Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Yes that particular VQ motor may have come out in 1994 BUT it was not a VQ35DE. You are comparing apples to oranges.

The VQ35DE came out in 2001 and no earlier. Just because they're VQ motors does not make them similar in any way other than the 6 pots.

And I don't forsee 6pot motors getting higher in capacity. More likely 4 pot turbos or big litre 4's, economy will be a design factor no doubt

I would respectfully disagree, the VQ specifies much more than '6 cylinders', it is the series of engine, and I would argue that the VQ35 shares many similarities to the VQ40, VQ30, VQ25 and VQ20, in the same way the RB series of engines are all quite similar, there are a lot of relativly minor changes in the life of the VQ, turbo chargers, variable valve timing, direct injection, different bore/stroke/piston sizes (and therefore capacities), external changes to suit vehicle mounting positions, etc. Any major changes to the design of the engine would result in a different series name, for example, the VR engines used in the GT-R are based on the VQ, but due to the number of changes, they specified a new series.

The same thing occured in the early 1990s with the VG engine, Nissan produced the VE engine for the USA J30 Maxima, it was essentially a VG block with a chain driven twin cam head specifically built to fit in the Maxima, but because the difference were significant, they re-labled it a VE.

If the VQ35DE was an all new design/build, it would not carry the VQ series label.

This is the next generation Infiniti / Skyline codenamed the V37 (surprise surprise). Basically all the writing is about how Nissan and Mercedes will now be in co-operation to supply engines to eachother as already discussed in this thread. So basically, they will have the following motors available in their cars:

- 3.5L V6 turbo petrol

- 2.5L V6 hybrid

- 3.0L V6 turbo diesel

- 5.5L V8 petrol

So I think the VQ37VHR is history, to be replaced by the 3.5L V6 running a small turbo. Then they have the hybrid which will basically produce as much power as the 3.5L V6 turbo, and MB will provide the 3.0L V6 turbo diesel and 5.5L V8.

This is the information I have collated, not 100% guaranteed as it's still mostly in development but that's how I understand all of it. They will retain the VQ engine series in everything but the V8, which is the MB motor. I'm guessing the V8 will either be an Infiniti Performance Line (IPL) car, and some of the motors will go in the G series, and others in the M series.

If anyone else can confirm/deny this information, please do so. There's a lot of information collated from different sources, but that's my understanding!

new+Nissan+Skyline+%2528Infiniti+G%2529+%25E6%2597%25A5%25E7%2594%25A3%25E3%2582%25B9%25E3%2582%25AB%25E3%2582%25A4%25E3%2583%25A9%25E3%2582%25A4%25E3%2583%25B3+2013+1.jpg

new+Nissan+Skyline+%2528Infiniti+G%2529+%25E6%2597%25A5%25E7%2594%25A3%25E3%2582%25B9%25E3%2582%25AB%25E3%2582%25A4%25E3%2583%25A9%25E3%2582%25A4%25E3%2583%25B3+2013+2.jpg

Infiniti-102.jpg

infiniti-G-front-three-quarters.jpg

OK guys, done some further investigating, taken directly from the magazine I posted yesterday. The power figures should be as follows:

3.0L V6 diesel - 211HP (confirmed in article)

5.5L V8 petrol - 387HP (confirmed in article)

"V6 petrol" - 272HP (confirmed in article, no idea what motor size though)

Note the last one, I believe this is ANOTHER motor produced by Mercedes Benz, best answer I can come up with is it seems likely they are releasing DIFFERENT motors in the US/Europe as Infiniti, then different motors in Japan as Nissan. That is what the article is about - sharing motors between MB and Nissan, I wish I could translate the entire article, would provide a lot more details but I can only make out certain parts of it. And my Japanese is not good to begin with, anyone who could translate it would be able to confirm everything I have said.

But there is a rumor I read that the "main" V6 (which is the one sold by Nissan in Japan, who knows if it will make the US/Europe) should be producing around 335HP, and it may be called a VQ35VHR (as opposed to the V36 which was originally released as a VQ35HR, then VQ37VHR in later models). Again, whether they will have different power outputs per country (the V36 Infiniti sold in the US produces less power than the V36 Nissan sold in Japan, same motor but different air filter/system to get around some strict air pollution regulations in the US market), or whether the sedan/coupe will have different power figures OR different motors available, who knows. From what I understand, Carlos Ghosn (CEO of Nissan) has stated that they want to collaborate with MB to develop motors/technology, but whether that is only for the Infiniti (US/Europe) or includes Nissan (Japan), I'm unsure.

So to sum things up, the Infiniti US/Europe will most likely get their own motors (the 3 mentioned above), while Nissan Japan will have their own or a mix of the motors. Hope this helps clear things up a bit, I'm still not 100% set on the details, but that's how I understand it. For anyone really interested, there is an article I found called Nissan Skyline Episode 13: The Legacy Continues - helped confirm some details for me and may explain the situation a little better.

387hp from a 5.5 V8?

Merc detuned? glare.gif

Yep, they have confirmed it's an AMG 5.5L V8 de-tuned to run less power. Maybe they feel the chassis can handle only so much power, or a gentleman's agreement as MB wants to protect their C63 AMG from being overtaken by a dirty Nissan/Infiniti ;)

i cant see them changing too much internally, if anything at all. that will just make production take longer and more parts to manufacture. they may change intake and exhaust, and then tuning. its cheaper to produce one engine and tune it down with ECU changes

It's actually pretty funny with the V8, the old AMG 5.6L V8 from 1986 was putting out 360HP, but the new AMG 5.5L V8 (naturally aspirated, not the twin turbo monster) now puts out 420HP, and the NA motor is actually a DE-TUNED version of the twin-turbo variant. So they're going to de-tune a motor that is already de-tuned? Doesn't make sense to me. Although Nissan has a history of producing motors with de-tuned power per model, ie. the 2006 Maxima had a 175kW VQ35DE, same motor that went into the 350Z and Murano but they both had 195kW. But then in 2009 with the new Maxima the power went up to 195kW, so who knows what they are doing. And again, they did the same thing with Infiniti in the US to get around strict air regulations, slightly de-tuning the V36 there by restricting the air flow system.

Again, we have to remember these power figures I produced are for Infiniti in the US/Europe, and eventually here when it goes on sale in late 2012. It's not confirmed if these are the power figures and motors for Japan. As I said the other day, the "main" V6 the Japanese V37 Skyline should come with is going to have 335HP already with a single turbo 3.5L V6, so I see little point in them releasing a 360HP naturally aspirated V8 when the V6 will basically be on par with the V8 already when taking engine weight into consideration. Why would you bother buying the V8 when you could buy the V6 and just bolt on a bigger turbo and get more power anyway? Does not make sense.

Another thing I will point out, the existing Nissan Fuga (the next model up from the Skyline in Japan) is sold in the US/Europe as the Infiniti M37 (3.7L V6, same motor) then the next spec up is the M56 with a 5.6L V8 that puts down 420HP already, so why would they put in a motor with less power to supersede it? Makes no sense to me, I find it very unlikely they are going to go backwards. I would say they are going to pick and choose specific motors in different markets, like they did with the Maxima and Murano/350Z here years back. These motors mentioned above are the NEW motors to be brought in and sold, doesn't say anything about deleting the old motors, so they may have different variants of V6's and V8's available. There have been rumours for ages in Japan that since Nissan dropped their last V8 years ago and as they now only sell V6's as their premium models, they are looking to make something big this time. I would agree, they are going to come back with something more powerful. They always do.

a few reasons they will probably do that, in no particular order:

1. economy

2. torque may be higher

3. euro emission standards

4. car may be lighter, thus needing less power and torque to move it

5. less power means less of a load on the engine, thus they can make it cheaper

6. people probably wont put a bigger turbo on the V6 and prefer owning a V8

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

    • Thanks folks - I've saved a few links and I'll have to think of potential cable/adapters/buying fittings. First step will be seeing if I can turn the curren abortion of a port into something usable, then get all BSPT'y on it. I did attempt to look at the OEM sender male end to see if it IS tapered because as mentioned you should be able to tell by looking at it... well, I don't know if I can. If I had to guess it looks like *maybe* 0.25 of a mm skinnier at the bottom of the thread compared to where the thread starts. So if it is tapered it's pretty slight - Or all the examples of BSPT vs BSPP are exaggerated for effect in their taper size.
    • Have a look at that (shitty) pic I posted. You can see AN -4 braided line coming to a -4 to 1/8 BSPT adapter, into a 1/8 BSPT T piece. The Haltech pressure sender is screwed into the long arm of the sender and factory sender (pre your pic) into the T side. You can also see the cable tie holding the whole contraption in place. Is it better than mounting the sender direct to your engine fitting......yes because it removes that vibration as the engine revs out 50 times every lap and that factory sender is pretty big. Is it necessary for you......well I've got no idea, I just don't like something important failing twice so over-engineer it to the moon!
    • 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
×
×
  • Create New...