barnat

iTrader: (59)

2 main resons i dont like sts 1, storys of rain, filter getting soaked.and loss of subframes for the charge plumming barnat

smoke20

iTrader: (2)

yes im leary of rain and deep puddles , having said that i keep the rain sock on durning wet times and avoid deep water, as far as subframe, the charge pipe mounts in same place as subframe on lt side so it basically replaces the subrame connector. i just installed rt side subframe and all seems well. as you can see im in florida so it rains alot here and no problem with water.

germeezy1

I am debating the same thing with my C5 H/C/bolt ons/N20 car. I know I want to keep the 100 shot for insurance but I also want to have around 550 RWHP available at all times off the bottle. The mechanical purity part of me frowns on the STS system , plus the realization that its no cheaper then the HP TT system or APS system when it comes right down to it. With a new baby I can no longer justify $10k-$14k for forced induction so now I am so desperate for it I would do anything that would give me 8 or 9 psi that I can have on the car for around $5k but I have not found a way to do that yet. Any ideas?

ty_ty13

iTrader: (42)

i'd say just do a l92 motor and put spray on it for a cheap fast solution...

EPP

iTrader: (22)

I recently had a potential customer pm me, inquiring about ATI ProChargers, and their cost versus the less expensive STS turbo kits. Below is my reply to him.

The STS kits look like a good deal, here is a list of my opinion of them, and why I don't sell them anymore:

1. STS claims that heat is not required to help spool the turbo, that exhaust velocity does the job.
Major retailers of the STS kits sell the kits with exhaust wrap, to help spool the turbo. We have done this at our shop, and it helps quite a bit. It is obvious that the closer to the engine the turbo is mounted, the more efficient it is going to be.

I copied this from the STS website.

"Doesn't heat create the velocity in the exhaust gasses to spool the turbo?
No, heat doesn't create velocity. Heat creates volume. If you look at any of the physics laws for gasses, you will find that pressure and volume and heat are related. PV=NRT is a popular one, The V isn't for velocity, it is for Volume.

The turbine housing is what creates the velocity. The scrolling design that reduces the volume of the exhaust chamber as it scrolls around causes the gasses to have to increase in velocity and pressure to maintain the same flow rate.

Hotter gasses have more volume, thus requiring a higher A/R which in effect means that it starts at say 3" and scrolls down to approximately 1". Lower temperature gasses are denser and have less volume, so they require a lower A/R housing which would start at the same 3" volume, as the turbine housings use standard flanges, and scroll down to say 3/4".

Now if you were to reverse the housings in application, the conventional turbo would spool up extremely quick, at say around 1500 rpm but would cause too much backpressure at higher rpms because the higher volume of gas couldn't squeeze through the 3/4" hole without requiring a lot of pressure to force it through. On the reverse side, the remote mounted turbo with its cooler denser gasses, wouldn't spool up till say around 4000 rpms but once spooled up would make efficient power because it doesn't require hardly any backpressure to push the lower volume of gas through the larger 1" hole."

So I take it the exhaust wrap should not make a difference?

2. You don't want to run catalytic converters with a rear mount turbo. Years ago a guy brought in a Ferrari to us that had a rear mount turbo. One of the catalytic converters internals came apart, as they sometimes do, and parts of it lodged into the turbo, ruining it. I predict that this will be happening to the STS turbo customers.

3. The oil return line is routed into the passenger side oil cap on the STS kits. This line has a habit of coming loose, and spraying oil into the engine compartment. It happened to us, and I have read where it has happened to other people.
These engines already have enough oil returning down through the heads, they don't need more! This is a bad design, and many people are rerouting the oil return line to the oil pan, where it should be in the first place. The problem with running the line to the pan is now you have to drill or punch a hole into the oil pan to run the oil line, unless you remove the oil pan. We recently removed the oil pan on a customer's car, and welded a bung into the pan for the oil return line.

4. The turbo hangs without brackets supporting it, and will sag over time. We add a bracket when we install these kits, I don't link seeing the turbo dangling there.

5. The air filter is in a bad location, as is susceptible to dust, water, dirt, etc. STS offers a cover that goes over the filter, but we found the cover seriously hinders performance. We proved that on our chassis dyno.

6. On the F Body STS kit, a driver side subframe connector cannot be used. STS claims their plumbing that is routed down the driver side does the job of a subframe connector. We find that humorous, at best!

7. The plumbing underneath the car hangs too low in my opinion, and you don't want a lowered car with an STS kit on it.

8. The silicone couplers that are provided with an STS front mount intercooler are thin, and we had two of them blow apart. The intercooler plumbing that was provided with the front mount intercooler option that we ordered for a customer's car was poorly routed, we ended up using our tubing from our front mount kits that we sell.

9. The oil lines sure have a long way to run, from the front to the rear, and back up front. If a leak developed, it could be a quick way to ruin an engine.

10. It would be relatively easy for someone to slide underneath the rear of an STS equipped car, and steal someones turbo.

11. The boost line running back up to the engine from the turbo has silicone couplers at various points along the way, and can blow apart.

12. Any exhaust leaks will diminish the efficiency of a rear mount turbo. Bob

pakisho

iTrader: (2)

And in with the knockout blow in the 14th round, Bob from EPP!

Good points.

DanZ28

iTrader: (5)

Everytime I go to take the plunge for FI, I get more confused at which way to go. I mean, other than the obvious differences, is one really better than the other (front mount turbo vs Procharger), especially for the track? I see alot of FI HP numbers get thrown around, but what about track numbers between the two?

I was so close (and still may) to getting the new speed inc twin turbo (best available IMO) for my camaro, but the procharger looks attractive as well, especially the $3K price difference.

Back on track.....out of your two choices, I would get the Procharger!

RooRnZ28

iTrader: (14)

well i like my sts kit. yes it has a laundry list of flaws, but having a turbo mounted ANYWHERE in the car is going to have its goods and bads. the list a couple posts above are some bad things about the sts kit, but it also has many goods that people overlook.
one thing i have never hear brought up about the sts kit is that the turbo exhaust has less distance to travel than from a front mount. disagree all you want, but if you think about it, its true. a rear mount exhaust is like a foot of piping, therefore it must breathe pretty good. it doesnt have to travel the length of the car to escape, but this is where spool is affected. but at WOT, i'm sure it doesnt make a difference, just that a rear mount can breathe better.

it all comes down to personal opinion and bias towards certain things, and everyone is never going to agree about what is the right kit for the right car....

i personally dont like front mounted turbos in an fbody, unless its a full out race car, but for a street car i'll stick w/ my sts. sure front mounts are more efficient than a rear mount, blah blah... but 2 things, the engine area gets hot hot. if you do manage to squeeeze everything in there, then you can keep your ac. A rear mount you can bolt on to a stock car and go. a front mount your gonna be tearing **** apart to ge tit all to fit in there. the list can go on and on as well, but like i said, eveyone has their bias and different wants out of their car. more power to you

98Aggie

iTrader: (19)

I know the red vette that ran at the texas mile has a 441ci motor runnning STS turbos making over 1100 rwhp.

mthegodfather

iTrader: (4)

STS ftw

carado1984

except this is a vette with a frame....