 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Nissan / Nissan Maxima / June 2004222 hp versus 255 hp
Between the '00-'01 Maxima's 222hp engine and the '02's 255hp engine, how much of a difference does that extra 33hp really make with all other factors being equal? How much can you really feel it in day-to-day driving? If I could get my hands on a 2000 Maxima SE for a lot cheaper than a 2002 SE, is there a monumental reason why I shouldn't heavily consider the 2000 SE (assuming that the overall condition of the two cars in question are similar)? Thanks. > Between the '00-'01 Maxima's 222hp engine and the '02's 255hp engine, > how much of a difference does that extra 33hp really make with all [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Thanks. Ummmmmm . . . . .WAY!:) The 255 hp motor was Nissan's recognition that the 5th gen body was a bit too big for a 3.0 to push around with authority. A 5th gen 3.0 with 17" rims can't even keep up with a 4th gen with 16s. Also, the power was up 02-03s, but so was the TQ, and that's what really made the difference. I don't mean to knock the 2000 and 2001s, it was just a bit of a power to body mis-match. Anyhow, Nissan makes the best V6 engines and so far, the 3.0 in the 2000 and 2001s is probably still the best ever of all of them, but the VQ35 is maturing, so it may knock it down sometime in the near future. CD > Ummmmmm . . . . .WAY!:) The 255 hp motor was Nissan's recognition that > the 5th gen body was a bit too big for a 3.0 to push around with [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > CD Check out the 0-60 times for all the cars, too. My 4th gen 5-sp supposedly hits 60 in 7.0 seconds and the new ones haven't surpassed that spec to my knowledge. Bigger engines, yes, but bigger cars, and overall they are the same or slower in acceleration. Dave > > Ummmmmm . . . . .WAY!:) The 255 hp motor was Nissan's recognition that > > the 5th gen body was a bit too big for a 3.0 to push around with [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Dave Looks like the Accord V6 is the way to go for performance. > > > Ummmmmm . . . . .WAY!:) The 255 hp motor was Nissan's recognition that > > > the 5th gen body was a bit too big for a 3.0 to push around with [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > Looks like the Accord V6 is the way to go for performance. My mom just bought an 03. It really is fast, and I didn't even get to test a 5 speed. It might be able to pound my Max. The manual transmission 02-03 maxima is the fastest maxima ever produced. Bone stock, it will easily surpass any 95-01 maxima, even modified with bolt-ons. The difference will be easily discernable. > Looks like the Accord V6 is the way to go for performance. Yes, my '04 Accord EX V6 only has 450 miles on it, and it is very fast. It would easily beat my '96 I30t (which is 150+ lbs lighter) to 60 mph. (Car & Driver says 7.0 to 60 for the V6 Accord; 8.2 seconds for the I30t.) However, the Accord is still a 3 liter, and low end torque is lacking. So a 3.5 L Maxima/Altima has a big edge off the line, and I think has a wider torque band as well. Also, the idle on the Accord is not as smooth as my 3.0 liter I30t, even though the VTEC system is supposedly optimized for smoothness in the Accord rather than power. The Accord is fast, it's practical, it's dependable, it's (hurray!) regular gas... but I'd still rank the 3.0 Nissan engine as "better" in many respects, and the 3.5 is awesome. Since the nearest Infiniti dealer is too far away from me, and the Nissan dealer had funny ideas about purchase negotiations, I got the Honda. Good service on my wife's Honda SUV for 5 years cinched the deal. JM > > Looks like the Accord V6 is the way to go for performance. > [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > JM Supposedly under 6.0 for the 6 spd coupe. My 01 Prelude is still a player though at just under 7.0. Not bad for a 200 hp I4. >>>Looks like the Accord V6 is the way to go for performance. >>> [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > Supposedly under 6.0 for the 6 spd coupe. My 01 Prelude is still a player > though at just under 7.0. Not bad for a 200 hp I4. Well, I don't mean to put you honda guys down, but the 3.0 Maxima, in 5-speed trim from way back in 1995, competes very well with the 2001 Prelude and the 2004 Accord. Not bad for a 9 year old motor/design. And the Nissan 3.5, that's another ballgame entirely. CD > >>>Looks like the Accord V6 is the way to go for performance. > >>> [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > > CD Not so sure about that. I had a 92 and 93 SE (DOHC) 3.0 and both 5 spds. Preludes would devastate them and are far more reliable. The 93 never ran right and the dealer could never figure out why. Both sucumbed to the VTC problem and various other ailments starting around 37,000 miles. The 95 engine was an improvement but the performance was reported not any better than the older 3.0. Dealer service was only just fair with our local dealership changing hands seveal times. I was an old Datsun fan dating back to the 280X and 810 but was disappointed with the later models in the 90s. Today, Nissan under the overview of Renault has appeared to improve its product line. > Not so sure about that. I had a 92 and 93 SE (DOHC) 3.0 and both 5 spds. > Preludes would devastate them and are far more reliable. The 93 never ran > right and the dealer could never figure out why. Both sucumbed to the VTC > problem and various other ailments starting around 37,000 miles. The 95 > engine was an improvement but the performance was reported not any better > than the older 3.0. I can't agree with that last statement. 95 was the beginning of the 4th generation, which is noticeably quicker than the 3rd gens. Dave >>>>>Looks like the Accord V6 is the way to go for performance. >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 46 lines] > Today, Nissan under the overview of Renault has appeared to improve its > product line. Well, I'm sure. The 92-94 SE was a 190 HP DOHC variable timing and variable intake manifold iron block design. The 95 VQ that repalced it produced the same 190 HP without the use of variable timing OR a varaible intake manifold. AND, the block was made of aluminum, making the bigger, roomier 95 actually weigh 100 lbs less than the 94 SE that it replaced. Performance was comparable with the 95 being just a wee bit faster, but the VQ was a hands down winner for reliability. Now, as I mentioned before, the 95 maxima 3.0 V6 compares very well with the newer designs from Honda. Comparing to a 2001 Honda prelude, the 5-speed Maxima will take it off the line, but the Prelude will catch it and leave it behind on the highway. Honda's tend to be a bit TQ poor in the city and then do a jekyll N Hide tranformation on the highway. VTEC and the open road, a match made in heaven:) When Nissan Gave the VQ30 and variable intake in the 2000 maximas, the car's acceleration became more consistent, but the body wieghed too much, hence the upgrade to a VQ3.5. A little tidbit worth noting, Nissan actually made a variable intake manifold for the 95-99 Maxima, but it never made it to US production. If you look at a JDM & middle eastern maxima 3.0 , and others, you'll see it. Or go to Maxima.org and look up threads on the MEVI. Enthusiasts have put them on their caqrs and experience much improved highway performance. CD >> "Codifus" <codifus@optonline.net> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > >CD If you could enlighten an ignoramus like me, I'd appreciate it: What does a variable intake manifold do for an engine's performance versus a static (?) intake manifold? BTW: The son of one of my friends just bought an '01 Prelude. Nice car. I just told him yesterday, that he had nothing to prove and that he should never get any Japanese "powered by" stickers or 20" muffler tips. :) >>>"Codifus" <codifus@optonline.net> wrote in message >> [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > he should never get any Japanese "powered by" stickers or 20" muffler > tips. :) Check this link out; http://www.ukcar.com/features/tech/Engine/turbo/vario.htm CD >>>>"Codifus" <codifus@optonline.net> wrote in message >>> [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > >CD Very nice link, thanks! Now for the next question (which I'll find out): Where to get one of these for my '98 and how much wil it cost. I'll post information if I find any. Seems like a trip to maxima.org is in order. K >I'll post information if I find any. Seems like a trip to maxima.org >is in order. > >K ...and of course the site is undergoing renovations.... sigh. Not really, they just haven't updated the main page. The forums have been back up and running for a while now. On Thu, 03 Jun 2004 20:08:44 -0700, in alt.autos.nissan.maxima you wrote: >...and of course the site is undergoing renovations.... sigh. > >>>>>Looks like the Accord V6 is the way to go for performance. > >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 64 lines] > more consistent, but the body wieghed too much, hence the upgrade to a > VQ3.5. True. Light on torque and lags when you are down on revs. But, when the VTEC cuts in at 5400 it screams all the way to redline at 7400. You have to keep the Prelude on the boil to make it run. The older Max 3.0 seemed to run out of breath (at least mine did) at around 5000 and it was useless to slog past that rpm to redline. The old 280Zs were like that too. > A little tidbit worth noting, Nissan actually made a variable intake > manifold for the 95-99 Maxima, but it never made it to US production. If [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > CD > Well, I don't mean to put you honda guys down, but the 3.0 Maxima, in > 5-speed trim from way back in 1995, competes very well with the 2001 > Prelude and the 2004 Accord. Not bad for a 9 year old motor/design. And > the Nissan 3.5, that's another ballgame entirely. > > CD Ummm... thanks for agreeing with me. I already said that Nissan's 1996 3.0 engine in my I30t (same engine as '95 3.0 Maxima) is "better" in many respects than the 2004 Honda V6. I still put 60 miles a day on my I30t to & from work. And I'd have a G35 now except 18 mpg with premium gas, and a thin dealer network kept me from it. JM >>Well, I don't mean to put you honda guys down, but the 3.0 Maxima, in >>5-speed trim from way back in 1995, competes very well with the 2001 [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > JM Well, you did say that Accord beats the I30t. I just wanted to level the paying field a bit by comparing a 5 speed to a 5 speed:) The I30 is hampered a bit by its 4-speed auto. CD > >>Well, I don't mean to put you honda guys down, but the 3.0 Maxima, in > >>5-speed trim from way back in 1995, competes very well with the 2001 [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > CD True, and I always thought the I35/new Maxima should have a 5-speed auto too. Nissan can build a bigger engine cheaper than a complicated, 5-speed auto. That's their choice, but it leaves the owner with a bit less performance and 5-6% lower gas mileage too. JM > Well, you did say that Accord beats the I30t. I just wanted to level the > paying field a bit by comparing a 5 speed to a 5 speed:) The I30 is > hampered a bit by its 4-speed auto. > > CD I missed the best argument. The '96 I30t was available with a 5-speed manual. On a level 5-speed-to-5-speed field, the numbers are this: I30t manual: 7.5 seconds to 60 Accord: 7.0 seconds to 60 JM > Between the '00-'01 Maxima's 222hp engine and the '02's 255hp engine, > how much of a difference does that extra 33hp really make with all > other factors being equal? What do the cars weight, what are the gear rations and tire diameters? That will tell the story. If the later car has 30 more HP but weighs 400 lbs more it's not going to be faster. Also where is the power being made? You can have 30 more HP at 7000RPM but have 50 less ft/lbs of torque at 2500 RPM so the higher HP car feel sluggy in normal driving, unless you drive at 4500-7000rpm all the time! :-)  SignatureSteve http://www.atlantaracing.com |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.