Sr20det?
06-09-2004, 08:54 PM
#42
Originally Posted by maxima98vspec
i raced a g20 with a sr20det swap that was pushin a bar, and he was preaty slow....
06-10-2004, 07:47 AM
#45
I agree with spanishrice completely. Although the Mitsu 4G63 has been known to make over 450 WHP on stock internals. But that's neither here nor there.The only reason that the VQ hasn't seen 500 WHP or higher is not because the engine doesn't have potential. It's mainly due to the fact that most boosted ppl dont wanna shell out the $$$ for lower compression pistons and/or proper tuning. The stock compression ratio and ignition timing are the main problems. Most boosted maximas that have blown motors were detonation-related not because the internals couldn't handle the power. And there is a difference.
And please show me an SR20 that's making over 450 WHP without upgraded internals. You can't...
06-10-2004, 08:56 AM
#47
Originally Posted by spanishrice
One bar on a SR is probally like 250 whp. Maybe he running extremely rich or something was wrong with the engine or car. I doubt you would of beat him if everything was running right.
06-10-2004, 09:03 AM
#48
Supporting Maxima.org Member
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 621
[QUOTE=Eric425] Don't kid yourself, ALL non turbo, small displacement v6 are slow. QUOTE]
BMW M3? NSX?
BMW M3? NSX?
06-10-2004, 01:25 PM
#50
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 334
Originally Posted by spanishrice
Your retarded. How many I-4's can handle 450-500 whp on stock internals. I can only think of one with is the SRT-4 engine. That whole car was over enginered anyway. And you talking crap about the VQ. The VQ crank will never have to be replaced. Even though the VQ rods and pistons are kind of weak because this car was never designed to be a sports car. But Nissan uses the VQ in almost every car in their line-up. They use the VQ instead of the stout RB in Japanese Racing. It will also be in the new skyline, their super car. Their is nothing wrong with high compression, the fastest 350z uses high compression. 11:1:1 compression and 9 lbs of boost. The VQ30DET is known in Australia to hold 600 whp with stock internals. So shut your mouth. Just because people don't grag race a Maximas which is a grochery getter, doesn't mean that it has pontential. Theres only a few people on the board who even tried to spend the time and money to release the potential of ours Maximas. And turbo I4's don't have **** on a Turbo V6.
and High compression is **** for boost, period. Big boost + lower compression makes much more power than high compression and low boost. How much that 11:1 compression, most powerful 350z making? How much is the most powerful supra making? High compression can only be run with low boost due to predetonation problems. And high compression + low boost can't make as much power as low compression + high boost. This is so freaking basic.
And the VQ30det? Who the hell was talking about the DET you ********? The whole post was about N/A v6s. Turbo v6s have nothing to do with it.
The VQ30De does has potential, but it's very limited. Much less than a turbo 4 with all strong internals from the factory. If you're ever in WA, and you wanna run, PM me. Besides my maxima, I drive a h/c ls1, and my good friend has a heavily done STI. we'll even give you a 1000 ft head start. You can see for yourself how crappy a turbo 4 is compared to a godly 3.0 V6 soccer mom car.
M3? NSX? Trust a bunch of retarded kids with mommys grocery getter to think these are fast. First off, the 6 cyl in the M3 isn't a v6, it's an inline. These cars come pretty fast off the showroom floor, but their isn't much to do to them without going turbo. They're not power dragging kings either. Power is ALWAYS, ALWAYS, and forever will be a function of the amount of fuel being burned. Period. It's a physical impossibility for power to come from nothing. Yeah, advances in design have increased the efficiency with which this power is transfered and burned, but 100% efficiency is all that it could ever be. The amount of power you can get out of an engine will always have an absolute limit at the maximum power that can be extracted from the amount of fuel being burned. That is why it is a physical impossibilty for a small displacement, n/a 6 cylinders to be fast. A non turbo, small displacement v6 will never be fast. Never.
You yourself said that a turbo 4 won't match the potential of a turbo 6.
This is why. Given comparably strong components, a turbo 4 will not be able to burn as much fuel as a turbo 6 before suffering predetonation problems. A decently built turbo 4 is vastly superior to a little na v6 for the same reason. A turbo 4 has the potential to increase boost, and thereby increase the amount of fuel being burned.
And the SR has a big aftermarket. Plenty of ways to upgrade internals to hold more power.
You're obviously some dumbass kid who looked at a few car review websites, saw the maxima had good reliablity and almost 190 stock horsepower, without regard for overall potential. Now you want to pretend you're fast. OK. You want to keep thinking your ricer thoughts about how to make a little NA engine fast, go ahead.
Why don't you go put some more stickers on your 15 second ride? Maybe that'll do it. Be sure to rev that mighty little six popper at hondas at stop lights, just watch out for the turbo 4s.
06-10-2004, 02:34 PM
#52
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 334
Originally Posted by Jeff92se
Eric. "small displacement V6 will never be fast". I'll take that as "powerful". What is not powerful? 3 liters? 3.5 liters? 275hp? 300hp? is not that much power? Just trying to get an idea
Yeah, powerful. Well, I guess "small displacement" is relative. Powerful is also a relative term. A small displacement, non-turbo'd v6 will never be as powerful as a larger displacement or turbocharged car burning more fuel and operating on similar efficiency. Personally, I consider 400+ hp to be powerful, but there should always be a higher potential. If you set yourself and enough money to it, anything can be powerful. I respect you alot, and the same goes for the other guys like Jime, hlh, working hard to build up their car and making it fast, whatever it may be. As stated in the original post, I respect all the guys who actually go out there and put in work to make something truly unique. It's a great feat to take a car which isn't typically considered a power house machine and putting in the work to make it fast. But I just can't stand to see some teenager with a v6 going on about how crappy turbo 4's are, and having no respect towards the potential of anything else beyond the car they have in front of them. Kids buying a floaty FWD sedan with a v6 and thinking it's some powerful drag car go making fun of other vehicles with engines that are techically smaller, not realizing that they too are an underdog in terms of performance. I don't usually do name calling, which obviously doesn't strengthen my arguement, but I'm just a regular guy too. Maybe I'm getting to be a jerk. People say ls1 drivers usually are.
06-10-2004, 02:39 PM
#53
Newbie - Just Registered
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 12
yeah....
Doesn't the Renaultsport Clio V6 do 0-60 in about 5.8? Those are N/A aren't they? I'd have to say that's a pretty fast N/A V6, wouldn't you? I see stock numbers for 1/4 listed as 14.6, no doubt it wouldn't be too hard to drop it below 14, right? Not the fastest thing on the road, but it's still fast.
06-10-2004, 04:27 PM
#54
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 750
Not to cause any arguements but my VR6 equipt Jetta is running in the mid 13's N/A with stock internal's and just basic performace mod's. (Neuspeed chip, eurosport intake, catback exhaust) And it's only 175hp stock and 2.8 liters.
http://www.dubtechnik.com/Markglry/page1.html
http://www.dubtechnik.com/Markglry/page1.html
06-10-2004, 04:27 PM
#55
Originally Posted by Eric425
DSMs, EVOs, have all handled 450+ HP on stock internals. ANY engine is only as strong as it's weakest component you moron. How many people make forged internals for the VQ? I don't give a **** that the crank is strong. It doesn't matter. Even if you had an engine the strongest crank in the world, but rods that can't handle more than 50 hp, and nearly no way to replace those rods, then the rods will limit the power you can get out of it.
Originally Posted by Eric425
and High compression is **** for boost, period. Big boost + lower compression makes much more power than high compression and low boost. How much that 11:1 compression, most powerful 350z making? How much is the most powerful supra making? High compression can only be run with low boost due to predetonation problems. And high compression + low boost can't make as much power as low compression + high boost. This is so freaking basic.
Originally Posted by Eric425
And the VQ30det? Who the hell was talking about the DET you ********? The whole post was about N/A v6s. Turbo v6s have nothing to do with it.
Originally Posted by Eric425
The VQ30De does has potential, but it's very limited. Much less than a turbo 4 with all strong internals from the factory. If you're ever in WA, and you wanna run, PM me. Besides my maxima, I drive a h/c ls1, and my good friend has a heavily done STI. we'll even give you a 1000 ft head start. You can see for yourself how crappy a turbo 4 is compared to a godly 3.0 V6 soccer mom car.
Originally Posted by Eric425
M3? NSX? Trust a bunch of retarded kids with mommys grocery getter to think these are fast. First off, the 6 cyl in the M3 isn't a v6, it's an inline. These cars come pretty fast off the showroom floor, but their isn't much to do to them without going turbo. They're not power dragging kings either. Power is ALWAYS, ALWAYS, and forever will be a function of the amount of fuel being burned. Period. It's a physical impossibility for power to come from nothing. Yeah, advances in design have increased the efficiency with which this power is transfered and burned, but 100% efficiency is all that it could ever be. The amount of power you can get out of an engine will always have an absolute limit at the maximum power that can be extracted from the amount of fuel being burned. That is why it is a physical impossibilty for a small displacement, n/a 6 cylinders to be fast. A non turbo, small displacement v6 will never be fast. Never.
Originally Posted by Eric425
You yourself said that a turbo 4 won't match the potential of a turbo 6.
This is why. Given comparably strong components, a turbo 4 will not be able to burn as much fuel as a turbo 6 before suffering predetonation problems. A decently built turbo 4 is vastly superior to a little na v6 for the same reason. A turbo 4 has the potential to increase boost, and thereby increase the amount of fuel being burned.
And the SR has a big aftermarket. Plenty of ways to upgrade internals to hold more power.
You're obviously some dumbass kid who looked at a few car review websites, saw the maxima had good reliablity and almost 190 stock horsepower, without regard for overall potential. Now you want to pretend you're fast. OK. You want to keep thinking your ricer thoughts about how to make a little NA engine fast, go ahead.
Why don't you go put some more stickers on your 15 second ride? Maybe that'll do it. Be sure to rev that mighty little six popper at hondas at stop lights, just watch out for the turbo 4s.
This is why. Given comparably strong components, a turbo 4 will not be able to burn as much fuel as a turbo 6 before suffering predetonation problems. A decently built turbo 4 is vastly superior to a little na v6 for the same reason. A turbo 4 has the potential to increase boost, and thereby increase the amount of fuel being burned.
And the SR has a big aftermarket. Plenty of ways to upgrade internals to hold more power.
You're obviously some dumbass kid who looked at a few car review websites, saw the maxima had good reliablity and almost 190 stock horsepower, without regard for overall potential. Now you want to pretend you're fast. OK. You want to keep thinking your ricer thoughts about how to make a little NA engine fast, go ahead.
Why don't you go put some more stickers on your 15 second ride? Maybe that'll do it. Be sure to rev that mighty little six popper at hondas at stop lights, just watch out for the turbo 4s.
06-10-2004, 05:07 PM
#56
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,246
Originally Posted by spanishrice
One bar on a SR is probally like 250 whp. Maybe he running extremely rich or something was wrong with the engine or car. I doubt you would of beat him if everything was running right.
06-10-2004, 05:22 PM
#57
Donating Maxima.org Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 282
Originally Posted by maxima98vspec
i raced a g20 with a sr20det swap that was pushin a bar, and he was preaty slow....
Putting an SR20 in a A32 would be retarded. You should have bought a SE-R to begin with. Boost the VQ...much better option.
Sigh...i miss the SR motor tho...
06-10-2004, 05:27 PM
#58
Donating Maxima.org Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 282
Originally Posted by nostrixoxide
Not to cause any arguements but my VR6 equipt Jetta is running in the mid 13's N/A with stock internal's and just basic performace mod's. (Neuspeed chip, eurosport intake, catback exhaust) And it's only 175hp stock and 2.8 liters.
http://www.dubtechnik.com/Markglry/page1.html
http://www.dubtechnik.com/Markglry/page1.html
I can only fit 3 midgets in a jetta before it starts getting cramped
06-10-2004, 05:43 PM
#59
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 750
Well I guess it's a good thing I have a maxima too to fit a few extra midgets?
http://www.imagestation.com/mypictur...tion=front_low
http://www.imagestation.com/mypictur...tion=front_low
06-10-2004, 05:51 PM
#60
Donating Maxima.org Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 282
Hahaha 
its all fun and games until someone loses an eye or gets pregnant.
its all fun and games until someone loses an eye or gets pregnant.
06-10-2004, 07:59 PM
#61
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 334
Originally Posted by spanishrice
And you trying to say what. All those cars are made for boost from the factory.:
:[/QUOTE] 450 hp is only acomplished with excellent tuning. You said their is no way to replace the rods? Come to Houston and get some SGP pistons and rods. Just because the VQ has not had aftermarket rods and pistons for so many years because most young kids can't afford a maxima and can afford a small car. So they make aftermarket for the small cars. Now the 350z is out, we are going to have a huge engine aftermarket.:[/QUOTE]
You asked how many 4 cyls can make 450 hp. I showed you several examples. The reason the VQ hasn't had an aftermarket isn't because it's too expensive. There's an aftermarket for EVOs, STis, vettes, and many cars much more expensive than that. The reason there's not much of an aftermarket in the VQ is due to a lack of interest. Yeah, you can replace the rods in the VQ with enough money. Anybody can do anything with enough money. That's not what anybody is talking about.
:[/QUOTE] All depends on what you want. I didn't say the most powerful, I said the fastest 350z on record is using high compression. There is a 1500 hp VQ35 350z and a 1100 hp VQ35 350z so shut up. Depends on what kind of numbers you want with high compression. Higher compression gives you better torque. Also on diesal engines they can run 50-100 lbs. of boost on high compression. Now if you said unleaded gasoline engine, you make more sense.:[/QUOTE]
Then what are you talking about, if not power? What does ET have to do with anything then? I'm saying low compression and big boost is superior for big HP numbers than high compression and low boost. It stands regardless of octane. A low compression high octane with very high boost will make more than a high C and med boost with the same octane. I brought up the Z vs the Supra to make a point that you will make more power with low compression and high boost, vs the other way around. This is fact, and undeniable.
And don't bring up diesel engines. The properties of diesels are completely different, and can compares to these engines like a jet engines to window motors.
Also, the 1500 hp Z? Show some form of verifiable proof. If it exists, I doubt it's even nearly close to stock, and that's what potential is about. You can get a kia rio to run 8's, 9's if you throw enough money at it. But it doesn't mean it's got a lot of potential. Potential is all about power gains/cost ratio.
[/QUOTE]Why are you getting upset. I was comparing the 2. You spend 10,000 on both and you get the same results. So what, N/A v6 or Turbo I4:[/QUOTE]
I was comparing non turbo v6s to turbo 4's. A turbo v6 has nothing to do with it. It didn't make sense to bring it up, other than you have no arguement to defend low displacement NA engines and just wanted to hear yourself talk.
[/QUOTE]Why is the potential limited because no one has spent money to release its potential.[/QUOTE]
And why is nobody spending the money? No one is spending the money because it's not worth it to most. There are many other vehicles out there which can have greater power increases for substantially less money. Anything has "potential" in terms of money. Throw a 100 grand at a kia rio and you could have an 8 second car. By potential, I mean the gain/cost ratio. Of which, a turbo 4 will have much better than a non turbo 6.
[/QUOTE]Wow you want to race me in your H/C what that is LS1. Thats fair. When I get my turbo I might do that. And I will bring some friends. Ill bring my friend with a Nitrous Viper. Lets see how powerful your LS1 is. Not fair is it [/QUOTE]
What do you mean my "H/C what that is ls1"? You know what H/C stands for, right? Heads/cammed. It's not a car itself. LS1s have run high 12's stock, and many turbo'd maximas are still stuck in the 13's and 14's. H/C combined with a flowing i/e system have routinely given well over 200 hp without use of nitrous or FI. Let's see a v6 do that all motor. Also, I wasn't just showing off blatantly. The comment with the STI is what to focus on. The posts further up were talking about how crappy a turbo 4 is. I'm just saying, you want to find out for yourself, find an STI, EVO, DSM, SRT, hell, any turbo 4 board and you'll find there's plenty of 4 cyls that will run you. I'm driving a 400+ hp car, and I don't even talk **** about turbo'd 4s.
:[/QUOTE] never said anything about an M3. Get your **** straight. I am sure there is some 500-600 whp M3's N/A. NSX can be made extremely fast, I don't know what you are talking about. Most people don't spend money of NSX's because they are already expensive and buy them more because they can not afford a nice porshe. Which the 911 is a flat 6.:[/QUOTE]
The m3 and nsx stuff weren't about you. It was some other guy asking about them. Also, you will NOT find a 600 hp non turbo m3. Absolutely not a chance. I'll put the pink slip of my maxima on it. And don't start trying to bring up fast times. Power and speed are different things. Sport bikes with around 100 hp will run 11s, 10s, and much better. Doesn't mean they're powerful. Try to find a 500 hp non turbo, small displacement 6 cylinder. You wont.
To reiterate for any other ricer: This is not a discussion about speed! It's about power. And you will not find a powerful, non turbo, small displacement engine. Potential, when I refer to it being limited, means the gains/power ratio is not good in contrast to many turbo or high displacement. I'm in no way, stating that a VQ30de cannot be made very powerful. However, it cannot be done all motor and will involve more money. No n/a v6 will be powerful in relation to similiarly efficent, high displacement or turbo engines. Not now, and never will be....
06-10-2004, 09:06 PM
#62
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 343
Oh ok, so my pride and joy that I forked out $7,000 for is just a POS. Thanks. 
06-11-2004, 07:00 AM
#64
Why do you even post on there boards. Go **** off if your going to talk smack about the maxima. We don't need your **** talking around here. Why do you even post here if all your going to do is be negative.
06-11-2004, 07:05 AM
#65
Originally Posted by Eric425
Yeah, I know they're made for boost from the factory. We were talking about 4 cyls that come with boost from the factory vs regular 6 cylinders that aren't turbo'd.
:
:
You asked how many 4 cyls can make 450 hp. I showed you several examples. The reason the VQ hasn't had an aftermarket isn't because it's too expensive. There's an aftermarket for EVOs, STis, vettes, and many cars much more expensive than that. The reason there's not much of an aftermarket in the VQ is due to a lack of interest. Yeah, you can replace the rods in the VQ with enough money. Anybody can do anything with enough money. That's not what anybody is talking about.
:[/QUOTE] All depends on what you want. I didn't say the most powerful, I said the fastest 350z on record is using high compression. There is a 1500 hp VQ35 350z and a 1100 hp VQ35 350z so shut up. Depends on what kind of numbers you want with high compression. Higher compression gives you better torque. Also on diesal engines they can run 50-100 lbs. of boost on high compression. Now if you said unleaded gasoline engine, you make more sense.:[/QUOTE]
Then what are you talking about, if not power? What does ET have to do with anything then? I'm saying low compression and big boost is superior for big HP numbers than high compression and low boost. It stands regardless of octane. A low compression high octane with very high boost will make more than a high C and med boost with the same octane. I brought up the Z vs the Supra to make a point that you will make more power with low compression and high boost, vs the other way around. This is fact, and undeniable.
And don't bring up diesel engines. The properties of diesels are completely different, and can compares to these engines like a jet engines to window motors.
Also, the 1500 hp Z? Show some form of verifiable proof. If it exists, I doubt it's even nearly close to stock, and that's what potential is about. You can get a kia rio to run 8's, 9's if you throw enough money at it. But it doesn't mean it's got a lot of potential. Potential is all about power gains/cost ratio.
[/QUOTE]Why are you getting upset. I was comparing the 2. You spend 10,000 on both and you get the same results. So what, N/A v6 or Turbo I4:[/QUOTE]
I was comparing non turbo v6s to turbo 4's. A turbo v6 has nothing to do with it. It didn't make sense to bring it up, other than you have no arguement to defend low displacement NA engines and just wanted to hear yourself talk.
[/QUOTE]Why is the potential limited because no one has spent money to release its potential.[/QUOTE]
And why is nobody spending the money? No one is spending the money because it's not worth it to most. There are many other vehicles out there which can have greater power increases for substantially less money. Anything has "potential" in terms of money. Throw a 100 grand at a kia rio and you could have an 8 second car. By potential, I mean the gain/cost ratio. Of which, a turbo 4 will have much better than a non turbo 6.
[/QUOTE]Wow you want to race me in your H/C what that is LS1. Thats fair. When I get my turbo I might do that. And I will bring some friends. Ill bring my friend with a Nitrous Viper. Lets see how powerful your LS1 is. Not fair is it [/QUOTE]
What do you mean my "H/C what that is ls1"? You know what H/C stands for, right? Heads/cammed. It's not a car itself. LS1s have run high 12's stock, and many turbo'd maximas are still stuck in the 13's and 14's. H/C combined with a flowing i/e system have routinely given well over 200 hp without use of nitrous or FI. Let's see a v6 do that all motor. Also, I wasn't just showing off blatantly. The comment with the STI is what to focus on. The posts further up were talking about how crappy a turbo 4 is. I'm just saying, you want to find out for yourself, find an STI, EVO, DSM, SRT, hell, any turbo 4 board and you'll find there's plenty of 4 cyls that will run you. I'm driving a 400+ hp car, and I don't even talk **** about turbo'd 4s.
:[/QUOTE] never said anything about an M3. Get your **** straight. I am sure there is some 500-600 whp M3's N/A. NSX can be made extremely fast, I don't know what you are talking about. Most people don't spend money of NSX's because they are already expensive and buy them more because they can not afford a nice porshe. Which the 911 is a flat 6.:[/QUOTE]
The m3 and nsx stuff weren't about you. It was some other guy asking about them. Also, you will NOT find a 600 hp non turbo m3. Absolutely not a chance. I'll put the pink slip of my maxima on it. And don't start trying to bring up fast times. Power and speed are different things. Sport bikes with around 100 hp will run 11s, 10s, and much better. Doesn't mean they're powerful. Try to find a 500 hp non turbo, small displacement 6 cylinder. You wont.
To reiterate for any other ricer: This is not a discussion about speed! It's about power. And you will not find a powerful, non turbo, small displacement engine. Potential, when I refer to it being limited, means the gains/power ratio is not good in contrast to many turbo or high displacement. I'm in no way, stating that a VQ30de cannot be made very powerful. However, it cannot be done all motor and will involve more money. No n/a v6 will be powerful in relation to similiarly efficent, high displacement or turbo engines. Not now, and never will be....[/QUOTE]
Learn to use the internet. What is powerful to you? I can show you a 400 whp N/A VQ30DE. How do V8's and I4's all motor make power. They increase displacement. You won't see that many B16's going all motor. They increase the displacement to 2.0 liters or 2.2 liters. On your LS1, I don't know that much about on the all motor thing. LEt me look it up and get back to you.
06-11-2004, 07:12 AM
#66
So the fastest all-motor LS1 is 530 whp and 500 lbs. of torque, and it has been stroked to get that kind of power. I bet you a VQ35DE with the AEBS stroker kit, 12:1:1 compression or higher, cams, poted heads and custom manifold with bigger throttlebody, and some weight reduction would be on Par with that LS1 or even have more power. So shut the **** up.
http://www.aebsracing.com/products.p...ct=vq35stroker
Eat it *****, eat it!
LS1 6.0 liter stroked = 88 hp per liter
VQ 4.2 liter stroked = 126 hp per liter
530 hp fror both.
I would shut your mouth, and you can see which engine is more efficient.
http://www.aebsracing.com/products.p...ct=vq35stroker
Eat it *****, eat it!
LS1 6.0 liter stroked = 88 hp per liter
VQ 4.2 liter stroked = 126 hp per liter
530 hp fror both.
I would shut your mouth, and you can see which engine is more efficient.
06-11-2004, 07:04 PM
#68
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 334
Originally Posted by spanishrice
So the fastest all-motor LS1 is 530 whp and 500 lbs. of torque, and it has been stroked to get that kind of power. I bet you a VQ35DE with the AEBS stroker kit, 12:1:1 compression or higher, cams, poted heads and custom manifold with bigger throttlebody, and some weight reduction would be on Par with that LS1 or even have more power. So shut the **** up.
http://www.aebsracing.com/products.p...ct=vq35stroker
Eat it *****, eat it!
LS1 6.0 liter stroked = 88 hp per liter
VQ 4.2 liter stroked = 126 hp per liter
530 hp fror both.
I would shut your mouth, and you can see which engine is more efficient.
http://www.aebsracing.com/products.p...ct=vq35stroker
Eat it *****, eat it!
LS1 6.0 liter stroked = 88 hp per liter
VQ 4.2 liter stroked = 126 hp per liter
530 hp fror both.
I would shut your mouth, and you can see which engine is more efficient.
First off, I want to apologize to Spanishrice. I was being a real moron with the name calling and insults. Getting dragged down to ****ing at a kid online, that was pretty shameful. I'm real sorry about that. I also want to apologize to any maxima owner who thought I was making fun of their car. Hey, I'm also a maxima owner and I love it. You're happy with your car, and that's all that matters. It sure doesn't hurt me that somebody thinks he's fast, and it's no right of mine to try to take that. You like your car, than that's great.
But to make a few final notes, which I know I should resist....
The ls1 is a great motor. There's guys making more than 530 all motor. You said you looked up the fastest all motor ls1, right? I haven't checked the stats on that, but remember, we were talking about power, not speed. If you're interested, continue looking around a bit more at sites like ls1.com, ls1tech.com or camaroz28.com. There's a lot of surprisingly nice guys out there, and if you're interested, we'd welcome you. We make 300+ bone stock, a few freaks are making 320+, and mods really wake this thing up due to the large displacement. I really don't believe in hp/liter arguements. There's those little toy cars which proportionately make outrageous hp/liter. But to me, as long as the motor gets me 30mpg on the highway and over 300 horsepower to the wheels at the same time, I wouldn't care if it was a 300 liter engine, cause it'd just be a number to me.
I looked at that site you gave, but I didn't see a mention or anything about the stroker kit adding 300 wheel horsepower. That's amazing for stroking a 3.5 liter v6. Is there a dyno somewhere that I missed? If so, it's really a great feat of engineering.
Do you remember what we were originally discussing before it got dragged into a ****ing match? In case anybody doesn't, a guy said that a turbo 4 is crap, and cannot be as good as the v6. I tried to defend the other vehicle. Now, back to the topic of my first paragraph. For the aforementioned reasons, as a V8 driver, I apologize for insulting a v6, I also don't insult turbo 4s. Likewise, don't you think it's unjust for v6 owner to say that a turbo 4 is crap?
In fact, I know a good number which could run my car down like nothing. They've got terrific potential, since it's relatively easy to increase the fuel being burned by the artificial "displacement" that a turbo gives. Boost controllers, fuel and other supporting mods, bigger turbos, higher octane, and these guys are running great. I think they deserve respect too.
Even if you still think that a turbo 4 is crap, it's alright. You'll grow as you get older and experience more, different styles of cars. There's morons on the v8 boards who think that anything which isn't a v8 is crap. There's guys on the turbo boards who think anything that isn't a turbo is crap. There's honda guys who think anything that isn't a high revving honda is crap. I went from import, to turbo's, to american muscle, and I honestly say that I appreciate any good sports vehicle. But I'm sure I'll grow too. Take care.
06-11-2004, 07:29 PM
#69
Originally Posted by Eric425
First off, I want to apologize to Spanishrice. I was being a real moron with the name calling and insults. Getting dragged down to ****ing at a kid online, that was pretty shameful. I'm real sorry about that. I also want to apologize to any maxima owner who thought I was making fun of their car. Hey, I'm also a maxima owner and I love it. You're happy with your car, and that's all that matters. It sure doesn't hurt me that somebody thinks he's fast, and it's no right of mine to try to take that. You like your car, than that's great.
But to make a few final notes, which I know I should resist....
The ls1 is a great motor. There's guys making more than 530 all motor. You said you looked up the fastest all motor ls1, right? I haven't checked the stats on that, but remember, we were talking about power, not speed. If you're interested, continue looking around a bit more at sites like ls1.com, ls1tech.com or camaroz28.com. There's a lot of surprisingly nice guys out there, and if you're interested, we'd welcome you. We make 300+ bone stock, a few freaks are making 320+, and mods really wake this thing up due to the large displacement. I really don't believe in hp/liter arguements. There's those little toy cars which proportionately make outrageous hp/liter. But to me, as long as the motor gets me 30mpg on the highway and over 300 horsepower to the wheels at the same time, I wouldn't care if it was a 300 liter engine, cause it'd just be a number to me.
I looked at that site you gave, but I didn't see a mention or anything about the stroker kit adding 300 wheel horsepower. That's amazing for stroking a 3.5 liter v6. Is there a dyno somewhere that I missed? If so, it's really a great feat of engineering.
Do you remember what we were originally discussing before it got dragged into a ****ing match? In case anybody doesn't, a guy said that a turbo 4 is crap, and cannot be as good as the v6. I tried to defend the other vehicle. Now, back to the topic of my first paragraph. For the aforementioned reasons, as a V8 driver, I apologize for insulting a v6, I also don't insult turbo 4s. Likewise, don't you think it's unjust for v6 owner to say that a turbo 4 is crap?
In fact, I know a good number which could run my car down like nothing. They've got terrific potential, since it's relatively easy to increase the fuel being burned by the artificial "displacement" that a turbo gives. Boost controllers, fuel and other supporting mods, bigger turbos, higher octane, and these guys are running great. I think they deserve respect too.
Even if you still think that a turbo 4 is crap, it's alright. You'll grow as you get older and experience more, different styles of cars. There's morons on the v8 boards who think that anything which isn't a v8 is crap. There's guys on the turbo boards who think anything that isn't a turbo is crap. There's honda guys who think anything that isn't a high revving honda is crap. I went from import, to turbo's, to american muscle, and I honestly say that I appreciate any good sports vehicle. But I'm sure I'll grow too. Take care.
But to make a few final notes, which I know I should resist....
The ls1 is a great motor. There's guys making more than 530 all motor. You said you looked up the fastest all motor ls1, right? I haven't checked the stats on that, but remember, we were talking about power, not speed. If you're interested, continue looking around a bit more at sites like ls1.com, ls1tech.com or camaroz28.com. There's a lot of surprisingly nice guys out there, and if you're interested, we'd welcome you. We make 300+ bone stock, a few freaks are making 320+, and mods really wake this thing up due to the large displacement. I really don't believe in hp/liter arguements. There's those little toy cars which proportionately make outrageous hp/liter. But to me, as long as the motor gets me 30mpg on the highway and over 300 horsepower to the wheels at the same time, I wouldn't care if it was a 300 liter engine, cause it'd just be a number to me.
I looked at that site you gave, but I didn't see a mention or anything about the stroker kit adding 300 wheel horsepower. That's amazing for stroking a 3.5 liter v6. Is there a dyno somewhere that I missed? If so, it's really a great feat of engineering.
Do you remember what we were originally discussing before it got dragged into a ****ing match? In case anybody doesn't, a guy said that a turbo 4 is crap, and cannot be as good as the v6. I tried to defend the other vehicle. Now, back to the topic of my first paragraph. For the aforementioned reasons, as a V8 driver, I apologize for insulting a v6, I also don't insult turbo 4s. Likewise, don't you think it's unjust for v6 owner to say that a turbo 4 is crap?
In fact, I know a good number which could run my car down like nothing. They've got terrific potential, since it's relatively easy to increase the fuel being burned by the artificial "displacement" that a turbo gives. Boost controllers, fuel and other supporting mods, bigger turbos, higher octane, and these guys are running great. I think they deserve respect too.
Even if you still think that a turbo 4 is crap, it's alright. You'll grow as you get older and experience more, different styles of cars. There's morons on the v8 boards who think that anything which isn't a v8 is crap. There's guys on the turbo boards who think anything that isn't a turbo is crap. There's honda guys who think anything that isn't a high revving honda is crap. I went from import, to turbo's, to american muscle, and I honestly say that I appreciate any good sports vehicle. But I'm sure I'll grow too. Take care.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Dave B
4th Generation Maxima (1995-1999)
19
03-31-2002 12:03 PM