Austarion

hi guys, new to the forums, im in the uk and there seems to be no decent starion forums, anyway, im looking to buy a starion in the not so distant future and wondered what the best engine to go for is? the 2.0? or the 2.6?

im ideally wanting to get it tuned to around 300hp(not at the wheels, crank) so whats the best lump to start with? as ive heard that some of the starion lumps were delicate, but havent seen any proof of this

cheers in advance

Where are you located on this big planet of ours?

I thought the bit where he says "I'm in the UK" would give it away. LOL

Welcome aboard!

Both engines have their fors and againsts. Depends on where you wanted to head with it modification wise. Twin cam can only be done on 2.0. Multipoint can be done with both, just different manifolds required to suit. 2.6 has cam driven by chain, 2.0 is driven by belt so engine is a bit quieter. Small differences here and there. Gearboxes and the rest of the running gear are the same.

And yes, the UK forum is next to useless.

like i say, around the 300 ish horsepower @ the crank, can you please explain the engine codes? as im not familiar with mistubishi engines, mostly toyota, honda, vauxhall, ford, etc

4G63 = 2.0 litre
4G54 = 2.6 litre

Alspos wrote:I thought the bit where he says "I'm in the UK" would give it away. LOL

hmm.. over looked that detail with my speed reading...

weegaz22.... moral of the story, update ya profile and add ya location... stop making me look more stupid than I already am.

welcome to austarion mate! the 2.0 4G63 vs 2.6 4G54 debate is one that has been fought many times on here, i'm a hardcore supporter of the 4G63 for many reasons, the only downfall with them is the standard pistons are fairly fragile, but thats easily and cheaply fixed by installing the twin cam type pistons, not necessarily forged, even casty's will handle 20 psi reliably.

i ran 20 psi in my car for 18 months without drama on galant vr4 cast cheapo pistons, i checked them when i pulled them out recently and there was no damage.

there are 3 main things i dont like about the 4G54, firstly they're not as eager 2 rev as the 63, secondly they have a really shithouse timing chain arrangement that will cause u grief (and rattles) no end, and thirdly the 54 makes the starion a bit more nose heavy and therefore loses a bit of agility when changing direction and turn in response etc. the 63 is a fair bit shorter engine overall so the weight sits further back. note the ralliart team stayed well away from the 2.6 when they raced them when new, that about sums it up for me...

and dont be fooled by the bigger is better thing, you only have to look at the power people are pulling out of the 4G63 these days in racing applications to see you can get as much power as u want, the sky is the limit with a twin cam version.

but wont the 2.0 need more mods to make 300bhp? whats the standard output on the 2.0? 180bhp?

weegaz22 wrote:but wont the 2.0 need more mods to make 300bhp? whats the standard output on the 2.0? 180bhp?

no. the non intercooled 2.6 actually makes LESS power than the aussie non intercooled 2.0 standard. it makes torque down lower though. they sold starions in the us exclusively with the 2.6 as the americans dont know how to rev an engine, they expect every car to drive like a V8, so the 2.6 suited them better!

the JA and JB make 125kw in australia, and the unleaded JD made 110kw.
so 125 kw is 168hp, but these engines do respond very well to increased boost, so its not hard to get over 200hp at the wheels which equates to around 300 hp at the fly and high 13 sec quarter mile times. i did it with a stock computer and turbo..

besides, the 2.6 is a different engine family, so will be an engine conversion, although it bolts up to the same gearbox and engine mounts, there are a lot of other things you will have to fabricate and make fit. so the effort spent there could have been put into the 2.0 making it faster again!

dont go thinking bigger is better, work smarter rather than harder!

redzone wrote:

weegaz22 wrote:but wont the 2.0 need more mods to make 300bhp? whats the standard output on the 2.0? 180bhp?

no. the non intercooled 2.6 actually makes LESS power than the aussie non intercooled 2.0 standard. it makes torque down lower though. they sold starions in the us exclusively with the 2.6 as the americans dont know how to rev an engine, they expect every car to drive like a V8, so the 2.6 suited them better!

the JA and JB make 125kw in australia, and the unleaded JD made 110kw.
so 125 kw is 168hp, but these engines do respond very well to increased boost, so its not hard to get over 200hp at the wheels which equates to around 300 hp at the fly and high 13 sec quarter mile times. i did it with a stock computer and turbo..

besides, the 2.6 is a different engine family, so will be an engine conversion, although it bolts up to the same gearbox and engine mounts, there are a lot of other things you will have to fabricate and make fit. so the effort spent there could have been put into the 2.0 making it faster again!

dont go thinking bigger is better, work smarter rather than harder!

hi mate, im in the uk, so we got the 2.6 turbo and the 2 litre turbo, but i dont know if we got the dohc 2.0l, i havent bought a starion yet so this is why im asking about the engines capabilitys so i can narrow down a model to go for

Redzone obviously doesn't know that we "non-revving" Americans have spun the 2.6 to 8K.. What is it with some of you guys? Americans this, americans that. :roll: Give it up. Instead of actually citing technical reasons for why the 2.6 isn't as rev-happy as the 2.0, you attempt prepubescent vituperating remarks. Can we get past this yet? Please try, as the level of some of your animosity towards us is NOT mutual on our part. Matter of fact, in my many years i've yet to see one single derogatory remark towards Australians. :x

The issue with the 2.6 and people not revving them to the sky, is that the torque has already dropped off at 5.5-6.5K(depending on setup), with the HP not far behind. Tell me, why would I keep the rpm's up if it's already out of it's power range? Would anyone here keep the motor in the same gear, while you know that you're 1500rpms past your power drop off point? You know what, forget it.. Who cares.

To the original poster wanting 300hp at the crank. Either engine will get you there with minimal modifications. No MPI needed on a 2.6, just intake/exhaust/hard pipes, fuel pump and a turbo swap will get you there.
The only 4g63's I can speak about are in DSM's which are already DOHC, so i'll let the gentlemen here advise you on that. I will say though, that they've hit the 300AWHP mark on the stock turbo.

A close friend has a "300 crank hp" setup and makes 240hp/335tq(yes, on a dyno dynamics :D ).. 14g turbo@18psi, stock TBi injection, 2.5" exhaust, hard pipes etc... Would a 2.0 give you that kind of hp/torque split? Hardly.

When it comes down to it, nobody here or any other website will tell you which motor is best. It simply can't be done.
I'll say that FOR ME, the 2.4/2.0(4g64/4g63 or g64b/g63b) hybrid is king of the mitsu 4's. All the head flow capabilities of the DOHC head, more torque than most street tires can handle, and nearly the same weight distribution as a regular 2.0. And yes, it'll mechanically rev higher than you'll need it to.

redzone wrote:welcome to austarion mate! the 2.0 4G63 vs 2.6 4G54 debate is one that has been fought many times on here, i'm a hardcore supporter of the 4G63

there are 3 main things i dont like about the 4G54, firstly they're not as eager 2 rev as the 63, secondly they have a really shithouse timing chain arrangement that will cause u grief (and rattles) no end,

I still prefur the 4g54 and yes this has been fought over a fair bit on this site
and yes in stock form are a little less eager to rev but with a bit of work that is not an issue
the shit house chain rattle cost about $0.50 in parts to fix fit a spacer behind the chain tentioner when the assembling the engine some 9/16 washers do the job

redzone wrote: no. the non intercooled 2.6 actually makes LESS power than the aussie non intercooled 2.0 standard. it makes torque down lower though.

quoting stock figures prob doesn't mean a lot as weegaz looks to want to mod to 300 Hp anyway
and as far as that goes I know my N/A 2.6 puts out figures in the same range as stock turbo engines and runs easy to 7000 in all gears and has done so at phillip island

JustPaus_88TSi wrote:Redzone obviously doesn't know that we "non-revving" Americans have spun the 2.6 to 8K.. What is it with some of you guys? Americans this, americans that. :roll: Give it up. Instead of actually citing technical reasons for why the 2.6 isn't as rev-happy as the 2.0,

redzone wrote:starions in the us exclusively with the 2.6 as the americans dont know how to rev an engine, they expect every car to drive like a V8, so the 2.6 suited them better!

dont go thinking bigger is better

I have seen a few reports on V8s in the states and guess what the yaks seam to have figured out how to make them rev to

and bigger is no alway better however it is easier as a rule to get power from a bigger engine and cheaper
here in oz where magna heads and EFIs are in every wreckers
billet cams for 4g54s go from $ 250 aus

how much are 4g63 parts


i'm a hardcore supporter of the 4G54

cheater

JustPaus_88TSi wrote:Redzone obviously doesn't know that we "non-revving" Americans have spun the 2.6 to 8K.. What is it with some of you guys? Americans this, americans that. :roll: Give it up. Instead of actually citing technical reasons for why the 2.6 isn't as rev-happy as the 2.0, you attempt prepubescent vituperating remarks. Can we get past this yet? Please try, as the level of some of your animosity towards us is NOT mutual on our part. Matter of fact, in my many years i've yet to see one single derogatory remark towards Australians. :x

When Mitsubishi introduced the Starion/Conquest to the market it was deemed the 2.6 was required due to the extra torque it has. This is in the 80's and the decision was obviously made by executives to suit the market and keep warranties, drivability etc in tact. In stock guise, the 2.6 has more torque but less power than the 2.0.

Ok....once you begin to modify then the story will change. A balanced and properly built 2.6 will pull 500 hp (allegedly, ) and a 2.0 properly modified will also pull good numbers. Your bank balance seems to be the only limits to what can be achieved.

In summary, noone (I believe) is sledging US folk just because they got 2.6. It's pointless.
Depending to what extent and which path you plan to go will ultimately determine which engine to buy. A 2.6 with exhaust/pipes as mentioned will do very well. So will a 2.0 with the same mods. If you wish to go further and twin cam conversions and the like, a 2.0 would be the better choice as there are more avenues to find and adapt parts to suit. But a well built 2.6 will also (as shown above) provide good figures.

It's lovely to see a good debate and here peoples opinions, please, continue.

P.S. wtf does vituperating mean?

Both engines have their merits and its a question about what you can access in your prospective country. If you can access more performance parts for the 2.6 then go for a starion with that engine and vice versa.

As for comments about americans, its all abit of light hearted fun with abit of truth in it, as alpos already stated, that was the market at the time and why mitsubishi choose the 2.6. Americans do the same stereotyping, i remember an episode of the simpsons that make fun of australia's convict past and kangroos on the street, so dont take it to heart.