Notices
Lancer General Come on in and discuss the US Lancer.

Daves Lancer Build Up

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Feb 21, 2007 | 11:29 AM
  #16  
mtags24's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 714
Likes: 0
From: Washington DC
Wow man good luck with that build, I bet you are really pumped!

Try incorporating some pistons and rods in there though. Even if you miss out on other things. If I was spending all that money on my lancer, I would want to make sure that I'm protecting my investment as well as possible.
Reply
Old Feb 21, 2007 | 11:31 AM
  #17  
mtags24's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 714
Likes: 0
From: Washington DC
If you guys are going to be in the VA area over the summer I could definitely help to!
Reply
Old Feb 21, 2007 | 01:36 PM
  #18  
ROCK's Avatar
Former Sponsor
iTrader: (67)
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 7,826
Likes: 3
From: Santa Fe Springs, CA.
Ditch the 4G93 Manifold. They suck and people up here have proved it. Stick with 4G94 Manifold.

ROAD/RACE
Reply
Old Feb 21, 2007 | 02:42 PM
  #19  
Shingen's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 1,679
Likes: 0
From: Northern VA
Originally Posted by ROCK
Ditch the 4G93 Manifold. They suck and people up here have proved it. Stick with 4G94 Manifold.

ROAD/RACE
I whole heartedly disagree with that. However, if you want a 4g94 I have one laying here in my closet. I'll give it to you Dave and you can have it ported to your desired specs. All you need is to take it to a shop and have them match it to the gasket.

As for the agruement about manifolds, it's all well documented here on evom and the debate is far from conclusive either way. We might as well be talking about synthetic oil on this one. What I can tell you though from personal experience is that the home port of the 4g93 is an improvment over stock.

Fox

Last edited by Shingen; Feb 21, 2007 at 02:46 PM.
Reply
Old Feb 21, 2007 | 02:46 PM
  #20  
Shingen's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 1,679
Likes: 0
From: Northern VA
Originally Posted by mtags24
If you guys are going to be in the VA area over the summer I could definitely help to!
I can see it now, four or five guys working on the car... it'll be done in half a day and doing burnout's by three in the afternoon. Haha!

Fox
Reply
Old Feb 21, 2007 | 05:05 PM
  #21  
ROCK's Avatar
Former Sponsor
iTrader: (67)
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 7,826
Likes: 3
From: Santa Fe Springs, CA.
Originally Posted by Shingen
I whole heartedly disagree with that. However, if you want a 4g94 I have one laying here in my closet. I'll give it to you Dave and you can have it ported to your desired specs. All you need is to take it to a shop and have them match it to the gasket.

As for the agruement about manifolds, it's all well documented here on evom and the debate is far from conclusive either way. We might as well be talking about synthetic oil on this one. What I can tell you though from personal experience is that the home port of the 4g93 is an improvment over stock.

Fox
I disagree too but it is fine to disagree.

ROAD/RACE
Reply
Old Feb 21, 2007 | 07:23 PM
  #22  
STIslayer's Avatar
Evolving Member
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
From: BG, kentucky
sounds great man. as long as u get a good tune i know u'll be happy. but i agree with mtags24 i would get new pistons and rod to protect my engin it i was going turbo....haha then u could think of nitrous. but good luck with that
Reply
Old Feb 21, 2007 | 07:35 PM
  #23  
ROCK's Avatar
Former Sponsor
iTrader: (67)
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 7,826
Likes: 3
From: Santa Fe Springs, CA.
NO need for piston and rods with turbo if you tune it right. Our Stage 2 stuff is around 10 psi on stock pistons. IF you do it right you can stay stock internally!

ROAD/RACE
Reply
Old Feb 22, 2007 | 12:07 AM
  #24  
nem187's Avatar
Thread Starter
Evolving Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 239
Likes: 0
From: Germany
Thanks for all the input guys. Fox- hold on to that IM for me if you can. So far they'll be 4 of us working on the car, lol. I would definitely like to be doing burnouts the same day we start the install, lol. But I'll hafta resist the urge. Won't hit on it hard until I get a tune. Now...anybody want to point me in the right direction for some fuel injectors?

Thanks for the input Rock. Undecided about which one I'm going to use yet, but its always good to hear both sides of an issue.
Reply
Old Feb 22, 2007 | 07:26 AM
  #25  
N1te's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (12)
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,704
Likes: 0
From: Northern Virginia
Originally Posted by nem187
Thanks for all the input guys. Fox- hold on to that IM for me if you can. So far they'll be 4 of us working on the car, lol. I would definitely like to be doing burnouts the same day we start the install, lol. But I'll hafta resist the urge. Won't hit on it hard until I get a tune. Now...anybody want to point me in the right direction for some fuel injectors?

Thanks for the input Rock. Undecided about which one I'm going to use yet, but its always good to hear both sides of an issue.
RX-7 High Impedience injectors, you just need longer bolts. They're cheap and perfect for your setup, anyone know what cc injector they are?
Reply
Old Feb 22, 2007 | 07:29 AM
  #26  
N1te's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (12)
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,704
Likes: 0
From: Northern Virginia
And I second Fox's dominance of the 4G93 over the 4G94. It appears to me a ported 4G94 had almost the same size opening as a regular 4G93. A 4G93 had the bottleneck on the connection side to where the throttle body goes, but if you port that then the plenum chamber is as wide as your opening. On the 4G94 manifold you would have to port a solid 1 1/2 foot into the manifold because the plenum chamber is so small that even porting the opening still leaves you with a small plenum chamber.

If anyone has an opinion otherwise please share.
Reply
Old Feb 22, 2007 | 07:30 AM
  #27  
nem187's Avatar
Thread Starter
Evolving Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 239
Likes: 0
From: Germany
This is why N1te is the man, lol. Thanks bro.
Reply
Old Feb 22, 2007 | 08:28 AM
  #28  
nem187's Avatar
Thread Starter
Evolving Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 239
Likes: 0
From: Germany
N1te,

Thanks man. Thats the most technical explanation of why to choose one IM over the other. I'm sure that will help anyone else who's one the fence about which route to take.
Reply
Old Feb 22, 2007 | 09:37 AM
  #29  
ROCK's Avatar
Former Sponsor
iTrader: (67)
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 7,826
Likes: 3
From: Santa Fe Springs, CA.
Originally Posted by N1te
And I second Fox's dominance of the 4G93 over the 4G94. It appears to me a ported 4G94 had almost the same size opening as a regular 4G93. A 4G93 had the bottleneck on the connection side to where the throttle body goes, but if you port that then the plenum chamber is as wide as your opening. On the 4G94 manifold you would have to port a solid 1 1/2 foot into the manifold because the plenum chamber is so small that even porting the opening still leaves you with a small plenum chamber.

If anyone has an opinion otherwise please share.
I will post a picture that shows otherwise. Good thing I took that pic!

ROAD/RACE
Reply
Old Feb 22, 2007 | 09:40 AM
  #30  
Silens's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
From: Valdosta, GA
Light blue 420 cc stock wrx injectors are a direct swap, no modifications needed, the ones from the 06 wrxs are 565cc but dont know if those fit, i know the 420s fit because ive had them on my car just couldnt tune them cuz of the returnless fuel crap

Edit: just realized your got an 03, dont know how different the fuel rails are, but they fit my 04 perfectly.

Heres what the 420s look like, i got mine for $100 from a local wrx guy.
Reply



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:14 PM.