DSM 4G63 output vs EVO8 engine? Which is better?

[ITSME4G63]

JIM!!!! how bout some imput here, these people are getting sand in their vagina

 

[Injected]

You do know that the Evo motor sits in an entirely different orientation than our cars right? It *could* be done but the cost far outweigh the benefits. At the heart the Evo motor is *basically* the same thing that sits in your car, it just spins the opposite way. It is not feasible since you would be actually fitting a DSM body around the Evo drivetrain rather then fitting the Evo drivetrain into a DSM.

I am in no way advocating that this would be an easy swap and everyone knows that the engines from the recent generations of Evo's sit the other way. If it were as easy as a honda k series swap, and parts were as cheap and as available, would you do it?

The new 4g63 is in fact a wonderful engine. But how much do you think a swap like you're referring to would cost? Any logical person with enough money to do an evo to dsm motor swap will utilize the "late 80s 4g63" block and buy parts such as pistons, rods, stroker kit, etc that were developed recently (hence, having better technology). So you can spend X amount of money putting that evo engine in your dsm or spend the same X amount of money utilizing the same 6bolt block that was developed in the late 80s and use different, high performance, internals that were developed recently and much up to date with technology. Who do you think will benefit more in the end?

That is my point earlier, but some of the things like head design and others cannot be moved over. These posts are pointless because I just said that it isn't feasable right now because of price, etc. etc. and I am getting replies saying, but it would cost to much and isn't feasable and your money would be better spent on a 6 bolt. I know it isn't feasable, please read my posts and understand that I was lightheartedly encouraging someone to develop a swap kit to make something that is currently unfeasable a little easier. If a shop offered motor mounts, ecu and harness service, driveshafts, all the lines (clutch, fuel) and whatever else is actually involved in this specific swap, a lot more people would do it. It's a basic economic supply side pull. Again, right now it's not feasable or effecient, but give it time.

Actually, the Evo IX to be released next year will reportedly have MIVEC+turbo. It will be the last iteration of the 4G63T before the EVO X gets the world engine that was co-developed by Mitsu, DCX and Hyundai.

You must have read the same article I did, but I didn't hear about the turbo ban in the WRC (no time to catch up on the WRC lately). Interesting...

 

[ITSME4G63]

new engine? that ####ing sucks, WHats with all these japanese copanies jumping on the "New Engine" bandwagon? If it aint broke, dont fix it. Look at porsche, how long have they been tweakign that boxer 6?

 

[leakyfaucet]

I never said that an extra gear was better for acceleration. The gear ratio argument is kind of pointless since the whole idea of the closer gears is to stay in the sweet spot of larger turbos and that is counter to what you are saying about taller gears.

For most DSMer's, all we want is a very fast, very reliable daily driver. The new 4G63 is simply a better engine since it is newer and uses far better technology.

I never said that you said it was better for acceleration, but I'm sure you would bring it up, as you did. I don't get what you're saying and I don't think you understand what I'm saying. In racing, more often than not, fewer gears are actually beneficial, since shifting wastes time that could be spent accelerating. Do you have any idea how many drag cars and dragsters have only 2 or 3 gears? Or no transmission at all?

What is all this amazing new technology that the EVO has that couldn't be put on a 1989 block with aftermarket parts? I want to know what's so amazing about an engine that makes 271 crank HP running 19psi of boost with a very good turbo and a FMIC/sprayer.

 

[GPTourer]

Well, the 4G63 has been around for like, what 16 years? Mitsu has to think about what makes fiscal sense. If they can get a new engine thats being codevloped with other manufacturers for less, that will pass emissions later, make the car lighter (its all aluminum) and keep their cars on the cutting edge, it'll be stupid not too. Most everybody here thinks the Evo engine is nothing special and not worthy of trying to get in a DSM and are happy with their six bolts that are already a decade old, so why should anybody care that the Evo will get a new motor soon? It'll be as unusable as the current horizontally opposed 7-bolt, no need to get upset about it.

The Evo's hollow camshafts, sodium filled valves are just a few things they talk about. Its all stuff that trickled down from their desire to win in the WRC. If you equally mod the engines with external bolt ons, I am pretty sure the Evo motor would produce more then the DSM. Wether you can bolt all that stuff on to a '90 block is a bit moot in my opinion since they are the "same" engine.

 

[leakyfaucet]

The Evo's hollow camshafts, sodium filled valves are just a few things they talk about.

Wow, such amazing technology. Those hollow camshafts probably allow for another whole 1-2 hp. And sodium filled valves, Jesus, truly space age technology!

With such extreme cutting edge technology, it's a wonder that auto makers like Ferrari and Porsche don't ditch their old school POS engines for these godlike Evo engines!




----------------
This sarcasm was in no way directed towards GPTourer, just at people who think the Evo 8 engine is somehow a magical high tech wonder.

 

[Syndicate13]

Wow, such amazing technology. Those hollow camshafts probably allow for another whole 1-2 hp. And sodium filled valves, Jesus, truly space age technology!

With such extreme cutting edge technology, it's a wonder that auto makers like Ferrari and Porsche don't ditch their old school POS engines for these godlike Evo engines!




----------------
This sarcasm was in no way directed towards GPTourer, just at people who think the Evo 8 engine is somehow a magical high tech wonder.

At least someone else gets it. You are not swapping in a "superior engine". How many people are making over 400whp on stock 6 bolts with over 100k on them? I'm willing to bet there are more than just a handful. The swap will never, ever be economical or practical, it's not just the motor that would have to be changed, you would be changing damn near the entire car, and for what? The only reason for it to be done is to win a dick swinging contest over who did the most out there swap to a car.

 

[DSM mechanix]

Even if parts were developed to make it an easier install, all the parts will still easily cost more than most DSM's. And with all this new expensive technology your installing, you'll then have to pay a premium for custom and newly developed parts.

On topic, the only power advantage I see the EVO having over an equally modified (equally technological) DSM is that I believe DSM transmissions have an extra shaft, meaning slightly more drivetrain loss.

 

[DSMJim]

JIM!!!! how bout some imput here, these people are getting sand in their vagina

Sure..

Swapping an EVO 4G63 is retarded. We can make all the HP we want with our current motors. The only reason swaps are popular in Honda's because they have so many different motors in their cars and very few of the fast one's come in the cheap chassis that everybody wants.

Well here is a fact of life for us, the good engine comes in *EVERY* chassis we have (T/E/L) and even the not-so great motor 420a is a great motor for building and turbocharging and can make some serious number with descent aftermarket support.

The fact of the mater is quite simply, whatever you could possibly gain from swapping an EVO motor over (AYC would never be able to be swapped and one extra gear is not worth it, our gearing is fine now) would never be enough to jusitify the cost. WHatever you think your getting you can simply get with cams, headwork and a built bottom end. Hell you would have enough left over for a shep tranny to boot.

With all that said: http://www.hasport.com/Products/Mount Kits/Mount EKK1.htm Have you seen the price of these mounts? $639 bux. When was the last time you saw a DSM guy spend even $100 on engine mounts? Never because we don't have to.

Besides forget mounts, wiring would be the biggest problem and a huge cost to the whole transplant. Even with that aside after your done spending all kinds of money on that, get ready to buy 5 custom drive shafts because the evo shafts will not work. Oh just a quick note, your shift linkage won't reach the trans either so get ready for custom cables, your gonna need them.

If our cars came with a SOHC 110hp motor we would swap motors to but it doesn't and 400whp on a stock motor for a few thousand dollars is a fact of life for us, were not swappin nuttin..

 

[GPTourer]

This sarcasm was in no way directed towards GPTourer, just at people who think the Evo 8 engine is somehow a magical high tech wonder.

Gee thanks, that makes everything okay.

Actually, the hollow camshafts and the sodium valves are the only things I know of that are tangible. The twin scroll feature for the turbo is another. I'm actually referring to basically stock cars here, but to be fair we'll toss out the 14B and T25 and give them Evo3's and similar fuel delivery. When you start modding a car (or engine), things change - its hard to make comparisons - that's why I said equally modded. I'd think that if they were engine dyoned the Evo would perform better, but I have no way to prove it. IF you want to believe that the Evo engine has no improvements over the DSM then fine. But, I'm not talking about a bare basic block packed with forged internals from Ross, Eagle, or Crower plus a Slowboy Stage VI head with Unorthodox Cam gears and HKS 272's with a Magnus sheetmetal intake, overbored throttle body lit off with an HKS twin power ignition system. So yeah, by the time you upgrade half the engine with non Mitsubishi components you could get 900+hp out of either a 2005 Evo block or a 1990 DSM block.

I'm not saying its worthwile to try an evo swap, not by any means - just that the engine has been improved over the last 15 years. Wether thats by leaps and bounds is relative. People on this forum may have one point of view, while engineers assigned to the project getting paid six figures may have another.

EDIT: Looking at it another way - the Evo produces its 271 (now 276)hp - (the highest hp per liter in this half of the world), meets current emissions requirements even in CA, and can do it on91 octane gas. Subaru had to punk out and come out with a 2.5L to beat it (and it still doesn't according to MT's head to head test of the '05 MR vs '05 STi) It has proven very streetable, at least last somewhere close to the 10 year 100,000 warranty and so far, AFAIK, none have walked. I'd call that great progress.

 

[NDgsx]

Has anybody ever really proven that putting a 1G head on a 2G motor is better or what? From the looks of it and what I have been discovering a 1g head (other then the cams) will be a power loss because of the way the intake ports are designed. They are on too much of an angle towards the valve, they are too large and will loose velocity. Does anybody have any dyno's or proof that the 1G head is better than the 2g head anywhere?

Sorry to go OT...

....and you thought I was crazy

 

[diambo4life]

Subaru had to punk out and come out with a 2.5L to beat it (and it still doesn't according to MT's head to head test of the '05 MR vs '05 STi)

Actually, the 2.5L was developed only for the U.S. market so it might be a little unfair comparing it to the EVO 4G63 that has undergone various revisions.

At least compare the FQ 300 or MR EVO to the STi Spec C which are closer to each other. The EVO doesn't exactly walk it and actually it was the other way round. I prefer looking at Great Motoring and Japanese mags for heads up battles than MT when it comes to imports. The only thing I would trade from my ol Talon for the EVO is the tranny. I like my 6-bolt block just perfect. I do not consider it inferior anyway to the EVO's 7.


DSMJim, do you have any data/proof to support your claims about the 1G head v/s 2G head argument? Let me know when you do. Any fast DSM's (John Shepherd level) running a ported 2G head? I don't really know any. If there are, it may probably explain why there are only like four 2G's in the top 30 AWD times. J/K :laugh: Sorry that was an easy one to hit below the belt.

 

[GPTourer]

Actually, the 2.5L was developed only for the U.S. market so it might be a little unfair comparing it to the EVO 4G63 that has undergone various revisions.

But to be fair, I have to use the comparisons because I don't think the FQ or Spec C could exist under CARB. Which I think is why the 2.5 was developed for our market.

If there are, it may probably explain why there are only like four 2G's in the top 30 AWD times.

Could it have a little something to do with weight? What else could be the difference if a 2G swaps in a complete 6 bolt long block?

 

[JiveMasterT]

for the money, wouldnt you rather just swap in a built 2.4L 4g64 from like slowboy or something? it would probably be cheaper, require just as much, if not less work to install, and it would give you more low end torque and be built for romping on. i dunno about you guys, but thats what im going to do, instead of waiting for someone to release a way to get an evo 2.0L in my car...

 

[blue1]

I thought the EVO 8 was a 2.4. Correct me if i am wrong but that should produce a bit more power than a 63 in stock form!

 

[blue1]

Sorry i will correct myself: http://www.modernracer.com/mitsubishilancerevo8.html check out the hp figures!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[JiveMasterT]

edit...

nvm.

 

[ITSME4G63]

the evo engine is better in stock form than the dsm engine, the design of the pistons and rods, the dude from ams did a whole writeup about it in a recent modififed mag, If I am able to scan it at work, I will do so fo you guys and post that shit up here today, and mods please do not get a sandy vagina if the pics are too big, because they weill be from a magazien and you need them that big to read the tiny writing.

 

[GPTourer]

I get Modified and I missed that, which issue is it?

 

[AMS stampy]

The basics of the EVO engine are the same as the DSM. there are small differences that make them tougher. Transmission the biggest. but all in all its the same motor...just newer. The headgaskets on them are phenonminal. We are creeping on the 700 mark in the shop EVO and we are still on the stock MLS EVO 8 head gasket. Swapping an EVO motor into a DSM is silly though. very silly.

oh and that guy is name Martin Damian. ya know .... the owner.

Eric

 

[lo2210]

2. mitsu would never go to mivec for the evo's , they are rally bred cars and n/a would never put up the torque numbers for a 4cyl required to even compete[/QUOTE]


In the fall issue of Road & Track Speed they have a pic of the EVO X due for release in 2007 will have the MIVEC & still be turbocharged with power at 300hp

 

[AWDLATIN]

There are a couple of mivec evo's out there. Shit, there are even a couple of Mivec head/4G blocks (Evo I-III 7 bolt blocks) out there too...they're just not in the US. I have read about a handful in thailand, china, korea and other places. Granted, these are not oem specs, but they are out there and it can be done. As far as which motor is superior, I think the Evo has it just based on the materials used. Other than that...pretty much the same thing (other than being turned the other way).

 

[DBR01]

I don't mean MIVEC N/A, I mean a variable cam tech. + Turbo. Ever seen a turbo Vtech car? Like that, but with a better engine.

I don't think any of you even know what MIVEC does......it's not a power mod at any level......it's for better gas mileage.....it simply runs off of 2 cylinders instead of 4 under certain conditions......basically for freeway driving.....you won't get any kind of added horsepower, if anything you will get less horsepower when engaged :thumbdown

 

[GPTourer]

I don't think any of you even know what MIVEC does......it's not a power mod at any level......it's for better gas mileage.....it simply runs off of 2 cylinders instead of 4 under certain conditions

That is so not true. MIVEC stands for Mitsubishi's Innovative Valve timing and lift Electronic Control system. Its in use in the 4G69 that is in the Outlander, Lancer Ralliart, and Galant 4cyl. It works similar to everybody elses VVT, VTEC, etc and so on.

While it could be used to improve fuel mileage, it is not a displacement on demand system. I don't deny that it helps more mundane cars like the Galant get better mileage (30mpg on the highway) yet it is bigger, heavier and more powerful (160>140) then the car it replaced. It might also be used to help a car like then Evo maintain its midrange punch (and perhaps supplement its top end) but have a more emissions friendly and gass miserly tune at idle and low RPMs.

 

[AWDLATIN]

That is so not true. MIVEC stands for Mitsubishi's Intelligent Valve timing Electronically Controlled. Its in use in the 4G69 that is in the Outlander, Lancer Ralliart, and Galant 4cyl. It works similar to everybody elses VVT, VTEC, etc and so on.

While it could be used to improve fuel mileage, it is not a displacement on demand system. I don't deny that it helps more mundane cars like the Galant get better mileage (30mpg on the highway) yet it is bigger, heavier and more powerful (160>140) then the car it replaced. It might also be used to help a car like then Evo maintain its midrange punch (and perhaps supplement its top end) but have a more emissions friendly and gass miserly tune at idle and low RPMs.

^^^ He is correct...