trdcamrypride Posted March 12, 2005 Report Share Posted March 12, 2005 do they come out with a fmic? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
irokin Posted March 13, 2005 Report Share Posted March 13, 2005 do they come out with a fmic? yea but it flows like SHIT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ancullen Posted March 15, 2005 Report Share Posted March 15, 2005 MIVEC. Mitsubishi Innovative Valve timing Electronic Control system. uses an electronically actuated piston at high rpm to link two parts of the tappet that opens the valves, giving more lift and duration. makes the best sounding engine noise. ever. Thanks. But wouldn't you agree that there should be a higher power claim now that the power cap has been made redundant? I would have thought that the 4G63 could be making around 250fwkw from the factory (I know it can make far more than that, but the factory won't necessarily want to give it any kind of warranty when there's that much strain on the motor). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Jamie Posted March 15, 2005 Report Share Posted March 15, 2005 (edited) 407Nm @ 3000rpm enables the motor to make a max of 235kw, so i don't think a stock evo 9 is going to be making 250kw at the wheels (all four wheels, not front wheels, considering it's an evo) considering that's probably about 300kw at the flywheel the power cap was a stupid thing to start with, it obviously wasn't policed very well, gtr skylines with 400Nm making 206kw, yeah right, try closer to 306kw. the manufacturers will catch onto the new system eventually it's just a number, who cares, you can work out how much power a car really makes from the torque figure. and if you're really curious, slap it on a dyno. buyers of these kind of cars (evo, sti, nsx, gtr, etc) aren't going to split hairs over a few kw on paper, rather they'll stick with the car which matches their driving style and which they already know or like (or likely own a previous model of) Edited March 15, 2005 by Super Jamie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Revhead[RL] Posted March 15, 2005 Report Share Posted March 15, 2005 that debacle was caused by bloody scarmongering reporters. the reason for the jap "cap" was similar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Jamie Posted March 15, 2005 Report Share Posted March 15, 2005 both very good and valid posts. power doesn't make a car quick, torque does. the idiotic media were the reason for the whole aussie muscle car scare of the late 70s, and the reason ford didn't produce a v8 for about 15 years after that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ancullen Posted March 16, 2005 Report Share Posted March 16, 2005 407Nm @ 3000rpm enables the motor to make a max of 235kw, so i don't think a stock evo 9 is going to be making 250kw at the wheels (all four wheels, not front wheels, considering it's an evo) considering that's probably about 300kw at the flywheel I don't mean to make an unnecessary fuss, but I just wanted to point out that I meant 'flywheel kilowatts' not 'front wheel kilowatts' when I used the abbreviation fwkw. I'm not sure if I used the right abbreviation, my mistake. Also, making cars with 400 KW at the wheels is a damn good way to get your vehicles banned, just ask Ford, GMH and Dodge... The Govt threatened them about 30 years ago that if they kept up making 200+ mph street cars they would never sell a car to a govt fleet again! Wasn't one of the main problems with the 'road-going supercar' scare of the 70's that the cars didn't have good enough brakes for the power they were making? Even if it wasn't the reason for the scare, it'd be reason enough for me, just look at the crap brakes on some of the Holdens & Fords of the time and you'll see what I mean. Then again, my lil' Lola has a similar thing going on - big (ish) horsepower with standard KE55 brakes. I can't wait to try slowing down from 140+km/h at the end of Hidden Valley's straight (he says with sarcasm in his voice). What I don't understand is how Holden got away with supposedly cancelling the Torana XU1 V8, but were still able to release the SLR5000 & A9X Toranas. It was basically the same thing (just in a LH/LX body shell instead of a LJ). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Revhead[RL] Posted March 16, 2005 Report Share Posted March 16, 2005 wow! some one who made a mistake, realised it, and publicly admitted it! =) there was alos the fuel crisis that added to ford not making a v8. holden got the a9x etc through, by not actullay relasing them as models, but as options. they did that alot, pick up a copy of aussie muscle car mag, they usually have a good explanation in there. a9x for example is not the model name (gt, gl etc) but the factory code, a bit like ae101 in the corollas Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Jamie Posted March 16, 2005 Report Share Posted March 16, 2005 ahh, abbreviation misunderstanding =) no worries. still, that much torque makes 235kw possible and no more (you can of course modify it for more) i find the power levels of cars these days to be incredible. even a stock v6 commodore/falcon is approaching 250hp. like have you ever actually driven an SS commodore? they SCOOT, it's also real f@$kin easy to get WAY too broad in them. i can't agree enough with the decision to keep these cars out of the hands of P platers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.