1) Stock Maxima 6spd dyno from NissanPerformanceMag.com (chinkzilla) +

2) Stock CL-S 6spd dyno from Astroboy at Acura-CL.com +

3) Some added dotted lines in Photoshop so that I could accurately read the dyno's +

4) Excel +

5) A bunch of free time =





I didn't realize that the VQ35's were a bit underrated on torque!

Comments? Discussion?

hehe...I wonder how long till this gets locked

 

damn VTEC!

 

PS, I converted both dyno's back to CRANK figures in case anyone was confused

 

I'm a little surprised that the 2k2 Max drops that much in tq and hp after 5000 RPMs....I mean, they have the VIAS System (same thing as the 4th Gen MEVI) stock.

But 255hp at the WHEEL?

Now that' confusing...I thought Nissan rated at the crank.

And Nissan advertises 255hp. That's a pleasant surprise.

IanS

 

arrrr!!!!

hehe...I did that so that n0ob's wouldn't be confused and ask why the hell they were dynoing at only 205 HP when they were rated for 255HP.

Now I'm getting the opposite!

All you hardcore guys are so used to seeing wheel figures...hehe

 

heh...missed that part.

So how do you convert to crank with any accuracy? Are are you just figuring x% loss from the drivetrain?

IanS

 

I have the same question, you can't use the same X value for both cars. Nissans tend to have up to 20%+ power loss fron bolt to wheel. And Hondas are usually 10-15%, but I guess if you know what its supposed to have and what it did you can just reverse the numbers with out use of algebra.

 

This is a 4th gear pull from a stock 2k2 max and 2k3 CLS 6spd from cartest. Both use the proper weight and dyno charts I have as power curves. Suffice to say the maxima has way more lowend-midrange torque. It just needs more IM or cams to keep the power up top .

 

When certain members go childish and whine and complain.




Otherwise, quite an interesting post......As I suspected, the J32A2s actually have decent torque that's fairly flat. Impressive.





I'm a little surprised the VQ35 tops out overall.......Honda's better ability to reduce drivetrain loss probably makes this more neck and neck, except for the torque thing. But if you keep it at 6k, then it doesn't matter.

 

I used the same 0.83 correction factor between both the Acura and the Nissan to flame proof it from Acura folks if they saw that I used a higher correction factor for the Nissan than for the Acura and started complaining..hehe. If you look closely, you'll see that the Maxima's curve doesn't quite reach 255 HP, and the Acura actually exceeds 260 HP slightly.

Realistically I should have used 0.804 for the Maxima and 0.834 for the Acura. So yes, the curve is a bit pessimistic for the Maxima, but using the higher correction factor wouldn't have significantly changed how the chart looked. Hmm...I'll play with revising them though and see how it looks.

But now we come to the "for comparison purposes only" part...

The purpose of compiling these charts was not to have everything 100% accurate down to the last tenth of a HP. If you want that then just look at the actual dyno graphs that the chart is based off of. Instead, the purpose of the exercise was just to illustrate how these engines make the power that they do, and where exactly they make it.

And the grand-purpose for all of this is n0ob education on the HonDUH boards where people think that all top-end and ZERO low-end is great and that torque doesn't matter, and then they wonder why their track times suck and they got their butt waxed by my weak 190HP VQ

You should see the Altima 240HP vs Accord 240HP charts. They ain't pretty. And I'm afraid to post them on the Accord site...hehehe

 

did the maxima have navi?

 

Let's have a look see. I am use to ugly things.

 

i wanna see, i wanna see!!

 

 

Altima 240HP vs Accord 240HP



The Atlima has a SERIOUS amount of additional low/mid-range torque over the new Accord!

However, the 5AT gearing in the Accord is MUCH shorter and closer spaced vs the Alty's 4AT to the point that a good chunk of the Alty's extra power may be negated. It's still going to be very close on the streets and at the track.

Alty vs Accord Gearing:
1st: 49mph vs 43mph
2nd: 86mph vs 73mph
3rd: 128mph vs 107mph

However, CarTest2000 simulations with both cars using these dyno curves is still showing the Altima maintaining a narrow lead. Not much more than a car-length through the 1/4 mile and up to higher speeds, but then again that's all you need. Once the new Accord gets going, it GOES, but below 5000rpm it's nothing compared to the Altima

 

Steve how many times did I tell you the 3.5 VQ was underated on TQ and you dissagreed with me?




Charts look real nice, thanks for doing the work

 

With a little better breathing, like a pop charger, to boost the high end HP. It becomes obscene.

 

wheres the VTEC jump when it kicks in that some hondas have

the prelude u can see it jump like 10hp all of a sudden on their dyno.

 

Yeah I noticed that, also is that Altima making torque numbers in the 270s?

 

Where's the real dyno figures without the conversion?

 

wanted to see them side by side

 

I did? hehe...show me where and make me eat my words

If I did...

 

Keep in mind that I'm using the factory-supplied dyno curve which is usually "smoothed out" such that customers aren't alarmed when they see how LITTLE low-end power there is. When an 03 Accord V6 owner dynos I'll update the charts but it might be awhile. It's tough to see the low-end on an automatic, and the 6spd's aren't due out until Feb 03.

I did a comparison of the factory J30A1 plot (98-02 Accord V6) vs *ACTUAL* dyno results from Accord V6 owners. The cars put down MUCH less low-end power than the factory dyno suggest.

Anyways, here is what the REAL power curves look like on a VTEC.



Broad powerband and 90% peak torque at 2000rpm MY A$$!!!!! And it doesn't even appear to be making its advertised 195 lb-ft of torque to begin with!!

Sorry...just needed to vent. I have a VQ now so I'm much happier

 

What does this prove? That the Maxima has more useable HP...whatever. If you line up a 6sp CL-S and a 6sp Max from a stop to about 80 it will be a drivers race. However if you start the race from a roll the 6sp CL-S will pull away. Its all about highend power baby, that's where the Acura engine has the edge! No flames please....

 

FLAME!!

i told you not to post without asking me first b!tch

 

It doesn't have to prove anything. It's just information and interesting data. It did prove that it somehow upset you though(judging by the wierdo race conditions )

 

I'm not upset, just sharing my opinion.

 

However if you let my brother's 3rd cousin's aunt's 2nd sister's 2nd husband's highschool teacher's 10th grade's student's 1st father race on Sat but only before noon but not when that Sat falls on the 5th of any month and when the Acura uses only 91 octane gas from a Chevron owned by devote Catholics that only go to midnight mass on Sat nights, that acura might win a race from 80-85 mph

 

:laugh

 

more like 80.9 to 81.00001 mph if the cl gets the jump

 

 

why don't you just stop fooling yourslef and come over to the dark side you know you want to

 

I have been considering a 350Z in 04. Hopefully by then the turbo version will be available.

 

So you finally want a car with real power?...and no more overrated vtec?...you are finally in reality.

 

we welcome you with open arms you practically like family now

 

Awwwww Shucks.....

 

hehe...did you forget about the extra 200lb of mass that the Acura is dragging around? Acceleration = Force divided by Mass. hehe...Newtonian Physics 0wNz all of us. No flames please

03 CL-S 6spd: 217 FWHP / (3446lb/1 ton) = 125.9 FWHP/ton
03 Max 6spd: 205 FWHP / (3239lb/1 ton) = 126.6 FWHP/ton

When I get some more time I'm going to make a new chart incorporating this working straight off of wheel horsepower data. Maybe something like this...



I have some other projects planned as well, mainly for newbie education. i.e. Crank Horsepower vs Wheel Horsepower (manual vs auto tranny losses), etc. Sometimes a picture, or a graph, speaks a thousand words, and it's much easier for newbs and vets alike to understand when trying to teach new things

 

LOL fwhp/ton....never compared like that before

 

hehe, a bit odd, but it makes life easier.

If I use the traditional lb/HP, the slower car ends up having the higher number and this is confusing to n00b's. If I use HP/lb, that results in an extremely small number. So I just divide out the weight by ton and it results in a much more understandable format

 

How do I explain it...simple better gearing and a higher reving engine. The CL-S is always in it's powerband and is gaining HP, while the Max's HP falls off in the upper RPMs. I had a race with a Auto 2K2 Max and the very same thing happened. I would pull little by little in the upper RPMs, and the Max would fall off a bit in the higher RPMs.