Lancer Evolution X News, Info, Pics, etc... | [ALL THREADS MERGED]
Account Disabled
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
From: NJ
It's ok if they Revamp the Motor as long as they make it better. LOOK at Vettes going from the LT1 to the LS1, good move.
Know what I think would be kewl? A 5G63. Same bore, same stroke, just an extra cylinder, that would be the **** and what I would do.
Know what I think would be kewl? A 5G63. Same bore, same stroke, just an extra cylinder, that would be the **** and what I would do.
Every Honda racer was scared sh_tless when they started putting K series in cars. Everyone was saying it was the end of modifying Hondas. Now the K series is the pinacle of Honda motors. Plus not to mention what GM has done with the Ecotec.
If they make a bad *** alluminum sleeved block with a good deck, head gasket, and an amazing cylinder head, it won't take us long to ring 1000+ hp out of it. As a racer and car builder, I welcome the opportunity to start with a new and modern design. Mitsubishi has to race these motors, and that will be kept in mind when they are designed and built, you can take that to the bank.
If they make a bad *** alluminum sleeved block with a good deck, head gasket, and an amazing cylinder head, it won't take us long to ring 1000+ hp out of it. As a racer and car builder, I welcome the opportunity to start with a new and modern design. Mitsubishi has to race these motors, and that will be kept in mind when they are designed and built, you can take that to the bank.
Evolved Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 4,312
Likes: 3
From: Birmingham, AL
Originally Posted by nj1266
If the 4g63 engine will not be in the EVO X, then I really doubt that the replacement will be as good ... If the new 2.0 engine is all aluminum will it be as strong as a steel block? If the new engine is open deck, then there is no way in hell it can handle as much extra boost as the 4g63... With the SR20 you can slap an aftermarket turbo kit and put down 400 whp on stock internals and rev to 7800 rpm. It was that good.
In 2003 Nissan introduced the QR25DE in the Spec V. It SUCKED.
In 2003 Nissan introduced the QR25DE in the Spec V. It SUCKED.
Evolving Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
From: Australia
Mitsubishi has a vast amount of experience with the 4G63 and from all reports I have seen the new engine will still be a 2L 4 cylinder so why can't they take everything (or most things) they have learned from the 4G63 and apply it to the new engine? The 4G63 was a decent engine when it was released anyway, ask the DSM guys. I know the basics of the 4G63 were around slightly before the DSMs when they were still SOHC and in things like the Lancer 2000EX and Starion and they were ok in those cars too when they were released. It wasn't as good as the current engine but it was still ok so why should we expect anything less of the new engine? If it is anything like the current engine it will be specific to the Evo, or whatever their performance car is, as well so it will be built properly to suit that application.
About the direct injection: if they do go with that then it shouldn't be too much of a problem for Mitsubishi since they have had gasoline direct injection since the early 90's and I think they invented it or at least patented a version of it. They also have had at least one 4 cylinder turbo with direct injection so they should have some experience there too.
About the direct injection: if they do go with that then it shouldn't be too much of a problem for Mitsubishi since they have had gasoline direct injection since the early 90's and I think they invented it or at least patented a version of it. They also have had at least one 4 cylinder turbo with direct injection so they should have some experience there too.
Evolving Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
From: Pittsburgh, PA
I think you also have to look at the kind of power Mitsu is looking to make stock on this car. Certainly that must be taken into account as these car will be sold with a factory backed warranty. Mitsu never felt comfortable enough to sell and cover the current model at these power levels (300-400 bhp) in the USA. So they must have a lot of faith in the new design.
Porsche is said to use Variable vanes on there new Turbo 911's so, I suppose that could give a flatter torque curve. Add in the Mivec and I'd say that we would be Titanium, wich is better than golden.
Originally Posted by MitsuEvoIIX
Looks nice but its just so different...dont know if its for me. Looks too big i dunno maybe ill start to like it more when i see it in person
And good job on the yellow I like it....I cant go bvack to driving a car thats not yellow lol.
Originally Posted by nj1266
If the 4g63 engine will not be in the EVO X, then I really doubt that the replacement will be as good. The 4g63 has been in production for 17 years and it has been perfected over the years. Any engine replacing it will have growing pains. If the new 2.0 engine is all aluminum will it be as strong as a steel block? If the new engine is open deck, then there is no way in hell it can handle as much extra boost as the 4g63.
Just as an anecdote I will share the story of the SR20DE and the QR25DE. Nissan used the indestructible SR20DE from 1989 to 2002 here and in Japan. In Japan it was turbo charged in the Silvia, in the US it was NA. With the SR20 you can slap an aftermarket turbo kit and put down 400 whp on stock internals and rev to 7800 rpm. It was that good.
In 2003 Nissan introduced the QR25DE in the Spec V. It SUCKED. It does not rev beyond 6100 rpm, it has an open deck design so it cannot handle beyond 6 psi of boost, and it blows headgaskets on the track under htolapping/racing conditions.
We had both the SR20 and the QR25 and there is no comparison between the two. Even though it is an old design the SR20 is head and shoulders better than the QR.
I really hope for Mitsu's sake that the new 2.0 is better than the 4g63, but I have serious doubts that it will be. That is why I will get a 2007 IX and wait until the new engine gets some years under its belt.
Just as an anecdote I will share the story of the SR20DE and the QR25DE. Nissan used the indestructible SR20DE from 1989 to 2002 here and in Japan. In Japan it was turbo charged in the Silvia, in the US it was NA. With the SR20 you can slap an aftermarket turbo kit and put down 400 whp on stock internals and rev to 7800 rpm. It was that good.
In 2003 Nissan introduced the QR25DE in the Spec V. It SUCKED. It does not rev beyond 6100 rpm, it has an open deck design so it cannot handle beyond 6 psi of boost, and it blows headgaskets on the track under htolapping/racing conditions.
We had both the SR20 and the QR25 and there is no comparison between the two. Even though it is an old design the SR20 is head and shoulders better than the QR.
I really hope for Mitsu's sake that the new 2.0 is better than the 4g63, but I have serious doubts that it will be. That is why I will get a 2007 IX and wait until the new engine gets some years under its belt.
Now Im inclind to agree with you but there are a few things to take into consideration.First and formost yeah the 4g63 is an amazing engineand its been around forever there isnt any argument there, but how long has this new engine been in development? Could have been years.
Also as for the aluminum block being able to hold the boost the the 4g63, now mitsu has some very smart and experienced engineers and I would hope they would take that into consideration and not use the aluminum unless it was able to.
Mitsu knows how much this car means to their future success, it is their flag ship. And I really dont think theyd flush it down the drain by putting a new engine in and not thinking about all the stuff that really does matter for this type of car.
Last edited by wreckless969; Nov 14, 2005 at 09:25 PM.
Evolving Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
From: Pittsburgh, PA
Recently I read about a new kind of turbo that Porsche has developed. They call it VTG (variable turbine geometry). This new kind of turbo can give power throughout the RPM range. Is it possible this is how Mitsu will get the even power band that they have been talking about?
There can be only one reason the engine bay of the X was covered... There is something in there they don't want us to know about yet.
There can be only one reason the engine bay of the X was covered... There is something in there they don't want us to know about yet.
I think that sticker price is going to be the limiting factor. We're still talking about a $30-35K car here. I don't see Mitsu raising the price on the Evo a lot. That will limit the amount of new technology that will go into this car. Plus their HP goal is only like 350HP. If you applied VTG, the highest level of MIVEC (like iVTEC), direct gas injection, etc. We would be talking about a supercar. Like a Skyline. Like 500HP. And a $60K+ price tag.
Evolved Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 4,312
Likes: 3
From: Birmingham, AL
But it is still a 4cyl. It is still based on the economy car chassis. It will still be cheaper for Mitsubishi to build it, then for Nissan to build a 6cyl twin turbo VQ based FM platformed Skyline. So no 60K pricetag.
The Evo has very little in common with the regular Lancer. The dash, wiper, and windows are probably interchangeable. The entire drivetrain, suspension, subframes, sheetmetal, brakes, wheels, etc are all Evo unique. Even the wheelbase is different. The Unibody is different as well to accomodate the AWD drivetrain and is rally reinforcements.
More info about VTG can be found here. http://www.turbos.bwauto.com/en/products/vtg.asp It is also interesting to find out that the 1.3 liter Opel Astra is using VTG too.
Evolved Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 4,312
Likes: 3
From: Birmingham, AL
The unibody is not different. They start life the same, and then they come in and weld in the reinforcements and subframes, all those other differences are easy when done in a factory rolling down an assembly line. Those differences don't add up to much in factory costs, all the additional hardware is what of course makes an Evo cost more then a Lancer, but Mitsubishi is not going to allow costs to balloon up putting the car at Skyline levels.
No way.
No way.