I went to the drag strip again today.

My best time of day was:

RT .512
60' 2.2979
330' 6.2729
1/8 9.5566 @ 74.92mph
1000' 12.4028
1/4 14.8395 @ 92.28 mph

My worst time was 14.97. And then 7 runs inbetween those numbers. I hot lapped most of the day, but I set my record when I let my car cool for 20-25 minutes.

There was a 10mph headwind that I think hurt my trap speeds slightly. My previous best time was 14.93 @ 92.61mph with 2.34 60'.

My new mods since my last track visit are Arospeed straight thru muffler (thanks James), HD midpipe (thanks me and Home Depot), and a slightly ported throttle body with matched intake (thanks Bryan H).

Oh well, this is the record now. I won't be at sea level anymore (moving to Vegas), so you guys won't see any more times like this. I wish I could have ran in better conditions, but I dealt with what I had. It was 45 degrees, overcast, headwind of 10mph.

 

Wow, you just keep getting faster and faster, I guess you will not stop until you see 13's N/A in your auto eh?

More proof that the VE is powerful and should be respected the same as a VQ, you dont even have a B pipe.

 

That was a nice little 3rd gen meet we had today
The wind was really not good for you guys, there were some bad gusts. But, it was fun just going out there to see you off Aaron. Have fun in Vegas, and don't forget about us NC guys.
-Les

 

Yeah it was fun. I won't forget about my roots.

Don, 13 NA!!!??? Well right now, it's not even in my dreams. Right now, it will be hard enough for me to break the mid 14 second barrier. But we'll see. JWT ECU, WSP B-pipe, headwork, tornado, and eRAM Electric Supercharger with 1psi of boost and I might be in the 14.60's.

Nobody has proven that an MSD Distributorless Ignition will or will not help.

 

do they even make one for 6cyl. cars?? The DIS4 is only for 4 cyl. or do they have something new??

 

Yeah, they make them for distrubutor-less ignition systems. 4cyl, 6cyl, or 8cyl. I think it's called the Stacker Series. i am really curious to see what will happen. But, I don't wanna waste my money if it doesn't work at all. I would like a way out of this mod if it falls through.

 

Taken from the DIS section at http://www.msdignition.com/

"With its two channels, the MSD Digital DIS-2 is designed for use on all 4-cylinder applications using 2 coils, while the DIS-4 can be used on all 6 and 8-cylinder engines with three or four coils."

So, don't we have 6 coil packs? Is that what it means by "coils"?

 

Na, I ain't scared of no auto VE and they'll never get my respect

Seriously though, nice runs Aaron. It's good you bettered your time because you're going to be severely disappointed in Vegas. I'd guessimate you'll be running mid 15s@90mph or so. The altitude (~2000'),very dry air, and the fact that the track isn't known to be quick will make your Max seem slow.


Dave

 

this is just 1 (one) auto VE in the 14s.. or even remotely close to them.. others are running 16s and mid to high 15s at best..

there are at least 3 VQs in the 14s.. and a few more very close.. AUTOS..

don't even mind the 5 speeds.. how many 5 speed VEs are running consistent 14s? compared to VQs?


we're waiting for you dmontz,
we're waiting....

 

congrats aaron

 

more than you think ...

http://forums.maxima.org/showthread....hreadid=182840

keep in mind that most of the 3rd gens have close to or over 150k...

 

Yeah, there is one thing I know about and that is the track in Vegas compared to the track in NC. I have run MANY times at both in my car. It's 2010' high. The dry cold is better, BUT the altitude makes much more of a difference. I estimate I will run EXACTLY a 15.30 when I get to Vegas. Mark my words. If I do ALL the same exact mods as I did when I was at Fayetteville, NC... that is the time I will run in Vegas. That is why I want to try SoCal tracks one day. Just to see how much faster Fontana is. Getting 14's in Cali will be VERY hard for me. I will need more mods.

NYCe Maxima, the next closest VE Auto to me has run a 15.30 ONCE before. Then, the next closest was Dirk at 15.60. Both of those cars are gone. I'm serious, IF you just know how to drive and know how to make your car produce that HP, it was VERY easy to get in the low low 15's. That is, IF you have a nice track at your disposal like I did.

 

Bone-dry air isn't bad, but it's not as good air than has some moisture. 35-45% humidity is pretty ideal. Air with 60% humidity will start to slow you down. One nice thing about racing in the desert is that it gets cold at night, even in the summer. I forgot to add that Vegas is apparently slightly uphill A 15.30 is possible as long as you can 60' like you were in NC.

I see you had some help from Bryan H. You're not running any special "weight loss" mods are you?


Dave

 

3rd gear run try 4th

 

Very nice job Aaron.

I'm up here in Idaho
now get this for all the people that still think that the VE isn't powerful

Our track is at 2700' above sea level.
Our humidity is usually in the 70's
and we always have a headwind at the track
my best time to date is
15.0 @ 89 mph on drag radials with a 2.18 60' time

without drags you ask?
15.1 @ 92 mph with a 2.32 60' time

I actually think the drags are hurting me and will not run them next year. Actually think about selling them.

And that run was made back in the middle of August. That's when our track closes. My time's just keep getting low everytime i go. when i first ran and didn't know how to drive my best was a 15.6, then i went to 15.4, then 15.3, then 15.1, then i ran a best of 15.0 and then my last time at the track for the season i ran back to back 15.2's WITH drag radials ! All other times except for the 15.2's and 15.0 were done on really bad street tires. hell i would spin the whole 60' with my stock tires.


And i still have stock B-pipe, and a Stock muffler. I still want to finish my exhaust and open up the TB.

 

Considering the 4th gens outnumber the 3rd by about 1000000, you will se more timeslips.

 

Yeah exactly...

I mean how many regular member modded VE auto's are even on the board? I can think of maybe 5-6..?

 

Hmmm...all I see is a dyno plot of a VE. I've never heard of a Clayton Eddy Current Dyno. Why did you dyno in 3rd and not in 4th? Those are pretty strong numbers, but they can't be compared a Dynojet 248 like most everyone else uses. I'm not saying their bogus numbers, I'm just saying all dynos calculate their numbers a little differently.


Dave

 

I don't know who told you that you needed some moisture to run good times. If I ran in 5% humidity, it would still be better than 35% humidity. Proven fact! But all that doesn't matter b/c of the altitude in Vegas makes much more of a difference.

Have you ever run at Vegas before? You should come out sometime to LVMS. And yeah, Vegas does go uphill slightly. If you look on their website, it shows the starting line elevation and the finish line elevation. I believe it goes uphill like 12 feet or something. WOW!

And I'm sure I can pull the same 60' as what I did in NC. If the Vegas track was in NC, I believe I would still do about the same times. They are both WELL maintained tracks. I can't spin my tires off the line on either track. But, I have more power now... so we'll see how Vegas grips. It's a very nice track though, I just wish Vegas wasn't that high.

 

Well, I wish I could find the article. I read it about a year ago and it was an excerpt from a drag racing book. It is a calculation.

No thanks though, I'm don't want to run in Vegas. I already run on an uphill track at 1100'. There's no need to go any slower than I do already.

Remember that just because you're not spinning your tires doesn't necessarily mean you're getting a good solid launch. The added altitude and other factors may make your VE a boggy mess off the line.

FYI, the 2002 NHRA ET correction factor for an NA motor running at the Vegas "Strip" is .9757. Pretty much that track sucks out 2.5% of your power or ~.3 of a second.


Dave


Dave

 

So, you run at Fontana? If so, I might come out there sometime. That is IF you think Fontana is the fastest track in SoCal.

Yeah, that's what I was thinking. The added elevation will hurt my 60', along with all the other numbers. My personal experience has shown a .45 decrease in time in Vegas compared to this track that I set all my records at in NC. Probably due to the track being uphill, elevation, and warmer temperatures.

So, I might come to SoCal just to meet with you guys and race.

 

Dave lives in Kansas.

 

Thanks, I was just about to tell him that.

 

my point in posting was to show that a 3rd gen can put out as much if not more hp than a 4th gen.... hence can compete with one.

here is my 4th gear run-out pull.. ignore everything before the last incline.... they started logging when i was at 25 mph.

http://members.aol.com/quocamolie/4th_gear_runout.jpg


do a little reading and you'll find that an eddy current dynamometer type (steady state dynamometer) is more accurate than a dynojet type dynamometer (inertial dynamometer) in giving real world results. mustang dynes are eddy current dynamometers. here is a good article comparing the two.
http://home.iprimus.com.au/stevebm/Dyno_Info.htm

 

Dave didn't say they are less accurate he said they can't be compared because of their different ways of measuring the HP. Regardless of if they are less accurate or more accurate, the numbers kind can't be compared to the numbers from the other because they differ.

 

uh oh here comes all the 3rd Geners

 

My bad

 

We are the thread hijackers.

 

14.8395 @ 92.28 mph is a pretty good ET. The mph isn't there like the 4th gens though, and that's the sign of hp.

 

compare VEs and VQs with the same mods

or stock for stock..

I would put my $ on the VQ...


outnumbered or not, 150k miles or 20k miles..

let's not draw conclusions from hypothetical facts..

IF my VE had good VTCs, 10k miles and was 500 lbs lighter.. i would run 12s..

 

I looked at that other plot and can't make any sense out of it. I use to reading Dynojet plots. Thanks for the info about the Eddy, I didn't know it was a Mustang dyno. The Mustang dyno might be more accurate (I don't know), but you can't compare your numbers to say, my numbers of 189fwhp/186fwtq which were generated in 4th gear on a Dynojet 248. Who is to stay my car wouldn't be making more/less power on the Mustang dyno? That's all I was trying to point out. 98% of the dyno plots in our dyno forum are from Dynojet 248s.

As for 3rd gens being comparable to 4th/5th gens, I believe it. It's rare, but it's happened. I know the infamous BryanH and I rode in his infamous low 14-second Maxima. Honestly, it felt no quicker than my 4th gen. Too bad we never got to race each other before he got rid of it. I believe Bryan's dyno best was ~175fwhp and 175fwtq. Before the MEVI, my car was making 183fwhp and 192fwtq. With the MEVI, I'm making 189fwhp and 186fwtq. I've seen Bryan's time slips and clearly he's a better driver than I. His 3rd gen consistently got 94-95mph traps where as mine gets 96-97mph traps. He even admitted I had the stronger car, it just lacked a driver I agree.


Dave

 

Stock for stock, I think a VQ should be able to ride a VE pretty easily. Here are some advantages to speed that the VQ has over the VE:

-All aluminum Engine Vs. VE's Iron Block/Aluminum Heads (~80lb. weight difference)
-205lb-ft of torque vs. 190lb-ft of torque (VQ's also available lower in the revvs)
-VQ Beam Axle Rear = Significantly lighter then 3rd Gen IRS

All of this equates to 4th Gens having considerably more low end grunt, and overall better performance. Was it the VE or VQ engine that has gotten Nation-wide recognition by almost every major car mag? The VQ my friends. The VE is a good solid engine, the VQ is an incredible engine.

:::awaiting the wrath of the granny maximas:::

 

Craig, you really don't know what you are talking about sometimes(actually more than sometimes!)lol. The weight of the engine and suspension really has no individual bearing except on the total weight of the car. I don't know if 3-gens are heavier or lighter though.
VEs have varible cam timing and dual stage intake manifolds. VQs do not. And EXACTLY how does the rear beam = "overall better handling"??? Yeah right. That's why Nissan went BACK to irs w/ the 6-gen right? And that's why Nissan went BACK to VTCs and dual stage intake manifolds right??

 

Bitter Jeffrey..


Last time I checked a car's total weight makes all the difference in acceleration.

Yes...yes thats good to know.

I never said it handles better. Read my post. They also increased displacement on the VQ, which increased the lower end grunt a lot.

 

Who's bitter? If I wanted a 4-gen, don't you think I could have bought one? But why go sideways and possibly downward just to get 10ft lbs torque? Especially for crappier paint, worse interior and worse overall build quality?



Which is what?

Ah yeah. 0.5 liters huh. What do you think is more responsible for the hp/torque increases? .5 displacement or continously varible cam timing and the dual stage intake? duh.

 

You need to stop speaking the truth. It hurts too many 4th gen and 5th gen guys who shelled out way too much money expecting to inherit the heritage of the 3rd gens and instead ended up getting a vehicle that was a shell of its past.


Stop with the truth and reality, please.

 

Sweet!! Another true 3rd gen vs VQ bashing. Time to add my worthless insight.

The 4th gen is lighter than the 3rd gen by ~100lbs.

The beam axle while ugly, DID outhandle the 3rd in slalom and skidpad.

The beam axle does ride better than the IRS over most surfaces.

The beam axle did free up the truck space.

With all that said, do I prefer a beam over IRS? Nope. Give me the IRS.

The 4th gen VQ generates the same HP and significantly more torque than the VE, even though the VE sports VTC and a variable intake manifold.

The VQ is a more reliable motor.

The interior of the 3rd gen never did anything for me. To me, it's looks very dated. The 4th gen borrowed heavily from early to mid 90s Mercedes design and it still looks fresh today, IMO.

The 3rd gen was by far the best stock looking Maxima ever to come out. A drop and some nice 16s and the 3rd gen looks perfect.

The 4th gen was by far the most boring looking Maxima ever to come out. However with a drop, some wheels, and other body enhancements, and the 4th is the best looking Maxima out. It never looks cluttered.



Dave

 

And guess who started it? heh.



Which versions? Even the fully loaded 4-gens?



I would tend to agree. But the skidpad is a smooth round circle. Not the real world. It's like bashing Ford for going IRS in the mustang when it performed worse in the 1/4 mile.



Inherently IRS is going to match the beam for ride confort in smooth surfaces and be superior to the beam in rough surfaces. Because irs won't transmit the it's wheel's bumps to the other side.



I can fit 4 full golg bags in my trunk plus one pull cart. What more do you want? Not an acceptable compromise for a solid axle IMHO.



IMHO the 4-gen has a very simple interior. Alot less conplex curves in the dash layout that's consistent w/ Nissan's cost cutting during that era. Not impressive at all.

thanks Dave. I've seen some really nice 4-gens also. But you're right, they need to be lowered.

 

Right now, this seems to be a hard argument to back up. Nissan's own internal documentation alludes to the VG30E as the most reliable motor in its history. I would say the single deficiency of the VG from a reliability standpoint is the timing belt change having to be performed every 60k. I do believe the VQ (at least the VQ30) has the potential to lay that same claim in the future.

The VQ is the only thing that made 4th gens special and nearly makes up for the other build quality and suspension deficiencies. The I30 would probably address enough of the build quality issues I have with the 4th gens on up to stipulate that a step back didn't take place when the 4th gens came out.


From a driving in the real world standpoint, I'd take my 94 over my 99 any day despite the 85000 mileage difference. I really don't see a trunk space or rear seat room advantage either. Both seem the same to me.

 

It's good to see weve all and made up.