http://y42.photos.yahoo.com/bc/drcol...c=ph%26.view=t

all i had on was the K&N drop in panel filter, 2.25 free flow exhaust, stock y pipe, lightened flywheel. timing is normal. Using 89 octane fuel,

 

What engine does this max have? How come in Dyno #3, the torque is 166 and Dyno #1 is over 230??

 

I have the VE motor with a 5 spd.

My ignition module is not working properly, most of the time it malfunctions, and the car runs like ****.
It took five runs until we seen a normal run.
Look at the dif a bad ignition module does.
I only printed out one of each run, the motor is pretty consistent with the hp and tq.
Look at the graph again and do you notice how sloppy the curve is??
Those are signs of bad fuel mixture, Ive had the injectors cleaned, new plugs installed, and a new ecu.
Next thing on the list to replace is the ignition module.

 

What does the ignition module do, and how much does it cost to replace. My 92 VE 5spd is very inconsistent and I am trying to find out what could be the prob. Maybe it's the ig module.

 

the ignition module controls which coil is gonna make the corresponding spark plug fire.
It is similar to the function of a cap and rotor in most typical cars ignition system.
The VG motor doesnt have an ignition module, it uses a cap and rotor with ignition wires and one big coil pack to produce high voltage for the spark plugs to fire.
The VE uses an ignition module, which sends a signal to each individual coil of each cylinder when to fire the spark plug.
Its just a fancy thing. I'd much rather have one big coil and big wires, than the fancy shmancy IG module.
As for the cost of one,I dont know yet!

 

Hey dude, I dont wanna burst any bubbles here, but how on earth can you have 230lb of torque when you have 170hp? Plus since you have the free flow exhaust, your loosing low end torque. I think the dyno chart messed up big time.

 

I just read this..... can someone please explain whats going on or am I missimg something? 170hp and 230tq??? I'm dumbfounded......

 

hey, i was surprised too, the second last run was the exact same, 200+tq, and 170 hp.
I know it sounds weird, but its very noticeable the power loss when the ig module is malfunctioning.
When all is working properly, My Maxima breaks loose at 1700rpm, and I have pretty sticky tires up Yokohama avs intermediates, 160treadwear.
And second gear is insane too, I lay a patch longer than most little cars can in first.
Also, my VTC's are working properly, so that helps too.
I find that with the free flow exhaust, I improve in all areas of the rpm range. I didnt go nuts in size like some guys do, its still 2.25 exhaust, not 2.5", The maxima is still an NA motor, and needs backpressure, its not like an FA motor, where you need no backpressure.
My colt has more torque than power too, I ran it, 150tq and 125hp @ 12psi.
It all comes down to tuning boys!
As for running higher octane on the maxima, its pointless, It doesnt need it, it just cant burn it all efficiently, 89- 91 is sufficient.

 

hey, i was surprised too, the second last run was the exact same, 200+tq, and 170 hp.
I know it sounds weird, but its very noticeable the power loss when the ig module is malfunctioning.
When all is working properly, My Maxima breaks loose at 1700rpm, and I have pretty sticky tires up Yokohama avs intermediates, 160treadwear.
And second gear is insane too, I lay a patch longer than most little cars can in first.
Also, my VTC's are working properly, so that helps too.
I find that with the free flow exhaust, I improve in all areas of the rpm range. I didnt go nuts in size like some guys do, its still 2.25 exhaust, not 2.5", The maxima is still an NA motor, and needs backpressure, its not like an FA motor, where you need no backpressure.
My colt has more torque than power too, I ran it, 150tq and 125hp @ 12psi.
It all comes down to tuning boys!
As for running higher octane on the maxima, its pointless, It doesnt need it, it just cant burn it all efficiently, 89- 91 is sufficient

 

I dont know how to put in any other way, but no max has 240lb of torque, unless you have the 2002 3.5L 260hp maxima.
Sorry I dont buy it.

 

Speaking of the 2002: I looked at Nissan's page to try and find the info on this bad boy but couldn't find ****. Could someone point me in the right direction?

 

Why is it that your VE is pulling more Torque than the slightly modded VQ guys?? I mean the VE has 190ft-lb of Torque stock and the VQ has 205ft-lb of Torque stock.

 

Im sorry guys, but ive been out test driving a few max's these last days, just to compare how much different my max is from others,
and well, The VG is just a car with no ***** stock, I dont see where the 205 tq is coming from.
And off all maximas driven so far, whether they be GXE or SE with VG or VE, none seem to wanna break their tire loose like mine.
When tires break loose at low rpm, that means high torque.

Once i get this damn Ignition module working properly, then i will be going forced air, sometime in august or september.
I d like to see stock VG dynos too please.

Just curious, how long have some of you guys been in the automotive industy?

 

Mostly stock VG (auto) dyno:

{img]http://images.cardomain.com/installs/132000-132999/132187_12_full.jpg[/img]

 

 

Its easier to gain torque than hp.
From what I recall, the VQ only has 15 or so more lb/ft of torque.
All torque is , is turning power.
Hp is energy, which is much harder to achieve.
Its all physics.
You dont even have to know anything about a car to know this.

 

what GEAR did you dyno your car in?

it's eays to end up with a huge number on the torque like that if you're in the wrong gear and the machine is set for a different gear.

anyone with a brain would know that. you don't have to be an engineer.

and there is absolutely NO WAY a near-stock VE has that much torque. it's impossible. you show me a STOCK VE Maxima that has that much torque on a correctly operated and calibrated dyno, and I'll hand over the papers to my car.

 

I just posted proof of a real dyno run in third gear, everything was calibrated properly, if not, then my colt would have been a 300hp 1.6turbo motor that is really only 111hp@ 8psi?!?!?!?!
If you dont believe me, send over $75 bucks canadian, And I'll run it again on the dyno, I'll even go to another shop.
If it doesnt turn out 200+ tq, then I'll send you the money back.

Fair?

 

What excatly do u have in your maxima that it pushes over 230lb of torque, i want the same thing, I can post a dyno test that can have 300lb of torque and say thats my max meanwhile it was done over photoshop. Even the supercharged max 1995-1999, which comes pretty close to the same torque u say your max pushes with just K&N??????????? Sorry man once again I dont buy it. Plus not to mention how do you have 230 lb of torque and just 170hp at the wheel?

 

I agree unless there is some turbo that you're not telling us about there is no way you have that much torque to the wheels.

 

What do you mean the VG has no ***** stock?? Are you crazy? The VG's have more ***** than the VE's. Race any stock for stock VE vs VG and I bet you the VG will pull off the line faster. The VE will eventually catch up and pass the VG. Also.. Are you sure you drove a VG? or was it a VQ? The 95-99 Maximas have the VQ. You also judge power by "when tires break loose". That is inaccurate measurement of power. Some cars break loose easily (also depends on type of tires) and other cars don't break loose. Sure muscle cars can rip through the tires like crazy since most of them are RWD and have a LOT more power than our Maximas. I was able to break loose in my old auto VG when it was modded but not stock. Anyone can break loose if they have a 5-spd.

Another question.. How come your Dyno doesn't show RPM?

 

there's the reason then. 3rd gear isn't a 1:1 drive. you should have dyno'd in 4th gear. the settings on the computer were most likely for 4th gear, which explains why you have one TQ curve that's waaay up there, then another identically shaped one 50ft-lb lower.

In fact, that 50ft-lb lower would be a "correct" reading for a stock or slightly modded Max- just like the HP readings.
a stock VE has 190hp and 190tq, at the crank right? (give or take a few). Then it would be logical to say that a stock max putting 170hp to the ground would put down about 170tq. Am I right? Yes I am.

Now look at your SECOND dyno run. hmmmmm, Max torque is about 170st-lb. WOW! Amazing, isn't it?!

That also explains why the car was only run to 95mph. I'm sure you know this already, but top of 3rd gear is about 95mph. that also makes sense.

Now note that your HP readings are almost identical. Well guess what? the torque readings are CALCULATED from the HP measurement on the dyno. that means that all the operator has to do is punch in the wrong gear ratio, and VOILA- you've got a huge torque number.

Again, since both your torque curves are almost identical, except for the number itself, I would put my money on the dyno operator putting in the wrong gear ratio for your 3rd gear.

and no, I'm not going to be stupid enough to send $75 to some guy that swears up and down he's got 250ft-lb of torque on a near-stock Max. that tells me already he's not worth trusting, let alone sending him money and HOPING I'll get it back when he proves himself wrong. Sorry. I'm not going to be taken for a fool.

Call up your dyno people and have them check the settings on their computer- if they've still got them in there. most will. you'll then see there was a different gear ratio or correction factor involved.

 

I was going to coment on that too, about the VG got no *****!!!!
I just recently race my friend and he has a 92 SE stick with a k&n. And we were about even all the way up to 45, then thats where my no cat exhaust kicked and he was behind me maybe about half a car, but id say we were pretty even. Because he beat me off the start. So i dont know what kind of a VG you were testing. mine is pretty stock, i only have K&N, no cat exhaust and short shift. (Nothing big)

 

For one, at least you noticed the rpm wasnt on the graph, I didnt.
But until you drive my maxima, why try to prove me wrong, you dont know me or how my maxima drives.
I have yokohama avs intermediates 215 55 16 with treadwear of 160. Its a really soft sticky rubber compound.
I also have Yokohama A520 on stock rims, sticky as well , but not like the intermediates.
As for breaking loose, not just any 5spd can do it, sure, by popping the clutch, any manual trany driven car can spin tires, but i dont pop the clutch, i simply take off normal and slow, and once its near 1700rpm, i just floor it(i know its not good to do that) but the damn thing just goes nuts.
I ve driven a 98 5spd today, and it seems a little less torquey than my Max.
So My max is most likely above 200tq.

As for the VG being faster off the line than the VE, youre ****ed up. Thats all i can say,
Im really getting sick of these damn websites of ppl just asking dumbass questions online, get out there and do your own real life research.
As soon as i come on with real fact on paper, you all diss me, and deny the fact that there is one better car like yours out there.
Im pretty sure there are 3g's out there better than mine.

You ppl are the reason I am sticking with DSM. We are not biased and put down others of our own group

Maybe i should have posted about my new painted FSTB and 18 "rims.

This is the reason i keep to myself, and everyone is scared of the pink colt, and now the black "I think its a Maxima" Maxima.

http://y42.photos.yahoo.com/bc/drcol...c=ph%26.view=t

 

Why cant you guys just face it, VG's have no power as compared to VE's Stock to stock.

If a VE is having a hard time with the VG, then the ecu is shot and is not controlling the VTC's. Ive talked to my nissan mechanic, and My other friend mechanic, and they say many ppl overlook the ecu.
Ive changed mine, and its like night and day the way the car drives. Basically my VTC's werent being triggered.
Its supposedly a common problem, The VE ecu pin 54, which controls the VTC, malfunctions, and doesnt ground the VTC's out.
Which will explain why a VG will take the VE off the line.
But for those of you who wish to waste time with a VG so be it, better you than me.

 

250ft of toque with only minor mods .....if the car is making 190 at the crank(and possibly 170 at the wheels) when stock, how could it possibly be making 250 at the wheels or even at the crank w/o MAJOR mods??? I agree with the other there must have had to be an error in there some where....

 

This has nothing to do with anyone dissing anyone about anything. YOU came in here and posted your car had 250ft-lb torque when it's almost stock.. that's IMPOSSIBLE. period. Then you keep insisting it when your second dyno graph shows a very typical curve. yet you insist the first one is correct. YOU are the one trying to BS your way through this. I proved you wrong, and you have ZERO factual basis to tell me I'm incorrect in what I said.

you're the only one that believes you have that much torque. no one else here does. if YOU want to prove that you have it, YOU go pay for another dyno and prove it. show us all the correction factors, get an RPM reading, and use 4th gear. 4th gear is the true "correct" gear to run in, since it's closest to a 1:1 inut ratio on the tranny.

Spinning tires is no way to prove anything about torque. I've driven VG, VE, VQ autos and 5 spds.. the VE 5 spd will break loose going through 1st gear if you're going uphill, or on a low-traction surface (i.e. greasy asphalt in the summer).

The VG and VQ 5 spd are exactly the same way, with the VQ 5 spd breaking 1st gear loose on just about any surface.

autos aren't nearly as crazy, but my modded VG auto (which dyno'd very similar to your VE) would break loose 1st gear through 3000rpm at every start on any surface- and that was with 16" pirelli P7000SS tires. pretty damn sticky tire.

So what else do you have in your bag of tricks?

 

Maybe thats all you should say. I'm all for VE power, but simply put the VG has a better, lower torque band. A VG can stick with a VE through first and most of second gear.

No on is holding a gun to your head to stay here. Matt presented the facts on why your car put down more torque. If you spinning something twice as fast(2:1 ratio) than someone spinning at an equal ratio(1:1) of course you'll get more torque. Simple physics. I'm sick of newbies like you coming here thinking they're the **** with their egos and attitudes. Its like a ****ing Honda board. BTW, I'm sure there's better 3rd gens out there as well. Deal with it.

Good, you don't like it. Get the **** out.

 

You must be mistaking me for a newbie. I guess Nissan just decided to make your VE faster than all the others?

If you want to prove us wrong, video tape/take pics your dyno run or video tape/take pics your max making a run at the track.. with all that torque you should be breaking into the 14's.

 

Im not into the 14's yet, im expecting a 15.1 maybe a 15.0 pass.
As for a newbie, ive been on this board for about a year now, and its the reason i dont hang here much, too much BS in here.
PPL dont hate me on the street cause i talk ****, I talk nothing on the street, you come test me at the lights, and you will be told.

Im anti Honda and VW, they are good cars, i just wont buy one.
Im stupid enough to have even started moddding a 3000+ brick of a car, i simply got bored with my maxima,as i am once again, and am selling it this summer.

I ran a 15.37@90mph when it was bone stock two years ago, but i guess that was bs too.
You damn computer geeks , get a life, i cant believe im even on here once in awhile. geeesh!

http://y42.photos.yahoo.com/bc/drcol...iew=t&.hires=t

If you think it either the dyno or the timeslip were photoshopped, i really doubt it, cause i couldnt for the life of me use the damn program.

I dont normally try to prove myself, but in this case, you seem to be a dumbass stubborn ****, so be it.
This will be one of my last posts. Im sure you will be very happy to hear that. Oh yay!

Im too tired for this sh-i-t, time for bed.

 

Wow 1 year. I'm impressed. Do you want a cookie? I don't hang in here much either, usually just to talk with friends and flame dumbasses(hmm.. interesting). You're stupid enough to be modding a 3000+ DSM aren't you? Those things sure as hell don't weigh that much less than a Maxima. I simply get bored flaming ignorant, bull****ters like you. Great time stock, I don't care if thats bull**** or not. Oh, btw, no one's saying your dyno sheet is photoshopped. We're saying it was done in the wrong gear. Not being in a gear that puts down a 1:1 power ratio will cause crazy dyno's like this. "Dumbass, stubborn ****"? Nice language, hotshot. I'll tell you what, bring your car to Avalon with the mods you have, we'll check it out, dyno it and the right gear. You hit 250 ft lbs of torque, I'll give you a Coke or something.

 

buddy, you just keep digging your hole deeper.

you run a STOCK max at 15.3.. then you add 50ft-lb of torque, yet you only expect a drop of 0.3sec?
HA! strike 1.

an SC'd vq with that much torque will run low 14s and even 13s, yet you're still only aiming for low 15s? strike 2.

90mph at the end of the 1/4 mile? certainly doesn't sound like you leap off the line to me. strike 3. you're out.

oh yeah.. it's the tire spin.. wait till you put your racing slicks on and race again. just like the rest of the riceboys.

 

I haven't raced a VE so I'm sure a lot of you guys will set me straight but here's my two cents. The VG's have 160 @ 5200 horsepower and 182 @ 3200 pounds of torque. The VE 190 @ 5600 horsepower and 190 @ 4000 torque. Now from my own experience with a VG Auto first gear smokes and I have no problem laying down some rubber. My torque peaks sooner then a VE so hanging with one shouldn't be a problem. At least in first gear, correct me if I'm wrong.) Problem comes when shifting to second gear, I need a shift kit or something because it takes so much time for the thing to sync before it shifts. It then pulls decent till about 3500 rpm, I believe this is where the VE has the advantage of more torque at higher RPM. From there on the RPM's are stacking up it's not pulling like it would in first gear. At the same time the VE is getting into it's power band and starts to pull away.

Bottom line, numbers don't mean jack because it is easy to make them speak whatever you want. What matters is what the stop watch says at the end of the quarter mile. If this guy says he has all this horsepower and torque lets see some time slips, that should prove if he's pulling the dyno numbers out of his butt or not.

92 VG Auto
Pop Charger
Jacobs Pro Street ignition system

 

I agree with you. The VG does pull harder in 1st gear at low band RPM.

But you have to keep in mind that numbers are needed. When you mod a car for Pro Racing, numbers start becoming a big deal. When the numbers are higher or lower than normal you think of 2 things. 1) Is this logical? 2) Is there an error?

 

If you say your max does 15.3 stock and you have 250lb of torque. Ill buy your max.

PS (maybe they dropped a VG30DETT in your max?) by accident!

 

hmmm...this is an interesting thread...hi mike matt and nevin....

BTW ive run with against a VE and VQ at the track and have been ahead or even with them through most of second...

im not gonna waste my time...

 

HP is simply a number calculated from torque using the following equation.

Hp = (rpm x torque) / 5252

(For more info visit
http://www.offroaders.com/info/tech-...wer-torque.htm)

Using the equation we notice three things (this is assuming constant torque, more on this in a minute).

1. Below 5252 rpm torque > hp
2. At 5252 rpm torque = hp
3. Above 5252 rpm torque < hp

This is the reason a Honda S2000 with 153 lb-ft of torque at 7500 rpm puts out 240hp at 8300 rpm. If you can hold torque long enough and rev high enough, then you will have good hp numbers.

Anyway, back to the Maxima. As I stated above we are assuming constant torque for these numbers. In reality many engine's torque curve will start falling before the hp peak is reached. As an example, look at the VG30E. It makes 160hp at 5200 and 182lb-ft at 3200. Obviously the torque is falling from it's peak value by the time you hit 5252 rpm, which causes the lower max hp (and lower redline). This leads to the characteristics of the VG, great low end power, but not much up high because you are off of the torque curve, and hence less hp. In contrast we can look at the VE30DE with 190hp at 5600 and 190lb-ft at 4000. The torque curve is moved up, and the VE is still making max torque at 5252 rpm. This means less low end power, but more high end hp.

The only way to have more torque than hp like your dyno chart claims, is if your torque peaks low and falls off by 5252rpm, which are not the characteristics of your engine.

This is all highly rpm dependent, but if we look at the dyno chart it is scaled on the horizonal in mph. The dyno chart ends at 95 mph, which is about the top of 3rd gear so we can assume the test was run in 3rd. (If it was in 4th you would only have hit ~4750 rpm which would make no sense). Assuming 3rd gear, 5252 rpm is ~75-76 mph, which is where the red dyno plots cross, as is expected.

So the question becomes, what's up with the blue plots? Based on the relationship between hp and torque, and at the specified speeds, they are impossible. I think people are right, they must have entered the wrong gear ratio during the dyno run.

SLOMatt aka. Matt92SE

btw. I think this is officially my 2nd post on maxima.org

3rd Gen Page
http://gen3.4mg.com/

3rd Gen BBS
http://www.4dsc.com/discussion

 

Nice to see you on the .org forum Matt!

 

Did you have to quote his whole post??

Go Matt!

 

Trbo-

Ignorance is bliss? Ehhhhh....

250fwtq out of an NA VE??


Dave