"I don't know Karate, but I do know Karazy and I will use it!" lol

:rofl2:

The one thing you are forgetting is that typically an NA motor, especially a built NA motor, designed to rev really high has a high compression ratio. If it doesn't make the power you want you can't just 'slap' turbos on. High compression and boost aren't a good combination. You could put turbos on but wouldn't be able to run much boost. a built NA motor is different than a 'built' motor for FI.

well, skeeterbop has kinda hit the nail on the head with the first reply, the whole point here is no ones done it. yes it will be expensive, and it might not be for everyone. but all results are just based on speculation right now. and as for the TT SC claims i made, i have a friend that was in guam with me, had a white 370 base with a stage 2 GTM TT, and it DID NOT make claimed power.... not even close, not to mention other issues like overheating and a host of other annoying things. and i dont know how many "i bought a SC and im dissapointed" threads ive seen in the past 3 years all over the internet. TT.... not so much, but ive heard a TON of people bitching about there SC build. Your right, just as many are satisfied. Yes theres a lot of perfect builds out there that do exactly as intended. but you still keep missing the point to all this.

personally i drive my car EVERY DAY "except winter" and i plan to do so until the wheels fall off. dont even start a bitch fest about gas and all that... i dont care. point is, if your one of the people who blindly slapped on a TT or SC on a STOCK car your running a huge risk of shaving off years of its life and reliability. thats the difference between building a engine thats MADE to take the abuse opposed to forcing a stock engine to perform outside its normal specifications.

i can bet, ten years from now all these 500-600 hp TT 370s will all have to have rebuilt engines, transmissions and all kinds of other problems. lucky if it even hits 150k miles without blowing up. especially if you beat on it, and thats what happens 99% of the time dont lie. short term reliability has been rock solid so far i will give you that, but this engine is NOT designed for that and it will fail.... mark my words. building an engine up is by far not a cure all to that but it most definitely makes it far less likely to be a problem since its BUILT TO DO IT.

I dont feel like dealing with a blown engine 8 years from now when the car has half of its miles it could have. this is my daily driver, and some day i plan on passing it on to my son or daughter as our generations "muscle car" just like my dad did with me with a matador red with white stripe 1971 AMC javelin SST 401 fully restored. so i would rather not give it to them in useless pieces lol.

a built NA engine is generally going to be less reliable than a bolt-on FI engine. High performance NA builds mean constant high compression and an aggressive valvetrain. Bolt on boost is generally very reliable, provided the tune is decent.


A proper, reliable build would require an incredible amount of R&D. The parts just aren't available for the VQ, and neither is the info.

Your better option in that case is certainly not an NA build then.






In seriousness, there are forums dedicated to cars that came with the VQ35. It is worth taking a look to see what people have done with NA builds. The VQ series has a pretty tough time being taken to high levels of NA power, no matter what you do with the engine. There are a couple of reasons for it, mostly related to parts availability and flow issues. There are quite a few good resources out there, and Nissan has a couple of whitepapers available as well that discuss engineering tradeoffs that were made for the DE (and were kept in play for the VHR)

I feel its possible and "tuning" vvel is not nessesary, general timing and AFR should be fine. don't forget higher compression pistions. As for fuel, IDK if it will be possible on 93 octane but as for the theory of making approximatly 500whp, I would'nt look past it.

http://www.the370z.com/forced-induct...ile-stone.html

^^^vvel not tuned/broken....whatever you want to call it

pulleys, flywheel, 4.5 stroker kit, ported heads, oversized valves, stronger head studs the list goes on I think it could happen.

3.7= .62L per cylinder

4.5= .75L per cylinder

the 300zx TT made 300 HP (N/A 220HP)

nissan made the 370z N/A 332HP

So theoretically .7L increase made the new Z 112HP, so a .8 increase should net a total of approximatly 440HP from the 4.5 stroker kit alone. higher compression pistons, ported heads, flywheel, pullies, oversized valves, larger intake cams........etc etc etc..... COULD be possible chii be ready for a headache bud.

Turbos work by cramming more air into the engine. You are dealing with an entirely different animal when you have FI. NA, it's a massive struggle to get to 100hp/l in many cars. When you are running 45 psi of boost on an FJ, you are dealing with an engine that can mix air and fuel like a 10L engine:eek:

Nothing has really changed since the old days. If you know old stuff, you know new stuff.
I think most people's negative reactions have been related to a perceived attitude, but there are plenty willing to share their knowledge if it is asked for politely (I will share whether you ask politely or not:p_

If you are down to do the work, get out and do it. No one on here has done it, no one here can pass you any advice. Get 'er done, then come spread the knowledge. I'll check out the build thread if there is one.

I'm going to go find these white papers you mention, I'm curious to see what they say. If you already have links or might be able to point me in the right direction that would be awesome. I'm off to google for a bit!

Found them, here is a link to my search: VQ35
Unfortunately, you will have to buy them to view them :(

Getting said tech paper so I can read it :D

Not really what I was hoping it would be, but one thing to note is that from ~4k rpm (this is for the VQ35 and was written in 2002) the engine's VE is 100% and stays at or above 100% until 6400rpm. So the efficiency of the intake/exhaust in the upper RPM appears to be very good, although I'm not sure what an average efficiency would be.

They did put a lot of work into decreasing NVH though.

Well as the plan sits right now I got out of the navy as some of you know, and I've yet to find a job. Unemployment goes away in dec, and I don't get into the army at the EARLIEST next may. So right now I'm really struggling to keep the car. Ive over 18k invested in the car already "payments and extra work" and still owe 29 flat and with this economy no one will pay me what I owe so selling it's to much of a hit. Potty story aside, the moment I get into the army almost every cent I make will be put toward massive overpayments on the car, once paid for in a few months I'm immediately going to start this build. First getting a pre built 4.5L stroker from gtm and then each other part respectively. I'm estimating roughly 28k in the motor w/o forced induction. All I have to do is make my car payments somehow for another few months and my plan will come to fruition and all of you will have plenty of new data points to argue about later lol. Sorry for comming accross like an ***, but the job situations had me on edge.... As well as my fiancé just left.... So I'm kinda hitting some hard times right now. Putting hope that all this will work out is the only this that keeps me going right now.

Being a veteran and not being able to get a job sounds extremely frustrating. Knowing what I do, all special warfare/forces personel must score well above average on their asfaq test. Going off of this alone your a smart guy, work through these troubles and you'll come out on top. don't let the fiance thing bring you down bro, you have a life to live and a career to find. work your way through this and you'll come out on top as a substantially stronger man. That being said I'm looking forward to the all motor build :tup:

thank you for serving chii and best wishes to you. even if its not said, its greatly appreciated.

hey chii pm'd you with a job lead, good luck bro!

Passing on a car is great, though add boost or even a built NA motor will not be the determining factor in if it will survive the ages. How you treat the car and support it throughout these years will, I have seen 350z motors with stock blocks go for over 100k miles boosted making 450whp (DE motor which was good for that motor). They tear the motor down and it still looks great, why? Because the owner takes care of the car, from pre-track work to post-track, to proper maintenance to understanding the motor.

You really need to take some time to read more from this forum and my350z, a lot of great information on the VQ motor and what it is capable of.

^^^my dad gots a 350z stock with 178000 running mobil 1 and hasn't had a catasrope yet! Just sayin....

Good luck with a N/A build. I, for one, am quite impressed with the factory output of this engine. Considering it passes emissions and has a warranty is even better still. I looked up a '68 Charger with 426 Hemi: 0-60 in 5.3 sec, 1/4 mile in 13.8 sec @ 105mph. I ran a 13.8 sec @ 102mpg in my girlfriends 370 with a 7AT. The numbers of the Z look as good with much less engine, and it can rail through the mountains. BTW, I love American muscle.

Remember, in a perfect, frictionless universe you have to burn twice the fuel to make twice the power. To burn twice the fuel, you have to ingest twice the air. If you add 10% to the displacement, you still have 90% to go. 10% better VE? That will require more extensive headwork after a displacement increase due to larger cylinders pulling air through the same number of ports. Ok... If you get that, you are getting closer. Of course, variable valve systems are not necessarily an enemy... unless peak HP is all you are after. They give you good VE at low RPM and good VE at high RPM. Are you planning on a custom stroke? If so, is that with a custom crank (will it fit?) or by shortening the rods (making the rod ratio worse is detrimental to engine life.). 15% higher RPM? Rods really don't like tensile loads. They are typically many times stronger under compression. Can it be done? Perhaps. Will anything be left of the engine you started with? Probably not.

From somebody that was building imports before imports were cool, I'm impressed with what these engines can do. Back in the day, we had 1.3L rotaries with 140HP and we were hot stuff. We could port them and squeeze them to 170 by porting and increasing VE, never pass emissions, killed mileage, and lost low end power. Custom peripheral port engines were close to $10k. So we did that. Made almost 300hp, wouldn't idle under 1300RPM and made power 6500 to 10,000 RPM. Forget A/C, power steering, picking up a woman, and getting to work on time because it was reliable. The car was clearly a dude magnet. Then we found turbos.

The same 1.3L displacement that once made 140FWHP now makes 425RWHP in my RX7. FI CAN double or triple the HP of an engine of a certain displacement. While I'm another person giving you an answer you don't want to hear, FI is certainly the easiest way to make reliable power. In our hypothetical perfect world, 15lbs of boost doubles the VE of the engine... doubling the power.

Sure, we are bolting turbos and superchargers on bone stock engines... or built engines. Why is that necessarily a bad thing? Many turbo engines run lower compression, so if you want to do it "right" toss a set of low comp pistons in. Since rods are stronger under compression, the prefer the additional stress of FI over the tensile loads of RPM. If you go FI and don't have a detonation issue, it's not overheating (we ARE making more power than stock, so we have to reject more heat... this is the case with NA or FI power), cranks every time, acts like a civilized vehicle when not on boost, and has a/c what is the problem?

Personally, I love the sound of turbos whistling and wastegates opening. Even in the American muscle world, when you want BIG power, you go FI.

How about a swap with the VR38DETT, not much of a displacement bump, but it was designed by Nissan with F.I. in mind. We also know it can be boosted to produce huge numbers. N/A build would be pretty cool to see though. I think the tough part will be getting all that power to the ground without breaking the tires loose.

why would you want to do a swap? swaps have been done before. Just like forced induction, that's been done to hell. What you gotta do is something that no one else has ever done... like a built NA.... oh wait that's been done too, just less often because everyone realizes it isn't worth the money. :p

I still fail to see the logic in spending quadruple the amount on modding a car to get worse performance just to be able to say you were the first one to do it, when in reality a ton of other people have done the same thing to other cars in the past, its just that when they did it no one cared because the performance was mediocre and it cost a ton of money.

I think the OP wants to mod this engine like it was from a classic American muscle car, and i guesss thats okay to a degree, but Nissans approach is different because the design goal was different. I get the fascination and draw to NA, but there is nothing "simple" about a properly built FI motor. No one in their right mind would say the Veyron w16 engineers took the easy route going with turbos. I dunno, I love the sound of NA engines, but ours sound like a can I rocks to begin with. If anything, the turbos drowns out some of the noise.

OP, sounds like you have waaaaay more important things to stress about than a silly car.

best of luck to you though!

at the end of the day, you gotta do what makes you happy, if the OP wants to blow his wad trying to build a super crazy N/A monster Z, more power to him. There's def easier, cheaper, and more tried and true ways to do 500whp (TT or stage II s/c) but hey, I'll be the first to say if it happens, I'll be pretty excited to see it cause I think n/a builds are neato as well. :tup:

First mod I would do in his situation is the stage 3 J.O.B. Just sayin....

LS1 swap.

/thread.

Fixed.

yea word... if you want v8 NA power... you need a v8. pretty much sums it up.

Well he mentioned $9500 to get an old AMC built up, so I figured a budget of around $10k. Even an LS1 swap is going to break that figure unless he does a lot of work himself.

If money isn't an issue, then yeah a cammed LS7 with upgraded valve train and an intake would be awesome.

My Civic smokes 'stangs all day!! :stirthepot:

Lambo V12

/thread

Bugatti veyron w16....that would be pimp!!!

Well the Veyron is quad-turboed so I don't think it would make the OP happy. Maybe if you just took the engine.

^^hahahaha nice!!!

if it would fit w/o mods i would take it lol. VQ doesnt seem to be a very user friendly engine thus far. its not that it wouldnt make me happy. i just dont want just a turbo. i want an engine that makes no less then a certain amount at any given time.... aka NA. even SC has a power curve, not as delayed as turbos but its still there. turbos are a nightmare when they get older. they dont last nearly as long as the engine. i had a 1984 datson 300zx turbo and then a 1992 300zx after they start to get old, and get miles the tubro is usually the first thing that gives you problems far before the engine decides to take a ****. i have nothing against them, but ive just had bad experience with it. so when my Z hits 150k i dont want to be swaping in another turbine, or any other pricy part on a kit. SC are the same way, the compressor is NOT DESIGNED to last 150, 200, 300k, i think they are actually rated. my guess would be about 60-70k. these parts are designed for a car thats not going to be someones only driving vehicle for 10 years lol. one could argue that a NA build wont last that long ether. not entirely true. most people that build an engine do what to it??? beat it, all the time. at the track and on the street. have you ever tryed building an engine up to TAKE abuse and then not abusing it? except on very rare occasion? like 4-6 times a year at a track? i would love to just slam a turbo on there and get it over with, trust me. its a LOT of power, and its easy. but from my past experience they just dont last even under normal driving conditions, even the little bitty *** thing that came on that 84.

im sure you will find a million examples that will prove me wrong, but point is there are just far to many variables to even make a educated evaluation of whats going to happen. it all comes down to how well you take care of it. i get what you guys are saying and i understand it. im just kinda dead set on seeing if this will work. its not really necessary to poke fun at the guy thats treading the path less taken lol.

As for the swaps, that would be cool lol but its a nissan..... im not a blasphemer thats going to pull the good old 350 chevy in the dodge dart bullcrap. i want the car to be as close to original as possible, thats why i havent touched anything visual on the car and never will. well except maybe all leather interior, with the red stitching and embroidery ...... because i feel nissan really dropped the ball and should have made the nismo in leather instead of there ******* old man touring edition :rolleyes:

and i just noticed jeffblue's avatar pic...... thats totally true, i fell for the trap twice lol.

Power curve: Even an NA motor has a happier end of the rev range, and the more extreme you mod an NA motor if anything the more curvey it gets. This is a rev-happy engine. If you're not at least at 3K RPM, preferably 4.5K+, you're really not in the happy range yet, you're in the moping around the mall parking lot range :).

Now many turbos do make the curve a whole lot more extreme and IMHO less drivable, so I'll give you that. I've never been a bolt-on turbo fan though, I'd much rather choose the SC route for the Z, it's flatter and has better initial torque, and it's just less complicated. The only tradeoff really is a lower peak number than a turbo for bragging rights.

As far as engine life goes, I think a solid SC setup that isn't trying to break extreme barriers will hold up well in the long run. But keep in mind everything is relative to how you treat the engine (maintenance), how you drive it (grandma vs endurance races), and how sensitive you are to it slowly getting bad (things getting "loose" and losing power). An interesting data point: the (surely nearly identical) version of our VQ37VHR that Nissan puts in the race version of this car is listed as having a maintenance replacement interval of 3,700 miles.

Granted, that's track miles, they're shooting for the moment it begins to loose any noticeable power, and they probably lowered the number a little to increase engine sales. You can probably get a few hundreds K out of this engine daily driving on the street like a grandma, but otherwise you're looking at overhauls/replacements at some point regardless. There's no free lunch on an engine. Every mile you drive, something is slowly wearing down :)

true that.

Q about the SC though, i was pokin around GTM's site and looking at the "power packages" just to see all the different variations they have available (i know you can make your own) and i looked at a couple of the SC. they were 500hp packages, and the dyno graph showed 414 hp for the SC 500hp package, and it shows 583hp for the TT 500 hp package. both are stage 1 and they both cost but a few hundred in difference depending on the other **** you get........ but wait a second.... if there talking about engine horsepower then the SC isnt even making the claimed 500, and the TT is making MORE. but if they are talking WHP then that means the SC probably isnt even MAKING 500 crank and the TT should be in the 600 hp package because if its making 583 whp its well over 600 crank...... WTF i think there just pulling there naming system on the packages out of there ***. ether way, the SC isnt even making the rated, sold as, power...... that bugs me.

typo, lies, or whatever it is aside..... the SC is still far from justified for its price tag. lets pretend they ment crank hp. so a 8k S1 SC just gave me...... drum roll..... 45 horse crank. thats retarded. now, giving them the benifit of the doubt and assuming its talking WHP it still only gives a PEAK increase of roughly 105-110hp. STILL not really justified. and based on that weird comparison to the TT setup numbers they have.... i really do think there talking crank horses. so if this is true, MY GOD the tt is the obvious choice.... its the same amount and gives you almost double the grrr. yes more complicated, yes it sounds..... ******* stupid, but i would rather spend my 8k on 275hp instead of 110. can someone clarify those numbers a little for me? i want to know what those SC can actually do. ive heard claims in the 480-500 WHP range, is this true?

http://www.gtmotorsports.com/images/...29_dyno250.JPG

http://www.gtmotorsports.com/images/..._PSI__copy.jpg

mind you, they are DIFFERENT kits so ignor the price, they come with clutch, traction control and all kinds of other ****. im just talking about the TT and SC themselves. seems odd.

and yes, i noticed the octane difference. it doesnt make much of a difference in raw HP. i run turbo blue in my race car and i can tell you its not 100+ hp of a difference from pump gas. its more like 10.

Ok lets break it down, you are comparing 8PSI (SC) v. 13PSI (TT), that is just retarded sorry. Second, the 13PSI would be the top end of the Stage I TT kit, which by the looks of it is the idea of that dyno, race fuel plus max PSI.

45 horse? Where did you get this number? You honestly are just throwing out numbers with nothing behind them. Great you found some dyno graphs but no baseline of each of those cars. Did the car run 300whp before the kit or did it run 240whp?

I understand you wanting a NA engine which has great engine response, but honestly you seem to be missing many things when it comes to research on the VQ37 SC & TT kits. And where are people getting 450whp from SC? Search and you would have found this: http://www.the370z.com/forced-induct...ed-builds.html

Keep in mind that full set of higher-end bolton NA work (intakes, headers, CBE, UpRev, tune) runs you in the ballpark of 3-4K+, maybe a lot + if you're paying someone else for all the labor, and gets you from stock's ~270 to ~310 (so somewhere in the neighborhood of 10-15% over stock).

I'm pretty sure the 414 number on the SC is in RWHP. You could call them to double-check. Real-world numbers versus stock (not versus a fully bolt-on'd motor), it's nearly a 50% gain in engine power. 8K+ for that is a steal compared to the 4K+ for the boltons.

thedreamer, its pretty safe to assume they didnt start with a 370z that had 240 hp, since this is an machine built assembly line motor. pretty confident somewhere around what 99% of them make, aside from the nismo model like mine.... but even then its just a simple matter of average subtraction. my engine dynod at 368.5 crank. and most base/sports are about 350 crank. THATS where i got the number of 300 RWHP, because thats what just a bit lower then mine. YES i was guessing, but i was using common sense. if you have a 370 that makes 240 rwhp somethings wrong, you got f u c k e d. so 45 came from the 414 and my 368, i was assuming that was CRANK horse, because otherwise they would be lying because its not even making the advertised 500. even then.... using the same % loss from our base motor, take mine for example, 368 to 300-305 roughly rwhp and thats using MORE then 15% loss. if it makes 414, it wouldnt make 500 crank. using that 15% loss thing you mentioned that means it would make 476 crank HP use a ******* calulator, NOT the advertised 500. yes i know theres variables and i would like to know them. but it just doesnt make sense if you just USE MATH. it doesnt matter what that motor DID make before, its all a matter of percentage.

and if you read, i was ASKING about those claims. you see them all over youtube and other forums, i clearly didnt say it like it was fact, or even that i believed it myself..... sorry for the misunderstanding, but im pretty sure i made that clear. i was asking because i was thinking they DONT make that much.

So much wrong in this post all I can do is this:
http://s3.amazonaws.com/kym-assets/e...4/facepalm.jpg