theres this dude up my street who claims he's running 600 hp at the flywheel and that the mitsu engines are alot better than ours b/c hes saying like they run 18 psi on stock block(keep in mind that he said any mitsu engine without turbo SUCKS and that they are built poorly). Now he has me thinking that AWD mitsu is the thing to get.

Overall, are Mitsu's that much more powerful than US?????

 

does it count that a honda motor is NOT built for turbo unlike a turbocharged DSM motor? hmm... maybe thats the answer to your question.

 

Mitsubishis are built to be turbod, hondas arent, but food for thought, at 12psi from the factory a gsx makes 215 hp from a 2L turbo. A JDM ITR from the factory is 215hp from a n/a 1.8L. See where I'm going with this one?

 

Honda motors are MUCH more efficient with boost...hell, even the SOHC D16 motor makes more power vs. boost than a 4g63 mitsubishi motor...

 

I think the dude down the street is full of ****. But to answer your question, yes the 4G63 is "better" than any stock honda engine as far as boost is concerned. They can take 22 psi on pump gas with just larger injectors, fuel pump, and a SAFC. 7.8 to 1 compression ratio (8.5 to 1 for 95+) and the block and internals are a brick house. It flexes a 1.7 to 1 rod/stroke ration too. A lot of DSM guys rebuild their engines with STOCK parts instead of buying JE, crower, etc....because it'll be strong enough with the stock pistons and rods. The 6 bolt ones don't crankwalk and they have rods the size of an elephant's trunk. If I could (I have to have an airbag in my next car and won't get a 2nd gen because I'm scared shitless of crankwalk) I'd cop a 91 GSX and just boost the hell out of it. AWD ownz when it comes to drag race launches...7,000 rpm clutch dumps Of course you then have reliability issues (not really that bad, just not up to Honda standards) but probably no worse than if you abused a honda @ 10+ psi. It all comes down to what you want. To me, the cost effectiveness really shines when you can be running low 15s in a Civic hatch with a B16 for the same price it would cost to run mid 13s in a GSX.

 

ALso, for those guys comparing the N/A B18C (JDM type R) to the 4G63...the 4G63 has made "276 bhp" in stock form in japan. That's with a 16Gish turbo in the Lancer. Not to mention the crucial torque curve afforded by the turbo. Seriously too, efficiency can be fucked in this discussion. That's like the "My B16 make 100hp per liter" arguement some people make to domestic fans. I love turbo hondas, but they sure aren't my first choice.

 

All Hondas make more than 1HP per cubic inch (at least new ones) and I don't there there is any Ford, Chevy or Mopar that can make that claim (using factory/stock figures).

 

Well I think the 4g63 turbo motors are really great, I would take an AWD 1g DSM, they are awesome cars/motors, but I still like Hondas better.

I was saying that the 2.0L DOHC mitsubishi motors are less efficient than Honda's 1.6L SOHC motors...now, compare the 4g63 with a simillar Honda motor (2.0L DOHC) a GSR (or LS/VTEC) bored to 2.0L or CRV/VTEC and turbo'd and compare that to the 4g63, doesn't take much boost (under 10psi) on a 2.0L VTEC Honda motor to make 300whp..hell, I've seen it done with 6-7psi...with a 4g63 how much would it take? Much more boost!

I have much respect for turbo DSMs as they are usually the only imports that can touch fast Hondas at the dragstrip...AWD sees some pretty low 60ft times, even thou they must suffer some serious drivetrain loss, where the Honda FWDs have a very small loss = more power to the wheels vs. engine power.

Turbo DSMs
Turbo Hondas

 

back in the day there were a few domestics that did make 1hp per cubic inch, but now hell no.... imagine this, 1.6honda b16 = 160hp ok a 5.7liter camaro =570hp NO 320 but it does have the torque that can end the arqument 9 times out of ten. But then again try sell a camaro with over 90,000 miles on it. My friend just got a 98 trans-am ram air, with full exhaust, lowered, and rims. a really nice car for 9grand and it had a bit over 90,000 miles on it. Thats like a third of the new price for the car, crazy huh, but damn his got a nice ride

 

4g63 is a AWESOME motor...probably the best 4 clyinder ever created...next to maybe the SR20DET.


edit-becuase i can't spell


[Modified by CzanSOHC, 6:52 AM 9/5/2002]

 

dude..come on...i love honda...but that statement was just plain inaccuate...you forgetting toyota..mazda...Nissan...come on man...have some respect these cars...some people just need to learn how to respect cars....i'm in NO WAY bashing honda...i love em..i own one..but that statement is why most poeple hate honda.

 

If I could get my hands on a Galant VR4, I would trade my Turboed B16 Civic in a heartbeat. Hondas are NOT all that!! you may think your fast but there is always somebody out there that is way faster than you

 

SR20s (aluminum block), is not as strong stock as a 6 or 7 bolt 4G63 but close. RB26 is iron block and 6 cylinder... not 4. There are many N/A 4G63s making 300+ hp... Stock engines will rev to 8500, and 9400 with titanium retainers and with stock hydraulic lifters. More than a few people have made 425+ Whp with a stock block 7 bolt (weaker) 4G63 with a 50 trim t3/t4 and HKS cams (one with over 130,000 miles). Not too bad.... I think turbo hondas are cool too

 

there all good in my book


I just love fast cars...doesn't matter if import or domestic...turno or N/A as long as they are fast.

 

A galant VR4? Are you serious...tipping the scales at around 3500lbs + driver...that car is way to heavy no matter how much power you can squeeze out the engine..a HONDA will have you beat.

 

What I was thinking these cars can do quick times in the 1/4 because there 4wd, try a race on the free way, turbo'd honda will kill 99.9 % of all these cars. Plus theres not much involved in buying one of those cars and trying to do fast times, atleast most of us turbo honda guys have a good understanding of our cars because we are changing them so drastically from stock to make em fast.

 

There is always somebody faster no matter what car you drive. All in all it's personal preference, but I think Honda has a proven track record of:

A. The most horsepower per cubic inch (at least for 4 cylinders)
B. The most reliable...they run for...100k....200k....still counting
C. Holding their resale value

You can argue all you want but those are facts. Hondas are probably the only import I would ever own. I do like the Eclipses (before they made them ugly a couple of years ago and raped them of their turbo option) but I don't think I would ever buy one.

 

regardless of how much HP those two come from the factory with, the modding potential on the Mitsu's is greater than that of the 1.8L ITR.

Put about $500-800 of mod money into both those cars and see where we are at now. And if I wanted to I could say look at the almighty 1.3L twin turbo motor out of the FD with 255HP (276HP JDM) versus the 1.8L 215 HP from your ITR. Engine size isn't always the determining factor, it's the amount of potential and HP they can spew out.

 

you DO know the sr20DET was built to cut costs, right? the RB series is serioulsy beefy, and if 1000+ HP out of them isint enough to show it, i dont know what is.
hell the last gen supras had a seriously beefy motor too.

 

As a Honda and Ford owner all I can say to this post is:

Well you and your friends can pat eachother on the back all day/night about that, but uhhh... ugh i don't even need to finish this post.

 

The Galant VR4 only weighs like 3350+-, not bad for a 4 door with leather and power everything that still flexes the most easily upgraded import (4 cylinder) drivetrain.

 

Uhhhhh....as the previous owner of many Fords and other cars all I can say is that your post makes no sense. WTF are you talking about genius? back at you!

 

This is a stupid thread. Yes the 4G63T is one of the best 4cyl motors out there. Everything I want to say has already been pointed out.

I do have to say I dont care how much hp/liter your making if your total hp is 200hp!!.

That is odd for you to say because it really has alot more to do with the size of the turbo. Typically a 4G63T owner looking to run <15psi will stick with a small turbo. You guys get a huge turbo to run that low boost. So basically that is not a really good comparison.

Overall just get over it. Turbo Hondas Turbo DSM

 

How can you guys possibly compare turbo'd motors versus N/A motors from the factory? In 9 cases out of 10, the turbo'd motors will have more power, unless it's an Audi (150 hp from an 1.8 liter turbo mo ).

Any anyway, all cars have different pros and cons. To argue which car is the best, is pointless because there is no car that is the "best". It all depends on your point of view and what you like.

 

Word, put an 18G or a 20G on a DSM and THEN compare it to your turbo honda....