rear mount vs. traditional turbo
03-22-2005, 06:05 PM
#41
On The Tree
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Salt Lake City
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
STS is a profitable turbo company that stays in business.
How many Fbody turbo kit companies come and go each year? It's hard to know who is in business and who has recently stopped returning calls. At least with STS you know that you'll have a one year warrantee on parts and replacement parts available later on down the road. If you go with a front mount kit what you are going to do in two years when your manifold has cracked and the company you bought the kit from is long gone?
STS is selling 50-60 kits a month, who else is doing that? General Motors is backing up STS up quite nicely with their Best Product award.
How many Fbody turbo kit companies come and go each year? It's hard to know who is in business and who has recently stopped returning calls. At least with STS you know that you'll have a one year warrantee on parts and replacement parts available later on down the road. If you go with a front mount kit what you are going to do in two years when your manifold has cracked and the company you bought the kit from is long gone?
STS is selling 50-60 kits a month, who else is doing that? General Motors is backing up STS up quite nicely with their Best Product award.
03-22-2005, 06:29 PM
#42
LS1TECH Sponsor
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Huntsville, AL
Posts: 2,725
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by bradyb
STS is a profitable turbo company that stays in business.
How many Fbody turbo kit companies come and go each year? It's hard to know who is in business and who has recently stopped returning calls..
How many Fbody turbo kit companies come and go each year? It's hard to know who is in business and who has recently stopped returning calls..
Originally Posted by bradyb
At least with STS you know that you'll have a one year warrantee on parts and replacement parts available later on down the road..
, why stop at 1 year??
Originally Posted by bradyb
If you go with a front mount kit what you are going to do in two years when your manifold has cracked and the company you bought the kit from is long gone?
Originally Posted by bradyb
STS is selling 50-60 kits a month, who else is doing that? .
Originally Posted by bradyb
General Motors is backing up STS up quite nicely with their Best Product award.
Jose
03-22-2005, 07:01 PM
#43
Teching In
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I for one would like all the people who find it necessary to continually pick at the STS system (without ever having owned one) to step a little closer to the plate and instead of saying it isnt efficient, or isnt as good, or is only for people with less ability or a lower budget.... instead try to quantify its inferiority. You have enough of an understanding of thermal dynamics and fluid flow to bash it, demonstrate that knowledge by saying "It is X% less efficient". Or, $10 K will get you X% less power on comparable systems. Or so many hundreths in the quarter. From what I read, the 2 GTOs that are running 11's or high 10's are not that extreme as far as their setup goes, but they manage to put out some pretty quick times for 4000 pound cars on an inferior system. A 11 second car is not pure bunk, and a denser charge can spin a tubine very well... just as a hotter charge can put more pressure on the the system. They are two different ways of spinning a turbine. The conventional approach has had to deal with high temps as efficiently as possible.... because they were almost unavaoidable to begin with, and that heat represented energy you might as well scavenge, rather than letting it bake everything and just escape out the exhaust. That approach has turned the heat into something that you couldnt do without.... rather than something to take advantage of. I can see that on identical engines, a conventional system might develope a little more boost a little sooner, but I think you have to quantify how much more boost, and how much sooner it is developed to support the amount of bashing the STS system recieves. The increase in time that it takes an STS system to pressurize its hot-side tubing has to be minimal.... and I think the math has been done before, based on the exhaust output of a typical LS1 and the typical volume of tubing that needs to be pressurized to spin the turbine. It is not a huge difference. In addition..... how exactly is this small difference supposed to affect the average owner? Someone driving on the street most likely wont even notice, and if they are indeed dragging the car, wont they be managing boost pressure and revs prior to launch anyway? That would seem to me to make the difference minute indeed. The fact that various crazy people intend to try and use the STS for dragging (something it is not sold as being intended for) does not make Squires a bad company, it just means people are taking a product that is outside the box to begin with, and doing something pretty cool with it. Car enthusiasts are kinda known for doing that anyway. I remember the first time I ever saw pictures of a FWD drag car, with skinnies in back and slicks up front.... I thought it was basically wrong, and would never be as efficient as a RWD setup, and would never really be competitive. Some of those inefficient wrong wheelers are running 8 and 9 second passes in the neighborhood of 200MPH. I know who was wrong = )
03-22-2005, 07:11 PM
#44
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Bakersfield, Ca.
Posts: 729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some of you guys are so stuck on velocity and heat, that you don't relize that STS went a different route. It is PRESSURE...
PRESSURE
PRESSURE
PRESSURE
And a T60 you would get for a typical front mount is not what you would get for a rear mount. They have changed parts of the turbo and kept the charge pipe small to get around some of the physics.
Granted though at some point there is a limit now to what the rear mount can do because of the changes.
The original poster asked if it as efficient. T60 vs T60... no, but again, it was not designed to be.
By the way... did I forget to mention... PRESSURE!!!!
PRESSURE
PRESSURE
PRESSURE
And a T60 you would get for a typical front mount is not what you would get for a rear mount. They have changed parts of the turbo and kept the charge pipe small to get around some of the physics.
Granted though at some point there is a limit now to what the rear mount can do because of the changes.
The original poster asked if it as efficient. T60 vs T60... no, but again, it was not designed to be.
By the way... did I forget to mention... PRESSURE!!!!
03-22-2005, 08:05 PM
#45
TECH Apprentice
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 362
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You failed to mention
DEAD HORSE
DEAD HORSE
DEAD HORSE
This has been discussed to the point that it's nauseating and I want each and every one of you to send me $5 for putting me through this yet again.
tannji.....all of your questions and concerns have been thoroughly discussed ad infinitum here, LS1.com and CZ28.
Did I forget to mention.....DEAD HORSE
I love you guys....
DEAD HORSE
DEAD HORSE
DEAD HORSE
This has been discussed to the point that it's nauseating and I want each and every one of you to send me $5 for putting me through this yet again.
tannji.....all of your questions and concerns have been thoroughly discussed ad infinitum here, LS1.com and CZ28.
Did I forget to mention.....DEAD HORSE
I love you guys....
03-22-2005, 08:11 PM
#46
Teching In
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LOL, if you read closely, I didnt really have much in the way of questions and concerns. I like the STS for certain applications. Like on a LS1 in my 2500 pound car. I dont anticipate too many people coming up to me after a run and being in too much of a hurry to tell me how inefficient my setup is.
03-22-2005, 08:55 PM
#49
I AM A MOTHERF*CKER
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Wildman
Some of you guys are so stuck on velocity and heat, that you don't relize that STS went a different route. It is PRESSURE...
PRESSURE
PRESSURE
PRESSURE
And a T60 you would get for a typical front mount is not what you would get for a rear mount. They have changed parts of the turbo and kept the charge pipe small to get around some of the physics.
Granted though at some point there is a limit now to what the rear mount can do because of the changes.
The original poster asked if it as efficient. T60 vs T60... no, but again, it was not designed to be.
By the way... did I forget to mention... PRESSURE!!!!
PRESSURE
PRESSURE
PRESSURE
And a T60 you would get for a typical front mount is not what you would get for a rear mount. They have changed parts of the turbo and kept the charge pipe small to get around some of the physics.
Granted though at some point there is a limit now to what the rear mount can do because of the changes.
The original poster asked if it as efficient. T60 vs T60... no, but again, it was not designed to be.
By the way... did I forget to mention... PRESSURE!!!!
Give up Paul. There's a new heat monger every week it seems like. For all this "advanced engineering" I keep reading it kinda makes my laugh and sick at the same time that everyone ignores the relationship to pressure.
... and now its time to hear from everyone how the turbos are exactly the same ... despite the fact that based on the theory we've been subjected to and by their own arguments, F8L can't have run a 12.3, Purevil must NOT be making that much hp, those GTOs are flukes, the camaros running 135 mph at 5500 feet must be driven by gravity recoil boost gun conduits and we all wait until 6300 rpm to see boost even though we all say different.
Oh well. You know STS kits can never make good 60' times, right?
My $5 is in the mail.
03-22-2005, 10:25 PM
#51
Launching!
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 296
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by bradyb
STS is a profitable turbo company that stays in business.
How many Fbody turbo kit companies come and go each year? It's hard to know who is in business and who has recently stopped returning calls. At least with STS you know that you'll have a one year warrantee on parts and replacement parts available later on down the road. If you go with a front mount kit what you are going to do in two years when your manifold has cracked and the company you bought the kit from is long gone?
STS is selling 50-60 kits a month, who else is doing that? General Motors is backing up STS up quite nicely with their Best Product award.
How many Fbody turbo kit companies come and go each year? It's hard to know who is in business and who has recently stopped returning calls. At least with STS you know that you'll have a one year warrantee on parts and replacement parts available later on down the road. If you go with a front mount kit what you are going to do in two years when your manifold has cracked and the company you bought the kit from is long gone?
STS is selling 50-60 kits a month, who else is doing that? General Motors is backing up STS up quite nicely with their Best Product award.
03-22-2005, 10:53 PM
#53
Teching In
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by LT1-7
You know the funny thing is 1/2 the people that call us are people that are unhappy with or want to grow from the STS kits. Figure that one out
03-22-2005, 11:58 PM
#54
LS1TECH Sponsor
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Huntsville, AL
Posts: 2,725
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by LT1-7
You know the funny thing is 1/2 the people that call us are people that are unhappy with or want to grow from the STS kits. Figure that one out
Jose
03-23-2005, 01:56 AM
#55
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Bakersfield, Ca.
Posts: 729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by JZ 97 SS 1500
Same for us, we have alot of STS customers that want better response, more horsepower, and want to run big turbo units without having to wait for spool times. Guess they are worried stones will be thrown at them if they mention the system doesn't work that well on the site.
Jose
Jose
It's funny how 2 or 3 equals a dozen in some peoples math.
03-23-2005, 02:05 AM
#56
12 Second Truck Club
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 5,574
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They are wusses then. LOL
I don't church up the STS kit as much as I could. I will tell the truth even when i know some of the STS guys are reading this and it might offend them. If people have issues with their kit it would be better for the industry as a whole if they voiced it. That's how I see it anyway.
That being said I <3 my STS kit
.
I don't church up the STS kit as much as I could. I will tell the truth even when i know some of the STS guys are reading this and it might offend them. If people have issues with their kit it would be better for the industry as a whole if they voiced it. That's how I see it anyway.
That being said I <3 my STS kit
.
03-23-2005, 05:01 AM
#57
TECH Fanatic
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 1,109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gosh, what a flame out.
Just like most others pointed out, for non-racing applications the rear mount is just fine. 5psi in the intake manifold is the same whether it came from a front or rear mount. Efficiency wise yes the front mount is superior no doubt, never doubted, not argued. I just wanted to make sure people realize that heat is not the only driving force behind turbo technology unless you are talking maximum efficiency or boost. Putting HEAT in red capital letters makes it look like the be all, end all.
Dead horse for sure....
Just like most others pointed out, for non-racing applications the rear mount is just fine. 5psi in the intake manifold is the same whether it came from a front or rear mount. Efficiency wise yes the front mount is superior no doubt, never doubted, not argued. I just wanted to make sure people realize that heat is not the only driving force behind turbo technology unless you are talking maximum efficiency or boost. Putting HEAT in red capital letters makes it look like the be all, end all.
Dead horse for sure....
03-23-2005, 05:36 AM
#58
Launching!
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Baltimore
Posts: 287
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't it's coincidental that the only people promoting the STS turbo are the one's who own it. I'd take PTK or a complete incon kit over it anyday. It's not a BAD setup, and it does produce great numbers. But a properly built/tuned front mount kit is better, end of story
03-23-2005, 07:34 AM
#60
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: South of Heaven
Posts: 5,469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by smokinHawk
why even buy an sts as phamspeed has a better kit for less now???
unless your vehicle type is unsupported
unless your vehicle type is unsupported
