HELLO ALL,
I WENT THROUGH ALOT POSTS AND TRIED TO FIND OUT MY ANSWER TO MY QUESTION. WHICH ENGINE IN THE MAXIMA IS BETTER? THE VG OR THE VE?
THANKS IN ADVANCE
JEFF

 

VE (DOHC 190 stock HP)
VG (SOHC 160 stock HP)

while there are issues on reliability, i've seen more people on this board having problems with their VE engines than VG, the performance differences more than make up for that.

 

well it depends on what you mean by better. The are both good engines with drawbacks.

the VE has more power (30hp more) and timing CHAINS though it has vtc, knock sensor and sometimes (though it seems not as frequent as VGs) exhaust stud problems.

the VG has exhaust stud problems and have read a few mention knock sensor problems. They have timing BELTS though which have to be changed or they can break.


They will both last a long time if you take care of them. Dmontzsta (I think thats his new sign on) has 200 something thousand miles on his VE.

They are both equally good engines with the VE having more power.

 

I dont see why people correlate VTC problems with unreliability. I mean granted you get an annoying and embarassing noise, but that doesnt make the engine not get you to point A and point B time after time.

The VE is by no means any more unreliable than a VG. More prone to noise, yes, but less reliable, no way.

A reliability problem would be something along the lines of a weak head gasket that blows ala older Neons. A noise problem isnt a reliability problem.

No ticking VTC's for yours truly

 

I wasnt saying they were less reliable I was just stating the differences but a few have claimed their motor tore up because of complete vtc failure.

 

he was referring to my post. im just stating on what i've seen throughout the forum. VTCS are the most common problems i've read with the VE, though there have been others. In terms of reliability, the VTCs no become "unrealiable" and cause the noise you were referring to. VTCs do cost money to replace and even though it isnt a whole lot, still money needed to sink into the engine. i on the other hand havent had to to anything to the actual engine except timing belts and a water pump job with my VG. im not bashing the VE engine, hell i'd rather have one in my 91, just stating what i've seen.

 

I wasnt sayin either of you guys felt the VE was 'unreliable' so to speak, just seeing this made me think of the general consensus of:

VG - reliable, if underpowered, workhorse

VE - unreliable but powerful

 

Perhaps 'less reliable' (slightly so, compared to VG) might be a better word. I don't think VEs are qualified as being 'unreliable' by most standards, especially compared to many other engines out there. If you call VE unreliable, what would you call some other engines like some GM engines, old Jaguars, not to mention Italian car engines?

 

jaguar engines....ouch

 

Over 170,000 miles on my VE. No ticking, but yes I think I do need a new knock sensor.

 

The VE is a vastly superior powerplant. Period. The only reason it has a "bad" reputation is because of the VTCs. Fix those, and you will have a winner. If I could go back in time, I would have NEVER spent my hard earned cash a slow asz VG auto. I get beat in the quarter mile by motorized wheelchairs.

 

That's why I was so happy to find the work order in my car from back in 1998 that said mine had been replaced by the previous owner.