IceY2K1

iTrader: (3)

Yes, any aftermarket 350z injector or even the STOCK 350z/DEK injector is a 50cc improvement.

nismology

iTrader: (8)

1. Where exactly did you read the DE-K had lighter internals?

2. Saying lighter internal parts add HP is like saying a lightened flywheel or UDP add HP, which they don't BTW.

Huh? We're talking about the HP gains on the DE-K. If the DE can rev to 8K w/stock valvetrain, so can the DE-K. What's your point?

SR20DEN

iTrader: (7)

Lighter internal parts such as pistons, rods and valves DO add hp, but without changing the BSFC. It's all about efficiency.

Lighter flywheels, crankshafts and UDPs do not add hp under a constant load at a specific RPM but they do make the car go down the track faster and do show up as a hp increase on an inertia dyno.

Tatanko

iTrader: (34)

Thanks

I agree. This was only a first attempt and I'm sure even they realize there's things they could go back and do a little better, a little less "ghetto," etc. If someone can come up a kit to do all this (all the custom parts, not including the DE-K manifold, fuel rail, injectors, etc.) it will be much cheaper and much more streamlined than the prototype you see.

DAVE Sz

iTrader: (2)

I said free up power didn't I? Yes. UDP and fly both FREE up power. As for the lighter internals I guess I was wrong. I could've sworn I read that somewhere last year or so. Oh well my bad.

SR20DEN

iTrader: (7)

No, you were correct.

nismology

iTrader: (8)

It makes sense that an engine would require more fuel per HP if the internal parts were indeed heavier. But I don't see how it would "add" HP if the parts were lighter.

I understand this much but they cannot be considered power "adders" because the force being transfered to the crank over time by the connecting rods is solely dependant on what goes on in the combustion chamber, no? Everything else would be freeing up power as opposed to adding it i would think. I guess it's just a syntax issue i guess.

Any replies you have please PM them to me. I'm always willing to learn. I don't wanna clutter this thread anymore.

So the DE-K does have lighter internals?? Hmmm... Do you have a link, i'd like to read that.

SR20DEN

iTrader: (7)

My take on this is how I would classify making "net" horsepower and not "gross" horsepower. Lighter internals do not add gross hp. Gross hp is only determined by the Brake Specific Fuel Consumtion and air mass intake.

Anything that you can do to an engine that will allow it to transfer more engery past the crankshaft to a 'brake' dyno is considered a power increase. An it does not matter how much fuel or air you added, equaled or subtracted.
The general rule of thumb is if it can show up on a brake style dyno as an increase then you added power. Rotating masses such as crankshafts, flywheels and pullies do not effect the energy transfer to this style of dyno thats why we don't call them power adders. However lighter pistons, rods, wristpins, valves, retainers, locks, valve spring rates etc. do allow the engine to transfer more of it's raw energy past the crank into the brake dyno.

Midknight MAXX

iTrader: (1)

Now I'm confused. Why can't you put an entire DE-K engine into a 4th gen?

SR20DEN

iTrader: (7)

No. This thing is being twisted around now. I was referring to his comment about the lighter internals making power. I already answered the other question.

Dave B

Thanks for posting those dynos and it further proves my point. Here's my DE with a Y-pipe, intake, UDP, and the MEVI.



I have yet to dyno with the JWT ECU, but I'd estimate I'm close to around 200fwhp/195fwtq now. Requin6 has a great dyno of his MEVI/JWT ECU 4th gen with power basically holding straight to 7000rpms. As you can see, both the MEVI and DE-K peak out around 6100-6200rpms and then the rpms hold and drop VERY slowly. I go from 189fwhp@6100rpms to 185fwhp@6500rpms. to me that drop isn't really worth noting. If you want to argue about 100rpms at the peak, fine, but in the overall performance it doesn't make much difference. If you compare the 203fwhp dyno to my 189fwhp dyno, you'll see that the power difference below 5500rpms are pretty small. We're talking about 5-6fwhp/tq if that. After 5500rpms is when the DE-K starts to really open up with gains of 10-14fwhp/tq over my MEVI. So basically below 5500rpms there's a minimal difference, but above 5500rpms there is a fairly substanial difference.


I understand that, but we're talking about Maxima.org where most of the people are clueless about working on their cars. I have a hard time seeing people who have wrenched very little on cars feeling comfortable relieving fuel pressure, removing fuel lines, disconnecting and swapping injectors, splicing injector wires, reworking vacuum lines, etc. Hell, most people in the Org still think the MEVI "install kit" is some special item you have to order when in reality it just stuff you get from a junkyard, NAPA, and Radioshack. As for aquiring the DE-K manifold, I don't know what junkyards Kris is dealing with, but all the ones I talked to two years ago would not part with just the manifold. It was the motor or nothing.


Dave

spirilis

iTrader: (2)

I was addressing his immediate question (i.e. why use lighter valvetrain components), not considering the fact that it's probably not even necessary...

IceY2K1

iTrader: (3)

Say what? What point was that? That with your Ypipe, intake, UDP, and MEVI, you're still not putting down what a stock -K does?

And that you're putting down ~15whp and ~10wtq LESS then a DEK with similar mods?

As soon as krismax dynos or in about a month or so when I do, you'll see what a -K+ECU can do to 7000rpm.

I see that on your dyno you cross ~175whp@5250 and peak at 188whp@6100rpm, so you gained ~13whp vs. the DEK with similar mods gaining more then 25whp over the same interval and then STILL gaining another 5whp by 6400rpm vs. your loosing ~4whp.

I agree, yet you're still dropping, ie past peak, the DEK is SLOWLY still gaining. You can see this also, since you're loosing at least 5ft/lb MORE torque from 6000-6400.

I disagree. It's hard to see on yours though, however it looks like you're 5whp even 10whp lower. Any chance you can get a better pic?

Also, what wheels were you running? I'd bet lighter then OEM 17s, right?

Actually, this could probably be done using a 4th gen lower manifold/injector/rail. Krismax just decided to swap those also for the fuel increase, which required the lower for the injectors.

Last, lets wait and see what the dynos show before we discuss anymore "my point all along" and "my arguement" points, eh?

mitch33x

iTrader: (5)

This is very awesome indeed. Great job for getting this to work, can't wait to see some dyno's

BlueC

iTrader: (5)

So this VI swap can be done w/o replacing the lower 4th gen intake manifold??? Would you still see gains, or is the upper manifold the only part that makes the difference??

Im 100% interested in doing this when summer rolls around, it'll add some power to my "other" swap.

Hmm... you know theres a 2000 I30 that sits next to my car in the garage at my house, wonder if my parents would notice the lack of high end power

IceY2K1

iTrader: (3)

If the 4th gen lower IM bolts to the 5th gen upper IM, then yes.

I'm not sure if krismax tried this or not.

BlueC

iTrader: (5)

Someone needs to try it. Im getting sick of my VQ choking past 5500rpm.

IceY2K1

iTrader: (3)

I agree...

Hopefully, someone tries it without changing more then is necessary.

BTW, anyone down for chipping in money to get krismax to a dyno SOONER?!?

I can't wait any longer.

Dave B

Which dyno are you looking at? Look at Russ's dyno (the first one). That's on the same machine I dynoed on so it makes the comparison even more legitment. Russ's STOCK 2001 isn't making the same amount of power as my MEVI with bolt-ons. His DE-K makes 183fwhp@6100rpms and peaks out. I made 189fwhp@6100rpms. The shape of the curves is basicially the same. My runs were on 48lb 17" rims at the time.

I'm not denying that the DE-K makes more power, but my point was the difference in power below 5500rpms between the two manifolds is pretty minimal. It's only from 5500+rpms where the BOLT-ON DE-K (last graph, 203fwhp) exceeds the power of the MEVI. That was my point.

Also, Krismax's will skew our dyno comparisons because he is running a ported manifold and Pathfinder TB. I guess our closest comparison will be Mike's I30 MEVI/JWT ECU when he dynos with the Pathfinder TB. As for 1/4 mile performance that too will be hard to compare because Kris has done quite a bit of weight reduction and weight is more of a factor in the 1/4 mile than power is.


Dave

IceY2K1

iTrader: (3)

Just drop in the whole DEK.

maxS already has IIRC.

IceY2K1

iTrader: (3)

Quit looking at PEAK only Dave.

Look at his torque below 3000rpm WHICH YOU CLAIM "I suffered no losses in power until about 3300rpms. .... I'll also note the MEVI actually gained me power below 3000rpms.. So, you have gained vs. a typical MEVI dyno. Yet, you're not breaking 175ft-lbs. and he starts at 175ft-lbs and climbs.

From 3K-4K he's around 193ft-lbs vs. your 3000-3500 "hump" to 184 and your DROP back below 175ft-lbs for 3500-4000.

4000-5250 is pretty even.

5250-6000 yours is linear/bows a little down(loosing acceleration), while his climbs/arcs up(gaining acceleration), just not as high by ~4hp vs. YOUR BOLT ONs. Throw an intake and he's with you NOT to mention a ypipe.

6100-6400 yours drops slightly and his does some funny twitches.

AGAIN, you have BOLT ONs.

Once you compare STOCK vs STOCK or BOLT ON vs BOLT ON, MEVI doesn't stack up ESPECIALLY in the upper range.

Honestly, unless you can provide raw numbers or at least a better dyno image, I'm not going to agree.

I agree. krismax has thrown a bunch of other variables into the mix, so a direct comparison isn't really possible. *HOPEFULLY*, someone figures out a way to just run the 4th gen lower/rail/injectors and just the -K manifold.

krismax

iTrader: (15)

Ok first off the lower intake manifold where it bolts to the heads. The manifold was ported and polished 1/16 of a inch around by nissan. This is another reason why I like the 2000 lower over the 96 lower. Its also cast thinner than the 96 lower ,so its actually about 3lbs lighter than the 96 lower. Now it bolts directly to the engine BUT the 2000 lower has a totaly different bolt pattern than 96 where the upper and lower meet. So in order to make the 2000 upper bolt to 96 lower you would have to cut off the 96 ends on the lower have ears welded on .Then have all other holes welded shut . Next drill and tap new holes in the 96 lower manifold to the 2000 spec.(may want to get a 2000 lower to get perfect bolt pattern and bolt size) Lastly have the 96 lower plained off and cleaned up.

This all cost me under $1000. I would say best way and cheapest would to get a 2000 long block and use almost all the parts you need are from the 2000 engine. Thing I noticed is that the large EGR guide tube from the 2000 will bolt right from Exhaust manifold to 96 egr valve and 2000 small EGR guide tube bolts from engine right into the exact spot in the manifold. You dont need the large 2000 tube just wanted to see if they fit. The EGR gas temperature sensor from 96 tube will screw right into 2000 small egr tube ( the one you see poking into the neck of the IM)
Now for the hood there was no cutting of the hood whatsoever. And it does not touch the hood at all. If you had stock motor mounts I would say to cut out a small little piece under the hood .if you have a carbon fiber hood you will have tons of room,probably over a inch. You have to understand that from nissan making a more aggressive window slope on the 2000 the engine bay is smaller than the 96,thats why some peoples measurements of the manifold were off. The 2000 manifold has over 4 inches of clearence before it touches the manifold.
Now for the power I hit the rev limiter at 8000rpm by mistake just because it pulls that hard. Forty minutes about before the pics and video were taken my battery was hooked back up (after me and joe spent 40-45 hours over that weekend outting everything on and every part was made or bought at that point and everything planned out)and fired up and it had no time to adjust I must say now the pull is alot better now.

IceY2K1

iTrader: (3)

Anybody know if ALL 4th gens including '99 Cali cars have the SAME lower manifold?

Dave B

You said my MEVI with the intake, Y-pipe, and UDP (doesn't do jack ****) didn't make as much power as a stock DE-K. I'm not just looking at peak because that doesn't mean jack crap as you know. And let's not argue about 4hp here and there because I see those kinds of swings between dyno runs. It's pretty meaningless. As for the dip from 3500-4000rpms with my MEVI, yes it's a loss of power, but you're talking about 400-500rpms and then the power comes back strongly. It's not going to effect acceleration, especially at WOT in a lower gear. BTW, that dip disappears with the JWT ECU and shapes the torque curve EXACTLY like the DE-K's curve.


Well you posted a bolt-on DE-K plot and I posted a bolt-on DE/MEVI plot and compared the two. From what I see, there isn't much difference below 5500rpms and this was where people said the DE-K has a big advantage (it really doesn't). From 5500-6500rpms is where the DE-K shines and has it's 10-15whp/tq advantage. A gain of 10-15whp/wtq from 5500-7500rpms isn't going to equate to huge 1/4 mile gains. You're looking at maybe .1 in the 1/4 mile, but pretty significant gains above 100mph.

I'll shut up now and wait for Kris' dynos (hears clapping in the back ground)


Dave

skeelo34

iTrader: (4)

I dont see why they would not. If you look at the upper intake manifold it has bolts in a certain position that I think is the same on all 95-99 maximas. If you look at the picture of the DEK manifold bolted up, you'll the bolts scattered in different places. So if the upper manifold is the same on all 95-99, it would only make sense that the lower has to be the same, or at least the bolts must line up in the same spot.

Kevlo911

iTrader: (36)

WHat RPM switch are you using and at what RPM is hte VI activating?

krismax

iTrader: (15)

Im using a summit rpm switch adustable from inside the car ,a led you see in the video lights up when it switches runners.
It set at 5250 right now but that will be dyno tuned as well as the engine.I think I may try 5750 rpm today.

Maxima NutBag

Wow, awesome work guys!! After having a VI motor like the VG, I don't think I could ever drive one without it! This is definitely something to look into doing when I upgrade to a 4th gen. Does the motor winding up to WOT sound any different (in mine it's a rising tone that increases in level with rpm) now? Mad props on undertaking, installing and wiring this beast. It's about time the 4th gens had an alternative to doing the MEVI.

Taken2DaMax

iTrader: (5)

wow congrads on the upgrade. This sounds promising...

krismax

iTrader: (15)

Even if power levels between MEVI and DEK manifold were equel the DE-k is better because it does not heat soak it gets mildly warm at most . It keeps the heat out of the intake manifold the aluminum manifold will lose a good chunk of power when 85 degree racing takes its toll.

deezo

iTrader: (3)

Pics of the Air/Oil separator which is set up in line with from the PCV to the manifold.

Jeff92se

iTrader: (82)

All VGs and 5-sp VE engines have a form of varible volume intake manifolds yes. The VE30DE is probably the father of the VQ versions. Although some say it's to help low end and not high end on the VE. I suppose it's in how you look at it. But if you look at the VE intake runners, it's very close in looks to the 4-5th gen manifolds

IceY2K1

iTrader: (3)

Good point~!

It definitely stays cooler then any other aluminum intake manifold I've worked with like my GA16DE.

Tatanko

iTrader: (34)

Sorry to bring this back up, but I'm curious. So for a stronger valvetrain, which is the better choice...VQ35 components or VK45 components? I'm sorry, I'm just confused since you say the VQ35 are the best choice then explain the VK45's...

EDIT: Or are you referring to a mix of VQ35 and VK45 parts? What all needs to be replaced for a strong valvetrain here? (please list all the parts you think of)

krismax

iTrader: (15)

On my350z.com Ive seen it said many times that the aluminum retainers will not take anything past like 7200rpm.
But if thats not true they would be the best choice and i would gladly use them.

IceY2K1

iTrader: (3)

krismax,

Are you willing to put together a comprehensive list of what parts and especially what CUSTOM fab parts were required to do this?

I *MIGHT* be able to get that IACV piece duplicated if that's the difficult part for people to make themselves.

Kevlo911

iTrader: (36)

Did you change all 6 injectors or just 3? For hte wireing, did you just cut the old harness off and match the wires to the new injectors?

96sleeper

iTrader: (4)

Dave I guess you forgot about me, here is my dyno thrown into the mix for the heck of it. I plotted my dyno with the dyno of the 5th gen with 203.7 whp, basically the same as my 204.2 whp. From 4500 rpm up it is not pretty for him . Peak power does hit a little bit later on the 5th gen, but not much. I guess with the addition of the 2000 VI and a JWT ecu it could get a little more interesting though.

Great job anyway krismax. Can't wait to see the dyno results. (hopefully on a dynojet ).

Ladzio

iTrader: (8)

That was a very Interesting Read! Congratulations Guys!!

Now I have a question bugging me annoyingly: Can 2k-2k1 engine with the VI be installed on a 4th gen?

samoylov installed 2K engine into his 4th gen but with 4th gen IM and you installed 5th gen VI on the 4th gen engine. Logical answer I guess it could be done....

krismax

iTrader: (15)

The whole lower from 2000 was used you cant interchange the injectors. Old harnesses were left on. Joe put the 2000 plugs on the old 96 wires