Quote:
Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr
Seems quite promising to say the least. And it does seem to be an easier testbed to keep looking for improvements on the long run, as it seems like there are much more aftermarket rear-end ratio options than what could be expected regarding the Mitsubishi transaxle and rear differential.
On a sidenote, what has led you to fit a Mitsubishi engine to a Camaro? Was it just based on your previous experience with that engine and willing to try it on another testbed or any other motivation? Well, maybe some info about the bolting pattern would be of interest to the off-road folks who often adapt some "unexpected" engine and transmission setups (which seems to be the case of a Mitsubishi engine backed by a GM transmission) to their rigs.
|
The main reason for the Mitsubishi engine in the Camaro is for traction when I street race and no prep race the car. The lightweight engine that will make around 1400 HP and help get the weight bias around 60% on the rear of the car will help it to get traction.
The other major reason is all my research has gone into this engine. My stratified charge pre-chamber has been designed around this engine.
The 71 Camaro also has pretty much one emission device and that is a PCV valve. So I can run it as lean as I want.
My goal is to put it in SEMA next year and remake a factory decal that was put on the 1991 Talon/Eclipse 7/70 warranty for a play on words. In mycase it will stand for 7 second 1/4 mile ET and 70mpg.
