How about those Pics????
WHEELMAN

 

It's not only the 5th gens. It's also in the 3rd gens like mine. 93 Max SE

 

If i'm not mistaken, this would be that elusive bump stop (circled in yellow). Notice the area directly beside it that receives the hit everytime you lock the turn.

 

Yep thats the 1
I guess ill give it a shot as well, the max seems to have the turning radius of a tour bus IMO.

 

Heading for da max with a wrench at daybreak.. then doing u turn testing
WHEELMAN

 

Let us know if it makes a difference if you remove the bolt.

 

you ppl should not remove those bolts...
besides, these bolts have 2 different styles: ajustable and NOT ajustable . The different design is used for different years, like 00/01, 02/->, 95-99, but i can't remember which is which... I'll try this: when i installed 2k2 hubs/knukls on 96 max i got giantic turn radius and... so 2k2 are not ajustable then... so i ether took the ajustable bolts off the 2k or the old ones off 96 and turnd them in so they got about a half short... It helped a little, but not much

 

The turning radius is designed into the car by the engineers. It has the steering geometry they designed it to have. If you want to risk damaging your car, go ahead and remove the steering stop bolts.

 

I agree. It looks like its there to prevent the CV joint from turning too far, possibley damaging it, or premature wear.

??

 

we might have the turn radius of a school bus but its better to live with that than replacing cv joints every couple months. all i can say is practice on 3 point turns.

 

I have yet to hear a real reason as to why the Maxima with 17" (SE/GLE) tires has a bigger turning radius than the Maxima with 16" tires (GXE), even though these 2 models share the same front suspension. It just doesn't make sense. All I hear is speculation about the tires rubbing, power steering pump stress, and CV joint weakness if we remove the steering stop bolts. If that was the case, then why do the 2k-2k2 Maxima GXE models have a much smaller turning radius (35.5' vs 40')?

 

i firmly believe it comes down to the tires because of this statement. 16" tires on the gxe vs. the 17" tires on the SE/GLE

i mean what else could differ? We could argue suspension but gle shares the same suspension the with the gxe.

Someone correct me if I am wrong

 

This is PURE SPECULATION, but my GUESS is that CV joints are more stressed when steering angles are at their greatest. The 3.5's available low end torque is quite a bit higher than the 3.0's. Engineers probably limited the steering angle to help reduce stress and wear on the joints from the bigger engine. Maybe this is just a fluke, but my 90 SE with the 160 hp 3.0 auto never needed replacement joints in the 130,000 miles I owned it, my 92 SE with 190 hp 5-speed needed both by 85,000 miles.

 

You forgot the GLE has those nice polished 7 spoke 17 in. rims and the 02/03 GXE has the 16 in. 5 spoke rims from the 00/01 GLE/ early SE Max. On the 02/03 the 16 in. rims look to small its something about the side skirts that make them appear that way to me. GXE's only made up about 5% of 02/03 Max production that why you rarely see them.

 

BTW the same horrible turning radius with the 17's and 18's is on the 2004 Max, their was a thread online someplace that someone explained that it was due to the larger rim size.