I can't understand the complaints about the N/A V6 engines in the Xterras. When you compare the specs with other mid sized SUV's, the engine size 3.3L and 180HP is about average.

It is a truck after all. I don't think many SUV's are going to throw you back in the seat when you punch the gas. They just aren't built that way.

Perhaps it's because we are higher up off the ground that we don't notice the speed as much compared to driving a Honda civic.

I have the Automatic N/A V6 and when the stop light turns green, I shoot ahead of everybody without even realizing it.

Keep in mind that I was driving a 4 cyclinder Kia Sportage before I got my X so believe me, my Xterra is a huge improvement in power and much quieter.

If you want to pass on the freeway, just hit the O/D off button for quick horsepower.

It seems like a lot of people don't appreciate what they are driving. It's a 2 ton truck! not a fiberglass corvette!

Your 4x2 has a slight weight advantage...

I dunno. For me, I enjoy the combination of the supercharger and the 5 speed. Makes it a very fun, enjoyable vehicle to drive. I love surprising assholes on the freeway who think I'm in a "big lumbering truck".

And every morning I have to dive for the carpool lane I am doubly thankful for the supercharger/5 speed combo. That extra merging power is much appreciated.

I drove an NA Automatic for a week and it was drivable - but there wasn't as much room for error - you definitely had to pay attention and plan ahead.

You guys who say the 3.3 is slow don’t know what your talking about, before this vehicle I had an 86 Isuzu trooper that wouldn’t go over 50mph on flat ground with a top speed of 75 down hill, and it wasn’t that bad being that you can only drive 55-65 anyways. If you want to go fast get a sports car, but the Xterra with a 104mph top speed (mine anyways) isn’t bad at all.

You are all nearly at sea level, as am I (419 feet, to be exact). Drive your Xterra to, say, Denver and report back on your acceleration impressions.

Many of the folks on this forum live in mountainous or higher elevation areas and that takes a major toll on the available horsepower.

Hahahaha..
I live around sea level (on long island) and the power is acceptable, even with 33's.
However it flat out sucked when I went through Colorado and Arizona with 8k foot plus altitudes.
Can you say 2nd gear going 30mph on the interstates creeping along?!
I'll stick with sea-level, thanx!!
BTW.. I have an air raid intake and a HKS cat back exhaust. So I cant even imagine if the truck was stock..Not fun..

SuperCharger isn't bad at altitude. Even with the auto.

But we do get the folks that don't like the bad drop in power when coming from sea level up to here.

We tend to get a lot of those, as half of California is relocating to the Front Range of the Rockies.

We came out there in the fall of '03 (Broomfield area) to do some work. We brought our Chevy 3500 duallie with us. It's a bad-ass beast here at home (has the 8.1L gas engine), easily smoking the duals from a stop.

We were using it for some testing out there and could hardly get the thing to chirp the rear tires without resorting to power-braking it.

As someone who is considering moving to the front range area (no, not fron Cali) I'm curious if the altitude changes can be dialed into the X somehow to improve performance at altitude?

Bumping timing, making sure it's all dialed in and little things like that will give a bit back. But there's no substitute for atmospheric pressure and oxygen.

Cyclemut,
Does Nissan (or dealerships) install a different PROM or re-program the ECM to deal with the lack of Oxygen?
I know that other manufacturers do that to help with the lack of power.
Im just curious. And I dont plan on moving to the front range. I like it right here at sea level.

It takes oxygen to furn fuel. High up there in CO, there is less oxygen, so you can not burn as much fuel. Less fuel = less power. about the only thing you can do is add oxygen (think a slow blead of NO2), or boost of some kind (SC/Turbo)..
High altitude is where turbos shine.. they are designed to give a set ammount of manifold pressure, so at high alt the turbo spins faster, and has the same boost.. wastegates are cool... superchargers are limited by engine rpm's, you set one up gor peak boost at 8000 feet, you are going to break stuff if you drive down to sea level.

Lower octane fuel seems to help when going into the mountains...higher octane can make it worse.



Sort of a temporary timing change.

I did notice in CO for example that regular octane was lower octane rated than regular octane in NJ, etc...so it looks like the gas stations take the altitude change into account so a rig set up for regular in NJ will run OK in CO (At least after re-fueling...)

You cannot compare the horsepower without also comparing the weight.

2004 Xterra
SE 4x2
Weight: 5000lbs
Hp: 180

2004 4Runner
SR5 V6 4x2
Weight: 5330lbs
Hp: 245

2004 Honda CRV
LE FWD
Weight: 3318lbs
Hp: 160

Source: Edmunds.com

I always thought the height made the truck feel faster than it was really going. I get in my '02 Altima and can barely tell I am going 75mph, My X feels like its flying apart at that speed.

As one of the few who have the S/C I can say I'd never have an X without it. It serves my purposes and I had a hec of a time justifying it to the wife when we bought it, but I think she appreciates the umff that it delivers.
Recently on a trip to California I had my Mom drive the first leg and I was astonished that she didn't give it enough gas to even engage the S/C. So I can see where there would be a market for the N/A engines. She currently drives a KIA Sportage and It scares me because it is soooo underpowered.
I guess it boils down to what you want. I would have saved about $1500 bucks on the sticker without it and would also be saving about $50 bucks a month on gas if I could use plain old regular, not to mention the price difference in tires for the 17" wheels, but I like the HP and wouldn't live without it.
OH, It wasn't an option to have the 5-speed in 03 if you were wondering. It was on the Frontier but not the X. I tried to get it that way and they couldn't do it.

Ha! I used to drive a Kia Sportage(5 speed stick shift) and it wasn't so bad, the engine was louder than a bus engine though.

what SUV's are you comparing it to? Because vehicles like the Highlander are FWD, and were never meant to see anything but a paved highway -- so that cannot be the same class.

But the real reason is simple : Numbers mean nothing. It's all the way it's geared, it's weight, and a bunch of other small factors that make the vehicle useful. Afterall, max HP is hypothetical -- and only happens under certain conditions... How does it perform in the range that you're gonna use it. My opinions of the 3.3L 180HP V6 is that it's adequate. Definitely not more than you need -- and less than what I'm used to. "Sluggish" comes to mind.

I don't think it sounds healthy either and this one is an automatic. I remember getting on the freeway once with her in CA, very scary seeing the traffic come up on you at 80MPH.

There's nothing wrong with the N/A V6. It doesn't have much power, but it has a ton of torque, and it'll go right up hills no problem. Remember, this is a truck, not a sports car. When I have a need for raw power, I drive my volvo.

Does a '04 2wd Xterra really weight 5,000 lbs? I thought it was about 4,000 lbs...

I haven't weighed it personally but I quoted my source as edmunds. Interesting, to note some other sources.

edmunds.com: 5000
consumerguide.com: 4034
cars.com: 3857
autos.msn.com: 3857
My Sticker: ?? Gotta Check

If these websites dont know, they shouldn't just guess.

Aloha,
Robert

2WD, 4WD, dry weight, curb weight, max loaded weight..
can go from just under 4k, to almost 5.5-6k..
keep in mind, after market front bumper, winch, sliders, full skids, and a tire carrier, full tanks of gas.. you are going to be overloaded when you sit inside it.

The X's GVWR is 5,200 lb...anything more than that is over the rated load capacity, and that includes cargo, passengers, fuel, etc.

The curb weight for my X in the manual/plate is 4,200 lb (4wd 5 spd V6...) leaving 1,000 lb to add a driver, passengers, cargo, armor, etc....to get up to 5,200 lb.

Winch, bumper, skids, sliders for me added about 440 lb, I weigh around 220, leaving 340 lb...My two college kids weigh 250 + 150 = 400 lb, so I'm already 60 lb over GVWR w/o the svelt wife or her not so svelt luggage getting on board...throw on some tools, spare parts, highlift, FLIR/UV/XRF equipment, a picnic basket, etc...

If I get around to getting a rear bumper/carrier for the 33" spare to make some room in back...

I'd be at close to 6K pretty easy.

I am about 3 weeks into my 2004 Xterra NA V6 ownership.

I had been driving my wife's Windstar previously.

Now, the Windstar has power. It has a larger engine (3.8L), 200HP and about 230-240FTLBS. Step on it and it takes you away.

Did I feel the difference switching to the X? Sure.

I had the choice of either a Frontier SVE (crewcab long bed 4x4) or my X. They didn't have SC Xterra's left. I decided to go with the X.

The main reason is this : I don't want to pay for premium gas.

All in all, I'm pretty happy with what I have.

It's not a sports car, but has enough torque and power to get me to work and back on the highway. And I drive it to Tahoe with no problems.

Ben

I live in Evergreen, Colorado at approximately 7800'. No, Xterra's are not the quickest off the line at a stop light, but I have driven much, much worse. The problems with altitude come when towing, typically cutting the tow rating in about half. To make up for the thin air, I use intake and exhaust changes so the engine can breathe better. I also run synthetic everything, so the engine has less Parasitic drag. Seems to help.

Just my 2 cents worth.

You are correct. Mine doesn't even quite make 5000 lbs and it has about 700 lbs of extras on it bringing it to about 4850 or thereabouts.

As far as the engine goes, the 3.3 is an excellent unit and I would never "bash" it, but I will never turn down more power either. When the truck was new and still weighed 4100 lbs I thought it had plenty of power, but now I wish I had more, even if it is technically "enough" right now.

The 210 hp provided by the S/C sounds great, but now you will be paying premium fuel prices while the '05 X owner will top off with the regular and have 50 plus hp over the '04 S/C. If the N/A V6 is not enough, head out to the dealer this week and trade up to the super powered '05. It doesn't have the looks of the '02-'04, but the power issue will be behind you.

North Americans are just too spoiled. Compare the 3.3 V6 to other 4x4 SUV and "jeep" type vehicles around the world, and you'll quickly see that the X is not bad at all.

100 hp diesel Defenders and Land Cruisers roamed all over the globe before soccer moms had their 8.1 Suburbans and 6.8 Excursions (and offcourse, the H2). Fully loaded 80,000 lbs semis with 450 hp is a lot worse than an 10,000 X/trailer combo with 180 hp.

It all depends what you compare it to. I find the 3.3 a very "truckish" engine - slow, but torquey, and relatively low revving. It could use better gas mileage though.

Mine (Detroit Series 60) has 470 HP and 1650 ft lbs of torque at 1200 RPM! Empty it will blow an Xterra off the road, especially from say 35 MPH to 65 MPH, loaded, well, it's damn quick considering the weight! BTW, it also can get 13 MPG while bobtailing, which is still about 20,000 lbs to push around.

I think every one would be best served by thoroughly test driving anything they are considering the purchase of...and evaluating if they would be happy with the performance of...

The window stickers give an idea of fuel use/grade...and between the two...a realistic expectation should be formed.

I keep seeing people buy a rig, and then complain that they can't stand how slow it is, that it gets 17 mpg, etc...why didn't they notice before they pluncked down the $?

It all comes back to pre-purchase research/evaluation...do it, you buy happy.

Ahh, but my X will be paid off. Premium fuel or not, I'll still be ahead.

Doesn't mean I still don't want an '05 tho Less than a 20% increase in cost for Premium - less than one payment a year for most folks...

I am right with you, Prem or not, I would rather have an '02-'04 S/C vs. 265hp-'05, it is just a better looking rig.

I agree but after seeing a pic of a '05 X with a Calmini bumper instead of the huge fugly stock bumper, I'd buy one. The stock front bumper would be on Ebay the day after I bought it though!

Ha ha, you sure about that?
I drive a Thomas International Bus everyday for my job with the Mercedes Rear Engine, and even in the rear, it sounds like the Earth is buckling under pressure everytime I start it and hit the gas

Just givin' ya a hard time, back to the topic!!!!

I have had the pleasure of having both N/A and supercharged vehicles, in more than just the X...the one problem with the X's Eaton supercharger is that it is extremely underpowered for the engine it's on. Look at the HP difference between the N/A and the S/C versions of the X. It's not THAT big of a difference. Now, if you stick an Eaton M90 on that thing rather than the 60 series, now that would be a noticeable and thoroughly enjoyable experience. Not that I don't enjoy my S/C X, but I'm just saying, it could be more.

Change the pulley on it and add an intake and exhaust, then you're talking about a different animal all together...but I haven't noticed many people doing that here, and I probably wouldn't either. If I'm going to use it mostly for light to moderate off roading, I don't see the point as it will never really utilized the full potential of a pulley swap...anyways, just my .02. I'm not a N/A basher, I certainly would have no right to be. What you bought was your choice, and you had your reasons, just as those of us who chose the S/C version had our own. Whatever they were, we all drive the X, and we should all just be happy dammit

you've GOT to be kidding me . that original front end is absolutely hideous! nissan tried so hard to make that thing look like a one-night-fling between a jeep and a mountain goat that they got the proportions ALL wrong with the headlights and grill area. some like it, but all i can say is that i thought the original front ends were wretched! This 05 model looks so much better in so many areas - especially now that it falls in line more accurately with the rest of the nissan trucks for styling. granted, the bumper is pretty obnoxious but the headlight change is all it took to convince me to wait for the 05 arrival. I would like to see some more interior options for colors and materials but i guess if i'm going to be that picky i might as well buy a pathfinder or a 4runner.

the added power to the X is SORELY needed. this thing is exactly what the segment needs now. that previous 3.3 V6 was anemic even with the supercharger. i can only imagine what a stroked version of the 350Z powerplant is going to feel like in this thing.

I have a NA V-6 and it is fine. Yeah it could have more power, but everyone thinks that. I have towed 2 trailers in tandem last summer over 2000 miles in one trip. In fact, I towed a 92 Toyota 4x4 200 miles home last weekend.

Dan

I don't mind the NA V-6 cause when I wanna go fast I just hop into my slighty modded 2005 STi

I traded my 94 Pathfinder for my new Xterra SC and MAN this thing is quick!
I was reading a review a few days ago comparing our X to the competition - RAV4, CRV etc and they kept saying how they handle better, they are faster THEY ARE BUILT ON A CAR FRAME... hello!!
Last I checked the Xterra is built on a truck frame! This thing isn't a car?! why do they compare it to a car?! I think, for a SUV, this thing handles quite well, and delivers plenty of punch.
I was one of the guys that went in to buy a XE or SE but when I drove the SE-SC I couldn't help it - I luv the extra kick it's got and forked out the $