Jump to content
SAU Community

370z

Mr_GaZZa

By Mr_GaZZa,
in General Automotive Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

_K1NGTR_ Proficient

_K1NGTR_

Posted
Posted

For N/A it has a bit of power quiet impressive i can see this being the 240z of the future.... Does anyone know the max power you can get from a 350z? As in Extractors, High flow cat and a good exhaust and tune anyone here know anyone?

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/246441-370z/page/2/#findComment-4288500
Share on other sites
scathing Grand Master

scathing

Posted
Posted (edited)
For N/A it has a bit of power quiet impressive i can see this being the 240z of the future.... Does anyone know the max power you can get from a 350z? As in Extractors, High flow cat and a good exhaust and tune anyone here know anyone?

For a 2003-2005 model with the 206kW engine, on a good day you'll see around 180rwkW (depending on the dyno).

Mine pulled 195rwkW on CRD's dyno here in Sydney with practically the mods you've listed, but on APS' dyno in Melbourne I'd be lucky to see 180rwkW. When my car was making 185rwkW on CRD's dyno, it was pulling around 170rwkW at APS.

I've seen stock V35s pull higher numbers than stock Z33s, but at the same time it's a case of "different dynos, different operators" so it's hard to say.

The engine delivers power like a passenger car. As you can see, my torque curve is flat as a tack. It's great in the midrange, but until you do all those breathing mods it'll feel a bit choked up top. It depends on what you want with the car.

I've driven a 350Z with a 221kW engine and it's far nicer. The engine revs cleanly all the way to the limiter stock, where a 206kW engine will start to strain from around 1000-1500RPM from redline. The loss of 10Nm in the midrange can barely be felt, but how much smoother it feels in the top third of the rev range makes it a much nicer experience.

Edited by scathing
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/246441-370z/page/2/#findComment-4288693
Share on other sites
GT500_Racer Enthusiast

GT500_Racer

Posted
Posted

With recent times (years 2002 onwards), would it be fair to assume that the ADM models will be just as powerful as JDM, factoring in thier higher fuel octanes ect..? I know that with the last crop of imports by Nissan Aust, eg 200sx, they have always been detuned for various reason, redering them less potent than the cars that are in the same price bracket. As most will know, the GTR all will have same power output reguardless of country being sold at, but will this apply to all Nissans globally?

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/246441-370z/page/2/#findComment-4288845
Share on other sites
_K1NGTR_ Proficient

_K1NGTR_

Posted
Posted
For a 2003-2005 model with the 206kW engine, on a good day you'll see around 180rwkW (depending on the dyno).

Mine pulled 195rwkW on CRD's dyno here in Sydney with practically the mods you've listed, but on APS' dyno in Melbourne I'd be lucky to see 180rwkW. When my car was making 185rwkW on CRD's dyno, it was pulling around 170rwkW at APS.

I've seen stock V35s pull higher numbers than stock Z33s, but at the same time it's a case of "different dynos, different operators" so it's hard to say.

The engine delivers power like a passenger car. As you can see, my torque curve is flat as a tack. It's great in the midrange, but until you do all those breathing mods it'll feel a bit choked up top. It depends on what you want with the car.

I've driven a 350Z with a 221kW engine and it's far nicer. The engine revs cleanly all the way to the limiter stock, where a 206kW engine will start to strain from around 1000-1500RPM from redline. The loss of 10Nm in the midrange can barely be felt, but how much smoother it feels in the top third of the rev range makes it a much nicer experience.

yea well how was your tune you said the 221 was good to drive but overall was it good to drive with around 180ish kw?

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/246441-370z/page/2/#findComment-4288883
Share on other sites
scathing Grand Master

scathing

Posted
Posted (edited)
yea well how was your tune you said the 221

The tune was checked by a few different outfits. CRD did it, APS has checked it, and I've put the car on the rollers at Unigroup and Autotech here in Sydney and they haven't seen any problems with it.

If I wanted a little more power I should put the factory airbox back on the car and fit a K&N drop-in filter. The OEM airbox is a really good design, and aftermarket intakes generally kill power. I just like the noise of it. :thumbsup:

was it good to drive with around 180ish kw?

Yeah, it's going OK. The car makes a proper sports car noise at high RPM but is still really quiet at low RPM. With all the mods I've run a G-Tech measured 13.9 ET on regular street tyres on....erm......a private road in the middle of nowhere :huh: That road wasn't entirely flat so it's not 100% indicative, but then if I did a proper launch on a properly grippy surface with heated tyres it should even out.

Edited by scathing
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/246441-370z/page/2/#findComment-4289324
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • GTSBoy
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • Kinkstaah
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By Kinkstaah · Posted

      I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • GTSBoy
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • Kinkstaah
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By Kinkstaah · Posted

      God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
    • GTSBoy
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
×
×
  • Create New...