vq bore/stroke comparison & discussion
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
From: Tulsa, KC, Dallas
vq bore/stroke comparison & discussion
old noob here, just bought a G35 coupe, 6MT..
waiting for KU/MU game to start, thinking and dreaming in a thread here:
One day, I'd like to destroke my VQ35DE to 73.3mm and increase bore to a larger yet safe demension. Add ITB's, cams, a very well designed header and at least 3" exhaust...
vq20de
bore: 76mm <--- smallest bore
stroke: 73.3mm
vq23de
bore: 85mm
stroke: 69mm <-- smallest stroke
vq25de
bore: 85mm
stroke: 73.3mm
vq30de
bore: 93mm
stroke: 73.3mm
vq35de
bore: 95.5mm <--- largest bore (tie)
stroke: 81.4mm
vq40de
bore: 95.5mm <--- largest bore (tie)
stroke: 92mm <--- largest crank
waiting for KU/MU game to start, thinking and dreaming in a thread here:
One day, I'd like to destroke my VQ35DE to 73.3mm and increase bore to a larger yet safe demension. Add ITB's, cams, a very well designed header and at least 3" exhaust...
vq20de
bore: 76mm <--- smallest bore
stroke: 73.3mm
vq23de
bore: 85mm
stroke: 69mm <-- smallest stroke
vq25de
bore: 85mm
stroke: 73.3mm
vq30de
bore: 93mm
stroke: 73.3mm
vq35de
bore: 95.5mm <--- largest bore (tie)
stroke: 81.4mm
vq40de
bore: 95.5mm <--- largest bore (tie)
stroke: 92mm <--- largest crank
Last edited by vqman; Feb 5, 2012 at 09:00 AM. Reason: corrected stroke of VQ35DE from 91.4 to 81.4
Your proposed combo would net you ~3.2 liters. It will rev to the moon but would most likely struggle to beat a stock 3.5VQ. Better off starting with the 3.5 and adding your supporting mods.
This motor is already oversquare. It really wouldn't do much to destroke it down to a 3.2 unless you had very wild valvetrain to support it. There are a few people spinning into the mid 8000's range with stock bore and stroke (with MUCH other work).
Want a crazy screamer?
Throw in a 1JZ-GTE. 6 cylinders with a 86mm x 71.5mm bore and stroke, respectively
Factory valvetrain good upwards of 8000rpm safely with many people spinning to 10,000 rpm with supporting mods. ANY motor sounds great at over 8000rpm
This motor is already oversquare. It really wouldn't do much to destroke it down to a 3.2 unless you had very wild valvetrain to support it. There are a few people spinning into the mid 8000's range with stock bore and stroke (with MUCH other work).
Want a crazy screamer?
Throw in a 1JZ-GTE. 6 cylinders with a 86mm x 71.5mm bore and stroke, respectively
Factory valvetrain good upwards of 8000rpm safely with many people spinning to 10,000 rpm with supporting mods. ANY motor sounds great at over 8000rpm
Sure if your going to stay N/A it wouldnt make much sense to destroke it, but if you throw in a fairly large turbo that can handle spinning that high and you might have a pretty potent combo... and hell i'd like to see him do it, just to see something different.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
From: Tulsa, KC, Dallas
ah thanks, I thought that seemed like a very large increase over the 3.0...
damn you wikipedia!! lol
I just remember owning a vq30de maxima and thinking the motor seemed MUCH smoother, and thought it had a lot to do with the shorter stroke.
If I ever do any non-Nissan motor into a Nissan, it would be a small block... the only other swaps of one brand into another I would consider is an SR20DET block with SR20VE head and N1 cams into an E30 or older 3-series, and drop the turbo.....
damn you wikipedia!! lol
Your proposed combo would net you ~3.2 liters. It will rev to the moon but would most likely struggle to beat a stock 3.5VQ. Better off starting with the 3.5 and adding your supporting mods.
This motor is already oversquare. It really wouldn't do much to destroke it down to a 3.2 unless you had very wild valvetrain to support it. There are a few people spinning into the mid 8000's range with stock bore and stroke (with MUCH other work).
This motor is already oversquare. It really wouldn't do much to destroke it down to a 3.2 unless you had very wild valvetrain to support it. There are a few people spinning into the mid 8000's range with stock bore and stroke (with MUCH other work).
If I ever do any non-Nissan motor into a Nissan, it would be a small block... the only other swaps of one brand into another I would consider is an SR20DET block with SR20VE head and N1 cams into an E30 or older 3-series, and drop the turbo.....
and you would still have a smaller engine taking longer to spool the turbo. several of the people who are spinning there engines to 8k are running large turbos. destroking a engine dosnt make sense period you are simply limiting your power. this arguement has been made since ancient times when it was chevy 350 vs chevy 302(yes that have a 302 as well very rare engine) vs chevy 327. end result? someone always comes out with the larger engine spinning the same rpms as the smaller stroke engines and making WAY more power.
your number one and two limiting factors when running a high rpm engine is always going to be the strength of your valve train first and strength of your rods second. when you break a crank from to many rpms then you look at a smaller stroke, or simply a stronger crank which is what most people do.
i can tell you right now i have every intention of spinning my 6765 dbb at 8k
edit: if you want further proof go that there is no sense destroking a vq35, run over to some lsx forums several people are running ls2/ls3's at 8k which has both a larger bore then the vq and a slightly longer stroke, they just switch to solid roller cams instead of the hydraulic roller used stock. couple are even running as high as 9k
its not like your building a f1 engine to run 19k rpms
one final note, sorry was finishing a math test. as i said a ls2/ls3 has no problem revving to the moon and it is running a 6.125 inch long rod long rod. the vq35de is only 5.58 inchs this results in lighter weight and alot more rev friendly. a longer rod would result in slower speeds at top dead center and make more power but its not as rev friendly. also i double checked this because it has been awhile, the shorter rod is better for turbos because of the pistons different speeds at different times in the cycle promote better exhuast side flow then a long rod. a long rod breaths better on the intake side again because of the different speeds which is good for a NA engine or a in block cam engine that only has two valves.
if you destroke your engine you will have to run a longer rod to put the piston back up in the cylinder where it needs to be to function correctly. adding weight, probably limiting your rpms right back to where you started negating any benefit plus you are making the engine breath worse on the exhuast side limiting turbo spool from less displacement and worse breathing.
essentially destroking the engine hurts you WAY more then helping you for what people think about doing it for.
your number one and two limiting factors when running a high rpm engine is always going to be the strength of your valve train first and strength of your rods second. when you break a crank from to many rpms then you look at a smaller stroke, or simply a stronger crank which is what most people do.
i can tell you right now i have every intention of spinning my 6765 dbb at 8k
edit: if you want further proof go that there is no sense destroking a vq35, run over to some lsx forums several people are running ls2/ls3's at 8k which has both a larger bore then the vq and a slightly longer stroke, they just switch to solid roller cams instead of the hydraulic roller used stock. couple are even running as high as 9k
its not like your building a f1 engine to run 19k rpms
one final note, sorry was finishing a math test. as i said a ls2/ls3 has no problem revving to the moon and it is running a 6.125 inch long rod long rod. the vq35de is only 5.58 inchs this results in lighter weight and alot more rev friendly. a longer rod would result in slower speeds at top dead center and make more power but its not as rev friendly. also i double checked this because it has been awhile, the shorter rod is better for turbos because of the pistons different speeds at different times in the cycle promote better exhuast side flow then a long rod. a long rod breaths better on the intake side again because of the different speeds which is good for a NA engine or a in block cam engine that only has two valves.
if you destroke your engine you will have to run a longer rod to put the piston back up in the cylinder where it needs to be to function correctly. adding weight, probably limiting your rpms right back to where you started negating any benefit plus you are making the engine breath worse on the exhuast side limiting turbo spool from less displacement and worse breathing.
essentially destroking the engine hurts you WAY more then helping you for what people think about doing it for.
Last edited by jerryd87; Feb 5, 2012 at 09:41 AM.
Trending Topics
and you would still have a smaller engine taking longer to spool the turbo. several of the people who are spinning there engines to 8k are running large turbos. destroking a engine dosnt make sense period you are simply limiting your power. this arguement has been made since ancient times when it was chevy 350 vs chevy 302(yes that have a 302 as well very rare engine) vs chevy 327. end result? someone always comes out with the larger engine spinning the same rpms as the smaller stroke engines and making WAY more power.
your number one and two limiting factors when running a high rpm engine is always going to be the strength of your valve train first and strength of your rods second. when you break a crank from to many rpms then you look at a smaller stroke, or simply a stronger crank which is what most people do.
i can tell you right now i have every intention of spinning my 6765 dbb at 8k
edit: if you want further proof go that there is no sense destroking a vq35, run over to some lsx forums several people are running ls2/ls3's at 8k which has both a larger bore then the vq and a slightly longer stroke, they just switch to solid roller cams instead of the hydraulic roller used stock. couple are even running as high as 9k
its not like your building a f1 engine to run 19k rpms
one final note, sorry was finishing a math test. as i said a ls2/ls3 has no problem revving to the moon and it is running a 6.125 inch long rod long rod. the vq35de is only 5.58 inchs this results in lighter weight and alot more rev friendly. a longer rod would result in slower speeds at top dead center and make more power but its not as rev friendly. also i double checked this because it has been awhile, the shorter rod is better for turbos because of the pistons different speeds at different times in the cycle promote better exhuast side flow then a long rod. a long rod breaths better on the intake side again because of the different speeds which is good for a NA engine or a in block cam engine that only has two valves.
if you destroke your engine you will have to run a longer rod to put the piston back up in the cylinder where it needs to be to function correctly. adding weight, probably limiting your rpms right back to where you started negating any benefit plus you are making the engine breath worse on the exhuast side limiting turbo spool from less displacement and worse breathing.
essentially destroking the engine hurts you WAY more then helping you for what people think about doing it for.
your number one and two limiting factors when running a high rpm engine is always going to be the strength of your valve train first and strength of your rods second. when you break a crank from to many rpms then you look at a smaller stroke, or simply a stronger crank which is what most people do.
i can tell you right now i have every intention of spinning my 6765 dbb at 8k
edit: if you want further proof go that there is no sense destroking a vq35, run over to some lsx forums several people are running ls2/ls3's at 8k which has both a larger bore then the vq and a slightly longer stroke, they just switch to solid roller cams instead of the hydraulic roller used stock. couple are even running as high as 9k
its not like your building a f1 engine to run 19k rpms
one final note, sorry was finishing a math test. as i said a ls2/ls3 has no problem revving to the moon and it is running a 6.125 inch long rod long rod. the vq35de is only 5.58 inchs this results in lighter weight and alot more rev friendly. a longer rod would result in slower speeds at top dead center and make more power but its not as rev friendly. also i double checked this because it has been awhile, the shorter rod is better for turbos because of the pistons different speeds at different times in the cycle promote better exhuast side flow then a long rod. a long rod breaths better on the intake side again because of the different speeds which is good for a NA engine or a in block cam engine that only has two valves.
if you destroke your engine you will have to run a longer rod to put the piston back up in the cylinder where it needs to be to function correctly. adding weight, probably limiting your rpms right back to where you started negating any benefit plus you are making the engine breath worse on the exhuast side limiting turbo spool from less displacement and worse breathing.
essentially destroking the engine hurts you WAY more then helping you for what people think about doing it for.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
