What if........
What if........
After owning and driving two different Q45's (96 w/138k and 2000 Anniversary w/56k), I got to thinking .......what if the y33 had the 4.5L engine.Then again, what if it had the current engine, like the M45. That car would kick butt, plus have the class of a Q45. Infiniti could have created a serious luxury performance sedan with a minimal investment for maximum performance.
My 2000k has the same engine as the 97 and the same weight. The 96Q is a lot more powerful.....and faster. The gearing is better in the newer one and it feels quick, but the 4.5 has more torque and out powers the 4.1. The race might be close 0-60.....but at highway speeds and more there is no comparison.
I think a lot of people on this board underestimate the capabilities of a well tuned 96Q45.
I think a lot of people on this board underestimate the capabilities of a well tuned 96Q45.
-
BadQ45t
- Posts: 3255
- Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 7:54 am
- Car: '21 Nissan Leaf SL Plus (wife's car)
'05 Nissan X-Terra S 4x4
'97 Infiniti Q45t SOLD! Miss the old girl
'84 Nissan 300ZX (Original Owner)
'16 Mercedes Benz S550e V8 Power & 35 MPG - Location: Half Moon Bay, CA
I don't know, I drove a 96' and 97' back to back when i bough my 97 and I didn't think the 96 was any faster. BTW, from what I heard form my Dad's buddy that owned Infiniti of Ventura at the time was the move to the 4.1 was to get rid of the gas guzzler tax, but I've never confirmed that. i know for sure my 97 got way better gas mileage than my 92 that I had for 6 months.
-
Q45tech
- Moderator
- Posts: 14296
- Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2002 3:19 am
- Car: 1990 Q45 342,400 miles 22 years ownership with original engine
1995 G20t 5 speed 334,000 miles 16" 2002 wheels - 205/50/16 Sr20ve vvl
Sure a 9% drop in displacement even with a 4.3% increase in diff ratio coupled with a 200 pound weight decrease yields at least a 5% improvement in mpg especially at equal speed cruising.
and 1.01 MPG is significant = unadjusted combined mpg tax(1/(.495/city MPG + .351/highway MPG))+.15 [adjusted]
at least 22.5 No tax at least 21.5, but less than 22.5 $1000 at least 20.5, but less than 21.5 $1300 at least 19.5, but less than 20.5 $1700 $1300 per Q less paid to US goverment because the old Q [22/16] actually fell in at 21.494717 mpg and the 97 achieved 22.5000013 mpg.
and 1.01 MPG is significant = unadjusted combined mpg tax(1/(.495/city MPG + .351/highway MPG))+.15 [adjusted]
at least 22.5 No tax at least 21.5, but less than 22.5 $1000 at least 20.5, but less than 21.5 $1300 at least 19.5, but less than 20.5 $1700 $1300 per Q less paid to US goverment because the old Q [22/16] actually fell in at 21.494717 mpg and the 97 achieved 22.5000013 mpg.
-
maxnix
- Posts: 22627
- Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2002 8:11 pm
- Car: 1995 Infiniti Q45
1995 Infiniti Q45t
2000 Infiniti Q45
Quelle differance?
1 mpg difference between G50 and FY33 is about what I see, but not consistently. Sometimes the G50 is better. Different drivers, different routes. On the Interstate, they both seem to be about 22mpg at 75-80 mph.__________________Brian1995 Q45 & Q45t & 2000 Q45
Discover the power of the button!
Discover the power of the button!
-
Q45tech
- Moderator
- Posts: 14296
- Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2002 3:19 am
- Car: 1990 Q45 342,400 miles 22 years ownership with original engine
1995 G20t 5 speed 334,000 miles 16" 2002 wheels - 205/50/16 Sr20ve vvl
If you measure each 1.8-2.2 millisecond injector squirt x rpm you get a number of grams of gasoline per hour. Slight tweeks of volumetric efficiency at cruise - actually each clyinder is only filling about 20% of it's volume with air due to the almost closed throttle even at 80 mph and you aare still in closed loop [O2 trim correction].
Personally I doubt there is even 1 MPG difference between the cars [say 90 vs 97Q] assumming both have new O2 sensors and use conventional fuel.............actually OBD2 is easier fooled by oxygenated fuels into running [3-5%] richer. This problem has been corrected in the 2002 with its expensive wide band O2.
22 mpg @80 mph=3.6363 gallons per hour x 6.2 lbs........22.5 pounds per hour is about 45 AVERAGE horsepower per hour [5-6 of that would be AC and alternator for AC]
http://www.windpower.org/en/tour/wtrb/d ... u/....html
In theory you should be able to get by with 32 HP at 80 mph so you are making/using 7 HP [without AC] too much probably because the road is not perfectly level for the trips and you are accelerating a little...........but within 15% of theory is very very good.
A professional driver using special techniques to maximize MPG could probably get 24-24.5 MPG with 44/51 psi tire pressure and perfect alignment and better rolling resistance tires.
Going from 0.30 to 0.28 drag coefficient saves almost 2 HP at 80 mph. DC [or CD as most call it] is not nearly as important as total drag area. Why lowering helps.
Personally I doubt there is even 1 MPG difference between the cars [say 90 vs 97Q] assumming both have new O2 sensors and use conventional fuel.............actually OBD2 is easier fooled by oxygenated fuels into running [3-5%] richer. This problem has been corrected in the 2002 with its expensive wide band O2.
22 mpg @80 mph=3.6363 gallons per hour x 6.2 lbs........22.5 pounds per hour is about 45 AVERAGE horsepower per hour [5-6 of that would be AC and alternator for AC]
http://www.windpower.org/en/tour/wtrb/d ... u/....html
In theory you should be able to get by with 32 HP at 80 mph so you are making/using 7 HP [without AC] too much probably because the road is not perfectly level for the trips and you are accelerating a little...........but within 15% of theory is very very good.
A professional driver using special techniques to maximize MPG could probably get 24-24.5 MPG with 44/51 psi tire pressure and perfect alignment and better rolling resistance tires.
Going from 0.30 to 0.28 drag coefficient saves almost 2 HP at 80 mph. DC [or CD as most call it] is not nearly as important as total drag area. Why lowering helps.