Andy@Performance

iTrader: (92)

Have you installed any of your exhaust parts yet or still running stock?

thawk408

iTrader: (16)

I have nothing stock on my exhaust. I have everything in my sig installed, but the Popcharger.

Zquicksilver

iTrader: (5)

Andy,

I wasn't trying to pick a fight, seriously I was just saying...like I originally said in response to the original poster... that sticking $1500 into the base motor isn't a bad option. The other choice is to start with a rev-up motor, which IMO will take to mods better, it should, right? But...you spend more money right from the start and if you decide to mod, you potentially void your warranty anyway. To be absolutely fair in making MY point, I should have taken "someone's" stock rev-up motor and compared it to my 287hp motor with 1.5k in mods.

Anyway, as the debate and quest goes on for the better deal to n/a performance, the base 06 guys with the rev-up motor will spank us all... It will never end until there's a HYBRID Z, which puts down better 1/4 times with it's electric motors, hahahhaha!

Zquicksilver

350zQ45a

Wow that was an informative thread sans the hating.

For me if the new engine feels better at higher rpms, like it's not going to explode, then I feel it is a much better engine.

Of the previous cars I've owned including some with V8s and Inline 6 twin turbos, this is by far the worst at upper rpms. I just hate it.

It looks like 2006 will the last year for the Z in this config as we know it. There will probably be changes with more HP.

I am holding off and waiting to see what 2007 brings. I would really appreciation if Nissan would get on the HP bandwagon and stick the VK45DE Infiniti V8 in the 350. That engine could easily be massaged to give 350+ hp. The aftermarket development would begin and life would be good.

Still I think it's clear if you are going to keep one example of a Z from 03-06 you want it to be one with a rev up motor.

MyZ4U2C

The 287HP model doesnt have variable valve timing on both the intake/exhaust? Thats news to me.

lowrider

iTrader: (3)

Variable valve timing on the intake side only on the 287HP motor.

Lou

arejohn

Considering all the improvements in the 300hp is it possible that it is under rated or that the 287 is overly optimistic.

Cost = purchase price + cost of options - risidual value.

Modifications more often than not reduce risidual value.

Zero to 60 times are to dependent on launch techniques to be a reliable measurement on HP.

I liked the 300hp, leather seats, wheels, brakes, etc, but with the extra money I could buy a boat. To each his own.

Nano

iTrader: (1)

Imho from dynoes I have seen (including an engine dyno) the old engine pulls out around 275-280hp crank stock. The new engine power rating seems more accurate at 300hp. It's more like a 20hp difference than a 13hp difference

Mods decrease value of a car, but bolt-ons are pretty meaningless... you can always revert it to stock before selling it and sell the parts on ebay for 50% of their original cost

spacemn_spiff

iTrader: (3)

Any links to back this claim?

thawk408

iTrader: (16)

No, but you can go look on your front engine cover.

Kolia

iTrader: (2)

It's fairly common knowledge...

sentry65

iTrader: (11)

...unless it'd cost more money to return the car to stock than what selling the mods are worth.

It's not worth the money to de-cam an engine or remove crawford headers, etc. You're just going to break even or lose more money


I don't see nissan putting in a bigger V8 engine in this car. Actually I don't see them putting in any different engine for awhile. It wouldn't be as cost effective. They already sank a lot of money into the engine to make it better with the rev up version as well as the ECU.

The setup passes emissions and people are buying them.

If they do anything it'll be simpler things. Fixing bugs, improving other aspects of the car.

The very fact that the newer engine is a little more sturdy means it gives them slightly more headroom to add in some more performance. Maybe they'll change their header design, maybe they'll tweak the ECU more, maybe they'll lighten up certain parts.

Nissan won't just totally change the engine and everything all around all of a sudden. Cars like the GTO can and did do that because there just isn't much difference between the LS1 and LS2 engine in terms of size. The LS2 weighs less so they didn't have to rebalance the car and adjust the suspension drastically different. They dropped it in, tweaked the ECU and were good to go. And WHY did they do that? Because the GTO didn't meet sales expectations.

The Z IS selling. People buy it for it's total package or specifically for it's looks. So that is nissan's focus.

The VQ isn't that same case as the LS1/LS2. There is no newer big brother version of it that isn't a race engine.

I doubt the Z engine will ever be as strong as a mustang V8 in stock form as far as HP and TQ. Nissan is doing well being able to say they have a 300hp car - and the mustang is 300hp (though much much more torque) but it's a more refined and elegant car than the mustang with more aggressive gearing, lighter drivetrain, ligher car, and better handling, higher reving, etc

If you REALLY want nissan to put in a more powerful engine or really boost power, then tell everyone in the world to STOP BUYING Z's. That's the only thing that'll get nissan's attention. Otherwise, standard business practice is if your product is making the money you're expecting it to make, don't go dumping a bunch of R&D and production money into it because your profits will go down. What it'll do is make a lot of current Z owners sell their Z to get a new one. Nissan doesn't make any new money when a current Z owner buys a new Z only to take away a sale from someone else who bought the used Z instead of a new one.

I think 80% of Z owners are actually normal casual drivers. Not big car performance enthusiasts. Adding more hp doesn't matter to those people so much. To them, the car is probably fast enough, and they most likely don't even redline their car anyway...

and I still wouldn't hold your breath for a FI Z.

thrill350z

iTrader: (1)

the 35th ann Z is slower in the quarter mile and 0-60, the torque loss is bigger then the HP gain

sentry65

iTrader: (11)

well yeah, it's also freakin heavy

jdg345

Might be psycological ... like when ppl install a turbonator and think their car is that much faster even though they're just hitting the gas harder. Tones are probably better, but the higher redline just makes me think more s2000

Kolia

iTrader: (2)

A bone stock 2005 Track on Azenis is faster down the MidOhio back straight than a semi-stripped 2003 Track with suspension and slicks...

So in a straight line (wich is what a lot of people here seem to care about and should get a Mustang instead of a Z) the revup engine is faster.

Whatever gains in TQ is pretty much offsetted when the older engine must "short shift" 400rpm earlier than the rev up engine.

Ho, and if both engines shift at the rev line, the rev up engine has more availlable TQ...

lowrider

iTrader: (3)

Not True - Go back and look at my Dyno on Page 4 compared with the "RevUp" Engine. His torque was up at the very top of the range, but I put out more peak torque, through out the range.

Lou

Kolia

iTrader: (2)

What kind of dyno was it ? If it's a common spin-the-barrel dyno, it's not very accurate. Real dyno runs are run from top rpm and then loading the engine to slow it down...

Testing individual and seperate street engine is not very accurate. Fuel and tune level will differ from on engine to an other. Test two cars with the same engine on the same day and you will get different results.

It's always possible to find "real life" exemple of a 287hp engine faster than the 300hp. But human error is the deciding factor in those instances.

Nano

iTrader: (1)

the rev-up engine peaks 200rpm later...
the rev-up engine has 200 rpm of usable extra power over the old engine.
(6600-6200 = 400 vs 7000 - 6400 = 600). The fact it can shift later in each gear is not really an advantage(see shorter 350evo final drive). At peak torque(4800rpm for both engines), the old engine is producing ~14hp more than the new one!

The old engine pulls harder from 0 to 6200rpm(it will *put down* power faster from 0-6200rpm). At peak power(6200-6400), the new engine has about same torque as the old engine. Everytime you are under 6200rpm the old engine pulls harder. Having the same gear ratio, the only advantage of the rev-up engine is the extra more flexible powerband, not raw power.

What you are saying doesn't make sense, rev-up doesn't account for "faster on a straight". A faster line and different drivers make more sense. Hell, ~13hp doesn't even account for 1/2 second on an entire lap. With slicks and suspension it makes even less sense. Anyway, scientifically, inertial dyno numbers are more accurate than sunday track story.

Shifting at redline(7000rpm) on rev-up engine(3-4-5th gear) puts you at around 5500rpm. On old engine shifting at redline(6600rpm) put you at 5200rpm. marginal considering the old engine peaks 200rpm later.

yes, the new engine is faster. But do not make it in what it is not. It's just a minor "tweak". 99.9% of mortals couldn't possibly feel the difference... if not for the old engine "felling" as it pulls harder from stoplights.

ZZ33bOI

I believe the only difference is the NISMO Exhuast...because i have the NISMO package and the said it suppose to give you that extra HP is that true???