Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I know I know I know, this topic has been covered before, but not in enough detail I reckon. 

I have a crazy idea, grabbing all the turbo bits off the vq25det engine and whacking them on my vq35de. 

Some have said the turbo would be too small, but does that mean it just wouldn't make huge power or would actually just get blown to bits? And would a high flow turbo work better then?

I'm not interested in huge power, just a nice little boost up from stock. 

Seems silly to spend 10k on a turbo kit, when vq25det setups are right there... 

Tell me I'm dreaming 

The 25 turbo would be too small, I have turbos from my vq30dets and even those would be too small for a 35 and I would guess the 30 turbo is bigger than the 25.  You can get high flowed vq30det turbos though that are so called rated for 400hp on a 30.  Could still use the rest of the turbo exhaust piping.

Got a mate selling his HKS turbo kit with Stillen exhaust which should bolt up on a PM35. Nowhere near $10k.

 

VQ25det plenum has very small runner holes compared to the VQ35. Not even close to matching up.

An inline VH45de from a Fuga or something like the below would give you some grunt:

https://www.trademe.co.nz/motors/car-parts-accessories/nissan/engines/listing-2154613139.htm?rsqid=b1d4fc303ef64319b70facb103b34613-001

It's not just the turbo kit. I've done about 4 or 5 of the VQ35DE turbo conversions ranging from 240AWKW to 660RWKW. Your supporting mods will be just as expensive as a HKS turbo kit to do it properly. If you do it yourself you will save big $$$.

 

IMO the best bag for buck on the street if you want approx 200RWK on a VQ35DE is a firstly a very well sorted and flowing exhaust with H/F CAT's(use Z34 headers and cat's), a Z33 manual diff(3.538) for those of you with the PM35 only as the PNM is already 3.538, fuel pump and good catch can setup. With those mods you should be able to get 180-190RWKW with good plug and play ECU like a LINK.

If you want more for a street car a supercharger is your next best bet. The supporting mods to make it work well and get you reliability. power will be about 220 - 240RWK.

Once you go turbo its a major game changer as everything needs to be adapted especially if your in the PNM35.

P.S. I am only talking figures with 98 Octane fuel for the boosted setups as E85 is another setup and power change. IMO is you have $20K put an LSA in it and say goodbye

 

7 hours ago, NicPM35 said:

Latest plan: give wife the car and just buy a faster car. Problem solved. 

Good idea. I was going to suggest selling it and getting the best RS6 you could afford.

1 minute ago, KiwiRS4T said:

Good idea. I was going to suggest selling it and getting the best RS6 you could afford.

Oof $$$$. I'm looking at importing a jzx110, still not the best bang for buck, but hard to beat a nice 4 door 1jz!

2 hours ago, NicPM35 said:

Oof $$$$. I'm looking at importing a jzx110, still not the best bang for buck, but hard to beat a nice 4 door 1jz!

Yep I had a nice Cressida 2.8  many years ago. I was just about to change my Skoda Superb 2.7 for an Audi Allroad 2.7TT when I got to the bit where it said to service the turbos first remove the engine so for now I have settled for a boring but reliable (almost beige) 2005 Camry V6

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

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...