257/245 ish
06-10-2011, 08:09 PM
#1
257/245 ish
256.82 @ 6056 RPM
245.45 @ 4576 RPM
Test pipe + Helmholtz delete (replaced with a 3"ID pipe knight_yyz's)
1.) I set all AFC settings to 0. It was thick/rich as you can see. Still put more down vs the last time.
2.) Leaned it up a bit. (-6-8%).
3.) Leaned it further, more so on the 5-6k range to hopefully indirectly add timing to manage the camels hump. (12-15% in the 5-6k, and 10-12% everywhere else.
4.) Decided to lean it more. -14% pretty much all around, except post 6k, was about -8-12%. Same, nearly identical within a 1/2 hp.
5.) Richened it up a bit, I think she was getting mad though, nothing changed, another nearly identical run.
As I suspected, the curve develops the camels hump in the 5k range due to the straight pipe. But, nicely adds some hp at 6k.
The sound is amazing.
Last time vs this time:
Best & worst of today:
See the AF, rich as shyt with 0 corrections:
All runs hp w/AFR:
All with torque and AFR:
245.45 @ 4576 RPM
Test pipe + Helmholtz delete (replaced with a 3"ID pipe knight_yyz's)
1.) I set all AFC settings to 0. It was thick/rich as you can see. Still put more down vs the last time.
2.) Leaned it up a bit. (-6-8%).
3.) Leaned it further, more so on the 5-6k range to hopefully indirectly add timing to manage the camels hump. (12-15% in the 5-6k, and 10-12% everywhere else.
4.) Decided to lean it more. -14% pretty much all around, except post 6k, was about -8-12%. Same, nearly identical within a 1/2 hp.
5.) Richened it up a bit, I think she was getting mad though, nothing changed, another nearly identical run.
As I suspected, the curve develops the camels hump in the 5k range due to the straight pipe. But, nicely adds some hp at 6k.
The sound is amazing.
Last time vs this time:
Best & worst of today:
See the AF, rich as shyt with 0 corrections:
All runs hp w/AFR:
All with torque and AFR:
Last edited by NmexMAX; 06-10-2011 at 08:44 PM.
06-14-2011, 07:17 AM
#6
Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 29
06-14-2011, 11:38 AM
#7
The only theoretical bottle neck is the JWT POP (76.2mm)
My last LRMAF (82mm) dyno was 242/238.
The latest have been with the 76.2mm ID.
Here's the last intake set-up, ub3r short SRI before I switched to the 3" ID.
Filter/LRMAF/TB. This netted 242/238, but this was pre-spacer/3" catback.
Last edited by NmexMAX; 06-14-2011 at 12:11 PM.
06-14-2011, 01:28 PM
#10
Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 29
I suppose it might make more. I have all the hardware I think I need to piece it together.
The only theoretical bottle neck is the JWT POP (76.2mm)
My last LRMAF (82mm) dyno was 242/238.
The latest have been with the 76.2mm ID.
Here's the last intake set-up, ub3r short SRI before I switched to the 3" ID.
Filter/LRMAF/TB. This netted 242/238, but this was pre-spacer/3" catback.
The only theoretical bottle neck is the JWT POP (76.2mm)
My last LRMAF (82mm) dyno was 242/238.
The latest have been with the 76.2mm ID.
Here's the last intake set-up, ub3r short SRI before I switched to the 3" ID.
Filter/LRMAF/TB. This netted 242/238, but this was pre-spacer/3" catback.
06-15-2011, 06:10 AM
#13
Seems easy enough to do with an LRMAF.
Been reading on other forums and such with cars of similar whp, and most cars with anything above 260 on an intraweb dyno seem to have a 3.5" intake. (TL-S, etc)
There are a few select Maximas on here with the exception, but I'm not ready for cams just yet.
Looks like I will piece this monster together this summer.
Last edited by NmexMAX; 06-15-2011 at 06:16 AM.
06-15-2011, 07:51 AM
#14
Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 29
I wont be going to Dyno anytime soon but I know for sure my car should be close to the 260whp mark because of previous Dyno and mph at the 1/4 and mph increase from mods after last Dyno session 
For me its more fun and cheaper to see the improvements at the track Next I will be testing a 3.5" elbow on top of the SSIM to see if there its any benefits from it but at the track. I wish I could get some kind of reflash without the hassle of rewiring a UTEC or changing to a newer type of ECU jut to get my rev limiter moved to 7100rpms ;(
For me its more fun and cheaper to see the improvements at the track Next I will be testing a 3.5" elbow on top of the SSIM to see if there its any benefits from it but at the track. I wish I could get some kind of reflash without the hassle of rewiring a UTEC or changing to a newer type of ECU jut to get my rev limiter moved to 7100rpms ;(
Last edited by Payu; 06-15-2011 at 07:59 AM.
06-15-2011, 10:36 AM
#15
I wont be going to Dyno anytime soon but I know for sure my car should be close to the 260whp mark because of previous Dyno and mph at the 1/4 and mph increase from mods after last Dyno session For me its more fun and cheaper to see the improvements at the track Next I will be testing a 3.5" elbow on top of the SSIM to see if there its any benefits from it but at the track. I wish I could get some kind of reflash without the hassle of rewiring a UTEC or changing to a newer type of ECU jut to get my rev limiter moved to 7100rpms ;(
For me its more fun and cheaper to see the improvements at the track Next I will be testing a 3.5" elbow on top of the SSIM to see if there its any benefits from it but at the track. I wish I could get some kind of reflash without the hassle of rewiring a UTEC or changing to a newer type of ECU jut to get my rev limiter moved to 7100rpms ;(.What was your last track time & trap? Has anyone ever looked into the TS flash working for your car (first gen ECU L31, from what I recall)? I bet they'd still be a PITA to obtain since people either hold on to them or just don't have them anymore.
What have you done since your last dyno? All it took for me was a test pipe and a different intake set-up to gain 10whp, so yeah, pretty easy game.
06-15-2011, 10:52 AM
#16
Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 29
Like I said somewhere, the best DA ever here, well at the closest track, was 1695 and it was 1-5-11, temp of -5ºF/31in/Hg. <-- That would never happen during the season. It's typically in the 7000-8000 DA range during the season. So I prefer to dyno .
What was your last track time & trap? Has anyone ever looked into the TS flash working for your car (first gen ECU L31, from what I recall)? I bet they'd still be a PITA to obtain since people either hold on to them or just don't have them anymore.
What have you done since your last dyno? All it took for me was a test pipe and a different intake set-up to gain 10whp, so yeah, pretty easy game.
.What was your last track time & trap? Has anyone ever looked into the TS flash working for your car (first gen ECU L31, from what I recall)? I bet they'd still be a PITA to obtain since people either hold on to them or just don't have them anymore.
What have you done since your last dyno? All it took for me was a test pipe and a different intake set-up to gain 10whp, so yeah, pretty easy game.
I think the only option for reflash was TS but I think they wont be doing this anymore I heard some rumors that JWT may do the reflashes like they did but have to confirm this...
Last edited by Payu; 06-15-2011 at 10:55 AM.
06-15-2011, 11:03 AM
#17
After my Dyno I did the SSIM and the 3.5" intake and LRMAF my PB after Dyno was 14.2 @ 97mph after SSIM and 3.5" intake and LRMAF all things being equal (no weight reduction) 14.1 @ 99mph but my best ET at this time 13.96 @ 100mph no back seat and pass seat.
I think the only option for reflash was TS but I think they wont be doing this anymore I heard some rumors that JWT may do the reflashes like they did but have to confirm this...
I think the only option for reflash was TS but I think they wont be doing this anymore I heard some rumors that JWT may do the reflashes like they did but have to confirm this...
Do you know if the DA's were nearly the same? Damn, I need to try this new 3.5" intake deal.
Yeah, that 4AT + 6600 rev limiter aren't very nice. Have you tried smaller dia. wheel/tire combo for beneficial and effective FD ratio?
06-15-2011, 11:27 AM
#18
Great numbers man. Your car really is putting out some strong numbers for the 5AT on the VQ35DE. I think with a 350Z IM you could potentially see even higher numbers, and add to that what an MREV II can do. I personally saw an '06 AT 350Z put over 270 RWHP on the same dyno I dynoed my Maxima.
06-15-2011, 11:37 AM
#19
Great numbers man. Your car really is putting out some strong numbers for the 5AT on the VQ35DE. I think with a 350Z IM you could potentially see even higher numbers, and add to that what an MREV II can do. I personally saw an '06 AT 350Z put over 270 RWHP on the same dyno I dynoed my Maxima.
If you mean including reverse, then yes, it is a 5AT.
I'd rather piece together a 3.5" intake with this existing IM vs doing all the jazz required for the MREV and such.
What type of dyno was it and what did your car put down?
06-15-2011, 11:45 AM
#21
It was a dynojet. That was 2 years ago almost exactly and I think it was around 102F outside. My car was 100% bone stock at the time and dynoed 200 rwhp, 210 rwtq super heatsoaked from a 40 minute drive and literally driving straight on the rollers.
06-15-2011, 01:11 PM
#22
I wont be going to Dyno anytime soon but I know for sure my car should be close to the 260whp mark because of previous Dyno and mph at the 1/4 and mph increase from mods after last Dyno session For me its more fun and cheaper to see the improvements at the track Next I will be testing a 3.5" elbow on top of the SSIM to see if there its any benefits from it but at the track. I wish I could get some kind of reflash without the hassle of rewiring a UTEC or changing to a newer type of ECU jut to get my rev limiter moved to 7100rpms ;(
For me its more fun and cheaper to see the improvements at the track Next I will be testing a 3.5" elbow on top of the SSIM to see if there its any benefits from it but at the track. I wish I could get some kind of reflash without the hassle of rewiring a UTEC or changing to a newer type of ECU jut to get my rev limiter moved to 7100rpms ;(
06-15-2011, 01:34 PM
#24
Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 29
Don't know where you live and all the DA situations where you live but if you put 260 to the wheels even a 4AT, shouldn't those times be like a 13.6 or even lower....but don't know where you live since they say the girl SexyLeo dynoed at like 247 and busted a 13.66 ....but who knows....
What was SexyLeo weight at the time of the 13.6 pass??
What were the 60'ft?
You have to look at the complete variants of the difference on the ET's to judge the difference...
I dont know the D.A. but all I can tell you its that temps are in the mid 80's and 30% humidity thats the price of living in the tropic jajajajaja
Go to salinasspeedway-pr.com
But its all good for me....
06-15-2011, 02:24 PM
#25
That means nothing I used to have a B13 Sentra that ran 13.7 with 160whp??
What was SexyLeo weight at the time of the 13.6 pass??
What were the 60'ft?
You have to look at the complete variants of the difference on the ET's to judge the difference...
I dont know the D.A. but all I can tell you its that temps are in the mid 80's and 30% humidity thats the price of living in the tropic jajajajaja
Go to salinasspeedway-pr.com
But its all good for me....
What was SexyLeo weight at the time of the 13.6 pass??
What were the 60'ft?
You have to look at the complete variants of the difference on the ET's to judge the difference...
I dont know the D.A. but all I can tell you its that temps are in the mid 80's and 30% humidity thats the price of living in the tropic jajajajaja
Go to salinasspeedway-pr.com
But its all good for me....
06-15-2011, 03:49 PM
#26
http://forums.maxima.org/1-4-1-8-mil...-100-05-a.html
Originally Posted by FlawleZ
I meant 4AT. Doh.
It was a dynojet. That was 2 years ago almost exactly and I think it was around 102F outside. My car was 100% bone stock at the time and dynoed 200 rwhp, 210 rwtq super heatsoaked from a 40 minute drive and literally driving straight on the rollers.
It was a dynojet. That was 2 years ago almost exactly and I think it was around 102F outside. My car was 100% bone stock at the time and dynoed 200 rwhp, 210 rwtq super heatsoaked from a 40 minute drive and literally driving straight on the rollers.
I'm guessing your 200 FWHP was SAE or even STD corrected (higher than SAE if the RH is above 30%), as was the Z33's.
That sounds about on par for a 6MT, and a bit high for a 4AT.
Last edited by NmexMAX; 06-15-2011 at 03:54 PM.
06-15-2011, 05:33 PM
#28
http://forums.maxima.org/dyno-discus...5hp-236tq.html
http://forums.maxima.org/1-4-1-8-mil...-100-05-a.html
I think he meant Payu? But yeah, 7000-8000 DA's here around this time, since the actual "DA" is already 5000.
That's how I do mine. It's a 1:45 minute drive, and she gets straight onto the rollers too.
I'm guessing your 200 FWHP was SAE or even STD corrected (higher than SAE if the RH is above 30%), as was the Z33's.
That sounds about on par for a 6MT, and a bit high for a 4AT.
http://forums.maxima.org/1-4-1-8-mil...-100-05-a.html
I think he meant Payu? But yeah, 7000-8000 DA's here around this time, since the actual "DA" is already 5000.
That's how I do mine. It's a 1:45 minute drive, and she gets straight onto the rollers too.
I'm guessing your 200 FWHP was SAE or even STD corrected (higher than SAE if the RH is above 30%), as was the Z33's.
That sounds about on par for a 6MT, and a bit high for a 4AT.
Maybe a mistake I thought she had that 13.66 time maybe somebody else
Last edited by Rods03Max619; 06-15-2011 at 05:36 PM.
06-16-2011, 06:20 AM
#29
A 6th gen went on one of those and hit 260, got on a DJ and hit 234. And of course, we've seen it break hearts where someone got 230 on a DJ, and got 190 on a DD.
DD's/Mustang Dynos are load based and need to be set up correctly in order to read correctly, and either way, they are apples to oranges.
IMO, load based dynos are best for correct tuning since they apply load according to speed, whereas a DJ just calculates the time it takes to accelerate a drum.
But this is why load based dynos need to be set up properly and parameters need to be taken into account (coefficient of drag, weight, most namely.) Cd has a lot to do with the front end of the car, aerodynamics, surface area, etc.
Originally Posted by Rods03Max619
Maybe a mistake I thought she had that 13.66 time maybe somebody else
Fast 5.5 Gen autos of the past include Jime (duh). http://forums.maxima.org/1-4-1-8-mil...3-4-101-a.html
Blubyu http://forums.maxima.org/1-4-1-8-mil...1-11-01-a.html There might be more.
Juice http://forums.maxima.org/1-4-1-8-mil...-100-31-a.html
1sexyleo (see above post)
GHustle http://forums.maxima.org/1-4-1-8-mil...ack-again.html
Most of these cars putting down somewhere in the 230's.
Last edited by NmexMAX; 06-16-2011 at 06:24 AM.
06-16-2011, 07:46 AM
#30
Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 29
Yeah those cars are in the "230's" but you have to take in to account the weight of the car with driver at the time they made those passes to compare to another car running slower with more power I am pretty confident that those cars were pretty glutted at the time they made those passes or by any chance a 2003 Altima SE with a 270lbs driver its just heavier than those cars with their respective drivers and I dont have 60ft times either to compare with those passes but they wont be lower than 2.1 for sure on regular street tires no DR or anything its just physics jajajajaja
http://forums.maxima.org/1-4-1-8-mil...onditions.html
For example this a car with probably 240's whp ran 12.9 @ 106 and then with a higher wieght and poor track conditions and regular street tires it ran 13.9 @ 100 just to give you an example
I am pretty confident that those cars were pretty glutted at the time they made those passes or by any chance a 2003 Altima SE with a 270lbs driver its just heavier than those cars with their respective drivers and I dont have 60ft times either to compare with those passes but they wont be lower than 2.1 for sure on regular street tires no DR or anything its just physics jajajajaja http://forums.maxima.org/1-4-1-8-mil...onditions.html
For example this a car with probably 240's whp ran 12.9 @ 106 and then with a higher wieght and poor track conditions and regular street tires it ran 13.9 @ 100
just to give you an example
06-16-2011, 08:52 AM
#31
Yeah those cars are in the "230's" but you have to take in to account the weight of the car with driver at the time they made those passes to compare to another car running slower with more power I am pretty confident that those cars were pretty glutted at the time they made those passes or by any chance a 2003 Altima SE with a 270lbs driver its just heavier than those cars with their respective drivers and I dont have 60ft times either to compare with those passes but they wont be lower than 2.1 for sure on regular street tires no DR or anything its just physics jajajajaja
http://forums.maxima.org/1-4-1-8-mil...onditions.html
For example this a car with probably 240's whp ran 12.9 @ 106 and then with a higher wieght and poor track conditions and regular street tires it ran 13.9 @ 100 just to give you an example
I am pretty confident that those cars were pretty glutted at the time they made those passes or by any chance a 2003 Altima SE with a 270lbs driver its just heavier than those cars with their respective drivers and I dont have 60ft times either to compare with those passes but they wont be lower than 2.1 for sure on regular street tires no DR or anything its just physics jajajajaja http://forums.maxima.org/1-4-1-8-mil...onditions.html
For example this a car with probably 240's whp ran 12.9 @ 106 and then with a higher wieght and poor track conditions and regular street tires it ran 13.9 @ 100
just to give you an example
06-17-2011, 09:46 AM
#35
Do you have a hookup at a dyno? With as many pulls as you've done I'd say you've spent a grip of money just at the dyno alone. Although I do think its awesome you have been so thorough with your testing as its really shed light on what helps to get the most out of these engines.
06-17-2011, 10:02 AM
#36
Do you have a hookup at a dyno? With as many pulls as you've done I'd say you've spent a grip of money just at the dyno alone. Although I do think its awesome you have been so thorough with your testing as its really shed light on what helps to get the most out of these engines.
But actually, yeah, they're cool with me. The second to the last time I scheduled, they couldn't get me so this past time, he only charged me for 3 pulls and I got 5. That happened a few times ago too, I got 7 for the price of 3.
06-29-2011, 04:54 AM
#37
nope
. and im sure the TC helped lol. that was the purpose for buying it.
06-29-2011, 12:46 PM
#38
New 3.5" intake set-up. Cant give any quantitative evidence of better flow because the MAF is seeing less. I'm going to wait until the fire is out and after the holiday to re-dyno/tune.
I needed to add about 20-22% fuel to get a decent street tune for 13.0-13.5. Was running really lean (15.0-16.0)
Timing is the same so the addition of that much fuel/voltage didn't seem to affect it.
Airflow went down about 10-12%.
I needed to add about 20-22% fuel to get a decent street tune for 13.0-13.5. Was running really lean (15.0-16.0)
Timing is the same so the addition of that much fuel/voltage didn't seem to affect it.
Airflow went down about 10-12%.
06-30-2011, 07:01 PM
#39
havent installed mimne ye. will be waiting until after the porting and honing to go about a full on install. been trying to get ahold of aaron, but for some reason have the wrong number.
Last edited by Cant_Get_Ryte; 06-30-2011 at 07:04 PM.
07-02-2011, 09:16 AM
#40
New 3.5" intake set-up. Cant give any quantitative evidence of better flow because the MAF is seeing less. I'm going to wait until the fire is out and after the holiday to re-dyno/tune.
I needed to add about 20-22% fuel to get a decent street tune for 13.0-13.5. Was running really lean (15.0-16.0)
Timing is the same so the addition of that much fuel/voltage didn't seem to affect it.
Airflow went down about 10-12%.
I needed to add about 20-22% fuel to get a decent street tune for 13.0-13.5. Was running really lean (15.0-16.0)
Timing is the same so the addition of that much fuel/voltage didn't seem to affect it.
Airflow went down about 10-12%.