Making a 6A12 go hard!

spetz · Post by **spetz** » Mon Nov 15, 2004 9:41 pm

How much power would I reasonably get from a modded V6 MIVEC, keeping it N/A?

What is the best route for power?
What parts?

I want my car to be quick, like turbo quick (if possible)

The engine is in a coupe lancer

FTO338 · Post by **FTO338** » Mon Nov 15, 2004 10:37 pm

Theres few guys including myself are trying to get much out of N/A as possible, so far i know one member had achieved close to 120kwatw in N/A form, is impressive consider that stock is 90-100kwatw.

I'm aiming 130kwatw by the end of the yr or early next yr so finger cross. Mind you, so far all the turbo FTO had reach 150kwatw easily. So unless you going to spend big bucks, its going to be very very hard to achieve what a "hairdryer"can do.

spetz · Post by **spetz** » Mon Nov 15, 2004 10:48 pm

I was thinking because my car is much lighter than an FTO, I already have an advantage.

To be honest, 120kw/atw is what I would expect from a stock FTO, considering they have 150 flywheel kw. I never quite understood the reason of the wheel kw being so low.

A friend has a mildly modded 1.8 SOHC (5mm oversize TB, CAI, extractors/exhaust, FPR and e-manage) and got 83kw atw with a rough tune. Are these 6A12 MIVEC's pretty crappy engines???

hnm738 · Post by **hnm738** » Mon Nov 15, 2004 11:44 pm

with those mods there on 6a12 mivec should give you about 110 kws atw or greater

Jono · Post by **Jono** » Tue Nov 16, 2004 2:51 am

spetz,

why do u say 6a12 mivecs are crap? Im just confused why u say its crap when you have transplanted this engine into your car.

Dr_Jones · Post by **Dr_Jones** » Tue Nov 16, 2004 3:36 am

spetz wrote:Are these 6A12 MIVEC's pretty crappy engines???

That looks like a question not a statement.

G1 · Post by G1 » Tue Nov 16, 2004 10:57 am

how many engines produced peak power of anything even close to 150kw from 2.0L N/A in '94 or even afterwards? hardly any.... so i dont think its crap at all

ellusion · Post by **ellusion** » Tue Nov 16, 2004 12:18 pm

The current Integra Type R is 147kw at the flywheel and produces about 96kw atw. The fto is quite similar so i guess its average in terms of flywheel vs atw.

Chiangstar · Post by **Chiangstar** » Tue Nov 16, 2004 1:54 pm

spetz wrote:A friend has a mildly modded 1.8 SOHC (5mm oversize TB, CAI, extractors/exhaust, FPR and e-manage) and got 83kw atw with a rough tune.

dont forget that there is a big difference between a 1.8L SOHC and a 2.0L DOHC engine

simon

fto617 · Post by **fto617** » Tue Nov 16, 2004 4:44 pm

i reckon !
why the hell is fto gpx engines crap
my friend dynoed his typeR 2002 model and had 108kw atw
and my tip gpx had 101kw atw
and also just because u chuck the fto engine in a lancer doesnt make your car fast
have u considered the setup of your car?

G_A_V · Post by **G_A_V** » Tue Nov 16, 2004 5:19 pm

I would say that the dyno your friends lance was one was rigged a little, last dyno comp i went to ftos all ran 103+kw and 1.8l sohc (modified) lancers ran 50-55kw.
As for your car beeing lighter, i thought lancers weigh more then an fto. at least with the 6a12 i guarentee they would wight more then an fto, which is why i wonder why people put 6a12s in lancers

spetz · Post by **spetz** » Tue Nov 16, 2004 6:47 pm

Lancer's are lighter than FTO's...
My Lancer's weight (before transplant) was 990 kg, an FTO is 1170kg.
I assume my car now will weight about 1050 kg or less.

I wasn't saying the 6A12 is crap, I was asking if it is overrated? It's hard to believe it loses approx 55 kw through the drivetrain? A stock lancer 1.8 usually does around 60 kw atw, 86 kw flywheel

G_A_V · Post by **G_A_V** » Tue Nov 16, 2004 6:55 pm

the other thing is, peak power does not measure performance, as for atw loss if a lance gets 60kw on a dyno then that is 69% where if an fto gets 110kw then its 73% not that much difference. especially considering ftos are up to 10 years old. and all lancers i have seen average 50-55kw atw

SilentBob · Post by **SilentBob** » Tue Nov 16, 2004 6:59 pm

ahhhh have you thought about what youve just said

example
Lancer ..... 86kw fly to 60kw atw = about .7 ratio
FTO..... 150kw fly to 105kw atm = you guesed it...ABOUT .7 RATIO

wow....how wierd

SilentBob

*** edit
damn gav you beat me
***

ruchi · Post by **ruchi** » Tue Nov 16, 2004 7:02 pm

spetz wrote:I wasn't saying the 6A12 is crap, I was asking if it is overrated?

Can you show me a 10 year old, 2 litre, normally aspirated engine that offers better performance?

Personally I think the FTO and its engine is understated and often overlooked.

spetz wrote:It's hard to believe it loses approx 55 kw through the drivetrain? A stock lancer 1.8 usually does around 60 kw atw, 86 kw flywheel

What's hard to believe? Both the Lancer figures you quote as well as the FTO figures equate to basically the same power loss (roughly 30%). Between 30-50% loss through the drivetrain is fairly standard depending upon the age and condition of the vehicle and whether it is manual or auto.

kay_8 · Post by **kay_8** » Wed Nov 17, 2004 2:54 am

When you assume your Lancer will be 1050kg, Is that only with a engine transplant??? If so have you considered that the gearbox, suspension and brakes, all these upgrades will increase weight. These upgrades will help your car keep up with your new engine. There is no point on having a fast car if you can't, put the power to the ground, hold speed through corners or stop the car when braking. I have a Lancer as well as an FTO. I have tought of doing a transplant on the Lancer before. When i factor all cost involved it was cheaper to buy an FTO. At the moment they are at such good value.

mrx · Post by **mrx** » Wed Nov 17, 2004 7:00 am

kay_8 wrote:When you assume your Lancer will be 1050kg, Is that only with a engine transplant??? If so have you considered that the gearbox, suspension and brakes, all these upgrades will increase weight. These upgrades will help your car keep up with your new engine. There is no point on having a fast car if you can't, put the power to the ground, hold speed through corners or stop the car when braking. I have a Lancer as well as an FTO. I have tought of doing a transplant on the Lancer before. When i factor all cost involved it was cheaper to buy an FTO. At the moment they are at such good value.

Amen

The defence rests, your honour.

ANBU_fto · Post by **ANBU_fto** » Wed Nov 17, 2004 9:40 am

FTO'S RULE!!!!

they are very much understated.... like heaps....

Boris · Post by **Boris** » Wed Nov 17, 2004 10:27 am

Hmm. Don't you think we're being a bit bias here?

As much as I like the FTO, I don't think there is such a thing as the best engine, sure there aren't many 2L engines like ours in that timeframe but that doesn't make ours the best.

What I really wanted to say is that, Spetz, if you're that concerned with your car being slow, post up some figures here, or come on the Canberra soon to be night cruise and drag me, or any other FTO and see how you compare.

FTO338 · Post by **FTO338** » Wed Nov 17, 2004 10:29 am

I've got to say this, standard FTO (non force induction)are over rated by FTO's owner, & big time under rated by others.