Intake side woes
The intake manifold would probably be totally different. And how much of a HP gain would it be. Significant enough for alot of $$$. If honda's can do it, i dont see why we cant swap parts. if it works ill do it, but i wont try it
It would probably be better for me since im turbo, and seems like a great idea. im gonna ask ROCK about it, but i already know what hes gonna say :P
It would probably be better for me since im turbo, and seems like a great idea. im gonna ask ROCK about it, but i already know what hes gonna say :P
Evolved Member
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 689
Likes: 0
From: VA
Hold your horses Boni. We don't actually know if the swap will work or if once swapped out that the changes to the car will be positive. That's why we're asking RMR about the swap seeing as how they have both models of the car in their possesion. If the swap goes well there's no doubt that its worth the money. Also perhaps Claudius or Michael of Scoobymike or Maxi could take pictures of the Evo's manifold so I could post a picture comparison showing how much of a difference there is between the two.
Evolved Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 4,312
Likes: 3
From: Birmingham, AL
B20 block Type R head...I mean 4g94 and GS head
Speaking of swapping heads, would not the NT 4G63 head found
on a 1G GS Eclipse and '94 Galant GS work? Even if these engines
are oriented opposite from the Lancer? (or are they?) Perhaps they
have cams and ECU's more suited for a Lancer rather then the
Evolution.
on a 1G GS Eclipse and '94 Galant GS work? Even if these engines
are oriented opposite from the Lancer? (or are they?) Perhaps they
have cams and ECU's more suited for a Lancer rather then the
Evolution.
Thread Starter
Evolved Member
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,722
Likes: 0
From: Up to 80 miles north of Gilroy
Re: B20 block Type R head...I mean 4g94 and GS head
Originally posted by GPTourer
Speaking of swapping heads, would not the NT 4G63 head found
on a 1G GS Eclipse and '94 Galant GS work? Even if these engines
are oriented opposite from the Lancer? (or are they?) Perhaps they
have cams and ECU's more suited for a Lancer rather then the
Evolution.
Speaking of swapping heads, would not the NT 4G63 head found
on a 1G GS Eclipse and '94 Galant GS work? Even if these engines
are oriented opposite from the Lancer? (or are they?) Perhaps they
have cams and ECU's more suited for a Lancer rather then the
Evolution.
Nope
We have not tried to swap, but we did try to hone out the intake manifold and the throttle body and we lost our *** on power. The car just can't take that much air. We tried everything to make the intake manifold work (even an AFR), but nothing worked. We did port and machine the head a bit and strengthened the rods to hold the higher compression. That worked quite well. Our car moves pretty well. We are working on an ECU right now (the ECU will have boost parameters for turbos!)Anyway, Thats all for now.
Blair
Blair
Thread Starter
Evolved Member
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,722
Likes: 0
From: Up to 80 miles north of Gilroy
It's a big request but perhaps could at least test fit or maybe just even take measurements to see if the Evo manifold could fit? Even as mentioned, how about the NA 4G63 engine? Any help would certainly be appreciated. Also, when you say you wanted to make the manifold work, did you try making it a shade smaller or perhaps removing the diffuser that might be in there?
Last edited by pjal84; Jun 6, 2002 at 03:59 AM.
Evolved Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 4,312
Likes: 3
From: Birmingham, AL
Timing and 87
I'll make sure I ask our mechanics tomorrow, but I remember
them saying how much power even a lowly 1.5L DE Mirage could
make just by advancing the timing. I can't remember what
he said, but it was something ridiculous like an additional 20hp from
something like a 5 degree advance I think, but don't get carried away yet until I get the proof. Remember, there are three little words on all you Lancer driver's gas caps: "Regular Fuel Only" Mitsubishi has choked the cars down from the factory to be MPG masters, if only the car were made to to take advantage of better fuel (ie more agressive timing and cams) could it probably then take advantage of all the air you want to shove down its throat. I hate it for all you Cali folks, but we gots 93 down here in Dixie for $1.40 or so, if the car were to made to take advantage of it, you would see better gains from boring the TB and a bigger IM.
them saying how much power even a lowly 1.5L DE Mirage could
make just by advancing the timing. I can't remember what
he said, but it was something ridiculous like an additional 20hp from
something like a 5 degree advance I think, but don't get carried away yet until I get the proof. Remember, there are three little words on all you Lancer driver's gas caps: "Regular Fuel Only" Mitsubishi has choked the cars down from the factory to be MPG masters, if only the car were made to to take advantage of better fuel (ie more agressive timing and cams) could it probably then take advantage of all the air you want to shove down its throat. I hate it for all you Cali folks, but we gots 93 down here in Dixie for $1.40 or so, if the car were to made to take advantage of it, you would see better gains from boring the TB and a bigger IM.
well does it matter which gas you use? i didnt know it was really serious... ive been putting in premium in the tank...ever since i got it... i dunno the word premium just makes it sound so much better... now im scared i totally killed my car... im sure a lil more octane wont kill my car...right?? 
what about the quad throttle body from rpw? that is claimed to add sick amounts of horse power with a ecu they said like it brough a stock 1.5 from 93 to 160 thats alot of power kinda costly but thats what turbo doese dont it and this would be N/A wouldnt it?
also about the gas thing if you use anything other then regular fuel it burn the valve heads.... thats why they tell you to use regular my mechanic told me to use premium like once in a wile but dont over do it
also about the gas thing if you use anything other then regular fuel it burn the valve heads.... thats why they tell you to use regular my mechanic told me to use premium like once in a wile but dont over do it
Thread Starter
Evolved Member
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,722
Likes: 0
From: Up to 80 miles north of Gilroy
The only reason that I haven't brought up quads or even just double throttle body systems is the ECU part. By just swapping out the manifold and TB section, the stock ECU should still be able to get the readings it needs. Plus, if you've visited and done the reading on RPW's site...tons of work needs to be put into a multi-TB system. I think we were trying to focus with bolt on power. GPTourer, I'm sure we'd all be interested in those numbers so please get on it! 
..what am i going to do... should i start using regular again??
let me see
First off the EVO car part is called the front clip. That's when they cut the car in half and you get the engine back to the gearbox or tranny I guess.
To get that much power from the Quad TB from Rpw one would need a new cam and valve springs, header, 2" exhaust, Fuel pressure regulator, computer hmmmm can't remember it all. I had planned on doing it to the Mirage I had. I think it was like 145 HP at the flywheel for the 1.5L but remember that that engine is rated at 92HP.
i'm very interested in the idea of swapping out parts. Keep us posted if you find out anything please.
WADAD
To get that much power from the Quad TB from Rpw one would need a new cam and valve springs, header, 2" exhaust, Fuel pressure regulator, computer hmmmm can't remember it all. I had planned on doing it to the Mirage I had. I think it was like 145 HP at the flywheel for the 1.5L but remember that that engine is rated at 92HP.
i'm very interested in the idea of swapping out parts. Keep us posted if you find out anything please.
WADAD
Evolved Member
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 2,167
Likes: 0
From: TB, FL
Okay, I hope I don't offend people on their idea of swapping parts easily like H&A . . . to a certain extent, Mitsu can but not major components.
To start swapping parts, the engine must be in the same family and engine orientation. So all the Evo swap won't work . . . the Lancer's 2.0L is in the 4g9x family not the 4g6x family . . . each family shares the same engine block with a bit different bore, stroke, manifold and cyl head design, and etc.
Swapping cyl head (too big) or intake manifold (runners are wayy too long to even to connect properly) from the 4g6x family to a 4g9x family block. To see proof, go to a drag event and look under a 4g63T or just take measurement.
Swapping camshaft won't work either. DOHC cam profile have separate lobes for intake and exhaust while the SOHC cam profile has both lobes. Can you say screwed up timing, bent valves, damaged cyl head, or not working at all.
As for the 1.5L mirage, it has a distributor to adv the timing while the US Spec 4g93, 4g94, and 3g eclipse's 4g64 have DIS . . . cannot adv timing unless through electronic means or mess w/ the slot holding the crank angle sensor like people in PR (they can experiemnet all they want, but I have no ways of finding that I'm doing it right or not).
To start swapping parts, the engine must be in the same family and engine orientation. So all the Evo swap won't work . . . the Lancer's 2.0L is in the 4g9x family not the 4g6x family . . . each family shares the same engine block with a bit different bore, stroke, manifold and cyl head design, and etc.
Swapping cyl head (too big) or intake manifold (runners are wayy too long to even to connect properly) from the 4g6x family to a 4g9x family block. To see proof, go to a drag event and look under a 4g63T or just take measurement.
Swapping camshaft won't work either. DOHC cam profile have separate lobes for intake and exhaust while the SOHC cam profile has both lobes. Can you say screwed up timing, bent valves, damaged cyl head, or not working at all.
As for the 1.5L mirage, it has a distributor to adv the timing while the US Spec 4g93, 4g94, and 3g eclipse's 4g64 have DIS . . . cannot adv timing unless through electronic means or mess w/ the slot holding the crank angle sensor like people in PR (they can experiemnet all they want, but I have no ways of finding that I'm doing it right or not).
Evolved Member
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 2,167
Likes: 0
From: TB, FL
Re: Intake side woes
Originally posted by pjal84
Okay...the Lancer isn't powerful to begin with but with the right touches, it can be made fast. This will concern the intake side of things. Cliff measured the stock throttle body (TB) at 63.5 mm. This hole is an entire 12mm smaller than the hole in the intake manifold, being 75.5 mm's. Another thing to notice is the size of the intake manifold itself. This thing is HUGE! It could possibly have a diffuser built into it, as to disturb airflow into the cylinders sapping power. The size also lends its hand to showing that there is a significantly smaller vacuum, and hence less air, being pulled into the engine. All these things make for a rather poor way to make power on the intake side. However...there may be a way around this...
Hypothetically (without
service manuals we have no definite way of knowing), it may be possible to switch in a larger (if it even is larger) Evo TB (due to its turbo nature) to perhaps make a bit of compensation for the woefully undersized stock Lancer TB. Another solution, and probably cheaper as well, is of course, a completely new Lancer TB, perhaps by some brand like Holley. RRM's bored out TB (+4mm over stock) is nice, but lacks an extra 8mm's of power making space. However, this is with good cause as anything over the 4mm requires the construction of a new TB. Now...another option is completely swapping out the stock Lancer manifold and TB and perhaps replacing it completely with an Evo manifold, injectors and all as well. More fuel and more air is always good. The Evo manifold is visibly smaller, showing that it has a much tighter vacuum with which to force air into the cylinders. This is all hypothetical but considering the Lancer (4G94) and Evo (4G63) engines are both 4G blocks, it may be possible...however, this is still all theory.
Okay...the Lancer isn't powerful to begin with but with the right touches, it can be made fast. This will concern the intake side of things. Cliff measured the stock throttle body (TB) at 63.5 mm. This hole is an entire 12mm smaller than the hole in the intake manifold, being 75.5 mm's. Another thing to notice is the size of the intake manifold itself. This thing is HUGE! It could possibly have a diffuser built into it, as to disturb airflow into the cylinders sapping power. The size also lends its hand to showing that there is a significantly smaller vacuum, and hence less air, being pulled into the engine. All these things make for a rather poor way to make power on the intake side. However...there may be a way around this...
Hypothetically (without
service manuals we have no definite way of knowing), it may be possible to switch in a larger (if it even is larger) Evo TB (due to its turbo nature) to perhaps make a bit of compensation for the woefully undersized stock Lancer TB. Another solution, and probably cheaper as well, is of course, a completely new Lancer TB, perhaps by some brand like Holley. RRM's bored out TB (+4mm over stock) is nice, but lacks an extra 8mm's of power making space. However, this is with good cause as anything over the 4mm requires the construction of a new TB. Now...another option is completely swapping out the stock Lancer manifold and TB and perhaps replacing it completely with an Evo manifold, injectors and all as well. More fuel and more air is always good. The Evo manifold is visibly smaller, showing that it has a much tighter vacuum with which to force air into the cylinders. This is all hypothetical but considering the Lancer (4G94) and Evo (4G63) engines are both 4G blocks, it may be possible...however, this is still all theory.
Was it measured correctly? On the butterfly or the outer ring/coupler? 63.5 mm! That's huge.
The 2g GSX's TB is approx 62mm in manual form while the auto form has appox 58mm. C'mon, DSM'ers can correct me if I'm wrong. It's hard to believe Mitsu would put that big of a TB on a NA car.
As for the Lancer's intake mainfold, the mirage guys with the 1.8L, including me, believed that Mitsu designed a better manifold over our log-style in air flow design.
As for the engine naming: 4g61 => 4g63 => 4g64
1) the 4 denotes amount of cyl
2) G denotes generation
3) 6 denotes classification
4) 4 denotes secondary classification
As for our family: 4g92 => 4g93 => 4g94
Hope, this helps . . .