4g63-510 Posted December 20, 2002 Report Share Posted December 20, 2002 I said f you not freak you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmendeol Posted December 20, 2002 Report Share Posted December 20, 2002 Come on guys, let's just agree that we have differing opinions and not start flame wars. We are all here for the same reasons and not to bash others opinions. We don't need the "Well if you don't think the way I do then you suck," type stuff. Let's just take a step back, breathe and calm down a little. And 4G63-510, I love 510's. I think what you're doing with yours is CRAZY, and really cool! Having such a light car and making big HP numbers = cage time, if you ask me. Oh, and mentioning the truck thing always gets someone here a little pissed off, but I'm sure that you know that now. -Tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heefner Posted December 20, 2002 Report Share Posted December 20, 2002 4g, I see your point, maybe I miss understood your other post. But, no matter what we start with we are gonna want it bigger better and faster. Honestly if I could drop a stock 4g63 in my car and run 12's I know I wouldn't stop there. I still would be dropping in diff. cams, ported head, bigger turbo, sheet metal intake, yada, yada, yada. I agree that the 2.0L is a great motor and would be a good plateform to start from if you had the resources. I guess what I'm saying is for us car nuts its not just were you end up, but also how you got there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJ_Lazarek Posted December 20, 2002 Report Share Posted December 20, 2002 James, I'm not sure what your trying to say. Â I don't think the engine swap is as easy as you say it is, especially for most of us guys here that don't own a shop to do it in. Â If I wanted a 4g63, I would buy one but since I don't, I'm gonna spend my money and hard work making what I have fast. Â As for making a dodge colt fast, its a beer can with 4 wheels, any motor with a little pep would make it fast. Â Look at the chrysler GLH, I've seen them run 11's with a few mods, so. Â The starquest wighs in at over 3200lbs, thats why it's hard to get sub 13's 1/4 mile times. Â This summer I watched 2 quest with stock turbo and motors run 12's with the bottle, the catch, the interior was stripped. Â Nothing but a drivers seat, steering wheel, tack and nitros bottle. Â Your missing out on all the fun. Half the fun of making these cars fast is proving the Nay sayers wrong. Â Think about how many full body, full interior cars run 12's at the track and can drive home (comfortably) from the races. Â Supras, awd dsm's what else? I'm not trying to start a pissing contest I'm just explaning how I see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJ_Lazarek Posted December 20, 2002 Report Share Posted December 20, 2002 The starquest wighs in at over 3200lbs, Why does EVERYONE think these cars are so HEAVY??? My 87 TSi (5-speed) weighs 2816 and my 89 TSi(auto) weighs just over 3000lbs. I don't know where everyone gets the idea that these cars or heavy from. Flase info or ppl that don't know what they are talking about? NYS Title has the weight printed right on the top becasue you need to know the weight to register your vehicle and the weight on the title comes right from the factory, so unless everyone is dumping bags of concreat in their quarter panals or something then you car shouldn't weigh more than mitsubishi said it weighs, right? Am I wrong? If so someone PLEASE correct me, thank you... DJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heefner Posted December 20, 2002 Report Share Posted December 20, 2002 DJ I weighed my car this summer at Mapple Grove Race Way in PA and it tiped the scale at 3230 lbs. So if your asking, yes you're wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siance Posted December 20, 2002 Report Share Posted December 20, 2002 How can there be an arguement, the fastest 4 banger is the 2.6 right?............maybe im wrong...... ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boosted_One Posted December 20, 2002 Report Share Posted December 20, 2002 LOL! The 2.0 WAS in trucks too. All hail the 4g63 : Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4g63-510 Posted December 21, 2002 Report Share Posted December 21, 2002 I was wondering how long it would take for someone to say the 2.0 started as a truck engine. The 4G63 wants to refered to as "THE GREAT 4G63". Does anyone have any comment to Eric Plabani's car??? james Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PiercedJD Posted December 21, 2002 Report Share Posted December 21, 2002 oy vey. ok I avoided commenting as to not ruffle any feathers here, but here goes. Sakura's motor BARELY resembles a 2.6. period. they have fabricated so much crap on that motor now that any comparisons between the 2.6 in your car and the engine they run are stretches of the imagination at best. just as brent rau's engine (granted it *appears* very similar to mine) bears very little in common with mine. I see an awful lot of people who are running 14's that chime in on conversations like this, and a lot of misinformation resultantly is spread about the community. IT IS COMPLETELY COMMON FOR A LIGHTLY MODDED DSM TO RUN 12'S ON PUMP GAS. It is VERY UNCOMMON for a starion/conquest to accomplish the same on race gas. PERIOD. to put this whole retarded argument in perspective, this is like comparing a LT1 and a LS1, or better yet, a 01-02 cobra to an 03 cobra. on the one hand you have a engine which is producing less horespower than rated/advertised, and on the other hand you have an engine that can easily add 100hp to it's rated horsepower on very light mods. this is not opinion. this is fact. I'm sure plenty of people will flame this post now, but you show me a starion/conquest turning 12's and I can show you a dozen DSM's turning 11's on the same mods. I love the car, that's why I chose it for my chassis. but I opted for the 4g63 power plant for reasons which should be abundantly clear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4g63-510 Posted December 21, 2002 Report Share Posted December 21, 2002 AMEN!!!! I agree, if I hadn't found my Eclipse I would also be driving a Starion. You know - right deal right time. But with THE GREAT 4G63 power. I've turned HARD core Toyota fans into switching to 4G63 power. I am one of those people that turn 14's here. My best on my Eclipse is 14.1 @107.3. FWD street tires and not willing to do what it takes to make it go faster. Its my daily driver. I love all the foo-foo crap, ac, power everything, stereo system, you know. All the same reasons you-all drive yours. james Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PiercedJD Posted December 21, 2002 Report Share Posted December 21, 2002 to put your time in perspective, your mph is a much better E.T. than a 14.1 willing to bet your 60' time was high as hell. Josh just went 12.2 @109 in a 90 awd talon. that was a pump gas run. ;D with some bolt on traction you should be at least mid to low 13's if not a high 12. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4g63-510 Posted December 21, 2002 Report Share Posted December 21, 2002 Yes it is, 60ft 2.8, 1/8th is 11.2, can't remember the mph SLOW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4g63-510 Posted December 21, 2002 Report Share Posted December 21, 2002 I might have a line on some 26x8.5x15 slicks I can try. Hope ets improve. Oh yea, all on pump gas driven to and from track, 2 adults and 2 kids and car seats in the back. No kids or riders on the track. My Eclipse if fairly simple. 16g 19psi boost 2g mas cartech front mount 18x6x2.75 2 1/4 intercooler pipe stock bov non-turbo fuel pressure reg. (+11 psi fuel pressure) super AFC severely ported exhaust housing, larger wastegate flapper ported O2 housing 3" mandrel bend exhaust hard pipe from mas to turbo hard pipe from mas to stock intercooler location holley 255lph fuel pump Basic stuff, but very effective to say the least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
88TSiEIP Posted December 21, 2002 Report Share Posted December 21, 2002 ok i tried so hard to stand back and let u guys fight but "4G" if the 2.6 and the starquest in general is such a POS then why are u on these boards? secondly obviously your 84 starion sucked it was non intercooled 140hp , also look at the times in which this motor was created id have to say this motor was pretty impressive for its time, and as for the 2.6 being in trucks who cares? the chevy 5.7 is in trucks so does that mean the motor sucks? id say it means the motor is bad because its in a pickup and meant to "haul" stuff. so thats not a good basis to trash a motor because its in a truck. also u said the 4g63 was better in stock form OBVIOUSLY 16v DOHC i sure hope its better stock! lol gee u think thats why mitsu stopped making the 2.6 G54Bt? and also i think the 2.6 has alot of potential its just that aftermarket companies dont have a market to make them for so they dont make go fast parts for them. if u hate the cars and u hate the motor and u hate us than dont post here and start pissing matches. these cars are great and the 4g63 motor is nice but its not a simple "swap" as u put it. those motors cost $$$$ and more money buyin a tranny that will fit plus engine mounts. so just for the swap will cost u 6 or 8000 and all ur doin is 13s if i was that interested in 1/4mile times id buy a 79 2 door malibu and throw a big block at it can the 4g63 make 500hp and 700 ft/lbs of TQ naturally aspirated? no and neither can a 2.6 but a chevy 502 can!! lol so for 6000 with a big block ur DEEP into the 11s and not using slicks or dialed in good yet just my .02 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4g63-510 Posted December 21, 2002 Report Share Posted December 21, 2002 You obviously(sp?) did not read all of my posts! I never said I hated 2.6, starions or all of you. I will repeat it. I have a great deal of respect for ary one doing things diffrent. Someone stated that the 4G63 was a no brainer to build. Well your 50's tech pushrod elephant 502 is as easy as it gets. My 5yr old could make it fast. ???Did it ever even offer something as simple as efi??? I don't think so. I don't know the last time you priced 4G63s form some of the JDM engine suppliers, the last 4 have cost me $895 plus shipping. How much does your cost??? You can't get one! Also like I stated before, I got on this site to inform people of what it really took to do the swap. Things I learned from this site--- no firewall mods-like my 510 no oil pan mods but my trans mods still apply see my post in Plain Old B.S. - 4G63 rwd I didn't start casting stones until someone started trashing my 510. I just might pick up a newer Starion and do the 4G63 swap. james Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PiercedJD Posted December 21, 2002 Report Share Posted December 21, 2002 we are making some kinda waves james! ;D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4g63-510 Posted December 21, 2002 Report Share Posted December 21, 2002 SWEET!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jinx Posted December 21, 2002 Report Share Posted December 21, 2002 Well, in STOCK form, the 2.6 falls way short of the DSM's potential If you're into plug n play, go with the 4g63 Obseving the fast 2.6s over the years, I noticed they have heaps of potential with simple bolt on mods. Sure, fast starions are not common, but mainly I attribute that to the finicky management that more often than not are loaded with quirks. Pay attention to the healthy ones and it should become very clear what the 2.6 is capable of. Back in the day, perf info was abundant and there were some hot 2.6s that would give comparable DSMs fits... eg. Tracey? ran 11.34 on 14g /tbi + spray. That is a fast street car A flatside that ran 12.1 Frank? ran 12.8 on a wheezy little 12A (320cfm), after hacking the oe intake for 4 injectors / programmable fi. Its common for DSMs to run 12s on the 14B (~420cfm?), but I'm curious if they can hit 12s on a 12A. Have my doubts on that one. Rolo's 11.22 on a 20g, cam, mpfi, is another fine example Many fast 2.6s out there have put the smack down, and once these mpfi guys iron out the kinks, you'll see more The US 2.6 fell short of the mpfi, roller rockers and the strong oe DSM pistons, etc.. as the later 2.6s abroad had, but u can fix that. A healthy tbi 2.6 "can" be damn entertaining and humble many street cars with proven combinations (read Greenstreak 16g post for eg). With pistons, mpfi, cam and the right turbo, it'll bat with the best of 'em. Bar none. Once u get to this level, I'd hate to have to choose between the g54b and 4g63... and no, once u got boost, dohc won't help much. I got tired of showing my GN tailights to japanese multivalve v6 wonders. Torque is very deceiving U really want a dohc 2.6 ? check out this dude. Thats determination! http://www.sdsefi.com/features/july02merkur.htm Admittedly, my favorite project is the SOHC 4g63 turbo in early 80s rwd corollas... just roll into the throttle and it leaves lonngggg black tire patch on spoolup, and that's bone stock. I'll be doing one with mpfi with the usual upgrades. This motor is silky smooth, simple, the easiest of the mitsus to work on, and will scream with the tach over 7500, stock valvetrain. Good stuff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boosted_One Posted December 21, 2002 Report Share Posted December 21, 2002 Kinda a bad place to trash a G54B I say! Both motors have potential. Many of us are completely aware of the potential of the 4g63, but many really don't care. We have our 2.6L's and we run them. Cripes, how many of us are REALLY going to be running 9's - 11's! That's a MINORITY amount in any car classification! Most people shoot for 13's-14's and have a nice street machine. It's like you gotta salute a 4g63 or something...c'mon!! : Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PiercedJD Posted December 21, 2002 Report Share Posted December 21, 2002 I never trashed the g54b. I am just sick and tired of hearing people trash 4g63's. show me the slow 4g63's, because they certainly aren't in Tampa DSM: 1. Jerry Dombrowski------11.297 @ 120.90 2. Joe Bucci----------------11.399 @ 125.75 3. Brad Bond---------------11.574 @ 115.29 4. Tom Tharp---------------11.671 @ 119.68 5. Ricky Sandhu------------11.841 @ 117.11 6. Eric Dunlap--------------11.954 @ 117.97 7. Josh Ittenbach-----------12.362 @ 110.49 8. Aaron Sadorf------------12.376 @ 111.48 9. Ryan Fitzpatrick---------12.477 @ 109.36 10. Brittan Mcghee-----------12.600 @ 114.00 11. Chris Renaud------------12.690 @ 111.27 12. Tom Noonen-------------12.700 @ 110.00 13. Jorge Alvarez------------12.705 @ 111.80 14. Jeremy Black------------12.866 @ 107.00 15. George Boldissar--------12.867 @ 103.32 16. Gail Ward----------------12.977 @ 102.85 17. Nick Cowood-------------13.040 @ 104.80 18. Bill Kaiser-----------------13.114 @ 102.59 19. John Conroy--------------13.166 @ 102.63 20. Joe Schreck--------------13.300 @ 102.59 21. Chad Volkert-------------13.323 @ 101.54 22. John Addison-------------13.385 @ 102.33 23. Joe D'Ettore--------------13.520 @ 99.80 24. Mike Knott----------------13.541 @ 101.45 25. Frank Bachant-----------13.700 @ 105.00 26. Matt Fink-----------------13.800 @ 103.00 27. Jose Santos--------------13.803 @ 95.50 28. David Bowerman--------13.900 @ 96.00 29. Mark Johnston -----------14.071 @ 98.71 30. Brandon McDonald-------14.300 @ 100.00 31. Don Bailey----------------14.300 @ 93.82 32. Jon Belof------------------14.380 @ 97.30 33. Chris Stark---------------14.424 @ 93.89 34. Eric Phillips----------------14.437 @ 98.19 35. Danny Camacho---------14.448 @ 93.05 36. Alex Copeland------------14.499 @ 97.09 37. Frank Raccuglia----------14.570 @ 94.00 38. John Kucek---------------14.611 @ 91.12 39. Aaron Trommater--------14.649 @ 92.37 40. Ryan Avery---------------14.660 @ 94.00 41. Jack Mont-----------------14.850 @ 95.78 42. Mike Davis----------------14.900 @ 96.30 43. Mike Yee------------------15.499 @ 90.86 The retired list --------------------------------------------- James Ray(2g 7bolt power)12.288 @ 108.68-97 TSi AWD Glen Boodram---------------12.793 @ 111.48-91 TSi AWD Tom Krutulis-----------------12.934 @ 101.31-92 RS T Brad Bond-------------------13.197 @ 110.36-90 RS T Eric "Fat a**" Phillips-------13.280 @ 103.37-90 GSX Tony Meroth-----------------13.820 @ 97.82-90 GSX Alex Galvan-----------------13.870 @ 97.00-90 GSX Kris DiSalvo-----------------13.940 @ 98.38-93 TSi tom tharp is the turbo mirage that was mentioned earlier in this thread, and Eric Dunlap drives a second gen (heavier) front wheel drive. I know that I will continue to hear how joe x went xx.xx @ xxx on brand z turbo . Understand that they are the EXCEPTION, not the rule. There are plenty of guys running sick times on stock turbo's in the dsm community, but I don't want to discuss that. this is a discussion of potential, last I checked, and dollar for dollar I believe the 4g63 has more potential. If I thought for a minute that the g54b had more potential that engine would be sitting in my car. those who pointed out that the 4g63 is basically plug and play, sure it is! that is why you would use it, as opposed to some briggs and straton lawnmower engine that with a terribly large amount of custom work you could get some insane horsepower figure out of, but every part that is on it would have to be fabricated. What is the point in doing that? you would have to understand that for every person who appreciated what you did and thought"wow that is pretty amazing, that he's doing that with a briggs and startton" there would be a dozen others saying "what a waste of time and money...... he could have just dropped a vette engine in it and made the same horsepower." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DSMconquest Posted December 21, 2002 Report Share Posted December 21, 2002 4g63's are an extremely fast car. Â My brother has a 93 awd tsi talon w/stock turbo running in the high 12's, with no front mount and a crap tranny. Â His mph is good for low 12s if he had a decent tranny. Â Also, my one friend has a full red turbo race setup in a '93 and will probably run in the 10s when race season comes. Â But the thing is, how many starions or conquests do you see around compared to talons/eclipses? Â In an edition of Modified there is a conquest with stock block and single cam in the 8s. Â And they also said that the G54B was the 4g63's "Red headed step brother." (since it doesn't get as much recognition or respect). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4g63-510 Posted December 21, 2002 Report Share Posted December 21, 2002 Does anyone have a comment to Eric Plaboni's car. He removed the g54b for 4G63 power. The last time it raced it was running 9.45 or so. That was with race weight of 3100 lbs. It still even had the fractory chassis, IRS included. If the 2.6L had so much potential, why the swap??? The stock block thing. David Busher is using the stock block and crank to run 7's. So what! I bet for every 12sec Starion there are 50 DSM's doing the same thing or better. Does that mean DSM's are better? NO! DSM's are "easier" because they made a ton of them. The world wasn't ready for the high performance import car. Detroit even tried. SVO GN Dodge 2.2Lturbos. But most poeple don't want and can't drive high output small displacement engined cars. We want the biggest, gas-hoggest, most pollutest car we can get. American thing. That is who most of the buying public is. Take a look at SUVs. 6500lb tanks. You are lucky to get 10-12 mpg. f-ing huge waste. I will take my more nimble great gas mpg quick little import any day. The days of the over weight pigs need to rest. Isn't it funny of how we got off track of the 12sec car??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yellow_quest Posted December 21, 2002 Report Share Posted December 21, 2002 So what! I bet for every 12sec Starion there are 50 DSM's doing the same thing or better. I'd say for Every Conquest there are at least 50 DSM's. the point to this thread was, whats it take to get a 12 sec conquest. we found: 1) it will take a fair amount of cash and some worthy mods to the Stock 2.6 to get you to the 12's 2) you can drop whatever other Powerplant in this sucker you want and do the same thing. 3) you will always own a Starion/Conquest, no matter what lives under the hood. 4) Sometimes people bicker and complain about the smallest little things, almost feels like high school... Just a a small recap for those that dont want to wade thru 3 pages of crap to get a point. Yellow_quest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PiercedJD Posted December 22, 2002 Report Share Posted December 22, 2002 I'd say for Every Conquest there are at least 50 DSM's. the point to this thread was, whats it take to get a 12 sec conquest. we found: 1) it will take a fair amount of cash and some worthy mods to the Stock 2.6 to get you to the 12's 2) you can drop whatever other Powerplant in this sucker you want and do the same thing. 3) you will always own a Starion/Conquest, no matter what lives under the hood. 4) Sometimes people bicker and complain about the smallest little things, almost feels like high school... Just a a small recap for those that dont want to wade thru 3 pages of crap to get a point. Yellow_quest AMEN brother! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts