general Q about EVO VII
Moderators: IMC, Club Staff
- fto617
- Veteran Mechanic
- Posts: 1069
- jedwabna poszewka promocja
- Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2004 5:00 pm
- Location: Sydney
general Q about EVO VII
hey guys
anybody know how reliable are the 4g63???
are the engine reliable in teh evo VII?
whats the difference between evo VII and VIII?
they look generally the same besies the nose job
Are they high maintenance?
what are petrol consumptions like?
are they more reliable than wrx?
are the gearbox good?
would 4g63 motors have tappet noise like ftos???
anybody know how reliable are the 4g63???
are the engine reliable in teh evo VII?
whats the difference between evo VII and VIII?
they look generally the same besies the nose job
Are they high maintenance?
what are petrol consumptions like?
are they more reliable than wrx?
are the gearbox good?
would 4g63 motors have tappet noise like ftos???
- SchumieFan
- Oldtimer
- Posts: 5875
- Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 5:00 pm
- Location: GPS signal lost
- Contact:
- Nacho
- Oldtimer
- Posts: 2087
- Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2005 5:00 pm
- Location: Melbourne
The EVO VIII came out with Active Yaw Control, and I off the top of my head I think it was an Active Differential Control. Look it up in the Mitsy website and it'll tell you.
I've also heard the EVO VII was a bit of a flop and they hardly sold any. It maybe coz they didn't race that one in the WRC. Not too sure though?! Which EVO was in 2 Fast 2 Furious? EVO VII or EVO VIII? I think it might have been VII
I've also heard the EVO VII was a bit of a flop and they hardly sold any. It maybe coz they didn't race that one in the WRC. Not too sure though?! Which EVO was in 2 Fast 2 Furious? EVO VII or EVO VIII? I think it might have been VII

- FTO338
- Oldtimer
- Posts: 6712
- Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2003 6:00 pm
- Location: Port Melbourne: Pimping with RX400h, B200 Turbo.
Is the VII Joel.nacho wrote:Which EVO was in 2 Fast 2 Furious? EVO VII or EVO VIII? I think it might have been VII

Btw Active Yaw control had been standard since EVO IV & EVO VII does have Active Differential Control as well, it was the first EVO to have it

The improvement of EVO VIII over EVO VII are
1. 6 speed manual instead of 5
2. Upgraded water pump with larger water passages in the turbocharger
3. Active Yaw control had upgraded software to SAYC1 (only on GSR model)
They are small improvement on paper, but they made the EVO VIII a much faster & more reliable weapon on the road & track.
DISCLAIMER: The above text is the personal opinion of the author and does not represent the indisputable truth. The author is not responsible for any deaths, injuries or mental illness caused by the above statments.
- SchumieFan
- Oldtimer
- Posts: 5875
- Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 5:00 pm
- Location: GPS signal lost
- Contact:
-
- Mechanic
- Posts: 730
- Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2003 6:00 pm
- Location: WA
- Contact:
- FTO338
- Oldtimer
- Posts: 6712
- Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2003 6:00 pm
- Location: Port Melbourne: Pimping with RX400h, B200 Turbo.
-
- Mechanic
- Posts: 730
- Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2003 6:00 pm
- Location: WA
- Contact:
He said the car was awesome for 5 minutes then he went about the bad stuff bout the car (evo 8 400 spec) eg turning cycle, clutch and the lag......and there was heaps of it!!
The best way to go is to get the normal evo and do it up yourself. It cost around 80k for that spec EVO.
spend 25k on other mods i reckon.
The best way to go is to get the normal evo and do it up yourself. It cost around 80k for that spec EVO.
spend 25k on other mods i reckon.
- SchumieFan
- Oldtimer
- Posts: 5875
- Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 5:00 pm
- Location: GPS signal lost
- Contact:
- FTO338
- Oldtimer
- Posts: 6712
- Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2003 6:00 pm
- Location: Port Melbourne: Pimping with RX400h, B200 Turbo.
Yeah the MIVEC in them are just for fuel economy & not performance.Nacho wrote:Hold out for the EVO IX which has inbuilt MIVEC and is rated something like 400ps in stock form.
What the hell is 400ps? If you mean BHP then the EVO IX is rated at 286bhp/213 KW
DISCLAIMER: The above text is the personal opinion of the author and does not represent the indisputable truth. The author is not responsible for any deaths, injuries or mental illness caused by the above statments.
-
- Veteran Mechanic
- Posts: 1020
- Joined: Sun Aug 04, 2002 5:00 pm
- Location: Sydney
Why would they design a sports car like the evo to get better fuel performance. The Mivec must be inthere for more reasons then just fuel.
I would imagine it just isnt as agressive as the NA version and also not as high compression ratio. I would imagine the Mivec was also for bragging rights, varible cam timming is something the subbys dont have.
The Different cam profiles are proberly there to help turbo spool too
I would imagine it just isnt as agressive as the NA version and also not as high compression ratio. I would imagine the Mivec was also for bragging rights, varible cam timming is something the subbys dont have.
The Different cam profiles are proberly there to help turbo spool too
- FTO338
- Oldtimer
- Posts: 6712
- Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2003 6:00 pm
- Location: Port Melbourne: Pimping with RX400h, B200 Turbo.
Actually Suby STI have Varible cam timming since MY04, so now Mitsu need to keep up with the "marketing" in order to justify why the EVO are more expensive then the STI...........ala MIVEC 

DISCLAIMER: The above text is the personal opinion of the author and does not represent the indisputable truth. The author is not responsible for any deaths, injuries or mental illness caused by the above statments.
-
- Veteran Mechanic
- Posts: 1020
- Joined: Sun Aug 04, 2002 5:00 pm
- Location: Sydney
I did not realise that, however as far as I can see the subaru AVACS is no where near as advanced http://www.drive.subaru.com/Win05_WhatsInside.htm
It doesnt use 2 different cam profiles
Wouldnt mind one of these babys
http://response.jp/issue/2004/1227/arti ... /78434.jpg
The mivec engine only adds 4 max hp, but 20nm of torque, so it wasnt just put in for fuel efficiency.
Though your right they are only just catching up
It doesnt use 2 different cam profiles
Wouldnt mind one of these babys
http://response.jp/issue/2004/1227/arti ... /78434.jpg
The mivec engine only adds 4 max hp, but 20nm of torque, so it wasnt just put in for fuel efficiency.
Though your right they are only just catching up
- bigpitty1
- Mechanic
- Posts: 629
- Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2004 6:00 pm
- Location: Mackay
The MIVEC in the FTO is variable valve timing and lift, with the EVO its just variable valve timing alone, basically all it does is give the engine a better fuel economy, give more torque at low revs and widen the torque range, its the same with the STI and it works on the intake cam only, I think it is the same with the evo, The FTO's MIVEC works on both intake and exhaust.
- GPXXX
- Oldtimer
- Posts: 3433
- Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2003 5:00 pm
- Location: < the matrix >
Nacho i think you have your facts mixed up between the Evo IX and the UK-only FQ400-spec Evo...FTO338 wrote:Yeah the MIVEC in them are just for fuel economy & not performance.Nacho wrote:Hold out for the EVO IX which has inbuilt MIVEC and is rated something like 400ps in stock form.
What the hell is 400ps? If you mean BHP then the EVO IX is rated at 286bhp/213 KW

from what I've read about the new Evo's 4G63B, the MIVEC was incorporated to improve overall engine response using optimised camshaft profiles to leverage the torque generated by the quick-spooling turbo (so in a way Gavin was right)...
many journalists who have test driven the Evo has acknowledged that power is very smooth and responsive with the MIVEC, not like the STI's which are reportedly 'riddled' with lag (though still not as bad as it sounds IMO).
- FTO338
- Oldtimer
- Posts: 6712
- Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2003 6:00 pm
- Location: Port Melbourne: Pimping with RX400h, B200 Turbo.
Even then the FQ400 is EVO VIII, but there is a FQ300, FQ320 & a FQ340 for the EVO IX.
Ohh & i take the new MY06 STI any day over the EVO IX
Ohh & i take the new MY06 STI any day over the EVO IX

DISCLAIMER: The above text is the personal opinion of the author and does not represent the indisputable truth. The author is not responsible for any deaths, injuries or mental illness caused by the above statments.