VQ30 Pathfinder Manifold install?
#5
Originally Posted by 93turbo gxe
yeah but wouldnt the throttle body be in the fire wall?
#6
The concept is interesting, but it seems like an awful lot of work for very little to possibly no gains over the MEVI. I would LOVE to be proven wrong though, so please, by all means try it since it appears you have one in your possession. Looks like the torque could potentially be rediculous, but given that the length of the "short" runners would still be really long (nearly as long if not as long as our USIM), I have to wonder how it would flow on the top end.
#7
Originally Posted by Tatanko
The concept is interesting, but it seems like an awful lot of work for very little to possibly no gains over the MEVI. I would LOVE to be proven wrong though, so please, by all means try it since it appears you have one in your possession. Looks like the torque could potentially be rediculous, but given that the length of the "short" runners would still be really long (nearly as long if not as long as our USIM), I have to wonder how it would flow on the top end.
#10
Make TB side come out in the front, then it's naturally induced air path right ahead of it. Kinda like RSX's intake manifolds. Block the EGR, Make IACV adapter plate with extended hose, get a longer throttle cable, extend a few more hoses, it's done. Willl have major problems during oil change, though. Not a practical idea.
#12
Supporting Maxima.org Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (89)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Quincy, MA
Posts: 6,255
Originally Posted by SPiG
It is a VQ35 Pathfinder BTW. The Pathfinder never had a VQ30. That is a very nice looking IM as far as how it shoud perform.
I know....I have a spare DEK in my garage I think the throttle body would actually face the radiator.
#16
you seem to be missing something or havent put it together yet . the pathy isnt like the MEVI or 00 vi it is a TRUE VI.
this has 12 runners in the pic its decieving on the way its setup
this has 12 runners in the pic its decieving on the way its setup
#19
Interesting idea Zack. I think it would be a good challenge to get it to fit correctly, even if the manifold collector lines up with the lower intake manifold section.
You could always try and test fit it on that spare VQ30DEK you have sitting around in your spare time. You would not know about the hood shutting correctly though.
You could always try and test fit it on that spare VQ30DEK you have sitting around in your spare time. You would not know about the hood shutting correctly though.
#20
Would you even have to flip the lower 4th gen IM 180*?
I wonder who will be the first one to try this and dyno it vs the 00vi?
Although, it could take a camaro style hood scoop/cowl to make it fit under the hood with the TB right there next to the radiator.
I wonder who will be the first one to try this and dyno it vs the 00vi?
Although, it could take a camaro style hood scoop/cowl to make it fit under the hood with the TB right there next to the radiator.
#26
I wonder how hard it would be to chop it and make the loooong runners more midrange friendly.
It looks like the top portion of the longer runners goes up gradually to make a better turn into the lower portion, it dips down, and gradually comes back up to where the short runners meet?
Maybe just chop the longer runners off totally and fab up some shorter runners with aluminum pipe? Sourcing the bends might be hard though.
Might even be able to make it clear a cut support stock hood.
It looks like the top portion of the longer runners goes up gradually to make a better turn into the lower portion, it dips down, and gradually comes back up to where the short runners meet?
Maybe just chop the longer runners off totally and fab up some shorter runners with aluminum pipe? Sourcing the bends might be hard though.
Might even be able to make it clear a cut support stock hood.
#28
Originally Posted by liqidvenom
i guess i need to write it all out for you.....
boost can cure the no mid range this might supposedly cause
boost can cure the no mid range this might supposedly cause
#29
Originally Posted by nismology
I'm not dumb. I understand what you said but failed to understand WHY you said it. Boost can cure the lack of mid-range? Boost can cure ANYTHING if you want to look at it that way, but that isn't the point of this thread.
#30
What liqidvenom is suggesting is true in that, if you could find a turbo that operates at peak efficiency in the range in which that IM is weakest, turbocharging could make up for the IM's inefficiency at least partly.
What nismology is saying is that no matter what you do, you can't change the fact that that IM is weakest in the midrange. Sure, you can try to fix that with boost, but why? You'll just end up with a turbo and an IM that never work together 100% since they are never in their most efficient ranges at the same time. For all the time, money, and effort you spend installing this IM and then trying to find just the right turbo, you would be able to get a lot more benefit out of your car by just going with a decent all-round IM that fits directly and then designing and building your turbo kit accordingly.
What nismology is saying is that no matter what you do, you can't change the fact that that IM is weakest in the midrange. Sure, you can try to fix that with boost, but why? You'll just end up with a turbo and an IM that never work together 100% since they are never in their most efficient ranges at the same time. For all the time, money, and effort you spend installing this IM and then trying to find just the right turbo, you would be able to get a lot more benefit out of your car by just going with a decent all-round IM that fits directly and then designing and building your turbo kit accordingly.
#32
ha ha, thanks for the clarity. btw, i did a search but i didnt find anything. but. how come no one ever did the pathfinder 3.5 swap? i think i saw somewhere the compression ratio was 10:1 as opposed to 10.4:1. anyway, i think it would make sense, since it uses throttle cable.
#33
Originally Posted by liqidvenom
thanks....glad someone can put things together
Saying boost can "fix" things goes without saying and is besides the point of this thread 100%. Completely irrelevant. Boost can "fix" a stock maxima for that matter...
#34
Originally Posted by AnDyMaN
ha ha, thanks for the clarity. btw, i did a search but i didnt find anything. but. how come no one ever did the pathfinder 3.5 swap? i think i saw somewhere the compression ratio was 10:1 as opposed to 10.4:1. anyway, i think it would make sense, since it uses throttle cable.
RWD block...
#35
Originally Posted by nismology
Ummm...i can too. I just don't understand why boost was mentioned to begin with. If you have to "fix" a modification with boost, is it worth doing? Like i said, if you want to look at it that way boost can fix anything. Need extra low end, get a small-ish turbo. Need better mid-range, get a medium sized turbo. Need crazy screaming top-end power, get a larger turbo. Need to lower your 1/4 mile times, boost it.
Saying boost can "fix" things goes without saying and is besides the point of this thread 100%. Completely irrelevant. Boost can "fix" a stock maxima for that matter...
Saying boost can "fix" things goes without saying and is besides the point of this thread 100%. Completely irrelevant. Boost can "fix" a stock maxima for that matter...
#36
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by Kevlo911
RWD block...
#39
liqidvenom, I think you two are speaking different languages. All he's saying is that boost won't fix that IM's deficiencies, per se. That's true. Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like what you meant to say is that boost will make up for the deficiencies. That's true too, and it's not incompatible with what he's saying.
You're also saying that with FI, this manifold could give benefits that outweigh its disadvantages, so you'd like to see what it can do. What nismology is saying is that it probably won't be worth doing. That's really just an exchange of ideas, since as you both know the argument is purely academic at this point.
See? No need to get panties twisted, guys...
You're also saying that with FI, this manifold could give benefits that outweigh its disadvantages, so you'd like to see what it can do. What nismology is saying is that it probably won't be worth doing. That's really just an exchange of ideas, since as you both know the argument is purely academic at this point.
See? No need to get panties twisted, guys...
#40
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by MaximaSE96
no ur wrong....the pathfinder and murano use different 4wd and awd systems