Why Not To Get STS?
07-19-2005, 08:51 AM
#42
TECH Enthusiast
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Vero Beach, Fl
Posts: 501
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by V6 Bird
I was just wondering if there can be any more excuses in one thread?
With a cam and a 100 shot most cars make over 450rwhp...FWIW...
Im a fan of FI just not STS style kits because of the design. Fast race cars simply dont run STS kits.
Mike
With a cam and a 100 shot most cars make over 450rwhp...FWIW...
Im a fan of FI just not STS style kits because of the design. Fast race cars simply dont run STS kits.
Mike
As for the comment about a cam and 100 shot. I looked into that route as well. And still am actually. Here's my issue with that. Bottle has to be refilled, and springs have to be changed. I hear people post about how they're lucky to get 12k miles out of a set of valve springs. Now that doesn't exactly sound like fun yearly maintenence to me. And as for filling bottles... Last time I had nitrous (several years ago) it cost me $35 to get a fill. I could go through that in one night on my 4 cyllinder. I imagine running a larger shot on my LS1 would eat up the bottle twice as fast.
For those (like me) looking for a somewhat inexpensive power-adder that doesn't require constant upkeep, and modification. The STS looks to be a good deal. I'm all for the REAL forced induction guys to chime in. Hell, it's why I made this thread. But for those of you that are message board racers, that read numbers from this guy vs numbers from that guy. I couldn't care less as to what your opinions are.
07-19-2005, 09:08 AM
#43
I am preparing to install the first STS kit on an LS2-GTO. I built my first turbo car 20 yrs ago [VW Scirocco...200+ hp @ 2100# and lots of suspension mods = a corvette/porsche killer in it's day!]. When I first heard about this rear mount, I had SERIOUS doubts...
...BUT...by properly matching the exhaust turbine w/ a proper compressor, it begins to make sense. Add the terrible unhood heat problem these goats have, and it makes MORE sense. And given the odd fuel tank position in the trunk, there is a GREAT location for the air intake under the passenger side of the trunk (again, specific to GTO).
I am installing a kit w/ the upgraded GT-series turbo, intercooler, methanol injection, 60# injectors, fuel pump mods. I've just been waiting on tuning for the LS2 before actually bolting this system on.
In terms of cost, I think you have to look at labor (even when you do it yourself, your time is worth $$; at least mine is
) and add'l parts. For example, there has been a lot of debate on the LS1GTO.com board, and several VOCAL Procharger supporters. The deal is, they are ALSO adding headers ($1000 for the goats + labor) and generally a cat-back system. That is additional cost. Fuel system mods are needed for WHATEVER approach you take to power production. STS install looks to be quite uncomplicated.
Underhood turbos in our cars just look like WAY too much heat. APS is developing a twin turbo setup w/ the turbos hanging down under the car up front. Basically it just pushes the turbo 6' closer to the exhaust ports, but still has the same issue of ground clearance, water, etc.
Anyway, this is all conjecture. Looks like I'll have this beast operational in about 2 weeks or so. Oh, BTW, I am NOT building a race car, but a true daily driver. I want practical as well!
...BUT...by properly matching the exhaust turbine w/ a proper compressor, it begins to make sense. Add the terrible unhood heat problem these goats have, and it makes MORE sense. And given the odd fuel tank position in the trunk, there is a GREAT location for the air intake under the passenger side of the trunk (again, specific to GTO).
I am installing a kit w/ the upgraded GT-series turbo, intercooler, methanol injection, 60# injectors, fuel pump mods. I've just been waiting on tuning for the LS2 before actually bolting this system on.
In terms of cost, I think you have to look at labor (even when you do it yourself, your time is worth $$; at least mine is
) and add'l parts. For example, there has been a lot of debate on the LS1GTO.com board, and several VOCAL Procharger supporters. The deal is, they are ALSO adding headers ($1000 for the goats + labor) and generally a cat-back system. That is additional cost. Fuel system mods are needed for WHATEVER approach you take to power production. STS install looks to be quite uncomplicated.Underhood turbos in our cars just look like WAY too much heat. APS is developing a twin turbo setup w/ the turbos hanging down under the car up front. Basically it just pushes the turbo 6' closer to the exhaust ports, but still has the same issue of ground clearance, water, etc.
Anyway, this is all conjecture. Looks like I'll have this beast operational in about 2 weeks or so. Oh, BTW, I am NOT building a race car, but a true daily driver. I want practical as well!
07-19-2005, 09:43 AM
#44
10 Second Club
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Orlando, Florida
Posts: 6,368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The STS system works, its a proven concept. If I were you and you're concerned about rain water getting sucked up into the turbo I would advise against, even though some of have used the sock. Its been raining A LOT here. Water in engine =boom
07-19-2005, 09:53 AM
#45
Most forced induction setups have low filters... that was never an issue with mine. I've moved along to another kit, and honestly, it feels a lot better. Thats same car... same driver... same turbo... different manifolds. It's a lot more responsive, I kept all my accessories, only thing I had to do differently was fab up some cold side piping. The STS kit works, it's been proven on hundreds of vehicles, and quite frankly, it's the only "budget" kit right now. I wouldn't go spend twice the amount on a PTK kit if I was planning on running 6 measly pounds. Thats what I would consider to be a Big Dog kit, built motor prerequisite.
07-19-2005, 09:55 AM
#46
Suspended Sponsor
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Just outside of Palm Springs Ca.
Posts: 371
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by V6 Bird
So you dont have valve springs or pushrods for that cam? 
The point of saying the cam is in there is that it was an N/A cam it is totally opposit of what you would want for a turbo, too much overlap and not a reverse split. In other words more left in the combo.
-Bryan
07-19-2005, 10:02 AM
#47
Suspended Sponsor
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Just outside of Palm Springs Ca.
Posts: 371
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If some of you all still don't believe, keep an eye out for more posts from us out here in CA you might be suprised when a CA smog legal car belts out 1KWHP!
Just wait and see...
-Bryan
Just wait and see...
-Bryan
07-19-2005, 10:34 AM
#49
Suspended Sponsor
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Just outside of Palm Springs Ca.
Posts: 371
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Armageddon
...
-Bryan
07-19-2005, 10:48 AM
#50
The STS kit does what it sopposed to pretty well. If the right exuast housing is picked it will work well. As well as a front mount....probibly not. Doesn't mean its bad though. Just cause alluminum or titianum rods are the best the 4340 steel ones suck..no. I would like to see one fly down the track though and take a look at 60ft times and mph and see how they perform in person. Something like purevl's car would have been really cool to watch go down the track, cause he put down some damn nice numbers, on the rollers.
07-19-2005, 11:12 AM
#52
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (15)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Grand Prairie, TX
Posts: 5,109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Mattism78
You could've probably summed up all of your thoughts in one post but that's neither here nor there.
As for the comment about a cam and 100 shot. I looked into that route as well. And still am actually. Here's my issue with that. Bottle has to be refilled, and springs have to be changed. I hear people post about how they're lucky to get 12k miles out of a set of valve springs. Now that doesn't exactly sound like fun yearly maintenence to me. And as for filling bottles... Last time I had nitrous (several years ago) it cost me $35 to get a fill. I could go through that in one night on my 4 cyllinder. I imagine running a larger shot on my LS1 would eat up the bottle twice as fast.
For those (like me) looking for a somewhat inexpensive power-adder that doesn't require constant upkeep, and modification. The STS looks to be a good deal. I'm all for the REAL forced induction guys to chime in. Hell, it's why I made this thread. But for those of you that are message board racers, that read numbers from this guy vs numbers from that guy. I couldn't care less as to what your opinions are.
As for the comment about a cam and 100 shot. I looked into that route as well. And still am actually. Here's my issue with that. Bottle has to be refilled, and springs have to be changed. I hear people post about how they're lucky to get 12k miles out of a set of valve springs. Now that doesn't exactly sound like fun yearly maintenence to me. And as for filling bottles... Last time I had nitrous (several years ago) it cost me $35 to get a fill. I could go through that in one night on my 4 cyllinder. I imagine running a larger shot on my LS1 would eat up the bottle twice as fast.
For those (like me) looking for a somewhat inexpensive power-adder that doesn't require constant upkeep, and modification. The STS looks to be a good deal. I'm all for the REAL forced induction guys to chime in. Hell, it's why I made this thread. But for those of you that are message board racers, that read numbers from this guy vs numbers from that guy. I couldn't care less as to what your opinions are.
07-19-2005, 11:17 AM
#53
Originally Posted by V6 Bird
For 13-14psi and those traps that sounds very WEAK! What does your car weigh? 4000+??
Weak, I didn't know that trapping 25-28 MPH higher than a stock ls1 was weak? I consider that an absolutely amazing task to do on the stock motor.
There is a built 427 LS1 in town here that only traps 119 (a4 street car with small cam) and a built 408 race car (m6, big *** cam 600+ lift) that only traps 122. I trap what was it again... oh yeah 126. They are fast cars, they just run at the las vegas track which makes it very hard to compare them to sea level cars like most people on here.
You should really stay out of these threads. You have made it quite evident in several of your previous posts that you have no understanding of how turbo charged engines work and the physics behind them. Trying to explain the concept of density altitude and the effects of heat on a FI to someone such as yourself would be very hard.
Thank you and have a nice day
Last edited by Zombie; 07-19-2005 at 11:28 AM.
07-19-2005, 11:24 AM
#54
Wow it's very rare I read a whole thread like this...... usually there is too much highschool drama that drowns out my interest... although there is plenty of drama up in here i really enjoyed reading this....
I'm considering the thought of an STS kit because I'm such a noob to FI... Can someone post i'm not interested in spam but i'm sure i'll get some... some figure of what an STS kits would run for a 95 LT1 T/A verse some comparable front mounts for the same application.... I'm doing the research but it would be nice for someone to explain to me the key difference why one is bettter than the other, why one is more expensive etc etc.. I think such answers will really heat up this debate quickly....
Thanks in advance for all the help you guys have been providing me...
I'm considering the thought of an STS kit because I'm such a noob to FI... Can someone post i'm not interested in spam but i'm sure i'll get some... some figure of what an STS kits would run for a 95 LT1 T/A verse some comparable front mounts for the same application.... I'm doing the research but it would be nice for someone to explain to me the key difference why one is bettter than the other, why one is more expensive etc etc.. I think such answers will really heat up this debate quickly....
Thanks in advance for all the help you guys have been providing me...
07-19-2005, 11:29 AM
#55
Administrator
Originally Posted by PurEvl
there isnt one friggin car here running 200 
You're aware that there are more motors in this world than the LS1 right?
Originally Posted by PurEvl
Harlans what...170ish with a 100k race car...
Originally Posted by PurEvl
go back to your mustang 
I'm going to build a TT 408 C5 in the near future and it sure as hell won't be a STS kit. That's just my opinion though. If it works for you, more power to you.
07-19-2005, 11:30 AM
#56
Originally Posted by PurEvl
i would have liked too but 10.5's out of two way lower powered heavier cars (gtos)was enough proof for me.
Just imagine your car trapping 135 plus would have stirred some debate.....Oh well keep up the good work I see a new exciting setup for you and you made some nice numbers with the STS when no-one else was that I seen.
07-19-2005, 11:41 AM
#57
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (15)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Grand Prairie, TX
Posts: 5,109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Mattism78
You could've probably summed up all of your thoughts in one post but that's neither here nor there.
As for the comment about a cam and 100 shot. I looked into that route as well. And still am actually. Here's my issue with that. Bottle has to be refilled, and springs have to be changed. I hear people post about how they're lucky to get 12k miles out of a set of valve springs. Now that doesn't exactly sound like fun yearly maintenence to me. And as for filling bottles... Last time I had nitrous (several years ago) it cost me $35 to get a fill. I could go through that in one night on my 4 cyllinder. I imagine running a larger shot on my LS1 would eat up the bottle twice as fast.
For those (like me) looking for a somewhat inexpensive power-adder that doesn't require constant upkeep, and modification. The STS looks to be a good deal. I'm all for the REAL forced induction guys to chime in. Hell, it's why I made this thread. But for those of you that are message board racers, that read numbers from this guy vs numbers from that guy. I couldn't care less as to what your opinions are.
As for the comment about a cam and 100 shot. I looked into that route as well. And still am actually. Here's my issue with that. Bottle has to be refilled, and springs have to be changed. I hear people post about how they're lucky to get 12k miles out of a set of valve springs. Now that doesn't exactly sound like fun yearly maintenence to me. And as for filling bottles... Last time I had nitrous (several years ago) it cost me $35 to get a fill. I could go through that in one night on my 4 cyllinder. I imagine running a larger shot on my LS1 would eat up the bottle twice as fast.
For those (like me) looking for a somewhat inexpensive power-adder that doesn't require constant upkeep, and modification. The STS looks to be a good deal. I'm all for the REAL forced induction guys to chime in. Hell, it's why I made this thread. But for those of you that are message board racers, that read numbers from this guy vs numbers from that guy. I couldn't care less as to what your opinions are.
Im far from your version of a message board racer...Not many take cars to the limits like some of us hard core guys. How many stock longblock cars can you cant with any power adder in the 9's? They are rare and thats what I enjoy. Just dotn like STS kits because im far from an inexperienced racer...lol
07-19-2005, 11:46 AM
#59
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 unit213
Really? I didn't know that. You're aware that there are more motors in this world than the LS1 right?
$100K huh? Right.
Ok...will do. Maybe I'll ask the Mustang guys then since there are a bunch that run over 200mph. I certainly don't recall seeing any rear mount kits on cars that make big power. The idea itself is flawed in terms of turbo placement.
I'm going to build a TT 408 C5 in the near future and it sure as hell won't be a STS kit. That's just my opinion though. If it works for you, more power to you.
You're aware that there are more motors in this world than the LS1 right? $100K huh? Right.
Ok...will do. Maybe I'll ask the Mustang guys then since there are a bunch that run over 200mph. I certainly don't recall seeing any rear mount kits on cars that make big power. The idea itself is flawed in terms of turbo placement.
I'm going to build a TT 408 C5 in the near future and it sure as hell won't be a STS kit. That's just my opinion though. If it works for you, more power to you.
And thanks I thought this was ls1tech which is about ls1's but i guess i was wrong. I guess a 630ci merlin wouldnt want an sts...you got me there. Good luck with your 408...I already got one with a t88. I guess the sts sucks since i still defend them and dont even own one..right?
07-19-2005, 11:48 AM
#60
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (15)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Grand Prairie, TX
Posts: 5,109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Zombie
Not sure on the exact weight of the car but i'm pretty sure it's at least 3700 with me in it since it's basically a no compromise street car (i run 17" et streets, i consider that a small compromise).
Weak, I didn't know that trapping 25-28 MPH higher than a stock ls1 was weak? I consider that an absolutely amazing task to do on the stock motor.
There is a built 427 LS1 in town here that only traps 119 (a4 street car with small cam) and a built 408 race car (m6, big *** cam 600+ lift) that only traps 122. I trap what was it again... oh yeah 126. They are fast cars, they just run at the las vegas track which makes it very hard to compare them to sea level cars like most people on here.
You should really stay out of these threads. You have made it quite evident in several of your previous posts that you have no understanding of how turbo charged engines work and the physics behind them. Trying to explain the concept of density altitude and the effects of heat on a FI to someone such as yourself would be very hard.
Thank you and have a nice day
Weak, I didn't know that trapping 25-28 MPH higher than a stock ls1 was weak? I consider that an absolutely amazing task to do on the stock motor.
There is a built 427 LS1 in town here that only traps 119 (a4 street car with small cam) and a built 408 race car (m6, big *** cam 600+ lift) that only traps 122. I trap what was it again... oh yeah 126. They are fast cars, they just run at the las vegas track which makes it very hard to compare them to sea level cars like most people on here.
You should really stay out of these threads. You have made it quite evident in several of your previous posts that you have no understanding of how turbo charged engines work and the physics behind them. Trying to explain the concept of density altitude and the effects of heat on a FI to someone such as yourself would be very hard.
Thank you and have a nice day