will the 370z out-perform the Evo X?
Evolving Member
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
From: Nor-Cali
Smoke? A carrera GT SMOKES a evo... a Z will be inches in front... it will absolutely be a drivers race... in which case the evo stands a better chance... if you are talking about just the straightaways.... put some corners in the mix and im sure it will be bye bye Z unless you have a ballsey driver in the Z willing to risk neck and a 30K new car....
STi2EvoX, here you go. This is from Forged Performance. I was off a bit on the power numbers. Their dyno is the VQ equivelant of Buschur's... it reads way lower than others. This is a ~550 DJ car, pump gas, and has been running trouble free for a few months.
I know GTM did a few, I'm looking those up as well. I think they're the ones that are pushing the 600whp limit.
Hi everyone,
Wanted to share our latest work on the next generation VQ motors. We just finished and installing and tuning our first TT kit on the G37 Coupe. This is the second GTM TT kit we've installed, and the first kit install on a G37.
As usual, the quality and completeness of these kits is second to none. Just like the VQ35HR kit we did last month, these engines just love to rev, and are very efficient at utilizing the boost! We elected to run the big ture GT30 TT kit that GTM offered. Down the road, my customer wants to crank this thing up to 15psi-20psi...but for now, 500whp will have to do! These turbos are still sleeping at just under 12psi. Speaking of sleeper, we hid everything in the cabin, out of sight...this thing looks very stockish. Just some wheels, tires, and a nice drop.
Here is are the basics of the build:
VQ37 VVEL Stock Engine
GTM Stage III TT Kit with TRUE Garrett GT30's (no wheel stuffing here )
GTM Fuel System
800cc Injectors
HKS FCON Vpro with Knock Amp
HKS EVC Boost Controller
Greddy EvoTT Exhaust System
GTM 3 inch dowpipes
FP Bottleneck Restriction
What a fun car to drive now...with tons of power to match the good looks....I hate driving my stock NA G37 now.
Wanted to share our latest work on the next generation VQ motors. We just finished and installing and tuning our first TT kit on the G37 Coupe. This is the second GTM TT kit we've installed, and the first kit install on a G37.
As usual, the quality and completeness of these kits is second to none. Just like the VQ35HR kit we did last month, these engines just love to rev, and are very efficient at utilizing the boost! We elected to run the big ture GT30 TT kit that GTM offered. Down the road, my customer wants to crank this thing up to 15psi-20psi...but for now, 500whp will have to do! These turbos are still sleeping at just under 12psi. Speaking of sleeper, we hid everything in the cabin, out of sight...this thing looks very stockish. Just some wheels, tires, and a nice drop.
Here is are the basics of the build:
VQ37 VVEL Stock Engine
GTM Stage III TT Kit with TRUE Garrett GT30's (no wheel stuffing here )
GTM Fuel System
800cc Injectors
HKS FCON Vpro with Knock Amp
HKS EVC Boost Controller
Greddy EvoTT Exhaust System
GTM 3 inch dowpipes
FP Bottleneck Restriction
What a fun car to drive now...with tons of power to match the good looks....I hate driving my stock NA G37 now.
Evolved Member
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 594
Likes: 0
From: Hong Kong
Stock evo Tsukuba lap times:
http://www.autoblog.com/2007/12/05/e...ba-lap-times/1
2006 is evo 9.5, which uses smaller turbo
2005 is evo 9
X - 1:06:46
IX MR - 1:05:07
IX - 1:04:88
For those who don't want to go in to read.
http://www.jasc.or.jp/
'Course guide' is the 4th selection next to 'HOME', it will show you the map of the circuit. The two long straights will be heavily dependant on exit speeds, which would be advantage to X big time according to you.
Here is a video of Ohlins evos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAbD4...eature=related
Yes, both are modded, but in a very similar aspect. Only times the IX is slower in the corner was when X was blocking it, once it has taken the lead, you can see that theres no difference in the corners.
http://www.autoblog.com/2007/12/05/e...ba-lap-times/1
2006 is evo 9.5, which uses smaller turbo
2005 is evo 9
X - 1:06:46
IX MR - 1:05:07
IX - 1:04:88
For those who don't want to go in to read.
http://www.jasc.or.jp/
'Course guide' is the 4th selection next to 'HOME', it will show you the map of the circuit. The two long straights will be heavily dependant on exit speeds, which would be advantage to X big time according to you.
Here is a video of Ohlins evos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAbD4...eature=related
Yes, both are modded, but in a very similar aspect. Only times the IX is slower in the corner was when X was blocking it, once it has taken the lead, you can see that theres no difference in the corners.
What are you even talking about here? Improvements to what? Changed what? The fact is that the X gained 250+lbs and 10 hp, do the math. The 9 is faster in the straights, the X handles better in the turns. Despite your unfounded claims, there is much data on this. Accept it and move on.
It is pretty undisputed actually that the X handles better than the 9. Whether some people prefer the "feel" of the CT9A to the X, the overall handling capability is just flat out better in the X. It has a stiffer chassis, wider track, better suspension geometry that tracks better and doesn't bump steer like the CT9A, and the improvements materialize on the track. It flat out pulls more Gs on the skidpad, it is more neutral on corner entry and faster on corner exit. There are more than enough comparison tests, like the one done by robispec, that show this to be true.
The NASA TT and USCC are not the only examples of the X proving it's worth, and those should be no less exemplary of the X's performance than any other venue. To expand on the above mentioned example, robispec took one of their track prepped 8s with a lot more suspension work AND more hp, and ran it against their X with nothing but a catback and coilovers and the X beat it by a considerable amount.
There was another test by JUN in japan where they tested their prepped 9 against their much less modded X (still in early development) and they provided data that the X AVERAGED 5-7 mph faster through the turns than the 9 did. I never said that the X was flat out better in all aspects, as I've said many times in many other threads that the 9 is a better platform for drag racing, but the X is a better platform for road racing.
In any case, I have provided facts and examples and you have provided nothing more than comments about wanting to see it win the Tsukuba super lab battle before you'll accept that it handles better, which is not a quantifyable test and no more or less worthy than the results from NASA or the USCC. If you don't want to like the X or give it credit than so be it, but the bottom line is this:
You can't dismiss the facts because they don't meet your absurd criteria for proof, and if you're going to dispute facts that someone else has provided then bring some of your own rather than vagueries and opinion based comments.
What baseless claims have I made? I'm afraid you are the only one making baseless claims. In any case, don't turn this into a X vs IX thread. If you want to continue this discussion then do it in the X vs IX sticky thread and I'll join you in there.
It is pretty undisputed actually that the X handles better than the 9. Whether some people prefer the "feel" of the CT9A to the X, the overall handling capability is just flat out better in the X. It has a stiffer chassis, wider track, better suspension geometry that tracks better and doesn't bump steer like the CT9A, and the improvements materialize on the track. It flat out pulls more Gs on the skidpad, it is more neutral on corner entry and faster on corner exit. There are more than enough comparison tests, like the one done by robispec, that show this to be true.
The NASA TT and USCC are not the only examples of the X proving it's worth, and those should be no less exemplary of the X's performance than any other venue. To expand on the above mentioned example, robispec took one of their track prepped 8s with a lot more suspension work AND more hp, and ran it against their X with nothing but a catback and coilovers and the X beat it by a considerable amount.
There was another test by JUN in japan where they tested their prepped 9 against their much less modded X (still in early development) and they provided data that the X AVERAGED 5-7 mph faster through the turns than the 9 did. I never said that the X was flat out better in all aspects, as I've said many times in many other threads that the 9 is a better platform for drag racing, but the X is a better platform for road racing.
In any case, I have provided facts and examples and you have provided nothing more than comments about wanting to see it win the Tsukuba super lab battle before you'll accept that it handles better, which is not a quantifyable test and no more or less worthy than the results from NASA or the USCC. If you don't want to like the X or give it credit than so be it, but the bottom line is this:
You can't dismiss the facts because they don't meet your absurd criteria for proof, and if you're going to dispute facts that someone else has provided then bring some of your own rather than vagueries and opinion based comments.
What baseless claims have I made? I'm afraid you are the only one making baseless claims. In any case, don't turn this into a X vs IX thread. If you want to continue this discussion then do it in the X vs IX sticky thread and I'll join you in there.
Proof? I am not doubting you, but I find it very hard to believe that an NA V6 engine rated at 330 hp could take 600whp on the stock block and stock internals. Statistically, this is unheard of as NA engines make their power from high compression which is NOT boost friendly, while turbo engines make their power from low compression to allow for high boost. I've seen many a NA engine go boom trying to make big power from a custom fab'd turbo kit running enough boost to produce the power you're talking about.
I'd like to see mod lists and dyno graphs, as well as documentation that the car has made the power for sustained periods of time and not just a couple pulls on the dyno. Aside from displacement, the VQ37 isn't much different in terms of construction to the VQ35, and the VQ35 needed a built block with forged, low compression internals to make the kind of power that you're talking about so you'll have to forgive my skepticism. Again, do you have any proof of these claims?
I'd like to see mod lists and dyno graphs, as well as documentation that the car has made the power for sustained periods of time and not just a couple pulls on the dyno. Aside from displacement, the VQ37 isn't much different in terms of construction to the VQ35, and the VQ35 needed a built block with forged, low compression internals to make the kind of power that you're talking about so you'll have to forgive my skepticism. Again, do you have any proof of these claims?
The VQ37 just builds onto the HR series of engines. They are as robust or more robust than the 4b11. Hate to break it too you but Mitsu definately aren't reinventing the wheel with the 4b11.
The HR engines have already surpassed 500-600whp already going on a couple years. Also just to note NA they have been breaking 320+whp NA and running 12's quite easily. So any evo may want to be careful with one on the highway.
Evolving Member
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
From: IL
Stock evo Tsukuba lap times:
http://www.autoblog.com/2007/12/05/e...ba-lap-times/1
2006 is evo 9.5, which uses smaller turbo
2005 is evo 9
X - 1:06:46
IX MR - 1:05:07
IX - 1:04:88
For those who don't want to go in to read.
http://www.jasc.or.jp/
'Course guide' is the 4th selection next to 'HOME', it will show you the map of the circuit. The two long straights will be heavily dependant on exit speeds, which would be advantage to X big time according to you.
Here is a video of Ohlins evos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAbD4...eature=related
Yes, both are modded, but in a very similar aspect. Only times the IX is slower in the corner was when X was blocking it, once it has taken the lead, you can see that theres no difference in the corners.
http://www.autoblog.com/2007/12/05/e...ba-lap-times/1
2006 is evo 9.5, which uses smaller turbo
2005 is evo 9
X - 1:06:46
IX MR - 1:05:07
IX - 1:04:88
For those who don't want to go in to read.
http://www.jasc.or.jp/
'Course guide' is the 4th selection next to 'HOME', it will show you the map of the circuit. The two long straights will be heavily dependant on exit speeds, which would be advantage to X big time according to you.
Here is a video of Ohlins evos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAbD4...eature=related
Yes, both are modded, but in a very similar aspect. Only times the IX is slower in the corner was when X was blocking it, once it has taken the lead, you can see that theres no difference in the corners.
Evolved Member
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,849
Likes: 1
From: USA
Stock evo Tsukuba lap times:
http://www.autoblog.com/2007/12/05/e...ba-lap-times/1
2006 is evo 9.5, which uses smaller turbo
2005 is evo 9
X - 1:06:46
IX MR - 1:05:07
IX - 1:04:88
For those who don't want to go in to read.
http://www.jasc.or.jp/
'Course guide' is the 4th selection next to 'HOME', it will show you the map of the circuit. The two long straights will be heavily dependant on exit speeds, which would be advantage to X big time according to you.
Here is a video of Ohlins evos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAbD4...eature=related
Yes, both are modded, but in a very similar aspect. Only times the IX is slower in the corner was when X was blocking it, once it has taken the lead, you can see that theres no difference in the corners.
http://www.autoblog.com/2007/12/05/e...ba-lap-times/1
2006 is evo 9.5, which uses smaller turbo
2005 is evo 9
X - 1:06:46
IX MR - 1:05:07
IX - 1:04:88
For those who don't want to go in to read.
http://www.jasc.or.jp/
'Course guide' is the 4th selection next to 'HOME', it will show you the map of the circuit. The two long straights will be heavily dependant on exit speeds, which would be advantage to X big time according to you.
Here is a video of Ohlins evos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAbD4...eature=related
Yes, both are modded, but in a very similar aspect. Only times the IX is slower in the corner was when X was blocking it, once it has taken the lead, you can see that theres no difference in the corners.
This was all covered months and months ago when this video first came out. The problem is that with it being in japanese, most people don't have a clue what's being said and assume that the two cars are equally modded, leading them to misinterpret the results. Anyway, as I've said before, this thread is for the 370Z vs the X. If you want to compare the 9 vs the X, then go to the appropriate thread and do it there. There's a huge sticky at the top of the X general section just for that.
Last edited by STi2EvoX; Dec 10, 2008 at 08:33 PM.
Evolved Member
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,849
Likes: 1
From: USA
Think you need to do a little more research Yoda. The HR 350z motors and on are MUCH different than earlier VQ's. The 07 and on HR's have already been proven to surpass 500whp quite easily and take it. The main engine design is much much improved.
The VQ37 just builds onto the HR series of engines. They are as robust or more robust than the 4b11. Hate to break it too you but Mitsu definately aren't reinventing the wheel with the 4b11.
The HR engines have already surpassed 500-600whp already going on a couple years. Also just to note NA they have been breaking 320+whp NA and running 12's quite easily. So any evo may want to be careful with one on the highway.
The VQ37 just builds onto the HR series of engines. They are as robust or more robust than the 4b11. Hate to break it too you but Mitsu definately aren't reinventing the wheel with the 4b11.
The HR engines have already surpassed 500-600whp already going on a couple years. Also just to note NA they have been breaking 320+whp NA and running 12's quite easily. So any evo may want to be careful with one on the highway.
Don't knock the 4b11 though, as it is proving itself just as much as the HR VQs seem to be. They are both great engines, but I will say this: I can guarantee the EVO will still be cheaper and easier to get power out of because of what's required to make power in the Z. But, if budget isn't a concern then this new Z looks like a force to be reckoned with. No Z or X alike should get too cocky on the highway, because you never know what the other guy's got under the hood.
Last edited by STi2EvoX; Dec 10, 2008 at 08:50 PM.
STi2EvoX, here you go. This is from Forged Performance. I was off a bit on the power numbers. Their dyno is the VQ equivelant of Buschur's... it reads way lower than others. This is a ~550 DJ car, pump gas, and has been running trouble free for a few months.
I know GTM did a few, I'm looking those up as well. I think they're the ones that are pushing the 600whp limit.
I know GTM did a few, I'm looking those up as well. I think they're the ones that are pushing the 600whp limit.
Is there anything about what kind of numbers this translates to on the track?
Not to turn it into a g37 thread..
As you should've seen a few posts up, I saw the dyno graphs and was impressed. I have much respect for this new VQ37 now that I am learning more about it and think that aside from the greater cost associated with turboing the Z to actually make decent power, it's looking like a great car and a very worthy competitor to the X. I assumed that it wasn't much different internally to the VQ35 (which couldn't handle much power at all without major work) and you're right, I should've done my research first before making assumptions.
Don't knock the 4b11 though, as it is proving itself just as much as the HR VQs seem to be. They are both great engines, but I will say this: I can guarantee the EVO will still be cheaper and easier to get power out of because of what's required to make power in the Z. But, if budget isn't a concern then this new Z looks like a force to be reckoned with. No Z or X alike should get too cocky on the highway, because you never know what the other guy's got under the hood.
Don't knock the 4b11 though, as it is proving itself just as much as the HR VQs seem to be. They are both great engines, but I will say this: I can guarantee the EVO will still be cheaper and easier to get power out of because of what's required to make power in the Z. But, if budget isn't a concern then this new Z looks like a force to be reckoned with. No Z or X alike should get too cocky on the highway, because you never know what the other guy's got under the hood.
I am definately not knocking the 4b11. Its a great little engine also. Being its stock FI it will always be cheaper to mod. I think to get 500whp out of both on pump the 4b11 most likely will still be cheaper. The VQ will have a superior powerband though.
Like said above this is somewhat of an odd comparison. Should be easily said the Z will be faster in a strait line. The current 07-08Z are already faster stock for stock, except for maybe 0-60 time (this is real life experience not going by megazines). Also assuming they handle as good or better than the current Z they will have no problem with an IX or X on the road course. I have been to the track with a couple HR Z's and with a skilled driver they are very impressive. Really only thing limiting them is the tires. They can pull over 1g of lateral acceleration on stock suspension with good tires. When it comes to mods though the evo steps into another league imo. Much easier to gain 100whp + and tire sizes and suspension setups are cheaper for the most part.
Newbie
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
From: Calgary
How can you say this when the pistons arent even forged in the VQ UNLIKE the 4B11 which ARE forged, AND it comes with a metal head gasket?? the 4B11 is sick