Since I ran 15.0 in the 1/4 in my '98 SE 5spd, bone stock, many of my friends have questioned how it only has 190 horses, weighs 3000 pounds and is that fast.
My one friend is a firm believer that our Maximas are underrated and are more likely at about 205 at the crank. He thinks they may have underrated the engine possibly for insurance purposes.
Wondering if you guys think the engine is underrated. You have to admit the car is damn fast for the amount of horsepower driving a foor door sedan.



On a side note: Anyone know how fast a '94 Camaro RS is?

 

I don't think the horses is underated, sometime it doesn't have to do with how much horsepower the car has, its torque and gear ratios also play a big part on getting the car to move. Not only that, shifting at the right times can play a part too. But maybe your right, about our engines are underated, but definantly a good run for you. Payce

 

I don't think Nissan would underrate their engine for insurance purposes. If that was the case, for as much as I'm paying, I'm getting robbed. I think the Maxima's speed is directly proportional to the engine's power. After all, your friends haven't taken into effect that the Max is lighter than they think. Most people, think that the Max is just another "road boat" like Cadillacs or Town Cars. In actuality, it can hold its own in the Sport Compact Car class in terms of weight. For example: My car weighed in at 3121. This is pretty light, especially for an automatic. We have some 5-speed owners with Maxima's that weigh 2800 lbs., and one that weighs 2600 lbs. That's right next to a Civic or a prelude.

 

Look at my 1/4 mile time down there in my sig. Seems pretty fast for a mostly stock automagic...

But, then look at my pathetic trap speed. This indicates that I only have 190 hp on tap.

 

rsx gets like 166 of its 200 hp to the ground at redline, and only 122 lbs of torque of its 160 i think to the groudn at redline, we only have 190 hp but get a good amount of it to the ground and then have our whopping torque......mmmmm....torque. its just that our engine isnt redline based and has lots of torque, thats why we hvae similar specs of a type s's numbers of quarters and 0-60.

 

Even the car magazines thought the same exact thing when they tested the 95 Maxima. They dynoed and saw the truth, 190 hp.

DW

 

Man most of those cars were a disgrace. I saw a few,maybe 3, that I liked however.

 

I don't believe the maxima is underrated. Dyno numbers and drivetrain numbers coincide perfectly.

 

Nice run, but I do not think the Maxima's are underrated.

 

Which car magazines dynoed the 4th gen Max becuase they thought the HP was underrated?

I dont recall ever reading about that...

 

I do recall reading 1 article that said that, but I can't find it now

DW

 

yo who makes your ypipe??? who makes your intake????and whats your 1/4 now with both>???

 

Cattman SS 2.5" Y-pipe, JWT Pop Charger. I haven't been to the track with the intake, its still winter here in michigan. I hate the winter. I got an email that you sent me a PM but my PM box was full so I didn't get it. I deleted some PMs so if you need to re-send it you can.

 

I think the magazine was auto ward 10 best engine that stated the engine felt underrated.

 

But did they run independent dyno tests to confirm??

 

nah - it cant be underrated, cause v-6 accord is rated at 200, and it can still whoop us (stock vs stock)

 

your joking right? those things are automatic. anyway, there is a slight possibility that my car might be underrated. well, my "mods" have released a few ponies under the hood. i've never dynoed however.

 

Well, I don't think they made the RS in '94. The RS's are usually those 80's model camaro's.

I raced a late 80's or very early 90's RS. It was a 5-speed. I gave it a headstart and then floored it. I Pulled on him steadily each time. I am automatic.

 

Ive raced a few stock v6 accords and I never lost, I am stock also. There must be something wrong with your car if you are getting "whooped" by accords. Oh yea im auto also.
Jules

 

It does have 190 HP, but its the 205PFT that pins you to the seat when you punch it.

 

95emeraldgxe you have posted over 1800 times in the past 2 months?? 20 posts a day?? can anyone top that one?

 

thank GOD no. the .org would have way too many server busy messages.

 

Have you noticed that ALL of his posts are BS?

 

underated i dunno, but small differences from car to car may be more likely. my old GXE compared to my SE, same year and tranny, the GXE felt like a boat while my SE pulls like nutzo

 

I know for a fact that Japanese car manufacturers under-rate the horsepower, but only to very high performance cars like Skyline, twin-turbo Zs, Supra, RX-7, Subaru WRX's etc. I believe the magic number is somewhere around 300hp.. ie as long as the rating is below that you are OK. So there isn't really a point to under-rate the VQ engine based on that fact. In addition, if Nissan needs to keep the "published" horsepower rating for Maxima/VQ under 190, why upgrade to 220HP for 5th gen and 255HP for the 2002 model?

 

Right, technically, they arent anlowed to produce cars with more than 276 HP. If you'll notice, all the hot JDM cars are rated at 276hp but they are obviously much faster than that.

 

They didn't make an RS Camaro in 94. They stopped making RS's in 92 and started making them again in 96.

 

No, the 4th gen is 190. But you have the right idea. From what I've picked up here ont he forums, In 98, Nissan made a variable intake for the 4th gen, but not for the US market. In the middle east, that 4th gen makes 220hp. Why didn't Nissan put it on any 4th gen's in the US??

1) the 4th gen was very powerful as it was, don't mess with a good thing
2) the 5th gen was 2 years away, and if they put the VI on a 4th gen, the 5th gen would not have seemed much more powerful.

DW

 

Pins you to the seat when you punch it??? Not mine.

 

Honda has never had Torque like Nissan

 

"Felt" underrated, huh. Compared to the massive list of cars i've driven over the past 18 years, my stock '95 GXE Automatic doesn't feel underrated to me...more like overrated. Now, if it was the 5-speed version i'd probably feel differently.

 

Wards Ten Best said the 4th gen VQ felt underrated, but when they dynoed it, they confirmed it made 190hp as specified by Nissan. While I think the VQ is a wonderful engine, I think one of the reasons it won 10 best so many times is because it was in a family sedan which also had a manual transmission, which tends to bring the engine to life a bit more than autotragics. Toyota's 1ZFE and Honda's 3.0L V6 are also excellent engines, but since neither initially came with a manual, they did not win the award. I've driven Camry V6 and Accord V6's and I can tell you both are great engines, pretty much as good as Nissan's VQ V6 in terms of smoothness and refinement. The Camry, of course, had the best automatic transmission.

 

Yeah, i still wish i held out longer and got the 5-speed. My sister has had a '94 V6 Camry since almost new, and i like that motor too, but her tranny was suspect from the get-go and had it rebuilt at 90k. Underrated or not, it's a great all around engine.

 

I love my Max but I too feel its over rated at times.... I must say that I have many Honda Accord kills!