Different car, different dyno, different day, different atmospheric conditions. While it seemed fast at the time, my car was a real dog when stock. According to my information, on average the stock 03.5 AT Sedans dynoed about 8-10 hp and torque higher than the 03s. If you'll check my Desert Day Dynoing article you'll see a totally stock 03.5 AT Sedan dynoed 231/230. Jenn's car produced the hightest numbers I've observed for a stock 03.5 AT Sedan to date.

One major difference I forgot to mention in my previous post is... engines built before June 2002 (Type I) are different than engines built after July 2002 (Type II). One difference is the post July engines have a baffle plate (windage tray) which for those who don't know usually increases an engines power. Since my car was built in June I have a 50/50 chance one way or another.

 

had to put it on this page too it was so funny

 

My point exactly, that is the only 6mt 05 I read about...tons of 03 and 04s have already hit the track, wait till more 05s go and you will see that the 05 is more poweful, stock for stock that is

 

Due to future testing, I plan to hit the track probably in the next 2 months to run stock and dyno the 05 for a baseline. I need this stuff for future plans . My 04 6mt dynoed 234 hp and 234 tq to the wheels with a ztube and K&N panel filter. I can't recall the exact 1/4 time, but it was around 14.2-14.4 at 97-98 mph.

 

I wouldn't say "tons" because we don't have many members in here that race the 1/4 mile, however quite a few 05 6MT coupes and sedans have hit the track since early this year. They're proving to be no quicker nor faster in the 1/4 mile, stock and mod for mod. Check the racing forum. According to 350ZDriver.com, the same can be said for the 05 300hp 350Zs.

The general consenus is people are disappointed in the 298-300hp "rev-up" motor. People were expecting a huge kick in the pants in terms of acceleration and they didn't get it. To some of us, it was obvious the car wasn't going to be much faster, if any, in the 1/4 mile due to the change the powerband. Is the rev-up motor not performing as advertized? No way. It's doing exactly what it said it would do. This motor is ideal for people who road race where they can exploit the additional power in 3rd, 4th, and even 5th gear. With the improved rod bolts, the rev-up VQ35 can now operate at higher rpms without much worry about snapping the rod and sending it through the block.

 

I was one who thought that the 298HP was originally weaker. After about 11,700 miles, I realize how powerful this motor is. I've raced some comparable cars and seen how mine has pulled away and exibited tons of power from 0-100mph.

 

Damn! I wish I had tons of power!!!! I'd settle for Gurgen's untuned 450+ ft-lbs of torque.

 

We all wish!

 

Hehe 05' owners are so touchy about there HP... I guess its because they traded in there 03's and 04's at a loss thinking they were getting more HP in the 2005...

Either way I enjoy my 2003.5 and could care less if the 05's have 20 more hp or not...

 

This whole discussion is funny.

*Some*, not all, of the 03/04 have ***** envy.

*Some*, not all, of the 05 guys WANT everybody else to have ***** envy.

 

No Doubt....where all the defensiveness coming from. I guess if I got all happy doing my superior dance and then DaveB came along and showed my car ran no better than the old yucky 03.5, I'd get pretty peeved too. Kinds reminds me of the 3 series buyers in my office building.

NicK don't take offense, one of the biggest topics this year (notice the brilliant minds that even bothered with this what turned into an absurd thread) is understanding what the hell the VQ evolved to with the 2005 manifestation. Nissan does not spell it all out in a press release. People want to understand what the minute differences are that make up for differences in HP stats and track times in each cog of the evolution of this motor. No one is saying that thier motor is better than yours. How can it be your's has stronger internals and a better redline. Thoise of us who mod want to know what the differences are so we can try to apply them. The thirst for understanding just happens to show what it does - so so results compared to what was EXPECTED for the 05 motor.

I think it's fascinating that the motor can be nearly identical in results and be so different in tune for the different years. At the track in June the 03's were some of the strongest out there.

 

Bro, I take no offense at all, I just made a big deal because as you can see what dave is saying, 03 is the strongest year VQ (top of page, I quoted him), well that is just absurd. I could care less if my engine was rated at 225HP, as long as it performs how it does. If I really cared purely about speed I would have bought the white STi I was looking at. So in the end my point is that the 03 is not the strongest, but every engine is different and some make more power than others, so I don't know why he keeps going on and on and on and on and on about the 03s 260hp engine.

 

I'm no DaveB apologist but I thought his posts were measured and reasonable. It is a forum afterall where discussion is supposed to occur. No need to take offense or bust his *****. More HP or not, in real world applications all the VQs are pretty darn close.

 

You cannot take two different tests and then say the 03 was underrated..lol So many factors apply. Temp/altitude/driver/car condition and setup. I did read the 298 version lost some torque which would explain the drop in times from 04 to 05. I would prefer to have a 280/270 setup than a 298/260.

The 298 would probably do better on a wide oval track but not so much for day to day driving. The variable valve timing on the exhaust side is what is different on the 05 engines vs 04. But as people say there are so many variables.

As long as they advertise the correct HP (even if it is a tad lower) and do not overstate it like Acura has on the TL. Using the so called new SAE standards, the TL now had like 258 hp and 233 torque.

 

It's not two different tests. It's four tests of which all the ET/MPH were corrected for atmospheric conditions. The cars are outfitted the same way (fully loaded with fuel, driver, and 50 lbs of test equipment). MT tested two different 03 sedan 5ATs (14.6s@96/97), a 04 sedan 5AT (14.7@94mph), and the 05 sedan 5AT (14.7@96mph). To me, that corrected data suggests two things:

1) The 03 isn't making less power than the 04/05
2) The 03 is showing quicker elaped times and often times faster MPHs.

I think it's reasonable to assume that the 03 was not the weaker verision and that all verisions perform about the same. It is also possible that the 03 may potentially be the quickest verison out of the 5ATs because it shows stronger trap speeds.

For Nick, the definition of potential is: possible, that can come into being. Potential does not mean "is".

I'll stop beating this dead horse now, but I'll continue to try and prove through my 03s performance that it's not the weaker model