I hope he doesn't get on national t.v. saying that. It'll be tough to get rid of the rest of the Outlanders we've already got, as much a beating it took in the press for it's lack of power. I was more impressed by its ability to deliver its rated torque at 2500 RPM. Pretty gutsy for a 4cyl. To me, the Outlander feels fine, I don't understand why people need to go so fast behind the wheels of SUV's. I haven't driven it with five passengers and a load of luggage, so I would guess that a bit more midrange punch is needed. I've always been leery of SUV's like the RAV4 and CR-V that claim superior horsepower using intelligent valve technology. I don't see their drivers spending much time at 6000 RPM. At the ride and drive with an average of four people in the car all the vehicles felt about them same to me and most of the other salespeople as far as power was concerned, all felt kinda weak (Outlander, RAV4, CRV, Sante FE) But I suppose its the only way to get more power out of a small four without F/I and if that is the way it has to be then so be it. I hope the MIVEC point isn't at some dizzying RPM.

 

Gotta agree with the excessive power lust for SUV's
There is no indication as to what will actually do to get the 20hp increase out of the 4G64 for the U.S.
MIVEC does tend to require higher rpm for power and torque. I hope that for the 2004 models, will have invested some more $$$ into improving the system to rival Honda, Nissan and Toyota.

 

Yeah, that's my beef with intelligent cam systems. Yes, they have more power, but, it's usually beyond normal (and comfortable) driving RPMs, and of extremely short duration. Look at my quote for my feelings on the most popular intelligent cam technology.

As for swapability, while it does use the Lancer's chassis, that doesn't necessarily mean that the swap would be simple by any means. The Evolution uses the same chassis, and a simple swap doesn't exist. Basically, if you're a fan of engine swaps, get a Honda or Acura. With Mitsubishi, bust your *** on doing modifications to the engine you got. The gains to money spent ratio will probably be on the Mitsu side 9 times out of 10. This isn't to say that I don't think the 2.4 won't fit (probably would, it looks almost the exact same as the 4G94, but, that's just eyeballing it), but that most people don't realize how difficult an engine swap is on car that don't utilize the EXACT same transmissions and drivetrains, like they do for H/A.

 

i was on the aem website and seen under new applactions for there ecu upgrade.2002-2003 lancer 2.4l mt only .and some other stuff for the same exsect model.so i guess the 2004 lancer has a 2.4 l 160 to 170 hp engine .i guess i am tradeing in my's unless i turbo it.or it cn also means that they just bore out the 4g94 to 2.4 and did changes to the intake and exhaust to get more hp.

check it out

http://www.aempower.com/application/ems_app.htm

and check out the dyno sheet with cai

http://www.aempower.com/pdf/results/...ancerOZCAS.pdf

 

Hmm... no offense, but, I think that is a typo of some sort. Because according to that, we should have had the 2.4L option in 2002 as well, and I know that the dealer didn't pitch me on that. I'd contact AEM.

 

Sure wish I had 2.4 as a option when i got my lancer.

If they did just bore out the 4g94 and beef up the internals and drop a new head on it, then that would mean we would have one hellofa rebuild option for our 2.0.
Guess we have to wait and see what is really going to happen.

Myself , I want to build a N/A monster so a bigger displacement would be great. And I dont think plopping a dohc onto a sohc block is so easy but ya never know what these manufacturers have up theyre sleeves.

 

As far as I know will show the EVO and the Endeavor at NAIAS. Chicago should see the debut of the 2004 Galant(like the '99 Galant). New York will likely get the debut of the Lancer Sportback(which I believe will also have the 4G64) and the beefed up Lancer powered by the 4G64.
Anyone else hear about this?

 

The 2.0L 4G94 is already a bored out version of the 1.8L from the Mirage LS's, I seriously doubt there's another four tenths of a liter left in that little block. We must remember that Honda's swapability was born due to the extreme demand and availablity of their vehicles, all using the same chassis and the same B and D sereis motors. But today there are people who make kits for you to make the job easier, even if you want an H-series in your car. As soon as Mitsubishis became in demand and there are feasible options (swaps that make sense money wise) then it might just become easy for us too.

 

Ageed on most points, however, the swapability, in my personal opinion, really came out of cost effectiveness for Honda/Acura. I mean, instead of creating a whole new engine for each different model, it seems like it would be less costly for a company with a larger model line (like Honda and Acura combined was at one time) and different options that they just design the engines and transmissions to be easily swappable so that since they have umpteen different models, they wouldn't have to have umpteen different engines/chassis. I think it had less to do with aftermarket and performance demand than cost of design and manufacture.

 

Oh I agree wholeheartedly, but that is true of almost EVERY manufacturer, they are all looking to cut costs. This isn't a technique that the H/A guys invented. However, what I meant was, to make it easy for most shadetree mechanics, the aftermarket provides the instructions, the unique mounts, you can get guides that tell you what interchangable parts you should get, what motors fit best into whatever. Its all been made a science, an art so to speak. Even with my old Pontiac if I decided I wanted a 3.4L DOHC V6 or the 3800 Supercharged from a new GTP I could drop one in, maybe even a Northstar V8 if I wanted it bad enough.

 

Oh, I see what your saying. Since H/A has sold in such quantities, and has a high aftermarket demand, that has caused the swap kits to be successful and has demand enough to be designed.

At first read it sounded like you were saying that H/A designed the engines/chassis with swapability in mind, hence my confusion. As such, I had to bring up the cost effectiveness thing (although many H/A lovers would like to think, they indeed did not invent EVERYTHING that is automotive).

 

Since all of us are from different areas, how do you think this new mid Lancer will do? I mean, how many Spec V's and Corolla Type-S's do you see in your area? The new Si is supposedly moving kinda slow for Honda, and I don't think the SVT focus has come out yet...so that just leaves us with the last NA offering. We already know SRT Neons and turbo Proteges are gonna be rare so no need to speculate on them.

And as for the swap issue, if a 2.4L from a Galant fits, has any one tried to get a 6G72 into their Lancer?

 

I see more Spec-Vs than anything out here. The SVT Focus is out in the ZX3 format, but, I've heard they aren't moving well. The Si... well, it's a shadow of it's former self. This is partially due to it's lack of speed over the last incarnation, and the lack of engine swaps (well, there is the one from the RSX type S, but, it's difficult, and requires dealer involvement). To put the Si "crisis" into perspective, the MSRP is a little over 19K, but, dealers in my area are selling them for a little over 14K, cheaper than some EX models, actually. They are harder to move than Pontiac Azteks. The Corolla S isn't fairing so well either from what I've seen. Back to the Focus, there is speculation that it will be either supercharged or turbocharged as early as next year.

Only NA "special" car that is around other than this mid-Lancer might be the RSX Type S, and that's only because any forced induction is right out with the new engines, and they are much more expensive than any (maybe not the SVT Focus) of the other cars mentioned.

 

Overall, the compact perfromance sales numbers are not that high. That's the main reason Mazda is bringing the Protege in limited numbers and also why will not risk too high a number for the U.S.
The Sentra SER is the car I see the most out of the segment.
The beefed up lancer has an advatage over the Civic Si and the Focus 3-door, since it is a four door. Also, the Corolla S is really not that much different from the regular Corolla, so consumers see little reason to buy.
Also, the Lancer has more interior room than the Sentra and Protege. This could lead consumers to prefer the Lancer over the Galant (despite the small trunk). Probably another reason the new Galant was slated for September 2003 release.

 

Oh yeah, I had forgotten that the Type-S's were pretty weak. I must have been thinking of that rumor mill article that said the Celica GTS engine might show up under the hood of the Corolla next year. If they do that I don't see how Toyota will be able to sell Celicas, Matrices, Type S's and Scions, but they'll damn sure try.

I would like to see a 17" wheel package, four wheel discs with ABS, a lowered stance "tuned" by Ralliart a unique spoiler and a decent interior, not trendy (as in ugly IMO like the Spec V's) and not too overboard on the stereo since most people want to do their own. No more then 19,500.