Craig Mack

Does anyone know another V6 engine that can hold this kind of power under these circumstances? Honestly, I think the VQ is freakishly strong. This is insane.

Mad Dhan

:crapshispants:

3.0LV6

Much props on your car!

I do want to clear up two misunderstandings/mistakes you made in reading your dyno chart.

While your car does make 170 ft/lbs of torque at 2,000 rpms its physically impossible to make 170 HP at 2,000 rpms when you only have 170 ft/lbs to work with.

You also got confused when you did your splice job on the dyno chart overlay.

From 2,000 to 5,250 rpms you copied your TORQUE curve, and from 5,250 to redline you copied your HP curve. The resulting affect is that it makes it appear that you are making BEEFY HP down in the low RPM's which isn't really happening. At 2,000 RPM's you are making 70 HP.

Still very impressive top end power though!!!

IceY2K1

iTrader: (3)

Good eye.

thnikkamax

iTrader: (2)

Ah, i see.. he copied over the bright blue and bright red when he should have copied the bright blue and dark blue which is DYNORUN.072

Anywho..

Nigel, If I'm understanding this right, you're working on a different engine rebuild on the side? So is that why you're pushing this one that way you know what the limits are?

Canuck

Let me know I will be going and so will ryan. It would be nice to have two turbo maxes ande a bottle fed max at the track on the same day!!!

Jr'sMaxima

Set the date and Ill be there.....see what I can do in the new 5spd...once I learn how to race shift it better.

turbo97SE

iTrader: (3)

Yup you are indeed correct. I did a dohhhhh! Sorry. I will correct it and upload it again. Thanks! I knew something was wrong ... I even told the shop there must be something wrong. Me = DUMB!

We actually did some of the pulls with some one pulling my intake open at about 5000 rpm. I have been too lazy to get the rpm switch. I ordered one about 2 weeks ago but it still hasn't come! Well, I must have got confused thinking there should be a difference. So I really didn't need to overlay them at all! Doh!

Maxima NutBag

wow, thats awesome!!! cant wait to see it in action when you've got it in tip top shape!

turbo97SE

iTrader: (3)

OK so I fixed the graph (you have to click refresh to see it).

95maxrider

iTrader: (32)

simply amazing. jesus. go run a bpu+++ supra.

Axel

iTrader: (3)

Hmm..I have no engine mods yet my engine broke down on me on January 2nd. The piston flew right out and made a huge hole in the engine block. Granted I race the car in Solo-1 but still, I was very surprised to see a VQ engine just get destroyed like that. Again, no mods on the engine. Maybe I was just unlucky and got a bad engine from the start but still...
I still have a lot of respect for the engine, but it's not indestructable (By the way, I only had 35K miles on it).

IceY2K1

iTrader: (3)

Just curious, but was it cylinder #5?

Lordrandall

iTrader: (4)

thnikkamax

iTrader: (2)

oh, and Nigel.. if your maxima sucks, THEN GIVE IT TO ME!

Y2KevSE

iTrader: (13)

Cylinder #5 is the last to get fuel, correct?

5.0THIS

Nigel, I take it those numbers from your dyno are corrected, right? You shouldnt be using the correction factor for a turbo car at altitude. If the correction factor was near normal for in Ft. Collins i'm guessing it would be right around 1.22-1.24, only problem is that that number is for NA cars. If that dyno is correcting with standard numbers then you're not making 429whp. And as far as boost, I thought a max could hold 9psi at sea level? That's all the cylinder pressure you're seeing up here running 12 psi (about the same as 9psi at sea level) maybe turn it up to 15psi up here and see what happens.


You should go down to bandi, with all that power and wrong wheel drive I doubt you'll be able to put much of it down, unless you run slicks, and I for one dont know exactly what your tranny/axles will think of that with all that power. I think you'll see about 13.5@109 or so at bandi.

stephenlc

iTrader: (1)

Umm I think he will see better times that that, and I agree with your statement about the axles, with that power they are going to snap. Great numbers though.

Axel

iTrader: (3)

Hmm..good question. I really don't know. I dropped the car off in New Jersey and took a flight home. I really didn't think of asking.
All I know is that it was one of the back ones (closer to the driver) and blew downwards/forward.

MAXIN

iTrader: (5)

~400+ fwhp and only 13.5? Are you predicting that with slicks?

turbo97SE

iTrader: (3)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Axel


Hmm..good question. I really don't know. I dropped the car off in New Jersey and took a flight home. I really didn't think of asking.
All I know is that it was one of the back ones (closer to the driver) and blew downwards/forward. [/QUOTE


number 5 is the closest to the driver. Mine misfires intermittently. I checked my compression - they all read exactly the same, injectors, changed all the plugs etc... but it still misfires. This cylinder is closest to the fuel regulator but is second to last in the firing sequence (don't think firing sequence will affect anything). Anyway, could it be that it is seeing too much fuel? I had to richen everything up at the top. My AFC is maxed out at 50%. Also my O2 sensors are bad so it is probably dumping as much fuel as it can. I have no clue at this point.

MardiGrasMax

iTrader: (14)

What plug gap are you running? try .030"

# 5 is the last to get fuel, what shows as 120psi at the fuel pressure gauge sender location is less at that last cylinder. 50%+ correction factor is insane. The reason it isnt knocking is because the ECU is seeing crazy high MAF voltage and is thinking that you are flowing crazy amounts of air (you are), but the higher the MAF voltage the lower the ignition advance. If you went with larger injectors and pulled MAF voltage with the AFC your timing would jump up and you would see some more power I bet, only try this with the J&S. It really comes down to what ever works I guess, but for how long is the question. Larger injectors should be next up for sure!

IceY2K1

iTrader: (3)

Please explain? Why is that?

BriGuyMax

iTrader: (1)

I agree with Matt, before I gapped down my plugs when I had nitrous, my car was misfiring like it was it's job.

turbo97SE

iTrader: (3)

Hi Matt

Thanks! I priced up some injectors yesterday, they ain't cheap! ... even your source requested twice what you said you paid for yours. I am gapped at 0.028" right now. I tried 0.030" but same thing. I didn't know about the ignition advance stuff, that's interesting.

With bigger injectors, I'll probably have to swap FMU ... probably go with the Cartech instead of messing with discs and back way off on the AFC.

I noticed in the FSM, it says compression should be about 140 psi to like 190 (can't remember the upper limit) it also has in parentheses that 140 equates to 10:1 and the upper limit is like 13:1 (I think unless it is a misprint). Didn't realise our compression was that high! Well you live and learn!

5.0THIS

Yeah, I dont see anything much quicker. Just because he's got all that power doesnt mean he'll be able to use it all. Remember, wrong wheel drive! When the tires spin you dont go anywhere fast. And remember, it's in Colorado.

Blu

iTrader: (63)

his times might not be that great but the traps speeds will show his power which is much greater than 109 traps. 109 traps is around 300whp and 300tq. I see around 116 traps with his power

5.0THIS

Isnt gonna happen, especially in Colorado ,I'll bet you money. But he'll never go to the track anyway, for what reason I dont know, but he does seem to shy away from going to the track.

Dreizehn

iTrader: (4)

He did go once...

Nismo87SE

He is right at that track a 15.0 @ 92mph car at sea level would probably pull a 16.1-4 @ 84-87mph at bandimere (sp?). High altittude ownz everyone there .

IceY2K1

iTrader: (3)

I thought FI cars, especially turbos, aren't affected near as much as NA cars by altitude.

If you set the boost to 12psi, no matter whether you are at sea level or 5000ft, you still end up with 12psi. The turbo just spins more revolutions to produce 12psi at 5000ft than sea level.

celica

i wwas told the same

FAST LS1

Back in the 80's GM made this V-6 that went into Grand Nationals, I heard it's pretty strong for a V-6

Soon2BMaxed

Mmmmmm i love GNs

stephenlc

iTrader: (1)

Yes you can easily make grand nationals into high 12 or low 13 second cars with $2000 dollars. They are trubocharged stock though. Automatics also, just like turbo trans ams. The only turbo trans am, and its the fastest.

turbo97SE

iTrader: (3)

Yeah, whatever ... You are one of the really mature ones here I can tell! I'll be at the track first chance I get this year. Some of us have to work you know? Plus going really fast in a straight line isn't my idea of fun ... kicking unsuspecting Corvette's butts on the street is more fun. Don't waste my time! It's all about having fun not about proving myself to immature woofters!

Soon2BMaxed

ummm what the hell is a woofter?

IceY2K1

iTrader: (3)

5.0THIS

Not true at all. Because of the way the spring works in a waste gate, you'll see 12 psi of boost with the same setting, but the cylinder pressure of 12 psi in colorado is about the same as 9-9.5psi of boost at sea level, so essentially he's seeing the pressures as a car at sea level would see running 9 psi boost. A turbo car at altitude sees about 4-5% power loss, a N/A car sees about 23-24% power loss. That's why I asked him if the dyno he was on was using a standard correction factor, because if it was, then he's actually making about 350whp or so.

5.0THIS

Damn, who crapped in your corn flakes? Getting a little defensive arent we? I never badmouthed your car, so why are you insulting me? How have I been immature? I did ask if your dyno numbers were figured with a correction factor, and you didnt repsond. I took the liberty of figuring more accurately what power your car is making. Assuming a 1.23 correction factor, your car is actually making about 349 hp at the wheels. So being as how a stock 97 SE maxima makes about 135 hp at the wheels, uncorrected up here, then you're claiming you've added 215 hp at the wheels with 12 psi boost. Let's look at the science here of all this: at our altitude, the ambient air pressure is about 12 psi. So, with 12 psi ABSOLUTE (ie no boost) your car up here processes a certain amount of air, CFM. Now, we've concluded that if your car proccesses x amount of CFM up here at 12 psi ABSOLUTE (ambient air), then it makes about 135 hp at the wheels uncorrected (97 SE 5 spd). SOOOO, you're saying you've added 215 hp (assuming 349whp) at the wheels with another 12 psi of ABSOLUTE manifold pressure. You must be pumping incredible volume to be acheiving those numbers. And I assume this was all on race gas with such a lofty compression ratio?

Anyway..... I am glad you'll be at the track, I'd like to see your car run. Above I only gave what I thought were reasonable estimates as to what your times would be. Werent your times in the 18s last time you were there? that's what I was told by some other maxima guys anyway..... Do you have a 5 spd? With a LSD? if not then that's probably why you're getting so much spin out of the thing. One wheel up front with no weight on it (it's transfered to the back of the car) equals no traction. Even my buddy's stock 97 N/A SE can break them loose fairly easily. I hope if you're coming to the track you can find a way to put power down. I think if you could put down 349whp you could easily be in the 12s running 115 mph traps. If you're interested, you should check out CSMA, a club I belong to, we are renting ou bandi for a day, you could get in 30 runs or more if you wanted, for 60$. which is a pretty good deal when test and tune costs 30$ and you only 4-5 runs at most. PM me if you want more details on getting in on that.

Andy