AMS Tests EVO X Cams
#1
Former Sponsor
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Arlington Heights, IL
Posts: 793
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AMS Tests EVO X Cams
Well I just took some measurments on the stock X cams. As most of you know these are direct acting cam on bucket design.
Intake Lift: .382" or 9.7mm
Exhaust Lift: .339" or 8.6mm
Looks like the exhaust cam lift curve is following the trend of the exhaust ports on the head, smaller lift and duration compared to the intake. I'll compare it to stock VIII cams and i'll discuss some differences Monday but for now looks like the I/E ratio is down compared to the evo VIII/IX.
Intake Lift: .382" or 9.7mm
Exhaust Lift: .339" or 8.6mm
Looks like the exhaust cam lift curve is following the trend of the exhaust ports on the head, smaller lift and duration compared to the intake. I'll compare it to stock VIII cams and i'll discuss some differences Monday but for now looks like the I/E ratio is down compared to the evo VIII/IX.
#2
Well, a lot of tests that I have read have actually shown larger gains from having a larger intake to exhaust valve diameter ratio, but perhaps with the cams being designed around this as well shows that although the head may be perfectly designed for big power, the cams are too conservative on the exhaust side to make big power. The car sure seems to be making beastly numbers, though. More power mod for mod than the 9, why do you think that is?
#6
^ who cares? Something as simple as an exhaust system can be reason to deny warranty work. I had a clutch replacement on my sti because the stock unit was slipping, and they wouldn't cover it because the car had an exhaust, and they claimed that the extra power caused the failure. The magnuson moss warranty act should've helped me get coverage, but dealerships are all corrupt. Bastards...
#7
Newbie
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
^ who cares? Something as simple as an exhaust system can be reason to deny warranty work. I had a clutch replacement on my sti because the stock unit was slipping, and they wouldn't cover it because the car had an exhaust, and they claimed that the extra power caused the failure. The magnuson moss warranty act should've helped me get coverage, but dealerships are all corrupt. Bastards...
Trending Topics
#9
Account Disabled
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 2,335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
^ who cares? Something as simple as an exhaust system can be reason to deny warranty work. I had a clutch replacement on my sti because the stock unit was slipping, and they wouldn't cover it because the car had an exhaust, and they claimed that the extra power caused the failure. The magnuson moss warranty act should've helped me get coverage, but dealerships are all corrupt. Bastards...
#10
Evolved Member
iTrader: (18)
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 1,063
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you're truly worried about your warranty, then you probably shouldn't mod your car. Or at the least like someone else said, get on a first name basis with the service people. Mitsubishi is notorious for voiding warranties for basically anything.
#11
AMS should we expect big gains with cam upgrades? I know that mivec on both sides will take away a lot of thunder power wise, but it would be nice if we get like 10~15hp and near perfect idle
#12
Evolving Member
iTrader: (16)
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: KC
Posts: 355
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Please, someone let me know if I'm wrong, but it seems as if the X makes more power because the starting awhp was lower than the VIII and IX.
From what I've read the X stock awhp is around 215 and I know my IX stock awhp is 259.
So yes when you start at 215 and hit 300 with few mods 85hp is a bigger gain compared to the IX that can make 300 with the same mods but it's gain is only 40hp or so.
From what I've read the X stock awhp is around 215 and I know my IX stock awhp is 259.
So yes when you start at 215 and hit 300 with few mods 85hp is a bigger gain compared to the IX that can make 300 with the same mods but it's gain is only 40hp or so.
#13
Evolved Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Plano, TX
Posts: 1,270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Please, someone let me know if I'm wrong, but it seems as if the X makes more power because the starting awhp was lower than the VIII and IX.
From what I've read the X stock awhp is around 215 and I know my IX stock awhp is 259.
So yes when you start at 215 and hit 300 with few mods 85hp is a bigger gain compared to the IX that can make 300 with the same mods but it's gain is only 40hp or so.
From what I've read the X stock awhp is around 215 and I know my IX stock awhp is 259.
So yes when you start at 215 and hit 300 with few mods 85hp is a bigger gain compared to the IX that can make 300 with the same mods but it's gain is only 40hp or so.
I've noticed that the biggest gains from ALL tuners seem to be leaning out the mixture with intake and boost controller. Each piece of mod from then on (i.e. catback to midpipe to intercooler) seems to net the same increase in whp as other turbo cars.
#14
Evolving Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NEW YORK/GA
Posts: 338
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mod for mod the X is supposed to be making more power. At 22/23 psi from the factory running pig rich and only making 225 to the wheels, I would be very upset to have that much boost for a little over 200 whp.
#15
Evolving Member
iTrader: (16)
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: KC
Posts: 355
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bingo! Mitsu cars run very rich from facorty. My AFR dropped off the sheet on my dyno. Well below 10. I believe AMS said the same about the X origionaly, I just can't find that post at the moment.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Chris@nolimitmotors
Evo 'For Sale' Engine Internals and Drivetrain
400
Jan 26, 2017 08:25 AM