alti, 240h.p. -max. 255.h.p.?????
11-18-2001, 08:36 PM
#1
Guest
Posts: n/a
alti, 240h.p. -max. 255.h.p.?????
why does the max have 15 more h.p. but ,both cars have same torque?246 lbs. of torque. what we need is someone to dyno a alti auto and a max.se auto.......lets see whats up?compare the 2. i read the max 2k2 auto has 189 hp. at wheels.........who wants to dyno a 3.5 auto alti??????
11-18-2001, 10:54 PM
#3
Re: alti, 240h.p. -max. 255.h.p.?????
Originally posted by maxgsxr1
why does the max have 15 more h.p. but ,both cars have same torque?246 lbs. of torque. what we need is someone to dyno a alti auto and a max.se auto.......lets see whats up?compare the 2. i read the max 2k2 auto has 189 hp. at wheels.........who wants to dyno a 3.5 auto alti??????
why does the max have 15 more h.p. but ,both cars have same torque?246 lbs. of torque. what we need is someone to dyno a alti auto and a max.se auto.......lets see whats up?compare the 2. i read the max 2k2 auto has 189 hp. at wheels.........who wants to dyno a 3.5 auto alti??????
11-19-2001, 03:44 AM
#6
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 722
Originally posted by Jeff92se
The more I think about it, the more I start to suspect the maxima/altima are not that far from each other. I see most of the important bits(vtc & varible intake). So it could only be ecu or exhaust.
The more I think about it, the more I start to suspect the maxima/altima are not that far from each other. I see most of the important bits(vtc & varible intake). So it could only be ecu or exhaust.
wdave
11-19-2001, 04:23 AM
#7
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally posted by wdave
Don't forget the magic of print. It's not unknown for manufacturers to publicise low hp numbers for insurance purposes - why not for market position - just rate the Altima hp 500 - 1000 rpm below power peak and let the Max be king?
wdave
Don't forget the magic of print. It's not unknown for manufacturers to publicise low hp numbers for insurance purposes - why not for market position - just rate the Altima hp 500 - 1000 rpm below power peak and let the Max be king?
wdave
11-19-2001, 07:01 AM
#8
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: state of confusion
Posts: 1,341
Originally posted by maxgsxr1
o.k. i checked it out ......max. 255 @5800rpm alti 240@5800 rpm the alti has dual exhaust with less horsepower??????!!!!and yes i know its only dual tips..
o.k. i checked it out ......max. 255 @5800rpm alti 240@5800 rpm the alti has dual exhaust with less horsepower??????!!!!and yes i know its only dual tips..
Norm
11-19-2001, 07:57 AM
#9
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 119
Originally posted by Norm Peterson
Intake and exhaust restrictions are greater as rpm's climb, so it's entirely possible for two engines to have similar output up to perhaps peak torque rpm. Below this general rpm range, the restrictions aren't severe enough to make much difference and resonance tuning differences can make most of this up. Above, the torque and hp curves can easily deviate as the effects of things like smaller intake or exhaust pipe diameter, bend radii, cat flow rate, muffler size and design, air filter size, differing air box shape around the air inlet & outlet that frequently get compromised in a smaller chassis choke off the flow more in the "tighter" installation. This would be reflected in different fuel and ignition mapping. And resonance tuning for the low end & midrange may detract at higher rpms. One psi of extra exhaust backpressure is typically worth 2% or so power loss, and one psi intake restriction is more like 5% - 7%. So the 6% hp difference could be due to something like 2 psi more Alti exhaust backpressure and half a psi more Alti intake restriction at 5800 rpm. Or make up your own backpressure/restriction combination, as the numbers I used were only for the purposes of illustration.
Norm
Intake and exhaust restrictions are greater as rpm's climb, so it's entirely possible for two engines to have similar output up to perhaps peak torque rpm. Below this general rpm range, the restrictions aren't severe enough to make much difference and resonance tuning differences can make most of this up. Above, the torque and hp curves can easily deviate as the effects of things like smaller intake or exhaust pipe diameter, bend radii, cat flow rate, muffler size and design, air filter size, differing air box shape around the air inlet & outlet that frequently get compromised in a smaller chassis choke off the flow more in the "tighter" installation. This would be reflected in different fuel and ignition mapping. And resonance tuning for the low end & midrange may detract at higher rpms. One psi of extra exhaust backpressure is typically worth 2% or so power loss, and one psi intake restriction is more like 5% - 7%. So the 6% hp difference could be due to something like 2 psi more Alti exhaust backpressure and half a psi more Alti intake restriction at 5800 rpm. Or make up your own backpressure/restriction combination, as the numbers I used were only for the purposes of illustration.
Norm
How does extra 15HP help?
Where would it manifest itself--- i.e. how do we take advantage of it?
Would we only see that extra 15HP at high end?
11-19-2001, 08:34 AM
#10
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 816
2k2 altima and maxima 6-spds may just be fractions of seconds off of each other. the altima i think weighs only 1 lb more than the maxima. Motorweek has rated the 1/4 of the altima 3.5 SE 5-spd at 14.4 @ 100 mph. They have yet to do the Maxima SE 6spd.
Im thinking it will be very close. But the 255hp sounds better for marketing reasons, trying to boost sales of the minor restyling of the maxima, vs. the total restyling of the altima, many people will go for the altima which has a newer styling cues.
So Far I know my 2k2 auto does 14.73 @ 93 mph with aftermarket filter. and with 320 DTE on the screen (full tank).
Im going to break out the video camera when I do the next pass at the track, and when I dyno the car. Rated at 255hp to the engine, but 189 to the wheels? how much does the 2k1 manual/auto have to the wheels?? Run the 2k2 auto right and you will beat the manual/auto 2k1's.
Im thinking it will be very close. But the 255hp sounds better for marketing reasons, trying to boost sales of the minor restyling of the maxima, vs. the total restyling of the altima, many people will go for the altima which has a newer styling cues.
So Far I know my 2k2 auto does 14.73 @ 93 mph with aftermarket filter. and with 320 DTE on the screen (full tank).
Im going to break out the video camera when I do the next pass at the track, and when I dyno the car. Rated at 255hp to the engine, but 189 to the wheels? how much does the 2k1 manual/auto have to the wheels?? Run the 2k2 auto right and you will beat the manual/auto 2k1's.
11-19-2001, 08:44 AM
#11
Don't know if that's true or not. The dimensions of the Altima is actually larger than the 5-gen maxima or so the mags say. I think it's more marketing than packaging.
Originally posted by Norm Peterson
Intake and exhaust restrictions are greater as rpm's climb, so it's entirely possible for two engines to have similar output up to perhaps peak torque rpm. Below this general rpm range, the restrictions aren't severe enough to make much difference and resonance tuning differences can make most of this up. Above, the torque and hp curves can easily deviate as the effects of things like smaller intake or exhaust pipe diameter, bend radii, cat flow rate, muffler size and design, air filter size, differing air box shape around the air inlet & outlet that frequently get compromised in a smaller chassis choke off the flow more in the "tighter" installation. This would be reflected in different fuel and ignition mapping. And resonance tuning for the low end & midrange may detract at higher rpms. One psi of extra exhaust backpressure is typically worth 2% or so power loss, and one psi intake restriction is more like 5% - 7%. So the 6% hp difference could be due to something like 2 psi more Alti exhaust backpressure and half a psi more Alti intake restriction at 5800 rpm. Or make up your own backpressure/restriction combination, as the numbers I used were only for the purposes of illustration.
Norm
Intake and exhaust restrictions are greater as rpm's climb, so it's entirely possible for two engines to have similar output up to perhaps peak torque rpm. Below this general rpm range, the restrictions aren't severe enough to make much difference and resonance tuning differences can make most of this up. Above, the torque and hp curves can easily deviate as the effects of things like smaller intake or exhaust pipe diameter, bend radii, cat flow rate, muffler size and design, air filter size, differing air box shape around the air inlet & outlet that frequently get compromised in a smaller chassis choke off the flow more in the "tighter" installation. This would be reflected in different fuel and ignition mapping. And resonance tuning for the low end & midrange may detract at higher rpms. One psi of extra exhaust backpressure is typically worth 2% or so power loss, and one psi intake restriction is more like 5% - 7%. So the 6% hp difference could be due to something like 2 psi more Alti exhaust backpressure and half a psi more Alti intake restriction at 5800 rpm. Or make up your own backpressure/restriction combination, as the numbers I used were only for the purposes of illustration.
Norm
11-19-2001, 08:54 AM
#12
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: state of confusion
Posts: 1,341
[QUOTE]Originally posted by vmax8
That was a very good write-up! Thanks!!!
. . .
How does extra 15HP help? . . .
The extra 15 hp (about 6%) is worth about 2% quicker times in the 1/4 and 2% higher trap speed, all else being equal (car weight, gearing, tire size, aerodynamic drag, grip, shift points, etc.). So, let's say 0.3 second or so and a couple of mph. You could also expect about 2% more on the top end, so 146 vs 143 (or add about 3 to whatever, but that's another thread). I don't have a reliable formula for estimating the effect on 0 - 60, but look for about 0.2 second or so difference there.
. . . Where would it manifest itself--- i.e. how do we take advantage of it?
Would we only see that extra 15HP at high end?
You only see it up at the top of the rev range, and you'd only see the entire 15 hp at 5800. In general, the curves gradually diverge. At 5000 the difference might be only 8 - 10. At 6500 the difference could be more, perhaps as much as 20, but since you'd be past the peak (supposedly, anyway, since we don't have Nissan's official dyno sheets) you'd be comparing something like high 240's against high 220's (again, I'm just illustrating with numbers that are ballpark-consistent with the advt. numbers).
Norm
That was a very good write-up! Thanks!!!
. . .
How does extra 15HP help? . . .
The extra 15 hp (about 6%) is worth about 2% quicker times in the 1/4 and 2% higher trap speed, all else being equal (car weight, gearing, tire size, aerodynamic drag, grip, shift points, etc.). So, let's say 0.3 second or so and a couple of mph. You could also expect about 2% more on the top end, so 146 vs 143 (or add about 3 to whatever, but that's another thread). I don't have a reliable formula for estimating the effect on 0 - 60, but look for about 0.2 second or so difference there.
. . . Where would it manifest itself--- i.e. how do we take advantage of it?
Would we only see that extra 15HP at high end?
You only see it up at the top of the rev range, and you'd only see the entire 15 hp at 5800. In general, the curves gradually diverge. At 5000 the difference might be only 8 - 10. At 6500 the difference could be more, perhaps as much as 20, but since you'd be past the peak (supposedly, anyway, since we don't have Nissan's official dyno sheets) you'd be comparing something like high 240's against high 220's (again, I'm just illustrating with numbers that are ballpark-consistent with the advt. numbers).
Norm
11-19-2001, 11:15 AM
#13
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 119
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Norm Peterson
Thanks for coming through with clear explanations again--- this
issue has been in the backburner for a while, and I'd been thinking
that Nissan inflated the HP numbers for the 2k2 Maxima vs the 2k2
Altima.
Originally posted by vmax8
That was a very good write-up! Thanks!!!
. . .
How does extra 15HP help? . . .
The extra 15 hp (about 6%) is worth about 2% quicker times in the 1/4 and 2% higher trap speed, all else being equal (car weight, gearing, tire size, aerodynamic drag, grip, shift points, etc.). So, let's say 0.3 second or so and a couple of mph. You could also expect about 2% more on the top end, so 146 vs 143 (or add about 3 to whatever, but that's another thread). I don't have a reliable formula for estimating the effect on 0 - 60, but look for about 0.2 second or so difference there.
. . . Where would it manifest itself--- i.e. how do we take advantage of it?
Would we only see that extra 15HP at high end?
You only see it up at the top of the rev range, and you'd only see the entire 15 hp at 5800. In general, the curves gradually diverge. At 5000 the difference might be only 8 - 10. At 6500 the difference could be more, perhaps as much as 20, but since you'd be past the peak (supposedly, anyway, since we don't have Nissan's official dyno sheets) you'd be comparing something like high 240's against high 220's (again, I'm just illustrating with numbers that are ballpark-consistent with the advt. numbers).
Norm
That was a very good write-up! Thanks!!!
. . .
How does extra 15HP help? . . .
The extra 15 hp (about 6%) is worth about 2% quicker times in the 1/4 and 2% higher trap speed, all else being equal (car weight, gearing, tire size, aerodynamic drag, grip, shift points, etc.). So, let's say 0.3 second or so and a couple of mph. You could also expect about 2% more on the top end, so 146 vs 143 (or add about 3 to whatever, but that's another thread). I don't have a reliable formula for estimating the effect on 0 - 60, but look for about 0.2 second or so difference there.
. . . Where would it manifest itself--- i.e. how do we take advantage of it?
Would we only see that extra 15HP at high end?
You only see it up at the top of the rev range, and you'd only see the entire 15 hp at 5800. In general, the curves gradually diverge. At 5000 the difference might be only 8 - 10. At 6500 the difference could be more, perhaps as much as 20, but since you'd be past the peak (supposedly, anyway, since we don't have Nissan's official dyno sheets) you'd be comparing something like high 240's against high 220's (again, I'm just illustrating with numbers that are ballpark-consistent with the advt. numbers).
Norm
issue has been in the backburner for a while, and I'd been thinking
that Nissan inflated the HP numbers for the 2k2 Maxima vs the 2k2
Altima.
11-19-2001, 11:18 AM
#14
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Muncie, IN
Posts: 436
I was talking to one of the dealers here, and he explained that, more or less, the Altima and the Maxima are the same type of machine (4-door sport sedan) but each are aimed at a different demographic. The Max is being aimed more at the older (40+) established crowd where the Altima is aimed more at the younger types. The Max delivers a more sophisticated, powerful ride where the Altima delivers a more "energetic" experience (Based on my test drive of the 2k2 Alt, I can verify the "energetic" part.)
11-19-2001, 11:49 AM
#15
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 499
Re: Re: alti, 240h.p. -max. 255.h.p.?????
Originally posted by RBa
Good question... But my question, which is faster?
Good question... But my question, which is faster?
As far as how the drive went, that thing was a monster. The engine sounded robust from inside the cabin (lack of insulation) as I revved it up. The shifter has a better feel than my 2001 Maxima 5 speed.
Accelerating from first gear to 6000 RPM, you really have to wrestle with the steering wheel to keep it from going sideways (torque steer). After that it was manageable It was pretty responsive on the highway. Very Noisy inside the cabin.
The car's pretty quick. From what my butt dyno can tell that claimed 14-point-something 1/4 mile someone mentioned in this post is easily attainable, skilled driver or not. But the fit and finish of the Altima is at the level of the Sentra.
11-19-2001, 12:04 PM
#16
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 119
Originally posted by Thorzdad
I was talking to one of the dealers here, and he explained that, more or less, the Altima and the Maxima are the same type of machine (4-door sport sedan) but each are aimed at a different demographic. The Max is being aimed more at the older (40+) established crowd where the Altima is aimed more at the younger types. The Max delivers a more sophisticated, powerful ride where the Altima delivers a more "energetic" experience (Based on my test drive of the 2k2 Alt, I can verify the "energetic" part.)
I was talking to one of the dealers here, and he explained that, more or less, the Altima and the Maxima are the same type of machine (4-door sport sedan) but each are aimed at a different demographic. The Max is being aimed more at the older (40+) established crowd where the Altima is aimed more at the younger types. The Max delivers a more sophisticated, powerful ride where the Altima delivers a more "energetic" experience (Based on my test drive of the 2k2 Alt, I can verify the "energetic" part.)
Looks like Nissan may have done the opposite in some cases.
So far, I've seen a guy in his 50's and a woman in her 40's
drive 2k2 Altimas (both SE's).
My friends (mostly guys in their 20's and early
30's) happen to like the 2k2 Max more than the 2k2 Altima. I've
decided to get a 2k2 6spd HLSD Max as soon as it becomes available.
I wonder if Nissan is surprised that the Max is still doing a good
job attracting the younger crowd.
11-19-2001, 01:03 PM
#17
Maxima Pilot
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Beaverton, Oregon
Posts: 1,467
Interesting post earlier about the Altima's....
...torque steer....I would figure the opposite, less torque steer than the Max as it really is a generation newer suspension-wise. As an example, the rear suspension on the Altima is nearly a copy from the new Skyline GTR's. Yes, that will have nothing to do with front-drive torque steer but I was using that as a point to state that all I've read is that the Altimas suspension is supposedly more modern and composed than the Maxes so more torque steer would be a surprise.
Anyone else seen this or could it have been a poor example of an Altima that was showing this behavior?
Anyone else seen this or could it have been a poor example of an Altima that was showing this behavior?
so i guess we don't know for sure what the real numbers are.
11-24-2001, 06:55 PM
#21
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 431
Originally posted by tomcat
In addition, the target buyers for the two vehicles are distinctly different:
-The target customer for Maxima is 40-50 years old; Altima target buyers are 30-40 years old.
-Maxima buyers have higher household incomes
-Maxima attracts more male buyers
-Maxima attracts more married buyers
Generally, Maxima buyers have reached many of their personal and professional goals. Altima buyers, on the other hand, are still buying homes, establishing families, and seeking new experiences."
This was an excerpt from a sales sheet that was faxed to my by a Nissan dealer. It is tited.. 'Introducing Maxima"
Tomcat
In addition, the target buyers for the two vehicles are distinctly different:
-The target customer for Maxima is 40-50 years old; Altima target buyers are 30-40 years old.
-Maxima buyers have higher household incomes
-Maxima attracts more male buyers
-Maxima attracts more married buyers
Generally, Maxima buyers have reached many of their personal and professional goals. Altima buyers, on the other hand, are still buying homes, establishing families, and seeking new experiences."
This was an excerpt from a sales sheet that was faxed to my by a Nissan dealer. It is tited.. 'Introducing Maxima"
Tomcat
Despite that I've seen $30K Altimas sitting in the dealer lots. Marketing sucks.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
BPuff57
Advanced Suspension, Chassis, and Braking
33
04-16-2020 05:15 AM
PeterUbers
5th Generation Maxima (2000-2003)
14
11-21-2002 11:21 AM
2M0A0X2
5th Generation Maxima (2000-2003)
2
02-17-2002 07:46 PM