2k VQ30DE-K bolt on dyno.

[MaxBoost925]

running pig rich w/o AFR tuning.

rather disappointed in the numbers.

My friend dynoed his stock 2001 5-speed with 173 whp compared to my 199.98.

[michaelnyden]

fully bolted, meaning what exactly? also, you are running super rich! you have to deal with that issue before you will start seeing good #'s! your hitting 10:1 at 6K? and 11:1 at 5K (even at 4K your at 12:1, a typical rich range for boosted maximas)...those are all too rich for a lot of boosted guys! take into consideration that your buddy is stock, so his AFR is probably still very good ie. around 13.5:1 across the board or so...ie. he is getting all the power that is there to be had...

never seen a stock bolt on maxima run so rich before without upgraded injectors added! you will gain a lot from A/F tuning...

to give you an idea where you should be @ if we are talking about absolutely every bolt on...the de-k is capable of 210-220whp with A/F dialed in...230-240whp with emanage ultimate (heavy ignition timing increase)...

[speed racer]

What type of DYNO machine did you use? Also, a list of mods would be cool for comparison reasons.

[Kevlo911]

I see nothing wrong with the numbers.

[NmexMAX]

Originally Posted by michaelnyden

fully bolted, meaning what exactly? also, you are running super rich! you have to deal with that issue before you will start seeing good #'s! your hitting 10:1 at 6K? and 11:1 at 5K (even at 4K your at 12:1, a typical rich range for boosted maximas)...those are all too rich for a lot of boosted guys! well atleast you know your VIAS is working! take into consideration that your buddy is stock, so his AFR is probably still very good ie. around 13.5:1 across the board or so...ie. he is getting all the power that is there to be had...

never seen a stock bolt on maxima run so rich before without upgraded injectors added! you will gain a lot from A/F tuning...

to give you an idea where you should be @ if we are talking about absolutely every bolt on...the de-k is capable of 210-220whp with A/F dialed in...230-240whp with emanage ultimate (heavy ignition timing increase)...

I still have not seen a DEK lay down more than 210 (Dandy's isn't a DEK) Also, I wouldn't go that far and say stock a/f would be 13.5 either.

IIRC, he doesn't have VIAS

My A33B shows leaner results when adding an intake.

[michaelnyden]

dandy max's is essentially a de-k...what's the difference? he has the 00VI....! yes cams on the regular vq's are slightly better, but aren't huge...

and to your other point, you haven't seen any of them lay down more than 210 cause none of them have had the ability to tune it properly since there is no ecu upgrade for these engines...only now has the emanage ultimate been avaliable--no de-k's with it that I know of to date...then I have no doubt #'s just like dandy's max's will be possible 230whp or so...
you have to think about this, maxboost put down 199whp without no timing advance, and no air fuel tuning, in fact he put it down with an almost 10:1 air fuel ratio...

also, you can't compare the a33b, the 3.5L has entirely different air fuel ratios iirc...

[NmexMAX]

Why would it(A33B) have entirely different afr's?

[michaelnyden]

what I mean is the 3.5 typically has entirely different afr's after adding things like headers and other bolt-ons than the 3.0's do...so you can't compare how one engine deals with changes or gains from a/f tuning and mods as some respond better than others and or produce slightly more power at a different afr than another...case and point, the 3.5's after headers need a good deal of afr tuning to see major gains, which they certainly do, but 3.5's don't seem to gain much from advanced IG timing, whereas historically, 3.0's have been the other way around...a/f tuning doesn't net them as much as IG timing advance does...it all has to do with the differences in volumetric efficiencies at different rpm ranges of each engine and which one can effectively use more timing or air or fuel at a certain location with knocking due to the VE being to higher or lower in that range than another.

[MaxBoost925]

Yup, I don't have VIAS

does this mean I don't need fuel management when I supercharge this summer?

[MaxBoost925]

Originally Posted by speed racer

What type of DYNO machine did you use? Also, a list of mods would be cool for comparison reasons.

Check my homepage for mods:

www.dsrmotorsports.cjb.net

[michaelnyden]

I was talking about dandymax that has the vias...

[jac121479]

Originally Posted by MaxBoost925

Check my homepage for mods:

www.dsrmotorsports.cjb.net

your homepage says you have timing advanced by 17 degrees. is this correct (what unit are you using to do so)? if thats the case, i can see you dissappointment in the numbers.

also when you say you don't have VAIS, i assume you mean you don't have the VAIS control installed, and that you dynoed with the VAIS control rod in the open position.

just trying to take the bits and pieces from this thread and put them together
cause it's kinda hard to follow.

[MaxBoost925]

Originally Posted by jac121479

your homepage says you have timing advanced by 17 degrees. is this correct (what unit are you using to do so)? if thats the case, i can see you dissappointment in the numbers.

also when you say you don't have VAIS, i assume you mean you don't have the VAIS control installed, and that you dynoed with the VAIS control rod in the open position.

just trying to take the bits and pieces from this thread and put them together
cause it's kinda hard to follow.

My timing was advanced by a Nissan Consult II machine at the dealer. It's different on a 5th gen bedcause the timing change stays in place compared to a 4th gen.

I took the whole 00VI rod out of my intake manifold so that my curve is linear compared to the "VTEC" like VIAS (also to assure myself that I am getting every bit of power I can since my VIAS was broken already)

[jac121479]

Originally Posted by MaxBoost925

My timing was advanced by a Nissan Consult II machine at the dealer. It's different on a 5th gen bedcause the timing change stays in place compared to a 4th gen.

I took the whole 00VI rod out of my intake manifold so that my curve is linear compared to the "VTEC" like VIAS (also to assure myself that I am getting every bit of power I can since my VIAS was broken already)

regarding the timing, understood...

as far as removing the control rod, never heard of that before so i'm curious. so basically you have a gutted 00vi (no moving parts within the manifold)? did this hurt your low end? i'm not too familiar with 5th gen dynoes so it's hard for me to tell just by looking at your dyno sheet.

[NmexMAX]

I can change my timing +/- 2* w/ Cipher.

Also, it's BTDC, no 'across the board'.

Typically w/o a tune, I've seen 2 other dynos (aside from yours) that put out ~ the same #'s w/ VIAS rod removed.

What were the SAE #'s? Do you have the run files?

Why did you cut the fun short @ 6k?

[michaelnyden]

the timing advance via the consult does not apply at WOT...only during closed loop operation, so on a dyno, the timing advance will not produce higher #'s since the test is typically done at WOT/open loop.

without the rod, other dynoes show about 10whp extra from ~5K and up, but show about 15whp less before that and about the same amount of torque loss until 5K, where the torque band is held flat till redline rather than dropping off...so there is a high end improvement to be had, but someone on here determined that by using the integral of the entire powerband, there was a actually a slight loss since our gears are not close enough to always keep it in that meaty powerband, hence there would be no practical acceleration gain...however, if it is broken and you are sick of fixing it, the best solution is probably to remove it...

here are a collection of graphs I did back in the day from a discussion on this very subject, and some simple math calculations of them to see whether there is a gain or not:

in this photo, there are four graphs, the first (up and left), is a graph of just one guy on here with his de-k that got 220whp after a/f tuning and full bolt ons...the second (up and right) was from a thread about someone with a broken vias and power rod removed, the third (bottom and left) is the torque graph of the same scenario--broken vias vs. power rod removed and the last one, (bottom and right) is of a working vias (although not working the best it seems) overlayed on a dyno of the power rod removed...the last picture is what we are primarily looking at and what all the calculations are based on...all the equations seen there are the regressions of the plotted data--the equations used to plot the graphs using two different methods for accuracy checking...then integrals were used on those functions.

this 2nd picture is some simple math regressions of to graphs on their integrals to see what the gain is like from vias working to power rod removed to see the gain since I was curios of this in the past.
The end result was that there is an overall 9ft.lbs wtq gain if kept above 5K rpms->redline and a overall loss of 18ft. lbs wtq if the entire rpm range is considered from 2.5K->redline.

looking at whp, if the entire rpm range from 2.5K to redline was considered, there is a 7whp gain with the rod removed overall, if kept above 5K, there is a 20whp overall gain

keep in mind these are rough estimations, just took the values at different rpm points from the last "overlay" graph of larry c and nathan...the comparison was almost perfect as told by them, they stated that as far as mods go, they were almost the same (almost potentially taints the data a good deal) and the conditions of the dyno were almost the same (once again, mess up the data little)...

so with the power valve removed, overall you gain 7whp and lose 18ft/lbs wtq going from 2.5K->redline according to the area under the curve/integral of the entire thing minus the other

if kept it above 5K rpms->redline, you gain 20whp and also gain 9ft/lbs wtq overall mind you, not peak...so don't get too excited!

I know larry had an extended rev limiter...didn't use the data past 6.5K of course, and nathan's data only started at 2.5K so I couldn't use larry's data below that to see torque loss.

so the final result on that discussion was determined that the removal of the valve was not optimal for everyday use, the whp gain was offset by the dramatic loss in torque, required to move our heavy cars off the line effectively and get us into that meaty powerband up top sooner.

if you are doing only high end racing though, the power rod removal can be worth it, especially with an extended rev limiter as the line stays steady in high rpms, never dropping. Most likely, though, proper tuning needs to be done to regain some low end and also to gain some high end to a factory ecu that has a static WOT a/f map that is tuned to expect more air below 5K and less air above 5K that the removed power rod effectively does. so tuning and an extended rev limiter are an absolute must if your going to remove the power rod.

[NmexMAX]

It applies to anything under 2300 RPM

[michaelnyden]

that's the second stipulation/condition...but primarily and most importantly, not at WOT, which is what everyone wants...more timing at WOT...

[jac121479]

good info!

[michaelnyden]

the best thing to do would figure out a way to modify the power rod to optimize flow, so you can balance it to get the best of both worlds! better high end with minimal low end loss...

[MaxBoost925]

Originally Posted by michaelnyden

the best thing to do would figure out a way to modify the power rod to optimize flow, so you can balance it to get the best of both worlds! better high end with minimal low end loss...

lol, I tell everyone I'm willing to sacrifice all my low-end torque in exchange for high-end HP, That's why I'm going SC instead of a custom turbo setup.

Another orger from SoCal told me theres practically no power in the lower RPM range on a supercharged maxima, you don't hit full boost until 6000rpm.

But whatever, SC is SC, and me wanty.

[michaelnyden]

not exactly true, with the much smaller pulley's, boost comes in sooner...since it is spinning at a faster speed at a lower rpm...so with the smallest pulley you see a little boost in the low end...plus does it really matter? our cars always have had a decent amount of low end...even the 3.0's...! it's not like your supercharging a 1.6 or 2.0L honda engine where there is no low end to start with...!

SC is a great way to go, yes less power possible in the end, and you get that parasitic drag from the pulley system, but in the end, with the smallest pulley, all bolt ons and proper tuning, you can confidently see 350whp if not a little more--now tell me that won't be one screamin' maxima regardless if most of the power is in the high end or not....!!??!?!

plus for road racing and track racing, SC is the best...you keep that beautiful NA-like linear powerband...no sudden peak or spool up...

[TDotMax]

Would the power valve removal then in turn benefit an auto? I notice that the auto doesn't hold top end power to well. I mean I need to fully check my Vias, but I'm sure it is working. I can't really see those dyno's but where was the most torque lost with the removal? If its minimal before 2500 then it can be beneficial on an auto? Correct me if I'm wrong? I'm just speculating as I need to verify if my Vias is actually broken or not.

[NmexMAX]

Depends on what type of driving you do. i.e., a lot of highway driving would benefit re: the long 4AT ratios.

Also, where did you get this notion that the AT DEK doesn't hold top end power to well?