Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register ) · Resend Validation Email
Mitsubishi-Forums.com > Technical > Performance > Mivec Vs Vtec
     
                        
Mitsubishi-Forums.com is not affiliated with or endorsed by Mitsubishi Motors.
3 Pages < 1 2 3 
Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll

Feature my ride Newest rides Updated rides Most modified

Do you like Mitsubishi-Forums.com? Link to us and help spread the word about our forum. Thanks!
 Mivec Vs Vtec, ??
 
bullet_bike_syke69
post Jun 9 2008, 07:55 PM
Post #41


Unregistered











no a aggressive cam profile handles just as well as a eco cam profile at low-mid ranges. yes the eco does slightly handle better as in running your engine at lower rpms. but for power it doesn't do much. once you slam on that pedal even at a low RPM the aggressive cam will produce better HP than a eco. why do you think that with a aggressive cam profile when someone surges the gas pedal to rev up to keep running the engine revs quicker than a economic set cam profile, better power!!!

does that answer your question?
Top
QuoteReply
pwee05
post Jun 12 2008, 10:35 AM
Post #42


Calibrated Elbow
Group Icon

Group Icon
Group: Admin
Posts: 4,421
Joined: 2-January 06
Member No.: 19,248
Location: Lancaster, PA
Drives: 1996 Talon AWD. Built: 1997 mitsubishi eclipse RS; 1990 Talon AWD; 1995 Talon AWD, 1997 Talon AWD. Seems like a pattern
Status: OFFLINE



QUOTE(vasiour @ May 13 2008, 08:04 PM)
But at the low & mid range, doesn't a normal camshaft perform slightly better than an agressive one, which is designed to opperate best at high rpm? Excuse me if i'm wrong, but the way i see it, since a normal cam has smaller duration (or so i believe, please correct me if i'm wrong), it best fits the low range, where there's enough time for mixture intake, and should perform just slightly better power.
*


vasiour your assumptions are correct. the "normal" cam will give you better driveability at low RPM, but less high RPM power. The performance cam will give you better high RPM power, but will sacrifice low end torque and driveability.

when speaking in terms of a DOHC engine:

"normal" cam lobes are typically shorter in duration and have less lift.
Lift is measured in inches and duration is measured in degrees.

A camshaft with this profile will be better for a turbo because you have some "overlap." Overlap created with an intake cam that has a higher lift and longer duration than the exhaust cam. This helps to create higher exhaust pressures when leaving the cylinder to spool a turbo quicker.

A camshaft with this profile(let's pretend it is the stock cam for informational purposes, it is actually very much NOT stock in reality) will create your most economical driving conditions. smooth idle, good low RPM torque, reduced emissions and overall good driveability,, but will sacrifice some top end power because it doesn't open the valves high enough or for a long enough period of time compared to a performance cam.

A camshaft with this profile (let's pretend it is a performance cam, wait, it is) will provide for the most top end power, a lumpy idle, less than good driveability at low RPM, and a loss of low RPM torque.

now, lets say that you put both of those cams together and install them on one engine. When oil pressure and rpm are low the stock cam will be the one controlling the valves. But when oil pressure and RPM are high the performance cam will be controlling the valves. This is the basic premise of v-tech, mivec, etc
Top
User is offlinePMProfile Card
QuoteReply
  Advanced Search
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

3 Pages < 1 2 3
Reply to this topicTopic OptionsStart new topic
Get your Mitsubishi listed in the Garage Today, for FREE, to share with the world what you drive and what toys and modifications you have.
 
> Link To Us
If you found our site useful please link to us <a href="http://www.mitsubishi-forums.com">Mitsubishi-Forums.com</a>.
Collapse> Similar Threads
Topic Title Author Views Replies Last Post
Mivec Swap?
Forum : Performance
lillben07 158 5 Jul 6 2008, 11:37 PM
By: KiT TeUnG 2549
Mivec Adjustment
Forum : Performance
psycho2003 527 6 Jun 26 2008, 05:21 PM
By: ProjectLancer
Eclipse 420a Swap For 6a12 Mivec
Forum : 1G/2G (1990-1999) Eclipse
ProjectGrip 207 13 Jun 5 2008, 03:48 PM
By: EMC 3000gt
4g37 (1.8 Sohc) To 6g72 Swap (mivec V6)
Forum : 1G/2G (1990-1999) Eclipse
PhillyKorean 1,933 10 May 21 2008, 01:43 PM
By: pwee05
Mivec Specifics.
Forum : Performance
rox 1,326 16 May 6 2008, 06:30 AM
By: manybrews
 
 
Time is now: 7th September 2008 - 03:56 AM
Mitsubishi-Forums.com is not affiliated with or endorsed by Mitsubishi Motors.