Is this a record? haha... step inside please..
05-26-2004, 07:48 AM
#81
Supporting Maxima.org Member
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 2,038
Originally Posted by SR20DEN
Also send the run files to mhwilliams@pinevilledsl.net please.
And yeah, mad2kmax has a 5 speed. And, he just told me that he cleaned his dirty **** K&N filter and removed the resitrictor plate. He claims the car feels a little faster now. I predict he will hit 210+ on his next dyno attempt after we do a few more tweaks to his car.
And yeah, mad2kmax has a 5 speed. And, he just told me that he cleaned his dirty **** K&N filter and removed the resitrictor plate. He claims the car feels a little faster now. I predict he will hit 210+ on his next dyno attempt after we do a few more tweaks to his car.
Would love to see you get 210!
I'm going to try the restrictor plate.
Also, I've got a clutch replacement on my plate right now. Trying to decide on the clutch (one of JWT's from Cattman) but probably won't go with the flywheel.
05-26-2004, 07:58 AM
#82
Try again please...if that doesn't work I'll give you another.
Originally Posted by Max_Gator
Your email address says it is not accepting emails.
Oops read the wrong sig.
He's basically got the same mods as I do (I have a udp which gave no gain on the dyno) and he may have cattman's muffler - at least that I had for the dyno. These are pretty good comparisons.
Oops read the wrong sig.
He's basically got the same mods as I do (I have a udp which gave no gain on the dyno) and he may have cattman's muffler - at least that I had for the dyno. These are pretty good comparisons.
05-26-2004, 08:01 AM
#83
Originally Posted by IceY2K1
That's what I think is VERY important here.
Since SR said metal on metal, I'm thinking the metal collar to L-rod piece.
If so, then maybe all you'd need to find/change is the VIAS box end withOUT having to remove the Power Valve.
Since SR said metal on metal, I'm thinking the metal collar to L-rod piece.
If so, then maybe all you'd need to find/change is the VIAS box end withOUT having to remove the Power Valve.
Another question is, if it's discovered exactly what breaks, would it be possible to custom fabricate a replacement piece for a reasonable cost that is somehow more durable?
05-26-2004, 08:10 AM
#84
Supporting Maxima.org Member
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 2,038
Originally Posted by IceY2K1
Try again please...if that doesn't work I'll give you another.
Hi. This is the qmail-send program at maxima.org.
I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses.
This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.
<IceY2K1@maxima.org>:
This address no longer accepts mail.
05-26-2004, 08:22 AM
#87
We still don't know if yours is broken though.
Larry is getting his pulled/replaced soon, hopefully he can open up his old one and take some pics of what broke inside.
Did you try rotating your power valve by hand when you had the VIAS box off?
Larry is getting his pulled/replaced soon, hopefully he can open up his old one and take some pics of what broke inside.
Did you try rotating your power valve by hand when you had the VIAS box off?
Originally Posted by spirilis
Hell, if it's the L-collar piece, I'd imagine one could fix that using something stupid like a soldering iron... but I do believe my L-collar piece is working properly, seeing as I toyed with it this past weekend.
Another question is, if it's discovered exactly what breaks, would it be possible to custom fabricate a replacement piece for a reasonable cost that is somehow more durable?
Another question is, if it's discovered exactly what breaks, would it be possible to custom fabricate a replacement piece for a reasonable cost that is somehow more durable?
05-26-2004, 08:35 AM
#89
You can't buy just the power valve, it's the WHOLE manifold including VIAS box end.
So, you're saying the "nylon" power valve is the breaking point? Can you describe or better yet point to where in any of the pics?
That way we at least know what to look for.
So, you're saying the "nylon" power valve is the breaking point? Can you describe or better yet point to where in any of the pics?
That way we at least know what to look for.
Originally Posted by SR20DEN
If you guys can't buy new power valves I will develop the fix for the broken ones. And it wont involve the use of JB Weld.
05-26-2004, 08:37 AM
#90
Ok here is the comparision bewteen MaxGator (red) and mad2kmax (blue).
It appears that mad2kmax has a slight advantage after 4750rpm but a disadvantage before. It also appears that the removal of the power valve may have not done much for him over having a working unit. But we will stay on this untill we know for sure if it is an advantage or not.
I have also noticed that if i change the smoothing to 0 it shows mad2kmax on top by less than one hp. The run veiwer does not show peaks the same way that the winpep software does.
It appears that mad2kmax has a slight advantage after 4750rpm but a disadvantage before. It also appears that the removal of the power valve may have not done much for him over having a working unit. But we will stay on this untill we know for sure if it is an advantage or not.
I have also noticed that if i change the smoothing to 0 it shows mad2kmax on top by less than one hp. The run veiwer does not show peaks the same way that the winpep software does.
05-26-2004, 08:40 AM
#91
Originally Posted by IceY2K1
We still don't know if yours is broken though.
Larry is getting his pulled/replaced soon, hopefully he can open up his old one and take some pics of what broke inside.
Did you try rotating your power valve by hand when you had the VIAS box off?
Larry is getting his pulled/replaced soon, hopefully he can open up his old one and take some pics of what broke inside.
Did you try rotating your power valve by hand when you had the VIAS box off?
05-26-2004, 08:41 AM
#92
Hey guys,
I just got back from a 3 hour drive testing out my car. Last night I did clean my filthy filter and also removed my restrictor plate or whatever it's called. On the drive today, I did notice low end torque loss, but once it gets around 4600 rpms, it explodes.
I don't really mind the torque loss too much because it still has enough to tool around town comfortably. The engine is MUCH more smooth now that it has all this room to breath. The transition from on the gas to coasting is now totally smooth, no balking, and my exhaust even gurgles a little now when coasting.
One other observation, Max_gator was correct in saying that it's now a monster at 80+ in third gear.
It explodes up to 100+mph with ease. I'm very anxious to get a few things done and get back to the dyno.
I just got back from a 3 hour drive testing out my car. Last night I did clean my filthy filter and also removed my restrictor plate or whatever it's called. On the drive today, I did notice low end torque loss, but once it gets around 4600 rpms, it explodes.
I don't really mind the torque loss too much because it still has enough to tool around town comfortably. The engine is MUCH more smooth now that it has all this room to breath. The transition from on the gas to coasting is now totally smooth, no balking, and my exhaust even gurgles a little now when coasting.
One other observation, Max_gator was correct in saying that it's now a monster at 80+ in third gear.
It explodes up to 100+mph with ease. I'm very anxious to get a few things done and get back to the dyno.
05-26-2004, 08:49 AM
#93
Originally Posted by mad2kmax
Hey guys,
I just got back from a 3 hour drive testing out my car. Last night I did clean my filthy filter and also removed my restrictor plate or whatever it's called. On the drive today, I did notice low end torque loss, but once it gets around 4600 rpms, it explodes.
I just got back from a 3 hour drive testing out my car. Last night I did clean my filthy filter and also removed my restrictor plate or whatever it's called. On the drive today, I did notice low end torque loss, but once it gets around 4600 rpms, it explodes.
The transition from on the gas to coasting is now totally smooth, no balking, and my exhaust even gurgles a little now when coasting.
So, when you let off it SMOOTHLY coasts down...not abruptly?
05-26-2004, 09:01 AM
#95
I was afraid you'd say that. I always figured it was the throttle-plate slamming shut, then opening or an ECU glitch, but now I know it's the IM design which can't be fixed unless you do somethig drastic like this probably.
Originally Posted by mad2kmax
correct, flawless transition
05-26-2004, 09:02 AM
#96
And when you pushed the L-rod on the VIAS actuator, you saw the metal collar that turns the key end rotate, right?
If so, it's not broke. Unless SR has something else to add like the nylon power valve is snapped in half somewhere in the middle of the IM, I don't see what else could be broke.
One way to verify this is to pop the passenger-side cover off *AFTER* removing the VIAS box side, removing the spring, and then putting the VIAS box side back together. Then push the L-rod on the VIAS actuator and if you see the passenger side end rotate, its got to be working IMO.
MAKE SURE YOU REMOVE THE SPRING BEFORE OPENING THE COVER ON THE PASSENGER SIDE Otherwise, the spring could come loose and fall inside.
If so, it's not broke. Unless SR has something else to add like the nylon power valve is snapped in half somewhere in the middle of the IM, I don't see what else could be broke.
One way to verify this is to pop the passenger-side cover off *AFTER* removing the VIAS box side, removing the spring, and then putting the VIAS box side back together. Then push the L-rod on the VIAS actuator and if you see the passenger side end rotate, its got to be working IMO.
MAKE SURE YOU REMOVE THE SPRING BEFORE OPENING THE COVER ON THE PASSENGER SIDE Otherwise, the spring could come loose and fall inside.
Originally Posted by spirilis
I do believe I did, and I could see the nylon assembly twisting with it (or at least what little of it I could see). I was rotating it by the key end poking out on the driver's side.
05-26-2004, 09:20 AM
#97
Originally Posted by IceY2K1
And when you pushed the L-rod on the VIAS actuator, you saw the metal collar that turns the key end rotate, right?
If so, it's not broke. Unless SR has something else to add like the nylon power valve is snapped in half somewhere in the middle of the IM, I don't see what else could be broke.
One way to verify this is to pop the passenger-side cover off *AFTER* removing the VIAS box side, removing the spring, and then putting the VIAS box side back together. Then push the L-rod on the VIAS actuator and if you see the passenger side end rotate, its got to be working IMO.
MAKE SURE YOU REMOVE THE SPRING BEFORE OPENING THE COVER ON THE PASSENGER SIDE Otherwise, the spring could come loose and fall inside.
If so, it's not broke. Unless SR has something else to add like the nylon power valve is snapped in half somewhere in the middle of the IM, I don't see what else could be broke.
One way to verify this is to pop the passenger-side cover off *AFTER* removing the VIAS box side, removing the spring, and then putting the VIAS box side back together. Then push the L-rod on the VIAS actuator and if you see the passenger side end rotate, its got to be working IMO.
MAKE SURE YOU REMOVE THE SPRING BEFORE OPENING THE COVER ON THE PASSENGER SIDE Otherwise, the spring could come loose and fall inside.
Yep, that's what I was thinking. The collar turned with the actuator's rod when I moved it by hand.
Anyway, I was also considering toying with the VIAS switchover point sometime after I get this all working. For MEVI, don't they use something like a Summit RPM switch or Harlan switch? If so, we could probably tap the RPM signal somewhere from the ECU harness, run a wire into the engine bay, program it for 4600 RPM and have the switch signal +12VDC onto the VIAS control solenoid. Probably the cleanest way to do it is to go to a junkyard, cut off the VIAS control solenoid harness and use the pigtail, wiring it up to the RPM switch instead.
05-26-2004, 09:32 AM
#98
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 242
so has everyone decided that a little tq loss is a better trade off for high end hp gain with the restrictor plate taken off? i see that mad2kmax did it along with a few others...i read the other thread on it and people were saying it wasnt worth it but if it is AND the VIAS isnt broken then it should be a pretty good trade off for driving above 5k? if so then i know what i'll be doing this weekend 
05-26-2004, 09:49 AM
#100
Originally Posted by spirilis
Yep, that's what I was thinking. The collar
turned with the actuator's rod when I moved it by hand.
turned with the actuator's rod when I moved it by hand.
Anyway, I was also considering toying with the VIAS switchover point sometime after I get this all working. For MEVI, don't they use something like a Summit RPM switch or Harlan switch? If so, we could probably tap the RPM signal somewhere from the ECU harness, run a wire into the engine bay, program it for 4600 RPM and have the switch signal +12VDC onto the VIAS control solenoid. Probably the cleanest way to do it is to go to a junkyard, cut off the VIAS control solenoid harness and use the pigtail, wiring it up to the RPM switch instead.
05-26-2004, 10:17 AM
#101
Not DAVEB the parts guy
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 8,555
It's great to know people like SR are around here to help people trouble shoot their cars and to point out the major design flaw in the DE-K manifold. Over the past three years there have been reports of failing VAIS systems and I believe the culprit is the plastic manifold. I think there is good reason why Nissan only used a plastic manifold for 2 years....it was a crappy design in terms of reliability.
Interesting things to note on these dynos is that the DE-K manifold is that isperforming nearly exactly like the MEVI. Once the rpms hit ~6000 the power flattens out and holds on. The DE-K does seem to make slightly better power though.
Here's my experience with trading mid range power for high rpm power. When I first installed the MEVI I didn't have the JWT ECU which meant I was stuck with the stock 6500rpm limiter. Driving the car around felt great and it seemed to drive like it did with the stock manifold, but when I put the car on the dyno it made 8-10whp/wtq less between 3500-5000rpms. After 5800rpms, my VQ gained a whopping 20-45whp/wtq and 6 peak whp/wtq (183 vs 189). I figured the mid range loss would be made up for with the upper rpm charge. I was wrong. At the track I was no quicker and usually fractionally slower both ET/MPH wise. Truth of the matter is mid range power is where you spend most of your time accelerating. That huge gain in power in the last 700rpms was pretty meaningless in the 1/4 mile because the VQ can't exploit the power because in 1st gear and 2nd gear you're only using that power gain for very minimal time. Once in 3rd you're able to start digging into the power once you get to 5000rpms. Another problem is gearing and the stock limiter. From what I remember with the stock limiter, my 1-2 shift landed at ~4200rpms, the 2-3 @4500rpms, and the 3-4@4900rpms. The problem here is that on every 6500rpm shift, you're dropping into a less powerful powerband. Even with a minimal loss of 8-10whp from 3500-5000rpm makes the car significantly slower. Now with the addition of the JWT ECU, my limiter was extended to 7000rpms (500rpm higher shifts) and my mid range power was restored plus a few. This took my car from consistent high 14.6s@95mph to consistent mid 14.4s@98mph. That ECU alone was the key to unlocking the potential of the MEVI and I'm sure the DE-K is the same way.
From what I'm seeing the VAIS system removed, the power deficit is much too large to be overcome by the 5000+rpm power and 6500rpms limiter. The car may be a little quicker from a 60mph roll, but in the 1/4 mile it will probably be slower.
In addition to my MEVI rpm switch, I wired in a manual switch so that my MEVI performs flawlessly at the track and on the dyno. I've driven the car with the switch engaged all the time and the car is definitely slower from idle to 5000rpms. Above 5000rpms it feels the same. During my MEVI dyno (not with the JWT ECU), I engaged the switchover at 4500rpms and you can see the significant loss in power vs engaging the switchover at 5000rpms.
I've accidently ran my MEVI with the butterflys open the entire race and I was about .1 and 1mph slower than with the system functioning correctly.
Now, if someone could make a 7200rpm limiter for the DE-K then removing the VAIS probably would be a huge deal because every shift would land you within the ideal powerband. This would also require a pretty high rpm launch and drag tires so that you could get into the power the quickest. Around town the car would be slower until you hit 5000rpms. I'd say the rod and power valves probably do suck out some power due to turbulence, but I doubt it's much more than 5whp. I know the Contour SVT guys have played around with their variable intake power valves and they see about a 5whp gain with the system removed.
As for 202whp being a 3.0 record, I do believe 96Sleeper made 205whp/199wtq with his 4th gen MEVI/ECU/I/E/Y and I know Requin6 made something like 200-202whp/200wtq with his 96 SE MEVI/ECU/I/E/Y. It sounds like all these cars will make roughly the same power.
Dave
Interesting things to note on these dynos is that the DE-K manifold is that isperforming nearly exactly like the MEVI. Once the rpms hit ~6000 the power flattens out and holds on. The DE-K does seem to make slightly better power though.
Here's my experience with trading mid range power for high rpm power. When I first installed the MEVI I didn't have the JWT ECU which meant I was stuck with the stock 6500rpm limiter. Driving the car around felt great and it seemed to drive like it did with the stock manifold, but when I put the car on the dyno it made 8-10whp/wtq less between 3500-5000rpms. After 5800rpms, my VQ gained a whopping 20-45whp/wtq and 6 peak whp/wtq (183 vs 189). I figured the mid range loss would be made up for with the upper rpm charge. I was wrong. At the track I was no quicker and usually fractionally slower both ET/MPH wise. Truth of the matter is mid range power is where you spend most of your time accelerating. That huge gain in power in the last 700rpms was pretty meaningless in the 1/4 mile because the VQ can't exploit the power because in 1st gear and 2nd gear you're only using that power gain for very minimal time. Once in 3rd you're able to start digging into the power once you get to 5000rpms. Another problem is gearing and the stock limiter. From what I remember with the stock limiter, my 1-2 shift landed at ~4200rpms, the 2-3 @4500rpms, and the 3-4@4900rpms. The problem here is that on every 6500rpm shift, you're dropping into a less powerful powerband. Even with a minimal loss of 8-10whp from 3500-5000rpm makes the car significantly slower. Now with the addition of the JWT ECU, my limiter was extended to 7000rpms (500rpm higher shifts) and my mid range power was restored plus a few. This took my car from consistent high 14.6s@95mph to consistent mid 14.4s@98mph. That ECU alone was the key to unlocking the potential of the MEVI and I'm sure the DE-K is the same way.
From what I'm seeing the VAIS system removed, the power deficit is much too large to be overcome by the 5000+rpm power and 6500rpms limiter. The car may be a little quicker from a 60mph roll, but in the 1/4 mile it will probably be slower.
In addition to my MEVI rpm switch, I wired in a manual switch so that my MEVI performs flawlessly at the track and on the dyno. I've driven the car with the switch engaged all the time and the car is definitely slower from idle to 5000rpms. Above 5000rpms it feels the same. During my MEVI dyno (not with the JWT ECU), I engaged the switchover at 4500rpms and you can see the significant loss in power vs engaging the switchover at 5000rpms.
I've accidently ran my MEVI with the butterflys open the entire race and I was about .1 and 1mph slower than with the system functioning correctly.
Now, if someone could make a 7200rpm limiter for the DE-K then removing the VAIS probably would be a huge deal because every shift would land you within the ideal powerband. This would also require a pretty high rpm launch and drag tires so that you could get into the power the quickest. Around town the car would be slower until you hit 5000rpms. I'd say the rod and power valves probably do suck out some power due to turbulence, but I doubt it's much more than 5whp. I know the Contour SVT guys have played around with their variable intake power valves and they see about a 5whp gain with the system removed.
As for 202whp being a 3.0 record, I do believe 96Sleeper made 205whp/199wtq with his 4th gen MEVI/ECU/I/E/Y and I know Requin6 made something like 200-202whp/200wtq with his 96 SE MEVI/ECU/I/E/Y. It sounds like all these cars will make roughly the same power.
Dave
jkjk
05-26-2004, 10:56 AM
#103
Originally Posted by Dave B
It's great to know people like SR are around here to help people trouble shoot their cars and to point out the major design flaw in the DE-K manifold. Over the past three years there have been reports of failing VAIS systems and I believe the culprit is the plastic manifold. I think there is good reason why Nissan only used a plastic manifold for 2 years....it was a crappy design in terms of reliability.
Interesting things to note on these dynos is that the DE-K manifold is that isperforming nearly exactly like the MEVI. Once the rpms hit ~6000 the power flattens out and holds on. The DE-K does seem to make slightly better power though.
Here's my experience with trading mid range power for high rpm power. When I first installed the MEVI I didn't have the JWT ECU which meant I was stuck with the stock 6500rpm limiter. Driving the car around felt great and it seemed to drive like it did with the stock manifold, but when I put the car on the dyno it made 8-10whp/wtq less between 3500-5000rpms. After 5800rpms, my VQ gained a whopping 20-45whp/wtq and 6 peak whp/wtq (183 vs 189). I figured the mid range loss would be made up for with the upper rpm charge. I was wrong. At the track I was no quicker and usually fractionally slower both ET/MPH wise. Truth of the matter is mid range power is where you spend most of your time accelerating. That huge gain in power in the last 700rpms was pretty meaningless in the 1/4 mile because the VQ can't exploit the power because in 1st gear and 2nd gear you're only using that power gain for very minimal time. Once in 3rd you're able to start digging into the power once you get to 5000rpms. Another problem is gearing and the stock limiter. From what I remember with the stock limiter, my 1-2 shift landed at ~4200rpms, the 2-3 @4500rpms, and the 3-4@4900rpms. The problem here is that on every 6500rpm shift, you're dropping into a less powerful powerband. Even with a minimal loss of 8-10whp from 3500-5000rpm makes the car significantly slower. Now with the addition of the JWT ECU, my limiter was extended to 7000rpms (500rpm higher shifts) and my mid range power was restored plus a few. This took my car from consistent high 14.6s@95mph to consistent mid 14.4s@98mph. That ECU alone was the key to unlocking the potential of the MEVI and I'm sure the DE-K is the same way.
From what I'm seeing the VAIS system removed, the power deficit is much too large to be overcome by the 5000+rpm power and 6500rpms limiter. The car may be a little quicker from a 60mph roll, but in the 1/4 mile it will probably be slower.
In addition to my MEVI rpm switch, I wired in a manual switch so that my MEVI performs flawlessly at the track and on the dyno. I've driven the car with the switch engaged all the time and the car is definitely slower from idle to 5000rpms. Above 5000rpms it feels the same. During my MEVI dyno (not with the JWT ECU), I engaged the switchover at 4500rpms and you can see the significant loss in power vs engaging the switchover at 5000rpms.
I've accidently ran my MEVI with the butterflys open the entire race and I was about .1 and 1mph slower than with the system functioning correctly.
Now, if someone could make a 7200rpm limiter for the DE-K then removing the VAIS probably would be a huge deal because every shift would land you within the ideal powerband. This would also require a pretty high rpm launch and drag tires so that you could get into the power the quickest. Around town the car would be slower until you hit 5000rpms. I'd say the rod and power valves probably do suck out some power due to turbulence, but I doubt it's much more than 5whp. I know the Contour SVT guys have played around with their variable intake power valves and they see about a 5whp gain with the system removed.
As for 202whp being a 3.0 record, I do believe 96Sleeper made 205whp/199wtq with his 4th gen MEVI/ECU/I/E/Y and I know Requin6 made something like 200-202whp/200wtq with his 96 SE MEVI/ECU/I/E/Y. It sounds like all these cars will make roughly the same power.
Dave
Interesting things to note on these dynos is that the DE-K manifold is that isperforming nearly exactly like the MEVI. Once the rpms hit ~6000 the power flattens out and holds on. The DE-K does seem to make slightly better power though.
Here's my experience with trading mid range power for high rpm power. When I first installed the MEVI I didn't have the JWT ECU which meant I was stuck with the stock 6500rpm limiter. Driving the car around felt great and it seemed to drive like it did with the stock manifold, but when I put the car on the dyno it made 8-10whp/wtq less between 3500-5000rpms. After 5800rpms, my VQ gained a whopping 20-45whp/wtq and 6 peak whp/wtq (183 vs 189). I figured the mid range loss would be made up for with the upper rpm charge. I was wrong. At the track I was no quicker and usually fractionally slower both ET/MPH wise. Truth of the matter is mid range power is where you spend most of your time accelerating. That huge gain in power in the last 700rpms was pretty meaningless in the 1/4 mile because the VQ can't exploit the power because in 1st gear and 2nd gear you're only using that power gain for very minimal time. Once in 3rd you're able to start digging into the power once you get to 5000rpms. Another problem is gearing and the stock limiter. From what I remember with the stock limiter, my 1-2 shift landed at ~4200rpms, the 2-3 @4500rpms, and the 3-4@4900rpms. The problem here is that on every 6500rpm shift, you're dropping into a less powerful powerband. Even with a minimal loss of 8-10whp from 3500-5000rpm makes the car significantly slower. Now with the addition of the JWT ECU, my limiter was extended to 7000rpms (500rpm higher shifts) and my mid range power was restored plus a few. This took my car from consistent high 14.6s@95mph to consistent mid 14.4s@98mph. That ECU alone was the key to unlocking the potential of the MEVI and I'm sure the DE-K is the same way.
From what I'm seeing the VAIS system removed, the power deficit is much too large to be overcome by the 5000+rpm power and 6500rpms limiter. The car may be a little quicker from a 60mph roll, but in the 1/4 mile it will probably be slower.
In addition to my MEVI rpm switch, I wired in a manual switch so that my MEVI performs flawlessly at the track and on the dyno. I've driven the car with the switch engaged all the time and the car is definitely slower from idle to 5000rpms. Above 5000rpms it feels the same. During my MEVI dyno (not with the JWT ECU), I engaged the switchover at 4500rpms and you can see the significant loss in power vs engaging the switchover at 5000rpms.
I've accidently ran my MEVI with the butterflys open the entire race and I was about .1 and 1mph slower than with the system functioning correctly.
Now, if someone could make a 7200rpm limiter for the DE-K then removing the VAIS probably would be a huge deal because every shift would land you within the ideal powerband. This would also require a pretty high rpm launch and drag tires so that you could get into the power the quickest. Around town the car would be slower until you hit 5000rpms. I'd say the rod and power valves probably do suck out some power due to turbulence, but I doubt it's much more than 5whp. I know the Contour SVT guys have played around with their variable intake power valves and they see about a 5whp gain with the system removed.
As for 202whp being a 3.0 record, I do believe 96Sleeper made 205whp/199wtq with his 4th gen MEVI/ECU/I/E/Y and I know Requin6 made something like 200-202whp/200wtq with his 96 SE MEVI/ECU/I/E/Y. It sounds like all these cars will make roughly the same power.
Dave
I had an entirely different lower intake manifold on my CSVT (no secondaries at all), but unfortunately the guy who was making them wasn't financially stable. He had to close up shop and head on out. Most of the car guys I hang out with on a regular basis are oldies from Contour.org (the SE/Georgia crew), but there are only 2 CSVT's left out of the dozen or so of us who had them...
Now if I could just get someone to make a variable intake for my 4.7L SOHC V8 powered Dodge Dakota...
05-26-2004, 10:59 AM
#105
That's true for the MEVI, since your power is still climbing and the torque is still holding past that point. However, with the DEK, it's starting to plateau and the torque is dropping.
In the MEVI case, moving the switchover point later is better, but with the DEK, it would benefit sooner then 5000rpm.
In the MEVI case, moving the switchover point later is better, but with the DEK, it would benefit sooner then 5000rpm.
Originally Posted by Dave B
During my MEVI dyno (not with the JWT ECU), I engaged the switchover at 4500rpms and you can see the significant loss in power vs engaging the switchover at 5000rpms.
05-26-2004, 11:03 AM
#106
Supporting Maxima.org Member
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 2,038
A lot of good points Dave.
Particularly, the point regarding the gain above 5000 needed to offset the loss below. I recall how difficult it was to prove my vias wasn't working despite losing 20-25 hp above 5k. The only way to show it was to run two equally equipped cars from a roll at 80 in 3rd. The results weren't earth shattering - the defective one was slowly pulled.
In fact, once I got my vias fixed and the car was again stock, I went to the track to compare runs with Vias connected and disconnected. It was a hot day but I "only" ran about .2 slower and 2 mph slower with my vias disconnected (big deal to me - small deal to many who just drive their car on the street).
So, your experience is no surprise to me.
As for comparing the de and de-k, I think you are right on. We might see just a bit more power out of the de-k with an ecu but I suspect that an ecu would only allow the de-ks to hold the power it has at redline not increase it. The fully modified de and de-k are very close.
The 4th gens clearly run better across the board at the track. That mainly is because of the weight difference and also the fact that most of the 5spd 2k/2k1s have heavy 17s (and that may make them dyno a bit lower). I think that the 5th gens are also harder to run at the track because of the way they must be launched - which is probably a result of being heavier - slip clutch from high rpms. It's hard to launch them that way - I still am inconsistent. The original madmax2k was a master at it, though.
With an ecu on a cold low pressure day, I would not be surprised to be able to hit low 14s and close to 100 - which is close to the best 4th gen times. Of course the big problem would be gearing since you've got to get out of 3rd at 98.
Particularly, the point regarding the gain above 5000 needed to offset the loss below. I recall how difficult it was to prove my vias wasn't working despite losing 20-25 hp above 5k. The only way to show it was to run two equally equipped cars from a roll at 80 in 3rd. The results weren't earth shattering - the defective one was slowly pulled.
In fact, once I got my vias fixed and the car was again stock, I went to the track to compare runs with Vias connected and disconnected. It was a hot day but I "only" ran about .2 slower and 2 mph slower with my vias disconnected (big deal to me - small deal to many who just drive their car on the street).
So, your experience is no surprise to me.
As for comparing the de and de-k, I think you are right on. We might see just a bit more power out of the de-k with an ecu but I suspect that an ecu would only allow the de-ks to hold the power it has at redline not increase it. The fully modified de and de-k are very close.
The 4th gens clearly run better across the board at the track. That mainly is because of the weight difference and also the fact that most of the 5spd 2k/2k1s have heavy 17s (and that may make them dyno a bit lower). I think that the 5th gens are also harder to run at the track because of the way they must be launched - which is probably a result of being heavier - slip clutch from high rpms. It's hard to launch them that way - I still am inconsistent. The original madmax2k was a master at it, though.
With an ecu on a cold low pressure day, I would not be surprised to be able to hit low 14s and close to 100 - which is close to the best 4th gen times. Of course the big problem would be gearing since you've got to get out of 3rd at 98.
05-26-2004, 11:18 AM
#109
whelp, just purchase a new oem IM from nissan. Hopefully this will replace my 20 whp that i'm missing on my 160 whp dyno.
here is the part number:
14010-3Y111
its going on this weekend. I will post pics of the POS when I take it off
here is the part number:
14010-3Y111
its going on this weekend. I will post pics of the POS when I take it off
05-26-2004, 11:33 AM
#110
And send it my way, right?
Need to give Dixit back his.
Need to give Dixit back his.
Originally Posted by Larrio
whelp, just purchase a new oem IM from nissan. Hopefully this will replace my 20 whp that i'm missing on my 160 whp dyno.
here is the part number:
14010-3Y111
its going on this weekend. I will post pics of the POS when I take it off
here is the part number:
14010-3Y111
its going on this weekend. I will post pics of the POS when I take it off
05-26-2004, 11:39 AM
#111
S-AFC or Walbro GSS342.
Actually, looking at another dyno, your AFRs are the same ~14:1, which is too lean for extended WOT operation IMO.
I've seen TWO different patterns...one where they stick to ~14:1 and one where they drop down below 12:1 at redline. I think I'd rather have the later and correct it with a S-AFC.
Max_Gator could definitely squeeze out some more HP by leaning out the AFR a bit.
Actually, looking at another dyno, your AFRs are the same ~14:1, which is too lean for extended WOT operation IMO.
I've seen TWO different patterns...one where they stick to ~14:1 and one where they drop down below 12:1 at redline. I think I'd rather have the later and correct it with a S-AFC.
Max_Gator could definitely squeeze out some more HP by leaning out the AFR a bit.
Originally Posted by mad2kmax
That has really bothered me too. Do you think it could be a faulty Air Temp Sensor? If not, how do you think I could lower that figure?
05-26-2004, 11:47 AM
#112
Supporting Maxima.org Member
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 2,038
Originally Posted by IceY2K1
Hmmmn....looking at the AFR charts....
mad2kmax is at ~14:1 for the whole run vs. Max_Gator's whose AFR drops below 14:1 around 3750rpm and all the way down to 11:1 by redline.
Any ideas why?
mad2kmax is at ~14:1 for the whole run vs. Max_Gator's whose AFR drops below 14:1 around 3750rpm and all the way down to 11:1 by redline.
Any ideas why?
It would not explain, however, the fact that we are putting out the same power at high rpms.
Hmmm.
05-26-2004, 11:55 AM
#113
Originally Posted by Dave B
From what I'm seeing the VAIS system removed, the power deficit is much too large to be overcome by the 5000+rpm power and 6500rpms limiter. The car may be a little quicker from a 60mph roll, but in the 1/4 mile it will probably be slower.
Dave
But we are by no means finished here and if there is a chunk of hp left in the plastic manifold I aim to find it. Now we need to see some dyno comparisions of removed plates, and cars with headers. There is a possibility that removing the power valve will have more effects on other combinations.
05-26-2004, 11:58 AM
#114
Originally Posted by Max_Gator
I wonder if that is why he's making 3-5 more hp and tq than me below 5000 on the graph where his vias is broken. On his other graph (the comparison posted by sr20den), I am making more power down low but that is after the mod to the vias.
It would not explain, however, the fact that we are putting out the same power at high rpms.
Hmmm.
It would not explain, however, the fact that we are putting out the same power at high rpms.
Hmmm.
05-26-2004, 12:06 PM
#115
Originally Posted by Max_Gator
I wonder if that is why he's making 3-5 more hp and tq than me below 5000 on the graph where his vias is broken.
It would not explain, however, the fact that we are putting out the same power at high rpms.
Hmmm.
Hmmm.
05-26-2004, 03:14 PM
#117
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,860
I just want to know what the weak point in the VIAS is. Maybe the power valve is not lubed enough inside the IM. If you can not see a physical break somewhere along the line I would bet that the actuator is not strong enough to turn the power valve.
I forgot who took theirs apart, but did you check if there was much resistance with the power valve in (turning by hand)?
I forgot who took theirs apart, but did you check if there was much resistance with the power valve in (turning by hand)?
05-26-2004, 03:14 PM
#118
Originally Posted by IceY2K1
Honestly, I think yours is working, so further testing, ie 3rd gear runs with VIAS enabled/disabled or better a dyno, might be necessary. You can try opening up the passenger-side end, if you're really convinced it's broke.
Actually, we need to just supply a ground at 4600rpm.
Actually, we need to just supply a ground at 4600rpm.
Time to go have some fun!
05-26-2004, 03:17 PM
#119
Oh...it's oiled PLENTY from EGR/PCV oily vapors.
Doubt that's the issue.
Doubt that's the issue.
Originally Posted by NewLoveI30
I just want to know what the weak point in the VIAS is. Maybe the power valve is not lubed enough inside the IM. If you can not see a physical break somewhere along the line I would bet that the actuator is not strong enough to turn the power valve.
I forgot who took theirs apart, but did you check if there was much resistance with the power valve in (turning by hand)?
I forgot who took theirs apart, but did you check if there was much resistance with the power valve in (turning by hand)?