Pm35's

[sleeper393]

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 ?

[andy65b]

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.

[sleeper393]

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 $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.

[mxfly]

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.

[sleeper393]

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.

[pixel8r]

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.

[iamhe77]

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

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

[Bis-e Bee]

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

[mxfly]

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

[nickcorr]

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...

[iamhe77]

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...

's

[sleeper393]

I would say that majority of vehicle manufacturers run their engines rich as was mentioned , to preserve engine life and appeal to the masses , the good old KISS PROGRAME . keep it simple stupid.