I dunno, but Technosquare does raise the rev limit 500 rpm on ecu reflashes unless you tell them otherwise. On stock internal engine components, it's not going to make more power doing so, but I guess teh argument is to hold the car in gear longer before shifting to improve trap times or the like.

To be honest, I hardly every redline the my car. There is sufficient power b/w 4-6k on my revup with bolt-ons. I did dyno my car to 7400 on 2 pulls, but went back down to 7k for the rest of the pulls because it was clear power was dropping off at that point and there was no point in pushing it. I hope I didn't *** up my pistons or get ring flutter or whatever , but I don't see the benefit or revving much past the stock rev limit unless you have a built motor like Adam that can take advantage of those extra rpms

 

And while some may disagree with me, to answer the op's question, I would not consider the Z to be a "rev happy" car, especially compared to some homdas and mazdas that are truly "rev happy" cars--on s2k's and si's and the like you really got to rev it high and hit vtech to get it going. Those cars also don't have much torque.

On a stock VQ35DE engine, I'm pretty sure power drops after 6500 rpm--that is not what I consider to be a "rev happy" car. The Z and G have some really good torque in the low-mid range that helps it take off, but I think they are more lethargic in the upper rpms without modding, imo. With a lightweight flywheel and lightened pulleys and full bolt-ons however, the rpms climb pretty quik

 

I would define "Rev happy" as an engine that tends to make the majority of it's power at high rpms, or an engine that needs to be at the upper end of it's rpm range to make "noticeable" power.

The RX-8 is a prime example of this.

The 350z's engine is designed to have an evenly distributed power band from the low to high ends of the rpm range, which would make this car the exactly opposite of "rev happy".

It makes most of it's power towards the top end of the rpm range. However, this is true of most gasoline powered cars, so that's not really what "rev happy" implies.

 

I only race people from rolls...and that bs technique does nothing but chirp your tires and beat up your transmission & clutch. My friend with his WRX swore by it...unfortunately I still walked him and he ended up blowing out his transmission. It might get you a HALF car from the onset of the race...but thats it...definately not worth damaging your car imho.

 

that makes absolutely 0 sense....when the car is in gear, why would you depress the clutch except to change gears? Do you know what double clutching is? Perhaps you are confusing your terms

 

4-6k ideal range for vq

 

You've probably been chastised enough for this enough already, but that sounds stupid dangerous for something that won't make you accelerate any faster.

 

linear power means not rev happy. The revup makes more power top end wise but its still very linear in how it makes power. VQs from what i seen where designed for spead out power throught the band and it seems after the 287 engine they seem to be designing for more peak as the engines evolve.


I would agree that the VQ series in our Zs are some of the best V6s effieciency wise to date besides toyota engine in the IS350 .

 

"Double clutching" is a really old term from the muscle car days, when manual gearboxes didn't have syncros. We don't really "double clutch" anymore with modern gearboxes.

Example of double clutching, in this scenario car is already rolling in first gear:

1. *accelerate*
2. *depress clutch*
3. *shift to neutral*
4. *release clutch*
5. *depress clutch*
6. *shift to 2nd*

This is my understanding of it thus far. What jOeL350z seems to be referring to is races that start from speeds that are nearly a dead stop, i.e. below 2000-3000rpm in 1st gear.

TK

 

I would like to be able to rev to 7500 rpm, lol, but if there is no advantage, whats the point I guess. So it would seem the engines can't handle an extra 500 rpm in stock form?

 

Fixed. I actually do this sometimes when the tranny and synthetic fluid is cold and doesn't want to shift to 2nd. Slides right in instead of having to force it.

 

furthest ive pushed my hr is to 155mph. Felt Really good

 

double clutching is useful when racing from a roll... this is true.
it makes anywhere from a 1-3 cars difference
ive done it from experince
but a worn clutch is when it stops making a diff.

might also be why some 1/4 mile times posted by professional driversi in magazines are never achieved by a anyone else, because the owner thinks of the longevity of their vehicle, pro divers do not even own the car so they beat the hell out of it.


so what if you break your trans .... if you don't break something your not driving it right/

i once heard that in a mustang forum

its funny my best time with my z it when i burned my clutch, it has that distict smell... broke my heart .......
but kinda proves my point, gotta give to recieve

 

What you're referring to still isn't called double clutching. Rev matching alone doesn't constitute double clutching, and redumping/reslipping the clutch into gear isn't double clutching either. The latter method is only most effective at speeds where you can't shift into the powerband i.e low rpms in 1st gear. Meaning the closer you are to a dead stop, the more effective it is, because it simulates launching the car.

TK

 

I dunno about rev-happy...it tops out at 7500 RPM on the newest engine (HR) and that's 1500 RPM shy of an S2000.

I gotta say though, I feel like my 2006 rev-up tends to bog down if I'm anywhere below 2500 RPM or so in 3rd gear or higher. I hit the gas and the thing just slugs, then once it gets to above 3000 RPM it's like all this energy gets released and the thing flies. Does anyone else notice that?

 

1500rpm shy of an AP1, only 500rpm shy of an AP2. The Z has usable torque throughout its rev range, but the "meat" of the powerband is still in the later half of it, so the Z not feeling that fast below 3000rpm is normal. Just downshift

TK

 

sometimes down 2 gears lmao.