Abbypathy

Hate to answer my own question. I think it appropriate here. So in my research replacing the original semi pressed in piston wrist pins with a set of pistons with fully floating pins will be fine. There is no engine perimeters in the VG33E that would forbid this. Its a engineering and performance issue more than anything else. My understanding is pressed in pins do have an advantage and also some draw backs compared to floating pins. And vice versa. Way to technical for me to discuss any farther. Never the less after market pistons will be floating more often than not. Probably due to ease of installation like you said Slartibartfast. So I see at this point no need to worry about the new pistons being the floating type. The retention clips seem to be solid, and that's important. I may put in new small end bushing to close up the gap there.

Its a very bewildering specs to grasp. Its not configured as a normal press in pin. And the oem clearances clearly are not fully floating and just barely would be considered a press in clearance. I thought press in wrist pins are pressed into the connecting rod (small end)all the time. In my engine its showing 0.0002 and 0.0009 clearance on C.R. to pin clearance and 0.0000-0.0002 on piston to wrist pin. In other words, wrist pins are pressed into pistons as opposed to being pressed in the connecting rod. I can only think of asking every possible engine builder I can find for advice

Does anyone have experience with rebuilding a VG33E and buying a new piston, pin set with a different wrist pin to piston pin hole clearance? Nissan's specifications call for a clearance of between 0" to 0.0002" for piston pin to piston fit. I bought a set that has a clearance of 0.0008". So its quite a difference but that's new piston manufactures specs. Nissan is almost calling for a press in pin. All I can find are floating wrist pins. The piston pin to connecting rod bushing(small end) is within Nissan's specs. So will this new engine geometry be a issue? All the lubricating holes on both the old Nissan pistons match with the new ITM pistons. Except agian the wrist pin hole diameter in the piston.

I totally agree. All the bolts for the rear axle are in that range. I went with 110 lbs-ft where the front axle side brackets bolt to the sub frame through rubber bushings.. Thanks for the help

Thanks Hawairish. I agree with your reasoning. Kind of had the same train of thought. It just seems awfully high for the back ones 125 ft-lbs.

Hey everyone. Would anyone happen to know what the torque requirement is for the bolts that hold the sub frame on to the frame for 97 Pathfinder. Its atleast 50 lbs-ft. Suspect its higher though. Kind of really needing the answer. The Nissan OEM repair manual doesn't specify what it is. Thanks.

Don't mean to be negative. I would be very suspicious and walk away.

I think XPLORx4 is right. In reality it isn't any different than doing a 2" lift using something like stiffer springs on the strut or 2" spacers. Not a bad idea to bring extra axles though. My pathy is fully loaded with tools, parts, shelter, food and anything else I can think of just in case.

I found 6" for strut to be max'd out. Its was a bit of wiggling to put it back together

I have manual lockers for the axle. And its strictly used on weekends and off road. Maybe 5,000 kms a year. No sign of wear yet. The angle isn't excessive, how ever more wear and tear will result. Guarantee that My sub frame spacers are 4 1/2" and strut spacers are 6". I wanted max possible clearance in the center of the axle. That's why the configuration is such. So CV angle is greater than normal. However got a nice clearance in the center and with the manual hubs and low mileage excessive CV Joint wear is manageable.

I am into the SFD for about $1400.00 . I don't know if a solid axle swap is possible with that amount.

Wondering if anyone else besides me has done a 6" SFD on the 97 Pathfinder. If so have you had problems with cracks in the frame where the rear bolts for sub frame bolt into the frame. I suspect the problem is putting in a 6" spacer between the frame and sub frame is to unstable. I am adding a lateral cross member that will join the spacers as one. Thus the spacers will not be able to twist in a lateral motion. I would think a 4" SFD is the max. you would want without adding a lateral cross member. Keep in mind on my pathfinder this created an extremely dangerous condition in which I figure within a short period of time I would have lost control completely while driving. In fact for the longest time I thought the bearing was loose on the passenger side front tire. I was getting a vibration at highway speed just like if you had a tire out of balance. Upon further inspection I found some serious cracks in both the sub frame and frame. So really want to warn you all of this issue.