Major weakness in the 4G63 motor...

[na90dsm]

ok now to further this discussion, i am wondering if the stats on the v6 mx6 are similar to that of the 4 cylinder. would my n/t talon have a chance against a v6 mx6. the mx6 has a new engine, no mods done to it except its a jasper rebuild and it has a weapon r intake and a borla catback w/ a hks hiper muffler replacing the borla.

my n/t has a full exhaust, gutted high flow cat, ported header, taylor wires,injen intake, and the rest is stock. would this have any chance against the mx6 v6. does the v6 have more power than the 4cylinder turbo, if so about how much more. mind you that the v6 is a n/a motor.

this has been a ongoing battle between me and my friend. i am interested to see the stats on this point and to see what this motor can actually do. i have a 4g63 and i am a strong beleiver that this engine for its size is one of the best tuning motors out there. its strong and adapts well to moduifacations. would this be a competition, and which car do you think will come out on top.

 

[Phoenyx]

Originally posted by DrZiplok


This entire discussion is pointless; your car is out of tune, the ECU is trying it's best to save you from some serious repair bills and you have the gall to complain that it's "not strong"?

Someone probably has a "you don't deserve this car" graphic; if they don't chime in, pretend I do.

Mike! I know you! You remember me? We talked all day long and you finally recovered your 30HP from tuning at Vishnu. How dare you insult me this way?

Nah, my car pulled 153WHP 172WTQ on Vishnu's Dyno dude. It was pretty decent for a Talon with just 13psi and a K&N cone. The point is, even at that state, the car felt like it was screaming to redline at the upper rpms. Maybe I'm saying this because I'm going from a 12-sec car (my RX7) to a 14-sec car..

-M

 

[Phoenyx]

Originally posted by na90dsm
ok now to further this discussion, i am wondering if the stats on the v6 mx6 are similar to that of the 4 cylinder. would my n/t talon have a chance against a v6 mx6. the mx6 has a new engine, no mods done to it except its a jasper rebuild and it has a weapon r intake and a borla catback w/ a hks hiper muffler replacing the borla.

my n/t has a full exhaust, gutted high flow cat, ported header, taylor wires,injen intake, and the rest is stock. would this have any chance against the mx6 v6. does the v6 have more power than the 4cylinder turbo, if so about how much more. mind you that the v6 is a n/a motor.

this has been a ongoing battle between me and my friend. i am interested to see the stats on this point and to see what this motor can actually do. i have a 4g63 and i am a strong beleiver that this engine for its size is one of the best tuning motors out there. its strong and adapts well to moduifacations. would this be a competition, and which car do you think will come out on top.

!

Dude a 4G63 is an awesome motor. The power potential is very good. However, stock for stock, there is no way you could compete. Comparing mods versus mods is not going to be an accurate conclusion. There is no winner here.. it all depends on the car's condition and mods..

-M

 

[Phoenyx]

For those of you who think my car has issues other than it running lean: Here is my dyno sheet from Vishnu Performance.

You must be logged in to view this image or video.

You must be logged in to view this image or video.

Btw, that's with the following mods:

o K&N cone
o 13psi

-M

 

[autronicDSM]

There is no major weakness in 4g63 motor other then its owner who turns up the boost without adding more fuel.

 

[Phoenyx]

Originally posted by autronicDSM
There is no major weakness in 4g63 motor other then its owner who turns up the boost without adding more fuel.

Ok, so now this thread is deteriorating pretty quickly. I did not write this thread for you to bash me. I wrote this thread so that some intelligent people to prove/disprove my theory about the motor and its topend power without an upgraded turbo.

If you don't have anything constructive to say about the argument then go pester some other thread!


-M

 

[na90dsm]

yes i can agree. this was a good discusion about the cars.

on the top end factor. the stock cams on the turbo car, do they lack cam duration on the top end. i read that the n/t cams are bigger than the turbo cams. does this have a big impact on how the power is at top end, if so why did mitsubishi do this to the cars instead of running one set of cams.

 

[ASZRAEL1266]

I am not sure about the cams for non turbos better then the turbo cams. There are people who buy trubo cams to put them on there non turbo DSM's. and to answer your questions na90dsm don't try to race your friends MX6. I have a probe GT with the 2.5 V6 and with intake and exhaust i was able to pull off high 14's. I totaly agree with adding more fuel. If you put on a fuel pump and get enough fuel to match your air and you don't heat soak the intercooler i think your car will pull very stongly even in the top end.

 

[PropXprt]

Ok maybe Im a little late in the game to add this but my friend has a decent mx-6 v-6 with exhaust, intake and 80,000mi. I have a 92gst 86,000mi free mods and k&n only, we raced each other four times, 2 times we drove our own cars and the other 2 we drove each others, my gst won by a car length every time. I agree that 4g63 is a little weak in the upper r's, I am saying this on the basis I have a basically stock engine. well theres my 2cents and please dont jump my a$$ for stating this, if it pisses anyone off that i added this please jus be considerate and forget it.

 

[Phoenyx]

Originally posted by PropXprt
Ok maybe Im a little late in the game to add this but my friend has a decent mx-6 v-6 with exhaust, intake and 80,000mi. I have a 92gst 86,000mi free mods and k&n only, we raced each other four times, 2 times we drove our own cars and the other 2 we drove each others, my gst won by a car length every time. I agree that 4g63 is a little weak in the upper r's, I am saying this on the basis I have a basically stock engine. well theres my 2cents and please dont jump my a$$ for stating this, if it pisses anyone off that i added this please jus be considerate and forget it.

Thanks for the honesty and your opinions. I believe if you had ran a ProbeGT Turbo though, you wouldn't have won. The turbo Probe's have more power potential than its V6 brother. *NOTE* I am only mentioning a roll along acceleration to a certain speed, NOT overall top end speed.

I'm saying the same thing you are based on a basically stock setup as well.

-M

 

[DrZiplok]

Originally posted by Phoenyx


Mike! I know you! You remember me? We talked all day long and you finally recovered your 30HP from tuning at Vishnu. How dare you insult me this way?

Like this.

Seriously though, trolling like you did with this thread is pretty lame. You know perfectly well that your car's not pulling well high up because you're detonating like mad.

Bitching about the car when it's your own fault (and worse, you know it) is very uncool. Trying to smokescreen the issue (eg. by suggesting that I shouldn't be calling you on your BS) is also pretty uncool.

Fix your problem and bi*** about something that deserves the aggro, eh?

In the spirit of helping you out; get one of these:

http://www.q.dyndns.org/~blc/ecuview/

Having a knock gauge you can watch while driving kicks ass. 8)

 

[ASZRAEL1266]

our cars are a little weak on the top end. All cars have the strong points and there weak points. For example Nissan 240SX have alot of low end but not much top end. our cars have alot of TQ more TQ then HP. TQ helps out alot in the low end and HP is what takes us in the top end. I think the reason why we feel our cars have weak top end is becouse we have more TQ then HP so we are going to feel the low and mid range better then the extream top end. That is just what i think. There is nothing wrong persay with our top end its just we have so much in the mid and mid upper range that it feels like it has no top end.

 

[Phoenyx]

Originally posted by DrZiplok

Seriously though, trolling like you did with this thread is pretty lame. You know perfectly well that your car's not pulling well high up because you're detonating like mad.

True. But even if I wasn't - the car still doesn't pull like other cars I've been in. Even when I was basically stock. Which of course begs the fact that I need more power.

Bitching about the car when it's your own fault (and worse, you know it) is very uncool. Trying to smokescreen the issue (eg. by suggesting that I shouldn't be calling you on your BS) is also pretty uncool.

Everyone bitches about a car because the fact remains - there are weaknesses in cars! My RX7 has a major weakness - its internal engine design is very delicate. A WRX has a major weakness - it's not good at top end power either. Why?

Don't get defensive in my argument about the 4G63. It *does* have a weakness that can be overcome... People shouldn't be so defensive to justify their purchases. That's uncool.

Fix your problem and bi*** about something that deserves the aggro, eh?

I will fix the car. But I'll still bi*** until I get this Talon as fast as my RX7!

In the spirit of helping you out; get one of these:

http://www.q.dyndns.org/~blc/ecuview/

Having a knock gauge you can watch while driving kicks ass. 8)

Got the Super AFC-II which comes with a Knock warning and reader... Hehehehe...

-M

 

[pneumo]

That's what I like about dyno tuning: Hard data! If any of the following is innacurate, please correct me, the resolution on my screen is poor.
From what I can tell your turbo reaches full boost at about 3800 rpm? Or is that just the way this dyno run was done? Just for comparison, my nearly stock Talon with 14b reaches 15 psi at 2600 rpm. My Laser with lots of mods and a Big 16G gets ful boost at 3000 rpm. At about 5200 rpm I see your A/F ratio hits a very rich 10.3 /10.5. That's rich for 14 psi, and the HP and torque show a sharp drop. Normal 4g63 engines don't have a power drop at 5200. Then the A/F ratio gets less rich, and the power starts to come back as the revs climb. Typical stockish 4g63 will show max HP at about 5800 -5900 rpm. Yours hits peak HP at 6300, then the boost dips again. Overall I'd say The A/F ratio needs to be fixed, the Apex Sper AFC will do the trick. Study the A/F ratio graph to see where you need to adjust the high settings. Also, if your turbo really does spool up at 3800 rpm, it's not right, look into it. I suggest doing a leak test. A boost leak will cause most of what I see here, such as delayed spool up, loss of power, rich A/F ratio at WOT. Maybe that will also fix the boost drop at high rpm. It also might be that your turbo is going out.

 

[na90dsm]

very well said. i think this may be a very good point. we have alot of pull in the low to mid range that when the tq curve falls off and the full hp takes over we feel something is missing.but then again how do people go about finding that happy medium between the 2. you can go with top end cams for instence and get mad crazy top end outta the car, but you loose some down low. in the same way you can tune for a lot down low but loose some in the top end. very interesting point

 

[InferiorWang]

there are a lot of posts in this thread so i skipped most of it, but has anyone mentioned the cam problem in the 90 models? Mitsu had a horrible exhaust cam in 1990 and all later dsm's had a better one. I've heard of people just switching out to a stock exhaust cam from 91-94 and gaining 20-30hp (with a few other mods of course, not stock)

 

[na90dsm]

and i definately can agree with the fact that there is simptoms of boost leak here. could be something simple, but if your running rich somewhere there has to be a leak. it could just be a seal thats really tiny but it can make a big difference

 

[na90dsm]

Originally posted by InferiorWang
there are a lot of posts in this thread so i skipped most of it, but has anyone mentioned the cam problem in the 90 models? Mitsu had a horrible exhaust cam in 1990 and all later dsm's had a better one. I've heard of people just switching out to a stock exhaust cam from 91-94 and gaining 20-30hp (with a few other mods of course, not stock)

which cams. the turbo cams or the n/t cams give the increase. i curious because i have a set of turbo cams from a 91 just sittin here. if it is the 91 turbo exhaust cam im in luck since my car is a 90

 

[Phoenyx]

Originally posted by InferiorWang
there are a lot of posts in this thread so i skipped most of it, but has anyone mentioned the cam problem in the 90 models? Mitsu had a horrible exhaust cam in 1990 and all later dsm's had a better one. I've heard of people just switching out to a stock exhaust cam from 91-94 and gaining 20-30hp (with a few other mods of course, not stock)

Interesting. Now we are talking. Can anyone verify this?


-M

 

[Phoenyx]

Originally posted by na90dsm
and i definately can agree with the fact that there is simptoms of boost leak here. could be something simple, but if your running rich somewhere there has to be a leak. it could just be a seal thats really tiny but it can make a big difference

Sorry my friend. The car isn't boost leaking. If you read earlier, I posted that the car pegs at 17psi now with the new exhaust. A boost leak will not allow the engine to reach max boost pressure and also the engine will not be so lean now.

I've owned 6 turbocharged cars and I still own 4 turbo cars. I know what a boost leak is and how to troubleshoot it. This car doesn't have a boost leak - trust me.

Again, we are getting off-topic here. I'm not talking about my car but the 4G63 in general. Anyone else care to post some dyno sheets of relatively stock 4G63s?


-M

 

[na90dsm]

yea. can anyone varify this, this would be a good free mod for me.:laugh:

but i have one delema. the cams are out of the car and i dont know which is intake and which is exhaust. i forgot to mark them and am kicking myself for not doing so. how do you tell which is which. i noticed that one cam has a knotch in the end of it on the oposite side that the cam gear mounts on. is the intake cam the one with the knotch

 

[DrZiplok]

Originally posted by Phoenyx

Don't get defensive in my argument about the 4G63. It *does* have a weakness that can be overcome... People shouldn't be so defensive to justify their purchases. That's uncool.

Your original complaint was BS. No amount of finger-pointing and name-calling will change that fact.

Keep the pleb-level logic for arguing politics down at the bar. I'm not completely stupid. :laugh:

Super AFC-II which comes with a Knock warning and reader... Hehehehe...

By all accounts, this is not compatible with the 1G knock sensor.

It also doesn't tell you what the ECU is thinking. The ECU has its own knock discrimination circuitry, the output of which can only be picked up via the diagnostic port. I haven't seen anything that suggests that the new S-AFC is doing anything more than sniffing the knock sensor output, which is not useful without considerable amounts of engine-specific signal conditioning.

 

[DrZiplok]

Originally posted by Phoenyx

Again, we are getting off-topic here. I'm not talking about my car but the 4G63 in general. Anyone else care to post some dyno sheets of relatively stock 4G63s?

Mine are in my gallery. I'll be doing another pass by Vishnu in a few weeks, once I'm done with the 3" MAF/sidemount upgrade to see whether I've cured my boost sag.

If not, I will be sad.

 

[Phoenyx]

Originally posted by DrZiplok


Your original complaint was BS. No amount of finger-pointing and name-calling will change that fact.

My original complaint still stands. But I see there are other who do "feel" me on that complaint.

Keep the pleb-level logic for arguing politics down at the bar. I'm not completely stupid. :laugh:

Why not talk here? I'm always at the bar when I'm on the computer. It's what I do for a living..

By all accounts, this is not compatible with the 1G knock sensor.

It also doesn't tell you what the ECU is thinking. The ECU has its own knock discrimination circuitry, the output of which can only be picked up via the diagnostic port. I haven't seen anything that suggests that the new S-AFC is doing anything more than sniffing the knock sensor output, which is not useful without considerable amounts of engine-specific signal conditioning.

How do you know? Have you experimented with the Super AFC-II or installed one? Have you compared values from the ECU/datalogger and the SAFC-II?

-M

 

[Phoenyx]

Originally posted by DrZiplok


Mine are in my gallery. I'll be doing another pass by Vishnu in a few weeks, once I'm done with the 3" MAF/sidemount upgrade to see whether I've cured my boost sag.

If not, I will be sad.

Go ahead and post what you have for inquiring minds....

-M