Old 4G63 Vs. New 4G63.....

Mannai · Dec 18, 2003

Me and my friend who owns an evo7 were discussing the article that AMS had in the latest modified magazine, and then I realized the power difference they made over us.

Why that much of a difference. I understand its newer and improved but they are making 350+whp on stock turbo just bolt ons and on pump. Close to 400whp with cams and race gas on a 16g!!! which is quite amazing, while still retaining the stock MAF and ecu, just a S-AFC. I know you cant compare their 16g to ours, much bigger exhaust housing and twin scroll. but still its quite impressive.

While we have people running 16g's, greens, true garret 50trims and still cant make that sort of power on 20+ pounds on pump (exception for a few, dre etc). I know it depends on the car condition and tune. but still I bet that mod for mod the new motor will make at least 20-30whp more and still drive better and smoother.

What do you guys think?

diambo4life · Dec 18, 2003

For one..EVO's do have higher compression than DSM's and have forged pistons. That will make a big difference. Add to the fact that they have a FMIC stock, better intake manifold STOCK and other stuff I can't think off right now..

anconover · Dec 18, 2003

many factors involved but as mentioned above, u can see they really arent the same. the evo has been 'revised'

Mannai · Dec 18, 2003

diambo4life said:
For one..EVO's do have higher compression than DSM's and have forged pistons. That will make a big difference. Add to the fact that they have a FMIC stock, better intake manifold STOCK and other stuff I can't think off right now..

Evo pistons are not forged, just higher compression.

But I am talking about eclipses with intercooler, injectors, afc, upgraded turbo, 3inch turbobacks, fuel pump etc. everything to run an upgraded turbo and still very very few make past the 330-350whp mark on pump, and this running turbos way bigger than the 16g on the evo.

I do agree that the intake manifold is better, but its probably in the whole design of the engine too. but what exactly?

I think the ECU is better mapped and is more aggressive, their ecu's do run rich but they handle mods better. probably the most gain is in the head design too.

Why is the engine rotated the other way round?

diambo4life · Dec 18, 2003

....oops I meant to say it has forged rods and aluminum pistons. Anyway it comes with a stronger bottom end STOCK than a dsm that was my point.

I don't think their ECU is that much superior to attribute it's power capabilities but I would say it's slightly aggressive than that of a DSM. A Euro/Jap. spec EVO ECU will probably be much more aggressive.

I have no idea why the engine was rotated 180 degrees. This started long ago though from the EVO IV if I can recall.:dunno:

Still if you got a dsm (say a real "3G"

) which had all the best attributes of the 1Gs & 2Gs (2G pistons, 1G big rods, 1G head, 2G MAS etc etc equip it with a fmic, 16G yada yada ) it would perform the same if not better than a stock EVO. Don't you think so?

11sec4cyl · Dec 18, 2003

diambo4life said:
This started long ago though from the EVO IV if I can recall.:dunno:

correct. evo 4-up were backwards from us dsms. (us dsms are backwards from everyone else so it seems).

16g-95GSX · Dec 18, 2003

Sounds like someone needs to check out the thread in the advanced section about evo heads vs 1g heads. It looks like the Evo's intake mani is a midpoint between a sheetmetal for us and a 1g, better flowing than our 1g's, and yet not low end reducing like a sheetmetal one would be.

Basically it seems to me that its like have a 8.8:1 compressioned 1g. You have very high flowing intake passages, a revised MAS that flows better, a twin scroll 16g stock, etc etc. Basically take a 2g DSM, put the higher flowing 1g parts on (TB intake, head), port out the 2g exhman and O2 housing, and then put all the basic bolt ons such as 16g etc and I believe youd have damn well close to the same outputs. In all honesty I dont think you can compare a 7.8:1 1g of ours with the same mods on the same boost to a 8.8:1 Evo, as that is way too high of a compression jump, let alone to lesser flowing exhaust components. For a 2g we dont have the higher flowing intake components so we get choked off there.

If you read that thread in the advanced section you'll see AMS dyno'd 530awhp on a stock evo head and shortblock, with stock internals. I believe it was even on the stock intake too. That to me is just absolutely sick, considering the drivetrain loos you're dealing with around 670 crank hp from factory internals, without breaking yet. Impressive...

11sec4cyl · Dec 18, 2003

im not sure about 670 which would be about 21%ish. the more hp the car makes, the less the drivetrain loss is (from what ive read atleast).

Mannai · Dec 18, 2003

11sec4cyl said:
im not sure about 670 which would be about 21%ish. the more hp the car makes, the less the drivetrain loss is (from what ive read atleast).

i think they do a FWD conversion and then dyno it. more around 12-15% loss.

can we use their MAF, will it work. I think I can get my hands on one.

really slow FWD · Dec 18, 2003

so to make a 1g run like an evo you take the intake, pistons, mas, and head from an evo VII and then you have a bad ass ride.

please egnore all coments in this post due to the fact that the poster drives a 1gnt and has no knowledge about turbo cars

mavisky · Dec 18, 2003

11sec4cyl said:
correct. evo 4-up were backwards from us dsms. (us dsms are backwards from everyone else so it seems).

they did this to offset the equipment the driver has on the wrc cars to give the car better balance from right to left. if you ever watch the wrc cars all teh drivers drive on teh left hand side. (why i don't know, but they do) the thought is that the engine and co driver weigh as much as the transmission/ driver/ and steering wheel pedal controls.

11sec4cyl · Dec 18, 2003

you honestly believe that they make a huge design difference in a mass produced vehicle because of a wrc race? im not buying it.

greenstreak · Dec 18, 2003

11sec4cyl said:
you honestly believe that they make a huge design difference in a mass produced vehicle because of a wrc race? im not buying it.

I def. would. The EVO production car is completely drawing on WRC racing.

epik_x · Dec 18, 2003

don't the evo's got some kind of variable valve timing, or are those only like the jdm and euro models?

Boost Fed · Dec 19, 2003

11sec4cyl said:
you honestly believe that they make a huge design difference in a mass produced vehicle because of a wrc race? im not buying it.

If I remember correctly some auto manufactures have put a vehicle INTO production just so that they CAN compete in a race. Isn't the gt40 one example of this?

I could be wrong but I could swear I've read where companies have done this.

Either way if you look at Evo history all of the design changes have been to benefit it as a rally car. (ie driveline changes, power changes, ect ect) and all of these changes they make from model to model are also in the mass produced cars.. I mean do you really thing they added active center differentials and active yaw control ect ect for the desires of the average consumer who commutes to work???

mavisky · Dec 19, 2003

11sec4cyl said:
you honestly believe that they make a huge design difference in a mass produced vehicle because of a wrc race? im not buying it.

you're damned right i believe it. notice the fender flares on the 5 and 6? added mid season to make it more competitive so it could fit wider tires.

notice the difference in the front bumper between the 5 and 6? not just a styling change, it helps direct air to the oil cooler and brakes better on the evo 6.

if i had an older pic you'd notice the vents in the hood didn't appear for awhile, a change made for obvious heat issues.

also you'd notice that each rear wing was different from the one before it, each was an evolutionary step in improved aerodynamics.

evo iv

evo v

evo vi

Mannai · Dec 19, 2003

I know the switch was for rally purposes, but it was done mainly because the rotation of the engine after the swap made some improvent in the tranny department, dont ask me how but I remember reading that somewhere. but yes it was done to improve the car for the rallies.

ShapeGSX · Dec 19, 2003

Mannai said:
Why that much of a difference. I understand its newer and improved but they are making 350+whp on stock turbo just bolt ons and on pump. Close to 400whp with cams and race gas on a 16g!!! which is quite amazing, while still retaining the stock MAF and ecu, just a S-AFC. I know you cant compare their 16g to ours, much bigger exhaust housing and twin scroll. but still its quite impressive.

What do you guys think?

First of all, the compressor on an Evo VIII 16G is not in the same class as the compressor on the classic big and small 16Gs. It is actually quite a bit bigger. Well, at least my Evo III compressor is quite a bit bigger. But I am going to assume that the VIII isn't a downgrade.

Second of all, the Evo VIII has a 9.8cm^2 housing on the 16G as opposed to the 7cm on our TD05H housings. That means more power per pound of boost.

Third, the Evo intake manifold puts the DSM intake manifold to shame.

Fourth, I've made similar power (close to 400hp) on an Evo III 16G. And if you look at the mods I have, they are similar to what the AMS Evo has. 3" exhaust, HKS 264 cams, 18" FMIC (smaller than what any Evo owner would install), etc... My car ran 118mph in the 1/4mi at 26psi.

Personally, I don't see anything that is out of reach for a DSM.

ShapeGSX · Dec 19, 2003

Incidentally, when was the last time you saw a shop with a dyno try to get maximum power out of a 16G turboed DSM?

Probably over 5 years ago. Buschur, AMS, Extreme, Magnus, Forced Performance, and RRE are all aiming to make 500+hp out of their parts combinations.

Too many people sell these turbos short and move on to bigger turbos before they have reached their full potential with the 16G. And frankly, if you can't get full potential out of a 16G, you probably won't get the most out of a larger turbo, either. Hence the underachievers.

But the Evo brought with it a whole ton of 16Gs that are screaming to be maxed out, and people with money that are screaming just as loud. So now you are seeing what can be done with modern, maximizing parts on a relatively small turbo.

One more thing, people tend to forget that Buschur ran 121mph on a 16G ages ago (though the car was probably lighter than mine). It can be done. It is just that most people choose not to do it.

Not me, though. I'm in for the long haul.

Wreckleford · Dec 19, 2003

11sec4cyl said:
you honestly believe that they make a huge design difference in a mass produced vehicle because of a wrc race? im not buying it.

Why do you think the Evo came about in the first place? They only made something like 5000 examples of the Evo I. Huge design differences made to the Mitsubishi Lancer in order to be competitive in the WRC.

Old 4G63 Vs. New 4G63.....

Mannai

diambo4life

anconover

Mannai

diambo4life

11sec4cyl

16g-95GSX

11sec4cyl

Mannai

really slow FWD

mavisky

11sec4cyl

greenstreak

epik_x

Boost Fed

mavisky

Mannai

ShapeGSX

ShapeGSX

Wreckleford

Top Contributors this Month

Recommended Communities