JClaw

iTrader: (17)

Has anyone thought of using the 04-05 upper IM?

Here is a stock dyno of a 04 maxima:



Keep in mind that is an Automatic. So a 5-speed tranny would probably pick up 10whp/10wtq.

The peak torque is lower than what Auto 02-03 Altimas/Maxima normally dyno (205-210wtq versus 193wtq), but you have to keep in mind that 04 maximas have HUGE 55 lbs per corner 18-inch wheels, so a good chunk of that torque is already stolen.

My sawblades, with 215/60/15 Toyos, for example, weight 38 lbs per corner.

As for the HP, it's 221 (auto) versus 195-200 (auto) normally, even with those huge wheels. Also the peak is at 6000 (stock) instead of ~5500.

I'd be interesting to see what results it yields in a 4th gen with a 3.5.

00-01 VI Versus 04-05 IM which do you think is better?

Thinking of buying one, boring the lower 02 IM and using the 04-05 upper.

JClaw

iTrader: (17)

2004


2001

Nismo3112

iTrader: (12)

I'm pretty sure underneith the plastic cover, the 02-03 and 04-05 IM's are similar...

After seeing Tilley run a 13.3 with a 00VI on his 3.5, I think it's safe to say the 00VI is king.

JClaw

iTrader: (17)

Not so sure. 2004 Maximas are heavy as hell (nearly 3500 lbs), with heavy @ss 18s yet some still manage to pull low 14s STOCK.

221 HP at the wheels bone stock on an automatic is very impressive, that is 20-25WHP MORE than what 02-03 Autos normally put down. Small loss in torque but when you're wrestling the steering with both hands who cares.

One thing is for sure though; the 04-05 IM is superior to the 02-03 IM.

SR20DEN

iTrader: (7)

So you're saying that a modified manifold that traps 103 is better than a modified manifold that traps 108?

SR20DEN

iTrader: (7)

You're passing off your speculation as fact. And untill we see a true factual comparison, speculation is all this will be.

JClaw

iTrader: (17)

I am not comparing it to your modded 2k2 manifold, SR, I'm comparing it to the normal/stock 2k2 manifolds. Not taking anything away from your 108 traps, but most of us don't have the same ability you have when it comes to tweaking power out of our cars, so I think the most logical thing I can do is take what Nissan engineered and not f*ck with it.

Besides, I found a 2k4 upper for 50$. Might as well give it a try.

TILLEYS99

iTrader: (4)

Cause that 2k2 manifold stock is made for tq too haul that tank around.

TILLEYS99

iTrader: (4)

Im coming for ya. Im down too a 13.32 detuned im hittin the dyno this week then back too the track too break some records NA.

JClaw

iTrader: (17)

Still have 4-5 mph to go though. He will be down to 12.6 once he gets his 60' down. But competition always gives good results

TILLEYS99

iTrader: (4)

I have alot more in the works..........

NmexMAX

iTrader: (22)

Dont they (02-03) weigh as much as 00-01's??

JClaw

iTrader: (17)

Weight is around the same, depends on options:

6th gen=3450-3500 lbs
5th gen=3200-3300 lbs
4th gen=2900-3000 lbs

E55AMG2

iTrader: (4)

IIRC, the 04 maxima IM should be very similar (if not the same) as the 02-03. The LowerIM is different, however. The ECUs for the 04+ maximas do get 64bit processing, unlike the 32bit from the 02-03. I think this has a bit to do with the disparity between the stock hp comparisons. The real difference is in the drivetrain, where the new 5spd auto looks to be more efficient than the archaic 4 speed.

JClaw

iTrader: (17)

Then why did Nissan produce an entirely new upper manifold if it worked the same as the 02-03? You don't manufacture a different upper manifold if you're going to gain precisely jack sh*t from it.

They only have 3 models of IMs for 3.5s:

02-05 Altimas and 02-03 Maximas
04-05 Maximas
03-05 G35's and 350zs

It's not logical for them to produce and entirely new IM if they know it works no better than the 02-03 IM. Why not Re-use the 02-03 IM?

Another dyno (2004 Maxima again):



That's Ramberg. He has pulley/Greddy catback/Injen. I believe he also has lighter wheels than the stock 18". Those numbers seem too high (and probably are), or the stock 2004 exhaust/intake system is very restrictive compared to its ECU tuning/IM and whatnot.

Either way, the dyno shows a similar pattern; as opposed to the 02-03 dynos, which always show monster torque but less HP until they dive into serious mods (headers, for example) and a peak of 5500-5600, the 2k4 seems to have those numbers flipped; HP is considerably higher than Torque and it peaks past 6000.

I doubt it'd be possible to get numbers this different if the IM was identical to 02-03. If the numbers were only higher than 02-03 it would be one thing, but the numbers aren't just higher, the TQ and HP are flipped upside down.

E55AMG2

iTrader: (4)

I will look up the part numbers, but I think they are the same. I know for a fact the 04-05 LIM is different. Also, i know the exhaus manifolds for the 04-05 are different than the 02-03s. That may explain part of the flipping.

JClaw

iTrader: (17)

Yeah that too. Because I doubt ECU tuning alone could do that.

SR20DEN

iTrader: (7)

WTF are you blabbing about now? No one has proven that the '04 IM is any better than the '02 IM. And the differences between them have been mentioned several times. The '04 part has EGR and is made in the US. That is why it has a different part number and is less expensive.

E55AMG2

iTrader: (4)

dont forget the integrated fuel rail

JClaw

iTrader: (17)

Great. Now quit being rude just because you hate me.

SR20DEN

iTrader: (7)

I don't think I hate you anymore. But you do still get on my nerves sometimes. I actually expected you to know this info already, that's why I am on your case.

JClaw

iTrader: (17)

Ah I see.



...

wut cold air intake should I get?

NmexMAX

iTrader: (22)

Does the 04-05 have an interlock so that the auto doesn't downshift, because that car is an auto from the cardomain page and that dyno reads from ~2.5k

steven88

iTrader: (28)

I see that is a mustang dyno.....don't they read 10% higher than normal dynojet 248cs?

if that is the case...then he is dynoing approximately 234whp....respectable #'s with just I/E/UDP......i have yet to see a stock 2k2 6spd do those #s without headers.....

E55AMG2

iTrader: (4)

Nmex and steven88: they can drive the car on part throttle until 3700, then go WOT while adjusting the load on the dyno. Mustang dynos actually read low (they claim to be more accurate as well, but ive never seen it) because they actually impose an additonal load that an inertia dyno (ex: dynojet) does not. They are also subject to operator error. If he was cranking out 261hp to the wheels as an auto, he would be making close to 340 crank hp........Im guessing this is a case of operator error in that they didnt put enough load down. OR they did it on purpose to boost the customers ego (and keep them coming back). This is why we should all be using 248c's, simply because there is less variability (ie: virtually none) from machine to machine.

NmexMAX

iTrader: (22)

So whata re you saying, that he is part throttle until 3.7k? I've dynoed before, i know how it works, and that just doesn't look normal for an auto, unless like some accords, you can lock 2nd in, not good for getting peak numbers but good for looking at the curve shape.

E55AMG2

iTrader: (4)

First, you dyno in 3rd gear on an auto...not 2nd. If its a 5 speed auto, then its more than likely 4th. Basically whatever gear is closest to 1:1. Second, on a mustang dyno, they can vary the load on the dyno....which in turn makes the TCM load sensor think that its ok to proceed in that gear and not downshift. Third, my curves look just like that. I have seen other 3.5 curves that look exactly that way too. There is nothing wrong with them...they just happen to be tuned differently than stock. on a side note, do you have a 3.5?

NmexMAX

iTrader: (22)

I know that, hence why I said that 2nd wasn't good to dyno in for numners, rather only for the shape not for the #'s, but since the accords can't lock in 3rd like they can 2nd, then you could get readings from 2.5k in 2nd, that was my point...

Yes I have a 3.5, dynoed a few times and tq is not that flat, it drops off like most other 3.5 (02-03's) with a stock IM.

E55AMG2

iTrader: (4)

Headers can help flatten that TQ curve out. Also, as per your edit an auto max will not downshift to 2nd @ 50, the cutoff is 42mph. If you have a TS ECU, you can Manually do it, but only if you have a TS. Otherwise the TCM just keeps it in 3rd.

NmexMAX

iTrader: (22)

I think you mean 1st gear cut-off is at 42. I'm saying 3rd gear at ~2.5k is about 50mph .. and from there would be the start of the dyno in 3rd ... My argument was that my car would downshift from 3rd to 2nd at that point ... But I read that the 04 have a maual mode ... so I got that quesion answered.


I have headers, my sig with all mods is on top of this page, and my dyno is in the dyno discussion section of the forum.

E55AMG2

iTrader: (4)

Yup, thats true...brainfart caught me. What I am trying to explain though, is that they can adjust the load on the dyno...and creep at part throttle so it wont d/s, then kick to WOT . The only issue is that it yeilds wildly high numbers (namely 261whp from an auto with modest mods) because the load on the dynamometer is too low. This is significant of inexperienced operators and an unkowledgable tuner. The shape of the curve is nearly identical to that of a DE-k, but my best guess is that because of the dyno used and the method in which it was used that graph is essentially pretty toilet paper.

As for your mods, you have headers and a GAB. Fine and dandy....except you need a piggyback fuel computer (SAFC or Emanage) to fully extract power across the rev range. Also, you will need the elevated rev limiter from an L-Spec ECU to make full use of your VB mod (i have a stage 3, and they ROCK) and your headers. Then you will need to go buy a block of time @ a dyno shop with an inertia dyno (read: dynojet) and tune your AFR until you get the desired power curve shape.

NmexMAX

iTrader: (22)

But it takes $$$