i can bolt on a cone filter to the MAS. i beleive tehy use the standard mitsu bolt pattern for the MAS.theres ur intake. a universal muffler welded onto the back...they exhaust manifolds look really nice in the outlander, reminds me of the old fed spec galants.

 

I'll tell you why Higher displacement is low tech. Compare a Viper's Power per Liter to a Honda S2000s. Or, compare a Corvette Z06's power per liter to an Evolution's. Higher technology (i.e. forced induction, computer controlled variable valve systems, etc.) are the wave of the future, and more complex and efficient systems than just upping the displacement. Corky from Life Goes On could comprehend that.

 

By your logic though, Honda should still be using the old 1300 motor out of my 82' Civic in the 1,000lb's heavier 03' Civic, because technological advances make up for the lack of displacement.

Your logic also assumes that larger displacements mean higher levels of technology can't/won't be incorporated, which is utter nonsense.

Also, ever heard of torque? American drivers love it, can't find much of it in your high-tech Honda wonder-motors.

Ain't no replacement for cubic displacement.

 

Ummm... I'm not saying that Honda make "wonder-motors" but, there are ways of getting torque out of a low displacement engine. Aggressive cam profiles, longer stroke, etc. I think that, yes, VTEC is more hype than substance in most applications, but, at the same time, Mitsu's current motors have a way of getting more torque than HP, and if they MIVEC technology could be put to use on current engines, I think we'd see some good HP numbers, and great usable torque.

My point is that technology like MIVEC which is readily available in every other market except the US mated to currently available engine blocks would BE CHEAPER, and more likely more efficient/effective than just bigger displacement, unintelligent cams.

And there is a replacement for displacement, and it's called technology.

 

Before you say anything... by technology I mean forced induction, and newer methods of engine management.

My point is that "Bigger Displacement for More Horsepower" is what's been being done pretty much since the internal combustion engine's invention. I think that Mitsu is selling themselves short by not even attempting to bring highER tech engines to America.

 

Forced induction isn't new technology. It is very old technology. It is however, expensive and increases maintenance and insurance costs for the consumer who also has to pay a penalty in drivability.

That's why turbo's (and to a lesser extent superchargers), which were very popular in the 80's, virtually disappeared in the 90's and are only recently making a very small comeback mostly in niche markets.

 

Just to let both of you know....varbiale valve timing is NOT new technology either....it has been around for some time now...and those who think Honda created it...think again?!?! Turbocharging as of late has become a very reliable way of making power due to the technical advances in turbo technology.

Nothing you two are talking about is new technology....but...I'd take a turbocharged car any day over a stupid variable valve timed car anyday of the week. I'd have to say that a turbocharged car contrary to what you think mark has to have more technological advances these days to create the power these cars have these days and to remain reliable.

Variable valve timing is nothing but a fad brought back into play by honda that has been made big by the import surge as of the last 5 years.

I see both of your points but I'd have to lean towards the turbo more as having more technology behind it...just for the simple fact that it has to be reliable to todays standards and to create the power they do that people expect...which means 150,000 - 200,000 mles or more out of a 250-300hp engine. Just my 2 cents

 

My point about variable timing is that it is a cheap and effective way to get more power per liter than most other forms of Natural Aspirated tuning. Is it new? No. Did I praise Honda for it? No. I just mentioned it as an option.

Mark, You're right... you never see reliable turbo cars anymore, and they're certainly not widespread. Unless you count Audi, Volvo, Saab, Volkswagon, etc etc. To say that todays turbos are not high tech by pointing at their predacessors is like saying that internal combustion engines are not high tech because the Model T engine was highly ineffective. Turbos have come along way in being not just for niche markets, at least when it comes to some European Imports.

My point is that, sorry, you're wrong, high displacement is not considered a high tech method of gaining power, even when said power comes from the factory. Effective? Maybe. You can beat someone to death with a club just as effectively as shooting them with a gun. Efficient? Hell no. You can't even concede that a variable timing engine is more high tech than a large displacement SOHC engine?

But, this is not my main point. In order to R&D, manufacture the machines to MAKE the new engine class should be more expensive than refining the current engines, or adding newer, readily available technology to them. i.e. MIVEC. There is no need to create new machines to make them, and the R&D would probably be alot less expensive, and, I, for one, would be more trusting of a proven engine than a brand new one. I can't beleive you'd still argue THAT.

 

I agree with what you say regarding cost and efficiency. I, too am skeptical of a 2.7l 4-banger.
However, Mark is simply the messenger reporting to us what he has been told by what he believes are reputable and reliable sources.

 

I used to work for mitsu (4 years)also....I wouldn't really trust a word the reps say...when I asked the rep back at the begining of 2002, he said the price of the evo would be 40 grand....I was like....are you just plain stupid!!!....that would price the car out of its target crowd of buyers. Even the reps most of the time don't have a clue as to what is going on at the higher levels. Just my 2 cents from past experience

 

I'm certainly not saying Mark is lying, or anything of the sort. My point is that so much changes before the salesfloor, and literally anything can happen. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Rumors are just rumors until you can pick the car up at the dealership. I mean, for recent reference, look at the Neon SRT-4. It's on the market now, but, less than a year ago, it was set to be built on the Lancer platform. Now, it's totally different. My point is that things change, and virtually no one knows what's gonna happen in the car industry.

I know I kinda started out refuting it, but, that's because I think it's a very unwise, and costly way of doing things. Now, yes, it may be true, but, for the reasons I've listed ad nauseum, I think it's a bad idea.

 

In respond to the Outlander's lack of power.... I would recommend to import the Airtrek (The Outlander in Jap is called Airtrek) Turbo R, which is a big hit in Japan. With the 4G63 turbo engine, it has 240 hp (which will be the most powerful small SUV in the US). Therefore, Outlander can have some differentiation in the already saturated small SUV market (as now I can't find any reason why I should choose the Outlander from the Kia Sportage, CR-V, Vitara and Rav-4), it can also improve the image of Mitsubishi. Even though the Airtrek (or Outlander) Turbo R may not sell as much as the normal Outlander, but at least it can draw some ppl's attention to the Outlander as a different small SUV from other competitor and when they wanna buy a small SUV, Outlander will come out in their mind, not only RAV4 and CRV.

For the spec. of the Airtrek Turbo R: http://www.30.com.hk/pc_spec/spec_airtrek_turbo.htm