STS Turbo Kit
If you want to know more about the methanol Injection go to www.snowperformance.net
Looks like a pretty good set up.
If you want to know a lot about these STS kits go to camaroz28.com under the FI board, there is about 7-10 pages of info on this kit, just try to find it with all the benchracing that is going on in that thread though
J
Looks like a pretty good set up.
If you want to know a lot about these STS kits go to camaroz28.com under the FI board, there is about 7-10 pages of info on this kit, just try to find it with all the benchracing that is going on in that thread though
J
TECH Addict
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 2,950
Likes: 0
From: Magee MS
Word's cannot describe my thaughts on that kit. IMO the whole point OF having a turbo IS to have it mounted on a manifold and have it closer to a intercooler.
I would MUCH rather pay for a QMP kit than that and I would prefer a twin turbo set up from CAS BUT it looks like I might have to settle for the QMP system.
Josh S.
I would MUCH rather pay for a QMP kit than that and I would prefer a twin turbo set up from CAS BUT it looks like I might have to settle for the QMP system.
Josh S.
TECH Enthusiast
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 698
Likes: 0
From: PA
Originally Posted by verbs
and the whole point of having a turbo is not having it close to an intercooler...
intercooler is an expensive, heavy bandaid to HEAT. Which u can still have if u please.
The car made over 600ft pounds... without an intercooler, and temperatures actually drop as boost Builds.
oops.
water injection has been around since the 60s........for a reason. (i'm thinking what's good enough to cool automatic BIG BLOCKs with poor cooling systems should do fine for an ls1)
this was never to be a race kit, it however is the best kit out.
TECH Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 10,341
Likes: 1
I wanna see dyno and track numbers one of these cars with a full fuel system, injectors, LS1 edit tuning, 300cfm heads, turbo cam and the methonal system running about 12-15#'s boost 
I think it is an interesting concept as well
I think it is an interesting concept as well
TECH Junkie
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 3,015
Likes: 0
From: At the office
Originally Posted by Excal
umm MR. genius, have u looked at his 60FT times, or have u seen one of these cars run?
it however is the best kit out.
it however is the best kit out.
I don't have to be a genius to understand physics. For you to infer that this turbo kit will spool just as fast any turbo kit on the market....I don't think that is going to happen. No way a turbo getting cooler exhaust gases at the back of the vehicle will spool as fast as an equal sized turbo up front.
And for you to claim this is the best kit out? Biased much? How many LS1's has this kit been on? Longevity tests?
This kit isn't really meant for more than 500rwhp per STS, so it therefore lacks flexibility when it comes to upgrades like the QMP kit.
LS1 Tech Stories
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
6 Common C5 Corvette Failures and What's Involved In Repairing Them
Pouria Savadkouei
Retro Modern Bandit Pontiac Trans AM Comes With Burt Reynolds' Autograph
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Greatest Cadillac V Series Performance Models Ever, Ranked
Pouria Savadkouei
Top 10 Most Powerful Chevy Trucks Ever Made!
Hennessey's New Supercharged Silverado ZR2 Has 700 HP
Verdad Gallardo
Coachbuilt N2A Anteros Is an LS2-Powered C6 Corvette In Italian Clothes
Verdad Gallardo
Awesome K5 Blazer Restomod Comes With C7 Corvette Power
Verdad Gallardo
10 Camaros You Should Never Buy
10 LS Engine Myths That Refuse to Die
Verdad Gallardo
IMO if a turbo was was Designed to spool with a cooler exhaust gas in mind it could and would. and as far as an Intercooler is concerned you have Piping to and from the Turbo hench the need not to have an intercooler, you dont need it if you are running low boost, all the piping is cooling it. Once again if i read correctly the Turbo was made for as Rear mount
Originally Posted by ChrisB
[/b]
How does that work?
How does that work?
Excal, you are not helping the credability of this kit at all. It might turn out to be a good, low budget turbo, that is an easy bolt in alternative to heads and cam with similar results. However, you are never going to be able to run it on the stock tune, and a turbo will heat up the air. That doesn't mean it won't make power, it will just make less than it could. My powerdyne was running 6 psi non-intercooled boost and it made 450 at the wheels. This kit looks like it could hit in that range too.
-Geoff
wow, intercooler, and bandaid in the same sentence..
i normally use that word for FMU's, MAFTs, and timing trickers, but never heard it used for an intercooler.
Care to explain how its a bandaid, and if it is, what is the corect method to remove heat from charged air?
Ryan.
i normally use that word for FMU's, MAFTs, and timing trickers, but never heard it used for an intercooler.
Care to explain how its a bandaid, and if it is, what is the corect method to remove heat from charged air?
Ryan.
i won't go that far.. if $$ was no object, we would all have 427 incon TT setups on our cars....
This kit is an interesting idea, and time will tell the results. Im still the biggest sceptic, but this might compare to a powerdyne setup, and give a good bang for the buck
Ryan
This kit is an interesting idea, and time will tell the results. Im still the biggest sceptic, but this might compare to a powerdyne setup, and give a good bang for the buck
Ryan
TECH Addict
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 2,207
Likes: 0
From: College Station, Tx
The results posted for the LT1 prototype kit look very interesting - I definitely would *not* discard the idea out of hand.
Yes, a lot of FUD is flying around - from an efficiency standpoint the setup starts out at a slight disadvantage because the gasses are much cooler.
But just because is it xx% less efficient doesn't mean it will not work. It sounds like the turbo was designed to work in this position, so spool up, etc. should be decent.
The #1 advantage it would look like it has to me would be ease of install. I would say wait and see how it turns out before dismissing it out of hand - some hard ls1 numbers (non g-tech) - would be a good indication of how the kit works, which I am sure are forthcoming.
That said, there still seems to be a lot of bashing of everything else going on, and in a way that only makes the person doing it look foolish. Try and get psi out of this kit and see if it still works well without an intercooler. Sure you can crank up the methanol injection to work, but that is an entirely different debate. And as for the laws of physics, I am pretty sure this kit obeys them also!
Yes, a lot of FUD is flying around - from an efficiency standpoint the setup starts out at a slight disadvantage because the gasses are much cooler.
But just because is it xx% less efficient doesn't mean it will not work. It sounds like the turbo was designed to work in this position, so spool up, etc. should be decent.
The #1 advantage it would look like it has to me would be ease of install. I would say wait and see how it turns out before dismissing it out of hand - some hard ls1 numbers (non g-tech) - would be a good indication of how the kit works, which I am sure are forthcoming.
That said, there still seems to be a lot of bashing of everything else going on, and in a way that only makes the person doing it look foolish. Try and get psi out of this kit and see if it still works well without an intercooler. Sure you can crank up the methanol injection to work, but that is an entirely different debate. And as for the laws of physics, I am pretty sure this kit obeys them also!
TECH Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 10,341
Likes: 1
The way the LS1 kit tubing is routed you could easily route it to a large front mount intercooler. With proper sizing I bet you'd see less than 1-2#'s boost loss and very low temp IATs.
What is the max Airflow/CFM capacity of the kit for the LS1? Would 10-15#'s boost be possible with a heads/cam/intake LS1 car?
Cheers,
Chris
What is the max Airflow/CFM capacity of the kit for the LS1? Would 10-15#'s boost be possible with a heads/cam/intake LS1 car?
Cheers,
Chris
I seen the pics of the kit and I am not impressed. Hot exhaust gases is what spools up the turbine. That is why the turbo is mounted as close as possible to the exhaust of the engine. The further you go the long the spool time. You could crutch it by using a smaller A/R turbine housing, but then you add more back pressure. IMO, this is not a good idea. If you want the same amount of power like these kits offer, do a ATI 5-lbs, 125 shot of nitrous, or a H/C setup.
On The Tree
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
From: Republic of Texas - Houston Area
Interesting Concept ... an OEM would never do this in an automotive application. Even so, I find it a bit innovative.
I think the methanol injection makes a nice option but should not be used in place of an intercooler ... there's a way to make the intercooler work without excessive pressure drop accross "it".
The energy loss of the exhaust gasses due to the turbo location can be compensated for to a degree in the turbine design. I believe this has already been stated albeit in different wording. To what degree is the question.
I think some sort of system efficiencies will need to be stated and proven concerning the turbo location in order for this kit to gain true credibility. I'm not saying its not credible ... it's an "out of the box" location for the turbo and will need to be proven with more than just HP numbers and track times IMO.
A terribly inefficient system can still produce good numbers up to a point. For my $$$ I'd need to know the system was atleast moderately efficient as well as capable of producing power levels equivalent to the competition.
Best of Luck ...
I think the methanol injection makes a nice option but should not be used in place of an intercooler ... there's a way to make the intercooler work without excessive pressure drop accross "it".
The energy loss of the exhaust gasses due to the turbo location can be compensated for to a degree in the turbine design. I believe this has already been stated albeit in different wording. To what degree is the question.
I think some sort of system efficiencies will need to be stated and proven concerning the turbo location in order for this kit to gain true credibility. I'm not saying its not credible ... it's an "out of the box" location for the turbo and will need to be proven with more than just HP numbers and track times IMO.
A terribly inefficient system can still produce good numbers up to a point. For my $$$ I'd need to know the system was atleast moderately efficient as well as capable of producing power levels equivalent to the competition.
Best of Luck ...
TECH Enthusiast
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 698
Likes: 0
From: PA
This kit isn't really meant for more than 500rwhp per STS
and that is with the 60-1 turbo...they WILL put a custom bigger turbo, so it's meant to make whatever u want, actually.
go to their site. WW2 planes used turbines in the rear..this is not new at all. just like water/alky injection.
yeah physics...there was a guy talking physics too on why it shouldn't work..
problem is when they dyno reads full boost at 3000rpm (more like 2800 rpm)...physics seize to matter.
These turbos are not exactly conventional, Garret designed them for MAX EFFICIENCY from the rear.
will they spool as fast as a properly sized turbo mounted up front, desgined to work conventionally? no. this is not a Race kit.
i have no vested interest, but i'm keeping my eye in the 5 or 6 people developing kits..
and it all sounds like this: costly kit + costly tuning, plus costly installation unless you can weld.
The energy loss of the exhaust gasses due to the turbo location can be compensated for to a degree in the turbine design.
because that's what garret did here.
and u would need an efficient turbine with next to no lag to run 11s cutting up the tires at Colorado elevation.
(stock ls1 ran mid to high 14s)
the car must've not knows physics either. Garret also doesn't know these"rules" of yours.