PDA

View Full Version : 6A12 Mivec 2ltr V6 Performance



VR4WGN
09-01-2010, 07:50 PM
what is the best way to get gains in performance on the V6 Mivec engine?
i know the basics ofcourse(NO POD FILTER) but mivec controllers or is there better ways to get gains noticeable?
i want to make alist of what to get for it,i would like to have it haul arse....:bobby2:

Nutter_John
09-01-2010, 09:10 PM
mapecu

VR4WGN
09-01-2010, 09:40 PM
SAFC???or more than that?

Nutter_John
09-01-2010, 09:50 PM
mapecu

Ryan
09-01-2010, 09:51 PM
MAP ECU is a standalone ECU Q, SAFC is merely a controller which intercepts signals from the MAF and alters them before sending them to the ECU.

Nutter_John
09-01-2010, 09:55 PM
Ryan , Mapecu is a piggy back ecu made by a company in NZ , Ben H has had some good results with it on FTO Mivec's

maybe ftooc would be a better place to look

Ryan
09-01-2010, 09:59 PM
I stand corrected on the MAP ECU. I believe my description of what the SAFC does is accurate though? /toycar

Turbo_Steve
09-01-2010, 10:00 PM
MAP ECU (or piggyback of choice).

Decent exhaust and intake. (including exhaust manifold).

Possible Cam re-grind / replace / timing.

Larger throttle body.

Then you're into headwork, porting etc.

After that, you will be looking to go for wilder cams and higher RPMS, which means precision balancing the internals, which means you might as well replace them for titanium components. By the time you've spend this much, you might as well have dropped in a different engine with forced induction. NA tune is much harder than Forced.

bradc
09-01-2010, 10:07 PM
Indeed, either http://www.ftooc.org/ or http://www.mivec.co.nz/

Searching around first is the best idea, otherwise you'll have Nutter John joining up to tell you to search.

Because they are a highly tuned N/A engine any gains you get will be minor, maybe 5kw for an exhaust, another 10-15kw for an ECU and that will be about it really.

VR4WGN
10-01-2010, 01:13 AM
ok il ldo Mani and Exh, Intake(ram air??)
and piggy back ecu
and see how that goes.then do Cams

VR4WGN
10-01-2010, 05:47 AM
what about this baby??

http://www.trademe.co.nz/Browse/Listing.aspx?id=264189821

bradc
10-01-2010, 09:20 AM
That ecu will be fine.

AlanDITD
10-01-2010, 10:58 AM
You gotta realise though your never going to make much extra from them with those mods and mapping i would guess at about 25hp tops. Possibly abit etter ddriveability but thats about it.

Turbo_Steve
10-01-2010, 02:33 PM
Actually, most of what you do to it is likely to compromise driveability, just like on the Hondas.

AlanDITD
10-01-2010, 04:03 PM
well i guess that depends on how you set it up. With mine it was fine untill i put a harsh clutch in. The engine reved so really freely and idled fine it was just awesome to drive imo.

You guys havent mentioned chucking in a lightened fly wheel either i would def look at this if theres one available

Dom B
10-01-2010, 05:31 PM
A full throttle body set up well resonant tuned will open up up to 20-30bhp more but it will cost mega bucks. As the guys said the mivec is pretty highly tuned as is so there is not as much to gain as say another engine could.

VR4WGN
10-01-2010, 06:40 PM
thanx heaps for the info boys i really really apreciate it, fortunatly i am able to make a new throttle body easy as so that is a big possibility,would you reccomend not getting an ecu then and just doing all the add ons,EXH,MANI,THROTTLE?? and wht do you think of ram air in NA?

Nutter_John
10-01-2010, 06:56 PM
what are you trying to do ?
why are youy trying to do it ?

answers to the abovewill help answer more questions

VR4WGN
10-01-2010, 08:07 PM
i like knowing im 1 better than the other Mivec engines out there,you dont just put a mivec in a legnum and thats that,you play with it to make it sound good,look good and feel good right? hence why i want to know what the best options are,im not drag racing or boyracing but merly want it running beautifull,and have the extra performance if i want it.

like maby introducing the mivec earlier and having a good sounding exhaust is a few of the majors to me..

Nutter_John
10-01-2010, 11:41 PM
Dude maybe you should to stick to what your good at and not try and run before you can walk .

You are playing in an area that you seem to have seem to have little knowledge , this knowledge can not be gained by asking questions on a internet forum .

VR4WGN
11-01-2010, 01:46 AM
sweeeet

Turbo_Steve
11-01-2010, 11:59 AM
Agree with John 100% - tuning blindly one someone elses car really isn't any fun for them, and is liable to be expensive for you if it doesn't deliver results or, worse, delivers a lump of scrap metal under the bonnet.

Some of what you're discussing doing is advanced stuff that an experienced mechanic would approach with extreme caution and deep pockets, even on their own car.

I'd make your money on servicing and fab for now, and bring on a good mechanic if/when it makes sense financially..

AlanDITD
11-01-2010, 01:00 PM
pants submariner......??

Dom B
11-01-2010, 01:51 PM
The throttle body set up i was talking to achieve 20-30bhp increase in a Normally Aspirated car is 6 individual throttle chokes alongside a programmable ecu. Just having a bigger single throttle body will gain some but no where near as much and big single throttle bodies are awful to drive.

Turbo_Steve
11-01-2010, 03:58 PM
Wow: yes they can give a huge increase in power (and, coincidentally, sound flippin amazing!) but they are dead pricey, not least as you will need to chuck the factory ECU in the bin as it's extremely difficult getting the MAF to work right with this setup!

Dom B
11-01-2010, 06:20 PM
I'd chuck the maf and just use speed density perhaps. Our cars are old enough to not be too difficult on the emissions. But yeah be prepared to spend about £2-3000 plus plenty of dyno time to set it up.

VR4WGN
11-01-2010, 06:24 PM
thanx for that guys,i see where your comming from with your replies,but at the same time what would changin a few things do? i mean really only talking some performance mods,ie air system,exhaust,throttle(single larger),maby some cam grinds, surely this wont fark the engine surely?

Nutter_John
11-01-2010, 06:29 PM
Have you not listened to anything said ?

why not go join a forum that supports this engine and ask the same question of them

Turbo_Steve
11-01-2010, 06:45 PM
surely this wont fark the engine surely

That's the point: you don't know. At the very least you need to understand what fitting various components does to an engine. With the best will in the world, mate, I would expect anyone working on my car to have a fundamental understanding of how that engine works: of why CamShafts are setup the way they are, of why a particular displacement / rod length / valve profile / boost pressure was chosen, of why an exhaust manifold is the length and diameter it is.

Everything on a car, EVERYTHING is a compromise of some sort, whether it's cost vs performance, driveability vs peak power, handling vs turning circle etc etc etc.


At the very least you need to undertstand why changing a camshaft could result in leanness that the ECU isn't allowing for, and blow the bottom end out.

I'm not having a go at you, Q, but you have to learn to walk before you can run, or you'll find yourself forking out to repair other peoples engines.

VR4WGN
11-01-2010, 08:21 PM
i fully understand that Steve and your right in what you say so no offence taken dude,i woulnt risk it on a customers car,but being my own i thort itd be my own fark up if it did ritght? so maby i should just stick to the typical upgrades then maby?? exhaust etc then,that way like you sa yit wil be 1 less expense should anythig go wrong lol..

fuel
13-01-2010, 10:04 AM
Hey mate, I feel I have quite a bit of knowledge regarding 6A12 MIVECs as I've owned four of them, two of which I still currently own and one of those I've just recently rebuilt.

If you're just dropping the 6A12 into your Legnum then I'm sorry but you are going to be severely disappointed with it. The power delivery of the 6A12 is best suited to a light car like the FTO or even a Mirage/Lancer.

The two 6A12 MIVEC's I own are factory fitted into E54A Galant VX-Rs, one manual weighing 1270kgs and one auto weighing 1290kgs and you can definitely feel the extra weight the Galant has over the FTO, let alone a Legnum.

Be careful with enlargening the throttlebody, the max you can go is 62.5mm and at that size you'll run into idle problems and low rev drivability issues. The factory throttlebody size is 54mm while a plain non-MIVEC 6A12 is 60mm strangely enough, and to be honest I couldn't really feel the difference between the two, if anything it ran better with the 54mm throttlebody.

The stock headers could definitely do with work, RPW make some off the shelf replacement performance items but they are a bit spendy. You really want some headers which have long primaries and almost as long secondaries, but given the layout its not easily achieved at all.

Many 4G92 MIVEC owners have tried going ITB's, but have gone back to stock single throttle plenum setup as there were no gains to be had and drivability was heavily sacrificed. But a high revving V6 on ITBs would sound so fricken hot!

Stock they are supposedly rated at 200PS @ 7500rpm but everyone who dynos them can't get more than 150hp at the wheels with them.

I notice a few of you guys are talking about MAFs with them, the MIVEC engines don't have MAFs instead they use a MAP sensor.

Also if you start pushing the 6A12 MIVEC expect to be replacing the big end and main bearings frequently, while they are the same width as 6A13 bearings the crank journal size is quite a bit smaller in diameter and as a result they have about 30% less surface area. I don't know the size of 6A13 rods but the 6A12 rods are scary thin, they resemble pencils. Put it this way, a stock automatic VX-R managed to do this http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l230/te71se/93%20Galant%20VX-R/sump1.jpg and this http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l230/te71se/93%20Galant%20VX-R/pistons.jpg

And finally, be prepared to constantly be setting your tappets and other niggly things like that. As they don't have hydraulic lifters they have manually adjusted tappets due to the rocker arm design, and the tappet itself comprises of a two piece setup with a foot attached to the bottom retained with a plastic (yes, PLASTIC) clip around it which is meant to look like this new http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l230/te71se/94%20Galant/tappets.jpg but ends up looking like this within a few kms on the clock http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l230/te71se/93%20Galant%20VX-R/DSCF1557.jpg, the plastic bit always breaks and drops down into the sump and the only thing holding the bottom foot of the tappet on is the clearances and if the tappet clearances grow too large then out slips the foot down into the sump too. Oh yeah, and to fix that up requires the removal of the cambelt and the upper 'cam tray' of the head to be removed, flipped upside down and a new tappet screwed in place, these next few pics should give a general idea of the job - http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l230/te71se/93%20Galant%20VX-R/DSCF1562.jpg http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l230/te71se/93%20Galant%20VX-R/DSCF1550.jpg and http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l230/te71se/93%20Galant%20VX-R/DSCF1554.jpg

Right, sorry for the essay but I hope I've given you some insight.

fuel
13-01-2010, 10:09 AM
also if you want more info about the MIVEC engines then definitely join the www.mivec.co.nz forums where I am a friendly moderator there.

scott.mohekey
13-01-2010, 10:48 AM
I had it in my head that Q was planning on putting the mivec heads on an NA 6A13 block. Is this not the case?

Nutter_John
13-01-2010, 10:55 AM
I had it in my head that Q was planning on putting the mivec heads on an NA 6A13 block. Is this not the case?

Thats another fantasy island project he mentioned

fuel
13-01-2010, 10:58 AM
I dunno I just thought from reading this thread he was wanting to drop a complete 6A12 MIVEC into his Legnum, unsure if his Legnum is 2WD or 4WD.

fuel
13-01-2010, 10:59 AM
and I don't know if anyone has successfully finished off a 6A12/6A13 hybrid yet, I know Goku is doing one but don't think he is finished and has it running yet.

scott.mohekey
13-01-2010, 11:17 AM
Kayne's is a 6A13TT engine with just a couple of bits from a 6A12TT, namely the rocker covers, oil pump, and maybe a few other small bits. He is mating it up to a 7g drive train though.

scott.mohekey
13-01-2010, 11:24 AM
I only assumed Q was putting the mivec 6a12 heads onto a 6a13 block because I couldn't see the point of putting a mivec 6a12 into a legnum.

Confused
13-01-2010, 11:27 AM
I did always want to put a 6A12 MIVEC into my Carisma, many times did I discuss it with my dad!


That would have been a nice upgrade from the 1.8, and would have sounded amazing!

fuel
13-01-2010, 11:29 AM
Kayne's is a 6A13TT engine with just a couple of bits from a 6A12TT, namely the rocker covers, oil pump, and maybe a few other small bits. He is mating it up to a 7g drive train though.

Oh right it's been a while since I've had a chat with him for some reason I thought he was doing a MIVEC 6A13TT hybrid, although he was being quite secretive with his engine build.

fuel
13-01-2010, 11:31 AM
I only assumed Q was putting the mivec 6a12 heads onto a 6a13 block because I couldn't see the point of putting a mivec 6a12 into a legnum.

I guess it would sound amazing.... while it's struggling to haul the 1500kgs body around haha. 200hp sounds impressive but it's all at 7500rpm and the peak torque of 200Nm is at 6000rpm. The 6A13 SOHC is only 25hp down on power of the MIVEC but is well up on torque and more importantly most of the torque is down low.

scott.mohekey
13-01-2010, 11:34 AM
Oh right it's been a while since I've had a chat with him for some reason I thought he was doing a MIVEC 6A13TT hybrid, although he was being quite secretive with his engine build.

He posted up pics on ozvr4, and maybe here. Ive seen it in the flesh and it is well shiny.

fuel
13-01-2010, 11:37 AM
hah I've just had a read of the 2.4 GDI performance thread...

wintertidenz
13-01-2010, 10:41 PM
How rare are those Gen-1 engines with the cambelts on the passenger's side? If they aren't that rare, then my old project might make a comeback...
V6 1600cc Lancer, rip the engine out and go MIVEC ;)

scott.mohekey
13-01-2010, 10:55 PM
Do you mean the 6A12s in the 7G galants?

wintertidenz
13-01-2010, 11:20 PM
Yeah :)

scott.mohekey
13-01-2010, 11:20 PM
Goku might have one for sale.

fuel
14-01-2010, 10:25 AM
nah I think he means the MIVEC 6A12's in the 7th gen Galants, they're only in the VX-R from 1993 til 1996. Prefacelift autos are 190hp while manuals and facelift autos are 200hp. Available in either MIVEC or MIVEC-MD.

I happen to have a whole VX-R for sale, suitable for parts as its uneconomical to put back on the road.

VR4WGN
14-01-2010, 06:49 PM
Thats another fantasy island project he mentioned

if theres nothing nice you can say then maby refrain from posting in this thread,youv said what you wanted now maby just leave it alone ok!!:flamed:

whilst i DO take in what everyone has said i AM however learning and how do you learn? Not from smartarse comments and querky lil sayings but from experience from others or own ok!!

i like to ask alot of questions but if this is not acceptable then by all means let me know and i WONT!

VR4WGN
14-01-2010, 06:50 PM
I had it in my head that Q was planning on putting the mivec heads on an NA 6A13 block. Is this not the case?

nope lol

VR4WGN
14-01-2010, 06:57 PM
I guess it would sound amazing.... while it's struggling to haul the 1500kgs body around haha. 200hp sounds impressive but it's all at 7500rpm and the peak torque of 200Nm is at 6000rpm. The 6A13 SOHC is only 25hp down on power of the MIVEC but is well up on torque and more importantly most of the torque is down low.

lol you bursting my bubble now lol...
um the reason for wanting to put th Mivec 6A12 into a Legnum is for economy from a VR4 and then the knowing of the high revving capabilities (if im right??)

this thread is REALLY interesting and i REALLY Apreciate Evryones input(including some of the bad ones).

if im wrong for wanting to install the Mivec on the grounds of economy with a bit of a change(mivec) please let me know guy

as for 2wd vs 4wd what do you think is best?
im going for a 4wd shell and a vr4 8G gearbox and transfer case

by what im taking in on this thread is that the better choice would have been the SOHC 6A13 correct? then how does that shape up in comparison on fuel usage to the Mivec 12'r?? and surely id get SOME pull when mivec kicks in correctover the 13??

thnx guys

bradc
14-01-2010, 07:02 PM
If you want economy then 2wd and a 2.0 engine is going to be better every time.

Have you driven a V6 2.0 EA4W or EC4W Legnum? The performance will be just the same as that, but instead of changing gear at 6000rpm it will keep on going to 8000rpm. Compared to the 6A13 SOHC, the 6A13 will have about 20-25% more torque from idle up to 5000rpm. At 5500rpm the two engines will have about the same amount of torque and at 6000rpm in a 6A13 it will slow down, whereas the 6A12 will keep revving.

Turbo_Steve
14-01-2010, 07:54 PM
IF you want economy, build a manual, 2WD VR4 with bigger turbos and ECU.
It should pretty much trounce the rest of the range for economy if you don't drive it like you stole it, and will also happen to have ooooodles of power too.

For the ultimate, make it RWD :D :D

VR4WGN
14-01-2010, 08:10 PM
lol Steve........ budgets lol.... i cant bend over far enuf to pull out enough $$ lol

Kenneth
14-01-2010, 09:43 PM
If you want economy, get the heads skimmed and up the compression to decent level.
You will also need a fuel and boost re-map to avoid detonation and make the most of your new compression ratio. NOTE: You WILL be lowering boost and committing to using the best fuel you can buy


The #1 problem you face is that the cost of doing any of this requires the car to be used for a long time (or lots of kilometres) to repay your investment in returns on fuel.

You would probably get as good continued return on investment if you make your other consumables last much longer (oil coolers, amsoil @ 25,000km etc)


I say this a lot, but here goes again... If you are concerned with the fuel economy to the point you will spend a couple of thousand dollars to improve it, you need to think about getting a cheap run-around.

That said, I am sure fuel economy is not your driving concern, in which case you might still find it a worth-while idea. Just ditch the fuel economy reasons, because that goat has had enough abuse :P

fuel
14-01-2010, 11:38 PM
I would highly advise against upping the compression ratio on a 6A12, especially if the bottom end is not new. The damage caused to one of my 6A12s which grenaded itself had just had its heads reconditioned and skimmed as it blew a head gasket - less than two weeks later numbers 3 and 4 big end bearings let go therefore allowing the pistons to hit on the head which caused one of the rods to snap and the other rod to come free from the small end as the piston shattered.

I cannot stress enough how fragile the 6A12s are in the bearing department. Talk to any reputable engine builder who has had experience with the 6A12 and they will agree.

fuel
14-01-2010, 11:44 PM
lol you bursting my bubble now lol...
um the reason for wanting to put th Mivec 6A12 into a Legnum is for economy from a VR4 and then the knowing of the high revving capabilities (if im right??)

this thread is REALLY interesting and i REALLY Apreciate Evryones input(including some of the bad ones).

if im wrong for wanting to install the Mivec on the grounds of economy with a bit of a change(mivec) please let me know guy

as for 2wd vs 4wd what do you think is best?
im going for a 4wd shell and a vr4 8G gearbox and transfer case

by what im taking in on this thread is that the better choice would have been the SOHC 6A13 correct? then how does that shape up in comparison on fuel usage to the Mivec 12'r?? and surely id get SOME pull when mivec kicks in correctover the 13??

thnx guys

The MIVEC-MD in my manual VX-R can pull some impressive fuel economy numbers on the open road, the best I got was 6.9L/100km but that was driving 90km/h and trying to get MD to kick in as often as possible. However once you start loading the car up with people and gear etc MD kicks in less often, sometimes not at all, and I find I have to push the engine more to get going and therefore fuel economy drops considerably.

Your Legnum un-laden is going to be the same weight as my Galant fully laden with passengers, then imagine your Legnum with passengers and gear in the boot. If I push mine hard enough it can drain the tank almost at the same rate as my VR-4.

For fuel economy, you want an engine which is going to be the most efficient with power delivery, ie something which delivers torque down low and is going to be reasonably un-stressed lugging the heavy body around.

There are plenty of cars out there which lower spec smaller engined models actually use MORE fuel than the upper spec bigger engined variants, simply because they are having to work harder to get the car moving.

fuel
14-01-2010, 11:48 PM
Also VR4WGN I don't know where in NZ you are but if you are close to Hamilton you are welcome to drive both my manual and auto VX-Rs, you'll see a huge difference in speed between the two and how the auto just feels like such a slug compared to the manual. The auto VX-R would still be considerably quicker than a manual MIVEC Legnum.

Kenneth
14-01-2010, 11:48 PM
Just to be clear (sorry if I made a bad assumption) my post was pertaining to the use of a 6a13 engine rather than 6a12. In my mind, you might as well have the 2.5L engine if you are not intending to be revving the nuts off it.

It did occur to me that perhaps the crank/rods etc could be taken from a NA 6a13 and put into a DOHC 6a13 to increase the compression a little.

fuel
14-01-2010, 11:51 PM
and also I agree with Kenneth, if you are worried so much about fuel economy go buy a $1000 ****ter like a 3cyl Daihatsu Charade. The VR-4 (or any Legnum for that matter) is what it is, in its fuel sucking manor - but you get satisfaction out of it.

To me my VR-4 is appalling on fuel, but I drive it only a few times a week, although there was a period I was driving it daily, but even then I didn't really care about the fuel economy because it gave me more smiles per gallon than it does miles per gallon.

scott.mohekey
14-01-2010, 11:54 PM
People seem to forget that the VR4 is VERY good with smiles per gallon.

fuel
14-01-2010, 11:58 PM
Yep you don't expect to drive a performance car and have outstanding economy, unless its a super lightweight rollerskate like an early MR2 or something. But I like my cars mid-sized at the minimum, and I'm happy to take the extra size as a trade off of fuel economy.

But.. I totally get where VR4WGN is coming from, nice to have a large practical car which has good performance AND good fuel economy. It's not going to happen though.. kinda like trying to find a reliable Mitsubishi, or a Toyota which isn't boring.

Bat
15-01-2010, 12:25 AM
Hi,
LPG conversion?
My n/a V6 goes well on the gas and it's half the price of petrol in the UK :)
If you want more power you can run more advance as it's equivalent to 116 octane petrol ;)
Cheers,
Gavin :)

fuel
15-01-2010, 12:43 AM
An aftermarket LPG kit for multi port injection cars is quite costly even with the subsidy from the goverment, and would take years to make it worthwhile. LPG has increased in price almost double over the last few years too.

VR4WGN
15-01-2010, 12:46 AM
intersting guys... very usefull!!!

indeed im not concerned about economy greaty but as it will be the round town driver/advertiser that is my reason for the mivec decision,being economical as you say but the revver is there if wanted,its mainly just a town cruizer,not a performance mchine as evryone has steered me away from now(of wich i fully understand and thank you for your info).

so on the grounds im installing this unit purely for difference being, and economy

Eurospec
15-01-2010, 12:50 AM
Okay, i admit i didnt read the whole thread......

But here is what i know.

Port velocity is very important on the mivecs. Do anything that will slow the gas down and power and torque suffer. The intake manifold and throttle body sizing seems pretty decent- at least increasing t/b diameter and matching the plenum to it always results in less power and torque. We actually tested this on the dyno for the ftoc. It wasnt a big loss, but a loss nonetheless. Porting works, but only in so far as to take out casting flaws, but the gain is small compared to the cost.

Our 'best' power output cars have had exhaust manifolds, downpipes, decat, map1 (map 2 wasnt out then) timing controlers, intake. The highest output of those have been on fresh built motors with port castings cleaned up etc. We have never got the gains people are looking for from cams for some reason.

Leave the mivec crossover alone- its smack in the right place. Most people opt to bring it in lower, but if you do you will get a really nasty power loss when it engauges- a bit like the opposite of the honda k serise where they engineered in a torque drop to make the vtec feel like it has a bigger kick- mitsubishi engineered it out! If you mess with it, you get what honda did.

Dont be thinking that the most expensive bits are the best. The fto oc tested intakes on the dyno. Fair enough the biggest increase over stock (all done same car, same day, same dyno) was the £280 Blitz SUS sonic with + 8 bhp, next was the good ol' ITG buzby hat thing at +7.6BHP for like £80!

The other thing is that the bang per buck on NA tuning on these engines isnt great. A turbo conversion might be the way to go if you're happy with the custom fab.

Cheers,

Ben.

Kenneth
15-01-2010, 12:56 AM
If you want to be different...

AWD or 2WD?

If 2WD, you can probably get a 3.5L from a Diamante in there, or a 3.8 from a 380.

You may be able to get the same with AWD, however you may need to find an AWD version and take the whole drivetrain.

Make sure you have the engine bay width first though!

CANDEE
15-01-2010, 01:00 AM
If you want to be different...

AWD or 2WD?

If 2WD, you can probably get a 3.5L from a Diamante in there, or a 3.8 from a 380.

You may be able to get the same with AWD, however you may need to find an AWD version and take the whole drivetrain.

Make sure you have the engine bay width first though!

The 3.5v6 is pretty wide, My olds have one in their Diamante... I would have thought that it would have been the same issue as putting a GTO motor in it..

The 3.5 v6 is a 6G74.. :)

J

fuel
15-01-2010, 01:02 AM
yeah the US spec 8G Galants have conventional macpherson strut suspension, possibly for clearance to fit in the longer 6G72 engine. Although having said that the 7G Galant in some markets had the DOHC 6G73 2.5L engine and it fits snugly into that engine bay with the same multilink suspension the 7G/8G has.

fuel
15-01-2010, 01:05 AM
The 3.5v6 is pretty wide, My olds have one in their Diamante... I would have thought that it would have been the same issue as putting a GTO motor in it..

The 3.5 v6 is a 6G74.. :)

J

When I had my 6A12 MIVEC and 6G72 MIVEC engines both on the ground next to each other they were almost identical in dimensions except that the 6G7x series is longer from front pulley to flywheel, but the overall height and width remains within 10mm of each other.

The 6G7X bare block is far lighter than the 6A1X block. It starts getting (only just) heavier when you add in the crank, cradle, rods, pistons etc.

bradc
15-01-2010, 03:23 AM
The crank and rods on an ST-R are the same as a VR-4. Only the pistons are different! A VR-4 is 8.5:1, all JDM spec 6A13 SOHC Legnums are 9:1. Strangely all UK, NZ and 2002 onwards JDM Diamantes with 6A13's are 9.5:1



Just to be clear (sorry if I made a bad assumption) my post was pertaining to the use of a 6a13 engine rather than 6a12. In my mind, you might as well have the 2.5L engine if you are not intending to be revving the nuts off it.

It did occur to me that perhaps the crank/rods etc could be taken from a NA 6a13 and put into a DOHC 6a13 to increase the compression a little.

bradc
15-01-2010, 03:25 AM
Fuel, if you want that sway bar and other thing, I'd love to come down and have a drive of your manual Mivec-MD

fuel
15-01-2010, 03:58 AM
Haha sure, once I get it back together. It's in a bit of a sad state at the moment.

bradc
15-01-2010, 05:27 AM
Cool, let me know and I'll come down

VR4WGN
15-01-2010, 05:49 AM
interesting Eurospec... muchly apreciated.. i wont fiddle with the timing lol.. ill do the exhaust and mani and maby ecu,otherwise thatll be it really. im hoping itll be a good combo and im sure itll run fine and smooth for me both gutsy at 6k rpm and economical when i want it.

iv always wondered bout the 6g series 3l mV but finding a manual box thatll fit was a problem as i had nothing or no info if it would have 1

Johny
15-01-2010, 06:27 AM
interesting Eurospec... muchly apreciated.. i wont fiddle with the timing lol.. ill do the exhaust and mani and maby ecu,otherwise thatll be it really. im hoping itll be a good combo and im sure itll run fine and smooth for me both gutsy at 6k rpm and economical when i want it.

iv always wondered bout the 6g series 3l mV but finding a manual box thatll fit was a problem as i had nothing or no info if it would have 1


http://www.trademe.co.nz/Trade-Me-Motors/Cars/Mitsubishi/auction-264423874.htm

lol:monkey:

Johny
15-01-2010, 06:28 AM
oh wait thats a 3500 never mind lol

bradc
15-01-2010, 07:08 AM
That would be the PERFECT engine for a RWD legnum :D

VR4WGN
15-01-2010, 07:39 AM
Insane itd be in a legnum lol..... but hey nyone want recros?? then lets get that car nd we have some lol

bradc
15-01-2010, 07:51 AM
It isn't worth that much though with 334,000km's on it! Maybe half that I reckon?

I know that they are fairly rare but still...

Johny
15-01-2010, 08:38 AM
it would also be cool to have high/low gear ratio's in a legnum lol

Turbo_Steve
15-01-2010, 09:01 AM
Yep you don't expect to drive a performance car and have outstanding economy

Actually, I do. I've had quite a lot of performance cars, with power outputs varying for 160bhp (a Mk1 MR2) all the way up to a 500+bhp 300ZX, and a selection of Scoobs, an Evo, a GTiR.......

The Legnum has the worst fuel economy of all of them. To the extent that buying a copy of EvoScan and a cable seems a sensible economy for me, just to actually check things are working as they should be.
The setup on the VR4 is just epic: they appear to have tried to make it feel like a 4.0L, with light pressure turbos and a super-flat torque curve.

Unfortunately, it's got the fuel economy of a big old-style yank V8 on carbs!

The most obvious fix for a VR4 is to change the final drive to get much taller gearing, allowing a higher speed cruise. Unfortunately, it's also ruining the car into the bargain: taking away from what it's good at.

A 6th ratio, with really tall gearing, would be fantastic...and is never going to happen.

So I come back to looking at the maps and the turbos, and thinking that the car spends most of it's life cruising just sliiiightly on boost...when there is no reason.

fuel
15-01-2010, 12:16 PM
I noticed a great improvement of fuel economy when I went from the factory TC05 to a TC06 on my Eterna, more so when cruising on the highway at 3000rpm or so as the turbo wasn't always spooled up like the TC05 was at those revs.

bradc
15-01-2010, 07:05 PM
It would be the same in a VR-4 with TD04s. I've had my bov make noise at 1800rpm before :)

VR4WGN
15-01-2010, 08:34 PM
well the engine has arrived in Palmy yay.. now i gotta finish your car Brad so i can strt on mine... im hoping to do a deal for a vr4 upgrade conversion innexchange for the paintjob tho.. then shes all go and ill ahve it done for the 4's and rotarys entry...