Official 2007 Z Discussion Thread
11-28-2006, 10:08 AM
#285
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Appleton, WI
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by NVS_350Z
11-29-2006, 09:43 AM
#287
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: NORCAL
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2007 Los Angeles Show: Unveil Schedule http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...ticleId=117631
Except they didn't cover the z at all!
Except they didn't cover the z at all!
Last edited by downforce; 12-05-2006 at 10:49 AM.
11-29-2006, 11:44 AM
#288
What the hell, my predictions:
First, the VQ35HR has almost no design benefits for N/A power. (insert yelling protests here) It's true, so hear me out. The new engine is primarily a cost cutting measure for other applications. This is the way Nissan works. There is too much money lost to design an engine specifically for one app, so the VQ as we all know has to be designed for many applications. The new changes are to better enhance other model lines and cut costs. Allow me to explain-
The taller block means that Nissan no longer has to have two seperate block castings for their trucks and cars. the VQ40 and VQ35/25 can now use the same block. In the 35/25, this means a longer connecting rod, which benifits high rpm breathing and cuts down on piston side loading. However, the VQ35 rod ratio was already better than the RB26 with lower piston acceleration at the same speeds, so the longer rod was obviously not NECCESSARY. Better for sure, but not needed. Nissan could have easily made the current block design rev to 7500rpm all day long is all I'm saying. A new casting for a taller deck height was not needed for this, but it does cut costs by not having a seperate block for the stroked VQ40 engines.
Next, the stouter crank is great, but like the taller deck height it was not NEEDED. The larger journal diameter does help for the larger, stroked VQ40 truck and SUV engines though. And here's the clincher- it is great for forced induction. Same with the beefier rods. The rod bolts and ends could have been upgraded just as they were on the Rev-Up engines to handle 7500+ rpm. The larger journals and beefier rod design (they're forged, not cast) is great for forced induction, though.
Finally, the heads. The current head design flows well. But the new ones look to be even better and have two massive quench pads in the combustion chamber. That's beneficial for all engines, but mostly so for the higher air temps of F/I.
I think the new HR is a great design that will cut costs for Nissan with only one block casting, and now has all the neccessary ingredients for a reliable factory turbo engine. The workhorse platform just got a broader design to handle more options in other words- and none of new changes to the block are needed for the N/A applications. The current DE block could easily be made to hit those numbers with the equal-length exhaust, intake and exhaust CVTC systems and such. The changes do make the new block stronger, and that new laddder frame in place of the current crank girdle just screams for F/I.
So, maybe this is already obvious, but it just confirms in my mind that the new GT-R will be a F/I version of the HR engine, and most of the changes are designed to accomodate this as well as give a boost in N/A power. I think the new Z will also have an option in the future for larger discplacement since the VQ37 engine code has already been registered. So, a stroked version is also easier now that the deck height has been raised to that of the VQ40, and still allow a decent rod/stroke ratio for maintaining revs.
Sorry, long winded but I was bored and that's my prediction.
Will
PS. that whole dual throttle thing is B.S. Where the power is made is a function of so many things, but throttle position and the number of throttles is not a major factor. The number of throttles and placement have a direct emphasis on response, not where the power is made. Most ITB make more power because the intake manifold improves with shorter runners and more plenum space, not because the TB's are multiplied or moved closer. The 415hp 3.6L Porsche GT-3 uses just one TB, so does Audi's 420hp 4.2L V8. The new dual intake would sure make plumbing a TT set-up easier for the GT-R though
EDIT: I think the next track model will be a lighter, "stripped" version of the Z with a 3.7L HR, while the rest of the Z line-up will be the 3.5L HR. Just my prediction.
First, the VQ35HR has almost no design benefits for N/A power. (insert yelling protests here) It's true, so hear me out. The new engine is primarily a cost cutting measure for other applications. This is the way Nissan works. There is too much money lost to design an engine specifically for one app, so the VQ as we all know has to be designed for many applications. The new changes are to better enhance other model lines and cut costs. Allow me to explain-
The taller block means that Nissan no longer has to have two seperate block castings for their trucks and cars. the VQ40 and VQ35/25 can now use the same block. In the 35/25, this means a longer connecting rod, which benifits high rpm breathing and cuts down on piston side loading. However, the VQ35 rod ratio was already better than the RB26 with lower piston acceleration at the same speeds, so the longer rod was obviously not NECCESSARY. Better for sure, but not needed. Nissan could have easily made the current block design rev to 7500rpm all day long is all I'm saying. A new casting for a taller deck height was not needed for this, but it does cut costs by not having a seperate block for the stroked VQ40 engines.
Next, the stouter crank is great, but like the taller deck height it was not NEEDED. The larger journal diameter does help for the larger, stroked VQ40 truck and SUV engines though. And here's the clincher- it is great for forced induction. Same with the beefier rods. The rod bolts and ends could have been upgraded just as they were on the Rev-Up engines to handle 7500+ rpm. The larger journals and beefier rod design (they're forged, not cast) is great for forced induction, though.
Finally, the heads. The current head design flows well. But the new ones look to be even better and have two massive quench pads in the combustion chamber. That's beneficial for all engines, but mostly so for the higher air temps of F/I.
I think the new HR is a great design that will cut costs for Nissan with only one block casting, and now has all the neccessary ingredients for a reliable factory turbo engine. The workhorse platform just got a broader design to handle more options in other words- and none of new changes to the block are needed for the N/A applications. The current DE block could easily be made to hit those numbers with the equal-length exhaust, intake and exhaust CVTC systems and such. The changes do make the new block stronger, and that new laddder frame in place of the current crank girdle just screams for F/I.
So, maybe this is already obvious, but it just confirms in my mind that the new GT-R will be a F/I version of the HR engine, and most of the changes are designed to accomodate this as well as give a boost in N/A power. I think the new Z will also have an option in the future for larger discplacement since the VQ37 engine code has already been registered. So, a stroked version is also easier now that the deck height has been raised to that of the VQ40, and still allow a decent rod/stroke ratio for maintaining revs.
Sorry, long winded but I was bored and that's my prediction.
Will
PS. that whole dual throttle thing is B.S. Where the power is made is a function of so many things, but throttle position and the number of throttles is not a major factor. The number of throttles and placement have a direct emphasis on response, not where the power is made. Most ITB make more power because the intake manifold improves with shorter runners and more plenum space, not because the TB's are multiplied or moved closer. The 415hp 3.6L Porsche GT-3 uses just one TB, so does Audi's 420hp 4.2L V8. The new dual intake would sure make plumbing a TT set-up easier for the GT-R though
EDIT: I think the next track model will be a lighter, "stripped" version of the Z with a 3.7L HR, while the rest of the Z line-up will be the 3.5L HR. Just my prediction.
Last edited by Resolute; 11-29-2006 at 11:50 AM.
11-29-2006, 12:09 PM
#289
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The Lou
Posts: 1,529
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Resolute
What the hell, my predictions:
First, the VQ35HR has almost no design benefits for N/A power. (insert yelling protests here) It's true, so hear me out. The new engine is primarily a cost cutting measure for other applications. This is the way Nissan works. There is too much money lost to design an engine specifically for one app, so the VQ as we all know has to be designed for many applications. The new changes are to better enhance other model lines and cut costs. Allow me to explain-
The taller block means that Nissan no longer has to have two seperate block castings for their trucks and cars. the VQ40 and VQ35/25 can now use the same block. In the 35/25, this means a longer connecting rod, which benifits high rpm breathing and cuts down on piston side loading. However, the VQ35 rod ratio was already better than the RB26 with lower piston acceleration at the same speeds, so the longer rod was obviously not NECCESSARY. Better for sure, but not needed. Nissan could have easily made the current block design rev to 7500rpm all day long is all I'm saying. A new casting for a taller deck height was not needed for this, but it does cut costs by not having a seperate block for the stroked VQ40 engines.
Next, the stouter crank is great, but like the taller deck height it was not NEEDED. The larger journal diameter does help for the larger, stroked VQ40 truck and SUV engines though. And here's the clincher- it is great for forced induction. Same with the beefier rods. The rod bolts and ends could have been upgraded just as they were on the Rev-Up engines to handle 7500+ rpm. The larger journals and beefier rod design (they're forged, not cast) is great for forced induction, though.
Finally, the heads. The current head design flows well. But the new ones look to be even better and have two massive quench pads in the combustion chamber. That's beneficial for all engines, but mostly so for the higher air temps of F/I.
I think the new HR is a great design that will cut costs for Nissan with only one block casting, and now has all the neccessary ingredients for a reliable factory turbo engine. The workhorse platform just got a broader design to handle more options in other words- and none of new changes to the block are needed for the N/A applications. The current DE block could easily be made to hit those numbers with the equal-length exhaust, intake and exhaust CVTC systems and such. The changes do make the new block stronger, and that new laddder frame in place of the current crank girdle just screams for F/I.
So, maybe this is already obvious, but it just confirms in my mind that the new GT-R will be a F/I version of the HR engine, and most of the changes are designed to accomodate this as well as give a boost in N/A power. I think the new Z will also have an option in the future for larger discplacement since the VQ37 engine code has already been registered. So, a stroked version is also easier now that the deck height has been raised to that of the VQ40, and still allow a decent rod/stroke ratio for maintaining revs.
Sorry, long winded but I was bored and that's my prediction.
Will
PS. that whole dual throttle thing is B.S. Where the power is made is a function of so many things, but throttle position and the number of throttles is not a major factor. The number of throttles and placement have a direct emphasis on response, not where the power is made. Most ITB make more power because the intake manifold improves with shorter runners and more plenum space, not because the TB's are multiplied or moved closer. The 415hp 3.6L Porsche GT-3 uses just one TB, so does Audi's 420hp 4.2L V8. The new dual intake would sure make plumbing a TT set-up easier for the GT-R though
EDIT: I think the next track model will be a lighter, "stripped" version of the Z with a 3.7L HR, while the rest of the Z line-up will be the 3.5L HR. Just my prediction.
First, the VQ35HR has almost no design benefits for N/A power. (insert yelling protests here) It's true, so hear me out. The new engine is primarily a cost cutting measure for other applications. This is the way Nissan works. There is too much money lost to design an engine specifically for one app, so the VQ as we all know has to be designed for many applications. The new changes are to better enhance other model lines and cut costs. Allow me to explain-
The taller block means that Nissan no longer has to have two seperate block castings for their trucks and cars. the VQ40 and VQ35/25 can now use the same block. In the 35/25, this means a longer connecting rod, which benifits high rpm breathing and cuts down on piston side loading. However, the VQ35 rod ratio was already better than the RB26 with lower piston acceleration at the same speeds, so the longer rod was obviously not NECCESSARY. Better for sure, but not needed. Nissan could have easily made the current block design rev to 7500rpm all day long is all I'm saying. A new casting for a taller deck height was not needed for this, but it does cut costs by not having a seperate block for the stroked VQ40 engines.
Next, the stouter crank is great, but like the taller deck height it was not NEEDED. The larger journal diameter does help for the larger, stroked VQ40 truck and SUV engines though. And here's the clincher- it is great for forced induction. Same with the beefier rods. The rod bolts and ends could have been upgraded just as they were on the Rev-Up engines to handle 7500+ rpm. The larger journals and beefier rod design (they're forged, not cast) is great for forced induction, though.
Finally, the heads. The current head design flows well. But the new ones look to be even better and have two massive quench pads in the combustion chamber. That's beneficial for all engines, but mostly so for the higher air temps of F/I.
I think the new HR is a great design that will cut costs for Nissan with only one block casting, and now has all the neccessary ingredients for a reliable factory turbo engine. The workhorse platform just got a broader design to handle more options in other words- and none of new changes to the block are needed for the N/A applications. The current DE block could easily be made to hit those numbers with the equal-length exhaust, intake and exhaust CVTC systems and such. The changes do make the new block stronger, and that new laddder frame in place of the current crank girdle just screams for F/I.
So, maybe this is already obvious, but it just confirms in my mind that the new GT-R will be a F/I version of the HR engine, and most of the changes are designed to accomodate this as well as give a boost in N/A power. I think the new Z will also have an option in the future for larger discplacement since the VQ37 engine code has already been registered. So, a stroked version is also easier now that the deck height has been raised to that of the VQ40, and still allow a decent rod/stroke ratio for maintaining revs.
Sorry, long winded but I was bored and that's my prediction.
Will
PS. that whole dual throttle thing is B.S. Where the power is made is a function of so many things, but throttle position and the number of throttles is not a major factor. The number of throttles and placement have a direct emphasis on response, not where the power is made. Most ITB make more power because the intake manifold improves with shorter runners and more plenum space, not because the TB's are multiplied or moved closer. The 415hp 3.6L Porsche GT-3 uses just one TB, so does Audi's 420hp 4.2L V8. The new dual intake would sure make plumbing a TT set-up easier for the GT-R though
EDIT: I think the next track model will be a lighter, "stripped" version of the Z with a 3.7L HR, while the rest of the Z line-up will be the 3.5L HR. Just my prediction.
I'm fairly certain there will be no 'track' model for '07
Nice right up, regardless of your assesment, it should be an improvement over the current one. Now everybody will have to buy 2 pop chargers. Hah!
11-29-2006, 01:11 PM
#291
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: dallas
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
350 z 2007
This is the email I rec. from my sales clerk about the 07 350 do you all think this is some BS?
Ok Thanks for the heads up. I was really hoping it would be out in January.
Sent via BlackBerry from Cingular Wireless
-----Original Message-----
From: "Pat Furley" <FurleyP@autonation.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 16:25:54
To:<pgreene21@gmail.com>
Subject: From Pat Furley at Bankston Nissan of Irving
<http://www.autonation.com/templates/website/autonation-branded/images/compass/dlr_logos/header2_2378.gif>
Cust# 25886059
Hello Perry,
Thought I would inform you that the 07 350z's are projected for march. It was projected for January but was pushed back. Have not received any information on what they are changing.
Patrick Furley
Internet Sales Guide
Bankston Nissan Irving
972-554-2200 EXT 253
FurleyP@autonation.com
You received this email because you requested an on-line price quote or contacted our dealership about a vehicle, parts or service. There is a customer service specialist at this email address ready to help you. However, if you are no longer interested or believe you have received this email in error, please let us know so we can stop trying to contact you regarding your request.
Ok Thanks for the heads up. I was really hoping it would be out in January.
Sent via BlackBerry from Cingular Wireless
-----Original Message-----
From: "Pat Furley" <FurleyP@autonation.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 16:25:54
To:<pgreene21@gmail.com>
Subject: From Pat Furley at Bankston Nissan of Irving
<http://www.autonation.com/templates/website/autonation-branded/images/compass/dlr_logos/header2_2378.gif>
Cust# 25886059
Hello Perry,
Thought I would inform you that the 07 350z's are projected for march. It was projected for January but was pushed back. Have not received any information on what they are changing.
Patrick Furley
Internet Sales Guide
Bankston Nissan Irving
972-554-2200 EXT 253
FurleyP@autonation.com
You received this email because you requested an on-line price quote or contacted our dealership about a vehicle, parts or service. There is a customer service specialist at this email address ready to help you. However, if you are no longer interested or believe you have received this email in error, please let us know so we can stop trying to contact you regarding your request.
11-29-2006, 01:23 PM
#292
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The Lou
Posts: 1,529
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Woah...that would suck big baaalllz if true, maybe there are too many 06s still left unsold, or there's a problem with the new engine. ahhhh now we'll all start coming up with endless conspiracy theories.
Say it ain't so!!!!! I wish we had some Nissan dealers on this site to clarify, although they always seems to know less than we do. wishful thinking I guess.
Say it ain't so!!!!! I wish we had some Nissan dealers on this site to clarify, although they always seems to know less than we do. wishful thinking I guess.
11-29-2006, 01:33 PM
#293
New Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: miles away
Posts: 1,890
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm chalking it up to yet another uninformed dealership. There seems to be a lot of that going on lately. I can't remember ANY car company releasing a new model year that late.
11-29-2006, 08:56 PM
#296
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Worldwide
Posts: 1,867
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHH!!! March? I hope that dealer that said that is B.S. I believe, that dealers know as much, if not, less than us. Like I've said before... there's still alot of 06's to sell out there. This car looks like it could be an 06 KILLER. If I don't hear anything by December 14th directly from Nissan regarding pricing and ETA, I'm going to commit a violent act. Waiting SUCKS.
11-30-2006, 10:36 AM
#298
Originally Posted by Resolute
What the hell, my predictions:
First, the VQ35HR has almost no design benefits for N/A power. (insert yelling protests here) It's true, so hear me out. The new engine is primarily a cost cutting measure for other applications. This is the way Nissan works. There is too much money lost to design an engine specifically for one app, so the VQ as we all know has to be designed for many applications. The new changes are to better enhance other model lines and cut costs. Allow me to explain-
The taller block means that Nissan no longer has to have two seperate block castings for their trucks and cars. the VQ40 and VQ35/25 can now use the same block. In the 35/25, this means a longer connecting rod, which benifits high rpm breathing and cuts down on piston side loading. However, the VQ35 rod ratio was already better than the RB26 with lower piston acceleration at the same speeds, so the longer rod was obviously not NECCESSARY. Better for sure, but not needed. Nissan could have easily made the current block design rev to 7500rpm all day long is all I'm saying. A new casting for a taller deck height was not needed for this, but it does cut costs by not having a seperate block for the stroked VQ40 engines.
Next, the stouter crank is great, but like the taller deck height it was not NEEDED. The larger journal diameter does help for the larger, stroked VQ40 truck and SUV engines though. And here's the clincher- it is great for forced induction. Same with the beefier rods. The rod bolts and ends could have been upgraded just as they were on the Rev-Up engines to handle 7500+ rpm. The larger journals and beefier rod design (they're forged, not cast) is great for forced induction, though.
Finally, the heads. The current head design flows well. But the new ones look to be even better and have two massive quench pads in the combustion chamber. That's beneficial for all engines, but mostly so for the higher air temps of F/I.
I think the new HR is a great design that will cut costs for Nissan with only one block casting, and now has all the neccessary ingredients for a reliable factory turbo engine. The workhorse platform just got a broader design to handle more options in other words- and none of new changes to the block are needed for the N/A applications. The current DE block could easily be made to hit those numbers with the equal-length exhaust, intake and exhaust CVTC systems and such. The changes do make the new block stronger, and that new laddder frame in place of the current crank girdle just screams for F/I.
So, maybe this is already obvious, but it just confirms in my mind that the new GT-R will be a F/I version of the HR engine, and most of the changes are designed to accomodate this as well as give a boost in N/A power. I think the new Z will also have an option in the future for larger discplacement since the VQ37 engine code has already been registered. So, a stroked version is also easier now that the deck height has been raised to that of the VQ40, and still allow a decent rod/stroke ratio for maintaining revs.
Sorry, long winded but I was bored and that's my prediction.
Will
PS. that whole dual throttle thing is B.S. Where the power is made is a function of so many things, but throttle position and the number of throttles is not a major factor. The number of throttles and placement have a direct emphasis on response, not where the power is made. Most ITB make more power because the intake manifold improves with shorter runners and more plenum space, not because the TB's are multiplied or moved closer. The 415hp 3.6L Porsche GT-3 uses just one TB, so does Audi's 420hp 4.2L V8. The new dual intake would sure make plumbing a TT set-up easier for the GT-R though
EDIT: I think the next track model will be a lighter, "stripped" version of the Z with a 3.7L HR, while the rest of the Z line-up will be the 3.5L HR. Just my prediction.
First, the VQ35HR has almost no design benefits for N/A power. (insert yelling protests here) It's true, so hear me out. The new engine is primarily a cost cutting measure for other applications. This is the way Nissan works. There is too much money lost to design an engine specifically for one app, so the VQ as we all know has to be designed for many applications. The new changes are to better enhance other model lines and cut costs. Allow me to explain-
The taller block means that Nissan no longer has to have two seperate block castings for their trucks and cars. the VQ40 and VQ35/25 can now use the same block. In the 35/25, this means a longer connecting rod, which benifits high rpm breathing and cuts down on piston side loading. However, the VQ35 rod ratio was already better than the RB26 with lower piston acceleration at the same speeds, so the longer rod was obviously not NECCESSARY. Better for sure, but not needed. Nissan could have easily made the current block design rev to 7500rpm all day long is all I'm saying. A new casting for a taller deck height was not needed for this, but it does cut costs by not having a seperate block for the stroked VQ40 engines.
Next, the stouter crank is great, but like the taller deck height it was not NEEDED. The larger journal diameter does help for the larger, stroked VQ40 truck and SUV engines though. And here's the clincher- it is great for forced induction. Same with the beefier rods. The rod bolts and ends could have been upgraded just as they were on the Rev-Up engines to handle 7500+ rpm. The larger journals and beefier rod design (they're forged, not cast) is great for forced induction, though.
Finally, the heads. The current head design flows well. But the new ones look to be even better and have two massive quench pads in the combustion chamber. That's beneficial for all engines, but mostly so for the higher air temps of F/I.
I think the new HR is a great design that will cut costs for Nissan with only one block casting, and now has all the neccessary ingredients for a reliable factory turbo engine. The workhorse platform just got a broader design to handle more options in other words- and none of new changes to the block are needed for the N/A applications. The current DE block could easily be made to hit those numbers with the equal-length exhaust, intake and exhaust CVTC systems and such. The changes do make the new block stronger, and that new laddder frame in place of the current crank girdle just screams for F/I.
So, maybe this is already obvious, but it just confirms in my mind that the new GT-R will be a F/I version of the HR engine, and most of the changes are designed to accomodate this as well as give a boost in N/A power. I think the new Z will also have an option in the future for larger discplacement since the VQ37 engine code has already been registered. So, a stroked version is also easier now that the deck height has been raised to that of the VQ40, and still allow a decent rod/stroke ratio for maintaining revs.
Sorry, long winded but I was bored and that's my prediction.
Will
PS. that whole dual throttle thing is B.S. Where the power is made is a function of so many things, but throttle position and the number of throttles is not a major factor. The number of throttles and placement have a direct emphasis on response, not where the power is made. Most ITB make more power because the intake manifold improves with shorter runners and more plenum space, not because the TB's are multiplied or moved closer. The 415hp 3.6L Porsche GT-3 uses just one TB, so does Audi's 420hp 4.2L V8. The new dual intake would sure make plumbing a TT set-up easier for the GT-R though
EDIT: I think the next track model will be a lighter, "stripped" version of the Z with a 3.7L HR, while the rest of the Z line-up will be the 3.5L HR. Just my prediction.
DUDE, nice write up! Its cool to see intelligence on these boards! I def agree with the dual TB now that I have talked to allot of peps about it.
11-30-2006, 10:55 AM
#299
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is kinda funny: http://www.nissanhelp.com/Models/2007/350Z/Price.htm
They don't show the prices, but they do list a Track model.
Edit: They show the same info over and over again all the way up to 2010 350Z. Maybe 2010 might be the last model, lol.
They don't show the prices, but they do list a Track model.
Edit: They show the same info over and over again all the way up to 2010 350Z. Maybe 2010 might be the last model, lol.
11-30-2006, 12:22 PM
#300
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Appleton, WI
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
https://my350z.com/forum/showthread.php?t=203271
Well, the announcement or whatever in that thread says Track is deleted, however, it also says 5 trim levels for the coupe and then only describes 4... so who knows. I hate preliminary info.
Well, the announcement or whatever in that thread says Track is deleted, however, it also says 5 trim levels for the coupe and then only describes 4... so who knows. I hate preliminary info.