2005 Vs 2006
12-12-2005, 03:55 PM
#42
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Baton Rouge LA
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Keep this in mind:
Curb weights and horsepower:
2005 Base:
3188lbs and 287hp
2005 35th Ann:
3247lbs and 300hp
2006 Track:
3400lbs and 300hp
The best motoring video doesn't matter because the 35th anniversary and the 2006 are not identical. The 2005 models are all lighter. If you want the fastest off the lot without doing any modifications, the pre-2006 track/35ths are gonna be your best bet, they weigh less with the same horsepower.
The stock Z's greatest weakness for both performance and handling is its weight. The upper models of the pre-2006, and all 2006 models weigh more than a Corvette with much less motor to carry it. It's very easy to add weight and not very easy to lose it. If your ultimate goal is performance and you have the money, and especially if you plan to replace lots of stuff with aftermarket parts anyway, buy a base model. You'll pay the least, start off the lightest, and won't feel like you're throwing away money when you do stuff like chunk the rims for bigger but light forged units. Just my opinion, though.
Curb weights and horsepower:
2005 Base:
3188lbs and 287hp
2005 35th Ann:
3247lbs and 300hp
2006 Track:
3400lbs and 300hp
The best motoring video doesn't matter because the 35th anniversary and the 2006 are not identical. The 2005 models are all lighter. If you want the fastest off the lot without doing any modifications, the pre-2006 track/35ths are gonna be your best bet, they weigh less with the same horsepower.
The stock Z's greatest weakness for both performance and handling is its weight. The upper models of the pre-2006, and all 2006 models weigh more than a Corvette with much less motor to carry it. It's very easy to add weight and not very easy to lose it. If your ultimate goal is performance and you have the money, and especially if you plan to replace lots of stuff with aftermarket parts anyway, buy a base model. You'll pay the least, start off the lightest, and won't feel like you're throwing away money when you do stuff like chunk the rims for bigger but light forged units. Just my opinion, though.
Last edited by lzaffuto; 12-12-2005 at 04:32 PM.
12-17-2005, 08:56 AM
#43
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: MA
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let it first be said that if you read this post in its entirety, you will be no closer to knowing whether the car with the 287 HP motor or the 300 HP motor is “faster.” It’s just a rant on what the numbers mean and why. However, if you have any tuning experience, your response would be appreciated.
As a 2005 35th Anniversary Edition owner and an engineer (you've never seen time wasted until you see an engineer doing the research before dropping $35k on something), here's my view.
Keeping the fundamental definition in mind:
HP = T*RPM/X
Where X is a constant depending on the units that everything is defined in. With the units that we all argue in (HP, ft*lb, and rev/min), X ~ 5,252.
Everyone has seen T and HP curves. Let’s look at a fictitious car with a dead flat T curve (T independent of RPM). The HP curve will be a straight line with a certain slope.
If you wanted to increase the peak HP of such a car, you could do two things:
1. Increase the area under the T curve. Since we’re constraining ourselves to a flat T curve, that means raising the T everywhere.
2. Increase the maximum RPM at which you can run the motor.
Let's look at the second case only.
Using the Z's rev limits, the power increase would be 7,000/6,600 or around 6.1%.
Simple. If you’re drawing your HP line and stop at 6,600 RPM, you have a certain power. Get greedy and just keep drawing that line a little longer, to 7,000 RPM. More peak power. Draw the line to 7,200…even MORE power.
So why is the power gain (300/287) only ~4.5%? Back to reality. The internal combustion engine does not have a flat T curve. It begins to fall off near redline. I am not a tuner, mechanic, or savant, so I can’t give you root causes. The effect of this on our scenario is this: the SLOPE of the HP line at a certain RPM is dictated by the LEVEL of the T curve at that RPM. What this means is that as the T level begins to decrease near redline, you can’t keep that nice steep slope on your HP curve going. In fact, there comes a T level at which you can’t even apply the trick of “more revs = more power.” As T falls through this level, HP stops increasing with increased revs and starts decreasing with increased revs. This is more realistic. You see that T curve plummet, and your HP starts to go down too.
So if I were Nissan and wanted a “300 HP” Z, I would say to my engineers: “I want a 300 HP Z so that dumb Americans will throw money at us. We in upper management are counting on YOU for our sons' and daughters' Harvard tuitions. Now GO!!”
The engineers, knowing that upper management spoke of the "return on investment" in reverent, hushed tones, decided that the easiest way to send someone to Harvard was to increase the rev limit. However, doing this alone would not yield any more peak HP. The T curve would still fall to its magic ripoff point at around 6,000 RPM (where the 287 peak HP occurs), and the peak HP would stay the same. In other words, the HP curve would just fall off even more between 6,600 and 7,000. Since everything is a compromise, they needed to give up midrange (peak) T to gain some at the high end. They essentially skimmed some midrange torque off the top and moved it over to near redline, essentially keeping the T curve from falling off at 6,000.
I haven’t seen T and HP curves of both motors compared, but the equation says that this is what is happening.
Here’s where you wrench-monkeys get to comment. Wrench-monkeys is a term of endearment, not a dig. Tell me what the guiding principles are here. How do you increase the redline of an engine for the same net reliability? Stronger and lighter valvetrain components? How do you tune for high-end torque that might decrease your peak torque? Throw me a frickin’ bone here. I’m the boss…need the info.
After all this is said and done there are a lot more things to consider like weight differentials, transmission and final drive ratios, wheel diameter, drivetrain losses, and many more. And most of all (in my opinion), driver differences. Maybe the one that weighs more is faster. Maybe those rear LED lights are 0.6 lb lighter, so the car gets through corner entry understeer earlier and you can hook the rear wheels up 0.025 second earlier in each corner. This is what goes on in F1. Each team has two drivers running essentially identical cars. The setups differ based on many things, one of them being driving style.
So which motor is "faster?" I don't know. I put faster in quotes because even the definition is subject to interpretation. I don't run the 1/4 mile or race Mustangs at stoplights (anymore...). You can benchrace all you want, but it depends on what you're looking to do in reality.
My mission statement is to keep my mouth shut and spend my money on track time. I go out there and try to improve MY driving. It has worked for me. How can I tell? People lap me at track days in cars that most of you would laugh at on the street. There are also E46 M3 and Carrerra 4S drivers that I can get past twice in a half-hour session in the Z. Not trying to be arrogant, but just giving you insight into how I define "fast" and why I picked the car that I did. I'm happy with the '05 35th Anniversary and its HIGHER claimed peak HP and LOWER claimed peak torque. I was at a track day with an '03 Track model and we ran pretty much neck and neck. Neither of us ever got by the other one. Maybe my car was way faster and I was a much worse driver than him. Maybe his car was faster and he was not as experienced as me. Who knows. I can tell you that we both had a blast.
Thanks for listening and please (constructively) point out errors or clarify.
uwaeve
As a 2005 35th Anniversary Edition owner and an engineer (you've never seen time wasted until you see an engineer doing the research before dropping $35k on something), here's my view.
Keeping the fundamental definition in mind:
HP = T*RPM/X
Where X is a constant depending on the units that everything is defined in. With the units that we all argue in (HP, ft*lb, and rev/min), X ~ 5,252.
Everyone has seen T and HP curves. Let’s look at a fictitious car with a dead flat T curve (T independent of RPM). The HP curve will be a straight line with a certain slope.
If you wanted to increase the peak HP of such a car, you could do two things:
1. Increase the area under the T curve. Since we’re constraining ourselves to a flat T curve, that means raising the T everywhere.
2. Increase the maximum RPM at which you can run the motor.
Let's look at the second case only.
Using the Z's rev limits, the power increase would be 7,000/6,600 or around 6.1%.
Simple. If you’re drawing your HP line and stop at 6,600 RPM, you have a certain power. Get greedy and just keep drawing that line a little longer, to 7,000 RPM. More peak power. Draw the line to 7,200…even MORE power.
So why is the power gain (300/287) only ~4.5%? Back to reality. The internal combustion engine does not have a flat T curve. It begins to fall off near redline. I am not a tuner, mechanic, or savant, so I can’t give you root causes. The effect of this on our scenario is this: the SLOPE of the HP line at a certain RPM is dictated by the LEVEL of the T curve at that RPM. What this means is that as the T level begins to decrease near redline, you can’t keep that nice steep slope on your HP curve going. In fact, there comes a T level at which you can’t even apply the trick of “more revs = more power.” As T falls through this level, HP stops increasing with increased revs and starts decreasing with increased revs. This is more realistic. You see that T curve plummet, and your HP starts to go down too.
So if I were Nissan and wanted a “300 HP” Z, I would say to my engineers: “I want a 300 HP Z so that dumb Americans will throw money at us. We in upper management are counting on YOU for our sons' and daughters' Harvard tuitions. Now GO!!”
The engineers, knowing that upper management spoke of the "return on investment" in reverent, hushed tones, decided that the easiest way to send someone to Harvard was to increase the rev limit. However, doing this alone would not yield any more peak HP. The T curve would still fall to its magic ripoff point at around 6,000 RPM (where the 287 peak HP occurs), and the peak HP would stay the same. In other words, the HP curve would just fall off even more between 6,600 and 7,000. Since everything is a compromise, they needed to give up midrange (peak) T to gain some at the high end. They essentially skimmed some midrange torque off the top and moved it over to near redline, essentially keeping the T curve from falling off at 6,000.
I haven’t seen T and HP curves of both motors compared, but the equation says that this is what is happening.
Here’s where you wrench-monkeys get to comment. Wrench-monkeys is a term of endearment, not a dig. Tell me what the guiding principles are here. How do you increase the redline of an engine for the same net reliability? Stronger and lighter valvetrain components? How do you tune for high-end torque that might decrease your peak torque? Throw me a frickin’ bone here. I’m the boss…need the info.
After all this is said and done there are a lot more things to consider like weight differentials, transmission and final drive ratios, wheel diameter, drivetrain losses, and many more. And most of all (in my opinion), driver differences. Maybe the one that weighs more is faster. Maybe those rear LED lights are 0.6 lb lighter, so the car gets through corner entry understeer earlier and you can hook the rear wheels up 0.025 second earlier in each corner. This is what goes on in F1. Each team has two drivers running essentially identical cars. The setups differ based on many things, one of them being driving style.
So which motor is "faster?" I don't know. I put faster in quotes because even the definition is subject to interpretation. I don't run the 1/4 mile or race Mustangs at stoplights (anymore...). You can benchrace all you want, but it depends on what you're looking to do in reality.
My mission statement is to keep my mouth shut and spend my money on track time. I go out there and try to improve MY driving. It has worked for me. How can I tell? People lap me at track days in cars that most of you would laugh at on the street. There are also E46 M3 and Carrerra 4S drivers that I can get past twice in a half-hour session in the Z. Not trying to be arrogant, but just giving you insight into how I define "fast" and why I picked the car that I did. I'm happy with the '05 35th Anniversary and its HIGHER claimed peak HP and LOWER claimed peak torque. I was at a track day with an '03 Track model and we ran pretty much neck and neck. Neither of us ever got by the other one. Maybe my car was way faster and I was a much worse driver than him. Maybe his car was faster and he was not as experienced as me. Who knows. I can tell you that we both had a blast.
Thanks for listening and please (constructively) point out errors or clarify.
uwaeve
Last edited by uwaeve; 12-17-2005 at 09:05 AM. Reason: Grammer and speling.
12-17-2005, 11:55 AM
#44
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Netko350Z
Mike Ditka!!!
It all comes down to the driver.
Ok if Mike Ditka was driving a 2003 n/a 350Z and was racing a TT'ed, fully built, 04 350Z.....
Hmmm...Ditka would still win!!
It all comes down to the driver.
Ok if Mike Ditka was driving a 2003 n/a 350Z and was racing a TT'ed, fully built, 04 350Z.....
Hmmm...Ditka would still win!!
DITKA!!! You forgot the over variables.... IF ditka raced a 2005 350z with VQ45 swap and a t78 ball bearing turbo at full boost....Ditka is driving a base model 2003 350z with 4 of the cylinders unpluged... on the expressway from a roll...ditka would win by 19 cars...
12-17-2005, 03:43 PM
#45
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Earth
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I have a 35th aniversary and my fried has a base model. Whenever we race it's a toss up. Most of the time I beat him but if I make just one mistake he wins. Of course in a track the brembo brakes are much better because of improved coolingand slight advantage in size, this can mean the difference in track performance. In a straight line the difference is minimal.
12-18-2005, 12:47 AM
#46
Master
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 2,556
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by davidv
I've seen the specs on Barney and I'm not impressed. If you guys want to feed your childish fantasies and go with Barney, good for you. But until I see some time slips, I say bologna.
"dont forget about the extra few hundred pounds the 06's carry."
Dont forget about the extra few hundred pounds the Barney carries! Lol !!!
I know, childish.
06-04-2006, 08:39 PM
#50
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: houston
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
new 06' base 6mt owner and just found this thread during a search as I was curious on the differences myself. I personally think the numbers are not significant to matter...also drove my friend's 03' touring...and it drives pretty much the same as my 06' base. What I can contribute to this flame enticing thread is that I have raced (off the line & on a roll) 4 03-05 Zs of varying trims and beat them by 1 car to 3 car lengths. Yes this was street racing....but it was on a remote road. I dont have any 'figures' to back up saying the 06' is faster, but so far from my personal driving experience it is proving so. Every driver/factory motor different... so who knows....
06' white base 6spd... (houston) if anyone wants to even the score for the 287s... (bolt ons welcome although i am stock)
seriously i am not trying to fuel a 287 vs revup matchup.. but i'd love to see a stock 287 or near stock one beat me. (flame suit on)...
06' white base 6spd... (houston) if anyone wants to even the score for the 287s... (bolt ons welcome although i am stock)
seriously i am not trying to fuel a 287 vs revup matchup.. but i'd love to see a stock 287 or near stock one beat me. (flame suit on)...
06-04-2006, 09:20 PM
#53
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: montreal
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It dosen't matter because Chuck Norris will roundHouse kick all our asses to 1874 where we all had 1 Hp on our little poney. Then he'd race on foot and whoop everyones *** only to round house kick the poor little hoarse to death, because he is Chuck Norris and your not.
06-04-2006, 09:22 PM
#54
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: montreal
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On a more serious note. It seems that the 300hp is better tuned for the track while the base is better tunned for light to light city driving/racing.
Which ever way you go the difference are all minor and it boils down to the driver.
Which ever way you go the difference are all minor and it boils down to the driver.
06-04-2006, 09:24 PM
#55
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Jackson County, GA
Posts: 1,384
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Takase350z
new 06' base 6mt owner and just found this thread during a search as I was curious on the differences myself. I personally think the numbers are not significant to matter...also drove my friend's 03' touring...and it drives pretty much the same as my 06' base. What I can contribute to this flame enticing thread is that I have raced (off the line & on a roll) 4 03-05 Zs of varying trims and beat them by 1 car to 3 car lengths. Yes this was street racing....but it was on a remote road. I dont have any 'figures' to back up saying the 06' is faster, but so far from my personal driving experience it is proving so. Every driver/factory motor different... so who knows....
06' white base 6spd... (houston) if anyone wants to even the score for the 287s... (bolt ons welcome although i am stock)
seriously i am not trying to fuel a 287 vs revup matchup.. but i'd love to see a stock 287 or near stock one beat me. (flame suit on)...
06' white base 6spd... (houston) if anyone wants to even the score for the 287s... (bolt ons welcome although i am stock)
seriously i am not trying to fuel a 287 vs revup matchup.. but i'd love to see a stock 287 or near stock one beat me. (flame suit on)...
Street racing is not only dangerous, but hardly a good way to compare whether the 05-06 300 hp Z is quicker than the 03-04 287 hp Z. Simple math would say it isn't, due to the added weight.
Here is my best stock 1/4 E.T. I ran 13.6 three times that day, and my high trap was 103.03.
06-04-2006, 10:00 PM
#56
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: houston
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I had the street racing thing coming.... i realize that. But anyways...
if a 13.6 is what you are running in a 287 (assuming it is stock as well) then good for you, those are impressive numbers. Actually, I hope I will be able to run close to that in my 06' revup...i should be visiting a nearby track soon. If ANYONE in Houston owns a comparable "strong" 287 version let me know... I'd LOVE to do a real world comparison (ok, this time at a track)... Again, I'm just saying this, because all 287s i have run into have been less than impressive. I would at least think we would be door to door. Also, just lighting a fire as this is probably the only way I'd be able to line up a race w/ a worthy driver. Anyone willing to set up a track night meet at Houston Raceway Park???
if a 13.6 is what you are running in a 287 (assuming it is stock as well) then good for you, those are impressive numbers. Actually, I hope I will be able to run close to that in my 06' revup...i should be visiting a nearby track soon. If ANYONE in Houston owns a comparable "strong" 287 version let me know... I'd LOVE to do a real world comparison (ok, this time at a track)... Again, I'm just saying this, because all 287s i have run into have been less than impressive. I would at least think we would be door to door. Also, just lighting a fire as this is probably the only way I'd be able to line up a race w/ a worthy driver. Anyone willing to set up a track night meet at Houston Raceway Park???
06-04-2006, 10:15 PM
#58
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: houston
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just saw your video... Impressive. Thanks. However, I am sure mid 13 sec 287s(or any Z for that matter) are at best uncommon for sure... You have a strong car and kudos to you. Although I'd rather have a real race w/ one... I'll settle for a visit at the track to see what I can do. Again, your video was great...actually makes me feel better about the Z being a solid 13 sec car.
06-04-2006, 10:28 PM
#59
Originally Posted by Takase350z
Just saw your video... Impressive. Thanks. However, I am sure mid 13 sec 287s(or any Z for that matter) are at best uncommon for sure... You have a strong car and kudos to you. Although I'd rather have a real race w/ one... I'll settle for a visit at the track to see what I can do. Again, your video was great...actually makes me feel better about the Z being a solid 13 sec car.
If you hit burn you will hear the announcer say 13.90 dial in. If you see race it was a double break out with me running a 13.850. 06's at Infineon are turning 14.3 14.5. Most stock 03/04's 14.1 -14.5. Infineon is considered a "slow" track.
Too bad you aren't in Cali.