2010 Taurus SHO against G37S
07-08-2009, 09:00 PM
#46
1. the old VQ didn't like boost. At all.
2. price.
3. that's what the GT-R is for. They are indeed listening.
The VQ/VR still doesn't have DI... and won't unless the displacement drops, as there's no room for it.
What will Nissan replace the VQ with? That's what gets my attention. I'd love to see a smaller displacement higher revving V6 with DI and a pair of small turbos. Maybe a conservative 380 hp to keep the GT-R guys happy.
As far as the "put on some turbo's" argument goes, that's said about a lot of cars. "why didn't they turbo it? why did they put such small turbos on?"
Imagine a CTS 3.6 DI with a pair of turbos... oh wait, that would step on the CTS-V's toes...
07-08-2009, 09:41 PM
#48
Registered Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Miami
Posts: 324
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Everyone's been saying that about the VQ for years, and yet, it hasn't been done because... well...
1. the old VQ didn't like boost. At all.
2. price.
3. that's what the GT-R is for. They are indeed listening.
The VQ/VR still doesn't have DI... and won't unless the displacement drops, as there's no room for it.
What will Nissan replace the VQ with? That's what gets my attention. I'd love to see a smaller displacement higher revving V6 with DI and a pair of small turbos. Maybe a conservative 380 hp to keep the GT-R guys happy.
As far as the "put on some turbo's" argument goes, that's said about a lot of cars. "why didn't they turbo it? why did they put such small turbos on?"
Imagine a CTS 3.6 DI with a pair of turbos... oh wait, that would step on the CTS-V's toes...
1. the old VQ didn't like boost. At all.
2. price.
3. that's what the GT-R is for. They are indeed listening.
The VQ/VR still doesn't have DI... and won't unless the displacement drops, as there's no room for it.
What will Nissan replace the VQ with? That's what gets my attention. I'd love to see a smaller displacement higher revving V6 with DI and a pair of small turbos. Maybe a conservative 380 hp to keep the GT-R guys happy.
As far as the "put on some turbo's" argument goes, that's said about a lot of cars. "why didn't they turbo it? why did they put such small turbos on?"
Imagine a CTS 3.6 DI with a pair of turbos... oh wait, that would step on the CTS-V's toes...
Nissan really seems to have it right. The GTR has always been a testament to that that really no other automaker can claim at that price point.
I agree that the VQ does not like FI and it really was never meant to. they have to come up with something else. They can perhaps drop the displacement a little and up the compression and go DI with higher output.
But for now the MPG and performance of the 3.7 is awesome for an NA V6. Also I thought that the older SHO was a Yamaha engine and not a Ford? (not sure though)
I think that Ford was simply not targetting the 335s and G37 demographics.
ps: I'd buy a kit TVR
07-08-2009, 10:01 PM
#49
You have a point there.. Ford has always been the leader in automotive innovations more so than many others. It's just that the final product that rolls out is not upto what the engineers and design artists envisioned...maybe it's just the cost-savings and productization department that messes up; I don't know.
Nissan really seems to have it right. The GTR has always been a testament to that that really no other automaker can claim at that price point.
I agree that the VQ does not like FI and it really was never meant to. they have to come up with something else. They can perhaps drop the displacement a little and up the compression and go DI with higher output.
But for now the MPG and performance of the 3.7 is awesome for an NA V6. Also I thought that the older SHO was a Yamaha engine and not a Ford? (not sure though)
I think that Ford was simply not targetting the 335s and G37 demographics.
ps: I'd buy a kit TVR
Nissan really seems to have it right. The GTR has always been a testament to that that really no other automaker can claim at that price point.
I agree that the VQ does not like FI and it really was never meant to. they have to come up with something else. They can perhaps drop the displacement a little and up the compression and go DI with higher output.
But for now the MPG and performance of the 3.7 is awesome for an NA V6. Also I thought that the older SHO was a Yamaha engine and not a Ford? (not sure though)
I think that Ford was simply not targetting the 335s and G37 demographics.
ps: I'd buy a kit TVR
The motor was a 3.0 All Aluminum Quad Cam Yamaha Motor. The motor was originally designed for boat racing. Ford and Yamaha had some kind of merger and they were going to use the motor for some kind of hot rod (so the story goes) but bailed at the last moment and decided to stuff the engines in the Taurus.
Let me tell you, those engines were STOUT. I was bone stock other than a SHO SHOP Y pipe and Cobra Maf and I would smoke Integra GSR's, RSX Type S's, ect. I would guesstimate it would run low 14's in the quarter. They had a supercharger out for them that put them around low 12's. That still good by todays standard for a Sedan, that's DAMN good for 1991. If I recall correctly, it was the third fastest sedan on the planet at the time.
Another odd fact is that the Yamaha motors were good for 8K plus rpm's, but Ford could not build an alternator to keep up with them. Also, the Intake runners are still a work of art. I miss that car everynow and then
!
07-09-2009, 10:54 AM
#51
And I want a VQ50VVVVHR lol I would love to get a G50 with the FX50 motor. THis might never happen, but the M50 is a real possibility and with the 7AT, that thing should be a monster. If they can get the 0-60 below 5 seconds, that would be a truly AWESOME car.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
maybeg37
Body Interior Exterior Lighting
9
09-08-2015 02:33 PM
