ horsepower WRX (stock block and tranny to boot)

Word to the wise Shiv and Bret and everyone from vishnu are an incredible resource to any automotive community. Treat them with respect and they will be more then happy to share any and all info they have in regards to any questions that you may have. Just dont ask them to tell you about there top secret products.

And for the record the EVO is one helluva machine wish my WRX could handle like your guys cars. As soon as i finish my book and a few other projects im thinking im gonna finish up my WRX (you can plan on seeing and hearing from me soon shiv) and possibly picking up an evo for a commuter.

yes i did read all 20 damn pages so i could formulate this hopefully helpful message.

 

Here's the rocket science that some here asked...

 

That table only addresses octane. It does not address specific gravity. Most pump fuels have a specific gravity of around 0.76. 76's web page indicates that their 100 octane fuel has a specific gravity of 0.744. The addition of the 100 octane fuel's lower specific gravity would have meant that the car was running richer than it would have if they had just put 93 octane fuel into the tank.

As well, if they didn't drain the tank and precisely mix the fuel, who knows what they ended up with. It is very hard to guage the amount of fuel that is left in a gas tank.

 

You mean lean out the a/f ratio.

 

On an EFI car, the specific gravity does not have a huge effect on the car.

 

I don't know what you are replying to, but I'll assume it is me.

No, a lower specific gravity fuel will flow more fuel through an injector at a given pulsewidth than a higher specific gravity fuel. That means that the car will run richer in open loop mode.

I see this every time I put 117 octane VP C16 race fuel (0.73 SG) into my car. I have to lean the car out at least 13 to 14% to get it running right as compared to 93 octane pump gas.

So it is possible that the addition of the 100 octane fuel did make the car run richer than it would have on straight 93 octane fuel. So the knock went away as compared to the 91 octane, but running richer means that you loose power. There was a net gain, but perhaps it would have gained more on straight 93 octane pump instead of a fuel concoction.

 

Ok trying to understand this...

you have an injector and it only lets a set amount of fuel out per given time, correct?
So if you want more fuel, you increase the pulse width.