Notices
Engine & Drivetrain VQ Power and Delivery

Track 2005 engine

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 01-19-2005, 11:35 AM
  #21  
cupcar
Registered User
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
 
cupcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: California
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

A friend pointed out to me that the nissannews.com site had a media site called "The 35 days of the Z" which I can't find any longer. The 35th day of the media presentation listed the Track and Anniversary Z engine changes, written down by my friend:

1- strengthened connecting rods and bolts
2- double-mass crank pulley
3- strengthened valve springs
4- revised shape of the piston head
5- new camshaft profile
6- remapped ECM
7- addition of valve timing control to the exhaust cam
8- modified intake w/ shorter and wider runners
9- revised oil pan baffling and more
Old 01-19-2005, 12:29 PM
  #22  
zluver
Registered User
 
zluver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Norman, OK
Posts: 197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

if the gearing of the transmission has not changed, there should not be a significant difference in performance, but the track engine should accelerate the car faster at higher rpms than the 287 version. Even though the track version gives up peak torque, it holds the torque level for longer in the rpm range with less drop off. 300 hp at 6400rpm translates to 246 lbs torque. The other engine, which has slightly less hp 6400rpm, est. 285, is only making 235 lbs torque. Overall the torque curve for the new engine should be flatter and last longer, meaning it should accelerate harder.
Old 01-19-2005, 12:34 PM
  #23  
cupcar
Registered User
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
 
cupcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: California
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

zluver is rite on.

I think the car will be a lot more fun to drive with the Track engine.

Too bad the changes include the pistons and connecting rods otherwise the rest would be within reach as a mod.
Old 01-19-2005, 06:47 PM
  #24  
SR20DEN
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
 
SR20DEN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally posted by cupcar
A friend pointed out to me that the nissannews.com site had a media site called "The 35 days of the Z" which I can't find any longer. The 35th day of the media presentation listed the Track and Anniversary Z engine changes, written down by my friend:

1- strengthened connecting rods and bolts
2- double-mass crank pulley
3- strengthened valve springs
4- revised shape of the piston head
5- new camshaft profile
6- remapped ECM
7- addition of valve timing control to the exhaust cam
8- modified intake w/ shorter and wider runners
9- revised oil pan baffling and more
And I do remember reading this info on nissannews when it came out. Which is why I was baffled when I read the cam profile in the new ESM. Hopefully a revised ESM comes out in a few months.
Old 01-19-2005, 06:58 PM
  #25  
thawk408
Registered User
iTrader: (16)
 
thawk408's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 2,939
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

So do you think this engine will be stronger or better for F/I use???
Old 01-19-2005, 07:02 PM
  #26  
SR20DEN
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
 
SR20DEN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

If they really did what they claimed in the press release I would say yes.
Old 01-19-2005, 08:05 PM
  #27  
kzshin
Registered User
 
kzshin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: OC, CA.
Posts: 954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

the track engine should accelerate the car faster at higher rpms than the 287 version. Even though the track version gives up peak torque, it holds the torque level for longer in the rpm range with less drop off. 300 hp at 6400rpm translates to 246 lbs torque. The other engine, which has slightly less hp 6400rpm, est. 285, is only making 235 lbs torque. Overall the torque curve for the new engine should be flatter and last longer, meaning it should accelerate harder.
Zluver is absolutely right.
Old 01-20-2005, 08:48 AM
  #28  
cupcar
Registered User
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
 
cupcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: California
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Another way to look at it is torque is only a force, horsepower is capacity to do work/time which is force X distance traveled/time.

Horsepower with the right gearing usually wins- except sometimes when the time to shift gears is added in....
Old 01-20-2005, 09:10 AM
  #29  
King Tut
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
 
King Tut's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Gulf Breeze, FL
Posts: 2,398
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

I think will all agree that the new 300 engine is much better than the 287 engine in the 6000 - 7000 RPM range. The thing you guys are forgeting is that that 6000 - 7000 RPM area is rarely ever used except at the drag strip. I think that if you look at the area under the curve of the torque on the 287 and 300 engines between 1000 and 5500 that the 287 will have more. That is what I would call useable fun to drive torque.
Old 01-20-2005, 09:27 AM
  #30  
cupcar
Registered User
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
 
cupcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: California
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

True- It just depends on your driving style- one either likes to downshift and stand on it or just stand on it.
Old 01-20-2005, 05:55 PM
  #31  
Kolia
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
 
Kolia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 2,821
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally posted by King Tut
I think will all agree that the new 300 engine is much better than the 287 engine in the 6000 - 7000 RPM range. The thing you guys are forgeting is that that 6000 - 7000 RPM area is rarely ever used except at the drag strip. I think that if you look at the area under the curve of the torque on the 287 and 300 engines between 1000 and 5500 that the 287 will have more. That is what I would call useable fun to drive torque.
Not in the real world. No.

Low-end torque is pretty useless unless you want to pull heavy load. Certainly not in a sport car !

When do you get to use 100% torque at 3000 rpm ? You would need to be WOT going up a steep enough hill pulling a trailler so that the car can not accelerate any more. Then you use all your torque.

So what if you get more torque using 60% throttle. I'll just give 62% throttle and keep up. I'll still have enough torque to smoke the tires, and if I really want to go faster, I won't be below 5000 rpm for long.

Low end torque is good for drivability at low speed. Both engine have plenty usable torque and low rpm. There won't be much difference there.
Old 01-20-2005, 07:37 PM
  #32  
287HP
Registered User
 
287HP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally posted by cupcar
Another way to look at it is torque is only a force, horsepower is capacity to do work/time which is force X distance traveled/time.

Horsepower with the right gearing usually wins- except sometimes when the time to shift gears is added in....
The only thing an engine "actually" produces is torque (moment of inertia*angular acceleration). The more torque your car produces in the upper rpms, the more horsepower the car has.
Old 01-20-2005, 07:55 PM
  #33  
IceY2K1Max
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
 
IceY2K1Max's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 427
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I talked to Nissan parts guru Dave Burnette a week or so ago and he said he had the latest parts diagrams SR20DEN.

Basically, he said ANYTHING that rotates/moves in the engine was a different part number on the '05s.

I think they changed A LOT more then most think.
Old 01-20-2005, 08:28 PM
  #34  
IceY2K1Max
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
 
IceY2K1Max's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 427
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

He just emailed me and said,

Anniversary & Track only! And EVERYTHING on the bottom end is diff! On the the top end, its the cams/chains/covers/vt crap that's different. And YES, the oil pump is a new one !
Old 01-21-2005, 05:48 AM
  #35  
cupcar
Registered User
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
 
cupcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: California
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

I wonder if any of the parts are from this list of jewels:
Nismo engine kit

If you use Google, right click on the page and select "Translate to English"

Makes me very interested, The only thing I've missed from my stolen Integra Type R is an engine that revs!!
Old 01-21-2005, 09:08 AM
  #36  
King Tut
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
 
King Tut's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Gulf Breeze, FL
Posts: 2,398
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Damn sorry to hear bout the stolen ITR. I miss my Skunk2 camed LS/VTEC all motor EG hatch as well. I still hit the rev limiter sometimes cause I think I have more revs left than I do.
Old 01-21-2005, 09:59 AM
  #37  
thawk408
Registered User
iTrader: (16)
 
thawk408's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 2,939
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

So, is this the Nismo S1 engine?
Old 01-21-2005, 10:20 AM
  #38  
cupcar
Registered User
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
 
cupcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: California
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Here is description of the S1 engine kit, use your Google right click to translate to English

Nismo S1 engine kit

Note that it just consists of different cam timing units, cams, air filter, ECU, stronger, rod bolts and change intake system and carbon engine cover with different spark plugs shown in the picture. Listed in the text are changes to the exhaust catalysts on back plus different valve springs.

Sounds like the Track engine is a lot more than the S1 kit.

Last edited by cupcar; 01-21-2005 at 10:22 AM.
Old 01-22-2005, 07:39 AM
  #39  
J Ritt
New Member
iTrader: (4)
 
J Ritt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Charlotte NC
Posts: 1,115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I'm anxious to see a dyno on one of these cars. I'm really curious what exactly they did with the ECM.

Former ITR owner here by the way...I had a Championship White '98 #765. Theives tried to steal it once when I owned, and at least twice from the guy I sold it to...bastards.

I do miss those revs sometimes!
Old 01-22-2005, 10:36 AM
  #40  
350Zenophile
New Member
iTrader: (20)
 
350Zenophile's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 4,350
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 3 Posts
Default

Originally posted by cupcar

2- double-mass crank pulley
Why up the mass on the crank pulley? Maybe to smooth out the extra revs?


Quick Reply: Track 2005 engine



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:03 PM.