DCAWD.com

Looks like the good keep on getting better. Still a little troublesome regarding the massive cash infusions the parent Mitsu group has had to dump in the past year. Hope they can straighten out the bottom line. I would love to see how this line evolves.

What do you guys think about the new duct-work up front? I kind of like it

linky uno

linky2

linky tres

colin

They're all about that 2.0L aren't they... But the car is as fast as an STi, why give it more?

ElZorro wrote:They're all about that 2.0L aren't they... But the car is as fast as an STi, why give it more?

Cause it's the engine they use in the ralley's, which stipulate not over 2.0L The only reason Subaru put a 2.5L in the USDM STI is b/c they know Amercian's, for the most part, think that dusplacement=power. Yet another reason the uneducated public drives me nuts. One of Suzie's friends (actually, a couple) went to dinner with us one night. They are contemplating buying a new car. I recommened the forester XT since the guy wanted something quick. Suddenly the wife goes, what size engine? I said it's a flat 4 like I have, then she goes "Oh, I don't want that, I want atleast a V6 so I can get up hills without changing gears" #$%&(!#$%&!#($%& STUPID PEOPLE

Let me know who they are, I'll take her for a ride.

Yea, I can see keeping the 2.0L, keeps the development costs down, something they need to focus on a little bit. Spend as little as you can to make as much as you can. Business world is fun.

close julian, but they made the sti 2.5 to round off the hp at 300

ElZorro wrote:Let me know who they are, I'll take her for a ride.

Yea, I can see keeping the 2.0L, keeps the development costs down, something they need to focus on a little bit. Spend as little as you can to make as much as you can. Business world is fun.

Some European nations set your income tax level based (partly) on the engine size of your car (larger engine = sign of wealth). The 2.0L mark is generally where the large increases are in tax brackets. Hence, most car sales will be for 2.0L-sized engines and smaller. Which means it's in the manufacturer's best interest to race and develop 2.0L engines. Which means FIA set the engine size for rally at 2.0L (probably at the request of the manufacturers). And the circle of life continues ...

Of course, in the U.S., we don't have any of that non-sense so we can get larger engines w/o tax implications.

--Alan

i think in japan it is the same way, or is tax by the amount of cylinders you have?

WANGAN_X wrote:close julian, but they made the sti 2.5 to round off the hp at 300

hahahaha

BTW, I didn't know that about the tax in Europe. Kind of interesting though. You get taxed on the "size" of your virtual dick. Seems like they would do this with HP/TQ rather size, but oh well. As they say, it's not the size, but how you use it... atleast, that's what all my ex's said Guess that is also the reason why they don't have the freaking LAND YACHT's that they have here. STUPID, but I digress...

the taxes on autos in Europe and Japan are based on displacement.

Julian's story makes me think about the IS300 getting a slower V6 for USDM because Toyota [Lexus] didn't think a turbo 4 would sell well to the target audience. "nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public."

Mitsu has been using the 4g63 powerlant for almost 2 decades now. It's been thier recipe for success. to bad, that mentality of "bigger displacment" pushed for a v6 eclipse

True but the implemented MIVEC and Larger Turbo should help us quite a bit...especially when it comes tuning time

Overall I like all improvement made to the IX! So much that I think I will most likely selll and buy.... The interior took a small but much needed improvement as well.

**random fact... read somewhere that Jackie Chan just bought an EVO 9 and a percentage of Mitsu.... how accurate this is, I have no idea! but they did you many from the evo series in his older movie**

I give lots of respect to the Mitsu powerplant. For the majority of the people who buy the EVO, it is very nice. For those of us who like to "improve" on things, the powerplant is growing up against its bounds.

stacked up

The handling and trans/differential on the EVO are something I wold like to aspire to, but I'll take lower compression and higher displacement for the potential gains in the furure.

If only Mistsu and Subby would team up and do buy one get one free deal! then we could have the best of both worlds!

EVO1VED wrote:
**random fact... read somewhere that Jackie Chan just bought an EVO 9 and a percentage of Mitsu.... how accurate this is, I have no idea! but they did you many from the evo series in his older movie**

Yeah I'll try to find the pics of Jackie and his special edition Evo... got em on my site somewhere

Just in case y'all didn't read to the bottom of the link...
WRX Compression 8.0:1 Boost 13.8 psi
USDM STi Compression 8.2:1 Boost 14.5 psi
EVO 8 Compression 8.81 Boost 19.0 PSI

The 4G63 is easily the most capable and forgiving 4 cylinder engine in production,...

Someday after my car is paid off, however, I will move on to an RRE/RnR built 2.4 liter 4G64,.. that, coupled with a decent sized turbocharger will be a force to reckon with,... drag/track/or autoX

i know i'm late in responding to this. but the main reason subbie used the 2.5 vs 2.0 was emissions. Subbie was unable to get the 300hp safely and reliably while still passing cali emissions.
Other reasons being stated above are correct.
I love how the 4g63 is going on 20+yrs of use and is still puttin out very high hp numbers. If anyone thinks its of no use for big numbers, may I point you to Brent Rau who went 6s this year in a tube framed eclipse and we all know John Shephard who went 7s this year on a 4g63