SAFC/TUNE or COILOVERS.........
03-26-2013, 04:12 PM
#42
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 539
Yeah....the car is definitely a little crippled by the handling. My SE actually does pretty well considering how high up it is, but when you are feeling frisky and you do 15-20 miles of "spirited driving" mashing the go pedal alot...you definitely notice its lack of stability...I bet coilovers are super fun.
03-26-2013, 04:44 PM
#43
Yeah....the car is definitely a little crippled by the handling. My SE actually does pretty well considering how high up it is, but when you are feeling frisky and you do 15-20 miles of "spirited driving" mashing the go pedal alot...you definitely notice its lack of stability...I bet coilovers are super fun.
03-26-2013, 06:49 PM
#45
I would take the tokico blues complete kit (struts and springs -1.25" all around) align, get a y, then save for safc and tune. This way you will enjoy turns better and will be prepared to take on the y pipe torque monster lol and tune
i do somewhat regret doing power first but I never intended to make his thing a handler... I love the powertrain and looks. Can't wait to install my illumina and stech, even though people **** on this setup it will be great coming from 18 year old oem suspension with 80k miles
i do somewhat regret doing power first but I never intended to make his thing a handler... I love the powertrain and looks. Can't wait to install my illumina and stech, even though people **** on this setup it will be great coming from 18 year old oem suspension with 80k miles
Last edited by carsnwomen91; 03-26-2013 at 06:54 PM.
03-26-2013, 07:05 PM
#46
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 539
I would take the tokico blues complete kit (struts and springs -1.25" all around) align, get a y, then save for safc and tune.
i do somewhat regret doing power first but I never intended to make his thing a handler... I love the powertrain and looks. Can't wait to install my illumina and stech, even though people **** on this setup it will be great coming from 18 year old oem suspension with 80k miles
i do somewhat regret doing power first but I never intended to make his thing a handler... I love the powertrain and looks. Can't wait to install my illumina and stech, even though people **** on this setup it will be great coming from 18 year old oem suspension with 80k miles
.....I think Im willing to cough up the extra $200 for the ability to dial in my exact ride height and dampening. Its likely these coilovers will last me the life of this car. I just did the tie rod ends and lower control arms.....coilovers would be the powermove!
The biggest car mistake I made sofar in my life was selling my 91 Celica GT when I didn't intend to. I had new struts and APEXi 2in lowering springs on it. Just an intake... (I was young..lol)...but this thing was on rollerskates. I think the only thing lower was one of those Civic SI hatchbacks that bottom out on a McDonalds salad container
. A salesman happened to have a MANUAL IS300 on the Toyota lot when I was going in to pick up a damn trunk piston. I had been through hell and back with this Celica and it was shiny and nice STILL. The best preserved one I've ever seen yet. 255k on the clock with new plugs n wires running like a top and I traded her for a newer car like she was nothing
STILL regret this. Although not as dramatic as this post seemsPoint being......Im not selling this Maxima until it refuses to look classy and take me where I want to go. At least once a week I give someone hell in this car (thats not even fully modded) thats driving some newer more powerful and twice as pricey car. They never expect a challenge, but they get one..lol. That to me is what its all about...lol
03-26-2013, 10:15 PM
#47
Ahhh the old spring/strut vs Coilover discussion?
Its almost impossible to argue pro spring and strut on this car. Coilovers are under 1k. Pretty hard to do spring and strut properly under 700.
That's without factoring labour, which is much more involved when doing spring and strut.
Its almost impossible to argue pro spring and strut on this car. Coilovers are under 1k. Pretty hard to do spring and strut properly under 700.
That's without factoring labour, which is much more involved when doing spring and strut.
03-27-2013, 06:27 AM
#48
Ahhh the old spring/strut vs Coilover discussion?
Its almost impossible to argue pro spring and strut on this car. Coilovers are under 1k. Pretty hard to do spring and strut properly under 700.
That's without factoring labour, which is much more involved when doing spring and strut.
Its almost impossible to argue pro spring and strut on this car. Coilovers are under 1k. Pretty hard to do spring and strut properly under 700.
That's without factoring labour, which is much more involved when doing spring and strut.
Coilovers are definitely the way to go, no question about it.
03-27-2013, 04:31 PM
#49
03-27-2013, 06:06 PM
#50
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 539
I would have to disagree. After this ypipe I'm gonna be putting down 200+ wheel torque. Isnt a stock 3.5 only about 205-210. I dont have that much money into modding this thing yet and it isnt even tuned.
So I say Pish Posh good sir....Pish Posh!
So I say Pish Posh good sir....Pish Posh!
03-28-2013, 06:35 AM
#56
Still would have liked to have seen dynojet numbers.
http://www.modified.com/tech/modp-09...n/viewall.html
In short:
http://www.modified.com/tech/modp-09...n/viewall.html
In short:
Fame Mustang 292.7
Pina Dyno Dynamics 318.6
Drift-Office Dynojet 312.5
Speed Factory Dynapack 324.4
English Racing Dynojet 315.9
Read more: http://www.modified.com/tech/modp-09...#ixzz2OqDqeD2T
Pina Dyno Dynamics 318.6
Drift-Office Dynojet 312.5
Speed Factory Dynapack 324.4
English Racing Dynojet 315.9
Read more: http://www.modified.com/tech/modp-09...#ixzz2OqDqeD2T
03-28-2013, 08:26 AM
#57
wut?
Dyno? Mods? Not saying untrue but with Manny barely pushing 7+whp on an '03AT, with proper tuning, your 250 sounds a little high. Just sayin'
**EDIT**
Read one of your threads on your DE-K build...yeah, cammed and all that sure 250whp sounds do-able. I stand by saying it's a waste on a DEK though...do the same mods on a vq35 and you would've netted 300whp, most likely. (which it looks like you agree with doing a 3.5 instead
)
Last edited by MrEous; 03-28-2013 at 08:31 AM.
03-28-2013, 08:35 AM
#58
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 539
Just my opinion...starting out with +33hp from a 5.5 just sounds so much better.
wut?
Dyno? Mods? Not saying untrue but with Manny barely pushing 7+whp on an '03AT, with proper tuning, your 250 sounds a little high. Just sayin'
**EDIT**
Read one of your threads on your DE-K build...yeah, cammed and all that sure 250whp sounds do-able. I stand by saying it's a waste on a DEK though...do the same mods on a vq35 and you would've netted 300whp, most likely. (which it looks like you agree with doing a 3.5 instead)
wut?
Dyno? Mods? Not saying untrue but with Manny barely pushing 7+whp on an '03AT, with proper tuning, your 250 sounds a little high. Just sayin'
**EDIT**
Read one of your threads on your DE-K build...yeah, cammed and all that sure 250whp sounds do-able. I stand by saying it's a waste on a DEK though...do the same mods on a vq35 and you would've netted 300whp, most likely. (which it looks like you agree with doing a 3.5 instead
)
. That fact that I can even get in the ballpark with WHP and just boltons to make up for a half a liter of displacement is pretty cool. People trash the DE-k but so far its actually responding to mods pretty similar to how my 2Jz did.
03-28-2013, 08:41 AM
#60
Just my opinion...starting out with +33hp from a 5.5 just sounds so much better.
wut?
Dyno? Mods? Not saying untrue but with Manny barely pushing 7+whp on an '03AT, with proper tuning, your 250 sounds a little high. Just sayin'
**EDIT**
Read one of your threads on your DE-K build...yeah, cammed and all that sure 250whp sounds do-able. I stand by saying it's a waste on a DEK though...do the same mods on a vq35 and you would've netted 300whp, most likely. (which it looks like you agree with doing a 3.5 instead)
wut?
Dyno? Mods? Not saying untrue but with Manny barely pushing 7+whp on an '03AT, with proper tuning, your 250 sounds a little high. Just sayin'
**EDIT**
Read one of your threads on your DE-K build...yeah, cammed and all that sure 250whp sounds do-able. I stand by saying it's a waste on a DEK though...do the same mods on a vq35 and you would've netted 300whp, most likely. (which it looks like you agree with doing a 3.5 instead
)
I did both. Because I'm heavy in the game, yahhmeen?
03-28-2013, 08:53 AM
#62
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 539
Haha.....
Hey don't think I didnt eyeball this on craigslist yesterday
http://atlanta.craigslist.org/atl/cto/3707063016.html
Little overpriced but the platform is all there.
Hey don't think I didnt eyeball this on craigslist yesterday
http://atlanta.craigslist.org/atl/cto/3707063016.html
Little overpriced but the platform is all there.
03-28-2013, 10:51 AM
#65
03-28-2013, 01:18 PM
#68
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 539
Clearly it was a pretty large thing to get an extra 32hp out of the same engine.
03-28-2013, 01:27 PM
#69
Adding a 0.5L, CVTC on the exhaust cams, different VIAS/IM, much higher flowing heads, better cooling, more aggressive cams, and higher CR only netted 33 hp, and only 28 in the case of the AE since we're paper racing now,
Oh, I know why, it's because they use the same injectors.
I'm not even going to try to explain anything anymore.
03-28-2013, 01:31 PM
#70
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 539
That's on paper, and you seem to like paper racing.
Adding a 0.5L, CVTC on the exhaust cams, different VIAS/IM, much higher flowing heads, better cooling, more aggressive cams, and higher CR only netted 33 hp, and only 28 in the case of the AE since we're paper racing now,
Oh, I know why, it's because they use the same injectors.
I'm not even going to try to explain anything anymore.
Adding a 0.5L, CVTC on the exhaust cams, different VIAS/IM, much higher flowing heads, better cooling, more aggressive cams, and higher CR only netted 33 hp, and only 28 in the case of the AE since we're paper racing now,
Oh, I know why, it's because they use the same injectors.
I'm not even going to try to explain anything anymore.
Wards ten best for like how many years? Lol
Why is the De-k superior for FI too? Odd.
03-28-2013, 02:23 PM
#71
VQ35:
VTCs, extra displacement, lighter valvetrain, more N/A power. Displacement naturally increases your ceiling for power as long as the internals and software you are using can support it. While we argue, guys with LS1/LSx powered anything are making 400whp N/A without breaking a sweat.
On the other side of that the VQ35DE has an underdeveloped intake manifold/intake system and weak rotating assembly. (some theorize that this was a cost cutting measure or a weight saving measure).
VQ30DE/K:
static cam timing (yuck, no control), less displacement, the K has that intake manifold that is very good at keeping the TQ curve flat. Enjoys high RPM or boost in stock form due to stronger/heavier rotating assembly and different rod bolt design (I don't have specifics on this exactly).
My VQ35 has a few things done to it, when I had a DEK I was on your side of the fence, but after having this engine there is no fence, people will drive what they will and you can make power with either platform.
Last edited by MoncefA33; 03-28-2013 at 02:25 PM.
03-28-2013, 02:24 PM
#72
Superior to what? The 30DE and 35DE?
Also, people forget to see my sig, I have a 95 VQ30 and it has MEVI/JWT 7200 and a few other things. People can argue the MEVI/00VI deal, BUT, let's not forget, 95 was the lightest of the VQ equipped vehicles.
Originally Posted by Ceffy
when I had a DEK I was on your side of the fence,
Last edited by NmexMAX; 03-28-2013 at 02:30 PM.
03-28-2013, 02:28 PM
#73
Not sure how anyone can say a 3.0 is better than a 3.5, we all know that there is no replacement for displacement.
Paper weights:
Stock 3.5l are rated up to 306 to the crank compared to 227 for a AE. I haven't seen a stock 3.0 that makes more than 260whp N/A. Then when you look at the potential of a 3.5l, people have been making upwards of 350whp.
There is no comparison, look at the area under the curve, tuning options, and aftermarket parts available.
In the real world, most of us do boltons and end it there. The gap in whp is even greater huge here.
Both are great motors but technology advances with the introduction of a newer motor.
Paper weights:
Stock 3.5l are rated up to 306 to the crank compared to 227 for a AE. I haven't seen a stock 3.0 that makes more than 260whp N/A. Then when you look at the potential of a 3.5l, people have been making upwards of 350whp.
There is no comparison, look at the area under the curve, tuning options, and aftermarket parts available.
In the real world, most of us do boltons and end it there. The gap in whp is even greater huge here.
Both are great motors but technology advances with the introduction of a newer motor.
03-28-2013, 02:33 PM
#74
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 539
Yes I guess....I've just read that if you are going to turbo or Supercharge...the DE-K is what you want. (doing my best Last Samurai accent) This suggest GREAT strength! OY!
03-28-2013, 04:10 PM
#75
The DEK takes more boost better.
The 3.5 takes less boost to surpass the DEK in power on every level, but doesn't take to high boost as well as the DEK.
The key to take away from that is that you need to boost the crap out of the DEK to meet a mildly-boosted/modded 3.5. That should tell you enough.
The 3.5 has it's maintenance problems, the DEK is bulletproof pretty much. That's the only area the DEK is better. Period. The 3.5 is a way better engine.
The 3.5 was pretty much new in this chassis. By the time it hit the 3rd model (I think) it was easily the best VQ ever built from what I know.
The 3.5 takes less boost to surpass the DEK in power on every level, but doesn't take to high boost as well as the DEK.
The key to take away from that is that you need to boost the crap out of the DEK to meet a mildly-boosted/modded 3.5. That should tell you enough.
The 3.5 has it's maintenance problems, the DEK is bulletproof pretty much. That's the only area the DEK is better. Period. The 3.5 is a way better engine.
The 3.5 was pretty much new in this chassis. By the time it hit the 3rd model (I think) it was easily the best VQ ever built from what I know.
03-28-2013, 04:33 PM
#76
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 539
The DEK takes more boost better.
The 3.5 takes less boost to surpass the DEK in power on every level, but doesn't take to high boost as well as the DEK.
The key to take away from that is that you need to boost the crap out of the DEK to meet a mildly-boosted/modded 3.5. That should tell you enough.
The 3.5 has it's maintenance problems, the DEK is bulletproof pretty much. That's the only area the DEK is better. Period. The 3.5 is a way better engine.
The 3.5 was pretty much new in this chassis. By the time it hit the 3rd model (I think) it was easily the best VQ ever built from what I know.
The 3.5 takes less boost to surpass the DEK in power on every level, but doesn't take to high boost as well as the DEK.
The key to take away from that is that you need to boost the crap out of the DEK to meet a mildly-boosted/modded 3.5. That should tell you enough.
The 3.5 has it's maintenance problems, the DEK is bulletproof pretty much. That's the only area the DEK is better. Period. The 3.5 is a way better engine.
The 3.5 was pretty much new in this chassis. By the time it hit the 3rd model (I think) it was easily the best VQ ever built from what I know.
But I hear ya....the bulletproofness is precisely why its perfect for me. I dont have crazy money to throw at a car as you can see......since I have to wait a month to buy the Ypipe and probably two more after that for coilovers..
.I have way too many hobbies. In addition to music, mountain bikes, road bikes, motorcycle AND Maxima now since I'd been ignoring the car for awhile. Thats too much $$
Im trying to pepper each hobby with a little funds every year to stay happy.
03-28-2013, 04:38 PM
#77
There you have it, do what makes you happy. If you wanna mod a DE-K, do it til you're content. Who cares what others think of YOUR hobbies and what makes YOU happy? I'm modding an 11 year old, 134xxx mile i35, not to impress anyone other than myself because I love to drive. No car payment, so I just splurge here and there for upgrades over time, just like you. I have to pick and choose between Jordan Retro releases and mods for the car. Wish I had unlimited money, but if I did, I probably wouldn't be modding an I35 haha. This way makes it more fun and worthwhile, to me at least. Just my .02
03-28-2013, 07:56 PM
#79
Not sure how anyone can say a 3.0 is better than a 3.5, we all know that there is no replacement for displacement.
Paper weights:
Stock 3.5l are rated up to 306 to the crank compared to 227 for a AE. I haven't seen a stock 3.0 that makes more than 260whp N/A. Then when you look at the potential of a 3.5l, people have been making upwards of 350whp.
There is no comparison, look at the area under the curve, tuning options, and aftermarket parts available.
In the real world, most of us do boltons and end it there. The gap in whp is even greater huge here.
Both are great motors but technology advances with the introduction of a newer motor.
Paper weights:
Stock 3.5l are rated up to 306 to the crank compared to 227 for a AE. I haven't seen a stock 3.0 that makes more than 260whp N/A. Then when you look at the potential of a 3.5l, people have been making upwards of 350whp.
There is no comparison, look at the area under the curve, tuning options, and aftermarket parts available.
In the real world, most of us do boltons and end it there. The gap in whp is even greater huge here.
Both are great motors but technology advances with the introduction of a newer motor.
Last edited by Rods03Max619; 03-28-2013 at 08:16 PM.
