370Z with a 3.7L??? When there is a 4.0!
11-22-2008, 10:03 AM
#1
370Z with a 3.7L??? When there is a 4.0!
Just before i was doing an O/F/L to this 06 Nissan Frontier and noticed something i have never seen in a Nissan before, unless i just never noticed. It had a V6 4.0L VQ40 engine stick shift. I wondered why the new 370 doesn't come with that instead of the 3.7?
I took a pic if anyone is interested.
I took a pic if anyone is interested.
Last edited by Dr. Venture; 11-22-2008 at 10:30 AM.
11-22-2008, 04:40 PM
#5
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 1,197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
11-22-2008, 05:03 PM
#6
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hawaii
Posts: 241
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yah, because a longer stroke version of a motor with the same bore spacing will totally f**k up your weight distribution. 
In all honesty, the reason the 4.0L "truck VQ" has never found its way into a passenger car is because it's designed and suited to truck duty. It has a longer stroke for better bottom end torque but it runs out of breath up top and isn't as much of a revver as the smaller displacement 3.5 and 3.7. As useful as 280 ft-lbs @ 4000 rpm is in day to day driving, there isn't much of a fun factor to be had when your peak hp figure of 261 ponies is made at 5600 rpm with the curve headed downhill thereafter.
In all honesty, the reason the 4.0L "truck VQ" has never found its way into a passenger car is because it's designed and suited to truck duty. It has a longer stroke for better bottom end torque but it runs out of breath up top and isn't as much of a revver as the smaller displacement 3.5 and 3.7. As useful as 280 ft-lbs @ 4000 rpm is in day to day driving, there isn't much of a fun factor to be had when your peak hp figure of 261 ponies is made at 5600 rpm with the curve headed downhill thereafter.
Trending Topics
11-22-2008, 11:04 PM
#8
Yah, because a longer stroke version of a motor with the same bore spacing will totally f**k up your weight distribution.
In all honesty, the reason the 4.0L "truck VQ" has never found its way into a passenger car is because it's designed and suited to truck duty. It has a longer stroke for better bottom end torque but it runs out of breath up top and isn't as much of a revver as the smaller displacement 3.5 and 3.7. As useful as 280 ft-lbs @ 4000 rpm is in day to day driving, there isn't much of a fun factor to be had when your peak hp figure of 261 ponies is made at 5600 rpm with the curve headed downhill thereafter.
In all honesty, the reason the 4.0L "truck VQ" has never found its way into a passenger car is because it's designed and suited to truck duty. It has a longer stroke for better bottom end torque but it runs out of breath up top and isn't as much of a revver as the smaller displacement 3.5 and 3.7. As useful as 280 ft-lbs @ 4000 rpm is in day to day driving, there isn't much of a fun factor to be had when your peak hp figure of 261 ponies is made at 5600 rpm with the curve headed downhill thereafter.
TK
11-23-2008, 04:11 PM
#9
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: ATX
Posts: 354
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Although, it will be interesting to see what the current VQ bore spacing will allow, displacement-wise, in the long term as Nissan evolves it's engines, as they always do.
Although, I would wish they invest the money into direct injention before displacement increases... as I'm sure they will.
11-23-2008, 09:32 PM
#10
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Buena Park
Posts: 630
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
11-23-2008, 09:41 PM
#11
Exactly. It's made for torque, not HP.
Although, it will be interesting to see what the current VQ bore spacing will allow, displacement-wise, in the long term as Nissan evolves it's engines, as they always do.
Although, I would wish they invest the money into direct injention before displacement increases... as I'm sure they will.
Although, it will be interesting to see what the current VQ bore spacing will allow, displacement-wise, in the long term as Nissan evolves it's engines, as they always do.
Although, I would wish they invest the money into direct injention before displacement increases... as I'm sure they will.
11-24-2008, 01:46 AM
#13
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: san francisco, california
Posts: 461
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yah, because a longer stroke version of a motor with the same bore spacing will totally f**k up your weight distribution.
In all honesty, the reason the 4.0L "truck VQ" has never found its way into a passenger car is because it's designed and suited to truck duty. It has a longer stroke for better bottom end torque but it runs out of breath up top and isn't as much of a revver as the smaller displacement 3.5 and 3.7. As useful as 280 ft-lbs @ 4000 rpm is in day to day driving, there isn't much of a fun factor to be had when your peak hp figure of 261 ponies is made at 5600 rpm with the curve headed downhill thereafter.
In all honesty, the reason the 4.0L "truck VQ" has never found its way into a passenger car is because it's designed and suited to truck duty. It has a longer stroke for better bottom end torque but it runs out of breath up top and isn't as much of a revver as the smaller displacement 3.5 and 3.7. As useful as 280 ft-lbs @ 4000 rpm is in day to day driving, there isn't much of a fun factor to be had when your peak hp figure of 261 ponies is made at 5600 rpm with the curve headed downhill thereafter.
Last edited by newtkindred; 11-24-2008 at 02:01 AM.
11-24-2008, 01:51 AM
#14
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: san francisco, california
Posts: 461
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeh, what since would it make to put a truck engine (designed for torque) in a sports car? Hmm, I guess they did it in the 240SX and Mitsubishi Starion? Oh, and the Viper. I could be wrong. Anyway, I digress. You could add volume by more bore and less of stroke so you do not add the extra length and weight to the crankshafts. Or go a head and stroke it and use some titanium rods to lighten things up so engine will spin. Anyway, I am delirious from the flight I just took here from Germany and suffering from a cold so I could be talking nonsense and wouldn't even know it.
Last edited by newtkindred; 11-24-2008 at 01:58 AM.
11-24-2008, 09:47 AM
#16
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: ATX
Posts: 354
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No.
Sure, some cars have boatloads of torque (Viper, ZR1, CTS-V, etc.)... but unless there is the HP ALSO to back it up, the acceleration will be dissappointing... look at any typical high torque/low HP diesel setup.
One can lust after the 560 ft/lbs of torque in the a Viper, but there is also the 600 HP to support it in the higher revs.
For instance, there are lots of fast cars with high HP/low torque ratings (M3, F430, etc.)... but there aren't fast cars with high torque/low HP ratings...
Sure, some cars have boatloads of torque (Viper, ZR1, CTS-V, etc.)... but unless there is the HP ALSO to back it up, the acceleration will be dissappointing... look at any typical high torque/low HP diesel setup.
One can lust after the 560 ft/lbs of torque in the a Viper, but there is also the 600 HP to support it in the higher revs.
For instance, there are lots of fast cars with high HP/low torque ratings (M3, F430, etc.)... but there aren't fast cars with high torque/low HP ratings...
11-24-2008, 10:45 AM
#17
No.
Sure, some cars have boatloads of torque (Viper, ZR1, CTS-V, etc.)... but unless there is the HP ALSO to back it up, the acceleration will be dissappointing... look at any typical high torque/low HP diesel setup.
One can lust after the 560 ft/lbs of torque in the a Viper, but there is also the 600 HP to support it in the higher revs.
For instance, there are lots of fast cars with high HP/low torque ratings (M3, F430, etc.)... but there aren't fast cars with high torque/low HP ratings...
Sure, some cars have boatloads of torque (Viper, ZR1, CTS-V, etc.)... but unless there is the HP ALSO to back it up, the acceleration will be dissappointing... look at any typical high torque/low HP diesel setup.
One can lust after the 560 ft/lbs of torque in the a Viper, but there is also the 600 HP to support it in the higher revs.
For instance, there are lots of fast cars with high HP/low torque ratings (M3, F430, etc.)... but there aren't fast cars with high torque/low HP ratings...
