number2jcb

iTrader: (2)

I called the nissan corporate offices and asked for their stance on this problem. They of course said that they measure what is at the crank and not at the wheels. They also said that an independant study had been conducted by Sport Compact Car Magazine that confirmed the HP difference. It is supposedly published in the March 2002 issue. If anybody can find this article, please post the link to it or scan it. That would be awesome.

If they have have 255 at the crank then we are wasting time and money on this. Before people go spend hundreds of dollars getting their car's dynoed lets find this article and see if what nissan says is true.

asu174

iTrader: (11)

Everyone here is aware that their measurments are 255 at the crank, not at the wheels.

Kojiro_FtT

I agree it's a waste of time. I don't think anyone here has the ability to dyno at the crank.

I had that issue of Sport Compact Car. They dyno'd the Altima at a little less than the Max, but they were getting much better times with the Altima. They actually said the Max is a waste of space, and recommended getting an Altima.

Y2K2Driver

iTrader: (1)

I can understand Nissan's point of view here, but you have to remember that 1 sample car is not neccessarily representative of the entire population. As far as the consumer is concerned, it is the minimum hp from the cars. Any manufacturing differences should be computed before hand to guarantee this minimum. However, in our case, it appears that they either 1) lied to us about the hp and simply used a preproduction car or tuned car to prove their numbers. I would be interested to see what the wheel hp was on this test car since if Nissan confirms that a given wheel hp is associated with the advertised crank hp and we can show that we have less, that actually makes are argument stronger. 2) manufacturing variances are such that they cannot guarantee 255 hp minimum. This is unfortunate to say the least. I don't think you can ethically advertise the best knowing full well most are less. That would be like Intel tetsing one chip at some insanely high speed, and then passing them all off as such. They don't do this, however. They test it for the max speed and sell it as such. Nissan cannot practically do this with cars. As such, they should really design in enough "extra" hp such that manufacturing variances don't allow for any consumer outside of say the 90 percentile to have less than it. This can be done and should have. I think it is pretty clear that Nissan fiddled with the numbers here. However, I don't expect anything to come from it. I don't think 10 hp would have changed my mind since I really wanted a stick and the Altima looks like crap inside, IMO. Right now I'm just going to worry about how to mod my car.

number2jcb

iTrader: (2)

I am not trying to discourage everybody, this is Nissan's official release on the topic. I really want to see a copy of that article and the results they got, and it bothers me, just like most others, that they may have produced a preproduction car that had different parts than the production model.

Kojiro_FtT

Just dug up that article. Max dyno'd in at 218 HP, 230 FT-lb, the Altima at 200 HP, 211 FT-lb. But the Altima ran 14.9 in the 1/4, while the Max ran 15.0. I scanned the dyno in, but can't post it till I get home.

olincoles

It looks like our case may tougher, or less actual, then we think. Despite being slower, the Maxima dynoed higher.

dino1063

Has anyone had a stock Max that dynoed close to that?!

Y2K2Driver

iTrader: (1)

I think this may actually help our case. By Nissan saying that the car dynoes correctly at 218hp, we now have a baseline from which to compute transmission loss. This in turn allows us to compute our crank hp fairly accurately. In this case, a 14.5% drivetran loss, I'm assuming 6 spd. here. This is what we all expected to be the case. Now if you take dynos that some of the org members have gotten, say 206hp(I forgot the exact numbers but I think this was close), this translates into ~236hp. This is obviosuly much lower than expected. Clealy Nissan has either lied about hp numbers or their manufacturing process has an error range as big as the hole in the ozone. I think the former is more likely.

Kojiro_FtT

Here it is:

92 SE-R 02 SE

how bout maxs' with and without HSLD? I would think the HSLD would produce less HP. I would like to see a 2k02 or 03 6spd HSLD and NO HSLD Dyno #'s.

Larry

I didn't even get 218 hp or 230 pounds of torque with Y & B pipes, modified muffler and modified air intake.
http://www.mustangmods.com/publish/8850//max005006G.jpg
My dyno sheet says factory intake but in fact the air filter was removed on the 215 hp run assimilating an aftermarket intake.

Kojiro_FtT

That's not a very good comparison though. It'll never fly in court. It does make you wonder though.

Larry

This one should fly though! http://www.mustangmods.com/publish/8...0Maxima%20Dyno

That's my stock dyno before any mods.

BioMaxDDS

iTrader: (1)

but how are gonna prove that those dynos are stock....cuz if they look at our cars...most of us have MODS

LegalNinja

What were the local environmental conditions at the time of the test or the correction factor used to determine the results of the test for the magazine article comparison posted above? And how do they compare to the environment/correction factor of the .ORG members who've posted their results? If the magazine was testing in the cool morning period with a high-speed fans (to reduce the effects of the engine heat in the testing bay) and high octane race fuel in the Max and/or testing the Altima in the mid-day with a lesser grade of fuel (regular premium or worse), that might account for the difference. There are so many variables that can affect power output in high-strung/close tolerance motors like the VQ.

Also, looking at the dyno, it appears that the hp difference is in the upper reaches of the power band which is indicative of airflow differences whether in or out. In addition, the torque is higher throughout the range despite the similar displacement and engine configuration. Not to be naive but, it could be easily explained by the variable capacity muffler and obvious engine variances (although they are supposed to be really close/tight). For example the Honda 954, Suzuki GSXR 1000, and Yamaha R1 all use valves in the exhaust pipes to boost low and mid-range torque by increasing backpressure while also increasing top-end power by reducing the restriction at higher RPMs. When a lot of folks modify the bikes by putting less restrictive exhaust systems on the bikes, the bikes actually make less power until the fuel mixture is enriched. Even then, the mid-range torque value is typically not as flat or wide as the stock numbers.

Again, if I'm missing some power that Nissan promised, I want it back. I'm just offering a motorsports comparison.