02/03 Max Vs 00/01 Max

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

08-23-2005, 11:17 AM

#41

igzy

I Know Kwaliti

iTrader: (18)

Join Date: Jul 2004

Location: Ontario, Canada

Posts: 1,441

I do agree that 5.5 gen is faster, but 5th gen will give you a good run for your $$$

08-23-2005, 11:24 AM

#42

NmexMAX

dot dot dot ...

iTrader: (22)

Join Date: Dec 2000

Location: Santa Fe, NM

Posts: 34,588

Not an auto ..

08-23-2005, 12:23 PM

#43

igzy

I Know Kwaliti

iTrader: (18)

Join Date: Jul 2004

Location: Ontario, Canada

Posts: 1,441

Agreed that autos suck. I went through all posted 1/4 times and here are the results:

Numbers shown are the averages of the posted numbers. "Other" means forced induction and below it states the average for that mod. Interestingly enough, there were only results available for the mods indicated...

08-23-2005, 01:35 PM

#44

maseo77

Senior Member

iTrader: (1)

Join Date: Sep 2002

Posts: 995

Quote:

Originally Posted by igzy

No disrespect intended to 5.5 gen. Like I stated, looking at 1/4 times 5.5 gen is slightly faster on average considering the same set up... All I meant to say is, given the small advantage of 5.5 gen, that a good 5th gen driver may be faster than a lousy 5.5 gen driver...

5.5 auto driver does not have to be LOUSY to get beat by a 5th gen manual.

08-23-2005, 01:37 PM

#45

igzy

I Know Kwaliti

iTrader: (18)

Join Date: Jul 2004

Location: Ontario, Canada

Posts: 1,441

Hehe, you are correct :-) I said that before I completed the table...

08-23-2005, 01:58 PM

#46

NmexMAX

dot dot dot ...

iTrader: (22)

Join Date: Dec 2000

Location: Santa Fe, NM

Posts: 34,588

I still don't agree with what you said --->

Quote:

(seems like only about 0.2 seconds) for same set ups, auto/manual, either stock or moded

bolt on 3.5L 4AT will easily beat a 3.0L 4AT .. mod for mod as well.

08-23-2005, 02:08 PM

#47

JClaw

Supporting Maxima.org Member

iTrader: (17)

Join Date: Aug 2004

Location: Montreal, Qc, Canada

Posts: 5,437

Guys, the 3.5-liter really does have a much bigger pair of ***** than the 3.0, same driver same tires same tranny same car.

08-23-2005, 02:19 PM

#48

NmexMAX

dot dot dot ...

iTrader: (22)

Join Date: Dec 2000

Location: Santa Fe, NM

Posts: 34,588

Coolest thing to date ..---> relicating the DEK power curve on a 3.5L scale

08-23-2005, 02:32 PM

#49

JClaw

Supporting Maxima.org Member

iTrader: (17)

Join Date: Aug 2004

Location: Montreal, Qc, Canada

Posts: 5,437

Quote:

Originally Posted by NmexMAX

I still don't agree with what you said ---> bolt on 3.5L 4AT will easily beat a 3.0L 4AT .. mod for mod as well.

Understatement of the century. Just look at Jime. 13.32@103 mph in an N/A '02 Auto. He has headers, slicks and a bunch of bolt ons. Show me a 3.0L auto that ever even came close to that.

Everybody just needs to stop this stupid 3.0 vs 3.5 debate. The 3.5 is the 3.0's bigger and dumber brother. It's not as smooth, but it hauls.

08-23-2005, 04:01 PM

#50

nismology

Supporting Maxima.org Member

iTrader: (8)

Join Date: Apr 2003

Location: Miami, FL

Posts: 9,116

Quote:

Originally Posted by JClaw

The 3.5 is the 3.0's bigger and dumber brother.

I wouldn't say that. Almost EVERYTHING is an improvement over the 3.0, and not just the displacement either. Less reciprocating mass, better designed heads (intake valves 1mm bigger, as well as higher valve angle), superior cooling and knock suppression (aka more possible ignition advance...which you know), lighter valvetrain, stronger rods, STOCK oil cooler...etc. I'm sure SR20 could step in and school the masses some more on this topic.

The only real disadvantage is some of the smoothness is compromised due to the longer stroke and lower rod to stroke ratio. No matter....it's still one of the smoother V6's on the market. And as for the weaker rod bolts, ARP's can easily fix that (as you already know as well). Be proud of the motor you have. It's bigger........AND BETTER!!!

08-23-2005, 04:10 PM

#51

maxgangsta02

Senior Member

Join Date: Jun 2005

Posts: 157

just compare the 00-01 seats

to the 02+.

and yeah... .5L more and 1 more gear in the tranny.

08-23-2005, 05:22 PM

#52

igzy

I Know Kwaliti

iTrader: (18)

Join Date: Jul 2004

Location: Ontario, Canada

Posts: 1,441

Quote:

Originally Posted by NmexMAX

I still don't agree with what you said --->
Quote:
(seems like only about 0.2 seconds) for same set ups, auto/manual, either stock or moded

bolt on 3.5L 4AT will easily beat a 3.0L 4AT .. mod for mod as well.

So, I was wrong and I proved that to myself too by compiling the table

:

The table is from all numbers shown in the 1/4 runs. The numbers are average for all runs shown. Of course like in any statistical population there are some outliers like the guy with slicks, etc. So keep in mind that the numbers shown are average for all 5th and 5.5 gen 1/4 runs and there will be many more guys running faster and slower than average

08-24-2005, 07:51 AM

#53

F23A4

Senior Member

Join Date: Aug 2001

Posts: 2,720

As already stated auto vs auto, the 5G isnt in the same league as the 5.5G acceleration-wise. I've only had about 2 runs against a 5G (hopefully 4AT for their sake) and it's just silly how much the 35 pulled on them.

I'm sure the margin is a bit closer 5MT vs 6MT, but I'd still have to go with the 5.5G.

For whatever the HP/TQ numbers really are, the VQ in my 02 has some SICK pull. Event under PT, it just seems to pull effortlessly.

08-24-2005, 08:31 AM

#54

NYPD-Arnold

iTrader: (8)

Join Date: Apr 2004

Posts: 5,818

Quote:

Originally Posted by igzy

Agreed that autos suck. I went through all posted 1/4 times and here are the results:

Those numbers are horribly skewed.

08-24-2005, 10:20 AM

#55

tornado019

Senior Member

Join Date: Jul 2002

Posts: 172

Quote:

Originally Posted by hovz

hey idiot theres more to the speed of a car than hp and torque, its not uncommon for a car to gain hp and torque and be slower than the previous year. if only i could put a bullet in the head of every stupid ****ing moron.

I'm not an expert on the 5th gens (I drive a 4th) but aren't the 00-03 models all basically the same car with just a different engine? They sure look identical. I would think with the cars being the same it would obviously be faster with the bigger engine. Seems logical in my special little world.

You wouldn't believe how many idiots like this I have to deal with in my town. I swear, this whole town is retarded. Some kid in a grand am gt thinks he can out run me because he has a better power to weight ratio, and he doesn't even have the engine he thinks he does! He's got the weak as SE not the ram air GT. Oh well, I guess it's just free entertainment for the rest of us.

08-24-2005, 10:49 AM

#56

igzy

I Know Kwaliti

iTrader: (18)

Join Date: Jul 2004

Location: Ontario, Canada

Posts: 1,441

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYPD-Arnold

Those numbers are horribly skewed.

I got all the numbers from here:

http://forums.maxima.org/forumdisplay.php?f=46

Put them in a spreadsheet and ran the averages... That's what I got...

08-24-2005, 11:53 AM

#57

NmexMAX

dot dot dot ...

iTrader: (22)

Join Date: Dec 2000

Location: Santa Fe, NM

Posts: 34,588

The coolest (fastest/most powerful) 5.5gs don't have

y-pipes .. they have headers ...

08-24-2005, 12:18 PM

#58

igzy

I Know Kwaliti

iTrader: (18)

Join Date: Jul 2004

Location: Ontario, Canada

Posts: 1,441

When I compiled the table:
- the first row indicates bone stock set up and odd drop-in K&N filter only
- second row has all NA bolt-ons included which consisted of Y, B, cat-backs, UDP and intake mods
- third row are SC, Turbo and NOS

I may be saw one or two headers and those would be included in the second row. Just to give you an idea, I found a total of 7 5th Gen 5-sp, 9 5th Gen Auto, 19 5.5 Gen 6-sp, and 10 5.5 Gen Auto runs... Stats speaking, not a significant sample, but will give you a rough idea of expected performance...

08-24-2005, 12:47 PM

#59

F23A4

Senior Member

Join Date: Aug 2001

Posts: 2,720

Quote:

Originally Posted by tornado019

Yes. Outside of some trim differences, the powertrain is the only major difference between the 5G and 5.5G.

08-24-2005, 12:54 PM

#60

anthunny

Senior Member

Join Date: Dec 2002

Posts: 531

5th gen auto: high 15s on avg
5.5th gen auto: high 14s on avg

5th gen manual: low 15 on avg
5th gen manual: mid 14s on avg

that table shown above looks pretty biased. from what i remember the 5th gen 5spd stock, the BEST has been 14.8 or so, dunno where 14.7 has came from for "average." and people with 6spd 5.5gens have gotten better than 14.7-8 missing 3rd and redeemin the shift after that.

also the 5th gens arent much different than 4th gens up till hwy speeds from what i recall.

VQ35 torque PWNS y-O

08-24-2005, 12:54 PM

#61

F23A4

Senior Member

Join Date: Aug 2001

Posts: 2,720

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYPD-Arnold

Those numbers are horribly skewed.

Although he compiled the data logically, there are other things to consider like temperature, elevation, level of tune. i.e.: A 5G 5MT running at Etown may post MUCH better times than a 5.5G 6MT running at Bandimere, where elevation plays a major factor.

That said, the best way to measure the comparisons would be for both 5G and 5.5G drivers to run their cars at the same time, same track OR for posted times to be corrected to account for external factors like elevation, humidity, etc,... $.02

08-24-2005, 01:39 PM

#62

igzy

I Know Kwaliti

iTrader: (18)

Join Date: Jul 2004

Location: Ontario, Canada

Posts: 1,441

Quote:

Originally Posted by F23A4

That said, the best way to measure the comparisons would be for both 5G and 5.5G drivers to run their cars at the same time, same track OR for posted times to be corrected to account for external factors like elevation, humidity, etc,... $.02

Although, the ideal situation would be for a same driver to drive both cars and those to have similar or no mods...