By my math you got a little over 16 hp and a little less than 13tq so nowhere near the 30 you mentioned. I know there are a lot of benefits other than power from tuning the G but it still makes me sad to see someone spend close to $1000 and get such small gains.

 

Sounds like some calculators out there need to be calibrated. Sorry to poop on y'all's party, but...

2006 6mt G35 = 298/260 crank horse power/torque respectively.
18% DT loss = 245/213 wheel horse power/torque respectively.
Tuner claims = 275/260

So, a stock diameter k&n intake and some test pipes are gonna net an extra 30hp and 47 ft lbs of torque? I wish.

It's supposed "tunes" like this that have given the Dynojet a bad rap for reading 10-20% high, which, when used without tuner input, it is actually the most accurate.

 

Speed Academy also installed headers to shift the powerband to the upper range since theirs was a track car.

 

the baseline you see in the chart is with all the parts on already. cats deleted and exhaust freed up. bone stock revup Z/G's typically lay down around ~245whp on this particular dyno.
the 16whp difference is before and after tuning with UpRev.

 

soooo, what kind of gains did you see with your parts and tuning?

why do you keep throwing around this 18% anyways? I have a 17lb flywheel that knocks off nearly half the weight of the stock DMF so your assumptions are already invalid right off the bat.
Tuning has absolutely nothing to do with how a dyno reads. tuning is adjusting your fueling and spark timing to optimize the combustion of the new rate of airflow that is going through the motor. at the end of the day, our engines are just huge air pump, more air you can combust = more power. Dynojets read higher than a mustang dyno due to it being an inertia dyno vs mustang being a loaded dyno, however that's a discussion for another day. Regardless of what type of dyno is used for tuning the car, it is the delta that matters. The baseline pull vs final pull after tuning. So since I didn't baseline the car in bone stock form, I have nothing to back my claims of the car's stock power. However the 16whp gain you see on the dyno sheet posted were just from Uprev itself and 2 hours of tuning.

what is your experience with this platform?

 

Yes, I know what tuning is. Thank you for that. I'm not going to argue gains gotten pre and post tune. My comments are based on the final power #'s to the wheels and how it clearly does not add up. If the base line and final #'s are both inflated, then so too are the gains via tuning. A lightweight flywheel might help the drive train loss a bit concerning the dyno results, maybe, but I doubt it. I've never seen lighter drive train components, whether they be drive shafts, wheel/tire setups or the like add horse power or torque but who knows.
Say you dramatically reduced you're d.t. loss with the flywheel, so much so that it's now 10% total d.t. loss which is NUTZ, but for arguments sake, let's use a 10% total d.t. loss;

10% DT loss = 268/234 wheel horse power/toque to the wheels BONE STOCK.
Tuner claims = 275/260
So, with 10% d.t. loss a stock diameter k&n intake and some test pipes are gonna net an extra 7hp and 26 ft lbs of torque?
Now in this scenario, regardless of how far-fetched it may be, the hp is reasonable if not a little low for the test pipes IMO but the added torque is nutz.

How about a 15% d.t. loss? = 253/221 which nets an added 22 hp and 39 ft lbs from some test pipes and k&n components?

A reasonably accurate baseline for the 298/260 G is gonna be @ 18% d.t. loss which = 244 hp and 213 tq. That's all I'm saying.

Here are links to my threads. Fastest naturally aspirated FX35, FX45, FX37 or QX70 known of on the planet.
Short and to the point;
https://www.infinitiscene.com/thread...rables.348690/
Details of build below;
https://www.infinitiscene.com/thread...e-mods.230572/

Weight - approx. 3,940
Power - approx. 251 awhp/231 awtq with an approx. 28% drive train loss & 348/321 @ flywheel (corrected MD500 Mustang)
Street - 5.2 0-60 & 14.0 1/4 mile @ 99mph (corrected)
Strip - 14.3 @ 97mph (corrected) 14.6 without density altitude correction

 

that's cool. i feel like you're more obsessed with doing math than anything else though at this point in the discussion.
we're specifically talking about my car on the z-car garage dyno. no assumptions, no ifs, no percentages, no guessing game is needed.
I realize where this is all going wrong. You took the part where I said stock revup motors are typically laying down roughly ~245whp on this dyno, and ran with it to come up with your ridiculous drivetrain loss assumptions on the torque. Like I've said before, its the delta that matters, but you need an actual torque figure and not some random number you derived.. Every dyno will read different so comparing stock baselines from other tuners are pointless.
With a little digging, I've found a dyno sheet from Z Car Garage on a 05' Revup G35 for your reference...pulled right off from this forum. This G had a plenum spacer installed and everything else is bone stock.

 

"that's cool. i feel like you're more obsessed with doing math than anything else though at this point in the discussion."
Math is factual. One cannot get around it's scientific implications.

"we're specifically talking about my car on the z-car garage dyno. no assumptions, no ifs, no percentages, no guessing game is needed."
There's a whole mix of if's and assumptions when the dyno is inflating the numbers. The question is why? If the numbers are inflated than so to are the gains.

"I realize where this is all going wrong. You took the part where I said stock revup motors are typically laying down roughly ~245whp on this dyno, and ran with it to come up with your ridiculous drivetrain loss assumptions on the torque."
No, I threw out some silly 10% d.t. loss examples just to show how far off this dyno is reading. It's known that tuners purposefully inflate the #'s. It helps to justify their $. It appears to me that this dynojet is off by 5-8% probably due to tuner inputs.

"Like I've said before, its the delta that matters, but you need an actual torque figure and not some random number you derived."
All the #'s needed are here and present. No random #'s on my end. Now, reliable dyno #'s, that's a different story.
298/260 for a bone stock g35 6mt at the flywheel minus that typical 18% d.t. loss and the #'s from your tune. It's all that's needed.

"Every dyno will read different so comparing stock baselines from other tuners are pointless."
One MD500 Mustang should read the same as another MD500 Mustang assuming they are calibrated. One Dynojet (same model) should read the same as the next assuming calibration AND TUNER INPUT are the same.

"With a little digging, I've found a dyno sheet from Z Car Garage on a 05' Revup G35 for your reference...pulled right off from this forum. This G had a plenum spacer installed and everything else is bone stock."
Another one from z car garage? Probably not the best source. If one's inflated, many, most or possibly all are.

Don't feel so bad about inflated numbers bra. There's a guy with an AWD FX35 out there with lesser mod's than I who thinks he's making 280 to the wheels! In the end, the dyno is THE TOOL of the tuner for the purpose of dialing in your **** so your **** can get from a to b faster and without detonating.

 

don't worry, no one is feeling bad. This is a good discussion and an opportunity to educate. By the things you're saying, I dont think you know how a dyno works. even if the sheets read 150hp / 120tq it will still read 180hp / 150tq after, its the DELTA that matters and it is still the same gains regardless of inflated or deflated numbers. A high reading dyno will not give you exponential gains, that's not how the device works. If the car baselines at 1000hp, the final pull doesn't magically become a 3000hp reading. The point of finding a stock pull on the same dyno is so we can compare apples to apples to see what a bone stock revup G puts down. It makes sense that you don't think it's the "best source" since you don't understand the reasoning why I went to find that dyno sheet.

sorry, I wanted to possibly learn something from you since you came out with such bold claims, but cmon... "Fastest naturally aspirated FX35, FX45, FX37 or QX70 known of on the planet" you realize that there's 3 different drivetrains in that statement right?

this has gone pretty far off course. the NA gains on the revup motor is very well documented by Speed Academy and didn't really need to be discussed, i'll just refer you to their article.
http://speed.academy/infiniti-g35-bo...s-nissan-vq/2/


Perhaps you can go over to my350z and tell Sasha that his Z has inflated numbers as well

 

Lightened rotating components don't add hp or torque. What they do is allow you to pull through the same gear in less time which makes for a faster acceleration time.

​​​​Lightweight flywheel can reduce about 15lbs of weight, aluminum driveshaft can reduce about 15 lbs of weight, that's a HUGE amount of rotating mass to remove.

Im not much of a math guy but the rule of thumb is 10lbs of rotating mass is worth 100lbs of dead weight.

 

Yeah, I don't think you're comprehending what I'm saying;

298 x 10% = 29.8
#1, 298 - (round to 30) 30 = 268
298 x 18% = 53.6
#2. 298 - (round to 54) 54 = 244
Let's take a % of either #. Which # will be higher? I bet it'll be #1., 268. What do you think?

Your gains are inflated because you're base and final #'s are inflated. Basic mathematics.

Sasha's gains could very well be inflated and if they are, I'd be willing to bet he knows and knows exactly by how much. Mine are deflated per the original, first ever, 15+ year old MD500 Mustang dyno in the state of NC. It sounds like a tank and it's rollers look they're for tuning a semi truck.


Yes, the fastest as I wrote though I did fail to mention "QX70 V6", not the V8 though interestingly enough my 0-60 times are the same as the V8. It's written correctly and in detail on my threads but here I'm in a slight rush to type.

 

Yes, what he said. I believe it was a Porsche engineer who was quoted saying one lb of rotational mass is = to 6-7 lbs of dead weight. I removed 80 lbs total from my wheels and tires and if this is true, this explains why it had such an impact on acceleration which was very noticeable and measurable.
A lightweight flywheel is fine but try shaving 20lbs per wheel off the G. You'll know right away that acceleration has improved dramatically but it will not show on the dyno.

 

I got 19 hp/22 lb-ft with my tune, not sure what dyno Jotech uses. $750 for the Uprev license and tuning, minus a $75 club discount so I paid $675. Since I have an Uprev license now, additional tuning is $400 for 2 hours. Not massive gains but very noticeable since the torque gains were everywhere. They also left my a/c on and it was nearly 90 degrees. I was told if I want my "hero" numbers to bring it back when its a lot cooler out...and of course pay for more dyno time.

I did notice about a 1.5-2 mpg bump in mileage at freeway speeds so that was nice. Only take me 10 years of road trips to save the money in fuel to pay for it.

We have N/A cars (well most of us) so tuning isn't going to give the big gains like turbo cars can get. But to me, the improved driveability and torque increases were worth it.

As far as the assertions that less rotating weight isn't measurable on a dyno (yes, I know you didn't make them Blue Dream), I remember seeing a build in Sport Compact Car years ago, they wanted to see if they could get an N/A CRX to hit 150 mph. When they tested the car with lighter wheels, the car showed average gains of 3-8 hp as the car was accelerated on the dyno. Motor Trend did a similar test with a BMW but used a timer to test it from 0-60 with different wheels and tires (+1, +2 sizing) and the lightest combo was 0.4 seconds quicker to 60 mph. So it is conceivable to me that a lightened flywheel could show some gains on the dyno as the car is accelerated. Steady speed HP would be unchanged.

 

If you had a fair amount of bolt on's, I'll believe it. My tuner was a Nissan tech then a service writer(?) for years before opening his shop. He is or was good friends with a well-known performance shop that deals strictly with nissans & infinitis. When I got my first tune, I had kinetix cats, a v-plenum and UR underdrive pullies. From base to tune I netted a wopping 6 hp and 7 ft lbs iirc. Less than 10/10 for sure.
My tuner told me that "these engines are tuned really well from the factory". Now this was also on a much more recent dyno, not the dynosaur I tuned on last, but still, 12% low #'s all day long. I've got a long quote on my thread somewhere about Berk Technology spelling out the differences in dyno's and how the Mustang is a notorious 12% low reader. When factoring in the low Mustang readings, I might've gotten 10/10 or just over. When factoring my above average drive train loss (awd) maybe a couple more that would've been there if I had RWD.
The gains made on the dyno from dropping wheel weight could be a mechanical and/or dyno related anomaly in several ways but I absolutely can attest to the drop in 0-60 times. Matter of fact, I can guarantee it. In my situation, it was also a drop pf 1 1/2" in tire diameter which netted an effective 3.88 final drive. FX wheels are way too big and way too heavy.

 

omfg lol you're so dense, this is hilarious. i'm just going to step away mr. "fastest" VQ35DE fx35 which somehow also happens to be the fastest VK45 FX45 and also the fastest VQ37HR QX70, all at the same time....guy.