Limitations of STS hot and cold parts
Agreed 100%
Trending Topics
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
For big ol' HP, a front mount would be a better choice. With an aftermarket K-member you can run a large downpipe for large HP and fabrication would not be any worse than a high HP STS. The front mount would have less lag and thus more HP under the curve. The only real advantage for the STS would be if retaining air conditioning is a major concern.
You could use that up in no time with a ft mount after the turbo if you get a decent one your down to $1500 your going to need to get k-member ,bat relocation, rad fans . ft mount is going to cost you a few grand more then a rear mount .
As for the biggest turbo for a rear mount. Guys have gone big with them but IMO get the TC-76 from FI I got mine for 1k . If you have all the cold pipes I would definetly do the rear mount
As for the biggest turbo for a rear mount. Guys have gone big with them but IMO get the TC-76 from FI I got mine for 1k . If you have all the cold pipes I would definetly do the rear mount
U dont need a k-member unless you want a big down pipe. No battery relocation is needed unless thats where you want the turbo. Radiator fans can be had fairly cheap.
I was looking into building a front mount to replace my sts kit using a truck and c6 manifold to retain a/c. You can mount the turbo in front of where the alternator goes and move it to the top passenger side head. Then all you need to do is cut your factory fan shroud in half and put the driver side one on the front. No need to stand the radiator up unless you want to, or going to a bigger one, which you should since you are going to be making more power. The down pipe will run along the motor on the driver side where the alt used to be. You need to run a solid motor mount though.
Just throwing that out there.
I cannot weld nor do I have a welder, so that would not help me out too much. So the front mount would be considerably more.






