Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi Guys and Gals,

not sure if anyones has seen this yet so I thought I'd post it up but current rumor circulating is Nissan possibly releasing a 450Z.

Apparently would have a tuned 4.5 litre V8, i think that would have to be the VK45DE engine, Rumored to have approximatly 400 odd hp. Also talk of it being all wheel drive, although I'm of the opinion that it would no longer be a Z then.... It would be targeted at the porsche/maserati market.

Here is an article... plenty more floating around the net about this...

I don't like the idea that much, but what does everyone else here think?

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/99294-rumored-450z/
Share on other sites

I think the rumours are put out there to stem the tide of deposits(orders) refunds for the upcoming GTR. Nissan has obviously just woken up, to the fact, that the GTR is great, but ppls aren't gonna wait forever for it. It's has taken too long. I've have since move on to something else and no longer waiting for one, looks --------> Porsche Cayman.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/99294-rumored-450z/#findComment-1810216
Share on other sites

For a mass production car maker, nissan had too many "performance" cars in their line up as it was thus no more Silvia..... having a GT-R will mean that there wont be a 450Z but then again if they dont go the GTR route then there just might be a 450Z for the US market

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/99294-rumored-450z/#findComment-1815292
Share on other sites

Well I can tell you its true that Nissan is releasing a new 350z, I’m not sure if it will be called 450z though.

My source was from one of the car shows yesterday (not sure on the name) they were test driving one of the sports Citron’s and in his final word he said he ‘wouldn’t buy the car because Nissan’s new 350z would come out next year and it would be faster and grip better then the Citron’.

So for him to have that information already then there must be something in the system.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/99294-rumored-450z/#findComment-1815352
Share on other sites

Well I can tell you its true that Nissan is releasing a new 350z, I’m not sure if it will be called 450z though.

My source was from one of the car shows yesterday (not sure on the name) they were test driving one of the sports Citron’s and in his final word he said he ‘wouldn’t buy the car because Nissan’s new 350z would come out next year and it would be faster and grip better then the Citron’.

So for him to have that information already then there must be something in the system.

new Z next yr ? u got to be kidding me ??!! its more like 3yrs.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/99294-rumored-450z/#findComment-1815497
Share on other sites

:werd; scathing what it needs is a turbo, not more cubes and weight over the front wheels. It already has plenty of torque as it is.

I saw the show the other day too I think it was a replay and they were talking about the anniversary Z. I reckon the current one with tweaks has 3-5 years in it yet.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/99294-rumored-450z/#findComment-1815783
Share on other sites

:werd; scathing what it needs is a turbo, not more cubes and weight over the front wheels.  It already has plenty of torque as it is.

It can always use more torque. If I can't coax any more than a slight chirp from the rears when snapping 2nd in the dry (with non-worn street tyres), more torque would be nice.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/99294-rumored-450z/#findComment-1815871
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


  • Latest Posts

    • 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. 
    • 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.
    • 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.
    • 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.
    • 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...