Engine swap...
01-14-2002, 04:13 PM
#41
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 637
I'm going to have to agree with Jeff on his post. Wow, if I could only understand half of what you guys are talking about that would be great. Maybe I'll have to read up on that book that was mentioned. So my next comment might not be the most intellectual in comparison to what has been said, but couldn't one lower the compression ratio back down to 10:1 or een 9:1 by using a thicker head gasket? That way with this lower compression ratio of a theoretical 9:1, it would still be possible to have and use a supercharger on a 4th or 5th gen vq engine. Maybe this "mod" of stroking and boring would be a "better" choice for those who have a 5th gen because they already have the variable volume intake manifold.
01-14-2002, 04:18 PM
#42
Well for one, aftermarket head gaskets are not available beyond the custom route. And depending on the thickness of the gasket, it might change the cam/crank timing. ie.. if you increase the engine height(with a thicker gasket) you change the chain length between the cams/crank. I don't know how one deals with that or if it's even a factor. I've seen thick gaskets on turbo SC300s from Toyomoto. But I've never discussed/read on how they keep the same cam/crank timing relationship.
Originally posted by Keh mon
I'm going to have to agree with Jeff on his post. Wow, if I could only understand half of what you guys are talking about that would be great. Maybe I'll have to read up on that book that was mentioned. So my next comment might not be the most intellectual in comparison to what has been said, but couldn't one lower the compression ratio back down to 10:1 or een 9:1 by using a thicker head gasket? That way with this lower compression ratio of a theoretical 9:1, it would still be possible to have and use a supercharger on a 4th or 5th gen vq engine. Maybe this "mod" of stroking and boring would be a "better" choice for those who have a 5th gen because they already have the variable volume intake manifold.
I'm going to have to agree with Jeff on his post. Wow, if I could only understand half of what you guys are talking about that would be great. Maybe I'll have to read up on that book that was mentioned. So my next comment might not be the most intellectual in comparison to what has been said, but couldn't one lower the compression ratio back down to 10:1 or een 9:1 by using a thicker head gasket? That way with this lower compression ratio of a theoretical 9:1, it would still be possible to have and use a supercharger on a 4th or 5th gen vq engine. Maybe this "mod" of stroking and boring would be a "better" choice for those who have a 5th gen because they already have the variable volume intake manifold.
01-15-2002, 06:45 AM
#43
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,018
Hate to bump this thread back up...
But I just thought of where to get lower compression pistons for the VQ. I bet that the JDM turbo VQs have them. I mean, they're basically our 190hp 3-liter VQs making at least 276hp on boost. That's gotta require a substantial amount of boost, and therefore, a lower compression ratio. Only thing is, who's gonna shell out the $$$ to get 'em?
01-15-2002, 07:17 AM
#45
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 839
any update??? because if this can be done, and also the turbo project... my gosh... anyone wants to race a corvette? hehe.. 
Originally posted by 95emeraldgxe
i cant wait to read about people doing this in real life later on this year!!!!!!
i cant wait to read about people doing this in real life later on this year!!!!!!
01-15-2002, 07:44 AM
#46
VQ33DE, Cams and cranking pressure
Any speculation on what the VQ33DE would look like with the stock cams but running higher octane gasoline (93-94 octane). I guess the question is, would the higher octane help enough to prevent knock, and if so, what would torque and HP look like.
It sounds to me like you're saying new cams = no knock, some torque, tons of HP up high. Would stock cams mean risk of knock, more torque, not as much HP up high?
I'd guess you'd want something like those 300ZX NA fuel injectors and JWT ECU or Unichip to feed this thing as well. Could either of those ECUs be used to trigger the manifold runner switch?
300HP NA on a FWD car is pretty amazing to consider.
It sounds to me like you're saying new cams = no knock, some torque, tons of HP up high. Would stock cams mean risk of knock, more torque, not as much HP up high?
I'd guess you'd want something like those 300ZX NA fuel injectors and JWT ECU or Unichip to feed this thing as well. Could either of those ECUs be used to trigger the manifold runner switch?
300HP NA on a FWD car is pretty amazing to consider.
Originally posted by Keven97SE
...
Also, I would personally argue that you should KEEP the 11:1 CR and instead have custom camshafts ground, albeit at exorbitant cost ($2000+ I'd guestimate). The cams would have increased duration and overlap. This increased overlap would decrease the dynamic compression of the motor by decreasing combustion chamber pressures and would thereby decreasing the tendancy to knock. It would also allow the motor to breathe better at higher rpms. I would also argue that the UK/middle east or 5th gen variable volume intake manifold be installed to further increase high-rpm breathability.
The combined effect of the 3.3L displacement, increased CR, hotter cams, and variable volume intake manifold would give a nice increase in torque and an even more substantial increase in HP.
More details:
I had to dig this up from around a year ago, but I actually did a full-blown cranking pressure vs. V/P index spreadsheet calculation on this exact upgrade. To maintain the same the same cranking pressure on a 11:1 VQ33DE as the stock VQ30DE, you'd have to add 18-19 degrees duration to the intake valve closure, ie add that much intake valve timing duration. This acts as a sort of pressure vent to the combustion chamber to keep temperatures down and hence increase knock resistance. At 18-19 degrees, you'd have the same knock resistance as the stock VQ30DE motor (same cranking pressure). The increased duration hurts torque over what the stock cams would provide on a "VQ33DE", but would still yield roughly a 5% increase in torque over a VQ30DE. The increase in high-rpm breathability with the almost 20 degrees increased intake duration would give a huge increase in HP, though, but only when coupled to an intake manifold that was correspondingly designed for the higher rpm flow, ie the variable volume intake manifold.
...
...
Also, I would personally argue that you should KEEP the 11:1 CR and instead have custom camshafts ground, albeit at exorbitant cost ($2000+ I'd guestimate). The cams would have increased duration and overlap. This increased overlap would decrease the dynamic compression of the motor by decreasing combustion chamber pressures and would thereby decreasing the tendancy to knock. It would also allow the motor to breathe better at higher rpms. I would also argue that the UK/middle east or 5th gen variable volume intake manifold be installed to further increase high-rpm breathability.
The combined effect of the 3.3L displacement, increased CR, hotter cams, and variable volume intake manifold would give a nice increase in torque and an even more substantial increase in HP.
More details:
I had to dig this up from around a year ago, but I actually did a full-blown cranking pressure vs. V/P index spreadsheet calculation on this exact upgrade. To maintain the same the same cranking pressure on a 11:1 VQ33DE as the stock VQ30DE, you'd have to add 18-19 degrees duration to the intake valve closure, ie add that much intake valve timing duration. This acts as a sort of pressure vent to the combustion chamber to keep temperatures down and hence increase knock resistance. At 18-19 degrees, you'd have the same knock resistance as the stock VQ30DE motor (same cranking pressure). The increased duration hurts torque over what the stock cams would provide on a "VQ33DE", but would still yield roughly a 5% increase in torque over a VQ30DE. The increase in high-rpm breathability with the almost 20 degrees increased intake duration would give a huge increase in HP, though, but only when coupled to an intake manifold that was correspondingly designed for the higher rpm flow, ie the variable volume intake manifold.
...
, have you priced the 3.5L crank and rods from the dealer yet?
01-15-2002, 10:01 AM
#49
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 637
Originally posted by MardiGrasMax
Costs...
$533 for the 3.5L crank
$75.15 per rod = 450.09
Total 983.90
Costs...
$533 for the 3.5L crank
$75.15 per rod = 450.09
Total 983.90
This is all sounding very nice. The ECU and getting the timing correct, etc might be the hardest part of all of this though. I wish I knew a lot more about engines to help figure all of this out.
01-15-2002, 11:07 AM
#50
OK, the wheels are turning...
If you would get 11:1 CR with the 3.5 crank and rods in a 3.0 block with 3.0 pistons, would is be safe to assume that using just the shorter 3.5 rods in a 3.0 motor would produce a lower compression ratio, mabye 9:1 for use with boost?
Hmmmm anyone know how to calculate this, I need a dam car math book sooooo bad!
I would also assume that you would loose low end power but gain high rpm power?
If you would get 11:1 CR with the 3.5 crank and rods in a 3.0 block with 3.0 pistons, would is be safe to assume that using just the shorter 3.5 rods in a 3.0 motor would produce a lower compression ratio, mabye 9:1 for use with boost?
Hmmmm anyone know how to calculate this, I need a dam car math book sooooo bad!
I would also assume that you would loose low end power but gain high rpm power?
01-15-2002, 11:29 AM
#51
Mardi, you need to calculate the compression ratios for each combination. It includes the cylinder bore, rod stroke, piston rod hole height, ring depth, combustion chamber cc size etc.. It's not that hard. I did all this when trying to make a turbo L20B for my ol'e Datsun 510.
I'll go out on a limb and assume you can use the 3.5L rods and the Cima turbo pistons or Arias, JE, etc.. If you really want to use the 3.5 rods, I guess you could either get custom pistons done(forged) or see if on the the factoy Nissan turbo pistons work out. ie.. 300z, cima or maybe even Sr20, 200sx-t or any one of the factory Nissan units. I would want to use at least a factory turbo piston to make sure it can hold the psi you are thinking of. Now the question is how strong are the 3.5L rods? Or maybe use the crank(probably stong enough) and then use the 300z turbo rods/pistons. But offhand, that would really up the compression if the crank throw is longer than the piston ring height reduction of the turbo pistons. It would be nice to use the 3.5L short or even better the longblock and maybe stuff it with 300z rods and custom forged pistons. That should get you where you need to be. But again you have to see if the 3.5L block is decently strong. If they used the same deck height and just punched out the bores to accept the bigger steel sleeves, the block thickness might be too thin. Would be nice if someone could take one apart.
What you have to do is get the equation going and juggle the components to see what you can do compression ratio-wise.
I'll go out on a limb and assume you can use the 3.5L rods and the Cima turbo pistons or Arias, JE, etc.. If you really want to use the 3.5 rods, I guess you could either get custom pistons done(forged) or see if on the the factoy Nissan turbo pistons work out. ie.. 300z, cima or maybe even Sr20, 200sx-t or any one of the factory Nissan units. I would want to use at least a factory turbo piston to make sure it can hold the psi you are thinking of. Now the question is how strong are the 3.5L rods? Or maybe use the crank(probably stong enough) and then use the 300z turbo rods/pistons. But offhand, that would really up the compression if the crank throw is longer than the piston ring height reduction of the turbo pistons. It would be nice to use the 3.5L short or even better the longblock and maybe stuff it with 300z rods and custom forged pistons. That should get you where you need to be. But again you have to see if the 3.5L block is decently strong. If they used the same deck height and just punched out the bores to accept the bigger steel sleeves, the block thickness might be too thin. Would be nice if someone could take one apart.
What you have to do is get the equation going and juggle the components to see what you can do compression ratio-wise.
Originally posted by MardiGrasMax
OK, the wheels are turning...
If you would get 11:1 CR with the 3.5 crank and rods in a 3.0 block with 3.0 pistons, would is be safe to assume that using just the shorter 3.5 rods in a 3.0 motor would produce a lower compression ratio, mabye 9:1 for use with boost?
Hmmmm anyone know how to calculate this, I need a dam car math book sooooo bad!
I would also assume that you would loose low end power but gain high rpm power?
OK, the wheels are turning...
If you would get 11:1 CR with the 3.5 crank and rods in a 3.0 block with 3.0 pistons, would is be safe to assume that using just the shorter 3.5 rods in a 3.0 motor would produce a lower compression ratio, mabye 9:1 for use with boost?
Hmmmm anyone know how to calculate this, I need a dam car math book sooooo bad!
I would also assume that you would loose low end power but gain high rpm power?
01-15-2002, 11:45 AM
#52
Guest
Posts: n/a
You're C/R would be way low. VQ30DE stroke is 73mm, 35DE is 81mm. That implies that the rods must be 4mm shorter (half the stroke change). I just calculated that the new C/R would only be 7.2. The car would drive like a pig until spooled up.
Originally posted by MardiGrasMax
OK, the wheels are turning...
If you would get 11:1 CR with the 3.5 crank and rods in a 3.0 block with 3.0 pistons, would is be safe to assume that using just the shorter 3.5 rods in a 3.0 motor would produce a lower compression ratio, mabye 9:1 for use with boost?
Hmmmm anyone know how to calculate this, I need a dam car math book sooooo bad!
I would also assume that you would loose low end power but gain high rpm power?
OK, the wheels are turning...
If you would get 11:1 CR with the 3.5 crank and rods in a 3.0 block with 3.0 pistons, would is be safe to assume that using just the shorter 3.5 rods in a 3.0 motor would produce a lower compression ratio, mabye 9:1 for use with boost?
Hmmmm anyone know how to calculate this, I need a dam car math book sooooo bad!
I would also assume that you would loose low end power but gain high rpm power?
01-15-2002, 12:05 PM
#53
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: VQ33DE, Cams and cranking pressure
Yes, you likely could use the stock cams along with the VQ35DE crank+rods and the correspondingly high 11:1 C/R, but you'd almost definitely have to use higher octane gas. Maybe the So. California guys with 100 octane pump gas available will be okay, but the rest of us are screwed.
You could get custom pistons to reduce the compression ratio back to 10:1. Problem would be instantly solved. HOWEVER, I think that would do your new engine a great disservice. You would not be able to get the maximum oomph out of the engine. It would still have the same high rpm performance as your current VQ30DE. That is, it'd run out of breath past 5000 rpm. Sure, the variable intake manifold (from the UK/mideast/New Zealand factory 4th gens) would reduce the torque falloff, but the motor would still not make the torque, hence HP, that I would personally want at 6000+ rpms.
What I'm suggesting is that custom cams would not only combat the detonation from the 11:1 C/R but would also extend the motor's high-rpm breathing to substantially increase HP well above what a simple 3.0-to-3.3L bump would do.
Understand that there's a difference between the STATIC compression ratio and the DYNAMIC compression ratio. The static # is the old, traditional value you here, in this case 11:1 for our "VQ33DE". The dynamic compression ratio, however, is what is ultimately going to determine how much torque you make and the pressure (and therefore temperature) of the combustion chamber. Dynamic C/R is what the engine ultimately "sees".
Think about a rotating engine, beginning with the intake stroke. The piston is going down and the intake valve is open. The engine is sucking in air. On a modern tuned engine, the intake valve doesn't close right when the piston reaches bottom dead center (BDC). It stays open awhile as the piston starts to move up (the compression stroke). It does this to aid in higher rpm breathing. On the 4th gen, the intake valve closes at 49deg ABDC (after BDC). This means the piston has already gone more than 1/4-way up from BDC in it's compression stroke before the intake valve closes. When the intake valve closes late like this, it has an impact on the pressure inside the cylinder. During this time when the intake valve is still open as the piston is travelling up, at really low rpms, the intake charge that just came in very easily just goes back out the intake port. This essentially "vents" the cylinder. You ultimately get some effective C/R, a dynamic C/R, that is less than the static value. While this reduction of charge pressure is bad from the aspect of "you're not getting all you can inside" it's good from the aspect of detonation control. If you reduce cylinder pressures, you reduce temperatures and hence reduce the tendancy to detonate.
On our VQ33DE engine with a 11:1 static C/R, we could use a later intake valve closure to reduce the dynamic C/R enough to prevent detonation. My calculation shows that you can still get a little more torque (5%) out of a VQ33DE than a VQ30DE even at a fairly radical 18 degrees later intake closure. What is really good about this setup is that the closure of the intake valve by-in-large dictates the peak torque rpm of the engine. A later intake valve closure like I'm proposing shifts the peak torque rpm up to a higher rpm. When you do this, you make more HP. I don't have the specifics, but adding 18 degrees to the intake valve closure would easily add 750 rpms to the peak torque rpm, probably more like 1000+ rpms. Instead of my VQ30DE peaking at ~4500, it would peak at around 5500. With the right intake manifold (the variable one), peak HP would likely shift from ~6400 (the mideast/UK/NZ variable manifold-equipped 4th gen peak rpm) to ~7400. That shift alone would give a ((7400-6400)/6400) 15% increase in HP. A fully modded N/A variable intake-equipped VQ30DE probably makes ~245 HP. For my VQ33DE, you'd see a 5% increase in peak torque plus another 15% HP, and you have roughly a (245*1.05*1.15)
***295 HP motor***
That's my calculated guess.
Wow, another honkin long post by me. Eeek.
You could get custom pistons to reduce the compression ratio back to 10:1. Problem would be instantly solved. HOWEVER, I think that would do your new engine a great disservice. You would not be able to get the maximum oomph out of the engine. It would still have the same high rpm performance as your current VQ30DE. That is, it'd run out of breath past 5000 rpm. Sure, the variable intake manifold (from the UK/mideast/New Zealand factory 4th gens) would reduce the torque falloff, but the motor would still not make the torque, hence HP, that I would personally want at 6000+ rpms.
What I'm suggesting is that custom cams would not only combat the detonation from the 11:1 C/R but would also extend the motor's high-rpm breathing to substantially increase HP well above what a simple 3.0-to-3.3L bump would do.
Understand that there's a difference between the STATIC compression ratio and the DYNAMIC compression ratio. The static # is the old, traditional value you here, in this case 11:1 for our "VQ33DE". The dynamic compression ratio, however, is what is ultimately going to determine how much torque you make and the pressure (and therefore temperature) of the combustion chamber. Dynamic C/R is what the engine ultimately "sees".
Think about a rotating engine, beginning with the intake stroke. The piston is going down and the intake valve is open. The engine is sucking in air. On a modern tuned engine, the intake valve doesn't close right when the piston reaches bottom dead center (BDC). It stays open awhile as the piston starts to move up (the compression stroke). It does this to aid in higher rpm breathing. On the 4th gen, the intake valve closes at 49deg ABDC (after BDC). This means the piston has already gone more than 1/4-way up from BDC in it's compression stroke before the intake valve closes. When the intake valve closes late like this, it has an impact on the pressure inside the cylinder. During this time when the intake valve is still open as the piston is travelling up, at really low rpms, the intake charge that just came in very easily just goes back out the intake port. This essentially "vents" the cylinder. You ultimately get some effective C/R, a dynamic C/R, that is less than the static value. While this reduction of charge pressure is bad from the aspect of "you're not getting all you can inside" it's good from the aspect of detonation control. If you reduce cylinder pressures, you reduce temperatures and hence reduce the tendancy to detonate.
On our VQ33DE engine with a 11:1 static C/R, we could use a later intake valve closure to reduce the dynamic C/R enough to prevent detonation. My calculation shows that you can still get a little more torque (5%) out of a VQ33DE than a VQ30DE even at a fairly radical 18 degrees later intake closure. What is really good about this setup is that the closure of the intake valve by-in-large dictates the peak torque rpm of the engine. A later intake valve closure like I'm proposing shifts the peak torque rpm up to a higher rpm. When you do this, you make more HP. I don't have the specifics, but adding 18 degrees to the intake valve closure would easily add 750 rpms to the peak torque rpm, probably more like 1000+ rpms. Instead of my VQ30DE peaking at ~4500, it would peak at around 5500. With the right intake manifold (the variable one), peak HP would likely shift from ~6400 (the mideast/UK/NZ variable manifold-equipped 4th gen peak rpm) to ~7400. That shift alone would give a ((7400-6400)/6400) 15% increase in HP. A fully modded N/A variable intake-equipped VQ30DE probably makes ~245 HP. For my VQ33DE, you'd see a 5% increase in peak torque plus another 15% HP, and you have roughly a (245*1.05*1.15)
***295 HP motor***
That's my calculated guess.
Wow, another honkin long post by me. Eeek.
Originally posted by philpoe
Any speculation on what the VQ33DE would look like with the stock cams but running higher octane gasoline (93-94 octane). I guess the question is, would the higher octane help enough to prevent knock, and if so, what would torque and HP look like.
It sounds to me like you're saying new cams = no knock, some torque, tons of HP up high. Would stock cams mean risk of knock, more torque, not as much HP up high?
I'd guess you'd want something like those 300ZX NA fuel injectors and JWT ECU or Unichip to feed this thing as well. Could either of those ECUs be used to trigger the manifold runner switch?
300HP NA on a FWD car is pretty amazing to consider.
Any speculation on what the VQ33DE would look like with the stock cams but running higher octane gasoline (93-94 octane). I guess the question is, would the higher octane help enough to prevent knock, and if so, what would torque and HP look like.
It sounds to me like you're saying new cams = no knock, some torque, tons of HP up high. Would stock cams mean risk of knock, more torque, not as much HP up high?
I'd guess you'd want something like those 300ZX NA fuel injectors and JWT ECU or Unichip to feed this thing as well. Could either of those ECUs be used to trigger the manifold runner switch?
300HP NA on a FWD car is pretty amazing to consider.
01-15-2002, 01:59 PM
#56
Guest
Posts: n/a
Not a book, but a link. This site is where I got all the info I needed to build my own VQ configuration spreadsheet. This link is incredibly informative. Everything is explained very well.
http://victorylibrary.com/mopar/cam-tech-c.htm
If you understand all this stuff, I can email you my spreadsheet. You can take a look at the different motor configurations and tweak with the factors to get different outcomes. It's an intersting thing to tweak with if you understand it. Just let me know.
http://victorylibrary.com/mopar/cam-tech-c.htm
If you understand all this stuff, I can email you my spreadsheet. You can take a look at the different motor configurations and tweak with the factors to get different outcomes. It's an intersting thing to tweak with if you understand it. Just let me know.
Originally posted by MardiGrasMax
Kev, can you recomend s good book on this sublect?
Kev, can you recomend s good book on this sublect?
01-15-2002, 04:00 PM
#58
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 347
Originally posted by axion
But here's the thing...say u got a lot of miles on your max, so do an engine swap, hopefully you'll be good to go. And THEN supercharge THAT! 60 HP + however much you get from the super, that's quite a bit. Well, if this is possible, who would be able to do it?
But here's the thing...say u got a lot of miles on your max, so do an engine swap, hopefully you'll be good to go. And THEN supercharge THAT! 60 HP + however much you get from the super, that's quite a bit. Well, if this is possible, who would be able to do it?
!!!
01-15-2002, 04:23 PM
#60
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 21
engine swap
Ok but instead of bolting on the supercharger onto 190 hp wouldn't be nicer to bolt it onto 222 hp. hwo says a engine swap is totally aout of reach. who says it cost 5000. y cant you just turn your vq into the awe inspiring vq35de. a few changes here and there is all you need. it really cant be that complcated i have a thread in here somewha=ere about this very question, but, im going to do it with the help of all of you guys input. There is a lot of smart people on this club site.
01-16-2002, 09:39 PM
#61
01-17-2002, 02:23 AM
#62
Honda Convert!
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Columbia, Maryland
Posts: 1,497
By the way guys didnt really read this thread to well but Je is custom making me 8.5:1 pistons for 790 for a full set of six. So if anyone has any questions just write me an email at chessieone@yahoo.com
Bruce
Bruce
01-17-2002, 09:23 AM
#63
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 544
Originally posted by papasmurf
By the way guys didnt really read this thread to well but Je is custom making me 8.5:1 pistons for 790 for a full set of six. So if anyone has any questions just write me an email at chessieone@yahoo.com
Bruce
By the way guys didnt really read this thread to well but Je is custom making me 8.5:1 pistons for 790 for a full set of six. So if anyone has any questions just write me an email at chessieone@yahoo.com
Bruce
01-17-2002, 10:27 PM
#64
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 637
Re: Follow me!
Originally posted by MardiGrasMax
http://forums.maxima.org/showthread.php?threadid=91790
http://forums.maxima.org/showthread.php?threadid=91790
05-09-2002, 02:03 PM
#65
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally posted by Jeff92se
Okay spend about $3,500 to $5000 for an engine swap and you yield 260hp? Not a very good way to gain hp to me. I would just bolt on a super charger for the 190hp engine and go to town. Kit costs less then $4,000? And some of these guys are getting pretty massive hp.
DA MAX! I'm at it again!
Okay spend about $3,500 to $5000 for an engine swap and you yield 260hp? Not a very good way to gain hp to me. I would just bolt on a super charger for the 190hp engine and go to town. Kit costs less then $4,000? And some of these guys are getting pretty massive hp.
DA MAX! I'm at it again!
05-09-2002, 02:07 PM
#66
Power to weight? Wha? The new VQ3.5s are lighter than a VQ30 w/ a supercharger??
What bunches of Stillen power for the 3.5VQ? Ain't nuttin' available from them yet that gives any significant power. If and that's one big "IF", they do a sc for the new VQ, then your talkin'. IF that combo will fit into a 4-gen that is.
What bunches of Stillen power for the 3.5VQ? Ain't nuttin' available from them yet that gives any significant power. If and that's one big "IF", they do a sc for the new VQ, then your talkin'. IF that combo will fit into a 4-gen that is.
Originally posted by Maxima06071
Talkin' power to weight. Also, you swap the engine then mod it it's the same thing the honduh boyz do. 255hp+ Stillen= bunches o' HP.
Talkin' power to weight. Also, you swap the engine then mod it it's the same thing the honduh boyz do. 255hp+ Stillen= bunches o' HP.
05-09-2002, 02:20 PM
#67
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 544
Originally posted by Jeff92se
Power to weight? Wha? The new VQ3.5s are lighter than a VQ30 w/ a supercharger??
What bunches of Stillen power for the 3.5VQ? Ain't nuttin' available from them yet that gives any significant power. If and that's one big "IF", they do a sc for the new VQ, then your talkin'. IF that combo will fit into a 4-gen that is.
Power to weight? Wha? The new VQ3.5s are lighter than a VQ30 w/ a supercharger??
What bunches of Stillen power for the 3.5VQ? Ain't nuttin' available from them yet that gives any significant power. If and that's one big "IF", they do a sc for the new VQ, then your talkin'. IF that combo will fit into a 4-gen that is.
-pete
05-09-2002, 02:31 PM
#68
I think it would take much more than 5 grand to have one of the faster Z's in the NE or westcoast. I would say it would probably take 550-650hp to play with those older Z boys. Take your pick of engines, turbo rotaries, V8s, turbo inline 6 L28 motors, TT supra motors, single turbo V6s, TTZ32 motors etc....
Those guys don't play!
Those guys don't play!
Originally posted by MaxSE98
for that much dough u could buy and insure a 70's Z theres a wealth of modifications for them and you can keep the maxima too. man if i had 5 grand to dump id probably end up with one of the fastest Z's in the northeast and id still have the maxi to play with
-pete
for that much dough u could buy and insure a 70's Z theres a wealth of modifications for them and you can keep the maxima too. man if i had 5 grand to dump id probably end up with one of the fastest Z's in the northeast and id still have the maxi to play with
-pete
05-09-2002, 02:43 PM
#69
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 544
Originally posted by Jeff92se
I think it would take much more than 5 grand to have one of the faster Z's in the NE or westcoast. I would say it would probably take 550-650hp to play with those older Z boys. Take your pick of engines, turbo rotaries, V8s, turbo inline 6 L28 motors, TT supra motors, single turbo V6s, TTZ32 motors etc....
Those guys don't play!
I think it would take much more than 5 grand to have one of the faster Z's in the NE or westcoast. I would say it would probably take 550-650hp to play with those older Z boys. Take your pick of engines, turbo rotaries, V8s, turbo inline 6 L28 motors, TT supra motors, single turbo V6s, TTZ32 motors etc....
Those guys don't play!
05-09-2002, 02:48 PM
#70
What does those V8 conversions do to the handling??
Anyway, yeah my mechanic's buddy had their Z in the shop w/ the Toyota 4x4 calipers. Nice mod! You only have to replace the booster? I mean don't you have to replace the master cylinder also? (ie.. 280zx unit)?
I had 280zx brakes on my 510. hehe. But I used the stock brake MC. Travel was a bit more.
Anyway, yeah my mechanic's buddy had their Z in the shop w/ the Toyota 4x4 calipers. Nice mod! You only have to replace the booster? I mean don't you have to replace the master cylinder also? (ie.. 280zx unit)?
I had 280zx brakes on my 510. hehe. But I used the stock brake MC. Travel was a bit more.
Originally posted by MaxSE98
i know they dont play , i got my Z for 2000, its a 72 240z, with 3000 i could do suspension (bushings struts springs) for 600 brakes (300zx rotors toyota 4x4 calipers upgraded brake booster) for 375 that leave me with 2025. 1500 to buy my friends dads built 350 (fairly built crazy cam) tpi manifold would be around 200 - 225. a muncie 4 speed would be about 500 so that puts me just over 5000. then id have to get the driveshaft cut and id need the JTR swap kit 450 i think and a gm radiator plus electric fan. so thats around 6000. fuel lines and other misc stuff 500. so say 6500. i do all my work myself so a lil over but not by much. or i could just buy a 20b and a dawes device boost controller and call it a day lol
i know they dont play , i got my Z for 2000, its a 72 240z, with 3000 i could do suspension (bushings struts springs) for 600 brakes (300zx rotors toyota 4x4 calipers upgraded brake booster) for 375 that leave me with 2025. 1500 to buy my friends dads built 350 (fairly built crazy cam) tpi manifold would be around 200 - 225. a muncie 4 speed would be about 500 so that puts me just over 5000. then id have to get the driveshaft cut and id need the JTR swap kit 450 i think and a gm radiator plus electric fan. so thats around 6000. fuel lines and other misc stuff 500. so say 6500. i do all my work myself so a lil over but not by much. or i could just buy a 20b and a dawes device boost controller and call it a day lol
05-09-2002, 02:56 PM
#71
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 544
Originally posted by Jeff92se
What does those V8 conversions do to the handling??
Anyway, yeah my mechanic's buddy had their Z in the shop w/ the Toyota 4x4 calipers. Nice mod! You only have to replace the booster? I mean don't you have to replace the master cylinder also? (ie.. 280zx unit)?
I had 280zx brakes on my 510. hehe. But I used the stock brake MC. Travel was a bit more.
What does those V8 conversions do to the handling??
Anyway, yeah my mechanic's buddy had their Z in the shop w/ the Toyota 4x4 calipers. Nice mod! You only have to replace the booster? I mean don't you have to replace the master cylinder also? (ie.. 280zx unit)?
I had 280zx brakes on my 510. hehe. But I used the stock brake MC. Travel was a bit more.
12-22-2002, 10:15 AM
#72
Great thread
A few known factors
Block deck height is the same.
Wrist pins are the same diameters.
Crankshaft main's are the same.
Elbow room, I will know that in a few weeks...
Also the 3.5L cylinder head intake ports are differnts than the 3.0L's, major port matching will be needed, its doable though.
A few known factors
Block deck height is the same.
Wrist pins are the same diameters.
Crankshaft main's are the same.
Elbow room, I will know that in a few weeks...
Also the 3.5L cylinder head intake ports are differnts than the 3.0L's, major port matching will be needed, its doable though.
12-22-2002, 10:49 AM
#73
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 544
Originally posted by MardiGrasMax
Great thread
A few known factors
Block deck height is the same.
Wrist pins are the same diameters.
Crankshaft main's are the same.
Elbow room, I will know that in a few weeks...
Also the 3.5L cylinder head intake ports are differnts than the 3.0L's, major port matching will be needed, its doable though.
Great thread
A few known factors
Block deck height is the same.
Wrist pins are the same diameters.
Crankshaft main's are the same.
Elbow room, I will know that in a few weeks...
Also the 3.5L cylinder head intake ports are differnts than the 3.0L's, major port matching will be needed, its doable though.
12-22-2002, 11:43 AM
#74
Honda Convert!
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Columbia, Maryland
Posts: 1,497
Originally posted by MaxSE98
what size belt did you use when you pulled the ac fitting ?????
what size belt did you use when you pulled the ac fitting ?????
Bruce
12-22-2002, 11:46 AM
#75
Originally posted by MardiGrasMax
Great thread
A few known factors
Block deck height is the same.
Wrist pins are the same diameters.
Crankshaft main's are the same.
Elbow room, I will know that in a few weeks...
Also the 3.5L cylinder head intake ports are differnts than the 3.0L's, major port matching will be needed, its doable though.
Great thread
A few known factors
Block deck height is the same.
Wrist pins are the same diameters.
Crankshaft main's are the same.
Elbow room, I will know that in a few weeks...
Also the 3.5L cylinder head intake ports are differnts than the 3.0L's, major port matching will be needed, its doable though.
So Mardi what is the size difference between the intake ports on the 3.5L vs the 3.0L? I know the VQ35 has a 1mm larger intake valves versus the VQ30, I think this would account for a larger intake port on the VQ35. Also the exhaust valves are the same diameter, so im assuming the exhaust ports are the same size.
So far it might be possible to fit a VQ35 crank and rods into a VQ30 block making the purposed VQ33. Are you also trying to swap the cylinder heads off of a 2001 pathfinder VQ35 and fit them onto the VQ30 block?
I want to do this swap so bad but I dont have the money to do so, I have already sourced a working VQ30 engine and a working 2001 Pathfinder engine at the same junkyard close to my home all for about 2000 bucks.
And for all those who care Dyno2000 perdicts 283 HP @6500 rpms and 263 TQ @ 4500 rpms for this engine combo. (VQ33DE with 2001 Pathfinder cylinder heads, JWT VQ35 cams, 10.0 to 1 dynamic compression ratio, and a full aftermarket high flow exhaust from the y-pipe to the muffler)
Keep in mind this software cant take into account the variable intake manifold or the variable valve timing, which would make more power provided they work on this engine swap.
and you should see what a good turbo setup does to this engine on Dyno2000...
12-22-2002, 04:29 PM
#77
Originally posted by MardiGrasMax
I am trying to put the whole VQ35 into my max.
I'll try and get some pics of the intake ports.
I get MUCH les power using DD2000 what specs are you using for all the info?
I am trying to put the whole VQ35 into my max.
I'll try and get some pics of the intake ports.
I get MUCH les power using DD2000 what specs are you using for all the info?
Specs are Nissan V6 block 93 mm bore and 81.5 mm stroke. 4-valve head/ported with large valves 37 mm intake and 31.2 mm exhaust. 10 to 1 compression ratio, 600 cfm @ 1.5 Hg SEFI, HP manifolds and mufflers, Roller lifters with seat to seat cam specs, JWT cams 10.64mm intake and exhaust lift with 256 intake/exhaust duration, and -4 timing.
I assumed with the VVT and VIM of the VQ35 cylinder head. I could use the ported with large valves setting and I had to guess on the flow rate of 600 CFM @ 1.5 Hg.
In retrospec I think 287 hp is too much power Im gonna go back and try to find a more realistic power output.
04-02-2003, 09:50 AM
#78
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,816
This is the BEST THREAD EVER!!!
esp. Keven97SE
Wow.
There was a discussion earlier on the 5th gen forum regarding the high end breathing ability of the VQ35DE. Could any of you smarter 4th gen guys lend some insight into this issue? It seems like simple modifications could net something similar to the numbers that 350Z owners are attaining due to no signifigant disimilarities between the two motors.
Turbo is nice, but I would much rather have the consistent power delivery of a built N/A.
Sorry, but I just couldn't let a great thread die
Edit: I just noticed this was in the 4th gen forum. To keep it somewhat on topic. How is your motor work going mardigrasmax?
esp. Keven97SEWow.
There was a discussion earlier on the 5th gen forum regarding the high end breathing ability of the VQ35DE. Could any of you smarter 4th gen guys lend some insight into this issue? It seems like simple modifications could net something similar to the numbers that 350Z owners are attaining due to no signifigant disimilarities between the two motors.
Turbo is nice, but I would much rather have the consistent power delivery of a built N/A.
Sorry, but I just couldn't let a great thread die
Edit: I just noticed this was in the 4th gen forum. To keep it somewhat on topic. How is your motor work going mardigrasmax?
04-02-2003, 10:38 AM
#79
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 219
Originally posted by Jeff92se
Okay spend about $3,500 to $5000 for an engine swap and you yield 260hp? Not a very good way to gain hp to me. I would just bolt on a super charger for the 190hp engine and go to town. Kit costs less then $4,000? And some of these guys are getting pretty massive hp.
DA MAX! I'm at it again!
Okay spend about $3,500 to $5000 for an engine swap and you yield 260hp? Not a very good way to gain hp to me. I would just bolt on a super charger for the 190hp engine and go to town. Kit costs less then $4,000? And some of these guys are getting pretty massive hp.
DA MAX! I'm at it again!
I'm honored.