i have the 5MT and got mine to 130 and it was still pullin haven't been able to fully find out max speed.

 

well since the lancers have a limit at 6000 rpm, that meens ud need to get a ECU chip to change it to 6500?

i wouldnt kno, im only 16, and just learning everything. i love cars though.

and where would u get a good ECU chip?--------- wen they come out

 

Wrongo.

ECU chips won't change the ECU like that. Only a reflash (altering the stock programming) will handle changing the rev limiter. Works is working on a flash, but it will of course take a while for them to crack all the programming.

 

you guys forget, with this third gen CVT in there, its got a brain bigger (CPU/ECU) then the regular engine / emissions control.

I am will to bet that there will be alot of problems with the engine management systems in the future for the CVT Lancer, I am sure there are are over rides that will prevent certain flash maps.

which sucks. cause if you could, then crushing cars in drags ummmm on a dyno * legal talk

 

Dunno. I think that, once the Evo comes out, and they figure out how to flash it, it won't be much of a leap to flash the other 4B11 Lancers.

 

I have been up to 120 mph and held it for 2 hours.
It climbed to 5k rpms and then dropped to 4000 on the dot and held there.
The RPM at that range changed from 4000 to 4500 rpms.

Under sport mode that is.

 

CVT = not for racing/power. That tranny computer is more than likely going to seriously limit any kind of power mods. High torque is bad juju for the belt.

 

Don't be so sure. It's all about the ECU. Subaru tuners learned that even though they could tune a WRX, the RS ECU was completely different.

 

I have an ES with a five speed. It revs up to 6500 RPM before the limiter kicks in. With regards to the MT, if the point of wanting to go beyond 6500 is to gain performance (acceleration), then I'm not so sure there would be any benefit in higher revs.

Let's consider when to shift from 2nd gear to 3rd to maximize acceleration . . .

Acceleration of the car will be proportional to torque at the front wheels. Torque at the front wheels is directly proportional to both crankshaft torque and the gear ratio. So, let's see how torque compares at different RPM in different gears. (Notice that I'm using the phrase "proportional to" here, not "equal to." To calculate an accurate acceleration you would need to consider mass, drag, friction, etc. I'll assume these things remain constant during the comparison.

I'll use data from the following sources: (1) Torque values are from a thread titled, "4B11 dyno list" (see post #1). These are not crankshaft values, but it should be safe to assume that the torque curve at the crank follows the torque curve shown here. (2) Gear ratios are from the Mitsubishi web site.

The torque curve implies that torque at 6500 RPM has bottomed out. I assume the person doing the test let off the gas before hitting the rev-limiter, or perhaps this is an artifact of the rev limiter itself. So, I'm not sure how accurate the data are near 6500 RPM. However, it looks pretty clear that torque starts dropping rapidly above 6300 RPM. Let's assume the data up to 6400 RPM are a reasonably accurate reflection of what's going on with the motor. (Yes, a lot of assumptions, but what the heck.)

So, given these assumptions, acceleration at 6400 RPM in second gear is proportional to 100 lb-ft of torque times a gear ratio of 1.913, which equals 191 (in some undetermined units).

When I shift from 2nd at 6500 RPM to 3rd I end up at 4500 RPM. Acceleration at 4500 RPM in second gear is proportional to 140 lb-ft of torque times a gear ratio of 1.333, which equals 187 (in some undetermined units).

So, let's say that torque/acceleration at 6500 RPM is about the same as that at 6400 RPM (a conservative assumption). If this is so, then shifting from 2nd at 6500 RPM to 3rd at 4500 RPM results in a 2% loss in acceleration. So, there appears to be little, if any, loss in front-wheel torque/acceleration by shifting from 2nd to 3rd at 6500 (or 6400) RPM.

Were you to continue accelerating beyond 6500 RPM, it seems pretty clear that your torque is going to drop rapidly below what you would have if you simply shifted to third. Furthermore, torque remains fairly constant all the way from 4500 to about 5500 RPM, so you have a lot of usable torque in front of you after making that upshift.

So, don't worry about what's beyond 6500 RPM, it looks like you're better off upshifting before you get to that point. (I'm not sure how this holds for 1st-2nd, 3rd-4th, or 4th-5th shifts, but the calculations are simple for anyone who wants to try.)

It seems to me that the Mitsu engineers knew what they were doing when they set the limit at 6500 RPM. What benefits could be gained from modifying the car???

It appears to me that simply eliminating or raising the rev-limiter won't do any good in the way of increasing performance. (Unless a better measurement of the torque curve were to reveal that torque does not drop precipitously beyond 6300 RPM.) It is, however, possible that going beyond 6500 RPM would toast the motor.

I don't know much about engine mods, but perhaps new camshafts, or intake, or valves, etc. would increase torque at higher RPM. Maybe new crankshafts, pistons, connecting rods, etc. would allow the motor to survive the higher limits? That's a story for someone else to pursue.

I'm no expert on the CVT, but with regards to the CVT, I don't see much benefit to going above 6000 RPM. Even at that point you are on a steep downward slide in torque. The whole point of having a CVT is to keep the motor in the fat portion of the torque curve, and above 6000 RPM you are out of it.

Cheers,

Mark

 

There is no governor on the 5spd, I pushed it to 220km/h what the limit is and even kept it there for about 5 minutes, it was at 6,000 rpm giv or take a few