why did FTO made to be a 2L ????

Post by **Supplanter** » Tue Feb 07, 2006 9:40 pm

SchumieFan wrote:
Bennoz wrote: how bout X-treme Chingrish "Rerry 2 Ritre Res?"
Youll have to get kev to do that

sh*t payday? debt payin day more like... but i dont care cause ill be in melbourne in 50 days! muhuahahaha

Only 50 days

DEAR GOD NO!

FTO338 · Post by **FTO338** » Tue Feb 07, 2006 11:00 pm

Let the Chingrish master have a go at this

Why 2.0L Mr Bishi made in first place for FTO.

Give it a few more post & this will be in the Garbo section like the rest of them haahahahahaa

P.S its so hard to type chingrish when you mean it

HiRAEdd · Post by **HiRAEdd** » Wed Feb 08, 2006 7:32 am

SchumieFan wrote:bork bork? u lost me!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_Chef

SchumieFan · Post by **SchumieFan** » Wed Feb 08, 2006 12:31 pm

HAHAHAHA as soon as i saw the link i cracked up... only problem is you just posted a pic of my head chef! muhuahaha

49 days to go!

14 and i can drive again

Nacho · Post by **Nacho** » Wed Feb 08, 2006 8:42 pm

Sorry Schumie but I may have missed something.........why can't you drive until 14 days?

Or to stay in the spirit of the thread....."Why you can't drive until 14 days?"

Post by **Supplanter** » Wed Feb 08, 2006 10:20 pm

SchumieFan wrote:HAHAHAHA as soon as i saw the link i cracked up... only problem is you just posted a pic of my head chef! muhuahaha

49 days to go!
14 and i can drive again

So in 14 days pedestrians will have to stop walking on the footpaths again?

cb · Post by cb » Thu Feb 09, 2006 8:56 am

Supplanter wrote:
SchumieFan wrote:HAHAHAHA as soon as i saw the link i cracked up... only problem is you just posted a pic of my head chef! muhuahaha

49 days to go!
14 and i can drive again
So in 14 days pedestrians will have to stop walking on the footpaths again?

Well with me aswell they have to be doubly as careful

SchumieFan · Post by **SchumieFan** » Thu Feb 09, 2006 12:29 pm

I get my licence back in 13 days

Havnt driven the FTO in 9 Months, lost my licence 12 months ago.... i have no idea how it drives now cause all the modding has been done while i havnt been able to drive

bye bye insurance!

poster · Post by **poster** » Fri Feb 10, 2006 1:23 am

and......thanks guys i have got my answer after all.....everyone have got there own idea about it hahah

and i do not mind if u go off topic so its ok....just keep going hehe

thanks guys

mr_bishi · Post by **mr_bishi** » Fri Feb 10, 2006 11:27 am

FTO338 wrote: Why 2.0L Mr Bishi made in first place for FTO.

Don't bring me into this!!

payaya · Post by **payaya** » Sun Feb 12, 2006 7:20 am

FTO338 wrote:I believe mitsubishi went for the small V6 instead of a larger capicity 4 or even just 2.0L is to overcome the lack of torque you get in lots of 4 bangers in the early 90's.

Most N/A 4 bangers back then produce around 150-180Nm, while FTO is 200Nm, plus its good for the marketing ppl as they can brag about "its a V6 & its MIVEC"

I dont think that a V6 will produce anymore torque than a I4 with the same capacity!

Its more based on capacity, the more capcity the more torque.

Also 2.0L is only small when compared to big aussie 6's and 8's. In Japan 2.0L is enough!

FTO338 · Post by **FTO338** » Sun Feb 12, 2006 11:05 am

Well i got my info from Mitsubishi Motor Japan.

Post by **Bennoz** » Sun Feb 12, 2006 11:32 am

Yeah, capacity is always going to result in more torque, but more cylinders will do as well. Got a lot of extra weight on the crank which results in momentum, which results in torque.

mr_bishi · Post by **mr_bishi** » Mon Feb 13, 2006 7:54 am

Also the greater stroke an engine has the higher the torque.

spetz · Post by **spetz** » Mon Feb 13, 2006 4:19 pm

To be honest I think the only good parts of the FTO being a 6 are:
More reliable (longetivity)
The sound, and how the engine looks

BUT, the disadvantages of it:
69mm stroke, nice and revvy but no good for torque! 78.4mm bore, massively undersquare engine, heavy V6 not good for handling either!

I think, it would be good if Mitsubishi at least made the Version R a bit better, like 6A13 MIVEC, and made the car lighter

pagan · Post by **pagan** » Wed Feb 22, 2006 6:47 pm

I think the over all answer is obvious. Mitsu needs to make another FTO.
if they had not kept it for them selves it would have been a big hit everywhere, im dead certain of this.

update it, keep the same shape just a little more agressive/modern, and more power as the new engines will give that regardless, and bang! they have a winner that will single handedly pull them out of the crapper.

simple really....sometimes i wonder who runs these car companies, and whether they ever bother to actually see the world outside their little office.

d_stroy_r · Post by **d_stroy_r** » Wed Feb 22, 2006 6:54 pm

The fto wouldn't work if its sold again.

The main problem mitsubishi had was the cost of a brand new fto,where the opposition was soo strong and around the same price or cheaper.

Nacho · Post by **Nacho** » Thu Feb 23, 2006 8:51 am

It could possibly work to relaunch the FTO coz one of the main factors that affected it's cost back then was the technology.

Tiptronic standard back in 1994 and other companies have started to release that over the last few years.

MIVEC engine is only starting to be implemented in the last few years on the lancers and pajeros.

Climate control, power windows, power steering, etc.

Those things were not cheap back then, but these days most brand new cars come with all these features. If they kept the shape and modernised things like the headlights, taillights, rims etc. then they would probably get one hell of a competitor. Even keep the existing suspension setup and we can still outhandle a majority of the cars on the road. The brakes are more than able to stop when required.

I know I'll get hung for this comment but placed in the same category and price range as say........New Accord, New Integra, Mazda 6, New Celica.....which one would you buy?

Maybe they can speak to Spoon sports and discuss ways to tune the MIVEC even more so we can take on the Honda S2000's!

testlabmonkey · Post by **testlabmonkey** » Thu Feb 23, 2006 10:47 am

isnt the mitsu eclipse pretty much the fto of today.... admitably the gt version has a 3.8ltr mivec but the GS with its 2.4ltr mivec sounds very ftoish.... i think we should be able to buy that here

.... the GS with manual trans is under US$20K........ now thats a bargain.

FTO338 · Post by **FTO338** » Thu Feb 23, 2006 11:57 am

Nacho wrote:Tiptronic standard back in 1994 and other companies have started to release that over the last few years.

MIVEC engine is only starting to be implemented in the last few years on the lancers and pajeros.

Climate control, power windows, power steering, etc.

You are correct if you refering Aussie market, but in Japan & HK, MIVEC had been in Lancer & Pajero (aka wankers

) even before the FTO. And all those climate control, power everything are standard in most asian model.

I remember in 1998 when i was looking at a Lancer in HK, it cost around $20,000-22,000 Aus dollar for a 1.6L MIVEC with 4spd tip, Leather, power everything including sunroof, & same climate control as the FTO. And in australia you be lucky to drive away with a sh*t box manual everything 2 spoke steering GLi at the same price back then.

I don't think Mitsubishi going to re-introduce FTO again, since the got the EVO & been heavily investing on a small size sports hatch/2 door coupe like Colt. (aka mirage).

These days its all about cut costing & multi-platform. So the only chance we see the FTO badge is the RHD version of the U.S Eclipse.