6th Generation Maxima (2004-2008) Discussion of the 6th generation Maxima. Come see what others are saying.

1/4 times for an SE auto...

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Aug 13, 2003 | 09:36 PM
  #1  
QuikSilver04's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 167
1/4 times for an SE auto...

Check it here...
Old Aug 13, 2003 | 10:06 PM
  #2  
ga2000's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 443
x

whats up bro congrats for being the first se auto to run at the track... how much did u lower the presure to? and what was the weather like? hot humid?? but 15.2 isnt bad but i think it could do alittle better?? great job!!! did u nail it off the line? or just ease on to it? im going next week so ill se if i run evan or do better. weather permitting of course, how much does the spare and jack weight anyway??
Old Aug 14, 2003 | 10:30 AM
  #3  
ga2000's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 443
i cant believe noone responded to this thread yet??
Old Aug 14, 2003 | 10:47 AM
  #4  
JAKE02's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 717
Originally posted by ga2000
i cant believe noone responded to this thread yet??

Low 15's is about what I figured, Nissan may have done it again.......6th gen slower than 5th gen, just like the 5th gen (00/01) was slower than the 4th gen. More horsepwer (maybe) but more weight.....
Old Aug 14, 2003 | 11:04 AM
  #5  
ga2000's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 443
i really dont think its slower than the 02 and 03, the temps where bad and the track conditions where horrible.. so i think it will run neck and neck with any stock 02 and 03.
Old Aug 14, 2003 | 11:52 AM
  #6  
MONTE 01&97 SE's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 3,750
From: Manhattan Beach, Ca / Dallas, Tx
Not bad, but I hope/think you could do better, 02/03's are running better times on not so great track as well thats proven. Your the first hopefully it will get better for the 04's I hope one breaks into the 14's and traps at 93-95mph like stock 02/03's can, and if an SE is running these times I can only imagine what the 4spd auto SL would run.
Old Aug 14, 2003 | 12:01 PM
  #7  
1SICKLEX's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 535
Well, it's really not bad. It's not a track car, it weighs more than any previous Maxima.
Old Aug 14, 2003 | 12:17 PM
  #8  
MONTE 01&97 SE's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 3,750
From: Manhattan Beach, Ca / Dallas, Tx
Originally posted by 1SICKLEX
Well, it's really not bad. It's not a track car, it weighs more than any previous Maxima.
But has more power and a more effecient auto tranny than any other Max as well!
Old Aug 14, 2003 | 02:33 PM
  #9  
Driver72's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 209
That's not too bad Quiksilver

I plugged in 90 degree heat and 85% humidity into the acceleration computer and got the following for the 04 Maxima SE with auto tranny:

1/4 mile in 15.08 @ 95.3 mph

Also keep in mind, this is calculated at sea level in perfectly still wind, with only 30 pounds of fuel, a 160 pound driver and tire pressures of 35 psi when hot, and perfectly level road (not even an inch elevation change).

Everything being perfect, the 04 Max SE auto should run a:

14.93 @ 95.96 mph

Your 15.2 @ 92+ mph is pretty good considering all things will basically NEVER be perfect!
Old Aug 14, 2003 | 02:53 PM
  #10  
4drsleeper's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 218
I guess I can count out high 13's with just an intake. just kidding.
14's is decent for such a big car. I'll definitely be adding an intake but I'll leave the stock exhause because I like the quiet ride. I wait and see what people say about the headers when they hit the marker, I really don't want to sacrifice the quiet stealh ride.
Old Aug 14, 2003 | 03:03 PM
  #11  
Glude's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,780
I ran my GF 02 auto the other night after a few races and i honked it off. I drive a 6 speed 04. anyways i told her to floor it on 2 honks because the auto takes a sec to go so we went from about 70 and i dropped it to 3rd and when i shifted to 4th I had about 1 1/2 and still pulling. I really think its a drivers race between the 02,03,and 04. Just my $.02
Old Aug 14, 2003 | 03:06 PM
  #12  
JAKE02's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 717
Originally posted by MONTE 01&97 SE
But has more power and a more effecient auto tranny than any other Max as well!
Old Aug 14, 2003 | 04:48 PM
  #13  
1SICKLEX's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 535
But has more power and a more effecient auto tranny than any other Max as well!
More weight and more power cancel each other out. You have to have a significant increase in hp to see the difference.

The 03 Max has what 260hp, the 04 265, 5 more?
The 04 Max weighs maybe 200lbs more? Simply divide for the power to weight ratio. Aerodynamics only play a large part at speeds over 100mph.

But it is an auto, the manual 04 Max should be faster by a tick or 2, still not bad times at all considering the heat.
Old Aug 14, 2003 | 04:54 PM
  #14  
c2003k's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 58
Originally posted by Driver72
That's not too bad Quiksilver

I plugged in 90 degree heat and 85% humidity into the acceleration computer and got the following for the 04 Maxima SE with auto tranny:

1/4 mile in 15.08 @ 95.3 mph

Also keep in mind, this is calculated at sea level in perfectly still wind, with only 30 pounds of fuel, a 160 pound driver and tire pressures of 35 psi when hot, and perfectly level road (not even an inch elevation change).

Everything being perfect, the 04 Max SE auto should run a:

14.93 @ 95.96 mph

Your 15.2 @ 92+ mph is pretty good considering all things will basically NEVER be perfect!
Try 86 degrees and 94% humidity, that’s exactly what is was when he ran last night
Old Aug 14, 2003 | 06:31 PM
  #15  
MONTE 01&97 SE's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 3,750
From: Manhattan Beach, Ca / Dallas, Tx
Originally posted by 1SICKLEX


More weight and more power cancel each other out. You have to have a significant increase in hp to see the difference.

The 03 Max has what 260hp, the 04 265, 5 more?
The 04 Max weighs maybe 200lbs more? Simply divide for the power to weight ratio. Aerodynamics only play a large part at speeds over 100mph.

But it is an auto, the manual 04 Max should be faster by a tick or 2, still not bad times at all considering the heat.
Actually the 03's have 255hp and donot have the 5spd auto.
Old Aug 14, 2003 | 07:02 PM
  #16  
3.0HO
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Originally posted by JAKE02



Low 15's is about what I figured, Nissan may have done it again.......6th gen slower than 5th gen, just like the 5th gen (00/01) was slower than the 4th gen. More horsepwer (maybe) but more weight.....
Nah it is only a couple of runs. Very hot day. 60ft is not so hot. Probably be close to the same speed. Manually shifted? What RPM?
Old Aug 14, 2003 | 08:00 PM
  #17  
QuikSilver04's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 167
c2003k was there and taped both my runs, but the track was really bad last night for everyone. I really think that after it cools down it will run a high 14. I might take that box out and just put a filter on it next time.

I used the SportShift last night and it usually shifts for you but I shifted before it shifted for me. I lowered the tires just a little bit, I'm not sure how much it was though. The spare and the jack weighed probably 40-50lbs.

I'll just have to wait until the temp. drops to about 60 or so, should run alot faster then.

About the SL auto, I ran a friend of mine in one a few days ago from 2 red lights, beat him both times about 2-3 lengths each time. Not sure if it was his driving, or something else, but c2003k knows someone that has one, so he will probably take it to the track, hopefully.
Old Aug 15, 2003 | 11:47 AM
  #18  
Driver72's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 209
Originally posted by c2003k


Try 86 degrees and 94% humidity, that’s exactly what is was when he ran last night
15.03 @ 95.27 mph

Again, at sea level, no wind, no elevation change, 30 lbs of fuel, 35 psi in tires (hot), and 160 lbs driver.
Old Aug 15, 2003 | 02:04 PM
  #19  
Dany's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,147
Originally posted by Glude
I ran my GF 02 auto the other night after a few races and i honked it off. I drive a 6 speed 04. anyways i told her to floor it on 2 honks because the auto takes a sec to go so we went from about 70 and i dropped it to 3rd and when i shifted to 4th I had about 1 1/2 and still pulling. I really think its a drivers race between the 02,03,and 04. Just my $.02
Yeah 02 Auto against 6-speed 04 is not really even race. I raced one Auto 02 Max and pulled on him as well.
Old Aug 15, 2003 | 05:09 PM
  #20  
MONTE 01&97 SE's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 3,750
From: Manhattan Beach, Ca / Dallas, Tx
Originally posted by QuikSilver04
c2003k was there and taped both my runs, but the track was really bad last night for everyone. I really think that after it cools down it will run a high 14. I might take that box out and just put a filter on it next time.

I used the SportShift last night and it usually shifts for you but I shifted before it shifted for me. I lowered the tires just a little bit, I'm not sure how much it was though. The spare and the jack weighed probably 40-50lbs.

I'll just have to wait until the temp. drops to about 60 or so, should run alot faster then.

About the SL auto, I ran a friend of mine in one a few days ago from 2 red lights, beat him both times about 2-3 lengths each time. Not sure if it was his driving, or something else, but c2003k knows someone that has one, so he will probably take it to the track, hopefully.
Wow if he was driving the SL is alot slower.
Old Aug 15, 2003 | 07:23 PM
  #21  
JAKE02's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 717
Originally posted by MONTE 01&97 SE
Wow if he was driving the SL is alot slower.
Very true Monte........
Old Aug 16, 2003 | 09:56 PM
  #22  
cefiro a32's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 241
Ill say 15.2
Old Aug 16, 2003 | 10:24 PM
  #23  
kit99bar's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 420
the trap speeds are really low
I'd expect 95ish

lets see what you get when it's cooler
Old Aug 17, 2003 | 04:14 PM
  #24  
Dave B's Avatar
Not DAVEB the parts guy
 
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 8,549
Originally posted by c2003k


Try 86 degrees and 94% humidity, that’s exactly what is was when he ran last night
No it wasn't.

Conditions in Gainesville, FL on 8/13 from 6pm to 10pm

Temps ranged from 87 to 77 degrees as it got later

Humidity ranged from 57 to 81 % as it got later

Data from www.wunderground.com (NOAA)


Dave
Old Aug 17, 2003 | 04:22 PM
  #25  
Craig Mack's Avatar
All YOUR grammer belong to me
 
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 7,400
QuikSilver04: You got rid of a 2k1 Lightning for a Maxima?
Old Aug 18, 2003 | 07:04 AM
  #26  
QuikSilver04's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 167
Yea, couldn't afford $20 or more a day in 93 octane
Old Aug 18, 2003 | 09:43 AM
  #27  
Driver72's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 209
Yeah, that 10-11 mpg really bites-*** doesn't it?
Old Aug 18, 2003 | 10:48 AM
  #28  
QuikSilver04's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 167
Mine was more like 6-8mpg usually, because I had to drive alot around town, stop-and-go was terrible on gas, considering I also had a 16" custom air filter and a dual-program chip, along with no mufflers. Was quite a gas hog, but would also roast 1st to 2nd on dry pavement
About to get my AA this fall, then move to Jacksonville and go to UNF so I had to get something else better on gas, and I think the Max is slightly more attractive to the female gender, since most of the ones I know have given more compliments on the car than the truck
Old Aug 18, 2003 | 06:12 PM
  #29  
c2003k's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 58
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Dave B


No it wasn't.

Conditions in Gainesville, FL on 8/13 from 6pm to 10pm

Temps ranged from 87 to 77 degrees as it got later

Humidity ranged from 57 to 81 % as it got later

Data from www.wunderground.com (NOAA)


Dave
[/QUOTE

I got my info from UF; I am not going to argue about it. I meant to save the picture to post, because I know someone would do this
Old Aug 19, 2003 | 01:36 PM
  #30  
QuikSilver04's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 167
Felt like it was alot hotter and thicker than it sounds. I know it will run better when the air cools down and thins out...

BTW, c2003k, did I right light both times? Somebody posted in the 1/4 timeslip forum under my post and said I redlighted both times, that's why I beat the SS off the line so bad, did I?
Old Aug 19, 2003 | 04:53 PM
  #31  
c2003k's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 58
Originally posted by QuikSilver04
Felt like it was alot hotter and thicker than it sounds. I know it will run better when the air cools down and thins out...

BTW, c2003k, did I right light both times? Somebody posted in the 1/4 timeslip forum under my post and said I redlighted both times, that's why I beat the SS off the line so bad, did I?


No you did not. When I raced a cl-type s he jumped both times his r/t was….-.078. Since there is no “-“by your number, you just timed it perfect.
Old Aug 20, 2003 | 08:10 PM
  #32  
SteVTEC's Avatar
Dyno plot says I have the most area under the Administrator curve
 
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 7,064
Originally posted by Driver72
Everything being perfect, the 04 Max SE auto should run a:

14.93 @ 95.96 mph

Your 15.2 @ 92+ mph is pretty good considering all things will basically NEVER be perfect!
I think you might be forgetting that CarTest2000 assumes 15" 45lb wheels and tires. The Maxima has whopper 18" wheels/tires that probably weigh about 55lb each. The wheel weight algorithm isn't accurate at all, so you have to adjust the curb weight. 8lb of curb weight for every extra single pound of extra wheel/tire mass, and you have 4 wheels/tires. So that's 320lb you need to add to the curb weight to compensate for the big 18's. Once you do that, I get...

Hot-n-Humid 90F/90% Hum: 15.11 @ 93.35 w/2.39 60'
Standard, 65F/55% Hum: 15.05 @ 93.74 w/2.39 60'
Cold, 35F/0% Hum: 14.97 @ 94.22 w/2.38 60'

The numbers I'm getting are a bit closer with the wheel weight compensation. I don't think these cars are going to be trapping at 95/96 mph on the automagic without some mods. Just too heavy, especially the 18's. Also, the program is much more accurate when you are using an actual dyno curve. With the 02/03's, the rated numbers were way off compared to the actual numbers, so who know what this engine is really doing. I don't think anybody has dynoed yet, have they?
Old Aug 20, 2003 | 09:44 PM
  #33  
bluemaxx's Avatar
Moderator GT-R
 
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 19,780
Originally posted by SteVTEC
I think you might be forgetting that CarTest2000 assumes 15" 45lb wheels and tires. The Maxima has whopper 18" wheels/tires that probably weigh about 55lb each. The wheel weight algorithm isn't accurate at all, so you have to adjust the curb weight. 8lb of curb weight for every extra single pound of extra wheel/tire mass, and you have 4 wheels/tires. So that's 320lb you need to add to the curb weight to compensate for the big 18's. Once you do that, I get...

Hot-n-Humid 90F/90% Hum: 15.11 @ 93.35 w/2.39 60'
Standard, 65F/55% Hum: 15.05 @ 93.74 w/2.39 60'
Cold, 35F/0% Hum: 14.97 @ 94.22 w/2.38 60'

The numbers I'm getting are a bit closer with the wheel weight compensation. I don't think these cars are going to be trapping at 95/96 mph on the automagic without some mods. Just too heavy, especially the 18's. Also, the program is much more accurate when you are using an actual dyno curve. With the 02/03's, the rated numbers were way off compared to the actual numbers, so who know what this engine is really doing. I don't think anybody has dynoed yet, have they?
These are the only 1/4 numbers that I know about. If you are really motivated you can search (good luck) for their respective track conditions in other posts. The auto is in FL and the 6spd is in E. TX. So One hot and humid and one hot and really humid.

SE 6 Speed
Originally posted by Glude
ok i went to the 1/4 track last night. ran with full interior and spare, with nothing removed. all tires were at 32 PSI. Heres my 2 best runs:

60' - 2.431 - 2.022
1/8 - 9.848 - 9.592
MPH - 74.16 - 73.75
1/4 - 15.086 - 14.851
MPH - 93.05 - 92.94

I know i can run wayyy better when i have the spare out and change the psi in the tires but this was for a general idea and i didnt feel like messin with it. i will go back soon to improve. later

SE 5 Spd Auto


Originally posted by QuikSilver04
Took the car to the track tonight

Ran it twice, felt like it wasn't going to get any faster so I gave up.

1st Run
R/T .188
60' 2.483
330 6.575
1/8 9.932
MPH 72.37
1000 12.831
1/4 15.276
MPH 92.30

2nd Run
R/T .230
60' 2.314
330 6.464
1/8 9.844
MPH 71.77
1000 .000
1/4 15.219
MPH 92.05

That pretty much tells all. I took spare & jack out, along with air filter, and lowered the front tires till they were just a little bit saggy. Avoided the water, just gassed it and spun a little bit for the burnout, staged and tried to get a good jump on the 3rd yellow light. 1st run kind was of spinning, but the 2nd I got a good jump and it didn't spin. 1st run was against a yellow S-10 extended cab, 2nd run was a girl driving a 96 or so Red Camaro SS. She ran a 14.115@99.74mph to my 15.219 but I got her pretty bad off the line, she caught me right at the 1/8.

Will have pics of timeslips posted tomorrow...
Old Aug 20, 2003 | 09:44 PM
  #34  
Glude's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,780
Originally posted by SteVTEC
I think you might be forgetting that CarTest2000 assumes 15" 45lb wheels and tires. The Maxima has whopper 18" wheels/tires that probably weigh about 55lb each. The wheel weight algorithm isn't accurate at all, so you have to adjust the curb weight. 8lb of curb weight for every extra single pound of extra wheel/tire mass, and you have 4 wheels/tires. So that's 320lb you need to add to the curb weight to compensate for the big 18's. Once you do that, I get...

Hot-n-Humid 90F/90% Hum: 15.11 @ 93.35 w/2.39 60'
Standard, 65F/55% Hum: 15.05 @ 93.74 w/2.39 60'
Cold, 35F/0% Hum: 14.97 @ 94.22 w/2.38 60'

The numbers I'm getting are a bit closer with the wheel weight compensation. I don't think these cars are going to be trapping at 95/96 mph on the automagic without some mods. Just too heavy, especially the 18's. Also, the program is much more accurate when you are using an actual dyno curve. With the 02/03's, the rated numbers were way off compared to the actual numbers, so who know what this engine is really doing. I don't think anybody has dynoed yet, have they?
I dont think anyone has dynoed yet, although Frankencar is suppose to have a dyno up soon to show the true power of their intake so i assume they will have a baseline along with the intake installed, that should give us a general idea and the answer to the question as to if the maxima really does have 10 more hp and tq. I possibly might take my 04 back to the track this saturday. I want to improve my 14.8 and put a few 5th gen times to shame. Not hatin' just enjoying this new car to much.
Old Aug 21, 2003 | 10:41 AM
  #35  
Dany's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,147
Originally posted by Glude


I dont think anyone has dynoed yet, although Frankencar is suppose to have a dyno up soon to show the true power of their intake so i assume they will have a baseline along with the intake installed, that should give us a general idea and the answer to the question as to if the maxima really does have 10 more hp and tq. I possibly might take my 04 back to the track this saturday. I want to improve my 14.8 and put a few 5th gen times to shame. Not hatin' just enjoying this new car to much.
How did you launched at the track? Did you get mad wheel hop? I am just wondering if 2004 Max has the same nasty wheel hop 2002 Maxima has. My car right now is getting rear engine mount replaced because I got mad wheel hop when I went to the track first time last week. It apperantly damaged the engine mount.

I noticed you ran 14.85 at 92mph with 2.0 60ft. Those are some nice 60ft times.

I don't think you will put 2002/2003 Maximas times to shame. I ran 14.7 at 96.5mph, which is not that much faster 1/4 time than you, but my 60ft were horrible 2.445. If I can get 2.0 60ft as you got, I should be in the lower 14s for sure.

Good luck with your runs.
Old Aug 21, 2003 | 11:18 AM
  #36  
QuikSilver04's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 167
I had really bad hop on the first run, just because I gave it too much gas, 2nd time it only hopped once since I didn't give it as much gas. I know I could leave the line without spinning, just a matter of timing and practice...
Old Aug 21, 2003 | 11:20 AM
  #37  
ga2000's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 443
the 04 is just as fast if not faster than a 03. i know a guy that runs consistant 14.6s at the track in his 03, auto with just a cone filter, and he drove my auto 5spd max "stock" and he said for a fact my car is just as fast if not faster than his 03 auto... so i wont go by that 14.8 with that max bad weather and track conditions, and he already said that 2.0 was wrong for that 60ft. by the way i got my car wieghted lastnight my 04 max auto elite pachage weights 3580 with me in it... wo without me in it the car is 3460 with a 1/4 tank of gas...
Old Aug 21, 2003 | 11:36 AM
  #38  
Dany's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,147
Originally posted by ga2000
the 04 is just as fast if not faster than a 03. i know a guy that runs consistant 14.6s at the track in his 03, auto with just a cone filter, and he drove my auto 5spd max "stock" and he said for a fact my car is just as fast if not faster than his 03 auto... so i wont go by that 14.8 with that max bad weather and track conditions, and he already said that 2.0 was wrong for that 60ft. by the way i got my car wieghted lastnight my 04 max auto elite pachage weights 3580 with me in it... wo without me in it the car is 3460 with a 1/4 tank of gas...
I am not sure who is faster. Don't really care, all I was saying that by his time he won't put other 5gens times to shame.

I am not saying 2004 Max is slow, I am just saying from personal experience and the track times, seems like 2002/2003 Max just pulls harder.
Old Aug 21, 2003 | 11:38 AM
  #39  
SteVTEC's Avatar
Dyno plot says I have the most area under the Administrator curve
 
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 7,064
Originally posted by ga2000
the 04 is just as fast if not faster than a 03. i know a guy that runs consistant 14.6s at the track in his 03, auto with just a cone filter, and he drove my auto 5spd max "stock" and he said for a fact my car is just as fast if not faster than his 03 auto...
Butt dynos don't prove anything. Timeslips and dynos do, though.
Old Aug 21, 2003 | 12:14 PM
  #40  
gmc74's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,282
I am gonna start charging $20 to butt dyno people's cars, I will get an official looking print out to give them too



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:11 AM.