Mitsubishi Motors Corporation (MMC) has announced a new engine. The ‘4J10’ is a lightweight and compact 1.8-litre petrol engine incorporating a new version of the company’s MIVEC variable valve timing system and the latest version of Auto Stop & Go (AS&G) tech.
The new 4J10 engine/AS&G combination will power the Japan-market RVR (ASX to us), Galant Fortis sedan (Lancer) and Galant Fortis Sportback (Lancer Sportback). MMC says that with the 4J10, the three models show 12% improved fuel efficiency in the Japanese 10-15 mode.
MMC says that the new MIVEC system together with improved combustion stability and reduction in piston friction provide better economy without any loss in engine performance over the existing 4B10 MIVEC engine. Used in overseas Lancers and the Proton Inspira 1.8, the 4B10 is a 1.8-litre, inline-4, 16-valve engine. It has DOHC instead of the new engine’s SOHC. Compared to the 4B10, the new 4J10 has just 1kW and 5 Nm less, so it’s a good trade for the 12% better economy.
MMC first applied MIVEC in 1992, and there have been two types so far – in one, the system switches between different valve lifts and valve opening durations according to engine speed, while in the other (as in the 4B10) the system varies the valve opening timing on a continuous basis.
The new MIVEC system in the 4J10 can do what the previous two systems could do “but at the same time, all the time”. This is thanks to a single mechanism that mechanically couples intake valve lift, opening duration and timing, allowing all three parameters to be varied simultaneously and continuously. The result is ideal valve operation control and the reduction of pumping losses.
AS&G is nothing new for MMC – it’s already being used in manual cars for Europe – but this latest version has been tailored for cars running continuously variable transmissions (CVT). The addition of a new control unit means that the new AS&G is integrally controlled along with the engine, CVT, Active Stability Control (ASC) and climate control.
Other changes include the use of a more durable 12V battery and a DC/DC converter. These are to prevent breaks in audio sound and to prevent the sat nav from rebooting when the engine restarts.
These developments are part of the Mitsubishi Motors Environment Initiative Program 2015, which targets 25% reduction in on-road CO2 emission of new vehicles compared to the 2005 global weighted average.
Looking to sell your car? Sell it with Carro.
Sorry MMC! You will not get my vote anymore.
haha, juz bought a 4B10? Proton (Inspira) gets screwed now…
Now you know why MMC was willing to offer their outdated
engine to Proton via Inspira.
Looks like current Inspira owners got played out
and are not so “smart” after all. !!
This ‘new’ engine is not much better anyway…
nothing wrong with inspira 4B10… its a global engine
12% is a lot of fuel efficiency, 4B10 is “zaman harga minyak rendah” type of engine.
Nevermind, Inspira owners are “smart” people. 12% fuel efficiency is nothing for them.
Haha.
better buy bicycle.
100% better FC
your mitsu grandis using what engine?
seems the numbers are showing equal power to the 4b10..no xtra horses:(
Maybe this is one of the reason MMC sells Mit Lancer to Proton as Inspira. So smart..
will inspira have it? n wat abt te 2.0?
will the Inspira be getting this new engine ?
SOHC only?
Myvi DOHC DVVT is better.
This is why my the best car in Malaysia! heck maybe in the world. ;p
MyVi is better than best.
Lagi best!
:mrgreen:
30 people did not find any sarcasm.
PFFT!! oops, sorry, i can’t hold my laughter.
Lol…this is sacarstic :P
any small turbo engine like tsi? ;p
DT, on the hybrid cars, the same motor that assist the drive-train will act as a starter for auto stop function. The restarting was seamless since it has bigger electric motor & free of normal multiple cranking (that ek-ek-ek and start sound).
How does this Mitsu come about restarting the engine after auto stop? Does it have multiple cranking sounds or it can start seamless just like hybrids?
While most start stop use electric motor or engine start up, Mazda already use the start-stop without the need for an electric motor or engine start up. It only use direct injection and combustion to restart the vehicle. They have cleverly designed the pistons to stop at optimal position for an engine restart at only 0.35 seconds….and that impress me greatly. Hope it will be available here soon.
Mazda I-Stop right? The engine restart is very fast indeed, as fast as a blink of an eye? Mazda 3 have it actually but only for some versions I’m not even sure if we have it here. Are there any Mazda models having the feature here??
Industry first?
Single cam but have variable valve lift…
Great news to single cam kakis out there
honda also have it la…
is continuesly variable valve timing and `lift` is similiar to BMW valvematic. this is 1st in SOHC engine
proton iinspira still use the old engine
why only inspira.. lancer GT, GX, all having the same engine…. even the evo’s have the same engine…. still living under the rock ker
u think the myvi lagi best n lagi mahal used the new K3,K5 engine unit?? just minor change lor….even still used old EAT tranny…not CVT like their japanese siblings….
the old engine is superb also
Seem mitsubishi going same way as honda
convert dohc to sohc for lighter engine and save more fuel
And thats how Honda gets customers and Mazda doesn’t.
Converting a DOHC to SOHC is just a short cut way to reduce fuel consumption. My full respect is given to Mazda for their effort on skyactive. Instead of normal practices of improving existing engine, they redesigned it from the scratch all over again and achieve a lighter, more powerful and more fuel efficient WITHOUT the need of converting a DOHC to SOHC or turbo charged or downsizing it. The skyactive looks like lightyear ahead of this Mitsu engine.
What is so next generation about an engine that still uses MPI instead of direct injection?
Mitsubishi 4J10
Power – 139PS / 6000 rpm
Torque – 172Nm / 4200 rpm
Fuel Consumption – 17km/l
Mazda Skyactiv-G 2.0
Power – 154PS / 6000 rpm
Torque – 194Nm / 4100 rpm
Fuel Consumption – 20km/l
Sorry Mitsubishi, too little too late.
Precisely…but the actual hp for skyactive 2.0 is 163. I m following very closely on this Skyactive. It reduces fuel consumption and yet increase power significantly. Not to mention the world record compression rate of 14.0:1. Added in with their skyactive light weight and high rigid chassis and new light weight skyactive transmission which they claimed to have both the advantages of DSG and CVT combined!! http://www.mazda.com/mazdaspirit/skyactiv/transmission/skyactiv-drive.html.
I strongly believe Mazda will really create huge excitement once it reach our shore.
both are having its own advantage and disadvantage…
technology never stop…
old tech concept may become better in next ten year..
You compare 1.8 Mitsubishi to 2.0 Mazda? …Mumbles something about apples to apples..
Obviously Mazda has a more superior engine over Mitsu. Higher power with bigger displacement yet more frugal in fuel consumption. Apples?….Mumbles something about Mitsu fanboy won’t admit defeat.
@Alex: Don’t mix your own aspirations with mine my friend. While SKY-ACTIV is a nice concept and fuel consumption looks good on paper, real world figures are yet to be accumulated.
In the meantime:
Engine type Inline 4 cylinder DOHC 16v, MIVEC
Displacement 2.0 L (1,998 cc)
Bore 86 mm
Stroke 86 mm
Compression ratio 10:1
Fuel system ECI multiple
Peak power 108-114 kW (147-155 PS) at 6,000 rpm
Peak torque 198 N·m (146 ft·lbf) at 4,250 rpm
And U are saying that the 4J10 engine is already proven in the real world? My friend, please google for the Skyavtiv-G engine reviews and U will see that “real world” results meet, if not exceed the 20km/l published spec.
In the meantime, since U wanna talk regular 2.0 engines…what about Hyundai’s new 2.0 GDI?
Engine type – 16 Valve (Dual CVVT / HLA / Swing arm)
Displacement – 2.0L (1,999cc)
Bore and Stroke – 81.0 mm x 97.0 mm
Compression Ratio – 11.5:1
Maximum Power – 130 kW @ 6500 RPM
Maximum Torque – 213 Nm @ 4700 RPM
Fuel efficiency – 6.8l/100km (mounted on a 1,595kg i40 tourer)
What is the 2.0 Mivec’s fuel consumption? 8.3l/100km (mounted on 1,375kg Lancer)
I rest my case.
No. I’m showing you the specs of the 4B11 which has a displacement of 2.0L that has been available in the Lancer since 2007.
I followed your advice and found out that a recent test drive with a
Mazda 3 2.0 SKY-ACTIV G on a 201 mile highway trip with the cruise on 70 MPH returned 40.8 MPG ,(17.33 km//l) city driving averages around 30MPG (12.75 km/l.)
Source:
http://www.automobilemag.com/reviews/driven/1110_2012_mazda_3_i_grand_touring_skyactiv_g_sedan_first_drive/index.html
Don’t blindly defend car manufacturers numbers, there is much more out there. Be fair and factual and you will win in the end.
Peace.
So what engine specs are those of? If they are new they look pretty disappointing.
Here are 2 more reviews of the Skyactiv:
www.caradvice.com.au/139832/mazda3-skyactiv-review/
“It may not sound like much, but after putting an additional 300km on the clock (and that’s driving the car in a thoroughly ‘non-green’ fashion) our average fuel consumption was 6.1L/100kms and that’s with two adults and overnight luggage on board.”
www.themotorreport.com.au/52569/2012-mazda3-sp20-skyactiv-luxury-hatchback-review
“Fuel Economy (claimed): 6.1 l/100km
Fuel Economy (on test): 5.9 l/100km”
Like the link U posted, the Skyactiv is claimed to give 40mpg on highway and the reviewers managed 40.8mpg.
I do not simply bash or defend any car manufacturer, all my points have been backed up with reviews to prove them. And I am not a fanboy of any manufacturer or make, I am simply a simple person who likes cars. And right now, the Skyactiv looks to be the most interesting to me.
Cheers.
yep…thats why i like mazda & ford..
ecoboost & skyactiv…woof!!!!!
mitsu already introduce gdi in the late 90′ n there must be reason they didnt want to go there all the way
The future is direct injection engines, probably best when turbocharged…skyactive is an excellent engine…what the hell happened to campro replacement? Just hope its has direct inj..if not its already obsolete even before launched, then again thats typical poton product..
17km/l? that is more saving than lagi best! :D
I believe this is to get their products comply to Euro and US CO2 std, thus be able to bring their cars there. If not, what to do? Pst.. pst, Toyota also do the same what… Their latest dual VVTi bla…bla… 1.8 also lost both the numbers, only gain on the ‘green’ side.
what is AS&G?
aik? did u read properly?…
TnG is Touch n Go. but AS&G no need to touch one.. it’s Auto Stop & Go (AS&G).
i’m just kidding. not related to Touch n Go at all.
Nowadays engine with little fuel usage is more preferable…
i wonder how it work ! no manufacture in the world have ever release a SOCH engine and claim it could have cvvt and cvvl in the same time! and claim that cvvt is only possible when the engine is DOCH… and even with cvvt and cvvl , the output is still lower than 4b11 ?
Does anyone know what ATF fluid the CVT in Mitsu cars uses? Specifically the Mitsubishi Colt? Because if service at Proton, they will put in their Proton SP-III ATF. If service at Mistubishi dealers, they put in Caltex Dexron III.
Been reading on the net, they say uses a CVT specific ATF fluid. Mitsubishi DiaQueen ATF-SPIII.
Can anyone help shed some light?
You can get the real thing from spare part shop, if not mistaken should use SPIII for most Mitsu Auto Gearbox.. Even my old wira gearbox also using it until now… If u want more protection can also use Penzoil Multi-ATF 100% syntetic..
http://products.pennzoil.my/gtao/100-synthetic-multi-vehicle-atf.html
http://products.pennzoil.my/pdsfiles/GTOs/PDS-GTO-FullySynthetic-Multi-Vehicle-ATF.pdf
CVT Fluids performance (engine <2.0 L) for Honda Z1, Mitsubishi SP III
Hii,…guys dont know where is MMC heading…….at lease Mazda is heading the right direction improved fuel consumption and better power.
Going SOHC is not that bad of an idea. People have this misconception that if you go back to SOHC that means there is something wrong with the company. Actually SOHC gives you better power at lower end rpm good for town driving. Where as DOHC you can only feel the power at higher end rpm. These are technical stuff and you need to ask MMC as to why they change their engine set up.
Please read http://paultan.org/2005/06/22/sohc-vs-dohc-valvetrains/
SOHC refers to Single Overhead Camshaft. In the days before DOHC, it was known as OHC, with no need to differentiate between a single or double camshaft. In SOHC, the camshaft is situated in the cylinder head, above the valves. The valves are opened and closed either directly with a shim between the cam lobe and the valve stem, or via a rocker arm. SOHC engine valve configurations typically have 2 or 3 valves per cylinder. It is also possible to have 4 valves per cylinder using SOHC but this translates into a complicated combination of rocker arms and cam lobe shapes. An example would be the 4G92P in my car which is a SOHC but has 4 valves per cylinder.
In the end, a SOHC 16 valve engine would have better torque on the low end where the DOHC valvetrain’s weight results in lower torque. But at high engine speeds, the 16 valve DOHC engine’s peak torque and horsepower would be greater. That’s the trade-off. With the amount of valves being equal, SOHC has better low-end torque because the valvetrain package is lighter while DOHC has better top-end power.
They should spend R&D to develop small turbo charged engine. would give a more significant savings in fuel consumption and without sacrificing power. They have the technology and experience from their Evo line of engines. Just have to make it smaller displacement and cheaper to make.
I dunno what Japanese company doing nowadays. seems to have lost focus and innovations.
The specs looks weak.
SOHC instead of DOHC
oversquare design (bore larger than stroke) = more fuel consumption
Power and torque is the same as my 7 year old corolla!!
I think it is more of a cost cutting exercise than real improvement.
12% better economy dumb ass. read properly la. oh wait, u’r a dumb ass..
p/s: paultan team plz approve this comment.
longer stroke means much more friction between piston and cylinder wall. friction will make engine power loss. understand? ur 7 yrs ago toyota is emmison sure cannot for today standard.
Since inspira, Mitsu is no longer in my shopping list.
stop and start is good, since we have bad traffic jam…its gonna be useful
u r one tough guy. the a/c doesn’t work without the engine spinning
i think, can use battery ..thats why they mentioned. Other changes include the use of a more durable 12V battery and a DC/DC converter.
not sure how they use the aircond, maybe the aircond doesnt rely entirely on engine..and aircond wont use much power unless the compressor kick in..
considering you wont stop for a long time, say 5 minutes, after engine restart it will charge the battery for the next auto stop..
just an opinion…better wait for the test drive..:)
4B10 MIVEC still “light year” ahead of Cam-Tak-Pro.
4J10 in P1 car? Waite until they have new only give this to P1’s rebadge car.
wait till turbocharged cfe coming out and smokes all the 2.0l engine cars with puny torque
In this era, who wants a stupid SOHC engine? Japanese going to die already. Technology going backwards, only stupid people will buy them in future!
So you talk as if you are smarter than those Japs that have so many years experience in manufacturing cars, who are so meticulous and innovative in so many fields? Then you shouldn’t be reading and talking rubbish here.
So when is Hyundai/KIA come out with a “Copycat” version of this engine ?
Gearhead, try switch of ur engine & on yr aircond, hello air cond can still work with battery lah ! How do u think Prius use battery power during slow speed but aircond still working ? N how on earth EV like Nissan Leaf aircond work ?
wow sohc vs dohc again
Why the hell people are arguing about performance of this 4J10 engine while Mitsubishi’s concern is apparently fuel economy and ease of maintenance. As always SOHC and NA engine is very economical to run.
For those “Nut’s” who know nothing about SOHC engine, n think DOHC is better in every aspect, read this (a 2005 Paultan article on SOHC Vs DOHC) perhaps it will cure ur penyakit bodoh sombong.
paultan.org/2005/06/22/sohc-vs-dohc-valvetrains/
It simply tell u SOHC have better low end power where else DOHC have better top end power.
Since the trend nowaday is fuel efficient SOHC is a good choice for smaller capacity engine which usually have lower torque, SOHC will compesate it, thus no need to rev into higher rpm for power especially city drive.
honda should offer their i-dsi for city again!!!
u are rite. nothing wrong with SOHC. Indeed SOHC design hv less power loss due to single cam design.
If you compare inspira (old engine) and lancer (new engine) in terms of their 12% fuel consumption, well then, let’s do some calculation
There are 52 weeks a year
Inspira Fuel tank, 55 litres
Fuel price currently, RM1.90
Let’s assume the driver pumps 55 litres of ron 95 fuel a week for 10 years
(52) X (55) X (1.90) X (10) = RM 54340
Cut down of 12% fuel consumption
RM 54340 X 0.12 = RM 6520.8
Now, how many people actually pump FULL fuel tank every week?
Price of inspira 2.0 is RM92k
Price of lancer is around RM120k
Different nearly RM30k
In another word, unless u drive lancer with new engine for at least 50 years, else I dun see what’s wrong if inspira with old engine but much cheaper than lancer.
It’s just like those cyclone n magnet n all kinds of weird aftermarket stuffs to save fuel. May or may not work, sometimes become worse. Rarely savings in improved f/c (if ever) can recoup the cost of such junks.
Enjin Dosh Pick Up power. Enjin Soch Pick Up kurang.Harap Top je. Itu Sebab boleh lagi jimat minyak.
GDI is old mitsu beging with engines in the 90′.
GDI , FSI, JTS, CGI, T-GDI, TFSI, SKYACTIVE .
Direct injection = problems
No thanks , i prefer old engines