I sense a very big headache for the one that does this swap.

 

just need a parts car and downtime will be huge.

 

I shall not be the one. Enough headaches for me

 

Pretty soon people are gonna be talking about a VQ55 swap. LOL.

 

Looking at the 350Z VQ35 block, which is RWD, the holes for the engine mounts are way different than the FWD versions of the VQ.. I am guessing the VQ40 also has the same design. So that right there is a headache within itself...

 

anybody got pics of the mount holes o nthe block and pics of the mounts itself from the 350z? so you guys think nissan changed the whole block?

 

Nismo was referring to the fact that the VQ40 is made for a RWD car, like the 350Z engine, so installing it into a Maxima is going to involve making new mounting locations in addition to any other headaches.

 

I was looking at the picture of the 4.3?L stroker they have on the market, and its clearly meant for a 350Z/G35/RWD

 

but the stroker kit should have nothing to do with the engine mount points...
I would think to make manufacturing cheaper and easier, they would have RWD and FWD mount points on all blocks blocks regardless of what platform they're going into.

 

exactly, i am wondering if the mountigs points for the mounts on a 350z atre on the block of the vq35 for the fwd maxima.

 

I was referring to the picture of the stroker kit. In it, you can clearly see that the mounting holes are different from FWD versions of the VQ.

Although it's a stroker kit, the BLOCK iself is from Nissan.. Right? So if the mounting holes are different than mine, its obviously for a RWD vehicle.. Thus the VQ40 should have the same design.

 

I have stated on several occasions that the VQ40 block certainly IS taller than the VQ35/VQ30/etc. blocks. I just haven't found the actual block dimensions to say exactly how much. Simple math tells us that it can't physically be the same height as a VQ35 block.

VQ3x/VQ2x blocks are all 215mm tall. This is measured from the crank centerline to the top of the deck.

VQ35 rod = 144.2mm
VQ35 crank radius = 40.7mm (81.4mm stroke)

Rod/Stroke ratio = 1.77
This leaves 30.1mm for piston height at a Zero deck.

VQ40 rod = 165.87mm
VQ40 crank radius = 46mm (92mm stroke)
Rod/Stroke ratio = 1.803 <~~ Better ratio than the VQ35.

If we assume the same compact 30.1mm piston height it would mean the VQ40 block would HAVE to be 241.97mm tall. The ESMs list an "a" dimension which isn't specific on one end point. But they do show that the VQ40 piston is 2.03mm taller within this listed dimension. Going by this all of the numbers seem to fall into place and suggest that the VQ40 block is (241.97+2.03=) 244mm tall. This is a 29mm difference in the block alone. And it exceeds my earlier 25mm guesstimations. I think this is enough evidence to convince me. So you guys feel free to quote them.

Lets also not forget that the VQ40 is vastly different at the bottom as well. Almost no internal parts are interchangeable with earlier VQs. The thing looks like it was built to withstand 2000hp minus the pistons & rods they probably chose, to conserve energy.


So to answer the original question, No, a VQ40 swap would not be worthwhile IMO for 99% of you. But that personally woudn't stop me from trying if I got a good deal on one.

 

I think I'll go with a used 4th gen SC kit when power increase time rolls around. Call me a traitor (Of course, I still don't know how hard the car will pull, all I'm used to is the stock 3.0L with a limping Knock Sensor).

 

I doub't the VQ40 could physically be stretched beyond 4.8 liters with AEBS/Darton sleeves (102mm bore) and a custom 98mm crank. I just pulled these numbers outta my ****, so don't you ***** go around quoting them.

 

So in otherwords, if you really have the need to increase displacement on a VQ35, get a stroker kit b/c it'll save you time and agony...

 

I think a stroker kit is almost as much agony simply based on the cost of a custom forged billet crank. The best way, monetarily, to drastically increase the displacement of a VQ35 is to use aftermarket sleeves/pistons at 100+mm bore.

 

In my past life I was a devotee of the Mopar turbomotors. There were three versions of the old 4cylinder. The 2.2, the 2.5 tall deck and the common block.

The common block came in both 2.2 and 2.5L versions. The differences were in crank, and pistons. The rods were identical. Given that Chrysler was able to make an additional .3L in a four cylinder through this method I have no doubt that Nissan could manage an additional .5L out of a six cylinder.

From a post on the first page of this thread, there is an additional 10.6mm of stroke in the VQ40 as opposed to the VQ35. That means each piston is traveling an extra cm and a half. From the ENGINE CALCULATOR WEBSITE that difference alone gives an additional .46L.

My guess is that Nissan, like most car companies is too strapped for cash to cast an entirely new block for the VQ40. They wanted a big torque engine so they tweaked (read: stroked) what they already had.

 

so basically they did the same thing they did to the vq30 to get the vq35?

 

They're no longer strapped for cash. The VQ40 is a new block. It just shares many of the attributes and design features of the earlier VQ engines. It's not accurate to just call it a 'stroked' VQ35. It's far more complex than that.

 

Does anyone ever pay attention to anything I write?

 

The article I quoted mentions that this is a new "tall block" design of the VQ so the block itself is elongated. Also by SR20DEN's calculations it shows that the deck height from the crank to the heads had to be increased to facilitate the stroke of the piston. I listened...

 

sorry sr20den, i skipped that part. lol.

 

One more thing:

Deck Height = Distance between the top of the piston at TDC to the block deck.

Block Height = Distance between the crankshaft centerline and the block deck.


The Deck Height is still the same, Zero.

The Block Height has increased +29mm.

 

You had to go and throw the wrench in their poor whirring gears...

 

This exact same wrench has been thrown many times before.

 

My bad. So where is the block deck?

 

If anyone's actually successful in converting a RWD block to fit a FWD car, and makes a VQ40 Max, you WILL feel it. I had the honor of working for a cold-weather auto testing facility (one advantage of a Minnesota winter) and spent a couple weeks behind the wheel of a euro-spec (92 octane) vq40 in a rather homely SUV (next size bigger than the X-terra). This one was rated about 280hp, and i can only assume that the torque was on the high side of 300ft/lb. Fairly mellow until about 3-3.5k on the tach, above that it was a monster. I really didn't know something that big could accelerate like that, it felt like i was in a catapault being TOSSED down the road, very nerve-wracking with the high center of gravity (almost totaled it one night on some frost. let's say prototypes aren't cheap and adrenaline REALLY clears the brain). I can only imagine what it would do in something that weighed a lot less and handled much better. Doubt it would be far off from the M45 (one hell of a ride; 315hp, transmission's tighter then your own **** hole), which would make the ultimate sleeper if nissan put that driveline in a max. SCCA, anyone?

alright, the flu's taking over and i've rambled enough. don't get me started on the FX45.
Ern

 

I wanna here about the FX. What engine is that?

 

fz has a vq35 in the fx35 and i think the 4.5 in the fx45. fx34 is a 6 cylinder and the fx45 is a v8. the v8 is used in the q45 and i t he m45. the v6 is used in the z, g35c and g35 sedan, the m45, the max, and etc.

 

Doubt it. Nissan will likely stop at 4.0L w/ the VQ series. Anything above 4.0L is VK territory (FX45, M45, Q45, Titan, Armada)

 

^Thanks. Sarcasm...

It seems stupid that the m45 has a VQ35 in it. I just had a brain lapse there. You know, we're talking about a 4 litre V6. That is huge. Way too big if you ask me. They shoulda capped it at the 3.5. Every number of cylinders has an optimum size to to overcome effeciency without lugging around extra weight. IIRC for the 4 cyls its right around 1.9 liters. For the 6 cyls its between 3.0 and 3.2. For the V8's its between 4.2 and 4.6L.

 

ok then whats up with a 3.5 as a v6?

 

Methinks the 3.5 is the perfect size.

 

Not really. To sum it all up, the word is competition. For the M, one of its targets is the BMW 5 series, which also offers 6 or 8 cyl, as well as the Lexus GS series

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...ticleId=104605

 

i saw the new gs on the road AND IMO it looks ugly. it looks like it wants to be like the new 5 series but lexus overdid it and trie too hard on it.

 

Theres a 4.3 liter V6 engine in the Cyclone/Typhoon.

 

they look better than those big round things they made for a couple of years. Yuck

 

theres no replacement for displacement but i would assume nissan will not icreasse the VQ past 4.0 they will probobly ride out the rest of decade with the VQ35-40 and then switch over to electric

 

Does that mean its good? There are many 4.0+ liter engines in SUVs & trucks. That would be due to the necessity for torque in those vehicles.

 

That is because it does not.
Original and new M45 = VK45DE
New M35 = VQ35DE

The GM 4.3 90º V6 is a 350 smallblock with two cylinders lobbed off. If they did the exact same thing with the new LS7 they would have a 5.3 liter V6.