dmbmaxima2k2

iTrader: (1)

i definetly think that S/C'ed guys with see gains off these way more then the N/A. for the couple more hp i think the n/a guys will see from the shorty headers and for how ridiculously hard they are to install i dont' think they are gonna be a good solution, but like i've said i hope they get more hp then i think but the numbers just don't add up in my head. i'd definetly like to see numbers on a boosted maxima though, those numbers should be sweet.

and

pezking4

Good point. Now try putting bends in the straw. The size of the headers shouldn't matter as much as the flow it has, dictated by the shape. I think the stock headers are pretty efficient, that doesn't mean that a different design wouldn't allow better air flow..

RussMaxManiac

No it doesn't actually.

IceY2K1

iTrader: (3)

Thanks Russ!

I can NOT believe they are selling that part for only $350. That is a nice piece.

My only complaint(more like worry) is that flex section is WAY WAY too small. Cattman learned the hard way that the larger the flex section the better.

If you get a chance, how long is the CL-S stock flex section compared to the OBX?

dwapenyi

iTrader: (3)

You know this mention of the famous Don in Texas with the fastest all time auto Maxima. He also had really really small front tires, did he not?? I'm sure that helped him a great deal as well as all the other stuff he did. Put small tires on a manual and you will probably never launch in 1st gear due to way too much tire spinning torque. I think a little too much credit is given to Don's motor.

DW

Dave B

Ignorant? Hardly.

Ethan, you are so blinded by the fact that you think buying into every potential performance modification will give you respect in this Org. It won't. Just because something works on one car doesn't mean it will work on another.

I've looked over your dynos a few times and your famed "228fwhp" run is really no better than your "219fwhp" run. Look closely and there's a quick spike from 6000-6100rpms where your car goes from 219 to 228 fwhp for 100rpms and then the power drops off quickly. So for 100rpms, your car made an after 9fwhp. You think that will do much for you in terms of performance? Also, those look like uncorrected graphs to me. My plots have shown 5-10fwhp gains in the spikes, but when the curve is corrected, the spikes and the spiked power disappear. Take for what you will.

Just because the 3.5VQ makes more power than the 3.2 VTEC, DOES NOT mean it's a more efficent pump. The added displacement of the 3.5VQ is what gives it higher numbers over the 3.2 VTEC. However if you look closely, the 3.2 VTEC makes strong and linear power longer (look at how flat the torque curve). Simply put, it's a more efficent and effective pump. It can breath longer than the 3.5VQ ever could hope for. By your rational, a stock 5.0 Mustang is a better engine because it make more HP and TQ. Sorry. While the Stang does make more hp and tq, it has a much shorter powerband therefore it won't accelerate as long in each gear.

As RPMs increases, air velocity increases, therefore the restriction becomes more of a problem. The CL-S moves more air after 6000rpms than the 3.5VQ therefore the restrictions become more of a problem. Think about it. When the 3.5VQ is wheezing for air at 6000+rpms, the CL-S is still filling it's lungs.

When Don ported the manifolds and showed no gains, it proved to Don, the performance shop that was going to make the headers, others on the org, and myself that the design of the stock manifold is not a problem. The problems lies in the y-pipe.

As for the headers on your old car, I've looked at your dynos and you were making 177fwhp and 183fwtq which is VERY typical for a modded 4th gen. The design of the headers http://www.poweredbynissan.com/images/emax/Aug01$01.JPG does not look that bad to me at all. The turned section of the pipe off the rear bank doesn't look bad at all.


Dave

RussMaxManiac

I won't know that till Friday when I remove mine. I will take pics as well.

MardiGrasMax

iTrader: (14)

I called OBX, their fax number is listed Fax: (650) 873-8802, I called 650-873-8800 BINGO!!!. They said three weeks, call back in mid December. The piping to the cat is only 2.5", too bad for us boosted guys.

Y2KevSE

iTrader: (13)

650 area code, eh? That's pretty close to here.

IceY2K1

iTrader: (3)

A turbo might respond quite well to shorty headers!?!?!!

New mod?

Y2KevSE

iTrader: (13)

Possible... maybe... depends...

Need to see the final design first.

96BLUMAX

iTrader: (3)

Wow this thread is long. Has anyone installed these headers yet? They looked pretty nice and a good dyno would help everyone.

emax02

iTrader: (1)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Dave B
[B]

No VERY, it's been proven time and time again..

Nice low ball shot here Dave, real good. Beleive it or not modifying a car is a hobby of mine, hell I LOVE it. I enjoy helpiing others and attempting to find bigger and better things to do. I'd amagine comming form a unconstructive lemming like your self helping and sharing your work with others would translate to nothing but a act for attention. Real good Dave real good..

What does this have anyhting to do with headers or my post? Seems to me your attempting another personal attack on me, great.. But just for the hell of it I am going to once again make you look like a fool. First off I dynoed 229.2 WHP, one look at my dyno graph would have showed you this. My power line is peaking out at where you call a spike, I have 20 dynoes with almost the exact same plot. For others to see: http://www.nissanx.net/gall/album20/Picture_003 . And BTW if you where not so ignorant you would have also noticed my dyno graph has printed on it, "SAE corrected" But once again nice try on a low ball attack Dave and next time try reading everything first.

"Efficent", who ever said anythign about which motor is more efficent? Nice try..


Again where is this "effecient" comment comming from? Remember you said it was "better"? And that's great the lines are smooth.. how does that translate in to your "efficent" quota? Give me a break Dave..

I never said the VQ could breath longer or had better top end? And in terms of my "rational" a 5.0 Mustang motor is a better "air pump". By no means does that make it a better motor..


Again Dave your going OT here in a pathetic attempt to make me look bad. Nice try, but I never said the VQ35 had better top end..

No, now your putting words in Don's mouth. He never said a well made set of headers would not help. All he proved was that gutting out stock headers is a waste of time.


Look at my dynoes again hot shot, my car only gained 2.9 FWHP! Wake up man, a typical Y-pipe adds a lot more peak power then that.


And Dave I have had a VERY, VERY bad day today and you are a VERY irritating and IGNORANT person so PLEASE STFU! Don't EVER talk to me again..

Blu

iTrader: (63)

seems like these are all proven points above. I don't see how there could be an arguement with any of them. I'm sure something else OT could be thought of though to keep the conversation alive. Can't wait to see it

BriGuyMax

iTrader: (1)

dmbmaxima2k2

iTrader: (1)

ROFL i love that pic, true too.

Dave B

You're a waste of my time, Ethan. Ignorance is bliss, isn't it?


Dave

MAX2000JP

This thread is G@Y!!

silvermax2k2

iTrader: (1)

Looks to me like Dave B Just got OWNED!

Nealoc187

iTrader: (23)

This was actually a very good thread until about 2 pages ago. People were having a civil discussion for ONCE about the virtues of the CL-S vs the 2k2 Max. Then it just dropped off the map. Bummer.

emax02

iTrader: (1)

Ya Some times you have to fight for your cause though I think all the info is allredy pretty much on the table here.

Cutler

iTrader: (3)

Ethan you car is fast enough

BigDogJonx

iTrader: (7)

How you going to come in this thread and ***** it? Can you see we trying to battle something out?

deezo

iTrader: (3)

I hope this thread doesn't send you back to smoking stogies.

Blu

iTrader: (63)

fight it ethan don't let internet thugs get to you

Dave B

I have reason to believe that the stock manifolds are NOT restrictive on the Maxima. I'm using Comptech's headers as an example because the Acura guys seem to believe they are a slightly better design over the OBX. Here is a pic of the Comptech headers:

http://solar.innercite.com/comptech/product231.html

Here is a pic of the New Zealand headers for the Maxima:

http://www.poweredbynissan.com/images/emax/Aug01$01.JPG

The designs look nearly identical. I'm seeing an oval port primary runner shorty-style header with a Y-pipe. Even the rear bank pipe "loop" is in both designs. The only difference is that the New Zealand headers are divided into a couple extra pieces on the exhaust pipe.

Here's Comptech's dyno for a CL-S with the headers:

http://www.comptechusa.com/images/dyno/2000CLSplot.pdf

As you can see, power is not really gained until after 5600rpms (assuming near the VTEC switch over). As the RPMs increase, the gains become more significant. From 6200 to redline is where the largest gains occur. As we all know, 6000+rpms is out of the power production range of the 3.5 VQ (except Ethan's freakish 2k2 which seems to contine to make power to 6200rpms - not a single other 2k2 Maxima dyno I've ever seen has ever shown this). The VTEC system incorporates a higher lift lob at a predetermined rpm. In a nutshell, this allows the engine to breath better in the upper rpms which extends the torque curve which then obviously increase HP. As RPMs increase over 6000rpms, the 3.2 VTEC is moving more air over a set amount of time vs the 3.5VQ. I also think the 3.2 VTEC motor uses a VIM also (could be wrong about this one). While an extra 1300rpms of topend breathing doesn't seem like a lot to most people who understand little about cars, it is actually huge when it comes to racing. Just like putting the VIM on the 4th gen, the powerband in each gear is extended and the engine will accelerate through a much more powerful powerband in each gear. The gains become more apparent in the longer gears (3rd, 4th, 5th).

When Don ported out the stock manifolds he gained ~1hp. In his eyes and the shop that was going to design the headers, the restriction just wasn't there. If the manifolds were terribly restrictive, more of a gain would have shown up. The problem lies in the Y-pipe. Yes, Don did post this info.

Sometimes the ugly stock peice is quite efficent in it's execution. On a high-rev motor (7300rpms) like the 3.2 VTEC, the stock manifolds seem to pose a restriction after ~5800rpms, but on the lower rev 3.5VQ (6000rpms), the stock manifolds don't seem to be much of a problem because power tails off 5800rpms.

Has usual this is just my opinion based on the things I've observed and the automotive experience I've gained over the past 14 years working and modifiying cars. On a stock LT1 F-Body, gains with a full shorty header are really no better than just running a Borla Y-pipe. However, once you add a decent streetable cam which increases power production to 6200rpms vs the stock 5400rpm peak, headers become more effective than just the Y-pipe. Just like I'm seeing in this CL-S vs 3.5VQ header fiasco, the better and farther an engine can breath, the more effective headers become.

Take it for what you will.



Dave

Blu

iTrader: (63)

I thought it was a waste of your time. Seems like to me you spent quite some time typing this. We will find out soon if these headers are productive. I hope they are

IceY2K1

iTrader: (3)

That's a pretty sh!ty design on the rear bank. I see why the CL-S Comptech headers do that bend, because the cat is so close, but for the NZ header their is PLENTY of room.

I'd like to see Cattmans' new Y-pipe combined with shorty headers. That would be a less restrictive design then the NZ header.

Any theory on how headers would affect the VQ30DE w/MEVI or VQ30DE-K?

dmbmaxima2k2

iTrader: (1)

even though the VQ30DE-K is a higher reving engine it's only a 3L "air pump" even at 6400rpms where is makes peak power it's still taking in less air then the VQ35 at it's 5800~rpm power peak due to it's increased size SOO.. if these don't work well for ethan(which unfortunately i don't think they will) they probably won't do much more for a VQ30.

Dave B

Na, I certain someone is a waste of my time. Not the orginal topic of this thread


IceY2K1-
The "loop" design of the Comptech header, like the New Zealand header, is an attempt to make the y-pipe an equal length design. It's not to clear a cat. IMO, you won't see much of a gain with the headers on the VQ30DE w/MEVI or VQ30DE-K. Just my opinion though.


Dave

IceY2K1

iTrader: (3)

Ok, I thought that might be the reason, but Cattman apparently doesn't think the same with his design. He's probably more concerned with production simplicity than an equal length design.

Now, why don't you think the VQ30DE w/ VI or -K will gain? Is it because they still pull to redline, therefore the exhaust isn't restrictive as it nears 6400rpms causing it to drop off like the VQ35 and CL-S?

That's my theory, since the boosted guys are still pulling to redline, so the headers must be flowing enough air.

SuDZ

I havent really looked in to it since I am at work right now, but how much of a pain is it to get to the headers? Are they just in a bad spot to reach or is there another issue... I noticed many people saying they are a pain.

SuDZ

IceY2K1

iTrader: (3)

Only the rear is a BISH. Your supposed to jack up the engine a little to clear.

SuDZ

So would you have to remove it from it's mounts or something for it to raise or can you raise it just a bit while still on the mounts?

SuDZ

IceY2K1

iTrader: (3)

I believe Ethan did it without removing the rear motor mount, but it sounds like it was a bish.

I'm not sure how much better removing the rear mount will make it.

Stephen Max

iTrader: (59)

If this were true then neither car engines nor turbine engines would work. You are forgetting that the volume of exhaust is significantly higher than the volume of air taken in due to combustion. This is what forces the pistons down and makes power in an engine, after all. If by making combustion chamber scavenging more efficient you can increase the air/fuel charge coming in, then you can make more power, and hence more exhaust, and that is what VTEC does.

soundmike

iTrader: (24)

Does this count?

IceY2K1

iTrader: (3)

North East USA
Opak Motoring
(516)847-0337 Tel
(516)847-0547 Fax


I believe someone already posted these, but;
USA Head Office
(650)873-8800 Tel
(650)873-8802 Fax


Also according to the website:
http://www.obxracingsports.com/perfo...=3&subcatID=22

Part #: Model: Year: Description: Color: MSRP:
H00056 Maxima 00- 3.0L n/a $499.00

Does someone want to be the guinea pig on this one?

emax02

iTrader: (1)

Yep I removed the rear manifold with out touching my motor mounts It was a hell of a job though, lol. It took me a good 14 hours to complete the whole damn thing.

I will try OBX some time next week, Mardi just called them so I will take his word on that info. I will get these headers as soon as they come out and do a after dyno. If I don't gain much it's not a big deal, atleast it will be fun putting them on and droping a cool 20 lb's off my car.


250 WHP and a 13.5 NA is in the works

IceY2K1

iTrader: (3)

Or you could just order them NOW, since you already know the manifolds are the same!

Part #: Model: Year: Description: Color: MSRP:
H00056 Maxima 00- 3.0L n/a $499.00