5th Generation Maxima (2000-2003) Learn more about the 5th Generation Maxima, including the VQ30DE-K and VQ35DE engines.

.....TunerMaxima's Sell it or Keep it Thread......

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Dec 14, 2011 | 11:51 AM
  #281  
nelledge's Avatar
"I'm just sayin'..."
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,226
From: Texas
Originally Posted by Mr. Brett
...longer tubing is also going to create more friction, meaning more tumbling and stagnant air. If you want a good example of this, take a straw and suck through it. Notice at full length how it's more difficult to move air through it due to friction. Now, cut the straw in half and repeat the process. Finally, cut that half in half. The initial uptake of air becomes easier and easier, but the harder you draw, the less air you'll be able to inhale as the straw length shortens...
Old Dec 14, 2011 | 12:12 PM
  #282  
Mr. Brett's Avatar
iTrader: (7)
 
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 4
From: Nashville, TN
Originally Posted by nelledge
Did I miss something?

By all means, correct me if I'm wrong.
Old Dec 14, 2011 | 12:16 PM
  #283  
nelledge's Avatar
"I'm just sayin'..."
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,226
From: Texas
Originally Posted by Mr. Brett
Did I miss something?

By all means, correct me if I'm wrong.
Your straw example is related to pressure difference. ijs
Old Dec 14, 2011 | 12:24 PM
  #284  
Mr. Brett's Avatar
iTrader: (7)
 
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 4
From: Nashville, TN
Originally Posted by nelledge
Your straw example is related to pressure difference. ijs
Well correct me next time instead of ing.

Old Dec 14, 2011 | 12:50 PM
  #285  
nelledge's Avatar
"I'm just sayin'..."
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,226
From: Texas
Originally Posted by Mr. Brett
Well correct me next time instead of ing.

I didn't have the time. A noob, I would have. Intelligent, old-school orger like yourself? You get the . And now the .
Old Dec 14, 2011 | 12:56 PM
  #286  
Mr. Brett's Avatar
iTrader: (7)
 
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 4
From: Nashville, TN
Originally Posted by nelledge
I didn't have the time. A noob, I would have. Intelligent, old-school orger like yourself? You get the . And now the .
H'okay. If you sez so.
Old Dec 14, 2011 | 02:37 PM
  #287  
BobPezz's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 992
From: Rhode Island
Originally Posted by TunerMaxima3000
LOL you guys know me.... No patience anymore for modding I just have to dig in. I'm doing my best to keep a premise active on this car though that wasn't so active on the Maxima:

ANY PROJECT I START, I EITHER FINISH RIGHT AWAY, OR REASSEMBLE THE PARTS.

My maxima had a couple months here and there where I was driving around with it half torn apart, I am going to do my best not to let that nonsense happen this time.
1. I'm going to get the twist lock, or at least, different ones from SBL, I have a big order to put in to get some Orange/Amber LED's, I'm still undecided on colour scheme in the car, I want something that's still classy, and don't want to do Blue. The orange/Amber would be nice as long as I mainatin a Rich colour, not the Stock yellowish colour that these cars come with.

2. I'll be making or getting a midpipe, and when doing so would like to explore forming a true CAI, possibly using the stock intake ducts (there's 2), and somehow integrating the cold air port I 'made', I'd like to keep this system sealed so that the Cone filter can pull the air in from the outside, through the cold air port as well as the stock snorkle ducting. I had some 3" tubing laying around but it seems the stock intake is actually 3.5" or equivalent on the G, so I need to get more tubing in.

3. Regarding the exterior/body mods, I'm already looking into the coupe front end conversion, but haven't been able to find any conclusive information on it, specifically, what parts I need to get together aside from the obvious (Outer fenders, hood, headlights, bumper cover)

And I've already got a Coupe midpipe sitting in my basement awaiting install.
Looks like a nice clean installation so far.
Old Dec 14, 2011 | 03:03 PM
  #288  
TunerMaxima3000's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
iTrader: (4)
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 5,545
From: Ontario, Canada
Originally Posted by Eirik
Maybe you can answer this, Mr. Brett: I've been trying to find any solid research on whether the Helmholtz resonators BEFORE the intake manifold change the power curve or if they are solely there to reduce intake noise.

It's clear that the design of the intake manifold (link to fifty different Sparks threads here) provides that bump in air volume at specific frequencies/speeds, but it's not clear if the pipe leading into the intake manifold can enhance or otherwise affect that internal intake manifold tuning. It's irritating that they silence the engine so much, but if yanking it off detracts from the engine's power or airflow, wouldn't the silence be preferred?

The '02-'03 FWD VQ35 has pretty small resonators attached to the intake piping, but the one on the '04-'08 Maxima VQ35s is friggin' huge. I took the resonator off my 3L Taurus back in the day. It sounded great and I don't remember feeling any power loss, but that was several years ago on a low-compression, low-power engine designed in the mid-80s.

Have you any thoughts or links on this subject? My thoughts especially wander to what happens when you go from partial to full throttle. Would the air in the Helmholtz resonator get sucked out, providing a boost in airflow to compensate for the delay between butterfly opening and outside air making its way all the way down the intake piping? Or does a sudden change in pressure have no affect on the contents of the resonator..? Ah, so many points of confusion. =(

@Tuner: That's a gorgeous clock look you have going on there. The interior of your car is strikingly similar to the '02-'03 Maxima! I didn't realize the G35s looked like a Maxima from inside. Did it feel like home when you stepped from your 5th gen to the G35?
Thanks. They're similar at a glance maybe, in that they're designed by the same company, but that's about where it ends, the G interior is just better in every aspect, from quality of parts to overall design, it trumps the Maxima on every level except gauges and sunroof control design.

Also, the rear windows go all the way down, work on the auto-down feature of the key fab, and every window is auto up and down.

Regarding your statements about intake:
- Reducing restriction in the intake will 9/10 times create gains across the powerband. Those baffles are there to limit noise, that's about all they do well, otherwise, they're just restrictions and are robbing power.



Originally Posted by Mr. Brett
Honestly, man, I'll be straightforward with you. I'm not sure. As far as I know, to date, the best intake design out there for the MAXIMA is to run 3" ID intake tubing, sparks said something along the line of 32"(?), with a BBMAF, velocity stack, and the helmholtz in place.

Really, it comes down to what range of the RPMs you want to see gains in. Shorter tubing is going to give a resonant frequency that gains in the low end. Longer tubing is going to give a resonant frequency that gains in the top end. But longer tubing is also going to create more friction, meaning more tumbling and stagnant air. If you want a good example of this, take a straw and suck through it. Notice at full length how it's more difficult to move air through it due to friction. Now, cut the straw in half and repeat the process. Finally, cut that half in half. The initial uptake of air becomes easier and easier, but the harder you draw, the less air you'll be able to inhale as the straw length shortens.

Resonators such as the helmholtz take advantage of how different effects, such as bottle-necks, and increases in diameter can change the frequency of the fluid passing through it.

Think of air as moving in waves, just like sound acoustics. When the air moves into the intake manifold, it doesn't just get sucked directly into the engine, but rather, bounces around inside the manifold, sheering off of various surfaces until it's "eaten," so to speak, by the cylinders. Air will be bouncing off of the VIAS, rear manifold wall, intake valves, and everything else. Most of it will be reflected back toward the throttle body, as inertia will cause it to want to tend to keep moving in a straight line until it experiences an interference of some kind. The frequency of the air reflecting back and fourth in waves changes depending on the amount of air that the car is using. The bigger the volume of air you're moving, the higher the frequency is going to become, based on a chamber of the same volume.

For example, take two bottles of the same size, and fill one half-way with water, and the other a quarter of the way. Set them on their side, and give them a few rocks end-to-end. You'll see that the greater volume of water in the one tends to move back and fourth faster, as well as hold its inertial energy longer than the 1/4 filled bottle.

Those are the best examples I can come up with for right now. And there are tons and TONS of factors that I've left out that affect the frequency of air waves entering the intake. This is just going off of basic fluid dynamics. If anyone with more education in engineering/dynamics can correct anything I'm wrong about, or fill in anything I've missed, by all means, go ahead.

As far as your comment about the interior, the interior of the G is actually surprisingly different from the Maxima. About the only thing that looks similar is the center dash. The coupe and sedan interiors are actually quite similar, though.
You've got a few things mixed up my man.

Shorter intake is Higher RPM power, Low end loss.

Longer intake is vise-versa.

There's pretty much no such thing as 3" ID pipe, it's 3" OD, which equates to about 2.75" ID, anything larger than that would mean you have to install a different MAFS and tune accordingly.

IIRC, the DE-K likes a 32 inch pipe for it`s intake, and the 3.5 about 26-30 inches, shorter for higher HP, Longer for low end Torque.

Again, resonators and baffles in the intake are only for noise suppression, they are not designed to change the performance in a positive way.

Last edited by TunerMaxima3000; Dec 14, 2011 at 03:12 PM.
Old Dec 14, 2011 | 03:08 PM
  #289  
TunerMaxima3000's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
iTrader: (4)
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 5,545
From: Ontario, Canada
OAN to Eirik, yes different intake tuning will change the throttle response, which is the main thing`I think you`re trying to refer to. You`ll notice with pretty well any car with a cable TB that when you just stop on it, it kind of bogs down and doesn`t pul lhard until you get up in RPM.

But, same car, if you get on the accellerator partially, and once the air starts coming in gradually open the throttle (push the pedal), you`ll get more of a `boost`.
Old Dec 14, 2011 | 03:10 PM
  #290  
T_Behr904's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 10,344
From: Jacksonville, FL
Originally Posted by TunerMaxima3000
the DE-K likes a 32 inch pipe for it`s intake, and the 3.5 about 26-30 inches, shorter for higher HP, Longer for low end Torque.
So for the de-k, that 32 inch is total length? From the throttle body to the filter base?
Old Dec 14, 2011 | 03:23 PM
  #291  
BobPezz's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 992
From: Rhode Island
Originally Posted by TunerMaxima3000
Regarding your statements about intake:
- Reducing restriction in the intake will 9/10 times create gains across the powerband. Those baffles are there to limit noise, that's about all they do well, otherwise, they're just restrictions and are robbing power.
You've got a few things mixed up my man.

Shorter intake is Higher RPM power, Low end loss.
Longer intake is vise-versa.

There's pretty much no such thing as 3" ID pipe, it's 3" OD, which equates to about 2.75" ID, anything larger than that would mean you have to install a different MAFS and tune accordingly.

IIRC, the DE-K likes a 32 inch pipe for it`s intake, and the 3.5 about 26-30 inches, shorter for higher HP, Longer for low end Torque.
That's what I thought, thanks for clearing that up. It's probably why a CAI will work better than an SRI on a VQ30DE-K and vice versa for the VQ35DE.
Old Dec 14, 2011 | 03:29 PM
  #292  
BobPezz's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 992
From: Rhode Island
Originally Posted by TunerMaxima3000
OAN to Eirik, yes different intake tuning will change the throttle response, which is the main thing`I think you`re trying to refer to. You`ll notice with pretty well any car with a cable TB that when you just stop on it, it kind of bogs down and doesn`t pul lhard until you get up in RPM.

But, same car, if you get on the accellerator partially, and once the air starts coming in gradually open the throttle (push the pedal), you`ll get more of a `boost`.
Probably why the VQ30DE-K feels stronger with the VIAS working properly, and IMHO mandatory with an A/T. Since it's low end limited to begin with vs. the VQ35DE.
Old Dec 14, 2011 | 05:26 PM
  #293  
TunerMaxima3000's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
iTrader: (4)
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 5,545
From: Ontario, Canada
Originally Posted by T_Behr904
So for the de-k, that 32 inch is total length? From the throttle body to the filter base?
Yes That`s how it`s measured, it puts you into the corner of the engine bay, pretty much you just relocate the battery 90*, and if you`re ambitious, move the fuse panel also and send it to the corner. The reason no one does it or opts for the SRI, is cause it`s so much darn work to get the ìdeal set up.

All that said, I actually have a mandrel bent, pre measured pipe arrangement sitting in my basement with all the couplers to make a TRUE CAI for the Maxima, I thought I`d use them on the G but the piping is bigger on the G.

Originally Posted by BobPezz
Probably why the VQ30DE-K feels stronger with the VIAS working properly, and IMHO mandatory with an A/T. Since it's low end limited to begin with vs. the VQ35DE.
Yeah after having experienced both, the 3.5 is very torquey on the low end, and the DE-K and even the VQ30DE are both more 4000k-6300 RPM performers. This for me settled a lot of recurring arguments around here, normally the arguments are due to this fact. The 3.5 guys have no problem `losing`the low end for SRIs, BOP plates, etc, etc. Cause even if they do lose a pinch, they`ve still got tons.

But for those with the VQ30DE and DE-K, it would be painful to lose any of the low end torque, because it`s a slug in the low end already.
Old Dec 14, 2011 | 05:29 PM
  #294  
Rochester's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 5,296
From: Rochester, NY
Originally Posted by TunerMaxima3000
The 3.5 guys have no problem `losing`the low end for SRIs, BOP plates, etc, etc. Cause even if they do lose a pinch, they`ve still got tons.
That's so true. And now you've got a (functioning) 3.5 to play with.
Old Dec 14, 2011 | 06:45 PM
  #295  
Eirik's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 496
From: Boise, ID
Thanks, nelledge, Brett, TM. I wasn't asking the long-dead question of which intake setup is best, (as Sparks clearly answered that for us last year) but simply whether chopping off a Helmholtz resonator located early in the intake route affects the airflow in a negative manner. I think it's absurd to state that removing an object that air passes OVER and not into and out of will boost power, and fortunately no intelligent folk here have suggested that, so I'm just trying to figure out if the huge plastic chamber is really there solely for noise suppression.

I read a Popular Mechanics article (from the late 90s or early 2000s) that implied the chamber's effect on the intake air's pulses was greater than mere noise cancellation. I just found this one tonight, however, that says the complete opposite.

Massively ridiculous link behind here: "...the device should have no effect whatsoever on your engine's performance," meaning I need to find a way to plug the huge hole at the bottom of the air cleaner assembly. :


(16580: Much larger than the '02-'03 resonator. Net effect? The '04+ Maxima's engine is noticeably quieter than the '02. )



I'll stop hijacking your threads now, TM. Are you going to change your name? Brett did shortly before he got his G, but we can attribute it to that if it gives you reason to become "TUNER G NINE THOUSAND!" in a spurt of gay rainbows.
Old Dec 14, 2011 | 07:57 PM
  #296  
T_Behr904's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 10,344
From: Jacksonville, FL
Originally Posted by TunerMaxima3000
Yes That`s how it`s measured, it puts you into the corner of the engine bay, pretty much you just relocate the battery 90*, and if you`re ambitious, move the fuse panel also and send it to the corner. The reason no one does it or opts for the SRI, is cause it`s so much darn work to get the ìdeal set up.
Good to know. I currently have a Berk/Apexi filter setup now. Extending the current intake to a desired length will give me something to do to the car in the future.

I recall seeing some pics somewhere of an intake on a 5/5.5 that had the filter located in the fender with the filter in between that and the plastic wheel well liner. Not sure if that would give the desired length or not, so measurements would have to be made.
Old Dec 15, 2011 | 06:30 AM
  #297  
BobPezz's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 992
From: Rhode Island
Originally Posted by TunerMaxima3000
Yeah after having experienced both, the 3.5 is very torquey on the low end, and the DE-K and even the VQ30DE are both more 4000k-6300 RPM performers. This for me settled a lot of recurring arguments around here, normally the arguments are due to this fact. The 3.5 guys have no problem `losing`the low end for SRIs, BOP plates, etc, etc. Cause even if they do lose a pinch, they`ve still got tons.

But for those with the VQ30DE and DE-K, it would be painful to lose any of the low end torque, because it`s a slug in the low end already.
After doing a bit of research I found out the 3.0L is grossly oversquare vs. the 3.5L having only a 2.2mm larger bore but an 8.3mm longer stroke. Which gives significantly different pumping/crank angle/torque characteristics. Probably also why it's argued that aftermarket intakes on the 3.0L in daily driving, show minimal gains over the OEM setup. Which is rumored as being frequency tuned to simulate a longer intake path.

Originally Posted by TunerMaxima3000
I'll be making or getting a midpipe, and when doing so would like to explore forming a true CAI, possibly using the stock intake ducts (there's 2), and somehow integrating the cold air port I 'made', I'd like to keep this system sealed so that the Cone filter can pull the air in from the outside, through the cold air port as well as the stock snorkle ducting. I had some 3" tubing laying around but it seems the stock intake is actually 3.5" or equivalent on the G, so I need to get more tubing in.
I like your idea of using the OEM airbox/snorkel setup as a cold air box/CAI. From the picture of the OEM setup the "Cool Air Diverter" concept would be a big plus for getting cool air up to the OEM inlets. It looks like there's lots of space ahead of the radiator/support for a large and effective device.
Old Dec 15, 2011 | 06:44 AM
  #298  
TunerMaxima3000's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
iTrader: (4)
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 5,545
From: Ontario, Canada
Originally Posted by BobPezz
After doing a bit of research I found out the 3.0L is grossly oversquare vs. the 3.5L having only a 2.2mm larger bore but an 8.3mm longer stroke. Which gives significantly different pumping/crank angle/torque characteristics. Probably also why it's argued that aftermarket intakes on the 3.0L in daily driving, show minimal gains over the OEM setup. Which is rumored as being frequency tuned to simulate a longer intake path.



I like your idea of using the OEM airbox/snorkel setup as a cold air box/CAI. From the picture of the OEM setup the "Cool Air Diverter" concept would be a big plus for getting cool air up to the OEM inlets. It looks like there's lots of space ahead of the radiator/support for a large and effective device.
Yes you see why they're so different now. That's exactly right, the 3.0 needs a longer intake, people who slap a SRI on there don't see any real gains, they usually lose torque. In the case of the 3.0, the Injen is the only aftermarket option that actually acheives the necessary tuning lengths to show beneficial gains on a N/A 3.0. I've argued this before with the Injen Ne-Sayers.

At the end of the day, the only real intake for that car is the Injen, or a custom CAI, next to that running as far as you can get toward the fender is likely best but again, requires moving the fuse panel and battery, and if you're going ot do that may as well go into the fender and do it right.
Old Dec 15, 2011 | 08:47 AM
  #299  
BobPezz's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 992
From: Rhode Island
Originally Posted by TunerMaxima3000
Yes you see why they're so different now. That's exactly right, the 3.0 needs a longer intake, people who slap a SRI on there don't see any real gains, they usually lose torque. In the case of the 3.0, the Injen is the only aftermarket option that actually acheives the necessary tuning lengths to show beneficial gains on a N/A 3.0. I've argued this before with the Injen Ne-Sayers.

At the end of the day, the only real intake for that car is the Injen, or a custom CAI, next to that running as far as you can get toward the fender is likely best but again, requires moving the fuse panel and battery, and if you're going ot do that may as well go into the fender and do it right.
Actually, it's no revelation to me. You confirmed what I've always suspected. I think much of the controversy stems from the 00VI IM having a small plenum and augmenting it with the inlet path. Vs. the 3.5L IM's larger plenum and less inlet length need. Believe it or not, after calculation, the OEM airbox setup has a larger inlet area and should theoretically be better than 3" dia pipe. That's not even factoring in the supposed tuning to simulate a long intake path. So for a N/A 3.0L daily driver it's probably tough to do significantly better than the Nissan engineers. My best guess; the OEM setup was initially designed to work best for the 3.0L, but is restrictive on a 3.5L. And why only the 3.5L yields significant overall gains with a GAB or SRI mod.
Old Dec 15, 2011 | 09:00 AM
  #300  
BobPezz's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 992
From: Rhode Island
On another note;
Originally Posted by TunerMaxima3000
Regarding the exterior/body mods, I'm already looking into the coupe front end conversion, but haven't been able to find any conclusive information on it, specifically, what parts I need to get together aside from the obvious (Outer fenders, hood, headlights, bumper cover)
From the looks of the front end pics. Might I suggest simply changing the stock grill for a nice chrome or polished wire mesh unit. It would give a nice Jaguar like look with the OEM shape of the grill. And of course the lower lip of your choice.


Last edited by BobPezz; Aug 30, 2014 at 04:58 AM.
Old Dec 15, 2011 | 09:02 AM
  #301  
Rochester's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 5,296
From: Rochester, NY
I think billet grilles are hideous. They look cheap, even on a Jag.

However, I also think that Jag is gorgeous, so what do I know? LOL
Old Dec 15, 2011 | 09:24 AM
  #302  
BobPezz's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 992
From: Rhode Island
Originally Posted by Rochester
I think billet grilles are hideous. They look cheap, even on a Jag.

However, I also think that Jag is gorgeous, so what do I know? LOL
Aren't you contradicting yourself? Seriously, I'm not talking those cheapo grills, but a nicely made unit like the Jag uses. I think it looks very tasteful in a 'form follows function sexiness' for lack of a better term. Which has always been Jaguar's claim to fame aesthetically. It could look tasteful on Tuner's G35 as on the Jag if done properly. And there's no question he's capable of that.
Old Dec 15, 2011 | 09:57 AM
  #303  
TunerMaxima3000's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
iTrader: (4)
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 5,545
From: Ontario, Canada
Hmmm chain link style eh... Normally I'd be quite opposed to anything resembling a wire/mesh grille, as they normally just look like hacked in Home Depot gutter guard or Home screening.

one of the guys at work has a Photoshop Master CD I should get it from him.

In either event, I still haven't decided whether to do the coupe front end or not, basically from lack of information thus far. So until I do make that decision I'm not bothering looking at the front end options.

I am likely buying THIS set of Side skirts. (NISMO).

Just the side skirts though.
Old Dec 15, 2011 | 09:57 AM
  #304  
Rochester's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 5,296
From: Rochester, NY
Originally Posted by BobPezz
Aren't you contradicting yourself?
IDK. Maybe.

Billet grilles look like cheap bling, which looks out of place on a Jag, IMO.
Old Dec 15, 2011 | 10:12 AM
  #305  
Prophecy99's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 6,097
From: SE PA
i like the side skirts, really nice and bold yet subtle at the same time.
Old Dec 15, 2011 | 10:20 AM
  #306  
MoncefA33's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 1,982
Why are you guys talking about intakes.

82mm MAF/intake pipe or go home.
Old Dec 15, 2011 | 10:21 AM
  #307  
Rochester's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 5,296
From: Rochester, NY
Originally Posted by MoncefA33
Why are you guys talking about intakes.
It's what they do, Moncef. It's what they do.
Old Dec 15, 2011 | 10:25 AM
  #308  
MoncefA33's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 1,982
Originally Posted by Rochester
It's what they do, Moncef. It's what they do.
Old Dec 15, 2011 | 10:30 AM
  #309  
BobPezz's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 992
From: Rhode Island
Originally Posted by TunerMaxima3000
Hmmm chain link style eh... Normally I'd be quite opposed to anything resembling a wire/mesh grille, as they normally just look like hacked in Home Depot gutter guard or Home screening.

one of the guys at work has a Photoshop Master CD I should get it from him.

In either event, I still haven't decided whether to do the coupe front end or not, basically from lack of information thus far. So until I do make that decision I'm not bothering looking at the front end options.

I am likely buying THIS set of Side skirts. (NISMO).

Just the side skirts though.
Nice!
Old Dec 15, 2011 | 10:42 AM
  #310  
BobPezz's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 992
From: Rhode Island
Originally Posted by Rochester
IDK. Maybe.

Billet grilles look like cheap bling, which looks out of place on a Jag, IMO.
I respect your opinion, and in most cases I'd agree. But IMHO the Jag makes it work beautifully. For instance a bar grill would also look out of place on the Jag, like something off a Taurus.
Old Dec 15, 2011 | 10:44 AM
  #311  
Rochester's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 5,296
From: Rochester, NY
That's fine, man. Opinions are like cottonwood seeds... fluffy and flammable.
Old Dec 15, 2011 | 10:51 AM
  #312  
BobPezz's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 992
From: Rhode Island
Originally Posted by Rochester
That's fine, man. Opinions are like cottonwood seeds... fluffy and flammable.
I thought they were like popcorn....
Old Dec 15, 2011 | 10:52 AM
  #313  
Rochester's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 5,296
From: Rochester, NY
Originally Posted by BobPezz
I thought they were like popcorn....
Cut me some slack... I'm working without a net here.
Old Dec 15, 2011 | 10:54 AM
  #314  
Eirik's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 496
From: Boise, ID
Originally Posted by BobPezz
Believe it or not, after calculation, the OEM airbox setup has a larger inlet area and should theoretically be better than 3" dia pipe. ... So for a N/A 3.0L daily driver it's probably tough to do significantly better than the Nissan engineers. My best guess; the OEM setup was initially designed to work best for the 3.0L, but is restrictive on a 3.5L. And why only the 3.5L yields significant overall gains with a GAB or SRI mod.
But people don't seem to understand just how intelligent the engineers are that design every single piece on a car! I mean, look at how much time Sparks spent testing and retesting and testing and retesting his various intake setups to get us firm data on what produces the most power. Even after all that work, weren't his best designs providing ~7->~10 more HP than stock? All that labor and applied sciences and he could only beat the original engineers by 2.5% to 4%!

When he fabricated his own custom intake manifold to go along with the intake, he got much larger gains, but very few members on this forum are willing to go that far in search of more power.

It's also interesting that the automotive/mechanical engineers that design intakes and the like have been well-aware of all the principals that are JUST now making it into the mainstream enthusiast community. Those stereotypical, clipboard-toting, white-labcoat wearing white males hovering around experiments? Yeah, they don't get enough credit.


And a billet grill on a G35? Yuck-o. Those side skirts look really sharp, but the rear splitter is waaay out of place. =/ Good of you not to get suckered into the whole package, TM.

Last edited by Eirik; Dec 15, 2011 at 10:56 AM.
Old Dec 15, 2011 | 11:06 AM
  #315  
BobPezz's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 992
From: Rhode Island
Originally Posted by Rochester
Cut me some slack... I'm working without a net here.
Right, as if you EVER needed a net 'Roc'! Aesthetics is basically beauty in the eye of the beholder anyway.
Old Dec 15, 2011 | 11:12 AM
  #316  
BobPezz's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 992
From: Rhode Island
Originally Posted by Eirik
But people don't seem to understand just how intelligent the engineers are that design every single piece on a car! I mean, look at how much time Sparks spent testing and retesting and testing and retesting his various intake setups to get us firm data on what produces the most power. Even after all that work, weren't his best designs providing ~7->~10 more HP than stock? All that labor and applied sciences and he could only beat the original engineers by 2.5% to 4%!

When he fabricated his own custom intake manifold to go along with the intake, he got much larger gains, but very few members on this forum are willing to go that far in search of more power.

It's also interesting that the automotive/mechanical engineers that design intakes and the like have been well-aware of all the principals that are JUST now making it into the mainstream enthusiast community. Those stereotypical, clipboard-toting, white-labcoat wearing white males hovering around experiments? Yeah, they don't get enough credit.


And a billet grill on a G35? Yuck-o. Those side skirts look really sharp, but the rear splitter is waaay out of place. =/ Good of you not to get suckered into the whole package, TM.
100% agreed! And the grill was just a thought after seeing a Jag XK in person. It looked so nice on the Jag, I thought maybe etc. etc.
Old Dec 15, 2011 | 11:35 AM
  #317  
L_U_D_I_AMaxima's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 921
From: Columbus, OH
looking good there.... can't wait to see she is done
Old Dec 15, 2011 | 02:29 PM
  #318  
Nexus67's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (23)
 
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,136
From: NJersey
Originally Posted by TunerMaxima3000
Hmmm chain link style eh... Normally I'd be quite opposed to anything resembling a wire/mesh grille, as they normally just look like hacked in Home Depot gutter guard or Home screening.

one of the guys at work has a Photoshop Master CD I should get it from him.

In either event, I still haven't decided whether to do the coupe front end or not, basically from lack of information thus far. So until I do make that decision I'm not bothering looking at the front end options.

I am likely buying THIS set of Side skirts. (NISMO).

Just the side skirts though.
Damn Tuner the car in that link isn't the nicest, but sure is clean. Don't you dare get your G looking that clean

Last edited by Nexus67; Dec 15, 2011 at 02:35 PM.
Old Dec 15, 2011 | 02:58 PM
  #319  
TunerMaxima3000's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
iTrader: (4)
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 5,545
From: Ontario, Canada
Originally Posted by Eirik
But people don't seem to understand just how intelligent the engineers are that design every single piece on a car! I mean, look at how much time Sparks spent testing and retesting and testing and retesting his various intake setups to get us firm data on what produces the most power. Even after all that work, weren't his best designs providing ~7->~10 more HP than stock? All that labor and applied sciences and he could only beat the original engineers by 2.5% to 4%!

When he fabricated his own custom intake manifold to go along with the intake, he got much larger gains, but very few members on this forum are willing to go that far in search of more power.

It's also interesting that the automotive/mechanical engineers that design intakes and the like have been well-aware of all the principals that are JUST now making it into the mainstream enthusiast community. Those stereotypical, clipboard-toting, white-labcoat wearing white males hovering around experiments? Yeah, they don't get enough credit.


And a billet grill on a G35? Yuck-o. Those side skirts look really sharp, but the rear splitter is waaay out of place. =/ Good of you not to get suckered into the whole package, TM.
I'm not sure I agree about the rear lip, I like it actually. But I don't know what's cooking with the rear end any more than I do with the front at this point LOL, so just getting side skirts for now was a good call I think, couldn't pass the deal up.

Regarding the comments about intakes, I'll say this one last thing because we're getting way OT with it, the most important thing about ANY mod or performance viewed aspect is NOT the PEAK HP rating, which is what everyone looks at. The fact that he "only" made 7-10hp means nothing to me, it's about WHERE he made increases in power, what are the differences in response time, and most importantly, does it FEEL faster.

And don't forget, thats "WHP" gains, so the percentage based of stock doesn't work, you have to base it off stock WHP to gain the proper percentage reading.

Those are the most important things to me, I don't really care about all the numbers, while we do need them to set a baseline and give us a rough idea, I think people put WAY too much stock in the "peak HP" gain numbers.

And when it comes to tuning, it's not about peak HP, it's about functional power. You can make crazy high peak HP with an intake tuned into high RPM, but it's usually useless power. Less HP tuned to a usable RPM range is better in this application.


Originally Posted by L_U_D_I_AMaxima
looking good there.... can't wait to see she is done
If I've learnt anything, it's that they're never done but thanks man Im anxious to get it on the go obviously

Originally Posted by Nexus67
Damn Tuner the car in that link isn't the nicest, but sure is clean. Don't you dare get your G looking that clean
No guarantees!
Old Dec 15, 2011 | 03:22 PM
  #320  
BobPezz's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 992
From: Rhode Island
Originally Posted by TunerMaxima3000
And when it comes to tuning, it's not about peak HP, it's about functional power. You can make crazy high peak HP with an intake tuned into high RPM, but it's usually useless power. Less HP tuned to a usable RPM range is better in this application.
That's about the best definition I've heard yet!



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:45 AM.