EvolutionM - Mitsubishi Lancer and Lancer Evolution Community

EvolutionM - Mitsubishi Lancer and Lancer Evolution Community (https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/)
-   Evo Engine / Turbo / Drivetrain (https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/evo-engine-turbo-drivetrain-22/)
-   -   272/264 v 264/272 (https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/evo-engine-turbo-drivetrain/202668-272-264-v-264-272-a.html)

ItalianEvo Jun 5, 2006 01:09 PM


Originally Posted by Ted B
No, I am talking about advancing the intake cam to 110 deg and tightening the LSA to 110 deg to make the engine more mechanically efficient at lower rpm.


No, you do not have a strange 3071. Your 3071 is normal.

You are running 29 psi on pump fuel, and this is what I suspected. This does not appear to be normal, and is almost certainly the cause of your problem.

I don't have any first-hand experience with a 3071 on an EVO, but 29psi is too much boost on pump fuel. In order to run this much boost without getting detonation, the ignition timing has to be retarded quite a bit. If the ignition timing is retarded far enough, the air/fuel charge is still burning when the exhaust valve opens. This creates high EGTs. Also, the mixture is burning inside the turbine housing, which is causing the turbo to spool quicker, and this is the cause of the surging issues. The high heat is not good for the turbo, and you aren't making any more power than you would with less boost and a more realistic ignition curve.

Also, your AFR is a very, very rich 10.5:1. This is only going to make things worse, because you're going to have unburned fuel igniting as soon as it contacts free oxygen in the exhaust system.

What I would do is bring the boost down to ~23-24psi, bring the AFR to ~11.2-11.5:1, and retune the ignition curve. You should make the same power, but you won't have the surging issues and your turbo will last longer.



Hi Ted...

if you're still following this thread...

I'd like to have your personal opinion/advice on that...

It seems TO ME that THE ISSUE ( if I considered all the things correctly ) is too high EGT...

then I THINK I have to decrease intake temps to let me have slower combustion = more advanced ignition map AND to let me have a leaner AFR without det.

IS there anithing else I could think about ?

Decrease backpressure ( for example going from .63 to .82 turbine ) could help me ?

Going from 264 to 272 intake cam could help me ?

Please, your ideas no this...

Thank you.

Ted B Jun 5, 2006 01:45 PM

As far as I can see, the only thing that is really going to help you is to reduce the boost to a level that is more appropriate for pump fuel, retune the AFR, and retune the ignition curve to something more reasonable.

ItalianEvo Jun 5, 2006 01:48 PM

Ok.

Thank you again !

Owens Racing Nov 15, 2007 04:11 PM


Originally Posted by Trojan man (Post 3121561)
Wang, that's correct. A larger intake duration bias will typically help out top end breathing. And, obviously most importantly is that the combinations need to be matched appropriately for your goals.

Evojon - No offense, but for your own sake, please do a lot more research into this subject. Cam designs vary SIGNIFICANTLY from OHV and DOHC motors. The cam specs themselves can't even be compared due to the different valvtrain geometries. For example, a 224/224 (single) cam on an ls-1 is a good midrange cam. I don't think anyone would ever run a 224/224 setup on an evo, because the two cam specs represent completely different valve actuation in real life. Also a turbo cam usually has the exact opposite duration setup as an NA or supercharged cam.

I thought this should be noted. I read through this thread looking at 272/264 cam info. Ran into this. Figured I would clear up the fact that the cam is not really all that small. The duration is shown @ .050 for the LS1 cam. The cams being discussed for the Evo's ex. 264,272,280. These are advertised duration.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:55 AM.


© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands