to me it seams like a marketing flop they wouldn't even do. Of all the cars to make hybrid-the Evo? Maybe a base Lancer. People in the market for Evo's dont care about gas mileage, so why invest in a market that's not interested in it? That kind of technology and market is for commuters. Also, they just developed the 4B11, and since they used the 4g63 for 15+ years, i dont see them using 4B11's for only 4 years.

 

I mostly agree with you ikt, except the plant that produced the 4b11 blocks closed a few months ago. I'm sure they'll have to find another plant (if they haven't already), but it does raise concern. I love the 4B11, it's such a great block.

 

+1

 

lolol closest thing to a production one on the market anyway.. 3 years is a long time though

 

I honestly don't believe will do this. I think it's going to be a concept car at the most and not see production. I think the 4b11 has many more years ahead of it. But that's just me... obviously it's 's call.

 

i think there could definitely be some tweaks to make it look a little better...

 

Yes the next Gen Evolution could use some tweeks from the engineering Gods across the pond. Mainly the TC-SST trans. Don't get me wrong, now, I love my MR with the TC-SST, but I am limited how far I can build the car's power due to the hp/tq limitations of the TC-SST. Bummer

 

I recommend Mitsu to change the back of the Evo X. First time I saw the back of the X my heart sank a bit

 

Manufacturers aren't going to see much reason to beef up the SST unless they're beefing up the stock power. Over-engineering is expensive.

You gotta wonder what sort of drugs they were on when designing the 4G63, though; what sort of engineering team designs a motor in the 1980s that'll take 600HP+?

 

4G63 was built to be used for rally since its debut back in 1979 Tokyo auto show. If you are familiar with rally scene back in mid 70s to mid 80s, and 'group 5' and 'group B', then you will understand why the engine is made to be able to take 600+ hp.

 

i dont know.... I'm not sure about that. The first 4G63T was debut in 1988 in the galant VR4 and the Eterna ZR4. what we using today in the EVo 0 -9 .
The 4G63/ Mitsubishi/ never been a grupe B car , as im aware of. Mostly because the Grupe B category was canceled in 1986 . So there wasnt Grupe B car runing in rally from 1987.
Or im missing something here.
sorry i forgot , i dont know any grupe 5 Mitsubishi car running in rally. Mostly because if im also right, those cars are a turing car category.

 

You might talking about the famous Mitsubishi Lancer 1600GSR which is won several rally vs the Porsche and others. But that wasnt the 4G63. Wasnt even turbo charged.
The Lancer EX 2000 had a 4G63 , but even then the rally car version didn't exceeded the 300 hp mark.

I think if im right even a street version was aroud 180 hp. ans 130 mph top speed. But i can be wrong. SO you can prove me wrong with some data her.
I'm getting old.

 

Yeah you are right, I was trying to refer to the 4G63 in the Lancer EX 2000. I know it was just SOHC back then (but still had turbo) and was in production like mid 80's, but the engine itself debuted back in 1979. I'm not sure if they really had group 5 in mind when they were designing it but I do know that rallying was one of priorities when designing the engine. Then came the group B in 1982, and by 1985 the cars in the category are making 600hp.

I don't know if the initial 4G63 were capable of withstanding 600hp but if it did, I can only think of what I have suggested as the only possibility of why the engine being so strong. If they did not, then I guess you can just say the engine evolved, perhaps due to large use in motorsports application towards later years and decided that it needed to be reinforced further for reliability. The head and internals definately changed a ton, even the turbos attached to it evolved throughout its years and I am almost certain that the production internals would not have held 600hp stock especially back in the 80's. As for block, I don't know how much technology is needed since its just a big chamber for explosions. Just make the walls thick and it automatically becomes more reliable, although heavier.

 

Thanks

yes the 4G63T is evolved to be a monster engine for the 4 cyl. 2l. configuration.

I wouldnt have any issue if they were keep that and just let it evolving more

But they decided to go a new design the 4B11T. Why i dont know.
Only thing i can tell you so far , the 4B11T is a great engine as it is. And if you make a comparison the first 4G63T vs the first 4B11T... Not even a fair talk. For multiple reasons.
Not to mention if they keep the 4B11T running and evolving for a next 20 + years...

I have to say this to make sure everybody gets it. I LOVE ALL EVOS. from 0-X
Each they own, and ALL can be fast as ANY of them. Only difference is the time and money You put in them. Some needs more some doesn't. But form a certain level they equal out.

 

I don't even know why people challenge 4B11 anymore, I don't have the link with me but Mitsubishi engineers has proved why 4B11 would be superior engine in every little details. The engine is value packed since so much money is saved from sharing the design as the 'world engine' and involved expertise from many companies and their engineers for the design, then Mitsubishi packaged it to evo standards. The head design is no contest, 4B11>>>>4G63. For block, as long as it can hold all the power it will ever produce, the lighter the better right? I mean its not like 4G63 is forged iron and 4B11 is made up of aluminum foil you find in your kitchen...

I just hope car manufacturers consider all possible angles before going all out alternative fuel, especially batteries, for any cars. I wonder how all the disposition and recycling of the batteries in the future when the cars expire? And refurbishing of all produced batteries including replacement batteries when they become obsolete due to another power alternative?