Why not a bigger engine
Aug 17, 2007, 02:12 PM
#35
Evolving Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Jersey
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think it's partially because they need a 2.0L engine if they want to get back into rally. And partly because they only have to make ONE engine to drop into every Evo no matter where it goes which saves development and parts costs.
The STI is still a 2.0 in Japan to adhere to Rally specs.
The STI is still a 2.0 in Japan to adhere to Rally specs.
As much as I'd like a 2.5L in my evo X, I understand the above reasons for the 2.0.
Aug 17, 2007, 02:21 PM
#37
Evolved Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 535
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can't believe I read three pages and nobody hit on the real reason... weight.
bigger motor weigh more and in motorsports you want lightweight... less mass to get moving and slow down.... this is why the VR4s suck (apart from putting 5lbs. of **** in a 4lb. bag that you have to work on).
ask anybody who tracks / road races any car above 3500lbs.. the cost in brakes and tires is just insane due to the mass.
the evo has enough weight due to the motor... we need to lose some fat in the X but that will never happen.
bigger motor weigh more and in motorsports you want lightweight... less mass to get moving and slow down.... this is why the VR4s suck (apart from putting 5lbs. of **** in a 4lb. bag that you have to work on).
ask anybody who tracks / road races any car above 3500lbs.. the cost in brakes and tires is just insane due to the mass.
the evo has enough weight due to the motor... we need to lose some fat in the X but that will never happen.
Aug 17, 2007, 02:43 PM
#39
Evolving Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Jersey
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i say screw the rally heritage (gasp) and just drop a 3.0 inline6 twin turbo in the Evo.
AWD is great for handling great low end torque...problem is the Evo never has great low end torque, in fact it loses that the more power it makes.
and everybody who said turbo lag doesn't get on their nerves once in a while is in denial. i'm still on the stock turbo and sometimes i want to break my windows.
now i'm not saying the 4g63t is a great powerplant. but with the recent wave of horsepower war and more and more cars coming out with bigger engines - some even with FI - i don't know how much longer the Evo platform can survive with a 2 liter turbocharged powerplant.
AWD is great for handling great low end torque...problem is the Evo never has great low end torque, in fact it loses that the more power it makes.
and everybody who said turbo lag doesn't get on their nerves once in a while is in denial. i'm still on the stock turbo and sometimes i want to break my windows.
now i'm not saying the 4g63t is a great powerplant. but with the recent wave of horsepower war and more and more cars coming out with bigger engines - some even with FI - i don't know how much longer the Evo platform can survive with a 2 liter turbocharged powerplant.
Aug 17, 2007, 02:47 PM
#40
Evolving Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Jersey
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyone happen to know the weight of an EJ20 vs an EJ25?
Or a 4g63 vs a 4g64? I doubt it's much.
Aug 17, 2007, 02:50 PM
#41
Evolving Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: OH
Posts: 400
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Considering the 4B11T is a square engine with the same redline as the oversquare 4G63, it would be cool if Mitsu left the engine in the RS at 2.0 and stroked the GSR engine. That would meet rally regulations and give the bigger Evo a little more low-end oomph.
Aug 17, 2007, 04:02 PM
#43
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A 6A13TT engine is 10kg heavier than a 4G63, and because it has more cylinders with a shorter stroke that are on a 60 degree angle, I'm willing to bet it's centre of gravity would be lower too!
Aug 17, 2007, 05:15 PM
#44
Evolved Member
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Ct
Posts: 722
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With a bigger motor the turbo will run out of breathe. I would rather have some good pull up top and sacrifice a little down low than have something that has good torque and doesn't want to pull to redline. I guess it boils down to what you enjoy. I know these aren't the reasons for keeping it a 2.0l but I like it that way.
Aug 17, 2007, 05:25 PM
#45
Evolving Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: OH
Posts: 400
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With a bigger motor the turbo will run out of breathe. I would rather have some good pull up top and sacrifice a little down low than have something that has good torque and doesn't want to pull to redline. I guess it boils down to what you enjoy. I know these aren't the reasons for keeping it a 2.0l but I like it that way.