I think everyone posting in this thread is forgetting that, and/or wasn't even around then.

Dandymax's de-k made 272whp @ 7,500 on a stock 3.5 oil pump & it was still climbing, the only notable differences (imho) on his were-


Mild head "work" (NOT ported though)"
PFTB
Speed density tune. (No maf)
exh. cutout

By less than ideal intake I assume you mean- a32 maf, a33 tb, and no portmatching. I agree.

Stock on all that except for 16" se wheels.

Other than the oil pump I'm pretty sure nobody has found the limits of the 3.0 bottom end in either RPM's or TQ. Wasn't Krismax revving 8k on the reg? Zach342 missed a shift and hit 8,600 and never had a problem. hal hit 600 ft/lb's on it.

We'll eventually rev this one out to 7,700 to see what it does, maybe even do some porting and run it again, but I doubt it will be left there for daily use.

 

Just noticed the OP says after the tune. What tuning device will be used?

 

the cut out probably hurt more than helped vs a decent exhuast setup.

 

Bunch of 3.5 shlong riders f*cking the thread up. Don't understand why folks can't just live and let live.

 

He gained ~7 hp with the cut out open over a cattman exhaust.

 

3" exhuast with a good straight through muffler should be all that is need. Cutouts are helpful when you want to make a lot of noise.

 

EU

 

I'll say 260 WHP.

00VI + cams + headers = air flow

I'm interested in the result because I am doing the same thing only with the Rev Up cams. Of course you'll make more power than me with the Deluboz cams, but the results should be similar with your power band more to the right.

 

you dreaming brotha man
agreed....

 

yall have got to be kidding me right???... i think ppl here is on dandymax's ***** sack too much, stop dreaming its a reason we dont see much more of those numbers from DE-K's... at max im giving this car 230whp and 211tq..... i didnt even read the whole thread to see if the numbers was posted but when i saw 260whp i had to stop....... cams are great for these things but not that good, you do realise that there is 6MT's that dyno's less than 260's right, n 5.5 6MT's dynoes an avg 35-40whp over DEk's right???.... cams aint picking that up lol.... yall in for disappoint unless i read this mod list wrong

 

You realize that an avg 5.5 6MT sick ballzness stops revving at 6500 right? And that the DEK's power keeps climbing until wherever you decide to stop. OP already mentioned that he's planning on running it up to 7700.

5.5



torque starts pooping out at 5k and hp at 6k.

now for your viewing pleasure



ok torque falls off too, but you see that climb? looks pretty linear right? And HP is 220 at the stock rev limiter. And that is with a 2.5'!!!!!! exhaust. Nevertheless it gains over 20hp between 5k and 6k, looking at the linear rise it's not too hard to imagine another 20 between 6 and 7.


But why do the 3.5s have such a bad rep with revving high here? There are some 350z revving up to 7500.

I'm gonna get a spare engine to do my cams and I was debating getting a 3.5 and with the 3.0 timing equipment mounting a blower on that and revving it up to 7200. I've not seen a 3.5 with 00VI either, which i think might be worth it.

But now some faint memories of rod bearing and rod bolt failure dawns on me...

 

A DEK is better at holding peak power vs a 3.5 I agree, however a 3.0 will not make no where near the same power as a 3.5 with similar mods........ I stick to wat I'm saying, everybody here can sell themselves a dream but I can see it now after he disappoints ppl will be like maybe thi is broke maybe that is broke n live in denial that with just these mods that's accurate numbers... again you can post up whatever cmparison you want but its me being real n what I think he will dyno...
230whp
211TQ....... he may hold 225 of the 230whp til redline though whooptie do

 

I'll say 253 whp.

 

What u also fail to realise is that even with the VQ35 dip in HP it still had as much power as the DEK at peak..... idk if what I saw was much pleasure

EDIT: better yet the "avg" 3.5 was making more power than the DEK even after its "ballsness" got soft...... don't sell urselves dreams... let's be real n stop hiding behind dandymax for every dyno

 

^Whats with your negativity? Everybody is just giving their opinions on what they think the car will make. No need to get your panties in a bunch....

If you're so caught up in some 3.5 numbers, wait a couple months and you'll see what a 3.5 swap with similar mods will put down once the op finishes his magic on my car lol.

Good luck mang, looking forward to the results.

 

If you do a 3.5 swap with 3.0 timing you will only hurt yourself, I don't care for reving, I care for power ... bro I've owned both DEK and 3.5, trust me on this, if you do a 3.5 swap, plz do the timing also, you will for a fact rob yourself of power..... I don't care if my car revs to infinity and beyond but don't make no power, thats dumb, that DEK was probebly going to peak at about 225 smh... I'm not either on the DEK nor 3.5 side, I favor none, my DEK was my favorite car but power wise.... nothing mesing with the 3.5 for the maxima..... until we see a 3.7 swap (next lifetime)

 

I been around way too long for that broman. I'm not the sensitive one, DEK owners get sensitive about the power they make cause ppl always compare em to 3.5's..... I owned a 3.5 and as we can see my DEK is the onein my sig... I love DEK's, I'm just telling you what I'm almost 100% sure of... all I saw was I/H/E and cams and extended revs... I do wish you proove me wrong bro its really no hard feelings, more to rejoice for in the community but I'm just aying I. Think it will be in the 230's that's all.... don't kill me for my opinion too, I'm just a regular guy giving .02c

 

i'm just wondering how do you think it will make 230 at 7700 when the dyno above shows one with not even full bolt ons at 221 at 6500?

and why would the 3.0 timing equipment hurt so much? I have an EU and can adjust ignition timing with that?

The cams on the DEK dyno above are the worst cams nissan built. intake of 224* an exhaust 232*, int lift is 8.5mm exhaust is9
OPs cams are 260int/ex with 11mm of lift...

 

Fixed. 5th word in the entire thread.

 

Also, i would technically rob myself of power on the 3.5 timing equipment because you can't mount the supercharger plate on it.

 

Found the limits of power no, but reliability yes - dandymax blew a revup pump, some people must have forgetten that too. Quick bursts are one thing, but I thought it became commonly accepted that the balancing of the 3.0's bottom end wasn't good enough for long-term 7500+ spinning - but everyone has a different definition of 'reliable' so...

Pretty sure dandymax's old setup topped out just under 270 - IIRC he had an engine simulation setup from actual measurements/blueprinting that would have put it into the mid/upper 270's while verging closer to 8K. The head ports on that engine aren't 'ported' in the sense that the shape is changed - but I'd say the LIM/heads are pretty deeply massaged and the TB->throat transition had some serious care put into it (it's in an A33 that is for sale in Toronto - someone should buy it ). I hadn't seen his intake setup, but aside from running speed density - pretty sure that record dyno run also had: a 2.5 inch cutout - 1 belt - lightweight wheels (<15 lbs) - walbro/FPR/returnless - flywheel - cattman headers - custom machined gears + cam timing - power rod delete and a custom air intake (*all this info is scattered throughout the forums). The big detail people don't understand when throwing parts together and comparing parts with HP predictions - is that that engine actually had reasons behind why some of the finer details were the way they were (port diameters/textures, etc). Not to mention, just seeing how smooth and flat the torque output was on the graph tells you the tune actually worked together with the mechanics of the whole system.

There are so many documented progressions of people pushing and outlining the limitations of the 3.0 and 3.5 and so many reasons to pursue either - or various configurations of both - it's only really fair to say the engines are different.

IIRC there was another guy with a crazy 3.0 on here, pretty sure it was on a standalone and overseas or something - I remember the thread having something to do with him having a tube-chassis Z, haven't been able to chase it down though.

 

I guess a tune will help a lot.. still don't see 250's though.... mcsteve to each his own, id waaaaaaaaaaay rather take a 5.5 that makes peak HP at 5600 rpm at let's say, 270whp but at redline only makes 250whp at vs a DEK that makes 240whp peak til redline... srry......... also there are regular setups lik sparksmax or JP or even other dyno's with extended revs and tune that will show a 3.5 making peak HP at 5600-6200RPM but only lose a max of 10whp at redline.. again wecan make a case for DEK's but obviously y'all will hide behind dandymax's extreme n one and only setup just like I could hide behind NWP's extreme n one and only setup but I won't I will keep it avg just to prove my point that it really takes nothing.... wanna pull up aaron92SE dyno of his 270whp auto vs dandy's 272whp 5MT? Go ahead because to be honest ill take that 3.5 270whp over dandy's DEK for reasons I can explain if you want me to.....

 

3.5 altima here with boltons dynoed 309whp IIRC, JP at this point is probebl in the 300whp category also, no head work or polishing.... again the motors re different I agree but the 3.0 guys needs to stop gettn ahead of themselves.... much as I love the DEK's........ bamboom that's was very well spoken, ppl do often miss the small details

 

So far it looks like Grand Hustle can urinate farther than any of us.

The dyno McSteve referenced is of a car without cams or the ability to advance ignition timing or increase the rev limit. The cams will accentuate any benefits from the headers and the 00vi.

Sounds like the car in question will have the stock A32 MAF and A33 TB? Will it be using a velocity stack or cone filter?

Also worth noting is the OP said it would rev to 7700 rpm "eventually" but also that he "doubt[s] it will be left there for daily use"

 

@ this post (the whole thing not just what I quoted)
We're way off topic in here guys....

Show me direct evidence plz, not just assumptions, and ideas about silly variable timing cams used to achieve economy, emissions and (what little) fuel efficiency.

Srsly back on topic, I think the DE-K guys already proved to anyone w/ an ounce of IQ that their cars really make less power than a 3.5.




KRZ, what stock fuel rail are we talking about here? DE or DE-K?

Also what fuel mods did dandymax use to rev the **** outta his car?

I mean since we're pretending to be Honda boys here you're gonna need to up the pressure and injectors, just like Hondas when they go far over the stock red line....

 

Just to prove how silly your torque curve argument is guess what motor this is:



If you DARE tell me that's a honda tq curve dont you dare come back on this forum.

 

Nobody has done it and I've been saying that for years. I'm the guy that portmatched 3.0 heads and '02 mani together. The dyno results were great, it had a sick mid-range, but fell off up top. I have been patiently waiting for a 3.5 owner (Preferably w/extended rev-limit & cams) to ask me to put an '00vi on a 3.5, it will be worth it, I'll bet the labor on it. I'll do that swap code free w/zero issues for $65/hr and if it doesn't make more power than a bop'd or ssim'd fwd I will give all labor back.

 

No it's not, Honda's maintain what little tq they have, you fail to realize the point I'm making, some other time, not clarifying now... but I am pretty dissapointed in that dyno, just when things are getting good TQ is saying KTHXBAI, I'm thinking it's a N/A car, most boosted cars usually don't loose that much towards the end unless the turbo is undersized but even then the HP falls off... so some N/A car... That fat *** midrange and dropoff towards the end is screaming chevy LS V8 motor, but there seems to be some head work or cams? to keep the HP up cause usually the HP trickles down towards the end on those motors w/ just bolt ons.

But i'm done w/ the DEK vs 3.5 argument, points were made, and are valid and clear, my job is done.

I am now interested to see how far we're pushing the limits of stock components on this motor.

Still waiting to hear about what's done for the fuel on this motor.

 

You're right but the question is 'why'? Why does any work on a 3.0 have to be about the 3.5? If we didn't have pioneers like the OP and dandy we would have never known what the DeK was capable of (as you suggest).

Which wasn't in question to begin w/ (look @ first post). Lol, the 3.5 guys came in here w/ the comparisons only god knows why. But whateve. Like you, I wanna see how the stock components hold up the power.

--------------------

Interested to see the outcome of this, the 3.5's been done we already know what that's about.

 

Since some DEK riders can't read they like to misquote people and cloud up the thread so KRZ can't answer some questions....

 

If that ain't the pot calling the tea kettle black. There was no misquotation (and I actually agreed w/ one of your points and wasn't referring to you as one of the '3.5' guys either). Inability to keep up is your own personal problem. How that would impede KRZ answering questions doesn't even make sense. With all this said, there's no beef.

 

We were going to do a walbro 255 in tank, but if anyone has suggestions for alternative brands I am ALL EARS. My last experience with getting a walbro for a dsm left me very disappointed in the amount of counterfeits, & the walbro dgaf.

 

What you fail to realize THAT'S THE WAY ENGINES WORK. Period, end of discussion, stop arguing about torque curves. Especially when it is clear the DEK maintains its torque curve better than the VQ35.

And that is a C6 Z06 with an exhuast and intake. Those things break 10s stock with a set of sticky rubber. And you are gonna say it has a bad tq curve.

If it is seriously that big of an issue convert your car to electric motors and batteries. Flat torque curve, no more issues.


BTW happy birthday b1tch.<---there i said it.

 

well seeing as though the proof is in the pudding i can infact show you that there is a major difference in numbers with 3.0 timing and 3.5....


So this here is a dyno Graph of Cardana24's 4th gen and i will copy it the exact way he posted it......

Power Mods:
VQ35 from 05 maxima with vq30 timing equipment
JWT S1 knockoff cams
JWT Pop charger
JWT ecu
OBX headers
Cattman 3" cat back
NWP spacers and BOP
VAFCII[/QUOTE]
Graph as you demanded



Now lets take a recent dyno on here and his mods
in this corner i present to you just you mildly bolted 5.5 6MT and his mods are
*copy n paste* MODS: Cattman Headers, Fast Cat, 3" catback exhaust, Stillen UD Pulley, NWP Spacers, Custom Short Ram intake, AEM filter w/ BPI Vstack.






Now hopefully you realise that with the 3.0 timing and extended revs aaaaaand cams hes only making 4whp over a stock limiter and no cammed 5.5 6MT.... this forum hasnt progressed as much as i thought it did... 3.5 swaps are cool n makes a difference but not as much as when timing it swapped over.... FACT!!! PROVEN!!! now lemme hear all the excuses

 

3.5 with 3.0 timing
Intake
Headers
Exhaust (3")
Spacers n BOP
Cams
ECU
VAFC and only 263WHP

3.5 with 3.5 timing
Intake
Headers
Exhaust (3")
Spacers n BOP
Pulley..... 259whp

now if you guy like i can also pull up what an even more similar modded 5.5 with cams dyno but im sure that 291WHP will make for waaaaaaay too many excuses and stubbornness... but again if this isnt proof then, its cool you can be stubborn

 

hope you realise that on a 1/4 track both of these cars will be running a max of maybe .1 seconds between each other n ones got ECU and cams..... i hate to compare but guys the OP here has a DEK and you guys have him making similar numbers to a fellow 4th genner with more mods hahahhahaaaaa.... yeeeaaa right.... 235WHP

 

@ghustle

well first of all, the second graph is abnormally high, there was a big discussion in the thread of that one, lot of people suspected a 3rd gear pull.

the numbers is like comparing apple's to oranges a bit too, depending on dyno setup etc.

But mainly i'd like to point out that the ECU you mentioned isn't there. VAFC doesn't tune timing and can't extend rev limiters either. With Emanage ultimate you can tune ignition timing.

 

grandhustle, obviously a 3.5 swap wont make as much power as a 5.5 gen with since the swap loses control of variable valve timing ~10 whp. Now if you think that if both those cars you posted the dyno sheets of went to the track with the 2 good drivers, and the difference would be only .1 seconds, you have no idea what youre talking about. The weight + gear ratio (5 spd vs 6 spd) of the 4th gen will easily cause it to out perform a 5.5 gen with similar power output.

 

Done. Might take a bit longer to get the extra parts and the time frame may be set back a bit but im all for it.

 

thats all just numbers to brag about....IMO it doesn't matter if they want to use a DE-K or a 3.5 , the important thing is that everyone has worked on their cars and has put a some effort to make them perform better,there no such thing as a perfect engine,maybe a 3.0 is smooth....maybe a 3.5 is a torque and HP monster,if the owner of the car wanted to use a 3.5 it would have used it,but the owner just wanted to do something "different",...and it did it.


and that engine is going to put down 3 horses,1 pony and 2 zebras to the wheels