What's the diff between 350Z's VQ35 and the Maxima's VQ35 Engine?
#41
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Hey Quicksilver....and anyone else that likes to talk specs...
Originally posted by SR20DEN
And thats probably why you can count a dozen of them in any repair shop at any time.
And thats probably why you can count a dozen of them in any repair shop at any time.
-vq
#42
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Hey Quicksilver....and anyone else that likes to talk specs...
Originally posted by SR20DEN
GPXSS and I ran our times at about 500 feet altitude.
The point he was making is that no matter what, 14.99 is not a good representation of a 3200 pound car with 200 fwhp 225 lb. ft. tq.
GPXSS and I ran our times at about 500 feet altitude.
The point he was making is that no matter what, 14.99 is not a good representation of a 3200 pound car with 200 fwhp 225 lb. ft. tq.
1000ft (twice that of your run)
70 degrees F
low barometric pressure
2.5 60ft (my nuub **** had horrible launches)
I weigh 250lbs (3450 pounds going down the track)
I didn't do ANY mods to my car...still had stock air filter, left the back seat in, didn't take out the spare tire...
the 3.1 is still a dog...do you still drive it?
With better techniques I should get 14.5's easy without any mods...
1 second is alot of time....compared to your 15.5...
15.5....that's Spec-V territory!
what car are you referring to? a Z24? or a Baretta? what was this 3500lb 15.56 second 1/4 mile Monster? and what mods did you do to it?
-vq
#43
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Hey Quicksilver....and anyone else that likes to talk specs...
Originally posted by VQMAN
204 fwhp 219 lb. ft. tq....i dyno'd my baby in January...
1000ft (twice that of your run)
70 degrees F
low barometric pressure
2.5 60ft (my nuub **** had horrible launches)
I weigh 250lbs (3450 pounds going down the track)
I didn't do ANY mods to my car...still had stock air filter, left the back seat in, didn't take out the spare tire...
the 3.1 is still a dog...do you still drive it?
With better techniques I should get 14.5's easy without any mods...
1 second is alot of time....compared to your 15.5...
15.5....that's Spec-V territory!
what car are you referring to? a Z24? or a Baretta? what was this 3500lb 15.56 second 1/4 mile Monster? and what mods did you do to it?
-vq
204 fwhp 219 lb. ft. tq....i dyno'd my baby in January...
1000ft (twice that of your run)
70 degrees F
low barometric pressure
2.5 60ft (my nuub **** had horrible launches)
I weigh 250lbs (3450 pounds going down the track)
I didn't do ANY mods to my car...still had stock air filter, left the back seat in, didn't take out the spare tire...
the 3.1 is still a dog...do you still drive it?
With better techniques I should get 14.5's easy without any mods...
1 second is alot of time....compared to your 15.5...
15.5....that's Spec-V territory!
what car are you referring to? a Z24? or a Baretta? what was this 3500lb 15.56 second 1/4 mile Monster? and what mods did you do to it?
-vq
I do not own any GM vehicle and my VQ35 has never run slower than 15.0 on a bad launch. If you want to see the rest of my times feel free to look them up. Another point I was trying to back him up on is that people are starting to speak of engines that they have no clue about (60º GM V6's). Go to the 60v6 forums and argue there if you really want to make an attempt to prove something. Perhaps you'll learn a thing or two. Just because you have no knowledge of something that doesn't make it a POS.
And yes you should be able to get to 14.5 with no bolt ons. Good luck.
#44
Guest
Posts: n/a
oops!
Originally posted by SR20DEN
I do not own any GM vehicle and my VQ35 has never run slower than 15.0 on a bad launch. If you want to see the rest of my times feel free to look them up. Another point I was trying to back him up on is that people are starting to speak of engines that they have no clue about (60º GM V6's). Go to the 60v6 forums and argue there if you really want to make an attempt to prove something. Perhaps you'll learn a thing or two. Just because you have no knowledge of something that doesn't make it a POS.
And yes you should be able to get to 14.5 with no bolt ons. Good luck.
I do not own any GM vehicle and my VQ35 has never run slower than 15.0 on a bad launch. If you want to see the rest of my times feel free to look them up. Another point I was trying to back him up on is that people are starting to speak of engines that they have no clue about (60º GM V6's). Go to the 60v6 forums and argue there if you really want to make an attempt to prove something. Perhaps you'll learn a thing or two. Just because you have no knowledge of something that doesn't make it a POS.
And yes you should be able to get to 14.5 with no bolt ons. Good luck.
Originally posted by GPXSSThe "3800" has only been around since 88'. The series2 3800 thats in all the cars now is quite different than the old 3.8 your thinking of. The 3800 is the chain smoker of the GM line.. its only worth a damn if its helped with its breathing. Gm is gonna ****can it in the next few years cause its such an underperforming boat anchor.
3.1 is a dog eh?
My 3.1 managed to push my 3500lb fatass down the quarter at 15.51@87.. you only managed a 14.99 in your lighter car.. talk about the pot calling the kettle black.. :rolleys:
3.1 is a dog eh?
My 3.1 managed to push my 3500lb fatass down the quarter at 15.51@87.. you only managed a 14.99 in your lighter car.. talk about the pot calling the kettle black.. :rolleys:
-vq
#45
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Hey Quicksilver....and anyone else that likes to talk specs...
Originally posted by VQMAN
204 fwhp 219 lb. ft. tq....i dyno'd my baby in January...
the 3.1 is still a dog...do you still drive it?
what car are you referring to? a Z24? or a Baretta? what was this 3500lb 15.56 second 1/4 mile Monster? and what mods did you do to it?
-vq
204 fwhp 219 lb. ft. tq....i dyno'd my baby in January...
the 3.1 is still a dog...do you still drive it?
what car are you referring to? a Z24? or a Baretta? what was this 3500lb 15.56 second 1/4 mile Monster? and what mods did you do to it?
-vq
2.24 60'
6.43 330'
9.93 1/8th @ 70.72
12.94 1000'
15.51 1/4 @ 87.26
this was in a 93 Grand Prix. A buddy of mine has a simliar engine in a 91 Z24 and has run a best of 14.8.
Ill give you the original 3.1 being a dog, the intake design was made for low end torque only.. not much room for power after 4000rpm. During that run I had the updated 3100 top end (intake, plenum, heads) 12.2:1 compression and a 62mmTB. I was running factory exhaust and by my times you can see it limited my trap speed.
Shortly I will be dropping in a 3100 punched to 3230cc's or so with even more work and higher flow which should put me in the 14's.
Im not trying to bash the VQ or the Max.. I know what they are capable of, just trying to point out that not all of the GM 60º pushrod motors are dogs (the 3800 is 90º).
#46
Thinking aloud, I wonder how much power Nissan could extract from a VQ35DE if they bored to 3.8liters with a supercharger thrown in; I bet more than the 260hp in the GP GTX.
Like SR20DEN states, that pushrod 3800 motor needs to die already.
Like SR20DEN states, that pushrod 3800 motor needs to die already.
#47
Re: oops!
Originally posted by VQMAN
I was "arguing" with him...I think you and Sam03 were backing me up...sorry again...
-vq
I was "arguing" with him...I think you and Sam03 were backing me up...sorry again...
-vq
But I will bash the 3800 (L67) all day long. Those boat anchors can't make any kind of real power without being boosted and they sound like total crap when they are boosted. The new 60º engines make as much NA power as the NA 3800's and are much much lighter, more fuel efficient and sound tons better. I could relate that to a 19 year old Nissan engine that behaves exactly the same way but too many people here would take offense to that.
#48
Re: Re: Re: Hey Quicksilver....and anyone else that likes to talk specs...
Originally posted by rocktboy
can anyone explain the "over square" vs. "square" engine thing? I don't know how to explain it.
I think the term "undersquare" means a motor has a larger bore than stroke. I believe the BMW 330Ci is an example.
Jesse
can anyone explain the "over square" vs. "square" engine thing? I don't know how to explain it.
I think the term "undersquare" means a motor has a larger bore than stroke. I believe the BMW 330Ci is an example.
Jesse
I can't remember the reason behind it. But someone mentioned high rpm capability and that is definitely one of the reasons. [/B][/QUOTE]
Sorry for the misinformation! I should have known b/c the Maxima is an oversquare engine (duh).
#49
Re: Re: Re: Re: Hey Quicksilver....and anyone else that likes to talk specs...
Originally posted by 02MaximizedVQ
no.......Larger bore than stroke is OVERSQUARE. Most super high performance engines (high HP/Liter) have that configuration. (F1, motorcycle...etc)
I can't remember the reason behind it. But someone mentioned high rpm capability and that is definitely one of the reasons.
Sorry for the misinformation! I should have known b/c the Maxima is an oversquare engine (duh).
no.......Larger bore than stroke is OVERSQUARE. Most super high performance engines (high HP/Liter) have that configuration. (F1, motorcycle...etc)
I can't remember the reason behind it. But someone mentioned high rpm capability and that is definitely one of the reasons.
Sorry for the misinformation! I should have known b/c the Maxima is an oversquare engine (duh).
#50
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Hey Quicksilver....and anyone else that likes to talk specs...
Originally posted by GPXSS
153fwp 203ft/lb torque myself.
2.24 60'
6.43 330'
9.93 1/8th @ 70.72
12.94 1000'
15.51 1/4 @ 87.26
this was in a 93 Grand Prix. A buddy of mine has a simliar engine in a 91 Z24 and has run a best of 14.8.
Ill give you the original 3.1 being a dog, the intake design was made for low end torque only.. not much room for power after 4000rpm. During that run I had the updated 3100 top end (intake, plenum, heads) 12.2:1 compression and a 62mmTB. I was running factory exhaust and by my times you can see it limited my trap speed.
Shortly I will be dropping in a 3100 punched to 3230cc's or so with even more work and higher flow which should put me in the 14's.
Im not trying to bash the VQ or the Max.. I know what they are capable of, just trying to point out that not all of the GM 60º pushrod motors are dogs (the 3800 is 90º).
153fwp 203ft/lb torque myself.
2.24 60'
6.43 330'
9.93 1/8th @ 70.72
12.94 1000'
15.51 1/4 @ 87.26
this was in a 93 Grand Prix. A buddy of mine has a simliar engine in a 91 Z24 and has run a best of 14.8.
Ill give you the original 3.1 being a dog, the intake design was made for low end torque only.. not much room for power after 4000rpm. During that run I had the updated 3100 top end (intake, plenum, heads) 12.2:1 compression and a 62mmTB. I was running factory exhaust and by my times you can see it limited my trap speed.
Shortly I will be dropping in a 3100 punched to 3230cc's or so with even more work and higher flow which should put me in the 14's.
Im not trying to bash the VQ or the Max.. I know what they are capable of, just trying to point out that not all of the GM 60º pushrod motors are dogs (the 3800 is 90º).
http://auto.consumerguide.com/auto/u...fm/id/2095.htm
my mother-in-law drives a 1996 Grand Prix...3.1L V6...rattles like crazy...interior parts don't match...when I bought my 1998 Maxima, she drove it....and was amazed...needless to say, her next car won't be another Pontiac...
the 3.8SC Grand Prix, my buddy has one... Can't accelerate hard and turn at the same time from a stop light...wider is better? my a$$....
-vq
#51
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally posted by F23A4
Thinking aloud, I wonder how much power Nissan could extract from a VQ35DE if they bored to 3.8liters with a supercharger thrown in; I bet more than the 260hp in the GP GTX.
Like SR20DEN states, that pushrod 3800 motor needs to die already.
Thinking aloud, I wonder how much power Nissan could extract from a VQ35DE if they bored to 3.8liters with a supercharger thrown in; I bet more than the 260hp in the GP GTX.
Like SR20DEN states, that pushrod 3800 motor needs to die already.
the 3.5 in the Z already puts out 287/274...
the GTP puts out what...? 260/280?
VQ38DER --> YOWSERS!
we're talking about 320horsepower/350 ftlb TQ
-vq
#52
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Hey Quicksilver....and anyone else that likes to talk specs.
Originally posted by VQMAN
1993 Grand Prix doesn't weigh 3500 lbs...
-vq
1993 Grand Prix doesn't weigh 3500 lbs...
-vq
#53
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Hey Quicksilver....and anyone else that likes to talk specs.
Originally posted by VQMAN
1993 Grand Prix doesn't weigh 3500 lbs...
http://auto.consumerguide.com/auto/u...fm/id/2095.htm
1993 Grand Prix doesn't weigh 3500 lbs...
http://auto.consumerguide.com/auto/u...fm/id/2095.htm
#54
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Hey Quicksilver....and anyone else that likes to talk sp
Originally posted by GPXSS
im such a dumbass.
im such a dumbass.
oh, and uh...Happy Trolling...
-vq
#56
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Hey Quicksilver....and anyone else that likes to tal
Originally posted by SR20DEN
Seems to fit you just fine.
Seems to fit you just fine.
#57
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Re: oops!
Originally posted by SR20DEN
I wasn't backing up anyone on the 3100 bashing because I've got a pretty good technical knowledge of these engines and I know what the new ones are capable of. The only reason most people call them junk is because they dont know much about them and arent as popular as the 3800. But you can be rest assured that the new designs coming out will mean the end for the 3800 and will possibly give the VQ a good run for it's money.
But I will bash the 3800 (L67) all day long. Those boat anchors can't make any kind of real power without being boosted and they sound like total crap when they are boosted. The new 60º engines make as much NA power as the NA 3800's and are much much lighter, more fuel efficient and sound tons better. I could relate that to a 19 year old Nissan engine that behaves exactly the same way but too many people here would take offense to that.
I wasn't backing up anyone on the 3100 bashing because I've got a pretty good technical knowledge of these engines and I know what the new ones are capable of. The only reason most people call them junk is because they dont know much about them and arent as popular as the 3800. But you can be rest assured that the new designs coming out will mean the end for the 3800 and will possibly give the VQ a good run for it's money.
But I will bash the 3800 (L67) all day long. Those boat anchors can't make any kind of real power without being boosted and they sound like total crap when they are boosted. The new 60º engines make as much NA power as the NA 3800's and are much much lighter, more fuel efficient and sound tons better. I could relate that to a 19 year old Nissan engine that behaves exactly the same way but too many people here would take offense to that.
#58
Originally posted by Greek to the Max
i can only imagine it breathes better and farts better. Plus, the computer is designed to do so as well.
i can only imagine it breathes better and farts better. Plus, the computer is designed to do so as well.
#59
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally posted by E55AMG2
cars that are RWD are a lot more efficient in the drivetrain cause it is alot simpler
cars that are RWD are a lot more efficient in the drivetrain cause it is alot simpler
but a RWD car's momentum helps with traction when launching.
but neither has anything to do with crankshaft HP...and that is what we're trying to figure out...well that and we also want to know if SR20DEN and GPXSS are the same guy...
-vq
#60
Originally posted by E55AMG2
I couldnt have put it better myself, but you forgot one thing.......REAR WHEEL DRIVE (cars that are RWD are a lot more efficient in the drivetrain cause it is alot simpler)
I couldnt have put it better myself, but you forgot one thing.......REAR WHEEL DRIVE (cars that are RWD are a lot more efficient in the drivetrain cause it is alot simpler)
#61
Re: Hey Quicksilver....and anyone else that likes to talk specs...
Originally posted by VQMAN
actually an engine can still displace 3500cc's and have a different bore and stroke...
but the 350z and the Maxima engine have the same bore and stroke.
but here's a scenario...
The BMW M3 has a displacement of 3245cc
the Mercedes C320 has a displacement of 3199cc
very close in engine size, but the bore x stoke is WAY different.
BMW's is 87.0mm x 91.0mm
Mercedes is 89.9mm X 84.0mm
with 6 cylinders both come very close to 3.2L (they call the M3 3.3L, but it's only 3245cc...it's more like a 3.25) they use different ways to get there power/displacement.
if you have a certain size engine...lets say 3.0, you can increase displacement 2 ways...you can increase the bore size, or you can decrease the stroke length....with a larger bore, and a shorter stroke, the engine doesn't have to work as hard for 1 revolution, making it easier to get high rpms out of an engine. but there is a limit to how HUGE you can make the bore, and how short you can make the stroke..
The vq30de revs quicker than the vq35de for this reason...as the 3.0 motor has a larger bore when compared with it's stroke...now it's not larger than the 3.5L's bore, but proportionatly, it allows for better revving..
can anyone explain the "over square" vs. "square" engine thing? I don't know how to explain it.
here's another scenario of bore and stroke being different, and the displacement being the same...probably a better analogy that the first, because the engines displacement are almost identical.
Honda S2000 (should be called the Honda S1997 because it has 1997cc of displacement) has a bore and stroke of 87.0 x 84.0mm
the sr20de engine (found in the G20 and SE-R) has a 1998cc displacement and it's bore and stroke is 86.0 X 86.0mm
here's some 3.4/3.5L comparisons
Taurus SHO 3.4L V8 ....... 82.4 x 79.5 mm
using the V8 really show's how different the bore/stroke can be with similar displacement
Tundra 3.4L V6 ........... 93.5 X 82.0 mm
see how much bigger the cylinders are in the 3.4L V6's when compared to the SHO V8? cool huh?
GM Lumina DOHC 3.4L V6 ... 92.0 x 84.0 mm
the pistons in the 3.4L V6's are WAY bigger than the pistons in the 3.4L V8!
GM Grand Am OHV 3.4L V6 .. 92.0 x 84.0 mm
notice how the OHV and DOHC GM engines probably used the same friggin block...GO GM! great engineering!
Diamante 3.5L V6 ...... 93.0 x 85.8 mm
300M 3.5L V6 .......... 96.0 x 81.0 mm
350Z 3.5L V6 .......... 95.5 x 81.4 mm
Maxima 3.5L V6 ........ 95.5 x 81.4 mm
3.5RL 3.5L V6 ........ 89.0 x 86.0 mm
Intrigue 3.5L V6 ...... 89.5 x 92.0 mm
-vq
just wanted to clarify...
actually an engine can still displace 3500cc's and have a different bore and stroke...
but the 350z and the Maxima engine have the same bore and stroke.
but here's a scenario...
The BMW M3 has a displacement of 3245cc
the Mercedes C320 has a displacement of 3199cc
very close in engine size, but the bore x stoke is WAY different.
BMW's is 87.0mm x 91.0mm
Mercedes is 89.9mm X 84.0mm
with 6 cylinders both come very close to 3.2L (they call the M3 3.3L, but it's only 3245cc...it's more like a 3.25) they use different ways to get there power/displacement.
if you have a certain size engine...lets say 3.0, you can increase displacement 2 ways...you can increase the bore size, or you can decrease the stroke length....with a larger bore, and a shorter stroke, the engine doesn't have to work as hard for 1 revolution, making it easier to get high rpms out of an engine. but there is a limit to how HUGE you can make the bore, and how short you can make the stroke..
The vq30de revs quicker than the vq35de for this reason...as the 3.0 motor has a larger bore when compared with it's stroke...now it's not larger than the 3.5L's bore, but proportionatly, it allows for better revving..
can anyone explain the "over square" vs. "square" engine thing? I don't know how to explain it.
here's another scenario of bore and stroke being different, and the displacement being the same...probably a better analogy that the first, because the engines displacement are almost identical.
Honda S2000 (should be called the Honda S1997 because it has 1997cc of displacement) has a bore and stroke of 87.0 x 84.0mm
the sr20de engine (found in the G20 and SE-R) has a 1998cc displacement and it's bore and stroke is 86.0 X 86.0mm
here's some 3.4/3.5L comparisons
Taurus SHO 3.4L V8 ....... 82.4 x 79.5 mm
using the V8 really show's how different the bore/stroke can be with similar displacement
Tundra 3.4L V6 ........... 93.5 X 82.0 mm
see how much bigger the cylinders are in the 3.4L V6's when compared to the SHO V8? cool huh?
GM Lumina DOHC 3.4L V6 ... 92.0 x 84.0 mm
the pistons in the 3.4L V6's are WAY bigger than the pistons in the 3.4L V8!
GM Grand Am OHV 3.4L V6 .. 92.0 x 84.0 mm
notice how the OHV and DOHC GM engines probably used the same friggin block...GO GM! great engineering!
Diamante 3.5L V6 ...... 93.0 x 85.8 mm
300M 3.5L V6 .......... 96.0 x 81.0 mm
350Z 3.5L V6 .......... 95.5 x 81.4 mm
Maxima 3.5L V6 ........ 95.5 x 81.4 mm
3.5RL 3.5L V6 ........ 89.0 x 86.0 mm
Intrigue 3.5L V6 ...... 89.5 x 92.0 mm
-vq
just wanted to clarify...
Here's a good pop quiz question. What is the maximum size (aftermarket supported, of course) that a horizontally opposed aircoold VW engine (Type I) can reach? Remember, they started off their American production with 1100/1200cc engines, and finally went to the 1600cc engine (that's not their exact size, but for arguments sake, you all know them as that).
#62
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Re: Hey Quicksilver....and anyone else that likes to talk specs...
Originally posted by Quicksilver
Here's a good pop quiz question. What is the maximum size (aftermarket supported, of course) that a horizontally opposed aircoold VW engine (Type I) can reach? Remember, they started off their American production with 1100/1200cc engines, and finally went to the 1600cc engine (that's not their exact size, but for arguments sake, you all know them as that).
Here's a good pop quiz question. What is the maximum size (aftermarket supported, of course) that a horizontally opposed aircoold VW engine (Type I) can reach? Remember, they started off their American production with 1100/1200cc engines, and finally went to the 1600cc engine (that's not their exact size, but for arguments sake, you all know them as that).
and you're right, it would be to expensive to have completely different bore/stroke for all the VQ's...
-vq
#63
Originally posted by VQMAN
actually, from what I've always heard, FWD cars usually have less drivetrain loss because the driveline is shorter/lighter...
but a RWD car's momentum helps with traction when launching.
but neither has anything to do with crankshaft HP...and that is what we're trying to figure out...well that and we also want to know if SR20DEN and GPXSS are the same guy...
-vq
actually, from what I've always heard, FWD cars usually have less drivetrain loss because the driveline is shorter/lighter...
but a RWD car's momentum helps with traction when launching.
but neither has anything to do with crankshaft HP...and that is what we're trying to figure out...well that and we also want to know if SR20DEN and GPXSS are the same guy...
-vq
He is my brother. He does 60º GM V6's and I do Nissans.
#65
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally posted by SR20DEN
No
He is my brother. He does 60º GM V6's and I do Nissans.
No
He is my brother. He does 60º GM V6's and I do Nissans.
-vq
#66
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally posted by SR20DEN
No
He is my brother. He does 60º GM V6's and I do Nissans.
No
He is my brother. He does 60º GM V6's and I do Nissans.
-vq
#67
they get 300+ HP and 300+ TQ
but depends on certain things
like how much they would spend and the size of tge engine bay
they may not be able to add a lot of tech if the supercharger takes up too much space under the hood
but depends on certain things
like how much they would spend and the size of tge engine bay
they may not be able to add a lot of tech if the supercharger takes up too much space under the hood
Originally posted by F23A4
Thinking aloud, I wonder how much power Nissan could extract from a VQ35DE if they bored to 3.8liters with a supercharger thrown in; I bet more than the 260hp in the GP GTX.
Like SR20DEN states, that pushrod 3800 motor needs to die already.
Thinking aloud, I wonder how much power Nissan could extract from a VQ35DE if they bored to 3.8liters with a supercharger thrown in; I bet more than the 260hp in the GP GTX.
Like SR20DEN states, that pushrod 3800 motor needs to die already.
#68
Re: Re: Re: oops!
Originally posted by VQMAN
what 19 year old nissan engine? the vg33?
what 19 year old nissan engine? the vg33?
#69
No, its not the same guy. GPXSS is very well known in the 60v6 community. Im not here to troll (neither was gpxss but i guess if you have a stick up your *** you will say anything to be offensive). I work on the 3.4 DOHC motors now, used to work on the pushrods. I could care less what maxima owners have to say about the motor, but at least get it right. The 3400 is the newer designed block. The 3.4 DOHC was based on the 3.1/3.4 block, but is not the identical block.
If you care to actually learn something about the motors, you can go to www.60degreev6.com. No, I am not GPXSS. This is the name I use on the 60v6 forums, and GPXSS uses his same name over there too.
If you care to actually learn something about the motors, you can go to www.60degreev6.com. No, I am not GPXSS. This is the name I use on the 60v6 forums, and GPXSS uses his same name over there too.
#70
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally posted by SappySE107
No, its not the same guy. GPXSS is very well known in the 60v6 community. Im not here to troll (neither was gpxss but i guess if you have a stick up your *** you will say anything to be offensive). I work on the 3.4 DOHC motors now, used to work on the pushrods. I could care less what maxima owners have to say about the motor, but at least get it right. The 3400 is the newer designed block. The 3.4 DOHC was based on the 3.1/3.4 block, but is not the identical block.
If you care to actually learn something about the motors, you can go to www.60degreev6.com. No, I am not GPXSS. This is the name I use on the 60v6 forums, and GPXSS uses his same name over there too.
No, its not the same guy. GPXSS is very well known in the 60v6 community. Im not here to troll (neither was gpxss but i guess if you have a stick up your *** you will say anything to be offensive). I work on the 3.4 DOHC motors now, used to work on the pushrods. I could care less what maxima owners have to say about the motor, but at least get it right. The 3400 is the newer designed block. The 3.4 DOHC was based on the 3.1/3.4 block, but is not the identical block.
If you care to actually learn something about the motors, you can go to www.60degreev6.com. No, I am not GPXSS. This is the name I use on the 60v6 forums, and GPXSS uses his same name over there too.
it's a crap engine, nothing you can say or do will make me change my mind...
if someone puts a gun to my head and says "say the 60degreeV6 isn't a crap engine" I'll say it, but I won't think it...it's crap.
(by his own admission) GPSXX went to the track with 100 pounds of crap in the trunk...what kind of an idiot hauls around 100 lbs of junk in the trunk on a regular day, let alone when going to the track? what is he selling out of his trunk? fake Rolex's? dude's got 100 lbs of fake Rolex's in his POS 1993 Grand Prix?
So now SR20DEN has 3 alias's? WTF??
CLARIFICATION of VQMAN's posts about the 60degree piece of crap My assumtion about the 3.4OHV and 3.4DOHC being off the same block was a "revelation" when I saw that they had identical bore and stroke when making a point about engine's being able to have the same displacement, and different bore x stroke...seemed I was right on the money...(based on the old 3.1/3.4 is close enough to me)
Hey SR20DEN, why not either
A) fight your own "battles"
or
B) quit hiding behind fake alias's....
go back to www.60degreeGMv6sucksa$$.com they like your type there...
damn troll...
ta ta
-vq
#71
I guess you cant carry a converstion with degrading others. Its how people weak of character and with little valuable content in their posts behave. GPXSS and myself aren't knocking your car or engine of choice. We simply ask a little more respect from someone with little knowledge on the subject. How can you say the 60v6 sucks when you dont know anything about them?
Do you know what 500 feet does to your time? Not much. Not worth even mentioning for that matter.
Do you know what 500 feet does to your time? Not much. Not worth even mentioning for that matter.
#73
Seems to me the main diff b/w the engines is the intake and exhaust....To complement this Nissan probably fiddle with the cams and timing. The VQ35DE is LOADED with untapped potential!!!...
I would love to see a turboed or supercharged sport tuned version...
On a side note, I've notice newer car make, Honda/Ac, MB, BMW, Nissan/infinti, giving their cars dual exhaust, single or double barrel. I hadn't seen such cars on a lift, but do each lines have separate cat converters? Or do then run into the same conveter? The later would seem to allow for better expiration...
I would love to see a turboed or supercharged sport tuned version...
On a side note, I've notice newer car make, Honda/Ac, MB, BMW, Nissan/infinti, giving their cars dual exhaust, single or double barrel. I hadn't seen such cars on a lift, but do each lines have separate cat converters? Or do then run into the same conveter? The later would seem to allow for better expiration...
#74
Originally posted by VQMAN
Hey SR20DEN, why not either
A) fight your own "battles"
or
B) quit hiding behind fake alias's....
ta ta
-vq
Hey SR20DEN, why not either
A) fight your own "battles"
or
B) quit hiding behind fake alias's....
ta ta
-vq
#75
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally posted by SR20DEN
Once again the unintelligent crap pours from your mouth. God forbid I actually have a life and don't spend my entire day on maxima.org. I have never hidden behind ANY alias. I have used SR20DEN and ONLY that name since 1996. Now if you choose to be ignorant for the rest of your life and never have any ambition at all do do your own research or make any attempts to educate yourself thats totally upto you. I realize you are entitled to your own opinions and thats fine too. But when you start bashing something that another group of people either like or have respect for then you should be prepaired to recieve a healthy dose of flack from the ones you offend.
Once again the unintelligent crap pours from your mouth. God forbid I actually have a life and don't spend my entire day on maxima.org. I have never hidden behind ANY alias. I have used SR20DEN and ONLY that name since 1996. Now if you choose to be ignorant for the rest of your life and never have any ambition at all do do your own research or make any attempts to educate yourself thats totally upto you. I realize you are entitled to your own opinions and thats fine too. But when you start bashing something that another group of people either like or have respect for then you should be prepaired to recieve a healthy dose of flack from the ones you offend.
oh, and if you want to be a closet Chevy guy, why not give love to at least an engine with a couple more cylinders...Seems GM can only get power out of an engine if it has...
A) 8 cylinders/huge displacement
or
B)Forced Induction.
I still can't believe there is an "enthusiast" site for a 60 degree GM V6...now I've seen it all....and they travel in "packs"! if you can call a guy with three alias's a "pack"
so SR20DEN why don't you take your dad/brother out to dinner for backing you up? you can sell a couple Rolex's from the back of your 1993 Grand Prix
oh yeah, when talking about inbred carolinians and 60degree GM V6's, one can't help but to SPEW unintelligent crap from his mouth.
say "hi" to your mom/sister for me!
-vq
#76
You just continue to be an idiot and jealous. You have no driver skills and you make excuses for that. Have fun with your 14.9's, hey was that at an 1/8th mile track?
If you would like to know what a 2002 Maxima is capable of then simply look here.
http://forums.maxima.org/showthread....hreadid=140283
http://forums.maxima.org/showthread....hreadid=128371
If you would like to know what a 2002 Maxima is capable of then simply look here.
http://forums.maxima.org/showthread....hreadid=140283
http://forums.maxima.org/showthread....hreadid=128371
#77
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Re: oops!
Originally posted by SR20DEN
I wasn't backing up anyone on the 3100 bashing because I've got a pretty good technical knowledge of these engines and I know what the new ones are capable of. The only reason most people call them junk is because they dont know much about them and arent as popular as the 3800. But you can be rest assured that the new designs coming out will mean the end for the 3800 and will possibly give the VQ a good run for it's money.
But I will bash the 3800 (L67) all day long. Those boat anchors can't make any kind of real power without being boosted and they sound like total crap when they are boosted. The new 60º engines make as much NA power as the NA 3800's and are much much lighter, more fuel efficient and sound tons better. I could relate that to a 19 year old Nissan engine that behaves exactly the same way but too many people here would take offense to that.
I wasn't backing up anyone on the 3100 bashing because I've got a pretty good technical knowledge of these engines and I know what the new ones are capable of. The only reason most people call them junk is because they dont know much about them and arent as popular as the 3800. But you can be rest assured that the new designs coming out will mean the end for the 3800 and will possibly give the VQ a good run for it's money.
But I will bash the 3800 (L67) all day long. Those boat anchors can't make any kind of real power without being boosted and they sound like total crap when they are boosted. The new 60º engines make as much NA power as the NA 3800's and are much much lighter, more fuel efficient and sound tons better. I could relate that to a 19 year old Nissan engine that behaves exactly the same way but too many people here would take offense to that.
I am used to Nissan engines (I had 1 sr20de, 1 vq30de, and 2 vq35de's) and when I drove my mother-in-laws 3.1, not only was I amazed out how many rattles a vehicle can have, I also was very unimpressed with the engine. In fact I thought that (stock) my SR20DE was a much better engine under hard acceleration than the 3.1. It was definately smoother. Sounded better too.
I was posting about bore x stroke, bashed a GM (this is a Maxima site) and you take the time to either
a)email all your buddies
or
b)make up new alias's...
either way, that brings me to the question, who has no life? I happen to sit in front of a computer all day at work and have access to the internet at work/school/home. and when someone calls me a dumbass...I'm not going to sit back and take it.
The personal bashing started with you calling me a dumbass...
your brother called himself a dumbass, I simply agreed with him. (albiet he was being sarcastic) but if you take a car to the track with 100 lbs of crap in the trunk...you are a dumbass. period, end of story.
if someone gets a 2.5 60ft because they can't drive, they are a non-driving idiot (me---I have no problems admitting I can't launch well yet) I've been to the track once. I think I didn't launch at high enough RPM's...
when you knock of 0.3 seconds from my 60ft, (2.2 is normal for a maxima) and you'd also knock off at least 0.3 seconds from my ET which puts me at 14.69 seconds. Come down to 500 ft of sea level I'll knock off another tenth or two from my ET...CAI catback...basic bolt-ons, and I'm going to blow a 60degreeV6 off the map. and at the same time, my vehicle doens't rattle all the time (it does once in a while) I also don't have to worry about stuff breaking down. Really, we all know the reliability record with GM automobiles.
anyway, barring some crazy ****, I'm done with this pointless arguement...
we both know the VQ is a far superior engine
sorry for calling you imbred and sorry for any other insults to you and your family/friends.
-vq
#78
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally posted by SR20DEN
You just continue to be an idiot and jealous. You have no driver skills and you make excuses for that. Have fun with your 14.9's, hey was that at an 1/8th mile track?
If you would like to know what a 2002 Maxima is capable of then simply look here.
http://forums.maxima.org/showthread....hreadid=140283
http://forums.maxima.org/showthread....hreadid=128371
You just continue to be an idiot and jealous. You have no driver skills and you make excuses for that. Have fun with your 14.9's, hey was that at an 1/8th mile track?
If you would like to know what a 2002 Maxima is capable of then simply look here.
http://forums.maxima.org/showthread....hreadid=140283
http://forums.maxima.org/showthread....hreadid=128371
the maxima is capable of much more than I can do with it right now.
sorry for being such a *****...I just didn't like it when you put a false quote with my name "Originally posted by VQMAN"....you know the one I am talking about....
you doctored it, I didn't like that....
peace...
-vq
#79
Originally posted by VQMAN
oh i know I can't drive...
the maxima is capable of much more than I can do with it right now.
sorry for being such a *****...I just didn't like it when you put a false quote with my name "Originally posted by VQMAN"....you know the one I am talking about....
you doctored it, I didn't like that....
peace...
-vq
oh i know I can't drive...
the maxima is capable of much more than I can do with it right now.
sorry for being such a *****...I just didn't like it when you put a false quote with my name "Originally posted by VQMAN"....you know the one I am talking about....
you doctored it, I didn't like that....
peace...
-vq
#80
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally posted by SR20DEN
Yeah I doctored it. You stepped on my toes so I stepped on yours. Im ready to end this childish argument. Are you?
Yeah I doctored it. You stepped on my toes so I stepped on yours. Im ready to end this childish argument. Are you?
yup!