VEvolution

This is about to get interesting..

nismology

iTrader: (8)

Do you have anything useful to contribute?

VEvolution

I was actually impressed with your knowledge, and anxious to see what was to come in this discussion. For once you actually showed some leverage.

nismology

iTrader: (8)

My apologies. I thought it was a smart alec "you're about to get owned blah blah" statement.

JClaw

iTrader: (17)

So you're arguing that the VE is superior to the VQ? The VQ in Europe was introduced in late 1993 with 227 HP in an engine that was 108 pounds lighter (not to mention more compact) that its predesessor WITHOUT VTC's. How is that NOT superior in every single way? A simpler, lighter, more compact powerplant that produces more power and has less stuff to go wrong.

When I see an NA VE in the 12's on stock internals with only bolt ons and tuning, in a full weight maxima, I will give it its props. Because 13.00 flat is the ET to beat for an NA DE-K (pushing 225whp). Stock junkyard engine.

So where are the 13 and 12 second NA VE's if it's superior?

VEvolution

No prob

Try keeping up after the 1/4 mile is finished

nismology

iTrader: (8)

They're out getting their VTC's rebuilt. It's just a joke fellas...just a joke




On a serious note though, now that you mention it JClaw i haven't seen ANY 200 WHP VE dyno's with just bolt-ons. BTW, the VE cams have more duration than the VQ35.

nismology

iTrader: (8)

This particular motor he is referring to has it's HP peak past the stock redline with the car trapping 104 MPH on slicks (which reduce traps speeds compared to street tires) so top-end power is fine, to say the least. Once again, internally stock.

JClaw

iTrader: (17)

What? Two cars trapping 100 mph in the 1/4 mile will be a driver's race on the highway. And I have yet to see stock VE's with bolt ons trapping 102, 103 or 104 mph like the VQ.

The gearing of the 5-speeds is identical from 1985 to 2001, the coefficient of drag is pretty much the same, and the VQ powered maximas have a 150 pound advantage. VI'd VQ30DE's or VQ30DE-K's with stock intakes have been known to peak as high as 6700-6800 with enough power to go well into the 7200 rpm range. Your argument makes no sense.

What is it with the VE guys thinking they have an advantage only after 100+ mph? The power follows in every gear, if you're not spinning (which you certainly aren't above 20-30 mph), then you're putting all your power to the ground in every gear. If you're trapping, say 93-94 mph in the 1/4 mile, you are NOT going to keep up with a car that's trapping above 100 mph. It's just physics. I don't care how much top end you think you have, highway racing = gearing + trap speed. Trap speed = Final power to weight ratio.

Try racing a 00 VI or Mevi 4th gen on the highway and you WILL get owned if the driver knows what he is doing. There's just nothing you can do about it.

NOBODY in this thread has given me a solid reason that the VE has any advantage over the VQ. It's a more complex (VTC's), more space consuming, heavier powerplant that produces less power overall and far less power per pound of engine weight - it is less efficient than the VQ. More complex=more stuff to go wrong. And it shows. VTC ticking anyone? Ever heard of that on a high mileage VQ? Nope.

Nissan went with the "simple" VQ because it could produce more power and torque from a more efficient design. The rotating assembly has been lightened. There is less friction of moving parts. The motor is over 100 lbs lighter. It was and is an improvement in every single way. ALL of the fastest maximas on this board have a VQ, whether it's N/A, Nitrous, Supercharged, Turbocharged - you name it - they all have a VQ.

VEvolution

So your saying because cars trap at a certain speed, it turns into a drivers race? In that case all cars trapping at around the same speed have exactly the same top speed....!? I really can't make sense of what your trying to say.

I hope you don't believe in what your saying, cause the whole "highway racing = gearing + trap speed" is BS..

The 4th gens(including 5spds) I've been racing not only on the highway, but at the lights have been owned up and down since I bought my car. Guess I havn't gotten lucky yet

It produces less power, yet still appears to be faster when it comes down to it. Whats going on around here?

I agree though. It's probably a bit better, but the VE is just so much cooler with all it's features and the fact it's only been in 1 car.

nismology

iTrader: (8)

Let me bottom line this discussion for you. The VQ (when equipped with a VI) will make more power mod for mod at atmospheric pressure and when boosted. It is also lighter and more reliable.

JClaw

iTrader: (17)

It's simple. The trap speed dictates the "pull" of the car on the highway. So two cars with similar trap speeds will be close on the highway.

Like I said, the trap speed dictates the pull of the car on the highway. If your VE had a magical "second" top end that automatically shows up only on the highway, it would be shown in your trap speeds.

Look I don't care who you raced but bottom line is get your car to the track and compare your trap speed to a 4th gen 5-speed. I went 15.00@92 mph with my stock 95 (and several have gone 14.5-14.9's@93-94 mph). It's simple. If you can't beat that with your VE, you're slower off the line. If you can't trap higher than 92-94 mph, you're no faster on the highway. I'm not even mentioning the VI here.

VEvolution

Reliable? Hhmm, well other then the VTCs.. I don't know what would make it more reliable.

You havn't raced many VE-5spds, have you?

nismology

iTrader: (8)

I was referring to the VTC's, and that's a pretty big deal...to me at least...


I bottom-lined my viewpoint a few posts up. Can you please do the same?

Matt93SE

iTrader: (44)

1993 Maxima SE 5 spd.
minor bolt ons, slipping clutch, bald kumho 712s, broken TO bearing, blown VTCs, -3 deg camber on the front end and ride height + weigh distro set for road course use, >200,000 miles.


I've also run 4 and 5 gens on the highway (not admitting I was street racing. , and above 100mph, the old school box car just walks away from them both.



It's all a matter of semantics, guys. one engine has a few features that beat the other one, yet it's beat by other features.
Keep in mind though that to make BIG power, the VE is basically a Z32 engine.. forged crank and the same rods. by the time you turbo it, you'll be using the same pistons. ECU and cams from the Z are available as well. Injectors and MAF also drop right in... the VE could easily be built to 600hp if only the tranny would take it.

4signs

iTrader: (2)

well said matt




(on 4th tranny)

nismology

iTrader: (8)

Some stock 4G's have trapped 92 and run in the 14.7-14.9 range.
We'll stick to 1/4 mile times here because:

1. The 4G likely didn't have a VI. We all know the top-end is lacking in a stock VQ. No one's arguing that.

2. The 5th gen might have been stock or had to fix the VIAS.
Sure the VE had more "features" than the VQ when it was first released but it quickly became apparent that the VQ was just a VI away from being the clearly superior powerplant in the categories that count. Plus it's lighter and more compact.
The VQ can be made to handle big power too. So can a ton of other motors. Doesn't prove much. A stock VQ30 can handle 400+ WHP easily as long as the motor was in good shape to begin with and the tuning is on point. Fastest stock motor 1/4 mile times is in the 11's trapping north of 120 MPH.


I can honestly say that i would consider swapping a VE into my car a downgrade. You would probably say the exact opposite. As long as that's true, this debate won't go anywhere.

VEvolution

All right..
VE > VQ

Oh and btw, how you say the VQ was a VI away from being the superior motor, well in that case the VE's oil gallies are probably just a few millimeters away from making the motor "reliable"

Thats one mean VE you got there..
Anything available to keep these trannies in check with big power?

I think JClaw is

Well 400whp is not 600whp.

nismology

iTrader: (8)

Based on what? If you consider features and weight to be your main criteria, then yea, the VE wins. If you want a simple, lightweight motor that makes more power mod for mod with the ability to make power excellent power past the stock redline when equipped with a VI and that is damn near I-6 smooth, the VQ wins.

So you're telling me that you're car wouldn't be faster and handle better if you stuck a DE-K in it?

He never said a stock VE could handle 600 WHP. Furthermore, there aren't any 600 WHP VE's that i know of, period. There have been 450+ WHP supposedly "weak" VQ's. There aren't any 11 second VE's that i know of. There have been a few 11 second VQ's.

Matt93SE

iTrader: (44)

Have you ever actually SEEN a VE with modded intake manifold, cams, custom-tuned ECU, and headers at the track? That's because the aftermarket doesn't exist for it.

You're comparing apples to oranges, yet again.
Stock for stock, the VE was faster than any 4th gen and gave the VQ30DEK a run for the money. also keep in mind advances in technology here.
you're comparing the VE with "A 5th gen that was broken" or a 4th gen that "needs a VI". well let me go dump another $1000 on my VE for a custom intake manifold and the tuning required to make it work properly, and I can do it to.


weight for weight doesn't matter when you dump it into the chassis. simplicity doesn't matter either, as once you're looking at the VQ35 or the DEK, it's got just as much, if not more crap on it as the VE. the VE is as easy to work on as a distributor-based engine. very little emissions crap to deal with and you don't have the hassles of OBD-II and the 3 (or more) oxygen sensors.

the VE is a much simpler engine. it may be heavier, but the iron block is MUCH stronger than the VQ. start putting 600+hp on a VQ and see what happens to it. Remember the old Nissan IMSA GTP race cars? they put down 1100+hp on a STOCK VG BLOCK. the factory rods in the car are good for 400+hp as well, and the pistons probably would too if they weren't 15 years old. drop in some forged pistons like what's in mine and the thing can handle tons of abuse.

Don't be so quick to knock old school technology just because the VQ is lighter and makes the same power. there's a ton of potential in either engine. The differences you're trying to use to make the VQ better are lame arguments that can all be solved by throwing money at either powerplant. no cams for the VE? make some.. $1200.
no headers for the VE? make some. $1800.
No good intake manifold for the VE? make one. $1500.

someone did all of that for the VQ as well. it just hasn't been done on the VE because the customer support isn't there..

VEvolution

Listen to the engineer

Tonyklem

iTrader: (1)

ummmmmm.... what he said . Good work matt

dmontzsta

iTrader: (8)

This debate is getting as old as chevy vs. Ford.

BTW: VE > vq. I have owned them both and can say the VE has more to it.

VEvolution

And it's seems to be the same people debating

nismology

iTrader: (8)

There have been 4G's in the 13's with none of those things you listed there.
The DE-K was in a heavier car. Furthermore, a few 4th gens have ran stock what your modded 3G ran.
My point is that we should stick to 1/4 mile times since we don't know what mods those cars that you beat on the highway had or what their state of tune was. A blown KS isn't outside of the realm of possibility. Also, no one is arguing that a 4G with a stock IM has good top-end power. But stick a VI on there and all bets are off. And i'll keep repeating this...13's with an internally stock VQ is possible and has been done by quite a few people.
Once again, 13's on an internally stock VQ with a generic JWT tune and plenty running low 14's trapping 97-99 MPH on street tires.
Who would've thought?...
I don't know about you but i've been referring to the 3.0l VQ's this whole time. And exactly what crap are you talking about?
I'm not understanding what you're getting at with this one. Forgive me...
By what standards?
Nobody has tested the limits of the VQ30 block that i know of.
Ditto the VQ.
The VQ being lighter is only ONE of my arguments.
Of course you can build any motor up with enough money. But how many 13-second/200+ WHP internally stock VE powered cars are there?
I can count on one hand the number of people that have touched the internals on a VQ30. And headers don't add THAT much power over a standard aftermarket y-pipe anyway, so that point is moot.



I'm curious as to what 1/4 mile times your built VE is capable of. Not being a smartazz either. I'd really like to know...

Matt93SE

iTrader: (44)

My built VE is still having tuning issues.. It's barely any faster than my old worn out engine right now and it knocks like crazy above 3500rpm. I'm not sure if it's maxed-out or dirty injectors, improper ECU tune (likely), a worn out MAF, or one of many other causes...
I'm sure it's capable of 13s IF I took the 600 lb of chassis bracing, dynamat, stereo, and other stuff out. note that my car weighs 3800lb with driver and 1/2 tank of gas. for track days, I pull out most of my stereo, spare, etc and 'track weight' is about 3650. It's a heavy *****. if I dropped the weight to sub-3000 like many of you 4th gen guys have, 13s are surely doable.

FYI Aaron's stock-internal NA VE is running 13s.. and he's an automatic.

You keep changing your arguements above. you say one thing in one thread talking about 5th gens and everything else, then try to say you're specifically talking about 4 gens. ya know, it doesn't really matter.

The VE is a very simple engine. you can change the water pump WITHOUT pulling the front half of the engine apart. cams can come out in less than 1 hr with the engine in the car.
the only thing that's not 100% straightforward on that engine is the VTCs, and they're still very simple. on or off, and it's just done by a solenoid on the head next to it. the crank sensor is easily adjustable- just like a distributor, so you can fiddle with your timing. the coilpacks are known to go out about every 10 years or so, but otherwise the engine is bullerproof.

And FYI, I ran a 14.9 BONE STOCK at KCIR just a few weeks after I bought the car. horrible running condition, the damn thing barely got me to KC in one piece.

That 14.7 I ran above was with only some maintenance, a CAI, UDP, and maybe a Y pipe. (I didn't buy the Y pipe until just a couple years ago when I got one cheap.. not sure exactly when). I still had a stock flywheel, slipping LuK (OEM replacement) clutch. I replaced the clutch and flywheel later with a Fidanza/ACT combination and still ran the same 14.73s again, although I only got 3 runs that night and never got a good launch. I go drag racing about once every other year, and have maybe 25 passes at the dragstrip total. the people you're referencing above with their 4th gens in 13s run that many runs in a week, and have done MUCH more to their cars than you're getting on.

You need to remember just how long I've been around here and what I've seen over the years.

Nealoc187

iTrader: (23)

yikes I think I'll

nismology

iTrader: (8)

If you ran 13's it'd be a pleasant surprise, honestly. When are you going back to the track?
He's also swiss cheese'd his car like it's going out of style.
Specifically which posts are you referring to?
All you have to do is remove the accessory belt tensioner bracket and remove the water pump cover and you're right there on the VQ.
Just so you know, i meant it's more simple MECHANICALLY, which is the most important thing to me.
That's pretty impressive, i'll say. But yet and still, the 4G's that ran sub-15's were without VTC's and a VI, which says something about the VQ. And the weight difference between a 4G and 3G is approximately the weight difference between the VE and VQ, so the "but you all are lighter" excuse can't really be used. The motor has to accelerate itself too...

All it takes to run low 14's @ 97-99 consistently on street tires in a 4th gen is a JWT ECU, y-pipe, MEVI, intake. With slight weight reduction, 13's are possible.

By virtue of it's geometry (high rod:stroke ratio) and better flowing heads the VQ has the potential to make more power n/a mod for mod, and PSI for PSI, not to mention the lightweight rotating assembly and efficient valvetrain design. There's no way around it. Most VQ30DE-K's with bolt-ons make their peak power at or near redline. And they're far from peaky. They have torque curves so broad you'd swear they had VTC's.

I'll give the VE some props. It had features that set it apart and it was definitely ahead of it's time. But for someone to sit here and say the VE > VQ based on it's "features" alone is missing half of the point. Somewhere in the discussion, facts and figures need to hold some weight as well. Practical > theoretical in my book.

nismology

iTrader: (8)

Facts and figures > driving impressions. There's no room for intangibles in this discussion, unfortunately. And just for argument's sake, have you driven a VI-equipped VQ?


And for the record i am NOT arguing that the VQ will outperform a VE outright mod for mod when equipped with the stock 4G intake manifold. The 4G might run a faster 1/4 mile time mod for mod on average, but will get worked on the highway without a VI. I know this very well.

JClaw

iTrader: (17)

I was dead set on buying a 1992 Black on black SE and test drove three of them before I bought my 1995. Was it the right choice considering overall potential? I still think so. Although now I think the better choice in either case would have been to skip the maxima and go straight to the VQ-powered S13.

nismology

iTrader: (8)

...........

JClaw

iTrader: (17)

Yep. So if the VE is superior when can we expect the 94 mph+ traps in 100% stock form? It has to trap higher if it's faster.

And remember, no getho rigged airbox. Nathin'.

nismology

iTrader: (8)

Drag coefficients are within .01 of each other as well, in case someone tries to sneak that one in.

VEvolution

The rear suspension on the 4th gen is like the ones you get on the minivans! ... Thats just funny

Edit: If Im not mistakin, doesn't a car benefit from this type of suspension in a drag race?

JClaw

iTrader: (17)

Only if it's the one driving the wheels.

Well that one is true ...

nismology

iTrader: (8)

<------ Waiting for a legit response...

Matt93SE

iTrader: (44)

<------ Waiting for you to get your VQ>* crap out of a thread that started about a VE in FR configuration and you and JClaw walked in talking trash.

None of us ever said the VQ was a POS.. but don't try to talk smack about the VE not being a capable engine when you've never seen one tuned to the same levels as a VQ. until you've seen it, don't knock it.

nismology

iTrader: (8)

Post #71 got me going and he seems to think it's a POS and i got overly defensive. It was more me defending the VQ's merits than saying the VE is crap. I guess i let the ignorance of one get to me. As long as i don't see any VQ dissing i won't jump into any of these arguments. My apologies for whoring this thread up and i'll be looking forward to your future track times.