vipex70

Maybe I'm just being stupid, but coudlnt the people who designed that turbo system run the intake into the trunk like they did with the boost controller? It just seems to be like having the intake underneath the car like is a the best way possible to suck tons of crap into the filter.

OLD BULL

iTrader: (1)

I am in no means a turbo expert nor an STS owner (yet) , but I have been researching this as much as possible before purchasing the kit. I believe that the properly sized turbo and intake piping should produce sufficient boost with little to no lag. As far as the heat is concerned (distance from head) I have never herd of heat alone turning a turbine or pump of anykind. Yes the gases do have more velocity when hot, but how much? With the turbo located father form the heat source you not only can take advantage of twice the volume of exhaust gases going through the turbo but also the fact that there will not be as much heat transfer through the turbo charger itself. Again I am in no means an expert, and I am open for opinions.

jrtf83

It does seem like that. But dont' forget about FTRA and SLP's CAI that both pick up air from under the car. I know its not the same but i could see this system working really well and being very stealthy.

jdp244

The main thing that I would be worrying about with this kit is hitting pot holes and more importantly hitting animals........ This may not be a concern to some but where I am both are very abundant. I would be pissed if a head on collision with roadkill ruined my 3000 turbo kit

CHRISPY

It looks like it would be very easy to fabricate a shield for the filter.

SSnakekiller

iTrader: (8)

What is this about NA vs Turbo?

We raced our JL LS1 car against a 427 Z06 (guy claims $20,000 for the engine and runs 10.80's) from a 25 roll on 10psi (stock cubes, stock heads, stock cam) and ran side by side the whole way. Take note, our LS1 is an Automatic! Thats top end turbo for you!

Went from a dead stop and pulled him

JZ'sTA

iTrader: (23)

The topic of Turbo hp vs Motor HP is a debate you can have.
However the playing field has to be the same.
Can a 400 RWHP A4 beat a 460 RWHP M6, sure.
However what would have to happen is that 400 A4 would have to have a 4400 stall, slicks, the correct gears, etc. The 60 ft times might be good enough to hold off the faster MPH turbo car.
Look around at the times NA guys have vs Turbo guys have on this site and you can see who this arguement can be ligit. Almost everyone has faster track times when NA in comparision to FI people making similar HP.
From a roll is a different story and I wont even try and agrue that one.
I am DEFENTIALLY NOT saying turbo cars are slower or NA HP is better than turbo HP just stating what normally happens.

2000 ws6

iTrader: (10)

Go to MTI's Website and read what a superstroker is.

Trust me I can afford your rims and tires. I know how fast my car is and I know how slow yours is. I tell you this. You are the one who intitated any form of racing with my brother. Drive to lexington, I will race you in my cam only car vs your cam only(no bottle) and I will wager 500 dollars that I pull you by at least 3 cars. Your alot of talk just like the rest of the kyfbody members and their horribly slow cars. I will even give you the gas money just to get here. Bring a friend and a camera and make sure your post the tape on here.

Whats the word little man? Do you want this race?

BigPlanTransAm

i would think a head on collision would have more chance of hurting a turbo mounted up front(closer to the point of impact) than one out back with a larger buffer zone for the rest of the car to absorb the impact for it

and also..

this guy has got to be kidding! a turbo car with the right turbo will have a MUCH broader powerband than a big cam N/A car.
also, if your turbo setup consists of a turbo large enough to still make power till 6800 rpm you'll leave that N/A car doing this

F8L Z71

I may not have made great peak #s with my old turbo setup but is this the kind of BROAD curve you are talking about? Keep in mind I had to start the run at 4300rpm to keep it from downshifting to 2nd. On the street full boost is had before 4000rpm

5.3L

SStolen

iTrader: (22)

Alex, I think your car could be even faster because your big head is slowing you down by at least two tenths. I don't think you know what you are getting into....
I know Levi, talked to him on at least ten different occasions. He was helping me out with a 427, so I was just kidding with the superstroker comment. I'm just getting everyone's panties in a bunch (and especially yours apparently) because turbo guys are so offensive. Your the all-motor guy with **** up to his knees. I'm not saying your car is slow and I was kidding about challenging your brother, I'm not stupid. You are definitely talking a lot of **** by saying that my car is slow. You might want to go back to the thread where I posted my runs after my cam install and see exactly why it was running the times it did. If you really want to race for $500 with a three car lead, let me know when and where you want to do this. We'll run from 20-120+, no bottle. I can't believe I'm internet racing....

2000 ws6

iTrader: (10)

LOL HAHAHA

Wildman

My goodness, talk about hijacking someones thread. Then all the mud slinging going around that has nothing to do with the original comment. And THEN for all the "SCIENTISTS" that STILL say the STS has lag, clearance issues, dirty filter, yada yada yada...
Why is everyone except the people that actually OWN an STS make the negative comments about it. Most of the nay sayers are working off of theories and have no actual experience or proof.
For all you anti STS peeps out there... the world is flat, man will never fly, the Sun rotates around the earth, and we will NEVER break the sound barrier.
Sheesh. IF YOU DON'T KNOW, please put a disclaimer.
And you 2 macho men, please have a little curtesy and start your own thread. This isn't lsturd.com.

/rant off
Paul

ArcticZ28

iTrader: (14)

25 cars... but what kind of cars... 25 Mini's? Cuz that would only be about 125 feet Just jerkin' your chain... 427 is higher than I can count

Machine

If I ever talk this much crap, I'm going to have to invest an awful lot of freakin money to back it up.

JERRY2500

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, I'VE COULDN'T HAVE SAID IT BETTER. STS OWNER. ASK THE GUY IN THE VETTE I BLEW AWAY YESTERDAY AND ASK HIM ABOUT THE TURBO LAG.HAHAHAHA

Armageddon

iTrader: (41)

Damn I want one of these now... Am I going to blow my **** up with my T-Rex all Bolt-On setup with LT's into True Duals???

SStolen

iTrader: (22)

I'll be laughing too when I'm counting my money. So what's up, little man? You want this race or not? Just know that my car will not be setup in the same form it was when I ran at the Valley. It will be COMPLETE, WITH tuning and the rest of the mods in my sig.

F8L Z71

Dude, get a clue. Nobody wants to "hear" about your car or this testosterone filled, He-Man, my **** is better than your ****, BS.... Take it to PMs.

jRaskell

iTrader: (1)

Actually, heat is the whole foundation of how turbocharging works. Without heat, you've got no boost. The only reason turbos work is because gases expand when heated, and contract when cooled. The air going into the engine is cool (relatively speaking, or at least we hope so), and dense, a given mass of this air at a given pressure doesn't take up much volume. However, it mixes with fuel, enters the combustion chamber, ignites, and becomes very hot. As heat increases, either volume or pressure increases (in this case, a little of both). This increase in volume and pressure is what a turbocharger harnesses to increase the pressure on the intake side of the engine. Without it, there would be no differential needed for the turbine side of the turbo to spin fast enough for the compressor side of the turbo to generate boost. Just wouldn't work. Part of the reason turbos are more efficient than superchargers is because they are taking advantage of otherwise un-used thermal energy being pumped out the exhaust pipes, where superchargers are relying on friction generating mechanical setups.