Eclipse Cross Forum banner

1 - 20 of 26 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
66 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Don't.
Though this might be seen as a rather negative writeup, please know that this comes from a place that started with a lot of hope, and now ends with much frustration.

Let's begin.

The Eclipse Cross' 4B40 engine is designed from the earlier 1.5L cast iron block 4A92 used primarily in passenger vehicles. No performance variants were available for the 4A92, and this becomes the basis for what's now the Eclipse Cross' powerplant. (Though the Colt Ralliart did sport a similar engine, but with different cylinder heads and a proper turbocharged I/E setup. ) Turbocharged and all, one might think there's promise here. Think again. The 4B40 in the Cross is mated to an IHI turbo (think Econo-turbo) that's about the size of a fist. Then consider that the exhaust port on the heads is INTEGRATED with the cylinder head itself! In other words, no way to properly design it for better flow. (other than perhaps a P&P job) No clue as to the flow characteristics on the head, though one can guess it's probably meh.

But, the biggest problem with the Cross, IMO, isn't the powerplant. That can be tweaked.
It's the transmission.

The Jatco CVT7 variant in the Cross is weak. It's no different than any other Jatco in other Mitsubishis and Nissans since, oh I'll throw out a year - 2008? … Save for a few programming tweaks saved on the transmission. The stepped 8-speed programming is all that's different in this transmission compared to that of the Outlander or Outlander Sport. They're the EXACT SAME HARDWARE. Biggest gripe: Mitsubishi could have shelled out the extra cash to get the CVT7 that has a higher torque capacity of 250Nm (the chain-driven one), but instead they opted for the belt-driven model (which taps out at about 180Nm). I've called Jatco, no joy there. I've tried to find info on the transmission internally via Mitsubishi. The only info you'll get is that it's rated at 189 lb-ft Tq, exactly as it's stated in Jatco's OEM product catalog.

Guys and gals, I'd hate to say this, but the Eclipse Cross just cannot be modified unless:
  1. You're willing to replace the transmission and properly mate this with the driveline.
  2. You're willing to go to a 100% custom ECU / engine management solution. This includes a way to properly control S-AWC. (Maybe GEMS?)
  3. You're willing to be the first one to put skin in the game.
As for what I've done thus far to substantiate these claims, here's a little bit of what I've done:
  1. Contacted Mitsu for tech info on the Cross. Does that ever really work?
  2. Contacted Jatco for tech info on the CVT. That obviously yielded no results.
  3. Gotten all the available TSBs for the Cross to date (as of July, when we bought ours). Not a lot there.
  4. Purchased a genuine FSM from Helm. Very helpful, of course.
  5. Engaged Eric @ Kozmic Motorsports in Houston, who specializes in Evos, and particularly the DCT470 (TC-SST) in the X MR.
It was Kozmic who ultimately convinced me that this is a lost cause. I hope someone proves me wrong.
Better yet, I hope Mitsubishi does better with future iterations of the Cross and its other product offerings. Because at this point in time, it's nothing but a really nice, smooth passenger vehicle … that does nothing to win back its old clientele, nor the old "Driven to Thrill" or "Wake Up and Drive" appeal.

The one saving grace in the Cross --- the S-AWC in it is surprisingly very close to that of the Evo X :)
(This coming from a guy who has two.)

I hope this helps.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
Appreciate the very in depth insight slipper and I inclined to agree with you. If you have any interest in performance, you are better off going with something other than the EC. I'd suggest having a look at the new Edge ST or even an older Juke Nismo.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
66 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Appreciate the very in depth insight slipper and I inclined to agree with you. If you have any interest in performance, you are better off going with something other than the EC. I'd suggest having a look at the new Edge ST or even an older Juke Nismo.
You speak a sad, sad truth. And if anything, this is why Mitsubishi continues to fail.

Truth is, I'd love to see what transmission, if at all, will bolt on easily (easier) with this block. It is a 4Bxx engine after all. Chances are, the bellhousings will line up between other 4Bxx-equipped vehicles that have other transmissions designed for them --- like the Evo.

The problem therein lies in whether anyone has any interest in spending the time and money to mod a CUV, when you can do better with a hatchback like a Mirage.

I'm hopeful (though not holding up a candle) that Mitsubishi finds it in themselves to offer some variant of this that's sportier, and that has better drivetrain options from the factory. There's buzz around a possible EV drivetrain being integrated at some point (probably from the PHEV). But even that's got a CVT.

So... as always Mitsubishi owners get the short end. Sorry to be such a Debbie downer. I just really wish they'd be smart about it and throw people like us a bone every now and then. It's not like they don't have the tech!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11 Posts
So... there's nothing to do performance-wise?
Some minor mods maybe?

Newbie here. EC is my first 4-wheel vehicle.
Still enjoying the smooth rides and those little turbo-kicks.
Just want to know some future possibilities.

TIA
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
66 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Thanks and you're welcome, Bam.

Ecalitis - Minor bolt-on mods to intake and exhaust won't hurt anything, but I doubt it will make it feel any sportier either. By minor, I'm talking about anything intake that comes before the Mass Airflow Sensor (e.g., intake box, filter, increased piping diameter), and anything after the downpipe (high flow cat, catback exhaust, muffler, increased piping diameter). I can't for certain tell you if anything cat-back will throw an SES/CEL light, thought I doubt it.

Where you can make a good dent in performance is suspension. Better tires for sure. I see the usual cheap Taiwan/Chinese-made coilovers for the Cross out there (buyer beware; personally I wouldn't touch em with a 10-foot pole, but if that's your thing... ). Swaybars and end links, there are some aftermarket companies already making em.

Note that Outlander and EC suspension components are similar, if not interchangeable. For instance:

Link.

Sway bars and end links are always a good place to start. But, beware that this will change the driving feel of the vehicle. If you're (like me) one who enjoys tight corners, these and wheels/tires are some of the first to be changed out.

----

So, in summary:

- power output: can't do much
- suspension: can do quite a bit, but prepare for decreased ride quality at the expense of better traction and cornering.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
66 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
So... there's nothing to do performance-wise?
Some minor mods maybe?

Newbie here. EC is my first 4-wheel vehicle.
Still enjoying the smooth rides and those little turbo-kicks.
Just want to know some future possibilities.

TIA
Glad you're enjoying it :)

FYI, those "little turbo kicks" are really just what MIVEC does. Hydraulic pressure engages/locks on a tertiary set of valve tappets that have advanced timing so the engine all of a sudden takes in a large amount of air than standard.

You really hardly feel any boost with this vehicle: the turbo is so small it really only tacks on marginal power to the engine and doesn't throw you back.

Still, nice to have that kick in the seat every now and then.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
66 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
So... there's nothing to do performance-wise?
Some minor mods maybe?

Newbie here. EC is my first 4-wheel vehicle.
Still enjoying the smooth rides and those little turbo-kicks.
Just want to know some future possibilities.

TIA
Glad you're enjoying it :)

FYI, those "little turbo kicks" are really just what MIVEC does. Hydraulic pressure engages/locks on a tertiary set of valve tappets or aligns a tertiary cam lobes to the main tappets that result in advanced timing so the engine all of a sudden takes in a large amount of air than standard. See the video below.


You really hardly feel any boost with this vehicle: the turbo is so small it really only tacks on marginal power to the engine and doesn't throw you back. It's really just an econo-turbo to supplement the small displacement.

Still, nice to have that kick in the seat every now and then.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
195 Posts
I think eventually that Mitsubishi can make a business case out of launching an "Evolution" version of the Eclipse Cross.

However in the process they might have to butcher what the Evolution name means, just slightly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
66 Posts
Discussion Starter #11 (Edited)
:)

I can appreciate the wishful thinking.

The Evolution was born out of homologation requirements for rally. Mitsubishi wanted to compete in the WRC and Dakar rallies, and the FIA had rules and criteria that had to be met by automotive manufacturers to compete in specific brackets of race. That is, a certain number of production vehicles had to be designed and actually commercially sold to the public.

Hence we have the Mitsubishi Lancer... Evolution, and the Mitsubishi Pajero... Evolution.

Before that, there were the Mitsubishi Galant VR4 and Lancer GSR 1600. Both were also mass-produced at a time when homologation spec were much less demanding on manufacturers.

These days...


  1. You don't have to have an exact spec of a production car to compete in Dakar in classes of vehicle that are not of type "SUV" or "CUV". The Eclipse Cross T1 is competing this year... but don't for one second think that you can buy one at a dealership. (Look up older MPR6s or Pajero Rally entries from various race teams for that.)
  2. There is no "road car" classification for a CUV. As much as manufacturers think they can sunset sedans (saloons) and hatchbacks in favor of full-fledged SUVs and CUVs, you really cannot call both classes at par with each other.
And it's for those reasons (rationalized, of course) that a lot of us old-timers who know the history don't appreciate the fact that Mitsubishi called this vehicle the "Eclipse Cross". First, there was totally no need to bastardize the name of an icon, save for simply being desperate for brand name recognition. Call it the "Mitsubishi Relevance" or something (and when this thing dies, imagine a "Mitsubishi Relevance Final Edition").

And secondly - Mitsubishi already admitted, there's no market in it for them to try to sell anything that's worth racing.

https://www.motortrend.com/news/heres-mitsubishi-doesnt-make-fun-cars-anymore/

If they make and actually sell something with the name Evolution in it... and it's not raceworthy - expect the horde to s.hit on it! I guarantee you, even Subie fans will give Mitsubishi a moment of hate.

My personal soapbox commentary - if ANYTHING with a CVT in it bears the Evolution name on it --- I might just send Mitsubishi something dead in the mail.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Hello everyone, I stumbled on these forums as I was potentially considering trading in my 2011 Outlander Sport for one of these Eclipse Cross vehicles. I already have a 2011 Evolution X MR that is north of 600 horsepower these days that I track at time attack events but that doesn't mean I would completely ignore modding my foul weather car to keep it punching above it's weight class.

I've managed to tune my Outlander Sport on a dyno after some breathing mods (cams, intake, exhaust, lighter wheels etc) and went from the stock 148 crank hp to around 190 crank hp after converting from the whp dyno numbers and it's shaved a solid 1.5 seconds off the 0-60 times. It's not anywhere close to where the Evo is but it still is better than stock and the CVT transmission has held up just fine despite it's less than amazing track record for holding torque.

When it comes down to it the real limitation of the CVT transmission is a torque rating which means if I can get an OpenSource XML definition created to tune the ECU in these I could intentionally keep the torque in check at low RPM's with reduced boost/timing/mivec while still letting a modded turbo stretch it's legs in the mid to top RPM range. Likely the stock turbo will be struggling to flow above 200 crank hp but it could be possible to modify it with larger wheels after some portwork and possibly target 250 crank hp and then tune the car to hold at 190-200 torque to keep the transmission happy. That would likely shave another second off 0-60 times or about 2.5 sec faster than stock which would definitely be noticeable.

Would all of that be worth it? That all depends on how well the car takes to mods to the intake like the airfilter area, intercooler piping, Intercooler, and throttlebody. On the exhaust side probably a 2.5" mandrel bent exhaust with high flow cat will wake it up quite a bit, I have no idea if there would be any cams that would swap in as performance upgrades but you never know. The fuel situation is another mystery but it would be pretty easy to calculate the injector duty cycle if I can get the tuning software talking and the car strapped to the dyno, swapping in larger injectors and a fuel pump isn't hard at all if really needed. Assuming all of that gets figured out swapping larger turbo wheels into the current housing or possibly just the compressor wheel might be enough to bump the power up significantly. If the stock turbo is so small that it's barely holding the factory boost then it would probably make more sense just to replace it all but then you are talking quite a bit more custom fab work and my goal would be for a budget minded mod list.

As far as the suspension goes I would likely start out with lighter and wider wheels, the stock Evo X wheels worked great on my Outlander along with Goodyear Eagle Sport tires. Specialty products eccentric bolts for the front should also allow some needed negative camber for better cornering along with a strut tower bar and polyurethane anti sway bar bushings. Add a touch of toe out up front and it should really improve the handling over stock before resorting to a coilover setup.

I guess if anyone has spotted others modifying the performance side of these cars already I would be interested to see what has been done so far before I pull the trigger on one. The local Mitsu dealership knows me well enough to where I can likely arrange a test drive on one for a few days and really look the car over but if some legwork has already been done it never hurts to see what has already been explored.

Here's hoping they come out with a fun car out of the gate that has a stronger transmission and larger 2L+ turbocharged engine in the future! Until then people like me will just have to build their own Mitsubishi.:D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
FSM from Helm
Would you be willing to share a page from that manual? I work for Tactrix and we have a customer in another country who has gotten himself in to a predicament by trying to read this ECU using a method that is not applicable, but did manage to get the car stuck in programming mode. I've been looking for a diagram showing the ECU wiring as we've just had a salvage yard ECU arrive today. Hopefully as part of this process we'll be able to add general reflashing support for this vehicle, though that won't help with a marginal transmission.

-Mike
Tactrix
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
230 Posts
Would you be willing to share a page from that manual? I work for Tactrix and we have a customer in another country who has gotten himself in to a predicament by trying to read this ECU using a method that is not applicable, but did manage to get the car stuck in programming mode. I've been looking for a diagram showing the ECU wiring as we've just had a salvage yard ECU arrive today. Hopefully as part of this process we'll be able to add general reflashing support for this vehicle, though that won't help with a marginal transmission.

-Mike
Tactrix
maybe it's in here??
[W/M] Eclipse Cross (GK#)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
362 Posts
54B and 54C in the Technical Information Manual discuss the LIN and CAN bus operation. There are diagrams overall connectivity and operation. ETACS ECU wiring diagram is in the Workshop manual section 90 - Wiring Diagrams.

Was searching the exact same info on the weekend...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
Thanks to you both. I had actually found that site earlier in the day but only stumbled upon a different manual so I assumed there was nothing technical on that site. My mistake. Thanks and hopefully we'll get somewhere with this ECU.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Thanks to you both. I had actually found that site earlier in the day but only stumbled upon a different manual so I assumed there was nothing technical on that site. My mistake. Thanks and hopefully we'll get somewhere with this ECU.

So the current Tactrix 2.0 cable can't even read the Eclipse Cross ECU as of yet? Likely I can get the tables defined for some tuning if nobody else has tackled that yet.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
66 Posts
Discussion Starter #19 (Edited)
Heeeey! Good to see you on here, Hiboost. Love your technical articles on the various Evo forums.

I appreciate what you're doing - I really am. Personally, the reason we upgraded to the Cross was that the wife wanted more creature comforts. I wanted something that had S-AWC. We had two Sports - both AWC. First one had the 4B11, then when the 4B12 came out, we test drove it and I fell in love. Something about that combination of the higher low-end torque and the TCU programming - I really didn't mind the CVT in that one. I really have reason to believe it was just the programming because it really was the same transmission.

Two challenges arise with the CVT in the Cross: first is that there's no technical data ANYWHERE nor are there resources to decipher the programming on the TCU. When we first got the Cross, I called Kozmic immediately, and after several exchanges, Rob just said it wasn't worth the risk. The CVT in all Mitsubishis are unfortunately the lesser of the two AWD compatible units available, this one being the belt-driven one (vs the Chain variant, which could handle upwards of 250 lb-ft of torque). This is the second and most frustrating issue. Oh, and if there's a third - it's clearly that there's no consideration placed on the horrible programming on the CVTs. Each time I take the vehicle in for servicing, I check for TCU updates or any TSBs equivalent to a reflash. Not even so much as a radio update. So... thanks Mitsubishi.

Other things to think about: Open diffs everywhere. No front LSD, and the tq bias distribution performed by the ACD is based on wheel sensor and brake force distribution (think Subaru S-AWD). As you know, the Evo's brand of S-AWC is accelerator-activated, and uses true Yaw/G-sensor readings. So, the Cross' performance capabilities are, while leagues better than the basic system in the Cross, isn't really world-shattering like the Evo's.

I maintain that the best way to make the Cross perform, is to take an MR, and swap out drivetrain components, starting with the SST, ACD, and AYC (or, RS/RA diff). Then, take the TCU, maybe the ECU, Yaw/G sensors, a Haltech, and then plug them up. Heck, at that point, might as well get the 4B11 and put that in as well. Then you would have wondered if it'd have just been best to stick with the Sport :)

Personally, I miss the Sport. I loved that body style - and it had similar or compatible underpinnings and components to the CJ Lancer / CZ4A Evo.
I figured, if I ever had a chance to build a fun project vehicle that wasn't track-bound, it would be another Sport and a donor X. Because... it's just easier. The incremental amount of gizmos and gadgets to figure out in the Cross just mean more shit to troubleshoot, you know?

But, hey - I still watch this thread from time to time. I would humbly subject to being proven wrong if someone such as you - or any other brave soul for that matter - manages to rise above and surpass my whiny litany of the platform's limitations, and produce results :)

... without spending an amount that would have been the equivalent of a used Evo or another vehicle for that matter.

Me personally... I can wait 2 more years 'til we can finally ship a Pajero Evo stateside. It'll be the perfect complement the FTO that's sitting in the garage. Much more satisfying than having to completely rework a half-baked attempt at jump-starting the idea of a brand that used to make you want to "Wake Up and Drive".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
Hi
slippercream
I've navigated into JATCO webpage and the transmission hardware is not the same as mentioned. The Eclipse Cross has CVT8 that works up to 380Nm. Saying that in my case I will receive from an official dealer of MIT a remapping to that will deliver 190CV and 30 Nm (not official information is 204VC and 32Nm). Please check that.

The car will be ready in 8 days, it is a 4x4 model. And the MIT will support all warranties. I will keep your posted here, but please check the link above with JATCO details about CVT8
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Top