Notices
Lancer Engine Tech Discuss specs/changes to the engine from cams to fully balanced and blueprinted engines!

Most power out of an NA 4G94 build

Old Dec 2, 2012 | 06:50 PM
  #1  
s.lee1993's Avatar
Thread Starter
Newbie
 
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
From: California
Most power out of an NA 4G94 build

Hey all,
I have a 2002 Lancer OZ rally MT with a K&N short ram intake and a custom catback exhaust. I want to get more power out of my lancer. I know the most efficient way is to turbo it, however if I were to stay NA, what is the MOST amount of power i could push out of the engine. Eg. Headers, intake, exhaust, maybe piggyback? I dont know if the performance increase will even be worth the money but I just want a general idea how much more power I could get. Thanks guys!
Reply
Old Dec 3, 2012 | 06:41 AM
  #2  
Green_Bandit's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (25)
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,829
Likes: 5
From: Tallahassee, Fl
MAYBE 5hp more TOPS at a certain rpm with everything.

You're right, the performance increase won't be worth the money.
Reply
Old Dec 3, 2012 | 07:57 AM
  #3  
03lances's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (14)
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,714
Likes: 2
From: West Coast WA
About the only way to get more than 5-10 hp staying NA is to go with some Hi comp pistons. That however puts even more stress on your engine than a turbo since the hi comp is there all the time meaning it would likely cost you more to build your engine to be reliable than it would going turbo. Turbo only ups the power when you want it ;-).

Last edited by 03lances; Dec 3, 2012 at 07:59 AM.
Reply
Old Dec 3, 2012 | 01:38 PM
  #4  
s.lee1993's Avatar
Thread Starter
Newbie
 
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
From: California
Yea you guys are right, thanks for the imput!
Reply
Old Dec 16, 2012 | 04:49 AM
  #5  
trfguy's Avatar
Newbie
 
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
From: Milan
We shall soon see. I'm building a 13.0:1 4G94 right now. It will run on Ethanol, have big duration cam, ported cylinder head, improved intake manifold, headers, and improved exhaust. Hoping for 180-200whp. I by no means am trying to set out and prove this is a cost effective method, but I do think the 4G94 can make respectable power NA, and in some instances it is the best option for certain people like myself. I'm building a Group 2 stage rally car, and the car must remain NA, I chose to stick with the 4G94 over other motors because it's high displacement to weight ratio. I anticipate full race weight of the car to be around 2,200 pounds. If I hit 190whp, and 2,200lbs, I will have significantly better power to weight ratio than stock EVO. Time will tell...
Ryan
Reply
Old Dec 16, 2012 | 05:43 PM
  #6  
Green_Bandit's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (25)
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,829
Likes: 5
From: Tallahassee, Fl
Just curious, why not do a 93 head swap trf?
Reply
Old Dec 17, 2012 | 04:56 AM
  #7  
trfguy's Avatar
Newbie
 
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
From: Milan
Originally Posted by Green_Bandit
Just curious, why not do a 93 head swap trf?
I guess I have never considered it, why is it better?

However, what I have considered, is after much study of a disassembled stock head I have this theory: The head design itself seems reasonably good, ports are short and well matched. Combustion domes are good, also consistent, and well designed. It seems to me the greatest shortcoming is in component adaptation. Their is a LARGE step at both the intake and exhaust manifolds where they match the head. A step like this will create efficiency robbing turbulence. It's my intention to port match everything, smooth out the runners, and see what happens.
Also, getting a better cam that's designed for performance (Rally specific), not just efficiency and emissions to go along with it, I hope makes substantial gains. 13.0:1 Compression sure isn't going to hurt any either
Reply
Old Dec 18, 2012 | 07:07 PM
  #8  
s.lee1993's Avatar
Thread Starter
Newbie
 
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
From: California
I was looking at the lightweight pulley from rrm. Looks pretty legit how much more power do you think that would give us?
Reply
Old Dec 18, 2012 | 07:16 PM
  #9  
03lances's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (14)
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,714
Likes: 2
From: West Coast WA
Originally Posted by s.lee1993
I was looking at the lightweight pulley from rrm. Looks pretty legit how much more power do you think that would give us?
Lightweight pulley may free up one or two whp at most. I have a lightweight pulley, it mainly will improve throttle response.
Reply
Old Dec 25, 2012 | 12:39 PM
  #10  
Dreamartist's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 621
Likes: 0
From: Los Angeles, CA
I've got an RRM pulley, it just made it easier to find in my engine bay.
Reply
Old Jan 8, 2013 | 11:09 AM
  #11  
Green_Bandit's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (25)
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,829
Likes: 5
From: Tallahassee, Fl
Lmao! Good one Dream.

Well sohc's have more opportunity for making torque. Not saying the op is going to be making much. Maybe it's just the small obsession I have with the 92/93e heads. Wish there were more of them...
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
jaynes37
Lancer Engine Management / Tuning Forums
12
Jan 30, 2016 05:08 PM
ambystom01
Lancer General
123
Jul 20, 2014 03:55 PM
arock90
Lancer Engine Tech
9
Nov 1, 2012 07:01 AM
Blue91lx
Evo Engine / Turbo / Drivetrain
21
Jul 4, 2012 06:08 AM
Racecarzz08
Lancer Engine Tech
6
Apr 11, 2009 08:37 PM


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:08 AM.