Street Cred

Post by **PalmerWMD** » Thu Sep 19, 2002 4:27 pm

I just went out again to the parking lot where, the local racer punks hang out.

I was looking for some entertainment.

I saw the one guy I had raced (and got a ticket from said race), but he left as I pulled in.

So I sit down at Rally's and a couple of his buddies are hanging out.

I tell then we raced and I won, they ask what are you running, and I tell them a little bit about the VH45DE..

Then the one guy says, "so what kinda car is that?"

I say "an Infiniti Q45"

The guy: " Yeah Infiniti's are faaast, even stock"

This is the second time I heard one of the local racers say that, almost exact same phrase.

And I dont really talk to them all that much.:pface

I think our brand has some serious street cred, at least here on preston.

Fred...

Post by **EWT** » Thu Sep 19, 2002 4:27 pm

palmerwmd wrote:I just went out again to the parking lot where, the local racer punks hang out.

I was looking for some entertainment.

I saw the one guy I had raced (and got a ticket from said race), but he left as I pulled in.

So I sit down at Rally's and a couple of his buddies are hanging out.

I tell then we raced and I won, they ask what are you running, and I tell them a little bit about the VH45DE..

Then the one guy says, "so what kinda car is that?"

I say "an Infiniti Q45"

The guy: " Yeah Infiniti's are faaast, even stock"

This is the second time I heard one of the local racers say that, almost exact same phrase.

And I dont really talk to them all that much.:pface

I think our brand has some serious street cred, at least here on preston.

Fred...

Considering most of them probably drive Civics that would be lucky to run a high 16 on a downhill track with a 50 mph tailwind, anything quicker than a moped is fast relative to their cars.

Unfortuantely for them, their "performance" modifications of clear corners, neon washer squirters, fake HID bulbs, and slamming your car so it looks like the suspension collapsed just make the car look stupid, rather than go faster. I love beating up on them with a stock big 4 door sedan, although my favorite story is when my mother in law with 3 people and a baby in the car seat took a seriously riced out Civic from a stoplight in a Malibu sourced from Hertz. That had to really hurt......

Post by **Mayhem_J30** » Thu Sep 19, 2002 4:27 pm

be carefull down there on preston fred. the CJ ran an article a week or two ago about cops cracking down hard on cruising and racing there. remember the whole undercover civic thing?

Post by **Sopdadope** » Thu Sep 19, 2002 4:27 pm

lol wow those guys' rides must be really slow if they think a Q45 is all that fast. I would never be terrified of a Q, Z06 yes...Q? hmmm...

Post by **theTony** » Thu Sep 19, 2002 4:27 pm

Mayhem_J30 wrote:be carefull down there on preston fred. the CJ ran an article a week or two ago about cops cracking down hard on cruising and racing there. remember the whole undercover civic thing?

Yeah, gotta watch out for the popo down there. That's kind of interesting that those other guys were giving the Infiniti some resepect. Usually they see the extra two doors on a car and never think anything more of it than they would a Camry.

Post by **Chally** » Thu Sep 19, 2002 4:27 pm

Hey Sopdadope,

What Honda have you seen beat a Q45? (apart from the NSX)

So far, I've creamed every Honda that has tried, & that's even with the family sometimes.:icesangel

I'm not saying you can't make them go, but do the same mods on the Q as on the Honda, & there is no contest.

I agree that you shouldn't be terrified of a Q, but maybe a bit concerned?

:D:D

I suppose if you put a Turbo on one, then that's a different story.

:pface

Post by **QShip** » Thu Sep 19, 2002 4:27 pm

I agree with you Chally. 1qckser has been running his stock 91 Q against 5.0 Mustangs, a SC Audi running 23psi and a Volvo with a custom turbo. He has not been embarassed.

The Mustangs get beaten outright. The other two cars cannot pull away from the Q.

Like you said Chally, how bad would the carnage had been if the Q were SC or had a turbo?

Post by **OLU40** » Thu Sep 19, 2002 4:27 pm

Here in NY among racers and serious drivers alike, my Q gets serious respect for power and those who dont have I take it by demonstration. Even our old stlye Q's are revered for their styling believe it or not. Alot of so called powerful cars with all that technology still dont match with the Q. Half-car, Half-Amazing!:D

Post by **PalmerWMD** » Thu Sep 19, 2002 4:27 pm

test,

edit: cool it works.

Fred...

Post by **jimb** » Thu Sep 19, 2002 4:27 pm

I have a 90 Q that I expect is as fast as anyone running box stock. I' m guessing, seat of pants, it will run the quarter in 15 flat.

Q's aren't dragsters. Not saying stock Civics are blowing by me, jeez, double the motor without doubling the weight, but my Vette runs by the Q (13.8 in the quarter).

Most any 90's Mustang or Camaro or Firebird kicks the Q's butt off the line.

Hey, I love my Q but guys come on. Its no race car. Let it be what it is, a very nicely made middle sized sport sedan with good power, decent handling and a high level of comfort. At least the Series 1 is, I've driven later models and wasn't that impressed.

Post by **AZhitman** » Thu Sep 19, 2002 4:27 pm

Jimb - Just don't try to run against one in "as new" mechanical condition from 45 to 140. Very few cars can hold their own against the 90-95 Q in this arena.

Post by **rahiel aziz** » Thu Sep 19, 2002 4:27 pm

I do not agree with jimp sure lot of cars with weight advantage over Q pulls away but once u catch up with them around 60mph thats where Q really shines.I live brooklyn ny so most of my races are short.If u are not using 1st gear manually than u will lose a lot .U have 90Q ,put jwt ecu/tri mode tcu and u will have a different car,thats from my personal experience.I just raced with Mb C230 kompreso which is half the size and weight of Q.he was fornt of me at red light when light changed and when i tried to pass him he nailed it i just tap Q passed him at 80mph.Next light i am waiting for him to come to right side but he stops few feet behined me on the right side, I wonder why.than something flash in head oh he wants rolling start and he knew about Q slow take off.light changed and he zipped by me and put 30ft gap between us,I nailed the padel now u see jwt ecu surprise Q pulls to 7500rpm goes into 2nd and i was right by his side at 85mph he coudn't pull away anymore I just stayed on his side.At next red light he rolled down his window I did the same.I saw two surprised teenagers, driver said hey man not bad , ur car can hold itself pretty good.I smiled and repeated my favorite line,not bad for a car with 200k miles on (actually 198,000mph).the reason i told this story is when u have a stock Q 90-95 engine only pulls up 6000rpm and after that its just a screaming engine even the redline is 6900rpm.but with jwt ecu Q will pulls upto 7500rpm and with jwt tcu she does that very smoothly.

Post by **DAEDALUS** » Thu Sep 19, 2002 4:27 pm

Rahiel (bobbynyc), JWT should pay you a commission if I decide to get the ECU. Your story has done more to make me want one than anything else to date. Jimb, I'd never race most vettes in earnest. True, the Q isn't a pure sports car. But given enough distance I'd be pretty confident against a non-SS Camaro or (especially) a 'stang. Granted, a quarter would be hairy, but beyond that it would be all Q.

Post by **jimb** » Thu Sep 19, 2002 4:27 pm

Problem is that when you live in North New Jersey you don't get many opportunities to drive in the speed range where the old Q really shines.

I agree that that once you get " on the cams" she goes pretty well but even there, seriously hot cars will walk away.

Actually, the discussion started talking about racing Civics and the like which really "who cares?" I mean, we have a double overhead cam 8 cylinder engine in a 3800 pound car. The list of cars a Q can take in quarter is lengthy, all those Corrolas, Accords, Taurus, Buick Century, but they all fall into the 'who cares' category.

If you want to talk street racing you at least have to be competitive with stock American v8s. There are so many modded Vettes and NOS Eclipses out there that you don't even want to think about them.

Again, its not like I'm putting the Q down, hey I own one and love it but when the talk gets around to street racing, chest thumping over the Q beating a Civic with a coffee can exhaust extension is kinda lame, IMHO.

Post by **EWT** » Thu Sep 19, 2002 4:27 pm

jimb wrote:Again, its not like I'm putting the Q down, hey I own one and love it but when the talk gets around to street racing, chest thumping over the Q beating a Civic with a coffee can exhaust extension is kinda lame, IMHO.

I personally think it's pretty funny that a 4,000 lbs. stock sedan can beat the vast majority of "modified imports." I never get tired of seeing the look on the face of the other driver as they fall farther and farther back from the "family sedan." My other car runs 11s in the quarter mile, so a stock Q45 doesn't feel that fast, but it is quick for what it is. They are faster from a roll than you'd think from looking at the standing start numbers too. A friend's mother had a 90 or 91, and it would consistently pull away from his Mustang that ran in the high 90 mph range in the quarter mile from 60 mph roll-ons. I never ran them side by side, but I always thought my 93 was faster than a modified AWD Talon I used to own from a roll too. I just wish they had geared them a little lower so they weren't so sluggish off the line (relatively speaking).

Post by **AZhitman** » Thu Sep 19, 2002 4:27 pm

Good point, DAEDALUS. I really really really REALLY want a JWT ECU for my 95Q now. Unfortunately, I'm about $300 short.

Oh well... Someday...

Post by **jmatas** » Thu Sep 19, 2002 4:27 pm

I think what gets lost in the whole discussion is that our cars are ~10 years old. I mean, of course a 2003 Corvette or Mustang GT will dog it, but that's comparing apples to oranges. Line a 1991 Mustang GT (IF you can still find one running) against a 1991 Q45 and the Q will smack it around. That's the beauty of what the Q was/is. This all reminds me of that stupid ad Lexus ran a few years ago showing the LS400 racing against an old Ferrari 308. I suppose they couldn't get their hands on an F355 at the time.

Post by **Sopdadope** » Thu Sep 19, 2002 4:27 pm

As it stands now, my Q isn't all that fast. Tom, another Q guy in the area, has a 90Q with the 4.11 diff swap and JWT ECU and he ran a best of 14.3@99mph at the New England Dragway. This was prior to getting new injectors, ignition coils and his intake and fuel system cleaned. Most lightly modded late 90's Mustang GT's (exhaust mods) ran high 14's and some in the 15's the same night so that's saying a lot. Right now, even with 190k my car's running stronger than ever (well it's sitting in a shop right now) and I'd venture to say it's probably a 14.8-9 second 1/4-miler.

Add in a light pressure turbo (4-6PSI) and not many respectable sports cars can leave it in the dust.

Funny thing is, Tom also owns a 98 Vette C5 auto and even he admits that the Q is a more stable, comfortable car beyond 90mph. Says his Q was rock solid all the way to the top of the needle but his Vette seems "looose, floaty" and sometimes wobbly at around 110+.

Post by **wamQ45** » Thu Sep 19, 2002 4:27 pm

I would agree the Q is very stable at high speed. Last week after I completed the under the plenum adventure I took it up to 110 and it felt great. The fastest I drove it was 115 after I bought it with 124K on the clock. One thing to point out through, a vet has verrrry wide tires and that should add something to stability. I just moved up to uni-directional 245/45 17s with 3 piece ultra light wheels and I am not sure how much that will effect speed but handling sure has changed for the better.

Post by **PalmerWMD** » Thu Sep 19, 2002 4:27 pm

wamQ45:send in some pics of your car and the tire/wheel combo to the "send us pics or your ride" link above.Be sure to include your screename in yur mail.

Fred...

PS: I also run 245/45-Zr17's

Post by **jimb** » Thu Sep 19, 2002 4:27 pm

I find the Q reasonably stable at higher speeds, in a straight line.

One of the often repeated criticizms of the car is the ultra light steering and I do find it a little twitchy at speed with not enough feed back.

The stock tires are too small and narrow to really feel good at speed.

I've never driven one with 245's but I imagine that might make a difference.

Post by **rahiel aziz** » Thu Sep 19, 2002 4:27 pm

hey dadalus i am not spokesman for jwt can't afford to work for free when u own a early Q.It took me more than a yr and few races to trust their product.thats why i kept mine original ecu/tcu for any future problems.Now i can tell u that with confidence they are safest mods for our cars.now lets get back to the topic I know Q is no 1/4 mile king or a sports car at 100mph+ runs.but it makes me very happy when people start comparing a 12 yr old 4dr over 2 ton with late 90's so called sports cars with lots of mods.I wish we had a half the after market for Q than other cars, u would see lots of 12sec or 200mph Q's .thanks to this site i am finding lots of things about this car I would have never known.thanks guys.Now i am going to visit "the Ring" very very quitely

Post by **AZhitman** » Thu Sep 19, 2002 4:27 pm

Great stuff.

BTW, I'm experimenting with a staggered tire combo:

245/50/16's in front255/50/16's in back

on stock '99 Q chromed alloys.

135 felt like butter two weeks ago between Phoenix and Globe.

Post by **Sopdadope** » Thu Sep 19, 2002 4:27 pm

It seems the loose, floating sensation of Vettes at over 100MPH is inherant to their suspension design and nothing to do with tires. I searched through their forum and a few of those guys griped about trying to find an elusive shock/spring combo that would alleviate that unstable feeling at high speeds.

Anyone also read the latest SUPER CAR SHOOTOUT Car and Driver did? They also complained about it and said even Lingenfelter's TT C5 suffered the same problems even though he had mammoth 12.5" wide tires in the back.

Post by **EWT** » Thu Sep 19, 2002 4:27 pm

Sopdadope wrote:It seems the loose, floating sensation of Vettes at over 100MPH is inherant to their suspension design and nothing to do with tires. I searched through their forum and a few of those guys griped about trying to find an elusive shock/spring combo that would alleviate that unstable feeling at high speeds.

Anyone also read the latest SUPER CAR SHOOTOUT Car and Driver did? They also complained about it and said even Lingenfelter's TT C5 suffered the same problems even though he had mammoth 12.5" wide tires in the back.

If it's only apparent at high speed, I'd guess it's an aerodynamic problem rather than a suspension problem. However, I've driven a Z06 on a racetrack at speeds up to about 130 mph, and I didn't notice any big problems with it.

Post by **Q45Racing** » Thu Sep 19, 2002 4:27 pm

what about a vvt controller for the Q to kick in eaelier than 4000rpm, anybody got ideas....

Post by **911/Q45** » Thu Sep 19, 2002 4:27 pm

I would think the VVT is pretty optimal already, as emissions are measured at low RPM.

Street Cred

Street Cred

Re: Street Cred

Nissan Forums

Infiniti Forums

Datsun Forums

Technical Forums

Classifieds / Marketplace

Nissan Motorsports

General Forums