4g93 intake vs 4g94 intake RESULTS

*02Lancer* · Aug 3, 2009, 05:10 PM

To start off I want to tell you what I did. Step one dyno’d the Car several times like 3 consecutive times here are the results of the best run. rupp 4g94 intake resized.jpg Second i want and installed the 4g93 intake STOCK. So i went from a stock 4g94 to a stock 4g93 intake. Then went back to the same dyno and dyno’d it again. And this is what i got. rupp 4g93 intake resized.jpg And this is the two runs overlaying each other.93vs94 resized.jpg (blue is 4g93) (Red is 4g94) So in stock form the 4g94 made higher HP which surprised me and the 4g93 intake made more TQ. Also not what i expected. But it's not by much and tied TQ the other 2 runs, but hp on the 4g93 was down 2-3 compared to the 4g94. Hope this helps people out. This test was done on an engine with 10k miles, injen CAI, 275CC injectors, 2.5" Exhaust and Fidanza flywheel. Stock Tune

imalancerman · Aug 3, 2009, 05:46 PM

So wait, please dont tell me that the g93 is a placebo then? I swear I felt a difference. But I guess the results speak for themselves. It looks like everything for the g93 is good though till up top. It tops the g94 or stays with it till right at the top, which I guess was to be expected with the smaller diameter runners.

4g94T · Aug 3, 2009, 05:56 PM

well you wouldnt gain much from switching the manifold alone.

you would have to do the whole intake side:

upgraded intake --> upgraded MAF --> bigger TB --> intake manifold --> ported polished head --> camshaft
and of course, retune.

but thanks for the info!

*02Lancer* · Aug 3, 2009, 05:57 PM

yah it seemed slower at certain spots for me but other way faster. But it drag race and as of now i would rather have the 93 but thats just me.

imalancerman · Aug 3, 2009, 06:12 PM

Word on that. Like I said, the g93 trumps the g94 in your graphs up till the end. So there are a lot of gains, just not much in peak gains.

*02Lancer* · Aug 3, 2009, 06:51 PM

Yah I know you have to upgrade the complete intake side it’s only as good as the smallest area in it. But there was no proof showing the 93 was better if it was even better just people talking and I wanted to give people hard evidence that it is or is not. And I think I showed that it is but not by a huge amount but defiantly worth the 5-30$ you can get it for at a junkyard.

4g94T · Aug 3, 2009, 07:21 PM

I've always wondered too if the manifold was as good as others said,
but there wasn't proof until now.

Were these manifolds ported?

*02Lancer* · Aug 3, 2009, 08:25 PM

No they both were is stock form except for the 93 tb hole was inlarged to the size of the 4g94 tb. that was it.

stygiosracing · Aug 6, 2009, 10:47 AM

man, i remember whan I had my 02, the 93 intake mani swap was sworn upon

WADADLIG_OZ · Aug 16, 2009, 07:47 AM

The G93 Ported swap was sworn upon, not stock swap.
I did not get to install the one I ported but there was quite a bit of material that I had to remove to match the gasket.

Now the next thing in this comparo would be to port the G93 and re dyno.

WADAD

tempest1130 · Aug 16, 2009, 09:41 AM

what would be a difference with a ported g93 and g94?
thanks for the info and dyno

KillahB · Aug 18, 2009, 04:48 PM

Most people tend to look at dyno charts for max values (which is, I guess, what gives you bragging rights). But for people looking to make usable power, there is more to it than that.

For example, based on the graphs, even tho the Lancer IM makes more peak, if you look at (I'm going to interpolate and hazard a guess) about 4000 - 5000 RPMs, where you would want peak delivery of power, the 4G93 peaks and sustains, whereas it looks like the 4G94 has a few flat spots.

I wish you had plotted RPMs versus speed so we can gauge a bit better the usable ranges for both IMs. But to me, it isn't a question of if -2 HP, +1 TQ is worth it, it's whether you get more midrange to top end power and low to mid range torque overall, and consistent (i.e. as flat and uniform as possible) power and torque throughout the RPM range.