Something all Maxima owners should read: Long

[bk2kmax]

Maxima.org Dyno Comparisons: Battle of the Maxima 3.0's


Submitted by Steve Pake



Dyno Comparisons — Introduction

One of the longest running debates among members of the Maxima.org community is the classic question of "whose is fastest". In the decade running from 1992 to 2001, the performance-oriented Nissan Maxima SE's were all built with 3.0L engines ranging from 190HP to 222HP. The novice might easily conclude that the 222HP Maxima is obviously the fastest, but there is much more to automotive performance than just peak horsepower figures alone. To get to the true answers, one must look much deeper into cars than this and analyze some factors that are often overlooked.

In the past, Maxima.org members have fiercely battled the merits of their respective cars, all vying that their particular generation Maxima is the fastest overall. Arguing points have been best stock ¼ mile times at the track, best modified ¼ mile times, and in some cases even competitions on the streets away from populated areas. However, there are always a very high number of variables in any of these racing conditions, the largest of which is the driver. As the saying goes, "a bad driver can make a fast car slow, but a good driver cannot make a slower car fast." If a car that's perceived to be slower runs a great time at the track, is it because of the driver, or was the car itself fast? This can result in an endless loop of debates.

The purpose of this article will be to take a new look at an old argument, and attempt to quantify the differences between these 3.0 Maxima's with a more scientific approach using something called dyno analysis. A chassis dynamometer measures the power at the wheels of a car from a low RPM all the way up to the engine's maximum operating speed, effectively measuring the vehicle's acceleration capabilities. An engine's force is not a constant throughout its operational range (it can actually vary quite a bit) so the power curves are very important to determine. Unlike competitions at the track, dyno analysis isolates the driver (the largest variable) from the car, which then allows you a much more detailed and accurate comparison of just the cars themselves.

If anyone has taken a basic Physics class, you'll probably recognize the following equation, "F = ma", from Newton's Second Law of Motion. This equation relates force "F", mass "m", and acceleration "a" all to each other such that you can determine anyone of these variables given that you know the values of the other two variables. The mass of a car is constant, and a chassis dynamometer gives you the force. This is two of the three variables, so now you can solve for the last remaining variable which is acceleration.

a = (F/m).

From this rearranged equation, it is now easy to see that there are two primary ways of increasing acceleration. You can either increase the force, or decrease the mass, and this is the basic principle for automotive performance. Everything else comes second.

Engine Power Curves

Lets take the first step and look at the dyno power and torque curves for the engines: the VE30DE, the VQ30DE, and the VQ30DE-K.

3rd Generation (1992-1994 SE): VE30DE, 3.0L DOHC 24-valve V6. 190HP @ 5600rpm, 190 lb-ft @ 4000rpm. Iron block and heads, variable valve timing, variable intake manifold.

4th Generation (1995-1999 all models): VQ30DE, 3.0L DOHC 24-valve V6. 190HP @ 5600rpm, 205 lb-ft @ 4000rpm. Aluminum block and heads, NO variable valve timing, NO variable intake manifold.

5th Generation (2000-2001 all models): VQ30DE-K, 3.0L DOHC 24-valve V6. 222HP @ 6400rpm, 217 lb-ft @ 4000rpm. Aluminum block and heads, NO variable valve timing, variable intake manifold.

Putting these engines to the test on the popular Dynojet 248 chassis dynamometer will net the following typical peak results below, although your individual car may test out slightly lower or higher:

3rd Gen VE30DE: 164whp/167wtq


4th Gen VQ30DE: 161 whp/174wtq

5th Gen VQ30DE-K: 186 whp/186wtq
Figure 1: Engine Horsepower and Torque Curves



Seeing the power curves for the engines, it's very easy to conclude that the VQ30DE-K with 222HP (186 whp) is by far the most powerful or the three engines. Also apparent is that the VE30DE engine has a bit more power at the top-end than the identically rated VQ30DE engine, most likely due to the VE engine's variable valve timing and variable intake manifold technologies that the VQ engine lacks.

Note that these figures are in wheel horsepower and torque, and that they are lower than the peak advertised numbers. This is because drivetrain components themselves require energy to use such that by the time the engine's power finally gets to where the rubber meets the pavement there is something less than what the engine started with. Typically, a Dynojet dynamometer will record a "loss" of 15-18% for manual drivetrains, and 22-25% for automatic drivetrains. The Dynojet dynos are passive rolling load type dynamometers, so the vehicle is tested while accelerating. Some additional energy is lost accelerating the engine and drivetrain components themselves, so there is not really this much "loss", but that is for another technical discussion. If you have ever wondered why manual transmission equipped cars are generally faster than their automatic counterparts, the difference in drivetrain efficiency is a big part of that, along with the fact that manuals tend to have an extra gear with more aggressive ratios than automatic transmissions.

However, you can't just ride an engine down the track - you need a car too!

Power to Weight Ratio Curves

Now that we have established the force that each of these engines are able to produce at each point along their RPM ranges, now we can figure in the mass that each of these engines are pulling to determine their overall acceleration rates.

3rd Generation: approx 3100 lbs.

4th Generation: approx 3000 lbs.
5th Generation: approx 3200 lbs.
We know that the 5th Gen Maxima clearly has the most overall power from the previous section, but it is also by far the heaviest of the three, and as you can see in Figure 2 below, this has a very significant impact on the vehicle's performance.

Figure 2: Power to Weight Ratio Curves



Now that weight has been accounted for, our calculations show that even with all of the extra power, the 5th Gen Maxima does not have much more, if any, acceleration potential than the 4th Gen Maxima until after 5500rpm. Otherwise the cars are pretty close, although the results indicate that the 5th Gen will edge ahead at the top of each gear. Also, one might not have thought that the 4th Gen Maxima with the same 190HP as the 3rd Gen would be any faster. However, because of the added torque and the reduced weight from the aluminum block VQ engine vs the VE's heavier iron block, the 4th Gen now has a clear advantage against the 3rd Gen.

So if we end the comparison here, it's a pretty close race overall with the 5th Gen Maxima taking a slight lead, the 4th Gen Maxima just behind, and then finally the 3rd Gen Maxima nipping at the heels of the 4th Gen VQ.

However, it doesn't end there.

From discussions with fellow Maxima owners on the Maxima.org Forums, it has generally been concluded that the 4th Gen Maxima's are actually slightly faster than the 5th Gen's. Stock vs stock, and modded vs modded, the 4th Gen's tend to put down slightly better times at the track, and they also tend to do slightly better in informal street competitions. Even members that have owned both 4th Gen and 5th Gen Maxima's have said that their 4th Gen's felt a bit faster, although their 5th Gen's still had better highway pickup thanks to the better top-end. So what's wrong with this picture? The dyno comparison shows that the 5th Gen should be faster overall, yet it's generally agreed upon that the 4th Gen's are the faster overall car. What gives?

As it turns out, there is another very significant variable still not accounted for, and it isn't the driver (not yet at least :-))

Wheel and Tire Weight !!!!

Wheel/Tire Weight vs Vehicle Performance

Professional and enthusiast cyclists know all about this, but it's often taken for granted among enthusiast circles in the automotive world. The heavier your wheels are, the more rotational inertia (drag) they'll have which means they will be more difficult to accelerate. To understand this concept, imagine that you have a small children's bicycle up on a stand. One of these small wheels may have about the same overall diameter as the wheels on your car. You can easily put your finger on one of the wheel spokes of the bicycle and get it spinning easily. Now try the same thing with one of your car's wheels. You'll probably end up with a very sore finger!! Even though the diameter of the wheels are the same, the wheel (and tire) on your car is significantly heavier and requires many orders of magnitude greater force to get it accelerating at the same rate as the bicycle wheel. It's not just that the wheels and tires themselves are heavier, but rather that you must accelerate this weight around and around in circles that makes it more difficult to accelerate.

Without going into the equations too much (I = mr2), the lighter your overall wheel and tire combination weight is, the smaller the moment of inertia will be for accelerating them, which will allow your car to accelerate faster. Also, the closer the center of mass of the wheel and tire combined is to the axis of rotation, the smaller the moment of inertia will be, which again will allow for faster acceleration. A good approximation for this is to just assume that the center of mass of your wheel and tire is equal to the radius of the wheel itself. If you have 18" rims and low-profile tires that in total weigh about 55lb and then switch to much lighter 15" rims and taller tires (while keeping tire diameter the same) for a total weight of 40lb you now have a two-fold benefit. First, you reduced the moment of inertia by reducing the weight of your wheel/tire combination by 15 lb. Secondly, you further reduced the moment of inertia by keeping the center of wheel/tire mass closer to the axis of rotation. So in the process of doing this switch, you lightened your car by 60lb, but also reduced the moment of inertia of your wheel and tires by 50% which will in turn allow for better acceleration.

So how big of a difference does a low moment of rotational inertia make? Well, the actual equations and algebra needed to show this directly get a little complex for those that are not engineers or mathematicians, so we will not do that here. However, a good approximation has been discussed and widely agreed upon that states that every single pound you add to your wheel and tire combination is equivalent to adding eight pounds to the curb weight of your car. However, you don't just have one wheel and tire. You have four of them, and all four wheels require energy to accelerate. In the above example of going from 15" to 18" rims and vice versa, that represents a difference of 480 lb of curb weight!!!! Now it's very easy to see how significant just a few extra pounds of wheel and tire mass can become. So now lets take a look at our Maxima's to see what the differences are.

Both 3rd Gen and 4th Gen Maxima's were shipped with 15" rims that weighed approximately 40lbs. including their tires. In 1997 the 4th Gen's got slightly larger 16" rims with a 2lbs. increase to 42lbs. for the new wheel/tire combination weight. Initial 5th Gen SE's were shipped with 16" rims as well (approximately 42lb) because the 17" rims were late availability. Once the 17" rims became available, all further SE's were shipped with 17" rims weighing 50lb including the tires. 17" rims account for the majority of the 2000-2001 Maxima SE's. Since the 16" rims are the middle ground, we'll use that as our baseline and then adjust the other curb weights from that point.

Vehicle Wheel Size Approx Wheel/Tire Weight Curb Weight Adjustment from 16"/42 lb Adjusted Curb Weight
3rd Gen 15" 40 lbs. 3100 lbs. - 64 lbs. 3036 lbs.
4th Gen 15" 40 lbs. 3000 lbs. - 64 lbs. 2936 lbs.
4th Gen 16" 42 lbs. 3000 lbs. n/a 3000 lbs.
5th Gen 16" 42 lbs. 3200 lbs. n/a 3200 lbs.
5th Gen 17" 50 lbs. 3200 lbs. + 256 lbs. 3456 lbs.


A 3100lb 3rd Gen effectively becomes approximately 3036lb. A 3000lb 4th Gen with 15" rims becomes approximately 2936lb. The 4th and 5th Gen models with 16" rims maintain their respective 3000lb and 3200lb curb weights. However, the 5th Gen with 17" rims takes a whopping 256lb hit to its effective curb weight. Now if we revisit our previous calculations the picture suddenly becomes MUCH different!

Figure 3: Power to Weight Ratio Curves, Accounting for Wheel/Tire Weights



Figure 4: ZOOM



Taking wheel/tire mass into account, we now have two completely different pictures for the 5th Gen's depending on how the vehicle is equipped. The 5th Gen with 16" rims is perhaps one of the fastest 3.0's, yet the 17" equipped models are perhaps the slowest. By now you should have a basic understanding of what you're looking at, so these charts should be pretty self-explanatory. Figure 3 shows the overall power and torque curves, while Figure 4 shows a zoom of the peak horsepower range at the top-end on the left, with a zoom of the torque curves for the low/mid-range on the right.

Final Results

Now that we have something that's more or less close to the "whole picture", we can finally make some objective conclusions about all of these different Maxima's. However, everybody has their own definition of performance which can vary greatly from person to person. Some of us are after flat-out top-end power, while others of us want strong low/mid-range punch for slicing through heavy stop and go traffic, and for pulling away from stoplight after stoplight. And then other people just want a car that performs well all-around and will be up to the challenge no matter what the task. So instead of trying to declare an overall winner that without a doubt would draw flames from the other two generations of owners, what I will do instead is categorize the results and then let you make your own conclusions based on what your specific needs and desires are.

Overall Performance (2000-6500rpm)

Rank Model FWHP/(Weight)
1 Gen5/16" 86.3
2 Gen4/15" 83.0
3 Gen4/16" 81.3
4 Gen3/15",
Gen5/17" (tie) 80.1
80.0


Top-End Performance (4500-6500rpm)

Rank Model FWHP/(Weight)
1 Gen5/16" 108.5
2 Gen4/15",
Gen3/15",
Gen5/17" (tie) 101.0
100.8
100.4
3 Gen4/16" 98.8


Mid-Range Performance (3000-5000rpm)

Rank Model FWHP/(Weight)
1 Gen4/15",
Gen5/16" (tie) 86.5
86.5
2 Gen4/16" 84.7
3 Gen3/15" 81.5
4 Gen5/17" 80.1


Low-End Performance (2000-3000rpm)

Rank Model FWHP/(Weight)
1 Gen4/15" 52.5
2 Gen4/16" 51.3
3 Gen5/16" 50.4
4 Gen5/17",
Gen3/15" (tie) 46.6
46.5


Overall Summary - Fifth Generation

Depending on what kind of wheels you have, you could have either one of the fastest 3.0 Maxima's ever built, or one of the slowest. The models with 16" rims are at the top of every category except for low-end performance where the 4th Gen's still have an advantage. If you love to tear up the highways, you will seriously love a 5th Gen Maxima. The GXE owners with the 15" steel wheels may be even faster. To owners with the heavy 17" rims, don't feel too badly. Your cars have a lot of potential, but most of it is being eaten up by the rims when you try to accelerate. If you're displeased with the performance you're getting, seriously consider switching to some lighter rims.

Overall Summary - Fourth Generation

The 4th Gen Maxima is a good overall performer. It may not be first in every category, but it's never too far behind, either. It excels in low/mid-range performance which is ideal for regular driving and ¼ mile performance. The fastest all-motor 3.0 Maxima in the ¼ mile is none other than a 4th Generation model, and those of you that spend your days in stop and go traffic below 3000rpm and pulling away from stoplights will love the car's performance in this area. However, top-end is not this car's strong suit. If you love highway passing power, and taking an engine up to redline in each and every gear, the 4th Gen is probably not for you. Even a 5th Gen Maxima with the heaviest 17" rims will be able to match or beat the 4th Gen's performance on the highway. If you're a 4th Gen owner and you desire greater highway performance, you do have options. Search for posts about the "MEVI" in the "4th Generation" Maxima.org Forum, and you will be enlightened.

Overall Summary - Third Generation

Although the 3rd Gen is not the best in any single category from the analysis here, it still manages to put down a very respectable level of performance. But to the 3rd Gen's credit, it is the oldest car in the comparison. Despite this, a 3rd Gen is still fully capable of running right with or even beating cars from the other two generations once the revs are solidly up in the high-end. Not bad for a car that's over 10 years old, eh? This is yet another testament to the true greatness of the 3rd Gen's.

Final Thoughts, Discussion, Arguments, and Disclaimers

About Drivers

In the end, the leveling factor for all of these cars are the drivers. Individual driver skill can make a big enough difference that any one of these cars could beat any of the other depending on the driver. Despite the various advantages and disadvantages of the cars, drivers from each respective generation have been able to come home with 14-second timeslips thanks to good driving. Good physical hand/eye skills are just one small part of this. Understanding the technical merits of your car, learning to maximize performance where it's strong, but yet respecting its weaknesses are all part of being a good driver.

About Dynos

In the course of putting this article together, I spent many long hours searching member's webpages and threads within the Maxima.org Forums trying to find the best representative stock dyno charts from each generation. No "ringer" dynos were used, and I have tried to do the best job possible in ensuring that the playing field remained level at all times. It may just so happen that your Maxima could be quite a bit stronger than the other cars of your type. However, the opposite may also be true. In the event of this, make adjustments to the results seen here based on your individual car.

About Wheel Weights

Determining wheel weights for each car was also a tedious process of searching through many Maxima.org Forum threads trying to find the overall consensus on how much each type of wheel really weighed. There is a high amount of variability in this however, because scales themselves have their own error, and people are often using non-OEM tires which can also sway results. Your individual wheel/tire combination weight may vary slightly from what was reported here. If this is the case, make your own adjustments to the results. Also, the 8 pound of curb weight for every single pound added to your wheel and tire mass "estimation" is exactly what it is - an estimation. In the process of translating a very complex concept down to something very simple like this, a degree of accuracy is always lost. It is by no means set in stone, and it's entirely possible that you may have very heavy rims yet have put down very competitive times at the track. Also see "About Drivers" above. Also see "About Dynos" above.

[thrasher]

i'm not gonna lie man, that is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too long to read the whole thing right now, i think a summary would be in order, pick out the main points...if you read the whole thing yourself

[n1smo]

I agree with everything in the article minus the part about the wheel/tire weight. I don't think the rear wheel weight should count in the rotating mass calculations. Yes, it does take some work to move the back tires but it shouldn't be anything close to the +1lb of wheel weight = 8 lb. So, the 5th gen is not that slow with the 17"s.

[Strider Negro]

I liked the article, it was well written and posts some good facts.
The cool thing about it is that the guy defended the 3rd gen!!!!
My car is still running well (Thank God), and I hope that it will last a while longer...

[Paonessa]

good reading accept the artice doesn't address modifications. all 3rd gens and the 1995 4th gen are OBD-1 engines. it's proven that they'll recieve better power gains from modifications than the obd-2's.

[Strider Negro]

Really????
3rd gens recieve better gain from mods?
An example would be a y pipe right???

and which is better Paonessa, a cold air intake or the other intake that looks like a cone....(don't know the name...)

[Strider Negro]

And what does OBD-1 mean?

[Paonessa]

i'm not sure what the exact meaning is, but as of 1996 all cars made or brought into the US have to pass specific emissions standards (obd-2). the 95's and below don't have to follow the new standards. look at the valve cover on a 96 maxima it has four sensors on it that my car doesn't have.

[99maxse]

the newer max`s do have restrictions cause of emissions. i liked the article , but to long.. all i gotta say is that it shows that regardless of what gen your maxima is ... you do got a great car all around

[Paonessa]

Originally posted by Strider Negro
Really????
3rd gens recieve better gain from mods?
An example would be a y pipe right???

and which is better Paonessa, a cold air intake or the other intake that looks like a cone....(don't know the name...)

i'm not a big fan of cold air intake on a 3rd or 4th gen. cold air's make less power at higher rpm's cuz of the extra piping and that's where those cars are already the weakest.
the intake on my car is a weapon R. it has carbon fiber piping and a hyper intake. i think that's the cone shape filter you were talking about. I'm pretty sure they're referred to as Warm air intake (WAI), but i think it has bad connotation. Mine cost me $250, which is what most people spend on a cold air system, but the extra money is from the pipe and an upgraded air filter and i use the Tornado even though some people don't like 'em

[bk2kmax]

Originally posted by thrasher
i'm not gonna lie man, that is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too long to read the whole thing right now, i think a summary would be in order, pick out the main points...if you read the whole thing yourself

Summary being that the 3.0 5th Gen Maxima with 16 or 15 inch rims was the fastest of the group as far as putting out more wheel hp.

[bk2kmax]

Originally posted by n1smo
I agree with everything in the article minus the part about the wheel/tire weight. I don't think the rear wheel weight should count in the rotating mass calculations. Yes, it does take some work to move the back tires but it shouldn't be anything close to the +1lb of wheel weight = 8 lb. So, the 5th gen is not that slow with the 17"s.

Well I agree with the whole article because he did the math that shows how he came up with his data, now unless someone comes up with some other type of math to counter his calculations then everything is right on point just as it is figured regardless of what our buttdynos tell us.

[bk2kmax]

Originally posted by Paonessa
good reading accept the artice doesn't address modifications. all 3rd gens and the 1995 4th gen are OBD-1 engines. it's proven that they'll recieve better power gains from modifications than the obd-2's.

You're probably right but it depends on what type of mods you're talking about, there are 5th gens that are turboed now and putting out crazy hp/tq numbers that I'm not certain any 3rd gen can touch.

[bk2kmax]

Originally posted by 99maxse
the newer max`s do have restrictions cause of emissions. i liked the article , but to long.. all i gotta say is that it shows that regardless of what gen your maxima is ... you do got a great car all around

Well I agree it is long but I warned everyone of that on the title of the thread but you are right regardless of what gen your max is you do get a great car all around, the numbers and quality/reliability of the car proves that and don't forget the VQ's 9 years in a row rating on Ward's Ten Best Engine List.

[Paonessa]

Originally posted by bk2kmax


You're probably right but it depends on what type of mods you're talking about, there are 5th gens that are turboed now and putting out crazy hp/tq numbers that I'm not certain any 3rd gen can touch.

usually turbo systems come with a whole new ecu so i don't think 96+ 4th gens, and 5 th gens would be hindered by obd-2 standards once they go forced induction