smohekey
1 AYC Bar
I don't know about Rob, but myself and 2 other kiwis did.
Engine options.
- Thread starter trotty
- Start date
I don't know about Rob, but myself and 2 other kiwis did.
Adam, how many evo's have you seen with massive LCA failures? Mulitlink is fine. When done correctly. Given the time and dollars required to make a safe and adjustable multilink setup, I'd rather a lighter tube subframe and some evo LCA's and hubs. Bonus brembos for PFL's
And rob, there'd be a minimal amount of stuffig around to put a 4g into a legnum. Besides cooler and exhaust piping and other assorted lines, everything physically bolts together from the Mitsu parts bin. If I was wanting big power from a vr4, it's exactly what I'd be doing. Not to mention, maintenance would be much easier with a 4cyl and single turbo
And rob, there'd be a minimal amount of stuffig around to put a 4g into a legnum. Besides cooler and exhaust piping and other assorted lines, everything physically bolts together from the Mitsu parts bin. If I was wanting big power from a vr4, it's exactly what I'd be doing. Not to mention, maintenance would be much easier with a 4cyl and single turbo
the VR4 Lower arm weakness is fixable by means of putting in replaceable ball joints when you do make the adjustable arms, also can drop the arm down so it corrects roll center for lowered cars.
I just don't see the logic in taking a step backwards in handling just to fit evo stuff.
also you will be lucky to make a tube subframe lighter than a ST-R alloy subframe. but going tube frame does allow you to change the suspension pick up points to fix geometry & roll centers etc. but personally I would stay multilink.
Again this goes back to the why fix what ain't broke thing I have been getting at in my last few posts.
why stuff around fabricating stuff and altering subframes etc to fit stock evo lower arms hubs and knuckles when you could spend the same amount of time money and effort on the VR4 multilink suspension arms and end up with something much better as the end result.
I just don't see the logic in taking a step backwards in handling just to fit evo stuff.
also you will be lucky to make a tube subframe lighter than a ST-R alloy subframe. but going tube frame does allow you to change the suspension pick up points to fix geometry & roll centers etc. but personally I would stay multilink.
Again this goes back to the why fix what ain't broke thing I have been getting at in my last few posts.
why stuff around fabricating stuff and altering subframes etc to fit stock evo lower arms hubs and knuckles when you could spend the same amount of time money and effort on the VR4 multilink suspension arms and end up with something much better as the end result.
vr4ssz
Leaving Skid Marks
I got a single turbo 1JZGTE Cressida with a single turbo and few goodies, not as much power as the 2jz but around 310rwkw and reliable. kicks the crap out of my cammed VZ SS.
Yes Simon I got the pistons from IPP.
Pauly I see your point but the way I see it is that we all own Legnums and Galants. Building a 6a13tt is more fun, challenging and more rewarding than just dropping another engine in our cars. How many Evo's, Skyline's, Supra's and WRX's do you see doing engine conversions?
My opinion anyway.................each to their own.
Pauly I see your point but the way I see it is that we all own Legnums and Galants. Building a 6a13tt is more fun, challenging and more rewarding than just dropping another engine in our cars. How many Evo's, Skyline's, Supra's and WRX's do you see doing engine conversions?
My opinion anyway.................each to their own.
yeah each to their own, i can see both you lad's point but keep in mind this thread started with talk of a rwd swap haha. piecing together a subframe would be childs play compared to redoing the firewall and floor and making a new front end to accept a northsouth motor and box.
your on the money there.
hence why if an engine swap was to happen, I agree with you that it is a no-brainer to do a 4g63/64,
