 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Mitsubishi Cars / April 20071997 Eclipse GS, supercharger, Yes or No?
I have a 1997 Eclipse GS. Its automatic, 2.0 non-turbo. I'm looking to get more power but I don't want to put turbo in. I was told about superchargers, but was also told it could blow older engines. Does anyone know if my car could handle it? And if so, what should I be looking for? Thank you for your time. > I have a 1997 Eclipse GS. Its automatic, 2.0 non-turbo. I'm looking to > get more power but I don't want to put turbo in. I was told about > superchargers, but was also told it could blow older engines. Does > anyone know if my car could handle it? And if so, what should I be > looking for? Thank you for your time. Perhaps you could consider cutting back on the McDonalds. It is safer to lose weight this way than to drill weight reducing holes in the car itself. Losing weight will give you an effective increase in "power". Supercharging is not as effective on a small engine as turbo charging. The SC will impose a constant load on the engine, whereas a turbo doesn't load up the engine since it just uses waste heat energy from combustion. Both SC and turbos can 'blow' engines. Mitsushitty engines blow regardless. >...Mitsushitty engines blow regardless. Alright Bhagat, we know you had a bad experience with Mitsubishi. Quite frankly, none of this NG give a rat's arse (we LIKE Mitsubishi) , so please go some place else now.  SignatureStewart DIBBS www.pixcl.com/lancerproject Arios25 ha scritto: > I have a 1997 Eclipse GS. Its automatic, 2.0 non-turbo. I'm looking to > get more power but I don't want to put turbo in. I was told about > superchargers, but was also told it could blow older engines. Does > anyone know if my car could handle it? And if so, what should I be > looking for? Thank you for your time. superchargers are not effective, as seen on most bay feedbacks. on my 1991 eclipse gs I simply used a K&N-like air filter, removing the air filter case, thus allowing more air to enter the engine. to have further power, you can use a catback 3" exhaust. but, the main way to go for performance on non-turbos is reprogramming ECU. if you want even more, you can think about nitro, but be careful: you'll probably need an upgraded clutch and other tranny parts. see more on www.dsmtuners.com andrea > Arios25 ha scritto: >> I have a 1997 Eclipse GS. Its automatic, 2.0 non-turbo. I'm looking [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > you can think about nitro, but be careful: you'll probably need an > upgraded clutch and other tranny parts. K&N filters admit more fine dirt into your engine. If you value your engine you would stay clear of those filters. A modern EFI engine is relatively insensitive to air filter impedance except at the wide open throttle position, for any other throttle position the ECU merely adjusts the duty cycle of the injectors as necessary to keep the Stoichiometric ratio at 14.7. Just by itself, re-programming the ECU won't do much for performance except it is like likely to increase emissions and waste fuel. You need to increase the volumetric efficiency of the engine and that means taking it apart. What a stupid suggestion to use Nitro! Are you serious? It is only good for a few seconds worth of power at best. Bhagat Gurtu ha scritto: > K&N filters admit more fine dirt into your engine. If you value your > engine you would stay clear of those filters. this is definitely not true. I used K&N on 5 cars without any damage, and with increase in throttle response and mileage. > A modern EFI engine is relatively insensitive to air filter impedance > except at the wide open throttle position, for any other throttle position > the ECU merely adjusts the duty cycle of the injectors as necessary to > keep the Stoichiometric ratio at 14.7. this is partially true: the ECM will adjust automatically air/fuel ratio. So, if the air filter allows more air to enter, you don't need to adjust it as with carburetters: this means simplicity and immediate benefit. But this is the point: you have more air available to burn, and more ready to use, so the overall functionality is increased. The same, and more, removing air filter can, so the engine is free to aspire as much air as it needs. > Just by itself, re-programming the ECU won't do much for performance > except it is like likely to increase emissions and waste fuel. You need to > increase the volumetric efficiency of the engine and that means taking it > apart. It's logical: more power needs more fuel. But our friend needs more power, so he'll ready to spend more money at filling station.. If he wants a cheap run, he hasn't to buy an Eclipse.. And, a good ECM programmer could increase power over a certain rpm: a friend of mine reprogammed his Alfa 164 2.0 over 4000 rpm's: under it, it is the same as before, but over 4000 he had a +30%, so he can choose between good mileage and high performances. > What a stupid suggestion to use Nitro! Are you serious? It is only good > for a few seconds worth of power at best. In normal roadrunning conditions, do you need max power for more than few seconds? I think no. Nitro is cheaper than turbo conversion, obviously it has some limits, but our friend don't want to fit a turbo unit andrea > this is definitely not true. I used K&N on 5 cars without any damage, > and with increase in throttle response and mileage. Think again. Here are the results of a proper test http://home.stny.rr.com/jpblock/ISO5011/SPICER.htm > But this is the point: you have more air available to burn, and more > ready to use, so the overall functionality is increased. > The same, and more, removing air filter can, so the engine is free to > aspire as much air as it needs. Only for full throttle. Who drives around on full throttle except if your car is powered by a a lawnmower engine? PS: Engines being inamimate don't aspire to anything. >> Just by itself, re-programming the ECU won't do much for performance >> except it is like likely to increase emissions and waste fuel. You need to [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > it is the same as before, but over 4000 he had a +30%, so he can choose > between good mileage and high performances. So he changed a map. Did he check the emissions afterwards? Bhagat Gurtu ha scritto: > Think again. Here are the results of a proper test > http://home.stny.rr.com/jpblock/ISO5011/SPICER.htm Not Found The requested URL /jpblock/ISO5011/SPICER.htm was not found on this server. Additionally, a 404 Not Found error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request. Okay, so what do you guys suggest I do than? I'd like to get more horse power, but I don't want to spend a ton of money to do it. I'm willing to spend a reasonable amount though. But I'm also not too knowledgable when it comes to engines so don't know where I should start from and what I need to do to other parts of the engine when I modify something else. Any suggestions on what I could do? Okay, so what do you guys suggest I do than? I'd like to get more horse power, but I don't want to spend a ton of money to do it. I'm willing to spend a reasonable amount though. But I'm also not too knowledgable when it comes to engines so don't know where I should start from and what I need to do to other parts of the engine when I modify something else. Any suggestions on what I could do? > Okay, so what do you guys suggest I do than? I'd like to get more horse > power, but I don't want to spend a ton of money to do it. I'm willing to > spend a reasonable amount though. But I'm also not too knowledgable when > it comes to engines Sell the automatic and get a 2.0L turbo with the manual transmission, otherwise you are wasting your money. If you upgraded the 4G63 to a higher spec (160-170 hp is possible) your auto transmission would likley be the next thing to fail. Ask a transmission shop what it costs to get a 97 Eclipse automatic transmission rebuilt. This is why most performance upgrades are done to (4 cylinder FWD) vehicles with manual transmissions. SignatureStewart DIBBS www.pixcl.com/lancerproject Well, I like my car as it is. I just want to gain some HP. I don't want gain a crapload. I just want to modify my current engine to gain some HP and not blow it. So useful advice as to gain on my current engine would be appreciated. > Well, I like my car as it is. I just want to gain some HP. I don't > want gain a crapload. I just want to modify my current engine to gain > some HP and not blow it. So useful advice as to gain on my current > engine would be appreciated. You could try some blue LEDs but your best bet is to sell the piece of sh.t and get proper car. Bhagat Gurtu ha scritto: > You could try some blue LEDs but your best bet is to sell the piece of > sh.t and get proper car. until my wife's Fiat Palio 75 will be slower than my 1991 Eclipse, I'll disagree from such opinions LOL. Keep the 97 eclipse. all in all it's a good car.. andrea Well, I like my car as it is. I just want to gain some HP. I don't want gain a crapload. I just want to modify my current engine to gain some HP and not blow it. So useful advice as to gain on my current engine would be appreciated. Arios25 ha scritto: > Well, I like my car as it is. I just want to gain some HP. I don't want > gain a crapload. I just want to modify my current engine to gain some HP > and not blow it. So useful advice as to gain on my current engine would > be appreciated. as a beginning, try K&N filter or similar (you can find them also on Ebay for cheap). Then, if you appreciate it, you can also fit the catback exhaust system. The overall cost should not exceed 500 usd. (100 for K%N and 400 for sway's) Thank about driveability: it's as important as the power, or more in running conditions. So, I recommend Eibach lowered suspensions, sway bars (front and rear) and strut bars (front). Other 500-700 bucks. That's all you need. Ah, of course, a manual tranny. 250 bucks on ebay. andrea Well thats a good start, but is that all I can do to get some more power? That won't really give to much power will it? Arios25 ha scritto: > Well thats a good start, but is that all I can do to get some more power? > That won't really give to much power will it? sorry but no. take into account that, if you have a turbo engine, it is relatively simple and cheap to have extra power. to do the same on a non-turbo engine is really more expensive, you probably need to change not only gerbox but also cams, valves, crankshaft, etc. so, the only alternative is to swap engine and transmission to a 4g63 turbo with manual transmission, and you probably can find some at graveyard. so, if you are not going to do so, it's better to have, as your goal, to achieve a small increase in performance but an overall better driving pleasure. this is the reason because I recommend just few things to do in engine bay, and to work mainly with suspensions. also because you don't need extra power, if you're able to run faster curves.. F1 teachs! ;-) andrea > Well thats a good start, but is that all I can do to get some more power? The simplest way to get more power from a non-turbo is to install an engine management system that replaces (NOT piggybacks on) the existing ECU. MOTEC (motec.com.au) are one of the best. It generally does not require replacement of the injectors for Stage #1. Initial mods should include - a set of headers and replacing the 2 1/8" exhaust system with a 2 1/2" system. Any bigger is no use without a turbo. - later mods are porting the head, bigger valves and higher compression. It possible to get 160-170 hp from a non-turbo. Pretty soon though the costs exceed getting a 4G63T. SignatureStewart DIBBS www.pixcl.com/lancerproject Stewart DIBBS ha scritto: re porting the head, bigger valves and higher compression. > It possible to get 160-170 hp from a non-turbo. > > Pretty soon though the costs exceed getting a 4G63T. Stewart, the standard for a 4g63 (european version) is 150 hp. so, all this work just for +20 hp, sounds not worth the hassle.. andrea > Stewart DIBBS ha scritto: > the standard for a 4g63 (european version) is 150 hp. > so, all this work just for +20 hp, sounds not worth the hassle.. No, its not. And why the 4G63T is the way to go. SignatureStewart DIBBS www.pixcl.com/lancerproject Stewart DIBBS ha scritto: >> Stewart DIBBS ha scritto: >> the standard for a 4g63 (european version) is 150 hp. >> so, all this work just for +20 hp, sounds not worth the hassle.. > > No, its not. And why the 4G63T is the way to go. so, Stewart, what's your opinion about nitro on n/t engines? you risk clutch and tranny, that's the way it is, but taking it into accout, may it be a reasonable way to have some extra power just when you really need it? andrea So getting lets say .. hi flow fuel injectors, hi f low fuel pump, fuel/air modulator, new headers and exhaust system, getting a new air intake system. Would that help increase response time and increase some power? And what about an electric supercharger, will that help at all? Pretty cheap and supposedly adds somem hp. > So getting lets say .. hi flow fuel injectors, hi f low fuel pump, > fuel/air modulator, new headers and exhaust system, getting a new air > intake system. Would that help increase response time and increase some > power? All very nice, but it is the engine management system that defines what the engine will do. The standard intake manifold is pretty reasonable when its clean. The MAF (in the air filter can) is restrictive, so a better intake pipe system will help. The valves are big enough. Exhaust flow and the std rear muffler is the main restriction, so put on a set of headers and a 2 1/2" system with a high flow cat. This will be good for about another 10 hp, and a freer revving engine == reduced response time. So the std 135hp 1G 4G63 DOHC engine will pick up to about 145-150hp Replacing the std ECU with a MOTEC (or similar) and configuring on a dyno will bump the n/a 4G63 to around 160hp or so. Bigger injectors will be good for another 5-8hp. Update the cams to a sportier profile with more overlap and higher lift, and again configuring on a dyno will bump a 4G63 up to around 180-190hp, BUT the power will come in later and low end drivability (ie torque) will suffer. You won't need a hi flow fuel pump until you put in a big turbo and big injectors. I use the std 4G pump in my Summit GTX 4G63T and its done everything I've ever asked of it. I will put in the 1G pump next time I take the tank out. > And what about an electric supercharger, will that help at all? Complete waste of money in my view, because the "boost" is only slightly linked to ECU control parameters. In any case, 1-3 lbs of boost is of minimal use. A proper turbo setup runs at about 12 lbs. SignatureStewart DIBBS www.pixcl.com/lancerproject Okay this is the kind of information I was really looking for, very helpful to me. I appreciate ur guys help that have given in input. I went to the motec website and looked around. I'm not sure which of the ECUs I would need.. I see a couple that match what my car is, but not sure which is the best. Sell it and get a 04-05 neon srt-4 ...0-60 in 5.3 sec ,top speed elec-gov limited 153mph. ALL In STOCK trim 230HP @ the wheels and 250 TQ . you can find a low mileage one for about $13,000-$17,000 (ebay). And if its a 05 it'll still have some warranty left. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_SRT-4 |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.