Two questions about AWD system

[Dhan]

When you pull the e-brake to lock up the rear wheels during rallycross, it’s recommended you press in the clutch. Why is this? How is it saving the rear dif?

Did Mitsubishi design the AWD system for the DSM or was it lifted from an existing platform and adapted to the DSM? Did they ever give the system a name (like how Audi named their system Quattro)?

 

[randman2011]

To answer your last question, our AWD system I believe was lifted directly from the EVO I-III and is mechanically very similar all the way through EVO IX. I know that the rear diff from the later EVOs swap directly into our rear ends. Obviously the transmission is different since the engine spins the other way, but it is my understanding that they are still mechanically related. S-AWC came after AWD Eclipses and was applied to Lancer-based EVOs (I'm not sure which one started it).

Hypothesis: The front wheels still have grip and are spinning roughly proportional to the speed of the car. If the clutch is engaged, the center diff is locked onto engine speed and the only variable is the speed of the rear wheels, which should be zero. If the clutch pedal is depressed, the center diff is free to spin however is best to balance speed between front and rear. That is how I would attempt to justify it with no prior knowledge or experience.

 

[oren hughbanks]

The AWD was available in the predecessor to our 1g dsm on the Mitsubishi Cordia, and Tredia. The dsm did not necessarily evolve from the evo platform. They do use alot of the same parts lucky for us, but after Evo3 they changed the layout 180 for better weight distribution. Our dsms evolved all on their own branch. It makes sense from a manufacturer standpoint to make as many parts interchangeable as possible.

I'm not aware of any name given to the AWD other than GSX or Tsi. It's a very simple reliable system with a 50/50 torque split, no electronic monkey business to mess with it. It just simply gets the power to the ground. Hard to believe the dsm evolved from this

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

 

[randman2011]

The AWD was available in the predecessor to our 1g dsm on the Mitsubishi Cordia, and Tredia. The dsm did not necessarily evolve from the evo platform. They do use alot of the same parts lucky for us, but after Evo3 they changed the layout 180 for better weight distribution. Our dsms evolved all on their own branch. It makes sense from a manufacturer standpoint to make as many parts interchangeable as possible.

I'm not aware of any name given to the AWD other than GSX or Tsi. It's a very simple reliable system with a 50/50 torque split, no electronic monkey business to mess with it. It just simply gets the power to the ground. Hard to believe the dsm evolved from this

Fascinating. Learned something new today. I guess it is really fortunate that they happen to be really similar to the EVOs, then!

Addition to my previous statement: Mitsubishi developed AWC, which first came out in 2001 on the EVO VII per Wikipedia. This is obviously later than the death of the DSM, so other than perhaps occasional part reuse, it has nothing in common with our system.

 

[oren hughbanks]

Mitsu first got into rally racing with the galant vr4 , but later went to the Lancer platform cause they were a little smaller and lighter. So the gvr4 has some good roots, I would love to get my hands on one. The dsm was not a very popular rally car, I don't think there were many classes for it, and they really lack good visibility with those flat windshields.

 

[dizily555]

I have been looking for options with the rear diff in my GSX for a long time, so I did research on what evo diff's could or do fit into the GSX rear subframe. I found none that would work, they are much bigger but are very similar mechanically as was said. Even enough that I believe some of the clutch discs can go into the GSX differentials will some modifications.

Maybe to add to this thread is something I have often wondered about. In my area there are quite a few evo's. People give me shit because GSX could be said to be a poor mans evo. I can see how this is true but its all personal preference. Anyway I wonder how different evo's really are than our DSM's because they all have roots from the AWD Mitsubishi engineers. Obviously over the years with evo's parts are made stronger and more science is put into weight transfer and everything else because they have had 10 generations to our 2. Anyway I want to know how different they really are. Anyone have some good input?

 

[oren hughbanks]

Lancer evolutions are a completely different animal, they really are pure bred rally machines. Our dsm is really a different class car, along the lines of the 3kgt, 300zx, rx7s. Evos were built just for rally racing, to compete against Toyota Celica gt4, corolla awd, Ford escort cosworth, and later on Subaru wrx, the ultimate arch enemy

They just happen to share the same 4g63, but even those are different. The evo 4g is flipped 180 degrees, and they use a 7 bolt crank, but use a 6 bolt style block with oil squirters on their own galley. Evos use a twin scroll turbo, along the lines of a 16g or 18g. The chassis is completely different too. You dint get much closer to a factory race car than a Evo RS , those are as stripped down as u get! Evos also sport much closer gear ratios, more oriented towards rally racing to help keep the engine in the powerband.
Now onto the evo ten. That in my opinion is a 100% completely different car. I wouldn't even relate those to ours. That's a neighbor of a second cousin who worked with our DSM.

It really is interesting why Mitsubishi went so many routes with these kinds of cars. I can't believe such a capable platform ended up turning into what they did. What a horrible waste I guess. You have so many great cars with such a strong presence in motorsport, and now it's all about gone. Mitsubishi has even officialy pulled the plug on the evo platforms, because of the cost to manufacture them. I guess Subaru really is last man standing now. I think it's a crying shame, and I hope one day it will come back. This is one of my favorite subjects, I could go talk bout this forever. I don't think Mitsubishi ever intended the dsm to turn into what it has, I wonder how different it would have been of we ended up getting all the EVOs. I think if I ever won the lottery I would have a small warehouse just to house all the evos I would import.

So i would say to anyone who would call my 1g a poor mans evo, to go do some research cause they really need to learn car history.

 

[dizily555]

Lancer evolutions are a completely different animal, they really are pure bred rally machines. Our dsm is really a different class car, along the lines of the 3kgt, 300zx, rx7s. Evos were built just for rally racing, to compete against Toyota Celica gt4, corolla awd, Ford escort cosworth, and later on Subaru wrx, the ultimate arch enemy

They just happen to share the same 4g63, but even those are different. The evo 4g is flipped 180 degrees, and they use a 7 bolt crank, but use a 6 bolt style block with oil squirters on their own galley. Evos use a twin scroll turbo, along the lines of a 16g or 18g. The chassis is completely different too. You dint get much closer to a factory race car than a Evo RS , those are as stripped down as u get! Evos also sport much closer gear ratios, more oriented towards rally racing to help keep the engine in the powerband.
Now onto the evo ten. That in my opinion is a 100% completely different car. I wouldn't even relate those to ours. That's a neighbor of a second cousin who worked with our DSM.

It really is interesting why Mitsubishi went so many routes with these kinds of cars. I can't believe such a capable platform ended up turning into what they did. What a horrible waste I guess. You have so many great cars with such a strong presence in motorsport, and now it's all about gone. Mitsubishi has even officialy pulled the plug on the evo platforms, because of the cost to manufacture them. I guess Subaru really is last man standing now. I think it's a crying shame, and I hope one day it will come back. This is one of my favorite subjects, I could go talk bout this forever. I don't think Mitsubishi ever intended the dsm to turn into what it has, I wonder how different it would have been of we ended up getting all the EVOs. I think if I ever won the lottery I would have a small warehouse just to house all the evos I would import.

So i would say to anyone who would call my 1g a poor mans evo, to go do some research cause they really need to learn car history.

I absolutely agree, I think with enough work DSM's can be just as good if not better than some evo's. I think DSM's look much sleeker and sexy compared to the boxy evo's, but don't get me wrong I love evo's too, ill own one someday but I'll always have a soft spot for a DSM.

 

[Dhan]

Some great info in here! Glad everyone's sharing what they know. Similar to what Oren said, I find vehicle history, particularly our DSM, really interesting.

I always felt Mitsubishi lost their way right around 2000 when they axed the 3000GT and 2g DSMs. The only reason we got Japan's Evo is because of Subaru's success with the WRX and STi. And now the only performance oriented car they have (Evo) is on its way out to make way for the i-MiEV and a cluster of dreary crossovers for the masses.
Our DSMs definitely have some roots in rally and racing, even if it is a stretch. The 1g was built off of Chrysler's D platform, which in turn was a reprint of the late 80s Galant. That translates to a porky coupe, versus the Evo III that weighs like 2,800lbs. Regardless, the DSM is a solid platform. It's been proven over and over.
Although I don't know why they didn't just give us the Evo I from the get-go. Just because it has four doors and Americans prefer a fast coupe instead of a a fast sedan?

Sometimes I wonder if Mitsubishi stretched itself too thin with all the performance models (not that I'm complaining about the variety). There was the Galant VR4, the 3000GT, the Mitsubishi FTO, the Eclipse GSX, the Evo series, along with all the badge-engineered cars. While a lot of the parts crossed over between the vehicles, it became taxing from a logistical standpoint once the market veered towards fuel efficiency and the Yen dropped off into the abyss around 2000.

And getting back to our AWD system. I love it! I much prefer its "proactive" and mechanical approach to distributing power versus today's electronic "reactive" AWD systems. Not writing off today's systems, as they are impressive in their own right, but I'm a sucker for simplicity. It worked for the WRC Galant VR4 and then the Evo, works for me!
Mitsubishi just could never get the marketing right. If they'd branded this AWD system and touted it as some miracle invention like Audi did, it could have maybe been something. Guess we'll never know.

 

[oren hughbanks]

I am a huge fan of our AWD too. It's just foot, boost, power, ground. No middle man in between. It really was well designed, and really made these cars what they are today. They were definitely ahead of their time with The 4g63 and the awd platform. I mean the closest thing you could get was a SOHC Subaru legacy (yawn*) and if you had deep pockets would have been a Celica all-trac.

I never really thought of Mitsubishi as spreading it too thin, I guess I forgot about the FTO. we did the get the Mitsubishi starion/ Chrysler conquest, but that definitely did not catch on. Yeah it's definitely a dark future ahead , i mean even Hyundai has a more exciting lineup of cars. Idk what Mitsubishi was thinking.

 

[Dhan]

Argh, completely forgot the Starion! Wish they had put a 4G63 in that and gave it a second generation with swoopy 90s style lines. It probably faced too much competition in the form of the Eclipse and 3000GT though.

Idk what Mitsubishi was thinking.

I think the bean-counters took over. It goes in waves though. Ford finally got rid of their American "MPGs meet MP3s" business model and gave us a turbo hot-hatch. There's talk of an AWD turbo Dodge Dart too. Mitsubishi's sun has set in regards to fast fun cars me thinks. At least for the moment. Maybe someday we'll get a "retro" 2022 model year Mitsubishi Eclipse.

 

[Archer Fabrications]

The AWD was available in the predecessor to our 1g dsm on the Mitsubishi Cordia, and Tredia. The dsm did not necessarily evolve from the evo platform. They do use alot of the same parts lucky for us, but after Evo3 they changed the layout 180 for better weight distribution. Our dsms evolved all on their own branch. It makes sense from a manufacturer standpoint to make as many parts interchangeable as possible.

I'm not aware of any name given to the AWD other than GSX or Tsi. It's a very simple reliable system with a 50/50 torque split, no electronic monkey business to mess with it. It just simply gets the power to the ground. Hard to believe the dsm evolved from this

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

Our awd is not a 50/50 split unless you have a welded center diff and a VCE. It's a 60/40 factory

 

[thomcasey]

DSM Drivetrain cam from the Galant VR4, without the AWS (essentially a mix of Cordia/Tredia-Galant VR4 stuff). Then they discontinued the VR4 in the rally area and went lancer due to the smaller size and therefore better performance in Rally (The Galant is HUGE compared to the EVO 1-3)

 

[89Patches]

Our awd is not a 50/50 split unless you have a welded center diff and a VCE. It's a 60/40 factory

I am pretty sure it is indeed a 50/50 split system. Because there would have been no reason for Cusco to make a 65/35 center diff if that was the case of being 60/40 from factory. Also I can say there is no way it's 60/40 from factory for how much my car under steers on a road course. I believe Subaru's are a 60/40 split.

DSM Drivetrain cam from the Galant VR4, without the AWS (essentially a mix of Cordia/Tredia-Galant VR4 stuff). Then they discontinued the VR4 in the rally area and went lancer due to the smaller size and therefore better performance in Rally (The Galant is HUGE compared to the EVO 1-3)

I can say that the Galant is indeed much bigger the an Early Evo. Had my car parked beside my brothers III and it probably was about a 1' longer. And probably was close to 400lbs heavier then his Evo stock.

 

[oren hughbanks]

I would think it's hard to say exactly what the dsm torque split is , since they run open diffs all around the power is always shifting from wheel to wheel.

 

[nathan_spindler55]

http://www.dsmtuners.com/threads/awd-dsm-torque-split-distribution.410949/

 

[lil corb]

http://www.dsmtuners.com/threads/awd-dsm-torque-split-distribution.410949/

good info

 

[dizily555]

Argh, completely forgot the Starion! Wish they had put a 4G63 in that and gave it a second generation with swoopy 90s style lines. It probably faced too much competition in the form of the Eclipse and 3000GT though.



I think the bean-counters took over. It goes in waves though. Ford finally got rid of their American "MPGs meet MP3s" business model and gave us a turbo hot-hatch. There's talk of an AWD turbo Dodge Dart too. Mitsubishi's sun has set in regards to fast fun cars me thinks. At least for the moment. Maybe someday we'll get a "retro" 2022 model year Mitsubishi Eclipse.

I have also heard of talk with the dodge dart, they do excite me because they are sleek little cars. But it is sad to think will most all brands mitsubishi, subaru, audi, bmw, toyota have all seemed to have lost the want for performance based cars like 2hat was coming out in the 90's. In my opinion even the Wrx has gotten more family oriented than the bug eye and hawk eye. Also bmw m3 and audi s4 have gone to more family and luxury looks while still having performance. The future for cars looks slow and not very thought out.

 

[Fullthrottle7]

And getting back to our AWD system. I love it! I much prefer its "proactive" and mechanical approach to distributing power versus today's electronic "reactive" AWD systems. Not writing off today's systems, as they are impressive in their own right, but I'm a sucker for simplicity. It worked for the WRC Galant VR4 and then the Evo, works for me!
Mitsubishi just could never get the marketing right. If they'd branded this AWD system and touted it as some miracle invention like Audi did, it could have maybe been something. Guess we'll never know.

I get the idea behind what you are saying in that simple mechanical systems are functional without as much hassle and provide worry free operation, but to say that they are "proactive" vs. the newer systems being "reactive" sets of some alarm bells. The newer systems sample braking, rotational speed, slip and yaw angles, and more hundreds and even thousands of times each second and translate that information to make corrections that are a huge aid to the driver. Whereas the viscous center and rear diffs in a DSM take SECONDS to react and "lock" up (and I use that lightly), the electronic systems provide near instant feedback and are seamless. The newest iteration of the support systems in the TC-SST trans and drivetrain of the EVO X is nothing short of incredible. There is a reason that they completely spank the STi around a track now when previous models were pretty close to each other and also smoke the manual equipped GSR model while in full automatic mode and it's because of those modern sensor based systems.

The application of most systems are "reaction" based in the sense that an input has to be given before an action is taken, but the reaction time of the electric systems is 100x faster than all but the most expensive mechanical ones. And if you were going to compare apples to apples, the advanced active mechanical systems don't hold a candle to the advanced electric systems like on the WRC cars. It would be damn near impossible to have a "proactive" system that would prepare the differentials BEFORE an input is given although technically the newer systems that allow the user to adjust settings like suspension stiffness, torque bias, and differential aggressiveness do that. Many safety features are being used on the newest luxury vehicles at this point that use laser and radar technology to apply brakes if the user doesn't and something is in front of them and others have steering control for parking, its only a matter of time until those are adapted for performance use and at that point we really will have proactive systems! Its already started a bit, the Mazdaspeed3 uses steering input to control torque steer, I think if you are turned more than 3* either direction your engine output is dropped something like 40ft/lbs. I'm sure there are more examples, I'd love to hear them if you guys know of any neat ones!

Since this is a DSM board the purist' ideal is what's likely to reign supreme and manual systems are going to be favored, but for me personally I would kill to have any one of the advanced systems integrated into my little import muscle car . Oh and to the guys saying the EVO rear diff is a direct swap that is not correct, the internals can be adapted to work with your 2g case but it will need work. TRE is the main shop that does this although I'm sure others can as well. In addition to finding an early EVO clutch type front diff, that would be about as advanced of a mechanical factory setup as a DSM could get! Add a Quaife center and you've got one hell of an AutoX machine!

 

[oren hughbanks]

I will agree with the post above, those tech advances are getting absolutely awesome, but I still prefer what our dsms have. I like not having anything to limit my power to the wheels. I think its more of a connection for me to the car, not having anything to make that connection fuzzy and dull. Idk maybe I'm just rambling at this point

 

[bmxfelon420]

Argh, completely forgot the Starion! Wish they had put a 4G63 in that

It had a 4g63 in pretty much every country except the US. They thought we wanted TORQUE and DISPLACEMENT so they gave us the 2.6l g46b instead. They're pretty stout engines, except for the wierd intake setup they have.

 

[mitsubishikid]

It had a 4g63 in pretty much every country except the US. They thought we wanted TORQUE and DISPLACEMENT so they gave us the 2.6l g46b instead. They're pretty stout engines, except for the wierd intake setup they have.

Technically It was not called the 4G63... because it was known as the G63B back then... but it was a sohc, much like the one fitted in my colt vista, only the starion had a different valve cover which boldly read: SIRIUS DASH.

Fun fact: contrary to popular belief, the sohc 8 and 12 valve G63B and 4G64 are not interference engines, there are deep valve reliefs cut into the top of the pistons, deep enough to avoid piston valve contact in the event of a snapped t belt, one of the reasons why you see so many still in use today.

The cordia/tredia had available awd the same year [1984] that the colt vista was also offered with awd... they had 3 bolt rear axles that look much like the 1st gen dsms, so I guess some of the dsm awd system could have began from the 1st gen colt vistas as well.

 

[oren hughbanks]

I hate putting things together. Especially something from harbor freight, their instructions are totally worthless to say the least. But I couldn't imagine these guys working at the DSM factory in Illinois, having to put together a entire car ! Getting all these parts shipped over in boxes with nothing but Japanese scribbles all over the place, no wonder they made 25 bucks an hour.

 

[Dhan]

Since this is a DSM board the purist' ideal is what's likely to reign supreme and manual systems are going to be favored

Above statement rings true and I'm glad you wrote it. It's a preference thing. Electronic torque vectoring, active yaw, brake force distribution, etc. are impressive in their own right, but I like the simplicity of what we have. Mainly because I can personally work on our AWD systems and I "get" it. The electronic systems are over my head. I understand what's happening and why, but there's that mechanical detachment that I miss.
Using similar logic, my dad staunchly retains a preference for carbureted motors and avoids EFI. I could go on all day about how EFI is superior and he'd probably agree on a lot of points, but in the end he'd stick to what he's familiar with. Call me old

And it's not to say I would write off owning an Evo or similarly "magnetized to the road" AWD car if funds were unlimited. If I could, I'd have a Lamborghini with snow tires for the winter and a GT-R for the track.

But I couldn't imagine these guys working at the DSM factory in Illinois, having to put together a entire car ! Getting all these parts shipped over in boxes with nothing but Japanese scribbles all over the place

That's pretty funny. It would make for a great DSM specific short-film!

 

[ervin00]

And it's not to say I would write off owning an Evo or similarly "magnetized to the road" AWD car if funds were unlimited. If I could, I'd have a Lamborghini with snow tires for the winter and a GT-R for the track.

Me 2, hope that dream comes true