Is the E gas necessary or can it be bypassed?

 

it is necessary cause there is a push sensor on the pedal that detects how far the pedal is pushed. then it sends a signal to ecu which opens the TB. the simple way of doing it is getting a throttle controlled TB from a pathfinder but the ecu will still be a task to find a way around.

 

Again, if you DON'T use the VQ35 ECU then you DON'T need to worry at all about the DBW. If you DO use the VQ35 ECU then it should be used but it can still be bypassed by placing the TPS back on the TB.

 

Wouldn't a 3.5 bottom end with 3.0 heads and a MEVI give better/or equal numbers to a 3.5 controlled by the 3.0 ECU? I know SR20DEN said the 3.5 heads and intake manifold is superior but we have alot of 3.0 guys running low 14s/high 13s N/A (Neal got 13.83 on street tires and he didn't have aftermarket headers). I'm thinking of the same exact setup, except with headers and a 3.5 bottomend.

What I am worried about is that the 3.0 upper end will restrict/take some power away (even with a 70mm TB), robbing potential.

Also, no one ever attempted to put a cable controlled TB on a 02+ so we don't know how well it'll work.

 

I would still say no. The 35 heads with the 35 intake manifolds will still outflow the 30 heads with any 30 manifold.
Someone did put a 90mm Q45 TB on a G35 coupe, bypassing the DBW for a custom FI setup.

 

Something doesn't seem right, though. I mean, 4th gens weight about 3000 lbs, while 5.5 gens are like 3230 lbs. I know the VQ35 is 35 pounds lighter than the 3.0 so that's 2965 against 3230 lbs, 265 pounds lighter or about .3 in the 1/4 mile. However, we won't have the VCT so that pretty much takes away much of the advantage of putting a 3.5 block in a 95-99...

Maybe I'm just getting paranoid again

 

You just do yours your way and I will build engines for my customers my way and let's leave it at that.

 

Didn't mean to **** you off. I just didn't think anyone had ever changed it to a cable-controlled TB...

 

Ok without going into this to much does a 3.0 ecu need to be converted to use a cable TB? If not then problem solved

 

Fitting the damn thing on

 

ok if you find a way around those problems, what about the gauge cluster? how are you going to hook that up?

all i have to say the simple way to do this is the way i did it or you are going to have a headache trying to combine 2 cars into 1.

 

How many times do you need to see the words 3.0 ECU.

And for fitting TB on how do you think i or any one else put pathy TB on are 3.0 manifold it was not a direct bolt on but very easy to fix.

 

OK well just wait me or SR20DEN will do it without 3.5ecu or e-gas. Im down for the challenge just need to try it. I know ways too make it work.

 

all i am saying is there is going to be a bunch of rewiring to do. think about it. outputs and inputs are different. even if oyu egt to use a 3.o ecu on the 3.5, how is the ecu going to see that the displacement went up on the engine? it is going to have to compensate for that. and everybody keeps telling me that they are going to use the 3.0 ecu. it would be easier to get a 3.5 ecu and connect all the old wiring if it is even possible to the 3.5 from the 3.0 ecu. there are more things that are going to go wrong than you guys think.

 

As far as seeing the extra displacement, I'm sure you could always have JWT or TS or somebody make up for that as part of a reprogramming.

 

Well Tilley didn't need to change his ECU and seeing as how he went from 15.5 to 13.8 in the 1/4 mile, the ECU DID adjust itself to the change in displacement. The 3.5 heads/intake manifold will only help flow but it's basically the same damn thing Tilley did, with a better upper end. Where's the problem? The internals are lighter and we have 510 cc extra displacement, but the ECU doesn't care about HP and torque. If all sensors are in place I have a hard time seeing how it wouldn't work. The computer isn't THAT smart.

 

it will only read more air flow whic just means it dumps more fuel.

 

yeah but he used the top end from a 3.0 so the injectors were not switched over. am i right? and since you guys want to do a complete 3.5 swap, that will include the 3.5 injectors which are different cause of the displacement of the 3.5. and since the injectors wre not switched over, the ecu still flows the same amount of fuel as a 3.0. and the only way more air will flow into the engine is if you are going to use the 2k2 maf sensor but tilley didnt. am i right on that? so he is still flowing the same amount of fuel as a 3.0 and the domputer is still thinking that it is a 3.0 engine but actually the bottom end is different. and no the 3.5 heads and Im is fat more superior then what tilley has. correct me if i am wrong.

 

The 3.5 valvtrain is lighter not the bottom end.

 

I used the 350z injectors with no prob with my 96 ecu


Anyways jim wolf tech already told me they can adjust my ecu if needed.

 

and was there a difference? all i am is saying is that you get injectors on there from a different car but still you need the maf sensor also.

 

You dont understand the 96 ecu controlled the 3.5 injectors fine and the maf from the 3.0 will be used to people use it with 500+fwhp why cant it flow for a little extra dicplacement and tilly already gave the answer for that more air more fuel simple

 

Will the 3.0 MAF fit with the 3.5 upper end?

Also, while I don't agree with what he says most of the time, he brings up and interesting point; are the inputs and outputs different? For example, the knock sensor. The engine I was looking to buy still has its 3.5 knock sensor, nobody knows how the 3.0 wiring will fit with it...

 

do you think my stock pluges plug up to the 350z injector....NO they didnt i got 350z plugs and had them sodered on then they plug in and the injectors were controlled by the 96 ecu same type as all 3.5's

 

Technically krismax has 5th gen or DEK injectors, but I agree 350Z sounds .

Anyways, one possible issue with using the VQ30 ECU on a VQ35 is timing. A larger bore cylinder requires more timing, since flame propagation distance is larger. However, the bump in compression from the VQ30 heads probably offsets that some.

So, a full VQ35 with a VQ30 ECU means you'll need or at least want more advance. Plus, the VQ35s long reach spark plugs and superior head cooling allows 5.5gens to run far more advance then the 5gens without detonation issues. A JWT/TS ECU upgrade or a piggyback such as the SMT6/7 or Unichip would be necessary to pull the same numbers a stock VQ35 5.5gen does.

 

Yes i have dek injectors but my plugs are not dek there off a 350z dont know what year .I have dek plugs and 350z plugs and its weird they bothlook very different but both plug onto the dek injector?

 

all i am is saying is that the inputs and outputs are probably different on the maf sesnor and the injectors as well. if we only had a dyno between the 2 injectors and maf sensors as well. maybe there isnt a difference but i do think there is a difference.

 

Anyone ever try using a Pathfinder ECU? 3.5, no DBW

 

I can't see why you would want to. A Maxima 3.5 ECU of any kind is going to be more similar to a Maxima 3.0 ECU...

 

We're still not even sure the 3.0 ECU will read the 3.5 sensors correctly.

 

Thats why important 3.0 sensors are used not 3.5 with the 3.0 ecu

 

Cut the smart-*** attitude, it's completely unecessary. How do you know the important 3.0 sensors such as everybody's favorite, the Knock Sensor, will work on the 3.5? Tried it yet? No? Nobody has. One guy swapped everything from the 5.5 gen and the other just dropped in the short block. That's it. Nobody's screwed with sensors and whatnot to mix the 3.0/3.5.
Whoever tries it is on shaky ground.

 

actually i used the 3.5 knock sensor, CPS sensors and oil pressure sensor

 

Stop posting retarded questions and we all will stop being smarta$$es.

 

Alright children, enough fighting...lol, j/k...but we do seriously need to straighten up or we're never gonna get anywhere.

 

Stupid questions? Jesus, this isn't a Honda swap, only two people have reportedly succeeded, in different ways. Did you read what the moderator said? "Notice to all: I am in the process of pruning extraneous posts that do not add anything of value to the subject of this thread. I will then sticky it if the other mods agree I should." Notice how none of my posts have been deleted.

If nothing at all stands in your way and you see no possible source of problems, then please, prove everyone who brought up hypothetical issues wrong by doing it yourself or for one of your custumers to show each and every single one of us that it's easy as hell thereby proving you actually know what you're talking about and that you should not, or will not consider any kind of potential issue with something nobody has ever done this way before, granting you every right in the world to actually be a smartass and brag all you want, throwing your weight around at people like me who want to know where to look for if/when something goes wrong and are actually worried about pesky issues such as, you know, getting the damn thing to work.

 

and that is where you are wrong. they are completly different things. they are programmed differently for the sensors and outputs and inputs are different also.

 

I agree they are completely different systems heck they dont even have the same ECU plug.

Also JClaw FYI SR20DEN is probably one of the smartest people on the org when it comes to a 3.5 adn knowing what you can do with it. He knows alot of tech stuff that nobody really looks into.

 

That may be, but it still doesn't justify his attitute. It isn't a requirement to know the VQs inside out to post on this forum, and insulting me is the very last thing that will help anyone even remotely considering this swap.

 

Yes, I know the two ECU's are completely different. However, I can't see how a Pathfinder ECU would be any better, and probably not cheaper, either.

No, but in the All Motor Forum it helps