A $48k 350z does the 1/4 in 14.1(0-60 in 5.8)........I'm suppsed to bow down and admit this car is faster than mine. Yes these times were done on california gas...I would not loose to a car with these numbers....(even if I put 87 octane in my car)!http://www.sportcompactcarweb.com/ro...0405scc_nismo/

 

For 48k oud think they would have gone FI
Trying to squeeze power out of an NA VQ35 doesnt end in much success; FI is where its at for the big numbers

 

Wow eithier thats one weak VQ or it was tested under some harsh conditions. Especially the R-Tune model, now that shocked me! 14.1 at 99.3 mph with NISMO intake, exhaust, headers, cams, and whole bunch of suspension, drivetrain, and aero goodies. S-tune went 14.1 at 98.4 and stock 14.2 at 98.5. My 2004.5 G35 Coupe ran a 14.29 at 100.92 mph with just a Stillen intake and Kineitx plenum! On the other I was near sea level, the track temp was 44 degrees, and I was running 93 octane. Still though, that article doesn't speak well for NISMO parts. The things are too over priced anyway and now it looks like they can't even through down some decent numbers

 

Wow, that was interesting. I want to know how the S-tune Z is making .98g on the skid pad.

 

Well that kinda sucks, all that work and money for 10 measly HP. No wonder they couldn't break 14sec

 

https://g35driver.com/forums/showthr...t=45124&page=2

Post number 20

 

Damn... that is pretty expensive parts!!!

I calculated dollar per hp, Stock was $34, 180 @ 239 HP (est) = $143 per hp
R-Tune was $48, 264 @ 249 hp (est) = $193 per hp

so, was it worth to spend $14 084 for 10 HP?

There is something missing in the spec is the wieght ratio of the Stock VS S-Tune. I've looked at the modification on R-Tune and S-tune as it add weights on the stock. Therefore, in my opinion... Stock would be faster than R-Tune as 239 hp at 6000 rpm compare to 249 hp @ 6100 and weight ratio as well.

Correct me if I am wrong.

 

braking distance also increased with the nismo pads...


Stock 2003 Nissan 350Z S-Tune 350Z R-Tune 350Z

Braking
80-0 stopping distance: 202 ft. 208 ft. 213 ft.
70-0 stopping distance: 153 ft. 168 ft. 163 ft.
60-0 stopping distance: 112 ft. 115 ft. 120 ft.

 

12k for 10hp and .03 secs off the 1/4 WTF

 

They money wasn't all spent on engine mods. More than half of it was suspension wheels and aero. Am I the only one who notices and likes the higher skidpad and slalom numbers?

I agree that it's surprising that they didn't get more HP for the mods that they put in, but they did not spend the whole $12k on the engine.

 

This kind of thing really makes you think twice.....just save the money and get the FI....I think even before I do that...I have to get a stand alone programmable ecu...I will not spend money on mods just to have the stock ecu counter act them.

 

Only thing that went to the engine, is intake, exhaust, cams

 

11.6 hp gain with NISMO headers alone huh? Not too bad! I still think they're over priced though, I mean over $1000 for headers is pretty expensive and half of it is going to the NISMO name. Now if there is one set of headers out there that is worth $1000 I'd have to say it would be Crawford. If you haven't seem em, take a look. Certainly not the prettiest looking things but the entire design is based on peformance and a lot of time and calculating went into it. Also, they're the perfect size and equal length. I personally haven't tried them out nor do I know anyone that has em, but I talked in length with one of the other members on here who has experience with Crawford products.