Duy

Our VQ engine is very nice but I believe many would agree with me that it does NOT respond too well to mods. The only thing that is confirmed is that about 80% (I think this was the official percentage) of the engine is new... now to the point of the thread... Does anyone have any knowledge, info, or educated guess, even opinions on the 2nd Gen G35 engine and how well it respond to modding? I know very little about engines but comparing the current 3.5 liter to the new 3.5, something special had to be done to produce 300 + hp. I just hope the next generation of VQs wont need $2000+ in mods for 15whp (sarcasism)

jl9618

I think thats what everyone is waiting for... information. So far Nissan has been very tight lipped regarding the new engine. It's been rumored to have displacement increased to 3.7 liters. Until they release specs on the engine and then the car itself, I think that any info regarding modability is purely speculation at best.

asianautica

It's pretty hard to get 100HP/L out of a N/A car without somekind of variable valve lift, like VTEC, VVTL-i, Neo-VVL. So I'm not holding my breath for a very modable engine. Unless you go F/I, which is a whole different can of worms.

jdm_inspire

Won't the 2nd gen engine still be a VQ? If it's in line with the sedan, then the engineers will most likely up the displacement to improve HP (as some have mentioned). Increasing HP (and most likely keeping compression to about the same) will not make the car any more mod friendly than it is right now.

derek

Here's my speculation and observations:

"IMHO:"

VTEC et al is commonplace for these engines today, the bigger deal being when it's on the suck and the blow side of things. 100 hp/L is, without exception, achieved with rpm for NA. Cases in point: 8K/9K S2K engines, 8K M3 engine, 8K GT3 engine... 100 hp/L currently occuring around 7800 rpm. New G, if it gets a 7.5K redline, should be just under that, therefore from a 3.5, expect somewhere around 330 hp, IF they don't detune it for model lifecycle planning purposes. Metals will necessarily change- sodium filled Ti valves is my guess for spinning those kinds of numbers. Rods will change too, I'm guessing.
Judging by the fact that the German mfgs now have it either on the showroom floor, or soon will (335 Coupe), and the fact that Lexus (IS) and Mazda (CX7) have as well, my hunch is that Nissan will have no choice but to follow the DI, or Direct Injection route for our next round of Gs. If not, it's not far off, and may be part of that life cycle plan as well. This won't provide huge power gains on top (expect none actually), but what it will do is expand the envelop, offering more torque and power from 2 to 6K, and thus improving street driveability (I find the sacrifice in torque made to get the extra 20hp between my 03 and 05 has meant that I must work harder to keep the car in the fat part of the powerband).

So to sum up:

500 rpm higher redline necessitating the use of new component metals/materials and direct injection, resulting in an engine providing a broader/flatter spread of torque, and peak hp around 330, for the 6MT coupe (less in the sedan perhaps for corporate political correctness, at least to begin). If it doesn't happen all at once, expect it over the life of the upcoming generation of G.

I suggest that if this isn't the case, then the sport luxury market will have just been handed back to BMW, with the Asian share of that market being handed to Lexus. These new cars will be pivotal for Infiniti. Pheonix from the ashes, the first Gs put the company back on the map; whether it was a "one-off", or the start of something meaningful, will soon be decided.

USANSealKYoon

iTrader: (1)

s2000 gets 60hp/L and that is flywheel. it gets around 50/L whp

derek

original S2K 9K redline, 240 hp, 2L engine.

Specs from the Honda website for the current engine:

"2.2L 16-Valve DOHC VTEC™Aluminum Alloy 4-Cylinder Engine with Fibre Reinforced Cylinder Walls •

Displacement (cc) 2157

Horsepower @ rpm (SAE net Rev 8/04)* 237@7800"

And for the Civic Si, again from the website:

"Displacement 1998cc

Horsepower @ rpm (SAE net Rev 8/04)* 197@7800"

RBull

iTrader: (1)

I was at the track past two days. The guy parked next to me had a BMW Z3 M. It has a 3.2 litre and 315 hp or 98.4/100 litres.

binar

iTrader: (2)

In a very simplistic way...
Displacement = Torque
RPM = Horsepower
The higher you can rev the little bastard the more HP you have.

vasqo

+10

Crazi4Speed

Who gives a rats @$$ about hp/l its such a retarded way at looking @ the engine..

I think we should get bigger displacement with cylinder shutoff and automatic 1->4 shift skip, this will save gas, give us more tourque and better hp... thats what we want...

asianautica

HP and TQ are directly related to each other. So what you said doesn't make any sense at all. HP increase = TQ increase. RPM = the speed of the engine. Only reason to increase red line is if the car can breath at the higher RPM and the internal can handle the speed.

derek

Funny, it may be what "you" want, but many would just want less pounds per horsepower. Lotus Elise customers are not disappointed with the "measely" 190 hp available to them? hp/L is the easiest way to achieve target pounds/hp. Performance is all about pounds per hp. Ask BMW why they employed TT, rather than two more cyls for the upcoming 335i. Weight. Why have they devised a valvetrain without a cam and lifters?- specific output across the entire rev range, and future weight reduction potential (this technology has not yet been put into production, but has been successfully developed). Why Porsche has stayed with 6 cyl powerplants? Weight. Why Chev keeps using pushrods? Weight.
Why is everyone moving to DI? Increase specific output thru rpm/FI, while maintaining torque across the powerband, while maintaining engine weight. Finally, why Mazda continues to develop a crazy idea some Wankel guy came up with- specific output; wieght.

You want displacement? Porsche has gone on record as stating that they feel they cannot punch out their 6 cyl beyond 4 litres. If they go to an 8 cyl, more weight- bad.

You can get your wish as stated, by buying an Impala SS. Good luck with that.

Educate yourself, before calling someone else retarded, please.


Cheers,
D

vt_maverick

iTrader: (1)

Not exactly. When Nissan/Infiniti went to the new rev-up engine, HP increased from 280 to 298 (6MT coupe), while TQ went down to 260 from 270. If you take a look at a dyno, you should notice that while HP and TQ intersect somewhere on the graph, there comes a point at which increasing HP results in decreased TQ.

So maybe it's more fair to say that they are indirectly related.

asianautica

hp= torque x rpm / 5252.
So as RPM increase, it can offset the slight torque drop off. But if tq drop off too much, that's when HP start to decrease, which is usually where the redline is. That's why on the dyno sheet, it always crosses @ 5252RPM.

So, your example of the Rev-up vs non revup engine is easily explained, they tuned the engine in a way where although it peak at 10 ft-lb less, it stay near peak for longer. which if you plug in the equation, you'll see why the new engine make 298HP instead of 280HP.