How does this sound.
#5
Originally Posted by nismology
Ok SR20.
Ease of installation comes to mind.
Ease of installation comes to mind.
Why would it be easier to install? If he doesn't want to drill the 3.5 cams he can just use his 3.0 cams, and then it wouldn't really be longer than tearing down both motors.
And besides, I think the Tomei cams have the holes already drilled for both 3.0 and 3.5 (not sure, it might be JWT's).
#6
Originally Posted by JClaw
I really don't see why he'd go through the trouble of buying the det heads when he could just use the 3.5 heads. I think Tilley's before/after results are enough to convince anyone.
And besides, I think the Tomei cams have the holes already drilled for both 3.0 and 3.5 (not sure, it might be JWT's).
#7
Originally Posted by IceY2K1
Can you show me those before/after results? I must have missed that.
He dynoed 233whp and 230wtq with the full 3.5, and 238whp/223wtq with the butterflies removed (or something like that) on the 2k2 manifold/2k2 heads.
#8
He dyno'd:
226hp/205.4tq(PEAK hp 6400rpm)
1)3.5 block, 3.0 heads, JWT cams, headers, 00VI WIRED COMPLETELY OPEN
232.79hp/230.9tq(PEAK hp ~5500rpm)
2)Full VQ35 including heads AND IM
238.46hp/222.84tq
3)Same as 2), but modded 2K2 IM.
1) vs. 2)
He gained ~7whp/26wtq with VQ35 heads and stock VQ35 IM over the 3L heads/00VI, however the 00VI was HELD open which sacrificed torque. So, how does ~7whp show the VQ30 heads are inferior? Could it have been the difference between the IMs? BOTH heads and IM played a role. Also, look at where the PEAK whp was located, ie VQ30 heads/DEK IM at 6400rpm vs. VQ35 heads/IM at 5500rpm. Right there you see the INTAKE MANIFOLD is making a difference and if you continued further with a higher redline, the whopping ~7whp "inferior" VQ30 heads/DEK would continue to pull a ways. On top of that, his AFR was pretty bad...at least on the 3L heads/DEK dyno.
1) vs. 3)
He gained ~12.5whp, but a lower 17.5wtq. So, AGAIN if the DEK manifold was able to use the longer runners, who knows how close torque could have been. Mod the DEK and we'd see that hp gap even smaller, so where's the BEEF, aka superior VQ35 heads now?
In short, YES the VQ35 heads are superior due to their larger valves/high port angle, however Tilleys' dynos have NOT shown how much the heads add exclusively. As for VQ30/VQ35 hybrid compression ratio of 11.5 vs. stock VQ35 10.3, you can assume whatever you want, but unless there was better fuel tuning and especially timing tuning, you can't ASSume how much that contributed. Plus, with only PEAK numbers to go off of, you/we can't really assume too much.
If Tilley had both setups tuned to a decent AFR and timing advance as far as possible for the fuel octane he uses, we know the VQ35 heads/IM would be superior. However, with the ONE dyno I have seen and the other two dyno peak values, you can't assume whether the torque gain or horsepower gain came from the heads, IM, heads+IM, better tuning, or non-working DEK vs. working VQ35 IM.
226hp/205.4tq(PEAK hp 6400rpm)
1)3.5 block, 3.0 heads, JWT cams, headers, 00VI WIRED COMPLETELY OPEN
232.79hp/230.9tq(PEAK hp ~5500rpm)
2)Full VQ35 including heads AND IM
238.46hp/222.84tq
3)Same as 2), but modded 2K2 IM.
1) vs. 2)
He gained ~7whp/26wtq with VQ35 heads and stock VQ35 IM over the 3L heads/00VI, however the 00VI was HELD open which sacrificed torque. So, how does ~7whp show the VQ30 heads are inferior? Could it have been the difference between the IMs? BOTH heads and IM played a role. Also, look at where the PEAK whp was located, ie VQ30 heads/DEK IM at 6400rpm vs. VQ35 heads/IM at 5500rpm. Right there you see the INTAKE MANIFOLD is making a difference and if you continued further with a higher redline, the whopping ~7whp "inferior" VQ30 heads/DEK would continue to pull a ways. On top of that, his AFR was pretty bad...at least on the 3L heads/DEK dyno.
1) vs. 3)
He gained ~12.5whp, but a lower 17.5wtq. So, AGAIN if the DEK manifold was able to use the longer runners, who knows how close torque could have been. Mod the DEK and we'd see that hp gap even smaller, so where's the BEEF, aka superior VQ35 heads now?
In short, YES the VQ35 heads are superior due to their larger valves/high port angle, however Tilleys' dynos have NOT shown how much the heads add exclusively. As for VQ30/VQ35 hybrid compression ratio of 11.5 vs. stock VQ35 10.3, you can assume whatever you want, but unless there was better fuel tuning and especially timing tuning, you can't ASSume how much that contributed. Plus, with only PEAK numbers to go off of, you/we can't really assume too much.
If Tilley had both setups tuned to a decent AFR and timing advance as far as possible for the fuel octane he uses, we know the VQ35 heads/IM would be superior. However, with the ONE dyno I have seen and the other two dyno peak values, you can't assume whether the torque gain or horsepower gain came from the heads, IM, heads+IM, better tuning, or non-working DEK vs. working VQ35 IM.
Originally Posted by JClaw
Check the dyno forum, it can't be too far back. He dynoed 205wtq and 226whp with 3.0 heads, JWT cams and a 00-01 VI, which flows MUCH better than the 4th gen manifold. So with the 4th gen maxima, he was probably in the low 200whp area.
He dynoed 233whp and 230wtq with the full 3.5, and 238whp/223wtq with the butterflies removed (or something like that) on the 2k2 manifold/2k2 heads.
He dynoed 233whp and 230wtq with the full 3.5, and 238whp/223wtq with the butterflies removed (or something like that) on the 2k2 manifold/2k2 heads.
#10
lets think about this 00vi on 3.0 heads 6400rpm peak ,and 2k2 manifold on better heads 5500rpm peak. what im saying is the 2k2 IM is crap and the 00vi the best of the bunch. the real test would be 00 vi on both dynoed. that will show what heads are diff.
Tilley gained over 3 1/2 mph in trap over 2k2 manifold modded with the 00vi (power rod was removed thats all)
Tilley gained over 3 1/2 mph in trap over 2k2 manifold modded with the 00vi (power rod was removed thats all)
#11
Originally Posted by krismax
Tilley gained over 3 1/2 mph in trap over 2k2 manifold modded with the 00vi (power rod was removed thats all)
Here on September 26th he ran 14.06 and then 13.87 in October with the 3.0 heads/US 4th gen manifold, all at 99 mph:
http://forums.maxima.org/showthread.php?t=340606
EDIT:Here on November 6th he ran a 13.92 with 3.0 heads and MEVI (But no extended rev-limiter):
http://forums.maxima.org/showthread.php?t=352156
But no track times with 3.0 heads + 00-01 VI, and no track times for 3.5 heads + 3.5 manifold.
#12
I got off on a tangent, however my point WAS that the one dyno chart and the other two dyno peak values is NOT enough data to conclude how much better the VQ35 heads are then the VQ30 heads or how much better the DEK is then a stock 2K2 or modified 2K2.
Tuning ESPECIALLY the timing with a 11.5 CR motor is crucial for the octane/gas used.
The VQ35 heads/manifold are what the factory designed for the 10.3:1 CR, so I'd assume out of the box it would perform better then the DEK stuff at 11.5:1 with no tuning. Also, Tilley could really pump out more power with the full VQ35 by advancing timing considerably, since from the factory VQ35s run far more advance then his 4th gen ECU provides.
In short, neither of Tilleys 3 or 4 setups have been OPTIMIZED to see what the full potential could be, so I'd hold off until others follow his lead and start tuning/tweaking to see what they are really capable of. Then after we have a few dynos from different people, we can start declaring "Combo X" is inferior/superior to "Combo Y". Just my .02, but we know from SR20DENs dynos that if you can help the full, ECU included, VQ35 breath and fine tune just the AFR, it will be the winner.
Tuning ESPECIALLY the timing with a 11.5 CR motor is crucial for the octane/gas used.
The VQ35 heads/manifold are what the factory designed for the 10.3:1 CR, so I'd assume out of the box it would perform better then the DEK stuff at 11.5:1 with no tuning. Also, Tilley could really pump out more power with the full VQ35 by advancing timing considerably, since from the factory VQ35s run far more advance then his 4th gen ECU provides.
In short, neither of Tilleys 3 or 4 setups have been OPTIMIZED to see what the full potential could be, so I'd hold off until others follow his lead and start tuning/tweaking to see what they are really capable of. Then after we have a few dynos from different people, we can start declaring "Combo X" is inferior/superior to "Combo Y". Just my .02, but we know from SR20DENs dynos that if you can help the full, ECU included, VQ35 breath and fine tune just the AFR, it will be the winner.
#13
Yes, 3.5 ecu/full 3.5 is better as it is, but if you advance the crap out of the timing and put SR20's manifold on a full 3.5 with 3.0, it would probably put down similar numbers.
#14
Originally Posted by JClaw
Yes, 3.5 ecu/full 3.5 is better as it is, but if you advance the crap out of the timing and put SR20's manifold on a full 3.5 with 3.0, it would probably put down similar numbers.
Except that the valves on the 3.0L heads are smaller. It might have similar numbers at relatively stock tuning, but your overall ability to gain more power is reduced (IMHO) when you try advanced tuning...
#17
Originally Posted by Quicksilver
Except that the valves on the 3.0L heads are smaller. It might have similar numbers at relatively stock tuning, but your overall ability to gain more power is reduced (IMHO) when you try advanced tuning...
#18
Originally Posted by JClaw
I was talking about a full 3.5 with 3.0 ECU. Same as what SR has, except no VTCs (which increase power at lower RPMs).
Ahhh...my bad. I thought you just left out the word "heads" in your description...
#20
Originally Posted by TILLEYS99
New track time at poor track 13.89 @103.65.....with vq35 heads/bottomend/00vi/vq30 JWT cams/obx headers/and a UDP. Friday comes the new 00VI im workin on in action at a good track.
#22
Working DEK manifold or just zip tied?
Which ECU, stock or JWT?
Which ECU, stock or JWT?
Originally Posted by TILLEYS99
New track time at poor track 13.89 @103.65.....with vq35 heads/bottomend/00vi/vq30 JWT cams/obx headers/and a UDP. Friday comes the new 00VI im workin on in action at a good track.
#27
#28
This run was before that.....
Originally Posted by spanishrice
Originally Posted by TILLEYS99
New track time at poor track 13.89 @103.65.....with vq35 heads/bottomend/00vi/vq30 JWT cams/obx headers/and a UDP. Friday comes the new 00VI im workin on in action at a good track.
#30
Originally Posted by MyownNismo
How about this then
3.5
3.0 timing
tomei 256 w/spacers
TB convert to cable
2k1 ECU to remove EGR.
3.5
3.0 timing
tomei 256 w/spacers
TB convert to cable
2k1 ECU to remove EGR.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
MaximaDrvr
7th Generation Maxima (2009-2015)
16
08-19-2015 08:20 PM
tomI30
5th Generation Maxima (2000-2003)
10
03-30-2001 10:17 AM