Hey i'm not sure what are the main differences b/w the TE 1996 v6 engine and the TS 1995 v6 engine. Could someone please tell the difference?

Completely different engine management system.
The engine is mounted 180 degrees (flipped)
TE V6 has 24 valves, 4 v per cylinder, TS only has 12v, 2 valves per cylinder,
TE - 140kw
TS - 120kw

Pretty sure the transmission would be different too.

TE:
Engine code 6G72-S4

Engine description Six cylinders, 'V'-formation, belt driven SOHC, four valves per cylinder, cast iron block, alloy cross-flow head.
Cylinders 6

Valves per cylinder 4

Engine orientation Transverse

Head material Aluminium alloy

Block material Cast-iron

Configuration V-formation

Engine location Front

Valve train SOHC

Capacity (cm3) 2972

Maximum torque 255Nm @ 4500rpm

Maximum power 140kW @ 5500rpm

Compression ratio 9.0:1


TS:

Engine code 6G72

Engine description Six cylinders, V-formation, belt-driven SOHC per bank, cast iron with cross-flow alloy heads, variable length inlet manifold runners.
Capacity (cm3) 2977

Compression ratio 10.0:1

Cylinders 6

Valves per cylinder 2

Engine orientation Transverse

Configuration V-formation

Head material Aluminium alloy

Block material Cast-iron

Engine location Front

Valve train SOHC

Maximum torque 235Nm @ 4000rpm

Maximum power 120kW @ 5500rpm

Only 235nm for the v6 TS?
My 4 cylinder pulls 233nm, but at over 5000rpm, i suppose the extra boost down low helps, and probably more area under the torque graph...lol but much more in depth than my post :).

thanks boys that enough info. I finally know that they are completely different engines. i just thought that it might be simular :doubt:

thanks boys that enough info. I finally know that they are completely different engines. i just thought that it might be simular :doubt:
Well they are both 3L V6's :P.

Only 235nm for the v6 TS?
My 4 cylinder pulls 233nm, but at over 5000rpm, i suppose the extra boost down low helps, and probably more area under the torque graph...lol but much more in depth than my post :).

235 N/A remember.

i like the ts v6 they go hard and they are easy to work on can even do plugs without removal of intake manafold they are very similer to the early pagero motore

235 N/A remember.
lol sorry poor choice of words, my car is N/A, i meant the v6 would probably have more pull down low and have more area under the torque curve.

i think the 4cylinder only has 212nm torque

He's right, the Astrons only produced 212Nm of torque @ 3750rpm.

Don't forget the V6 is optimised for premium unleaded, so the numbers can become slightly higher, 244Nm @ 3000rpm campared to 235Nm @ 4000rpm, a whole 1000rpm lower!

He's right, the Astrons only produced 212Nm of torque @ 3750rpm.

Don't forget the V6 is optimised for premium unleaded, so the numbers can become slightly higher, 244Nm @ 3000rpm campared to 235Nm @ 4000rpm, a whole 1000rpm lower!

The V6 isnt optimised for PULP, no magna was.

The V6 isnt optimised for PULP, no magna was.

12 valve 6G72 will produce 120kW on ULP, and 124kW on PULP (Remember reading it in the user manual when my dad has a TS Wagon)

Funny, I almost directly quoted from the Magna brochure and a Verada brochure.

Sorry guys dunno where i pulled 233 from :S.
212NM @ 3750RPM (91 RON)
220NM @ 4000RPM (95 RON)
I wonder how much it would be on 98 RON like optimax etc.

12 valve 6G72 will produce 120kW on ULP, and 124kW on PULP (Remember reading it in the user manual when my dad has a TS Wagon)

Yes..but it's not *tuned* for PULP, if it was this would mean it would be only able to run on PULP. That was my point.

Even the Ralliart was tuned on ULP

killbillys right. no magna is factory tuned for pulp it is easy to do but factory they steered well clear of pulp tuning as most people cbf'd paying for it and would in turn kill there engines. slowly.

I'm not trying to create any flame wars, but this is exactly as it is written by Mitsubishi:


*This engine has been optimised for premium fuel usage

(*) points to the V6 motor.


Okay it doesn't use the word 'tune', but 'optimised'. I would say it has been tuned further towards premium unleaded use, but not entirely upon PULP.

...would in turn kill there engines. slowly.
The engine has a knock sensor, so using standard unleaded won't cause any harm, the computer will just retard timing.

Don't forget this engine was released in the early 90's, petrol wasn't as expensive as today. The fact that Mitsu decided to tune their late model engines to standard unleaded was because of the fuel prices, back then it wasn't an issue.

I'm not trying to create any flame wars, but this is exactly as it is written by Mitsubishi:



Okay it doesn't use the word 'tune', but 'optimised'. I would say it has been tuned further towards premium unleaded use, but not entirely upon PULP.

The engine has a knock sensor, so using standard unleaded won't cause any harm, the computer will just retard timing.

Don't forget this engine was released in the early 90's, petrol wasn't as expensive as today. The fact that Mitsu decided to tune their late model engines to standard unleaded was because of the fuel prices, back then it wasn't an issue.
And the reason why you get a increase from pulp in the 2nd gen V6's aside from the knock sensor and ignition timing, is the fact that they run a 10:1 compression ratio. which in itself is more suited to 95 ron PULP

And the reason why you get a increase from pulp in the 2nd gen V6's aside from the knock sensor and ignition timing, is the fact that they run a 10:1 compression ratio. which in itself is more suited to 95 ron PULP

Exactly. It's not tuning that does it. If it was then the motors would be having issues on ULP.

Hmm, just re-read my posts and realised i never did say 'tune' :P

I still stand by the V6 being 'optimised' (not neccessary being tuned) for PULP :badgrin:

Difference between one engine being 'optimised' and one not I would say (non-technically) that the optimised engine has better potential then one that is not. As to my example above, a nice 10Nm gain at 1000rpm lower, though I wonder how flat the torque curve is, if it dips exponentially right after peak torque then well it means nothing :P