Given the engine bay clearances for the engine block(assuming the colt/evolution have less than the lancer) I'm thinking length won't be a big problem. Do they use different bolt patterns for each block that is the question? I wish I could scan the pictures I have to show you the SOHC colt with said intake manifold on it I guarantee you its head is straight of the Mirage. The 4G6/9 blocks I'm talking about are the latest class which are all oriented in the same direction belts to the left. Bore and stroke are fairly different OZ 81.5x95.8 EVOLUTION 85.0x88.1 so that basically guarantees that the runners length would not prevent the swap. It would only have to be done to find out whether or not it works. By saying this I'm assuming if anything the Lancer block is as long if not longer than the Evo block.

 

I'd assume so I measured at the butterfly.

 

You mean the 3g Colt HB (not an expert on the 3g) w/ the 4g61 (1.6L - hopefully, I have gotten the right engine code for the NA version . . . I do know the TC version . . . my whole premise hinges on this). That motor is the baby clone motor of the US spec 4g63T and faces the wrong way for the 5g mirage.

Bolt pattern is different between family class: the 4g9x and 4g6x.

That's why some DSM'ers (know not 100%, they can get EVO exhaust manifold fitted on their 4g63T from RRE) can use parts from the EVO.

Mesuring bore and stroke is not the answer to see swappable big components . . . it's pretty much a given that you can swap small components like fuel pump or FPR from an eclipse TC or EVO onto the mirage w/ minor fitment/tuning issues.

I just wish some DSM'ers on here could chime in on this tech debate. They have the most experience working on the 4g6x block and parts while I'm in the 4g9x (don't have much in the 92 or 94 experience - can gain the latter talking the local lancer guys near me, whenever it doesn't rain us out).

 

I tried getting a few DSM people on this board (ones that make their living working on them), but they think the lancer is a joke.

 

I guess the point Bahamut is trying to make is that engine parts like manifolds, cams and the like that are made for the 4G63 whether it be for the EVO or the Mirage are not going to bolt onto a Lancer engine.

The head will not bolt on, whether it is a 4G63 with the correct orientation (i.e. EVO IV and up) or not. The block design is different between the two families (4G6x and 4G9x).

If you want to find out just how much different the flange patterns are between the 4G6x engines and the 4G9x ones, It would only take a trip to your dealer. Ask them to see the intake manifold gasket for a 4G63 and the same gasket for the Lancer.

Something that you might want to consider if you are looking for DOHC would be the 4G93T DOHC head from the 96' up Jspec Lancer GSR. These cars are pretty rare and so are their parts. But for the Lancer it would have to be 96' and up because of engine orientation. That should be usable with little or no modification.

A lot of you should probably contact RPW as well with your needs. These guys do amazing head work and offer cams for just about anything Mitsu makes. I believe they were saying that their Lancer cams would be available soon and their turbo kits as well.

RPW has a Lancer (mirage) with a turbo, cams and other mods that is making sick power. And that car still has its SOHC head on it.

They say that there is still tons of power to be made without changes to the intake manifolds and worrying about a DOHC swap..

I know the DOHC looks cool.. but whats more important? Spending much more with less return? or getting twice the HP return for less money?

RPW Turbo kit, Head work, cam, cam pully, exhaust mods, fuel system mods, piggy back computer. And you could potentially have a nasty beast.

 

has anyone done the theoretical swapping of a larger evo tb and/or manifold?

i'm interested in this swap......(if its worth the money)

 

I see several wrong/bad ideas here. Hopefully this will help someone out, without making me look like a jerk.

1. I HIGHLY doubt that the stock TB is 63.5 mm. Mitsubishi has made all of their TB's smaller over the years to promote better gas consumption, and a 6G nonturbo Galant 2.0l tb is 60mm. I bet thats the biggest non turbo TB they ever made. 63.5mm is HUGE compared to other comparable mitsu TBs. That would make an incredible aftermarket overbore size though.

2. THe EVO TB probably would bolt on.

3. The EVO IM would NOT bolt on, period. WAY different family of engines, the bolt pattern, gasket, etc are gonna be different.

4. Same goes for the head. Honda does make interchangable heads. This is becuase they tend to keep a family design consistent to years the vehicle was made, whereas Mitsu evolves the engines over years, thus distributing several different engine familes over several different years, into the same cars. The 4g6 family, the 4g1 family, and the 4g9 family engines are very much different from each other. However, engines within the same families have alot of interchangability throughout them. Thus, the 2.4l 4g64 Galant engine BLOCK will accept a 4g63t head, and is possible. Also, a 4g93 Engine, will accept a 4g92T's manifold, turbo, etc. It's also usually possible to fit the head, with some modifications.

5. EVO parts can be acquired in the US, Rally Shops are a good place to start. However, when looking for EVO parts, there is usually a cheaper way of doing it, as they are VERY expensive. Other cars parts can often be used. The 4g64 from the newer eclipse probably has almost as much stuff that can be used off of it as the EVO 4g63t engine, which isn't much.

6. The posts on gas, well, higher octane simply makes is harded to detonate. This won't damage the car in any way, BUT it could make a car run worse. My Mirage 1.5l engine HATES anything higher than the cheap stuff. However, turbo engines like the better gas, as it slows down predetonation (knock) which is harmful to the engine.

7. RPW's quads are AWESOME, unfortunately, the whole ECU thing does play in. They can be hard to tune, and take away some of the "comfort" things if not hooked up properly.

8. everything Bahamut says is 100% true.

9. same goes for DireWolf.

I've gotta start hanging out here, you goes have a nice setup here!

blytz

 

Okay here some info for everyone

(A) I agree I don't beleive that the standard throttle body would 63.5mm as Mitsubishi 4G64 2.4 litre engines only run a 58mm unit stock.

(B) The 1.8 Mirages 4G93 motor runs a 50mm standard so I beleive that the 2.0 should be running around a 55 - 58mm throttle body standard on there car.

(C) The Evo unit won't go across mainly because you are using the newer style throttle bodies with a diaphram regulator bolted on the side which is also a cruise control option on some model cars as well. Not something generally found on an Evo car.

(D) RPW posted ages ago that we have available right now two options of a 65mm and a 70mm throttle body upgrade for the Lancer vehicles. Obviously some testing on a car would need to be carried out but this should be a direct bolt on and comes with the diaphrams for cruise and non cruise control model vehicles.

Either of these throttle bodies could be fitted to the car without any need of ECU changes etc as they would use the MAF sensor to re calibrate the fuel curves as it registers the extra air going through.

If you want to try this system then contact Vision Imports and we can organise a trial fitment on your car of a 65mm unit to start with.

David Thomas
www.rpw.com.au

 

So basically the only options for a head swap would be to import a 1.6
MIVEC head, or dig up some ulta rare '89-'91 Mirage/Colt Turbo. Another
colleague and I are considering some sort of project which is either
going to involve a Lancer or a current Galant with which what we want
is a 4g63 under the hood. I just wish there was some other solution then
looking for an 8 year old JDM engine.

 

I'll measure again. I'd been assuming that thing was small myself looks o so puny.

 

ok its 52-54mm.

 

Many thanks to my colleagues and Mitsiman for filling or correcting any tech stuff that I may have left out.

The 3g colt/mirage/summit is in the 4g6x family . . . can't use cyl head transplant.

MIVEC head swap on the 4g94 might not work 100%. Your stroke is way too long to even make the MIVEC rev happy . . . might snap in half spinning too fast.

The modern galant faces the wrong way compared to the US spec 4g63T.

 

See, I told you guys that Mitsu improved their design on the Lancer's TB/Intake manifold over us 1.8L guys.

 

Don't know about improved seeing as how it has a much smaller fuel rail than yours. Perhaps increased efficiency at the sacrifice of power.

EDIT: That is to say they might have had to when they changed the engine to make it run to their specifications.

 

The Lancer intake/TB is an improvement from the 1.8l...

Also, the smaller fuel rail is a seperate part from the intake. Besides the smaller the fuel rail, the higher the fuel pressure. This does create more work for the fuel pump, but can actually be good initially for you all.