Is it true that a lot of the cars from the Japanese manufacturers are de-tuned from the factory on order to sell in American markets? I remember hearing that a ton of cars could have significant improvements by simply tuning it stock without adding mods but I don't know if that was just a thing of the past

>>28512080 (OP)
Idk about most jap cars but the VR30 in the base model Infiniti Q50/Q60 were underrated at 300 HP when they actually made that amount at the wheels. You could tune up the boost and achieve the Red Sport's 400 BHP but you're missing the extra water pump for the intercoolers, oil cooler, and turbo speed sensors for supporting that increase.

>>28512080 (OP)
It's cope.
99% of cars these days make 100% of their advertised power

>>28512227
engine cover in OPs pic is a vq37. I know the picture is for ants but the grey is the signature cover for that engine in the q50. you're right though, the vr30 is under-rated by at least 30hp. it makes more at the wheels than you'd expect for drivetrain losses. I suspect the 3.0t low output version makes closer to 340hp if applying a standard 15% drivetrain loss.

>>28512375
What about the 3.7-liter V6 engine (VQ37VHR) found in the G series/Q40? Iirc that makes about 330hp stock

>>28512375
>>28512386
nvm I misread ur post

>>28512386
I think those track about what you expect. I think they put out about 290 wheel. still good numbers. on E85 they can really eat up that extra timing available. on e85 they can make about 320whp and FBO are good for close to 340whp.FBO takes it out of the scope of the OPs original question a little though. I think that's what makes the vr30 such a killer deal. email tune is good for well over 400whp and 500whp is a fuel pump, heat exchanger, dyno tune away though the turbos are on severely borrowed time.

>>28512080 (OP)
It would make sense that they detune them to increase reliability since Americans are too stupid to change oil on time and stuff

>>28512351
Kek they're de-tuned in their own country of origin. That's why they're called "tuner" cars. Course curiously they also then to shit themselves if you tune them so maybe that's not a great idea....

>>28512550
>See you can remove the limiter no probl......ACK!

every turbo car is detuned from the factory from its full potential change my mind

>>28513098
car manufacturers have to contend with emissions, mileage, cooling, brakes, and so on. 400 hp on most turbo 2.0 engines isn't a stretch, but then you run into potential reliability issues plus not having a suitable transmission to handle that much power

>>28512080 (OP)
Most engines have some headroom available unless they struggle to breath at stock power levels. This is because NO2 emissions increase significantly at the hottest end of the gasoline combustion spectrum, and NO2 emissions rules are pretty tight. Almost everything will accept more timing and a throttle remap (turbocharged Throttle by Wire cars in particular often don't actually give you WOT at max boost and high RPM, just like newer TbW bikes don't give you WOT at high RPM either). You can gain at least some power by altering these parameters from factory settings, but the factory settings aren't just good for NO2 emissions, but also for engine longevity and fuel economy, so there isn't a free lunch here.

This is not specific to Japanese cars either, it's specific to basically everything that isn't a miserable penalty box. The problem is that some cars are so complicated to tune in this manner (especially DI cars with robust ECU encryption) that no one bothers.

>>28512080 (OP)
What you're trying to reference is the mid '90s bubble of jap sports cars. In the U.S. some were rated up to 320hp, but were rated at 276bhp in japan due to a gentleman's agreement. On cars like the Skyline you could remove a vacuum restrictor(oft named boost pill) and instantly make more power.