ve vq swap out
06-05-2008, 09:10 PM
#81
Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: MO
Posts: 275
This issue comes up with the 84-89 Z31 crowd all the time. The conclusion that everyone reaches in the end is that all the work required for the swap isn't worth the minimal power gain. Especially considering that the VG is capable of 400rwhp.
06-05-2008, 09:22 PM
#82
you mean putting a RWD VQ35 engine in the Z31 car? (stupid question alert! did any RWD cars use VQ30s? or was that not until the VQ35?) it'd balance the car better weight-wise.. lighter aluminum engine in the front, 200lb bias to the rear
Last edited by CapedCadaver; 06-05-2008 at 09:28 PM.
06-06-2008, 04:53 PM
#83
qfmft. I remember a guy a while back asking what engines would "fit" into the bay, and it turned into a flame fest. hope that guy comes back and says "HA!!! NOW WHAT, BEY-OCHEZZZ?!?!?!".. prolly wont happen, but hey, y'know?
always remember: men once said it was impossible for us to fly.... and it took some bikers to prove them wrong!
always remember: men once said it was impossible for us to fly.... and it took some bikers to prove them wrong!
06-06-2008, 05:07 PM
#84
Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 270
you are gonna have to figure the fact that pretty much the entire wiring harness will have to be spliced into your car. then making engine/tranny mounts(I dont think the vq would bolt up to a ve tranny), cv axles custom made, shift linkage, etc.
now consider that the gauges may not (and probably wont) work with the vq ECU. you are gonna have to figure out how to monitor your car.
im gonna guess about 1,000 for parts (used), about the same for labor(easily), plus all the research the shop will have to do to make it "work". still think its worth it?
if you get this done, make sure the shop documents every step on this swap. everyone wants to know what itll take to make it work and for it to be right.
now consider that the gauges may not (and probably wont) work with the vq ECU. you are gonna have to figure out how to monitor your car.
im gonna guess about 1,000 for parts (used), about the same for labor(easily), plus all the research the shop will have to do to make it "work". still think its worth it?
if you get this done, make sure the shop documents every step on this swap. everyone wants to know what itll take to make it work and for it to be right.
06-06-2008, 05:52 PM
#85
You would be Wrong.
VQ30DE produces 190 to 227 hp @6400 rpm and 205 to 217 ft·lbf (277 to 294 Nm) @4400 rpm.
VE30DE produces 190 hp at 5600 rpm and 190 ft·lbf (258 Nm) at 4000 rpm
People need to stop blurbing what they think and more of how things are, so the .org can be a source of accurate information.
Last edited by goon9; 06-06-2008 at 05:57 PM. Reason: info gathered from wiki
06-06-2008, 05:58 PM
#87
Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 270
You would be Wrong.
VQ30DE produces 190 to 227 hp @6400 rpm and 205 to 217 ft·lbf (277 to 294 Nm) @4400 rpm.
VE30DE produces 190 hp at 5600 rpm and 190 ft·lbf (258 Nm) at 4000 rpm
People need to stop blurbing what they think and more of how things are, so the .org can be a source of accurate information.
VQ30DE produces 190 to 227 hp @6400 rpm and 205 to 217 ft·lbf (277 to 294 Nm) @4400 rpm.
VE30DE produces 190 hp at 5600 rpm and 190 ft·lbf (258 Nm) at 4000 rpm
People need to stop blurbing what they think and more of how things are, so the .org can be a source of accurate information.
But whats with the 190-227??
Guess I shouldnt believe everything I read, just like I shouldnt believe the things that come out of most females mouths. LOL
06-06-2008, 06:21 PM
#88
the 190-227hp is from different models the engine was produced in, variations of components in different years to make it "more appealing". and thats true stuff, just a marketing ploy to encourage people to buy a newer car. you see it all the time, advertising that the vehicle has more power than last years model, and its not just nissan, it all of the manufacturers.
06-06-2008, 06:37 PM
#89
Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 270
the 190-227hp is from different models the engine was produced in, variations of components in different years to make it "more appealing". and thats true stuff, just a marketing ploy to encourage people to buy a newer car. you see it all the time, advertising that the vehicle has more power than last years model, and its not just nissan, it all of the manufacturers.
06-07-2008, 07:58 PM
#90
the 190-227hp is from different models the engine was produced in, variations of components in different years to make it "more appealing". and thats true stuff, just a marketing ploy to encourage people to buy a newer car. you see it all the time, advertising that the vehicle has more power than last years model, and its not just nissan, it all of the manufacturers.
2000 went to like 222 and 01 went up a little more as well but those are DE-K motors not just DE.
The VE is a more fun motor than the VQ IMHO. I had them both at the same time, and for driving pleasure, I took the VE. For comfort I took the VQ (it was in an I30)
06-08-2008, 10:53 AM
#91
Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 58
mmg23 might have earned a place in the max.org hall of fame if this monster lives...
I wonder if anyone would ever stick some kind of v8 in a third gen and get it to work, now that would be a modern frankensteins monster wouldn't et?
I wonder if anyone would ever stick some kind of v8 in a third gen and get it to work, now that would be a modern frankensteins monster wouldn't et?
06-08-2008, 12:33 PM
#92
Wanna stick a TPI motor and 700r4 under the chassis?
06-21-2008, 07:17 PM
#95
why do so many people wanna swap a vg for a ve or vq cant u get more hp out of a vg in the long run personally im looking into too swapping the manifolds on my gxe with a 89-91 300zx this had the vg30dett so wouldn't this be a cheaper option for any vg owners and allow for turbo alot cheaper then building a brand new kit on a vq
06-21-2008, 08:54 PM
#96
why do so many people wanna swap a vg for a ve or vq cant u get more hp out of a vg in the long run personally im looking into too swapping the manifolds on my gxe with a 89-91 300zx this had the vg30dett so wouldn't this be a cheaper option for any vg owners and allow for turbo alot cheaper then building a brand new kit on a vq
06-21-2008, 09:10 PM
#97
why do so many people wanna swap a vg for a ve or vq cant u get more hp out of a vg in the long run personally im looking into too swapping the manifolds on my gxe with a 89-91 300zx this had the vg30dett so wouldn't this be a cheaper option for any vg owners and allow for turbo alot cheaper then building a brand new kit on a vq
90-91 300ZX is VG30DETT which is a physically MUCH larger motor and is too big for the stock maxima engine bay.
06-21-2008, 09:25 PM
#98
Taking my Maxima to the Max!
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Alachua, FL 32615
Posts: 1,096
So, until this VQ swap guy shows back up let's talk about something useful.
Which has more torque/acceleration in the low end? The VG or VE? The reason I ask is I am trying to decide whether to build and turbo my VG or try to get a VE to work on. What would be my gains on the VG and would it be equal to or greater then the VE?
Also, what is the most HP/TQ someone has gotten from a VG (NA and Turbo)? Same for VE (NA and Turbo)?
Which has more torque/acceleration in the low end? The VG or VE? The reason I ask is I am trying to decide whether to build and turbo my VG or try to get a VE to work on. What would be my gains on the VG and would it be equal to or greater then the VE?
Also, what is the most HP/TQ someone has gotten from a VG (NA and Turbo)? Same for VE (NA and Turbo)?
06-22-2008, 09:48 AM
#100
Taking my Maxima to the Max!
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Alachua, FL 32615
Posts: 1,096
Yah, that's what I was thinking. So, if I add a turbo that should take care of the top end, correct? Does anyone have any actual dyno numbers or charts to show the difference between the VG and VE power curves?
06-22-2008, 11:01 AM
#101
Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 58
Well this question might be dumb but can you twin turbo the stock VG?
From what I'm hearing the VG is heavy and weak... But with the time money and know-how, it has far more power potential then the VE and perhaps VQ engines?
Just felt like thinking out loud.
From what I'm hearing the VG is heavy and weak... But with the time money and know-how, it has far more power potential then the VE and perhaps VQ engines?
Just felt like thinking out loud.
06-22-2008, 11:20 AM
#102
I honestly thought my VG was more fun to drive, but then, I haven't experienced a VE that ran correctly, yet (hope to soon 
).
At least part of that reason though has to do with the difference in steering and handling. The VE just FEELS heavier to handle (Entirely new front end parts and struts in both cases, by the way).
I recall somebody here not too long ago stating that the steering mechanisms on the VG and VE were different- whether that meant ratios, amount of assist, or whatever. He had suggested doing some kind of a swap, I think of the power steering units. Has that been tried? I'd love my VE to have the feel that my VG did. I'm kind of thinking there's a lot more to it, though.
). At least part of that reason though has to do with the difference in steering and handling. The VE just FEELS heavier to handle (Entirely new front end parts and struts in both cases, by the way).
I recall somebody here not too long ago stating that the steering mechanisms on the VG and VE were different- whether that meant ratios, amount of assist, or whatever. He had suggested doing some kind of a swap, I think of the power steering units. Has that been tried? I'd love my VE to have the feel that my VG did. I'm kind of thinking there's a lot more to it, though.
06-22-2008, 03:48 PM
#103
the answer is "yes, you can turbo a vg, there are stock 300zx turbo cars that used almost the same engine (the vg30et for turbo). I have read that the vg stock internals can support 400hp. so a turbo and a heavy shot of no2 can bump it pretty close to that (theoretically...) now I am not sure where you get the weak for the vg engine, 160 is pretty stout for an early 90's import. think of all the hondas from the era. boasting around 130hp. and for a long time, the vg was used in everything from the 300z to the pickups. it was even in production models until '04 in many models (as the vg33e and its variants), so it was and still is a pretty stout engine.
06-22-2008, 07:04 PM
#107
scanning through turbo forums (here and elsewhere, trying to figure something out about them, but the $#@!ing math!!!) seems to suggest a lower CR is a little better, allowing for more boost, but I just cant seem to wrap my head around it, either. I would think higher CR + XX psi = more pressure. but most people who have been doing it for a while recommend around 8ish for a cr, compared to the 9ish for vg, 11ish for ve (don't feel like looking for exact numbers, but you get the drift, right?)
06-22-2008, 09:51 PM
#108
scanning through turbo forums (here and elsewhere, trying to figure something out about them, but the $#@!ing math!!!) seems to suggest a lower CR is a little better, allowing for more boost, but I just cant seem to wrap my head around it, either. I would think higher CR + XX psi = more pressure. but most people who have been doing it for a while recommend around 8ish for a cr, compared to the 9ish for vg, 11ish for ve (don't feel like looking for exact numbers, but you get the drift, right?)
06-23-2008, 09:48 AM
#109
well its the amount of psi that allowed into the cylider so the lower compression the more boost without detonation so 11.5:1 allows 165psi and 10:1 allows 190 or somethin like that
so is that really enough to make a difference or is it about as worthless as weight distribution
so is that really enough to make a difference or is it about as worthless as weight distribution
06-23-2008, 03:34 PM
#110
Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Redding, California
Posts: 71
scanning through turbo forums (here and elsewhere, trying to figure something out about them, but the $#@!ing math!!!) seems to suggest a lower CR is a little better, allowing for more boost, but I just cant seem to wrap my head around it, either. I would think higher CR + XX psi = more pressure. but most people who have been doing it for a while recommend around 8ish for a cr, compared to the 9ish for vg, 11ish for ve (don't feel like looking for exact numbers, but you get the drift, right?)
First when gasoline "explodes" it has about a 1:9 expansion ratio.
If your compression ratio of the air/fuel mixture at ambient (sealevel)
air prassure is 10:1 the result of the explosion of that mixture running at sealevel is the same as 9 X 10, which equals an expansion ratio of 1:90.
Meaning that you took 10 "units" of air and gas, compressed them into
the space of one unit, then ignited the mixture. It has the force equivalent to taking 90 "units" and squeezing them into the total volume of the combustion chamber at bottom dead center. Simple.
But for every pound per square inch of boost you add over the ambient air pressure, you multiply this ratio by that number. So if you're running a 10:1 compression ratio, and your boost is 5psi over ambient air pressure, your final expansion ratio is 9 X 10 X 5 = 1:450! Now it becomes very clear, very quickly why turbocharging is the ultimate way to increase
the efficiency of your engine. And the 1:450 expansion is all comtained in the same small displacement (10 units) as the normal explosion. This is why cast Aluminum pistons will expire very quickly if your timing isn't adjusted accordingly. You're dealing with tremendous pressures and one "knock" or pre-detonation can cave in a piston crown in no time at all.
Forged pistons are really about the first thing you would want to replace of your internals. The stock rods should take up to 7-8 psi boost without
failing. Now imagine the amount of horsepower created in racing engines running 18psi boost over ambient pressure... It boggles the mind...
06-23-2008, 04:23 PM
#111
really, I was also referring to the charts for different turbo models, getting a great setup with the info like you provided, and making it all work well, rather than "okay"
06-24-2008, 05:27 AM
#113
06-24-2008, 06:46 AM
#114
the goal is to fit more molecules of oxygen and gasoline into the combustion chamber, thereby creating more power.
Whether that is done by high compression and low boost or low compression and high boost doesn't matter. if you feed X amount of fuel and Y amount of air into the cylinder, it will make approx Z horsepower.
It's easier to run lower compression and more boost on most cars because you can still run crap fuel. running higher compression and turbo requires higher octane fuel all the time.
The higher compression also means more power and torque off boost and faster turbo spooling because the engine is pumping more air to move the impellers on the turbo faster.
Look at some of the turbo systems that are coming out nowadays on street cars. the BMW 335i runs something like 10.2:1 compression on a factory turbocharged engine, and does it very well. Factory compression on a VG30E is 9.5:1. factory for a VE is 10:1. so the BMW runs higher compression than either of these factory engines AND is turbo'd. I have a few friends that own them and say they're an absolute blast to drive- turbo lag is all but invisible. It's a matter of doing the math right in the design phase, not just lowering the compression and adding a turbo.
Whether that is done by high compression and low boost or low compression and high boost doesn't matter. if you feed X amount of fuel and Y amount of air into the cylinder, it will make approx Z horsepower.
It's easier to run lower compression and more boost on most cars because you can still run crap fuel. running higher compression and turbo requires higher octane fuel all the time.
The higher compression also means more power and torque off boost and faster turbo spooling because the engine is pumping more air to move the impellers on the turbo faster.
Look at some of the turbo systems that are coming out nowadays on street cars. the BMW 335i runs something like 10.2:1 compression on a factory turbocharged engine, and does it very well. Factory compression on a VG30E is 9.5:1. factory for a VE is 10:1. so the BMW runs higher compression than either of these factory engines AND is turbo'd. I have a few friends that own them and say they're an absolute blast to drive- turbo lag is all but invisible. It's a matter of doing the math right in the design phase, not just lowering the compression and adding a turbo.
06-24-2008, 12:58 PM
#115
Taking my Maxima to the Max!
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Alachua, FL 32615
Posts: 1,096
Factory compression on a VG30E is 9.5:1. factory for a VE is 10:1. so the BMW runs higher compression than either of these factory engines AND is turbo'd. I have a few friends that own them and say they're an absolute blast to drive- turbo lag is all but invisible. It's a matter of doing the math right in the design phase, not just lowering the compression and adding a turbo.
06-24-2008, 01:02 PM
#116
VE would rock the VG's world, as it does stock for stock.
better airflow through the heads due to DOHC as well as higher compression ratio.
the VE has 30HP more than the VG to begin with and the same torque ratings. VE has a much flatter torque curve w/ same overall torque. thus it's faster all around. adding boost to said engine, the VE will spool sooner and make more power than the VG given the same turbo and overall boost levels.
better airflow through the heads due to DOHC as well as higher compression ratio.
the VE has 30HP more than the VG to begin with and the same torque ratings. VE has a much flatter torque curve w/ same overall torque. thus it's faster all around. adding boost to said engine, the VE will spool sooner and make more power than the VG given the same turbo and overall boost levels.
06-24-2008, 01:15 PM
#117
VE would rock the VG's world, as it does stock for stock.
better airflow through the heads due to DOHC as well as higher compression ratio.
the VE has 30HP more than the VG to begin with and the same torque ratings. VE has a much flatter torque curve w/ same overall torque. thus it's faster all around. adding boost to said engine, the VE will spool sooner and make more power than the VG given the same turbo and overall boost levels.
better airflow through the heads due to DOHC as well as higher compression ratio.
the VE has 30HP more than the VG to begin with and the same torque ratings. VE has a much flatter torque curve w/ same overall torque. thus it's faster all around. adding boost to said engine, the VE will spool sooner and make more power than the VG given the same turbo and overall boost levels.
06-24-2008, 04:15 PM
#119
Taking my Maxima to the Max!
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Alachua, FL 32615
Posts: 1,096
VE would rock the VG's world, as it does stock for stock.
better airflow through the heads due to DOHC as well as higher compression ratio.
the VE has 30HP more than the VG to begin with and the same torque ratings. VE has a much flatter torque curve w/ same overall torque. thus it's faster all around. adding boost to said engine, the VE will spool sooner and make more power than the VG given the same turbo and overall boost levels.
better airflow through the heads due to DOHC as well as higher compression ratio.
the VE has 30HP more than the VG to begin with and the same torque ratings. VE has a much flatter torque curve w/ same overall torque. thus it's faster all around. adding boost to said engine, the VE will spool sooner and make more power than the VG given the same turbo and overall boost levels.
I happen to have a good low mileage VG (89k) in my '89 Max as well as a VE donor/parts car with good drivetrain, although it is higher miles (173k). So, if I go turbo soon would you recommend trying first with the VG and keeping the VE as a backup engine/swap, or should I just skip the VG turbo and build and turbo the VE and swap it in all at once? The VE car is a bit tired being a rebuilt car, so that's why I probably wouldn't just keep it in that car.
06-24-2008, 04:50 PM
#120
Well, that's good news!
I happen to have a good low mileage VG (89k) in my '89 Max as well as a VE donor/parts car with good drivetrain, although it is higher miles (173k). So, if I go turbo soon would you recommend trying first with the VG and keeping the VE as a backup engine/swap, or should I just skip the VG turbo and build and turbo the VE and swap it in all at once? The VE car is a bit tired being a rebuilt car, so that's why I probably wouldn't just keep it in that car.
I happen to have a good low mileage VG (89k) in my '89 Max as well as a VE donor/parts car with good drivetrain, although it is higher miles (173k). So, if I go turbo soon would you recommend trying first with the VG and keeping the VE as a backup engine/swap, or should I just skip the VG turbo and build and turbo the VE and swap it in all at once? The VE car is a bit tired being a rebuilt car, so that's why I probably wouldn't just keep it in that car.