<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr>

"Slowly and gingerly creeping beyond the 75 lb/ft per liter normal street engine limit ~~76.6 lb/ft per liter."

WOW!

I guess all of those STI and AMG motors will be grenading any minute.......what with 120hp/litre and 86.2hp/litre respectively.

(waiting for the big boom)

<hr></blockquote>
<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr>

Tech it seems is prob not working much as a tech or he wouldn't post all day right? He seems to be a corporate noodge who exists to spin mods as bad so they can cut down on warranty litigation or something. He appears to be brilliant but never answers questions - just blows people away with theory and calculations that have little relavance to the question. Like asking a nasa engineer to explain gravity in 1 sentence or less - watch them spin!

And whatever happened to Infinittech. He's done spewing about pulleys causing cars to grenade but has he re-incarnated?



<hr></blockquote>

... hang on a sec. there folks! Q45Tech's talking about TQ-per-Liter ... not HP-per-Liter! That's about as good a mix up as saying you did 200kph and I did 200mph! Eeesh!

Believe it! 75 ft-lbs./Liter is one healthy engine ... and anything above is damn strong! This is not the most ideal way to sum this up, but is the best I can think of at this moment in time. TQ/Liter gives an indication how much potential was extracted out of a given displacement, while HP/Liter clues you in on how efficiently the engine operates.

Oh and naturally, force-induced cars throws the curve off the chart.

... oh I resent that NASA comment! LOL!

Clint (THX723)<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small"><EM>Edited by THX723 on 09/02/04 04:45 PM.</EM></FONT></P>

 

"Isn't my fault you don't have a Master of Science degree in Automotive Engineering. " I think they offer that a Michigan and my Cousin is taking it or something similar. And since no else around here really has that degree you are over most peeps head unless they read over and over but since the question is usually igonored it really isn't worth the time for many. No offense I love all the science but every mod thread has like a mom is watching feel to it.




2003.5 DP 5AT Sedan
14.2 @ 97.18
Z-Tube
K&N Drop In & Airbox Mod
10 Wire Hyper-Ground
Crawford Plenum (V4)
UR Crank Pulley
Hotchkis Sways (M/M)
Polk EX-3500 Tweeters/Shock Sensor/H-Liner

 

"like a mom is watching"

Whew, I usually don't chime in on threads like this, but I can't resist. I'm really, really appreciative of the input of "technical" members. Too many times I've upgraded engines WITHOUT "mom watching", and I've turned them into expensive grenades. (There was this one '68 Mustang with a hi-compression 302... but I digress) Although some of the postings are at a high level, they are solidly factual, and they are grounded in a level of experience that very few can match. It is INVALUABLE input for those of us that want a balance of reliability and performance.

If it's beyond you, it doesn't mean the other person is talking down to you. Don't take it personally... just disregard it. But please don't discourage valuable postings that the rest of us could use.



03 G35C DG/G - Houston

 

I too highly value the science. It's challenging to understand but not impossible and who doesn't want to improve their mind and learn new things? Since the Discover Channel and The Learning Channel are now nothing more than home improvement shows, I'm glad Q45Tech is around because he's the closest thing to what these channels USED to provide as good intelligent challenging programming.

2004.5 Coupe/5AT/Ivory/Everything but front spoiler/Nismo CAI/Crawford V5/Crawford Cats

 

I agree with dreaming35c.....if you can't/don't comprehend some of the technical advice/warnings given here, please do not try and squelch the person posting......there are some of us that do have the technical understanding to comprehend what they are telling us.....there are some of us that have engineering degrees and we have the training/schooling to understand....so don't include me in your statements of "no else around here really has that degree you are over most peeps head". Believe it or not, Q45Tech's posts are completely factual, very insightful, AND he doesn't ignore the questions asked but does indeed answer them.....it's not our fault that you can't understand the answer that he puts right out in front of you.

Keep up the good work Q45Tech, there are those of us that do appreciate and value your technical insight.



Memphis
04 G Coupe 6MT | IP | Clear Bra | 15% Tint | Clear Corners |

 

Another vote for the tech info. Always like to expand my mind and not listen to the same drivel over and over again. People sharing their knowledge of engines is one of the reasons I read this website and is always welcome in my opinion.

 

Agreed. I know for a fact that having individuals with a high degree of technical knowledge on these forums has saved more than one G35 owner the heartbreak (and wallet detonation) that would have occured due to improperly modifying the VQ engine. Not to mention saving on the expense of adding useless mods to the car which seems to be all the rage on these boards. Personally I don't have any problem with people modding their cars: if you feel that stringing a dozen wires all over the car helps performance, then go for it. But I for one appreciate a scientific position on the effectiveness (for foolishness) of such a modification, rather than relying on the infamous "butt-o'meter" that seems to be many driver's only gauge of success/failure. Q45Tech's opinions are valued on a lot of boards, including this one.

 

Holy **** this thread has spun off-topic.

I think it's safe to say that while some don't appreciate a consistently tech-heavy poster, most of us do. There have been some good arguments made as to why it's ridiculous to try to improve the intake on the G. As things have turned out, those early arguments and observations were right on the money. Keep up the posts.

Those who aren't interested will scan past them, as I have actually done before. Just last week I skipped the explanation, for the formula that allows you to determine the airspeed of an unladden African swallow, that was in the "How To Recline Seats?" thread. lol


'05 IP(or ?) 6MT... ...Never too soon to think about modifications!!

 

Everyone should appreciate a tech-heavy poster.......when the tech is ACCURATE. The problem I have is playing too loose with formulas and calculations that aren't ACCURATE.

DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH WITHOUT TAKING SOMEONE'S WORD FOR GOSPEL !!!

'04 G35X Graphite/graphite, NAV, wood, premium

 

SixFive: If it's something you do not understand, then ask. To assume he doesn't know what he is talking about or that he is not answering your questions is a bad on you, not on him. I have no degree and I understood what he was referring to and why he posted what he did. However, my knowledge comes from my own research and experiences. Q45Tech posts on at least 2 other major forums and he posts a lot of technical information. Admittedly, it does at times require a fairly advanced amount of knowledge to comprehend(or sometimes, a calculator). But he can not be responsible for having to write a book to cover every detail each time he posts. Nor can anyone else. So if you, or anyone for that matter, does not understand, ask about what it is that you do not understand. I'm sure Q45Tech or any number of people in this forum would be happy to try and explain. I tend to like to be more comprehensive when I post technical information, but I usually have plenty of time on my hands when I do. Though, I have seen Q45Tech spit out some rather lenghty posts in the past.

Writing lengthy technical posts in a forum is a rather thankless job to do. It's hard to find the motivation to repeat yourself over and over in great detail and get nothing for it. It's impossible for one to know how much a reader understands. In this case, it's usually easier to go back and answer more specific questions as they come up rather than trying to predict them all.

 

Much Appreciation. I think this got slightly taken out of context. I'm only admitting (readily) that I have to read them a few times before they make sense and I'm not so mechanically inclined. I've benefited greatly from this board and even from the intake discussiion that may have included the Tech. My point is not to keep him from posting but manifests a bit of frustration I have with folks who slam every mod. I can't think of a mod QTeck endorses. All mods are not bad or we wouldn't be here and the factory is not perfect. I've have found for the topic they add small to no insight for the question and TONS of info related to engineering and design process several steps removed from the modders perspective and IT IS NOT always correct. While intersting there is certainly a tinge of overbearingness. Always think for yourself..the bandwagons are fleeting around here and enough has been said by me...have awesome weekends.

2003.5 DP 5AT Sedan
14.2 @ 97.18
Z-Tube
K&N Drop In & Airbox Mod
10 Wire Hyper-Ground
Crawford Plenum (V4)
UR Crank Pulley
Hotchkis Sways (M/M)
Polk EX-3500 Tweeters/Shock Sensor/H-Liner

 

For years on my Q I had 3 different loud aftermarket performance exhaust systems till they rusted thru or started sounding bad.
I've always used performance Michelin tires in larger widths higher load index than stock, performance shocks and 20-24 mm rear sway bar and softer front 28mm front bar and a strut tower brace plus Eibach lowering springs.

I've used a JWT ecu reprogram with 7300 rpm readline since 1994 and a trimode transmission controller. I have tried 3 different aftermarket intakes and air filters.

I've probably spent $6,000 in mods over the years, currently back to an almost brand new oem exhaust and a stock oem air filter box after weeks/months of detailed testing with real instruments showed the gains were not worth the downsides!

I've used Powerstop rotors since 1994 [5 sets] and tried 5 different front brake pad compounds.

One must go thru the trial and error mod cycle in order to speak intelligently about each situation.

Lots of expensive mods were installed by customers even carbon fiber and aluminum drive shafts, different diff gears, cams headers, no cats, Jspec engines without precats, extrude honed intakes modified throttle bodies and MAFs, and every CAI known in the world.

Some owners have swapped engines 3 times [at $5,500 + each] looking for power every mix and match known to man.

When I try to give both sides of the mod story you should not take it as being totally anti mod.

 

Tech, excuse my ignorance, although I am educated my degree is not in engineering. Could you explain this 75 TQ/L rule you are refering to. It sounds like you are suggesting the extra torqe is going to affect reliability.

 

"Everyone should appreciate a tech-heavy poster.......when the tech is ACCURATE. The problem I have is playing too loose with formulas and calculations that aren't ACCURATE.

DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH WITHOUT TAKING SOMEONE'S WORD FOR GOSPEL !!!"

Very well said Wayne!

Forum members should be careful... very careful.


DaveO
03 G35 AT Sedan / DP / Willow / Premium / Sport / Aero / 262 / 260.7

 

I agree, but have yet to find Q45Tech in error, other than his interpretation of the Clean Air Act. This is the only assertion he's made that I've been able to find fault with.

2004.5 Coupe/5AT/Ivory/Everything but front spoiler/Nismo CAI/Crawford V5/Crawford Cats