Would like to see if anyone has already done this, appears the stock 3.5L already has the long block and just needs some tuning. A reliable 7500 rpm V6 in a mass produced 3200 lb car looks like fun and it has room for after market 20x9s. 306hp would be just enough to upset alot of other RWD cars.
But...the G35\G37 coupe exists and has rwd
John Welsh said:But...the G35\G37 coupe exists and has rwd
So doesn't the 350Z lol but they're heavier and don't have transaxles that can exit corners quicker.
C'mon, backwards Porsches anyone?
Are you saying that a front drive car exits corners quicker than a rear drive car?
In reply to thatsnowinnebago :
Sounds like it. I’d love to hear the reasoning behind that statement.
350z is maybe like 100 lbs heavier than an Altima coupe, but has a vastly better suspension and right wheel drive.
There was someone on here who took the VQ out of a Maxima and put it in a Sentra. Now THAT'S a sleepy Nissan. Not a HR engine, but still plenty for that little car. The HR only came in RWD.
I seem to recall the FWD VQ engines sharing the same bellhousing as the RWD, but the blocks have different engine mount positions. But double-check me on that.
I recently worked on a Maxima with the 3.5l and surprised myself taking it around the block. Those things rip! Really puts the Datsaniti build from this very forum into perspective.
thatsnowinnebago said:Are you saying that a front drive car exits corners quicker than a rear drive car?
Sometimes it’s true, if it’s really wet or a loose surface.
BlueInGreen - Jon said:thatsnowinnebago said:Are you saying that a front drive car exits corners quicker than a rear drive car?
Sometimes it’s true, if it’s really wet or a loose surface.
My man, those front wheels pointed out of the corner make magic. Imagine positraction in fwd, boo yah. Even in the dry if you have the same size tires as the RWD car ;)
I feel like weight transfer does bad things to a FWD car's motive traction. It would be interesting to see a chart or something showing speeds at corner entry, apex, and exit between RWD and FWD.
In reply to thatsnowinnebago :
It's the same as AWD, the only difference is the tires don't spin with AWD, so the trick is just getting the FWD tires not to spin. Less weight transfer also means better handling, that's why 50/50 weight distribution is ideal. Yeah weight transfer is great for RWD accelleration in drag racing and Porsche has a theory about the low rear engine catapult weight transfer causes superior braking but none of that matters on a properly set up car. The Altimas 20x9s will take 265/30s nicely, that should limit slip just right, because a little wheel spin is good for acceleration also.
Remembering rally from the 90s and of course Seb Loeb an fwd is plenty fast. Watching a ton of Irish tarmac recently fwd is as E36 M3 to watch as ever unfortunately.
I also remember CCC diagramming the best corner approach for fwd/rwd in normal road conditions. That was cool.
AWD sucks too. Can't stand it for rally.
FWD at least is the entry to mid-level keep the manufacturers happy with modern sell on Monday up to date body.
But I miss simple rwd fun. For that there will always be Irish tarmac where you don't have to clinically straighten the steering before you can put the boot in it. I do wish it wasn't all Mk II Escorts out there tho'. 
I say all of that despite looking out the window over my shoulder at three fwd Nissans belonging to myself. 
The rearward weight transfer on acceleration helps RWD everywhere, not just the drag strip. I agree that limited wheel spin is the goal, but the difference here is how much power it takes to get there. And it is hard to discount the fact that FWD is asking the front tires to provide lateral and forward grip. Whereas RWD shares that load between the front and rear tires. Either way, I'm still curious about corner exit on pavement. I've never driven a front driver with an LSD but I hear good things.
svxsti said:In reply to thatsnowinnebago :
It's the same as AWD, the only difference is the tires don't spin with AWD, so the trick is just getting the FWD tires not to spin. Less weight transfer also means better handling, that's why 50/50 weight distribution is ideal. Yeah weight transfer is great for RWD accelleration in drag racing and Porsche has a theory about the low rear engine catapult weight transfer causes superior braking but none of that matters on a properly set up car. The Altimas 20x9s will take 265/30s nicely, that should limit slip just right, because a little wheel spin is good for acceleration also.
So the goal is not to spin the tires, but spinning the tires is good?
Is there room to put the entire transverse package where the rear "seat" was in the Altima? That is the only place to put it. Mass forward of the axle, not a 911.
svxsti said:BlueInGreen - Jon said:thatsnowinnebago said:Are you saying that a front drive car exits corners quicker than a rear drive car?
Sometimes it’s true, if it’s really wet or a loose surface.
My man, those front wheels pointed out of the corner make magic. Imagine positraction in fwd, boo yah. Even in the dry if you have the same size tires as the RWD car ;)
Having had a 5th gen Maxima with the VQ and top-end suspension and tires (it was an autocross car), I'm gonna go with "nope" (and I'm the one who admin'd the suspension and handling subforum on Maxima.org) The only place FWD cars get out of the corner quicker, all other things being equal, is on slippery surfaces.
Also, if you're talking about performance/handling with boat-anchor 20x9s, you've lost me already. The Altima chassis is best served with 17x9 or 18x9 at most. Increasing the diameter just increases rotational weight and slows things down - and limits you to (generally) rubber-band profile tires, which are usually not an improvement in performance.
But each to his own - if you like FWD, that's your thing. As to the original question of whether the HR would "work" in an Altima - the answer is "probably" as it's based on the same VQ35 the Altima has. Will it be drop-in? I doubt it, due to packaging. And unless your Altima already has LSD, seems like a waste. The Alti already has more than enough power for its meh suspension, and you can make more power on the engine you have with some bolt-ons and a tune.
Talk to NISformance, they're the specialists at "FWD HR" engines. Any 07+ Altima and 09+ Max has this engine.
The hot ticket is one of those engines swapped into an older chassis, mainly to get rid of the CVT they all came with stock. They bolt into pretty much any VQ maxima (95+) and 02+ Altima. With some fab work they also fit into Sentras.
Boat anchor? They're the same dimensions as the fronts on a CGT with no engine or axle lol see these are the guys I wanna prove wrong. And if FWD is better on slippery surfaces, then it should be even better on dry. Just don't spin with the wheel turned lol
In reply to svxsti :
Just think how well Nissan's wrong wheel drive WEC hybrid turned out.
svxsti said:Boat anchor? They're the same dimensions as the fronts on a CGT with no engine or axle lol see these are the guys I wanna prove wrong. And if FWD is better on slippery surfaces, then it should be even better on dry. Just don't spin with the wheel turned lol
20" wheels on the CGT are almost certainly the function of fitting the massive carbon ceramic brakes and much less to do with optimization of tire height or whatever.
You've been corrected multiple times by multiple people. FWD will not have and advantage exiting a corner in dry conditions over a RWD car. You are asking the front tires to steer and accelerate exiting the corner in a FWD. You can only ever use up to 100% of the available tire grip. That job is split in the RWD car. This shouldn't be so hard.
svxsti said:Boat anchor? They're the same dimensions as the fronts on a CGT with no engine or axle lol see these are the guys I wanna prove wrong. And if FWD is better on slippery surfaces, then it should be even better on dry. Just don't spin with the wheel turned lol
boat anchor = heavy.
20" wheels are heavier than 17" wheels, in the wrong place (outside diameter = more rotational mass). This is simple physics. If you can go fast with 20x9s that weigh 30lbs, you can go faster with 17x9s that weigh 20lbs. This is pretty basic stuff.
I really can't help but feeling this is a trolling post, at this point, so I'm out....
(on my old Maxima, those are 17x9s @ 17lbs with 255s, by the way)
The fronts were 19s on the CGT lol I just said dimensions. Never mind the other Nissan Coupe with a V6 Turbo and a front axle uses 255/40/20s and dominated the Nurburgring, even lighter cars. That size should be the bench mark for all cars with that much weight on the fronts.
If I spent that much time on a Maxima I would have just welded on the whole GT-R front suspension lol
svxsti said:The fronts were 19s on the CGT lol I just said dimensions. Never mind the other Nissan Coupe with a V6 Turbo and a front axle uses 255/40/20s and dominated the Nurburgring, even lighter cars. That size should be the bench mark for all cars with that much weight on the fronts.
If I spent that much time on a Maxima I would have just welded on the whole GT-R front suspension lol
1. Hell, You're right. Your Altima is pretty much just like a GT-R, except with a little less power (which you will take care of). Hey, they both have front axles, they both have 6 cylinders, and they both are Nissan coupes, after all. Kind of like a 911 GT2 and GT3 - just variations of the same thing, basically.
2. Whoa, slow down there! That Maxima is even more like a GT-R. It has front axles. It has 6 cylinders. Hell, it even has a spoiler on the trunk. And it was actually built in Japan, just like Godzilla (your Altima was made in either Tennessee or Mississippi).
Did you look at the Sentra swap? When you're ready to buy, he'd probably have some valuable feedback. https://grassrootsmotorsports.com/forum/build-projects-and-project-cars/2004-nissan-sentra-v6-swap/106992/page1/
You'll need to log in to post.
