can anyone link me to this supposed lawsuit going on over Nissan's claims of 255hp for the 02-03 maximas but in reality it being less?

I'd like to jump on the bandwagon

 

Not that I'm opposed to the idea of a lawsuit---I would just like to state a point.

I keep hearing complaints of "less than specified" HP concerns. I have a 2k3 6 spd (with 255 hp) and my friend has a 2k2 Mustang GT 5spd (with 260 hp). His is stock with 3k on the odo and mine stock with 2k. Both cars weigh VERY close to the same weight (~5lbs depending on what site you consult.) We have raced at least 5 times--- it's almost the same result every time. He can get me out of the hole (RWD vs FWD) and I pull past him and stay there until I hit 5th and he starts to nose past me. Rolling start--I walk him almost every time (until we hit that 5th gear switch.) I am defenitely running a higher MPH int he quarter than he is. Very VERY close acceleration between these two cars.

Point is: If the horsepower is less than what Nissan claims, then why would the Mustang with 5hp more and same weight perform about the same or be slower? Ford fudging the numbers too perhaps???

Just a thought......(don't hate me!)

 

31 hits and no one has any ideas?

 

Here's a possibility:
a) Your car could be dyno'd higher for a variety of reasons (You got the Monday production model )
b) Your mustang buddy can't drive or you're a good driver

The real point is that your one case (not disputing your results with the Stang) doesn't point to ALL 2002 GT Stangs performing this way. That being said, you can't assume that his car HAS "260" (at the crank or fly, whatever, just for arguement's sake) and that since your races are so close it MUST mean that your car must be at 255hp.

Oiy, i just messed up that explanation

anyhow, good info on your mustang experience, you've got a good car be happy with that

 

I was anticipating some rebuttle so let me add....
I am unsure as to whether or not I have a "Friday" car or a "Monday" car, simply because I have not dyno'd it and I know no one local to compete with. I can hold my own behind the wheel, and my buddy can as well (10+ years of practice. Some of us never grow up......) He has raced several other Mustangs and his is thought to be more of a "Monday" car as it seems to run better than average. I have run other GTs and pulled away even more than with my friend's.

My point is: Even IF my car was slightly slower he always pulled past me, I would still not question my HP because he has slightly more *rated* HP and a V8. Not to mention, many cars (especially with aluminum engines) tend to take awhile to completely break in (LS1 is prime example, they tend to get faster till they reach 10-15k.)

Obviously no 2 cars are the same, and some engines will run better than others. Don't you think that if the cars were truly *significantly* underrated that there would be a more considerable margin between an equally weighed/powered vehicle?

Just my $.02 worth...

 

Nissan horsepower case

 

This is the first I've heard of this, but count me in. In fact we should all jump on this wagon - here's why. Ford and Mazda have already LOST these lawsuits (Ford overstated the HP on the Mustang Cobra, and Mazda on the Miata). I know that Mazda offered the owners a choice of free service or to buy back the car (I know this as fact because I bought one of the buyback cars directly from Mazda). So, if there is a lawsuit we all stand to gain.

 

 

The answer is simple. It's called average hp and average torque. Although the Maxima never actually peaks out to the advertised 255hp it has a relativly high average hp. On several dyno charts you'll notice the engine peaking out at about 4800 rpm and holding that same peak hp all the way to 6000+ rpm. As well as the fact that the VQ35DE is under rated in peak torque. As much as the advertised 255hp is an overstated joke, the advertized 246 lb. ft of torque is an understaded joke. It has been proven several dozen times and generally accepted by the masses here that the Maxima actually makes about 240hp and 265 tq. at the crank. It just so happens that Nissan has one VQ35 powered vehicle with exactly that same rating. The 2001- 2003 Pathfinder with automatic tranny. Quoted from the Nissan site
"The 3.5 liter V6 engine pumps out 240 hp. That's more horsepower than some V8s. And it's torque-rich (265 lb-ft of torque at 3,200 rpm), especially in the low rpm range - ideal for climbing hills and towing." . The real point of the lawsuit wasn't because of the lack of performance, it's because we don't appreciate their false advertising. Especially when the slightly cheaper Altima has the exact same engine setup.

 

Lots of potential answers:

High torque of VQ (as mentioned above)
Different gear ratios
Different power curves
Different capabilities of drivers
Efficiency of drivetrain

Unfortunately for the 255 HP, your post only proves (well, illustrates a trend) that your Max can beat your friends GT, most of the time.

 

sue them for the extra hp so they can sue you guys for the extra tq

 

SHBBY had lawyers ready to handle the HID case he was concocting. Maybe those laywers would like to make double $$$ and take the HP case.

 

--I'm afraid it proves more than that. The Mustang has more rated torque and horsepower. It performs roughly the SAME as the SAME weight car, only the other car has LESS *rated* HP and TORQUE.

You can argue gear ratios all you want, but it really doesn't mean much---it all comes down to power to weight ratio. The gear ratios aren't that much different. The drivers' abilities in this case are the same.

The 2k2+ cars with the *rated* 255 hp (whether its correct or not doesn't matter at this point, and it has yet to be proven on the ENGINE dyno) runs vurtually the same as the comparable car with MORE *rated* HP and TORQUE.

What is not obvious about this? Am I missing something? We all bought cars with an *advertised* HP rating--that competes with (or beats, in this case) comparable car with more *advertised* power and torque. It runs just as good as everyone else's stock Mudstain GT 5spd, and has a lot more class (not to mention build quality.)

They can claim that it has as much power as they want. We all know that all manufacturers' engines do not put out EXACTLY what they are rated to produce. Some overstate, some understate. Every engine is different. Everything affects performance (altitude, temp, humidity, quality of fuel.) But we bought 255 *rated* HP cars that perform like *260* HP cars.

I just feel like we are splitting hairs here. Maybe I'm too quick to jump on a society that mostly wants something for nothing (yeah I know, wrong forum.)

Don't get me wrong, I too would like more power (part of being a gearhead--you can never have too much!) If Nissan wants to retrofit my car with better exhaust or intake then I surely won't object.

 

First off, I was NEVER CONCOCTING ****.........I was purely coming to the aid of fellow NYers and NJ catz who had their HIDs taken because of Nissan's reluctance to come up with a fix due to their negligence....

Like I said before....bottomline really is I could give two ***** about anyone on here who wants to talk crap about my efforts. It really doesn't matter to me either way...Wanna know why?

My car is garaged; no one will have ANY opportunity to steal my lights because the car is always garaged or watched. At work it's watched and at home its garaged. Being the fact that I refuse to shop in NYC, I don't have to worry about it here either.

My whole deal from the get go was to try and help out fellow .org members because to tell you the truth, the short time I've been on here I've found most of you very helpful with the exception of some haters out there like this a$$ quoted above me.

So Maxlight, tell me how EXACTLY I CONCOCTED this lawsuit...I didn't design the lights....I'm certainly not stealing them. The only thing I have to gain is some tranquility in knowing that my lights are safe from would-be thieves trying to steal them if the suit was won in court.

If your intent was not as I described here, then I suggest you rethink next time before you post a word such as "CONCOCTED" because CONCOCTED means "MADE UP"

I surely MADE NOTHING UP!!!

 

Yo... I think you just went overboard on your response. I don't read concocting as a bad word of choice for this. I don't think he means you're making it up but rather putting the case together with legal counsil.
Is this correct maxlight ?

 

no matter how you cut it bro, concocted straight from a text book definition means "made up"

I made NOTHING up....this just seemed to me like another HATER trying to get in my way of progress..


remember...PROgress not REgress and don't hate, congratulate!

 

Can't we all just get along????

 

 

99+ GT's dyno with 220+ RWHP...which equates to approx 260 crank HP. They also run 13.9's in the 1/4 stock, which no stock 2002+ Maxima has done yet (to my knowledge). I run both of these cars at Commerce and Silver Dollar here in Georgia, and I've never lost to a stock 2002+ Maxima. I've lost to a few modded ones, though . The best I usually see out of stock Maximas (with the 6 speed) are 14.5's-14.4's, and "if" I screw up during the run, I might get that time in the GT's.

 

No, it doesn't. Without dynos on both of your cars, and in this single instance (i.e. not a trend for ALL Mustangs and Maximas), your information is an anecdote - nothing else. You may be a much better driver than your friend - how do you know you have the same "abilities"?) Even switching cars wouldn't prove it, as you're more familiar with yours).

Yes, power to weight ratio is significant. And with taller gearing (I'm talking final drive, not just tranny) the same car will accelerate more slowly.

A lot of people make the mistake of extrapolating a single instance (yes, I know you've raced FIVE times) to cover the majority of cases. It doesn't.

Anyway, I'm done - rebutt (sic) away.

 

True, the Mustang would most likely always have a faster ET because it's RWD. RWD cars can always launch harder than FWD due to weight distribution. But if you have been racing for long, you know well that ET means less than trap speed unless you're bracket racing. Your trap speed is usually pretty consistent even when your ET's vary. That is the more accurate measure of how fast the car is. I am curious to what your trap speeds are at the 1/4 in both cars.

I'll restate my point again--The Mustang with the same weight, a V8 with more power and torque runs right with the V6 Maxima with less. I feel like I got what I paid for regardless of what its *rated*. I would EXPECT to be beaten consistently by a GT, but that is not the case (and I wouldn't complain if it was.)

It really wouldn't surprise me that BOTH cars HP ratings are high....

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Maximax2
[B]

No, it doesn't. Without dynos on both of your cars, and in this single instance (i.e. not a trend for ALL Mustangs and Maximas), your information is an anecdote - nothing else. You may be a much better driver than your friend - how do you know you have the same "abilities"?) Even switching cars wouldn't prove it, as you're more familiar with yours).

Exactly right--we do not know the *actual* power output of either engine, not to mention no 2 engines run the same. It would ultimately take an average reading of several engines under the same circumstances (dyno, too) to prove the HP #s accurate. At least in this case, driver varience is not an issue. Not much to racing error here other than launch and shifts (missed shifts and speed through the gears.) If anything my buddy can launch better than I. Drivers are consistent (in this scenario.)



Yes, power to weight ratio is significant. And with taller gearing (I'm talking final drive, not just tranny) the same car will accelerate more slowly.

True, we know the gearing is slightly different, especially with the 5 and 6 speed variance in tranny, plus the final drive gear (must be combined.) But, again, the 4.6 has more *rated* power and torque (considerably more torque, 302 Ft. lbs.) The gearing variance would have to be rather significant to eat up that much power.



A lot of people make the mistake of extrapolating a single instance (yes, I know you've raced FIVE times) to cover the majority of cases.

I have stated from the beginning that not ALL cars or engines are exactly the same. I know I'm not the fluke because there are others who have posted victories as well. I'm not arguing that either car is faster than the other consistently. All I'm saying is that the Max can't be that bad if it directly competes with a GT (same weight, more power.)

 

 

HA! No $h*t, right!

 

Best ET was 13.82 @ 99.87 MPH (still dead stock). All my trap speeds were 98+ MPH...

From what I see, the stock 2002+ Maximas are in the 93-94 MPH trap speed...

 

My bad. I meant to say 'cooked up' up a lawsuit.

 

NT2SHBBY,
Actually, your wrong. This is from the dictionary for "concocted":

1) To prepare by mixing ingredients, as in cooking.
2) To devise, using skill and intelligence; contrive: concoct a mystery story.

"then I suggest you rethink next time before you post a word such as "CONCOCTED" "

Maybe you should be the one to calm down and check your vocabulary before you blow a fellow member out of the water.
And you do this while being wrong and making yourself look like a true *******.
(Feel free to look-up "*******" in the dictionary if you need to)

 

actually dude...pull out Webster's thesaurus and you shall find concocted, contrived, all mean "made up"

you couldn't possibly look up "made up" in the dictionary because its not one word, it's a conjunction. Don't talk to me about vocabulary dude..I was an english major at a prestigious college in NY....I know my verbage....

 

Why can the 6 speed Maxima compete with the more powerful 99+ Mustang GT? Because the Maxima has more power under the curve. Simply put, it has a fatter and richer powerband. The hard truth is that the 4.6 SOHC motor is still very much a truck engine. That means lowend grunt, but a lack of topend power. Power comes on hard and fast, but it isn't sustained as well as power is in the VQ.

Overall, the Mustang GT is a quicker and faster car on average. The AVERAGE 99+ Mustang GT 5 speed is a 14.2-14.4@98-99mph car. The AVERAGE 6 speed Maxima is a 14.6-14.7@95-96mph car. Sure, there will always be those that go .2-.3 quicker and 1-2mph faster, but I'm talking about what MOST people run in this cars. Don't dispute it because it's true.

From a roll, it is pretty much a driver's race with the edge usually going to the GT. The 3.5 VQs problem is traction. Too much torque in a FWD chassis is no good when you have crappy Potenza tires and a soft suspension. The Mustangs problem is a lack of topend. I wouldn't be surprised if a 3.5 VQ would run down the Stang after 100mph.

Am I afraid of 99+ GTs? Nope. They're sweet cars though. I'll take a Bullitt please.


Dave

 

I've never been afraid of an automotive vehicle.

-R

"My gun is a 105mm Howitzer"

 

I agree with most of what you said, but the 5 speed GT's run 14.0 and under all day long here in Georgia (with good drivers). There are no stock 2002-2003 Maximas running that. I think that if the G35 (6 speed) and a GT (5 speed) raced, then all bet's would be off. The 14.2-14.4 times you listed are really what the beginner GT drivers run, and it's usually do to lack of experience (as is usually the case with any). Again, this is just from my experience in GA. I understand that other tracks and conditions may apply, but I can mis-shift badly and still run a 14.5 in a GT.

 

But how many of those GTs are completely stock? I'd venture to say less than 10%. Must Mustang guys do something to the cars likes gears, exhaust, and intake modification. If it's at the track, chances are it isn't stock. At Kansas City International, it's not uncommon to see modified 99+ GT 5 speeds hit low to mid 14s. Rarely do I ever see a modified 99+ GT grace the 13-second barrier. I do admit that my track is not known to generate great ET/MPHs. Lightly modified LS1 F-Bodies are lucky to get mid 13s@104 or so on street tires.



Dave

 

Take into consideration GA's track elevations when reading this...

The times I am referring to are times that I and some of my other buddies have run in stock cars. Most light mod GT's can hit mid 13's with relative ease. Moderate moded ones hit low 13's..so on and so forth. My 13.82 was run bone stock ('00 GT)...sans spare and jack. That's it. We have a total of 4 99+ GT's, and each and every one hits 14.0x or better each and every time out (unless someone misses a shift). KCIR is quite a bit higher in elevation than Silver Dollar...not sure about Commerece. That's probably the major difference. Of course, all the guys that run in my group could be deemed semi-pro, so that could also be a factor. A good race (at least IMHO) is my '02 Dakota and a stock 6 speed 2002+ Maxima. I've only run one, and he lost by bogging down on the launch (at least he didn't spin forever).