$300 is a lot imo but it looks good none the less

 

This is the only one in existence (prototype) and it is spray bombed gloss black. The production units will be fine texture black powdercoat, so it will match the bumper a good bit better.

 

Keep it if you like it but just like your nose ring, you could always plasti dip it.

 

I agree the middle pic looks really good. I wonder how much it really helps though.

 

I did the maths. Assuming a vent opening size of 2x8 inches (each), you will see 1200cfm of extra airflow at a speed of 100km/h (62mph). This is equivalent to adding a 12" rad fan.

Edit: For those interested, fun fact: Having the license plate mounted in the middle, hanging down over the lower opening, the plate blocks about 900 cfm at 100km/h. Given that some of the air is deflected around the plate into the opening, you're missing around 600-700cfm that would be there with a side mount plate.

This means that an Evo, with the way the front bumper fascia ducts additional air to the two front vents, has ~2000cfm more airflow than a RA with a center mount license plate.

 

Air flow aint as simple as how much air will go through a hole of a certain size at certain speed.

Personally i wouldn't recommend cutting holes in any structural component of a vehicle.

 

You obviously were not a Mitsubishi Engineer involved in the development of the Evo X crash beam...lol. This isn't a part of the frame, gentlemen. It is a bumper. Will it allow slightly more damage to the radiator and engine bay if you were to get in a head on collision at just the right angle? Possibly and slightly. Would it be less protective in an impact than the ALUMINUM crash beam in the Evo X. Not very likely at all. It is what it is. There are no holes in the existing crash beam on the RA because it was not needed from the factory because of the small intercooler. If they would have put the Evo X intercooler in the RA, it would have the crash beam cut in a similar fashion as this part needs, or the weaker aluminum beam from the Evo.

 

where did u buy it? and also u should throw up a how to. i'm interested in it but couldnt see how i would or could cut the beam. thanks!

 

I posted a link earlier in the thread. I bought it from Mach V Motorsports. They supply templates to gut the beam. It's not as intimidating as you would think. The whole job takes about 2-3 hours total. They have pictures of the cut beam on their website.

 

Five years as a reliability engineer ten years in manufacturing 4 years as Production manager for Asia Pacific and Africa for one of the big three and a senior member of the society of manufacturing engineers if you don't think that that is a structural component and an integrated part of the safety system you know very little about safety systems.

In many modern cars the bumper you describe is actually a structural component of the vehicle with a crush pad and a thin abs skin.

On BMW's the Bumper radiator crash pad and structure are an integrated module that ties the whole front of the chassis together same on Ford focus I've set up production facilities for both.

Evidently you are a Mitsubishi Engineer. Difference between the evo x beam is its engineered to have the holes in it as opposed to taking a gas axe or a grinder to the RA beam. Evo beam is most likely Aluminium for weight but would have the same structural strength as the Ralliart beam most likely being of a thicker material.

Oh and by the way cars haven't had frame for about 30 years they are pressed steel construction, chassis rails are generally found on archaic Four wheel drives and Pickup trucks and frames on older supercars.

 

We need to take into consideration the resistance in airflow from the intercooler which creates positive pressure associated with these calculations. Not to mention that the area is not sealed off to stop the air flow from going in other areas other than the I/C. 1200cfm is the amount of flow. Not the amount flowing through the I/C itself. Yes the flow of air is entering into the opening but the air filtering though is much different. We can all agree that there is more air flow but there is much more to it than the amount that is entering the mouth of the bumper. The way you put it, it sounds like 2000cfm is filtering thought the core and that is just is no the case.

 

I totally agree with this. My earlier post was just supposed to be a quick calculation for how much more air those vents theoretically can let in. I never ran any calculations for how much of that airflow is actually crossing the intercooler. I just wanted to see what the volume that those vents were capable of flowing. I was very aware that this would have to be in a perfect situation, with no calculations for intercooler airflow resistance, boundary layer airflow effects, turbulence, or any of the other variables that would be at work in a real world situation. That being said, even if the peak volume of 1200cfm was somehow reached, this isn't a very large amount of air when considering what the total theoretical airflow capability of the rest of the car's openings.

I apologize for not mentioning that the numbers were just for fun!

 

I'm not trying to get in to a pissing match with you over structural components and what is and isn't, but four years in reliability engineering (whatever that is. BSRE degree, maybe?) is less than half as long as I have been a design engineer (and not for Mitsubishi). I said frame, not frame rails. Just because a car has a unibody construction does not mean it does not have a frame with heavier structural components and doubled material thicknesses incorporated within them for integrity. Try jacking up your RA on anything but the structural channel on the underside of the car and see what happens. Having actually had the front bumper skin of the RA off, I can tell you that the crash beam is just that, a crash beam. It is not a structural member no more than the strut tower brace is. It is there simply for a front end collision. If you are any kind of engineer, you can take your bumper skin off, look at the beam, agree with me and move on, or just don't worry about this part, or touching your beam. To each his own. It is your right to disagree with me, and I applaud you for having your own opinion.

 

So are you suggesting that from an engineering perspective a crash beam doesn't transfer impact loads to the main body?

My point is simply this cutting holes in what is clearly a part of the vehicles safety and impact protection system is neither prudent or justifiable from an engineering perspective.

 

From my professional experience (in dumb ideas and general idiocy) cutting or modifying ANYTHING different from it's original design compromises structural integrity to some degree. Unless, of course, the original designer was a moron and didn't know what they were doing and the modification involves intentional, additional reinforcement, ie. roll cage, and even then...

That being said, will cutting into your crash beam make it less effective? I would think yes

But to what degree? I really don't think it would cause the front end to implode or collapse upon itself.

What about in the event of an accident? It could definitely have some issues, depending on the severity of the impact. Not to mention if you end up with a knowledgeable adjuster who realizes you've been tampering you'll probably have issues with your claim.

So what do I do now? The EvoX crash bar bolts on directly, if you are seriously concerned about it, buy one here for $175.97: http://www.mitsubishiparts.com/oe_parts_catalog.html. If not, then cut your OEM bumper reinforcement and hope for the best.

Me, personally, I would just buy a new bar for an Evo. For less than a couple hundred dollars, better safe than sorry. Before taking this advice though, I would most definitely verify that the openings in the aftermarket part mimic the EvoX vent locations exactly, otherwise you then have mismatched vents that will require cutting anyway and defeat the purpose.

All modifications include risk. This is only one of them. Best of luck.