FTO - EVO

ruchi · Post by **ruchi** » Wed Mar 03, 2004 12:03 am

I don't actually know either, but from what I understand, I don't believe chassis strength will be an issue.

From what I understand of the homologation rules of the WRC and the costs involved to do a major design change such as a chassis, the rally car used in the WRC has the same chassis as the standard road going version. i.e. The Corolla they race in the WRC uses the same chassis as the one we can buy for around $20K.

Likewise the WRX, standard Imprezza and rally version all have the same chassis. I would suggest it is the same for the Lancer and EVO.

Based on this I see no issue with making the FTO AWD.

As with any car, you can add / improve sway bars and brace struts to reduce flex and roll, but I would see this as an option, not an essential.

FTO338 · Post by **FTO338** » Wed Mar 03, 2004 12:29 am

ruchi wrote: Likewise the WRX, standard Imprezza and rally version all have the same chassis. I would suggest it is the same for the Lancer and EVO.

Yes they all have the same chassis, but the rally version had extra 30 welding points to strengthen it. I know this cause my friend inported a rally chassis from japan for his WRX. I'm also aware that the STI had a different control arms then the standard WRX to cope with extra power.

Jeff Beaumont (Real Rally driver) had imported numerious EVO VII & VIII chassis, & they all been strengthen like the WRX Rally chassis as well.

ruchi · Post by **ruchi** » Wed Mar 03, 2004 12:39 am

Thanks Kev, I think you've just answered this topic.

Based on what you've said the road going versions of these cars use the same chassis whether they are AWD or 2WD, and it is only the actual rally version that has extra weld points (but still the same chassis).

So if the likes of a standard Corolla, Focus and Lancer can handle a AWD setup with no chassis modifications, I reckon it would be more than safe to say the FTO could too.

dannyboyau · Post by **dannyboyau** » Wed Mar 03, 2004 2:29 am

MarkFTO wrote: The car is currently running approximately 600bhp

//\\//\\ark

that is quite impressive would love to see the dyno charts

MarkFTO · Post by **MarkFTO** » Wed Mar 03, 2004 2:54 am

dannyboyau wrote:
MarkFTO wrote: The car is currently running approximately 600bhp

//\\//\\ark
that is quite impressive would love to see the dyno charts

me too, but they are being a bit cagey about giving out the information

EURO · Post by **EURO** » Wed Mar 03, 2004 7:50 am

i remember just after i purchased my FTO in 2002, that an EVO FTO came up for auction, i think J-spec advertised it. I dont remember the details but im 99% sure it was an FTO with a EVO 4 engine and drivetrain. From memory it was going to cost me about 25-26 to land it? plus compliance etc. I definately would have purchased but my baby was already on her way over!
mikey remembers this car too, he might know more details

FTO338 · Post by **FTO338** » Wed Mar 03, 2004 8:13 am

yeah i remember that, cause mikey put up a post & see who was interested, & if memory serve me correctly, mikey just order his FTO from Japan 1-2 wks before this EVO 4 FTO came up.

It was running full EVO gear but still a FWD though.

GPXXX · Post by **GPXXX** » Wed Mar 03, 2004 11:55 am

that was MARKFTO's car!!

MarkFTO · Post by **MarkFTO** » Wed Mar 03, 2004 12:41 pm

yup thats me.... im joining dannyboys club too as it looks like i killed the clutch or possibly worse at the weekend racing at santa pod

pulling the box out over the weekend to investigate further.

//\\//\\ark

d_stroy_r · Post by **d_stroy_r** » Wed Mar 03, 2004 1:21 pm

It was also in the prestige-motorsport site too,http://www.prestigemotorsport.com.au/au ... tockID=478

FTO338 · Post by **FTO338** » Wed Mar 03, 2004 9:33 pm

Blaze wrote:well ruchi, it does not need to be expanded, since you answered what you are unaware of. Sorry that I would not go far investigating structural differences between fto and evo.
If you want to know more about FTO chasis stiffness and realted issue, I would suggest to submit your enquiry to MMC and cc to Mizushima Motor Vehicle Works (i.e: plant that manufactured fto) both in Japan.

Well i submited my enquiry about the chassis stiffness between the road version of EVO VI (Australia spec) vs the standard Lancer (CE Model) to MMC.

To my suprise, they reply me within 24hrs by a phone call from the RalliArt department, & he said theres a lot of different between the standard Lancer chassis & the road version of EVO VI, he claimed apart from the usual suspension, control arm, driveshafts.....etc modification they also did extensive modification to the chassic inorder to adapt the AWD & the power that produced from the Evo engine. They might look the same but they are certainly huge different.

Anyway its all sounds like bunch of marketing stuffs to me, but at least now we all clear that theres is a different between the road version EVO VI (or all EVO) and the standard Lancer chassis from the people who makes them.

ruchi · Post by **ruchi** » Wed Mar 03, 2004 9:46 pm

Good stuff Kev, thanks for doing that.

I'm not surprised by the suspension mods, but am by the chassis mods, as from a production point of view this would add a lot of extra time and cost.

I'd be really interested to read the email, could you forward it to me via PM?

FTO338 · Post by **FTO338** » Wed Mar 03, 2004 10:30 pm

Hehehehehh i would love to share with everyone, but like i said on my post, they called me & i didn't expected that.

Hey if you don't believe me, you can always call up RalliArt, i'm sure they would be just as helpfull to you as they did to me today

Number for RalliArt Head Office as follow

+81 0011-03-5479-2357

ruchi · Post by **ruchi** » Wed Mar 03, 2004 10:32 pm

Kev, I believe you, I just wanted to read the details. You know I am a detail person whereas you just like it short and sweet.

dannyboyau · Post by **dannyboyau** » Thu Mar 04, 2004 12:04 am

d_stroy_r wrote:It was also in the prestige-motorsport site too,http://www.prestigemotorsport.com.au/au ... tockID=478

I do believe that is the car markFTO bought

MarkFTO · Post by **MarkFTO** » Thu Mar 04, 2004 4:53 am

dannyboyau wrote:
d_stroy_r wrote:It was also in the prestige-motorsport site too,http://www.prestigemotorsport.com.au/au ... tockID=478
I do believe that is the car markFTO bought

yup!

Blaze · Post by **Blaze** » Thu Mar 04, 2004 4:30 pm

FTO338 wrote:Well i submited my enquiry about the chassis stiffness between the road version of EVO VI (Australia spec) vs the standard Lancer (CE Model) to MMC.

Well done, FTO338.

GPXXX · Post by **GPXXX** » Wed Mar 10, 2004 1:34 pm

MarkFTO wrote:
dannyboyau wrote:
d_stroy_r wrote:It was also in the prestige-motorsport site too,http://www.prestigemotorsport.com.au/au ... tockID=478
I do believe that is the car markFTO bought
yup!

Mark, check your PM!

channy · Post by **channy** » Mon Mar 15, 2004 7:15 pm

I would love to have a 4WD FTO. Just reading on the Pervious replies on this topic. Dosn't the FTO use a Galant platform?? If it uses the Galant platform, why try and mate it with the EVO/Lancer 4WD system underneath it?? why wouldn't you mate it with the 4WD system from the Galant. Please do remember the Galant VR4. The Galant VR4 uses a 2.5lt V6 Twin turbo. Wouldn't this be an easier fit (engine, 4WD system, gearbox).

GPXXX · Post by **GPXXX** » Mon Mar 15, 2004 10:37 pm

you have to remember, the FTO is based on the Galant FWD chassis, not the 4WD version...

The 6A13TT motor should also fit relatively easily, but there is a shitload of fabrication involved to convert the FTO's underpinnings into a 4WD platform, ans believe me you don't want to know how much it costs for the engineer's report , let alone labor!