Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

performance wise would the PM35 stag , keep up with the nm series turbo stag , i know power delivery would be different , but how much so ? :(

I guess as it is the VQ35DE it would have performance similar to a V35 but with a heavier body.

From what I have read the V35 coupe is doing about a 6.7-6.9 0-100 and the M35 is meant to be about 6.5 - 6.7 0-100.

So I would imagine it would be a tad slower than the Vq25DET.

I also saw today that the 2WD version of the PM35 has a slightly higher diff ration than that of the 4WD version. I guess this is because it would be putting a little more power to the driving wheels (2 only) than the 4WD equivalent.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/282150-pm35s/#findComment-4751807
Share on other sites

I guess as it is the VQ35DE it would have performance similar to a V35 but with a heavier body.

From what I have read the V35 coupe is doing about a 6.7-6.9 0-100 and the M35 is meant to be about 6.5 - 6.7 0-100.

So I would imagine it would be a tad slower than the Vq25DET.

I also saw today that the 2WD version of the PM35 has a slightly higher diff ration than that of the 4WD version. I guess this is because it would be putting a little more power to the driving wheels (2 only) than the 4WD equivalent.

cheers, that rests my case . stick with the nm35 , unless i can come up with the money to turbo the pm35 :( $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/282150-pm35s/#findComment-4752802
Share on other sites

Don't bag a PM35 unless you've driven one. I initially had my doubts as well but after driving one for 20 minutes, I was truly hooked.

Imo I reckon a PM35 2WD will go as good, if not better than a 4WD NM35. The gearbox is also improved as well in the later models so manual shifting feels a lot more crisp and responds better than the older NM35's.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/282150-pm35s/#findComment-4752867
Share on other sites

Don't bag a PM35 unless you've driven one. I initially had my doubts as well but after driving one for 20 minutes, I was truly hooked.

Imo I reckon a PM35 2WD will go as good, if not better than a 4WD NM35. The gearbox is also improved as well in the later models so manual shifting feels a lot more crisp and responds better than the older NM35's.

i'd love the current version , but i'd like awd, and i think the awd pm35 might be a bit sluggish, with the extra weight , but then again haven't driven so im being ignorant, might have to see if i can organise a side by side driving test , once compliance is finished with the pm35.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/282150-pm35s/#findComment-4752950
Share on other sites

The power delivery would be completely different. The NM35 has higher PEAK power and torque but I'd be willing to bet the PM35 has significantly more power and torque up to say 2200-ish rpm, possibly higher.

Dont just look at the power figures on paper, thats just the maximums. If they could quote you "average" torque figures, or if you could get hold of a dyno graph of each (showing power and torque), that might make it easier to compare.

This means that driving around town the PM35 would have a fair amount of get-up-and-go, more so than the turbo model. One extra Litre ought to make quite a difference to low-end torque.

The power delivery would be much more linear in the PM35. but no turbo, no fun - I say, although if you're not into turbos then this isn't likely to matter one bit.

The PM35 would also be better on fuel too. There are many things in its favour...but I'd miss the turbo. :P

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/282150-pm35s/#findComment-4753128
Share on other sites

The PM35 would also be better on fuel too. There are many things in its favour...but I'd miss the turbo. :P

You would think so... Official numbers state that the VQ35DE powered PM35 is worse on fuel than the VQ25DET powered NM35.

PM35 (VQ35DE) - 8.2km/L = 12.1L/100kms

NM35 (VQ25DET) - 8.9km/L = 11.1L/100kms

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/282150-pm35s/#findComment-4753143
Share on other sites

You would think so... Official numbers state that the VQ35DE powered PM35 is worse on fuel than the VQ25DET powered NM35.

PM35 (VQ35DE) - 8.2km/L = 12.1L/100kms

NM35 (VQ25DET) - 8.9km/L = 11.1L/100kms

That's could just be the Nissan factory tunes getting worse and worse!

Most people I've spoken to who have been dynoing Nissan vehicles (including imports) have said most of the models just run way too rich, they mainly put it down to bad tuning. Who know's, maybe the fuel companies have a handshake agreement with Nissan :down:

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/282150-pm35s/#findComment-4753587
Share on other sites

That's could just be the Nissan factory tunes getting worse and worse!

Most people I've spoken to who have been dynoing Nissan vehicles (including imports) have said most of the models just run way too rich, they mainly put it down to bad tuning. Who know's, maybe the fuel companies have a handshake agreement with Nissan ;)

So a tuner thinks that Nissan make a bad tune for a car they build from the ground up, meaning the tuner can do better?

Being that Nissan program the ECU from scratch to have the car appeal to wide audience (more sales), with high reliability...

That is probably not a statement the tuner can back up.

Having said that, I will be in line (eventually) to have my ECU re-mapped.

It's not really bad tuning. The cars run rich so that it reduces the chances of an engine failure.
:)

That's what I heard as well.. Better to be too rich and use a bit more fuel than the lean out and grenade the engine...

:stupid: 's

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/282150-pm35s/#findComment-4754330
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


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Yup. You can get creative and make a sort of "bracket" with cable ties. Put 2 around the sender with a third passing underneath them strapped down against the sender. Then that third one is able to be passed through some hole at right angles to the orientation of the sender. Or some variation on the theme. Yes.... ummm, with caveats? I mean, the sender is BSP and you would likely have AN stuff on the hose, so yes, there would be the adapter you mention. But the block end will either be 1/8 NPT if that thread is still OK in there, or you can drill and tap it out to 1/4 BSP or NPT and use appropriate adapter there. As it stands, your mention of 1/8 BSPT male seems... wrong for the 1/8 NPT female it has to go into. The hose will be better, because even with the bush, the mass of the sender will be "hanging" off a hard threaded connection and will add some stress/strain to that. It might fail in the future. The hose eliminates almost all such risk - but adds in several more threaded connections to leak from! It really should be tapered, but it looks very long in that photo with no taper visible. If you have it in hand you should be able to see if it tapered or not. There technically is no possibility of a mechanical seal with a parallel male in a parallel female, so it is hard to believe that it is parallel male, but weirder things have happened. Maybe it's meant to seat on some surface when screwed in on the original installation? Anyway, at that thread size, parallel in parallel, with tape and goop, will seal just fine.
    • How do you propose I cable tie this: To something securely? Is it really just a case of finding a couple of holes and ziptying it there so it never goes flying or starts dangling around, more or less? Then run a 1/8 BSP Female to [hose adapter of choice?/AN?] and then the opposing fitting at the bush-into-oil-block end? being the hose-into-realistically likely a 1/8 BSPT male) Is this going to provide any real benefit over using a stainless/steel 1/4 to 1/8 BSPT reducing bush? I am making the assumption the OEM sender is BSPT not BSPP/BSP
    • I fashioned a ramp out of a couple of pieces of 140x35 lumber, to get the bumper up slightly, and then one of these is what I use
    • I wouldn't worry about dissimilar metal corrosion, should you just buy/make a steel replacement. There will be thread tape and sealant compound between the metals. The few little spots where they touch each other will be deep inside the joint, unable to get wet. And the alloy block is much much larger than a small steel fitting, so there is plenty of "sacrificial" capacity there. Any bush you put in there will be dissimilar anyway. Either steel or brass. Maybe stainless. All of them are different to the other parts in the chain. But what I said above still applies.
    • You are all good then, I didn't realise the port was in a part you can (have!) remove. Just pull the broken part out, clean it and the threads should be fine. Yes, the whole point about remote mounting is it takes almost all of the vibration out via the flexible hose. You just need a convenient chassis point and a cable tie or 3.
×
×
  • Create New...