Is this for real?
Is this for real?
Originally Posted by y2khawk
Enough to know better 
Me thinks he missed a factor of 2 somewhere in his "math"
Me thinks he missed a factor of 2 somewhere in his "math"
Trending Topics
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
Hey guy's I am the guy who got the whole sts turbo question started. I just want to let you know that this math doesn't apply to real life. I just had a question to see your opinion of horsepower numbers using the equations from horsepower manufacturer's. I would be the happiest guy on Earth if the car makes 500+ at the wheels. The car right now runs 12.3, if I can get the in low elevens I would be quite content. once again the 1,122 horsepower was a question and not a statement. I would appreciate it if you know of anyone running the sts turbo, please send me the numbers of the horsepower the car is making. The whole reason why I did this is because people don't read what I post and I just wanted to argue because I had the numbers from the manufactures that can back me up. Even though we all know they are not as realistic as we would like them to be.
Just for fun, if you would like to see the mathematical formula I used it is at the begginning of the second page on that post. It's funny because it does add up to 1,122 horsepower before nitrous.
TECH Resident
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 840
Likes: 0
a 
mounted... oops rear mounted turbo is'nt going to make that kind of power.
Its too inefficient..
The amount of energy the turbine absorbs way back there is'nt as much and the system has to move the air all the way up front on the cold side..
Twins with a great IC, good cam, good head etc could hit that 25psi and up...
mounted... oops rear mounted turbo is'nt going to make that kind of power.Its too inefficient..
The amount of energy the turbine absorbs way back there is'nt as much and the system has to move the air all the way up front on the cold side..
Twins with a great IC, good cam, good head etc could hit that 25psi and up...
Originally Posted by onephatZ28
Hey guy's I am the guy who got the whole sts turbo question started. I just want to let you know that this math doesn't apply to real life. I just had a question to see your opinion of horsepower numbers using the equations from horsepower manufacturer's. I would be the happiest guy on Earth if the car makes 500+ at the wheels. The car right now runs 12.3, if I can get the in low elevens I would be quite content. once again the 1,122 horsepower was a question and not a statement. I would appreciate it if you know of anyone running the sts turbo, please send me the numbers of the horsepower the car is making. The whole reason why I did this is because people don't read what I post and I just wanted to argue because I had the numbers from the manufactures that can back me up. Even though we all know they are not as realistic as we would like them to be.
Check this STS Camaro SS out. Bob
Originally Posted by onephatZ28
Hey guy's I am the guy who got the whole sts turbo question started. I just want to let you know that this math doesn't apply to real life. I just had a question to see your opinion of horsepower numbers using the equations from horsepower manufacturer's. I would be the happiest guy on Earth if the car makes 500+ at the wheels. The car right now runs 12.3, if I can get the in low elevens I would be quite content. once again the 1,122 horsepower was a question and not a statement. I would appreciate it if you know of anyone running the sts turbo, please send me the numbers of the horsepower the car is making. The whole reason why I did this is because people don't read what I post and I just wanted to argue because I had the numbers from the manufactures that can back me up. Even though we all know they are not as realistic as we would like them to be.
I will say this, efficiency, efficiency and efficiency....btw did I say efficiency. Compressor maps are shewed heavly when mounted in the rear. And if you go by what STS writes on their website, then the world is still flat.
Also turbos require a good bit of power to turn. We have worked with some turbo companies to work out rough equations for this as well as our own findings on a turbo test stand.....
BTW, a 408ci engine, revving to 6500rpms, running a S-trim turbine (2.96 E/ 3.200 I), 76mm compressor wheel at ~50% efficiency (which is approx. the efficiency where a 76GTS would be running on a 408 at @20psi), would require/cost ~ 163.32hp. You would be suprised how much hp people give up on this site and others by running to small a turbo/turbine...
Also turbos require a good bit of power to turn. We have worked with some turbo companies to work out rough equations for this as well as our own findings on a turbo test stand.....
BTW, a 408ci engine, revving to 6500rpms, running a S-trim turbine (2.96 E/ 3.200 I), 76mm compressor wheel at ~50% efficiency (which is approx. the efficiency where a 76GTS would be running on a 408 at @20psi), would require/cost ~ 163.32hp. You would be suprised how much hp people give up on this site and others by running to small a turbo/turbine...
Hey guys,
thanks for being cool and seeing this for what is.
The other forum doesn't really write back much so I think you adopted this baby.
Seriously though, what is up with STS advertising their product as taking zero horsepower to operate. You can read their exact quote in supercharger vs. turbochager page on their website.
The temerity of such companies that would advertise under a false pretense just make a buck. It's already hard enough for double digit I.Q.'s such as myself to focus on a positive integer less than two.
Look guys, we're ambassadors to racing and therefore should make known when malfeasance is being employed to deceptively and fraudulently sell a product. This is only if the website is in fact incorrect and doing so knowingly. Let's advodcate for social justice so we all are apprised of what each modification really does.
Respectfully,
Chagrined STS AGNOSTIC!
thanks for being cool and seeing this for what is.
The other forum doesn't really write back much so I think you adopted this baby.
Seriously though, what is up with STS advertising their product as taking zero horsepower to operate. You can read their exact quote in supercharger vs. turbochager page on their website.
The temerity of such companies that would advertise under a false pretense just make a buck. It's already hard enough for double digit I.Q.'s such as myself to focus on a positive integer less than two.
Look guys, we're ambassadors to racing and therefore should make known when malfeasance is being employed to deceptively and fraudulently sell a product. This is only if the website is in fact incorrect and doing so knowingly. Let's advodcate for social justice so we all are apprised of what each modification really does.
Respectfully,
Chagrined STS AGNOSTIC!
Last edited by onephatZ28; Dec 22, 2005 at 01:11 PM.
Originally Posted by onephatZ28
Hey guys,
thanks for being cool and seeing this for what is.
The other forum doesn't really write back much so I think you adopted this baby.
Seriously though, what is up with STS advertising their product as taking zero horsepower to operate. You can read their exact quote in supercharger vs. turbochager page on their website.
The temerity of such companies that would advertise under a false pretense just make a buck. It's already hard enough for double digit I.Q.'s such as myself to focus on a positive integer less than two.
Look guys, we're ambassadors to racing and therefore should make known when malfeasance is being employed to deceptively and fraudulently sell a product. This is only if the website is in fact incorrect and doing so knowingly. Let's advodcate for social justice so we all are apprised of what each modification really does.
Respectfully,
Chagrined STS AGNOSTIC!
thanks for being cool and seeing this for what is.
The other forum doesn't really write back much so I think you adopted this baby.
Seriously though, what is up with STS advertising their product as taking zero horsepower to operate. You can read their exact quote in supercharger vs. turbochager page on their website.
The temerity of such companies that would advertise under a false pretense just make a buck. It's already hard enough for double digit I.Q.'s such as myself to focus on a positive integer less than two.
Look guys, we're ambassadors to racing and therefore should make known when malfeasance is being employed to deceptively and fraudulently sell a product. This is only if the website is in fact incorrect and doing so knowingly. Let's advodcate for social justice so we all are apprised of what each modification really does.
Respectfully,
Chagrined STS AGNOSTIC!