4WD Longtitudinal 4G63???

marck_c · Post by **marck_c** » Sun Sep 23, 2007 1:40 pm

Hello folks, I am new to this site. I am building a tubeframed chassis 4wd road race evo. I would like to know if there is a way to mount, the engine longtitudinaly ( basically a mid engine setup) using one of the RWD transmissions modified like the Group B starion was with the Pajero transfer box. Or some sort of 4WD transmission such as a Pajero/Montero. Has anyone done anything like this?

Fabritory · Post by **Fabritory** » Sun Sep 23, 2007 8:04 pm

from my knowledge the evo motor spins in the opposite direction if so that throws the hope of using a 4g truck trans/case out the door ? and im sure the groupe b starion had a Pajero/Montero trans and case

Post by **DJpowerHaus** » Sun Sep 23, 2007 9:21 pm

The EVO motor does NOT spin the opposite direction. I dont know why this keeps coming up.

Just off the top of my head here are some ideas. Both should allow you to mount the engine at least front mid ship, if not further back. The further you go the easier it will be to mount the front differential. With a dry sump you could tilt the engine over quite far to keep the weight low and the transfer case could be tilted so its not so low. Shifter position may get really weird though. Also it will be 50/50 torque split.

You could use one of Bill Hincher's Toyota bellhousings. I'm pretty sure he's making or will be making one for the Evo bolt pattern. This will let you bolt any number of Toyota 4WD transmissions up. If you could use a wideblock you could use a RX7 trans (or dogbox) with a B2600 transfer case.

But if you've got the motivation (and $$) to play with all this tube chassis evo stuff, you might want to consider looking into a real racing transmission like a Hewland or something.

Is it really worth all this effort? Stock classes are fun to race in too.

marck_c · Post by **marck_c** » Sun Sep 23, 2007 10:10 pm

Is it really worth all this effort? Stock classes are fun to race in too.

Been there, done that, bought the t-shirt. Seriously. Ran the car with the original evo motor for 5 years in the "stock" configuration. I'mmoving up in class against tube framed transaxled RX-7, so I need something a little more capable.

Do you know of any Toyota 4wd transmissions that can handle the power and rpm? I'm talking of 450whp and the input shaft speed as high as 10,500rpm. And actually I'm using a 4G61T motor and not an evo, so the bolt pattern is the same as the VR-4 or 1st Gen eclipse.

marck_c · Post by **marck_c** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 8:41 am

Does anyone make an adapter to use a B2600 transmission with a narrow block 4G63. Since the B2600 trannsmission is similar to the Gen2 RX-7, this provide a strong and suitable base for a high rpm, high ouptut transmission. How does the RX-7 box work with the 4WD transfer case of the B2600?

Post by **DJpowerHaus** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 6:22 pm

The B2600 bellhousing was always the main selling point for us wideblock guys. The transmission was strongish, but more importantly it bolted up. The transmission is nothing too spectacular. Perhaps not worth the effort of making a custom bellhousing.

If this transmission is for you, why not use a wideblock engine? Is your new class limited to 1.6L or something? Also, why use the 4G61t? Seems like too much work for 1.6L turbo or otherwise. Why not a 2.1L destroked 2.4L or a 2.4L? Between those 2 choices you can have a more revs or more torque than the 1.6L.

I'm not sure if the RX7 transmission could be made into 4WD by bolting on the end of a B2600, but its a possibility. Other than 5th gear I'm pretty sure its the same transmission as the B2600 transmission is, but you never know when it comes to small differences in bearings and syncros. Might need to buy both to find out.

Here is a picture of a B2600 transmission (G6 bellhousing but that's beside the point)

Here is a picture of an RX7 transmission (Dear lord they're trying to sell on ebay the same transmissions I was selling for $300 for almost $900.)

With the B2600 bellhousing the engine tilts towards the passenger (R) side. Tilt the engine to straight up and that transfer case shouldn't be too much of a problem when it comes to ground clearance and the shifter wouldn't be too bad (my racecar is like this and it has a great shifter angle). Mount a rear differential upside down up front in front of the engine with some custom length half shafts going to the EVO hubs. Might not be equal lengths, but whatever. Might move the engine towards the passenger side, but with it moved back so far that might start to get uncomfortable.

Put your thinking cap on.

Bill Hincher · Post by **Bill Hincher** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 10:09 pm

the 4G61T bolt pattern is even smaller then the 4G63T bellhousing bolt pattern they dont intercchange

marck_c · Post by **marck_c** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 12:32 am

Actually, they are identical, I already measured them. The reason I am going with the 61 is our technical regs, base the minimum weight of the car on the engine size. A 1600cc car only has to weight 1880lbs, whereas a 2000c has to weight 2326lbs. The difference in weight of 446lbs is well worth the effort. The 61t only has to put out 374 whp to give a competitive power to weight ratio. A figure that is easily achevieble with the right mods.

Thanks for the pics of the b2600 setups, I was actually thinking of using a rear evo diff which I have lying around and flipping it to use as the front diff, Great minds think alike

I would welcome any more suggestions.

Post by **DJpowerHaus** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 8:37 am

Damn. That's a heck of a weight difference. I see your point.

Is this displacement with a turbo multiplier? How about a Japanese Mitsubishi 6A10? 1.6L V6. People have made over 400bhp non-turbo with those. Do you need to stick with Mitsubishi engines?

Mr Hyde · Post by **Mr Hyde** » Thu Sep 27, 2007 12:36 pm

Marck is correct. The 4G61T bolt pattern and the 4G63T bolt patterns are the same when it comes to mounting the blocks to a tranny.

Tons of guys are dropping 4G63's into their turbo Colt's/Mirages, and using the stock 4G61T tranny. And guys, 4G61t engines, when modded correctly make well over 350 hp. Sure, you could just go with the 2.0, but if racing regulations persist, you can still make very good power/less torque, with the 61T. Hope this helps...

Geoff
"Mr Hyde"

marck_c · Post by **marck_c** » Thu Sep 27, 2007 1:23 pm

Is this displacement with a turbo multiplier?

That weight includes the turbo multiplier.

so the wohle rumor about the evo4+ engines turning counter clockwise is false....? Who started the stupid rumor.. I mean if thats the case I may as well grab a later evo engine or something..

The engines in the evo 4 and up are spun around. They sit on the left hand side of the engine bay (as seen from inside the car). Obviously none of te evo 1-3, galant or VR-4 engine will work.

How about a Japanese Mitsubishi 6A10? 1.6L V6.

I have never heard of this motor. Can you PLEASE provide some more details. I woulf be very interested to find out more.

marck_c · Post by **marck_c** » Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:15 pm

6a10 is a 1.6l v6 na engine that puts out around 160hp

People have made over 400bhp non-turbo with those.

Can you shed any light on this?

Post by **DJpowerHaus** » Thu Sep 27, 2007 4:42 pm

marck_c wrote:
6a10 is a 1.6l v6 na engine that puts out around 160hp

People have made over 400bhp non-turbo with those.
Can you shed any light on this?

I'm sure it wasn't cheap. My guess is that they had porting, ITBs, HIGH compression, race fuel, and probably nitrous. I've tried finding more info on it, but everything points back to a wikipedia article which is probably where I got it from.

One thing I did find was a bunch of people saying how much heavier the V6 is compared to a 4G61.

Here is the info I copied from wiki or something a few years ago:

??? wrote: 6A10
With the engine capacity of only 1.6 L (1597 cc), this is the smallest yet most powerful 1.6 L engine available on production car. With the configuration of 6 cylinders, dual overhead cam (DOHC), and 4 valves per cylinder, the 6A10 engine manages to output 140 hp (104 kW) @ 7000 rpm in stock condition.

Available in the Mitsubishi Lancer MX in 1992, this engine was once the most sought after engine for modification in Japan. In 1994, the Kotsumi's brothers from Kanagawa, Japan, managed to turn the 1.6 litre engine into a 'little monster' able to produce 430 bhp (320 kW) @ 6000 rpm without a forced induction system.

Specifications
Displacement: 1597 cc
Power: 140 PS (103 kW) @ 7000 rpm
Torque: 147 Nm @ 4500 rpm
Power density: 7.71
Engine type: V type 6 cylinder DOHC 24 valve
Fuel system: ECI multiple (electrically controlled gasoline injection)
Fuel type: Unleaded premium gasoline
Compression ratio: 10
Bore: 73 mm
Stroke: 63.6 mm
Fuel consumption at 10-15 modes: 8.3 L/100 km

Anyways. Sounds like if there is a multiplier (I'm guessing x1.4) the 1.6L Turbo than a 2.1L N/A motor would be acceptable as well. If turbo is your thing though than go for it.

locost_bryan · Post by **locost_bryan** » Mon Dec 10, 2007 9:24 pm

I'm surprised the all-alloy 6A V6 would be heavier than the all-iron 4G - has anyone got actual weights for the two engines in the same standard of trim?

The 6A range is :-
6A10 1597 (73.0x63.6) 137bhp@7000rpm 108lb/ft@4500rpm Lancer MX
6A11 1829 (75.0x69.0) 132bhp@7000rpm 123lb/ft@4500rpm Galant
6A12 1998 (78.4x69.0) 169bhp@7000rpm 140lb/ft@4000rpm FTO
6A12 1998 (78.0x69.0) 199bhp@7500rpm 147lb/ft@6000rpm FTO MIVEC
6A12T 1998 (78.0x69.0) 235bhp@6000rpm 227lb/ft@3500rpm Galant VR4
6A13 2498 (81.0x80.7) 172bhp@5500rpm 169lb/ft@4500rpm Galant
6A13T 2498 (81.0x80.7) 275bhp@5500rpm 267lb/ft@4000rpm Galant VR4

The turbo setup off the 6A13T could probably be fitted to the 6A10, with only minor mods (possibly none, if the block height and inlet manifolds were kept standard across the range).