front mount turbo v.s. rear mount turbo
#102
Originally Posted by engineermike
For 400 rwhp, I wouldn't bother with spray. Bolt on's and the Cheatr cam will pretty much get you there and pass smog.
Pass smog? what's that?
#103
What is wrong with rear mounted turbos?
Just that. I am trying to decide with no luck on which turbo setup to go with. Can anyone explain to me the pros and cons of a rear mounted turbo set up compared to any of the other setups that mount the turbo close to or in the engine bay? What is it, lag time? Max HP output way low? The rear mounted setup looks good at first but I know nothing about turbos. I am just going to get one but not sure what style to go with.
To help I will say I plan to drive the car all the time and hope to make 700+ RWHP with the 408 and a Turbo kit of some sort.
Thanks for your input.
To help I will say I plan to drive the car all the time and hope to make 700+ RWHP with the 408 and a Turbo kit of some sort.
Thanks for your input.
#104
If your stuck on a 408 only... I would encourage you to look at a front mount. From all of my research, you cant tuck a big enough turbo under the back to capatilize on the big cubes...
And this is comming from a rear mount lover....
And this is comming from a rear mount lover....
#105
Thats scarry. I am truely looking to do the whole thing myself. Fab and all. I know the rear kit set up would be the easiest for me to do. But if the rear mount won't work to feed a 408 then I will do the extra work to make a forward mount kit instead.
The problem with a foward mount in my setup is I already have a very nice set of headers that I realy would love to keep. I like the look under the hood with these. A rear mount I could keep these, but a foward mount would mean changing them out to something else. I am not sure that headers are realy not that useful with a turbo but they do look good.
I am thinking if I go forward I would use the factory manifolds, run the exhaust under one side of the K member to the turbo. Install the turbo in front of the engine and behind the radiator, as high as I can fit it. Then run the return under the opposite side of the K member. Doing this would require quite a bite of length in the hot side from the manifolds to the turbo but not as much as a rear mount. It would also make the cold side better in my view, considering the air intake could run threw the factory filter box(colder and cleaner air then from under the car). Also less piping for the cold air side. I am just conserned with heat from the turbo in the engine compartment and the loss of any and all room for working on the accessories. If I had a nice set of short headers instead of the long tubes I have I would like the setup better.
What do you think?
The problem with a foward mount in my setup is I already have a very nice set of headers that I realy would love to keep. I like the look under the hood with these. A rear mount I could keep these, but a foward mount would mean changing them out to something else. I am not sure that headers are realy not that useful with a turbo but they do look good.
I am thinking if I go forward I would use the factory manifolds, run the exhaust under one side of the K member to the turbo. Install the turbo in front of the engine and behind the radiator, as high as I can fit it. Then run the return under the opposite side of the K member. Doing this would require quite a bite of length in the hot side from the manifolds to the turbo but not as much as a rear mount. It would also make the cold side better in my view, considering the air intake could run threw the factory filter box(colder and cleaner air then from under the car). Also less piping for the cold air side. I am just conserned with heat from the turbo in the engine compartment and the loss of any and all room for working on the accessories. If I had a nice set of short headers instead of the long tubes I have I would like the setup better.
What do you think?
#107
How is the lag time? How much boost can you make with it? What is the rpm that it hits? DO you have an intercooler.
I am looking for something that can make at least 15psi and I do not want too much lag time. I can probly stand a little though. Would launch better if it did not all come on at once. I also eun a 3800 stall so that might help it to boost qiucker. The main area I am worried about as far as lag time goes is like from a 50 mile an hour role. I drive a new F450 Deisel for a work truck. It has some shitty lag time on the turbo. From a stop, you will cross two lanes before the turbo kicks in. I am talking you can count one Mississippi, Two Mississippi, then it will kick in.
I know, its a Ford
I am looking for something that can make at least 15psi and I do not want too much lag time. I can probly stand a little though. Would launch better if it did not all come on at once. I also eun a 3800 stall so that might help it to boost qiucker. The main area I am worried about as far as lag time goes is like from a 50 mile an hour role. I drive a new F450 Deisel for a work truck. It has some shitty lag time on the turbo. From a stop, you will cross two lanes before the turbo kicks in. I am talking you can count one Mississippi, Two Mississippi, then it will kick in.
I know, its a Ford
#108
What do you really think about STS' turbo?
I'm leaning more and more towards turbos than superchargers lately. I see topics about STS turbo, and you can't really beat their price.
But, the only thing I hear is good things about this system, but I'm wondering any downsides to it. I orignally wanted a D1SC running about 8lbs, which the STS can also. But I've only seen the STS kit move ls1s about 1-5 seconds in the 1/4, while the D1sc giving people about two seconds, and both are putting down about the same numbers.
So, what are the downfalls comparing the two systems?
But, the only thing I hear is good things about this system, but I'm wondering any downsides to it. I orignally wanted a D1SC running about 8lbs, which the STS can also. But I've only seen the STS kit move ls1s about 1-5 seconds in the 1/4, while the D1sc giving people about two seconds, and both are putting down about the same numbers.
So, what are the downfalls comparing the two systems?
#109
Well just so you know, i dont believe there is an STS f-body i nthe 10's yet unless it was hit just recently which i havent seen posted. LongRange4U hit 11.01 i believe as the fastest but then he blew his #7 piston. Both kits are great but i like the turbo a little more. However, if yuo are lowered at all, you will scrape your sts kit. Also if you are a little leary about having your turbo out i nthe open and under your car, then id go with the D1SC or check into a different turbo kit (hi-flo when they get theres out, or GMR) Both of which i believe are as cheap as the D1SC but GMRs price competes with the STS's. The STS will net a little more power, but the D1SC may be an easier install/tune, etc.
__________________
Featuring 6 different turbo kits for your F-body!
Check us out on Facebook at: www.facebook.com/HuronSpeed
Featuring 6 different turbo kits for your F-body!
Check us out on Facebook at: www.facebook.com/HuronSpeed
#110
The STS kit looks inexpensive until you add in the options necessary to make it compete with the other systems out on the market. It does make more power than I thought it would, with no perception of turbo lag. Bob
#113
let see...everyone that i have heard of with an STS is traction plagued...so they just need some more track time and some better components so they don't break stuff trying to go 10's or lower
#115
Like pumps, injectors, ect.
So should I think about getting the STS, or spend it elsewhere? Still kinda like the idea of TD and a D1SC, but turbos seem to be going to the best route. Can you run a TD setup with the STS?
So should I think about getting the STS, or spend it elsewhere? Still kinda like the idea of TD and a D1SC, but turbos seem to be going to the best route. Can you run a TD setup with the STS?
#118
Originally Posted by mdhmi
I'm not a fan at all of rear mount setups. To each his own.
Mark
Mark
Te design itself is fundamentally flawed. There are zero fast (6's/7's) cars
running rear mount turbo kits...at least that I'm aware of.
#119
Originally Posted by black01_WS6
look at EPP web page they just built scotts sts camaro, and it is difiantly a 10 sec car they just need to get it to the track. its a little cold up there.
#120
Originally Posted by Superman09
Well just so you know, i dont believe there is an STS f-body i nthe 10's yet unless it was hit just recently which i havent seen posted. LongRange4U hit 11.01 i believe as the fastest but then he blew his #7 piston. Both kits are great but i like the turbo a little more. However, if yuo are lowered at all, you will scrape your sts kit. Also if you are a little leary about having your turbo out i nthe open and under your car, then id go with the D1SC or check into a different turbo kit (hi-flo when they get theres out, or GMR) Both of which i believe are as cheap as the D1SC but GMRs price competes with the STS's. The STS will net a little more power, but the D1SC may be an easier install/tune, etc.
friend of mine is pushing 525rwhp on his STS through a TH-400. i know it has been 10.98 on the dyno when it was at 477rwhp. And doubt it'll have a problem doing so on the track as soon as it opens.
Last edited by 01Lowboy; 02-11-2006 at 07:19 AM.