First Pics of STS install
05-30-2009, 01:10 AM
#3
11 Second Club
Thread Starter
iTrader: (22)
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Nashville,Tn
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just doing twin t3 t4. I am going to run around on 7 pounds and when I run high boost I will run meth. The setup with the stock turbos is good for 800hp, we are going to try to get atleast 600whp out of it.
. 
Trending Topics
06-02-2009, 10:12 PM
#10
TECH Addict
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you want turbos, you better get them mounted as close to the engine as possible......where they belong.
If I NEEDED twin turbos, I would call Turbo Technologies.
If not, I'd go with a TVS 2300.
The new Techco 3.0 liter twin screw is definitely worth looking into and might be the best solution overall.
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/c6-f...eo-inside.html
06-03-2009, 01:06 AM
#11
11 Second Club
Thread Starter
iTrader: (22)
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Nashville,Tn
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The STS should be the LAST option.
If you want turbos, you better get them mounted as close to the engine as possible......where they belong.
If I NEEDED twin turbos, I would call Turbo Technologies.
If not, I'd go with a TVS 2300.
The new Techco 3.0 liter twin screw is definitely worth looking into and might be the best solution overall.
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/c6-f...eo-inside.html
If you want turbos, you better get them mounted as close to the engine as possible......where they belong.
If I NEEDED twin turbos, I would call Turbo Technologies.
If not, I'd go with a TVS 2300.
The new Techco 3.0 liter twin screw is definitely worth looking into and might be the best solution overall.
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/c6-f...eo-inside.html
06-03-2009, 09:25 AM
#13
On The Tree
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: West Chester, PA
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The STS should be the LAST option.
If you want turbos, you better get them mounted as close to the engine as possible......where they belong.
If I NEEDED twin turbos, I would call Turbo Technologies.
If not, I'd go with a TVS 2300.
The new Techco 3.0 liter twin screw is definitely worth looking into and might be the best solution overall.
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/c6-f...eo-inside.html
If you want turbos, you better get them mounted as close to the engine as possible......where they belong.
If I NEEDED twin turbos, I would call Turbo Technologies.
If not, I'd go with a TVS 2300.
The new Techco 3.0 liter twin screw is definitely worth looking into and might be the best solution overall.
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/c6-f...eo-inside.html
06-03-2009, 09:26 AM
#14
On The Tree
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: West Chester, PA
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
06-03-2009, 11:10 AM
#15
TECH Addict
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fact: The STS boost delivery is terrible when compared to front mounts and positive displacement blowers, STS does not see full boost till higher gears, and there is a reason rear mounts will never be OEM equipment.The only STS cars that run good numbers have done so with custom systems combined with HIGH stalled autos and forged strokers.
Everyone likes to talk about peak numbers when they defend STS. All you have to do is drive a STS car back to back with another FI system. Then, the STS will prove to provide poor boost delivery and you won't want a STS anymore. Don't believe me? Go do the test yourself and report back.
06-03-2009, 02:22 PM
#16
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Here and sometimes there too.
Posts: 13,845
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is no room for opinion. Only facts.
Fact: The STS boost delivery is terrible when compared to front mounts and positive displacement blowers, STS does not see full boost till higher gears, and there is a reason rear mounts will never be OEM equipment.The only STS cars that run good numbers have done so with custom systems combined with HIGH stalled autos and forged strokers.
Everyone likes to talk about peak numbers when they defend STS. All you have to do is drive a STS car back to back with another FI system. Then, the STS will prove to provide poor boost delivery and you won't want a STS anymore. Don't believe me? Go do the test yourself and report back.
Fact: The STS boost delivery is terrible when compared to front mounts and positive displacement blowers, STS does not see full boost till higher gears, and there is a reason rear mounts will never be OEM equipment.The only STS cars that run good numbers have done so with custom systems combined with HIGH stalled autos and forged strokers.
Everyone likes to talk about peak numbers when they defend STS. All you have to do is drive a STS car back to back with another FI system. Then, the STS will prove to provide poor boost delivery and you won't want a STS anymore. Don't believe me? Go do the test yourself and report back.
Okey Dokey...I went and tested it myself and am here to report back to you!
A) I had a forged 6L... = NOT STROKED
B) I had a 2600 Yank converter... = NOT A HIGH STALL
C) I saw full boost in 1st gear...
D) reason you'll never see rearmounts as OEM features is cost, not functionality
E) My STS kit was not customized, all the same piping and routing.
F) Boost threshold or "tip-in" is dependant on Housing sizes, heat retention and tuning. All of which is easily managed on any turbo including STS.
Just because you had a poor experience with it doesn't mean it's trash, it means you didn't know what your doing.
Have a nice day!
06-04-2009, 10:00 AM
#17
TECH Addict
but they do have their place for those that don't want to deal with under hood issues, smog issues, like the fact the bit of extra lag means they just don't blow their tires off when they punch it, etc......
your getting too hung up on max performance and act like you have to have a system that will get you every 1/10th at the drag strip. if your being realistic most of the cars on here see the strip .01% of their lives. why not get a system that is very street friendly and meets the needs of the average guy that has a need for speed.
your getting too hung up on max performance and act like you have to have a system that will get you every 1/10th at the drag strip. if your being realistic most of the cars on here see the strip .01% of their lives. why not get a system that is very street friendly and meets the needs of the average guy that has a need for speed.
06-04-2009, 02:18 PM
#18
TECH Addict
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
but they do have their place for those that don't want to deal with under hood issues, smog issues, like the fact the bit of extra lag means they just don't blow their tires off when they punch it, etc......
your getting too hung up on max performance and act like you have to have a system that will get you every 1/10th at the drag strip. if your being realistic most of the cars on here see the strip .01% of their lives. why not get a system that is very street friendly and meets the needs of the average guy that has a need for speed.
your getting too hung up on max performance and act like you have to have a system that will get you every 1/10th at the drag strip. if your being realistic most of the cars on here see the strip .01% of their lives. why not get a system that is very street friendly and meets the needs of the average guy that has a need for speed.
But, poor boost response is NEVER a benefit. Your right foot controls traction.
I'm not talking .01 seconds or racing, either.
Boost response is MOST important for a street car that spends the magority of it's time in low and mid RPMs and frquently sees the throttle going from close to wide open.
Boost response isn't as much of an issue at the track when the engine speed doesn't dip lower than the launch RPM....especially when you are making boost at the line with an automatic.
Last edited by 427C5; 06-04-2009 at 04:05 PM.
06-04-2009, 02:48 PM
#19
TECH Addict
i'll agree with you there.
the lag comment was a bit of a reach
still stand by the other reasons though.
they are the reason I ditched the ATI and went STS.
no cooling issues and no smogging issues outweigh any benefit a front mount would give me.
the lag comment was a bit of a reach
still stand by the other reasons though.
they are the reason I ditched the ATI and went STS.
no cooling issues and no smogging issues outweigh any benefit a front mount would give me.
06-04-2009, 02:56 PM
#20
On The Tree
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: West Chester, PA
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree that, as a LAST resort, rear mounts are an option.
But, poor boost response is NEVER a benefit. Your right foot controls traction.
I'm not talking .01 seconds or racing, either.
Boost response is MOST important for a street car that spends the magority of it's time in low and mid RPMs and frquently sees the throttle going from close to wide open.
Boost response as much as an issue at the track when the engine speed doesn't dip lower than the launch RPM....especially when you are making boost at the line with an automatic.
But, poor boost response is NEVER a benefit. Your right foot controls traction.
I'm not talking .01 seconds or racing, either.
Boost response is MOST important for a street car that spends the magority of it's time in low and mid RPMs and frquently sees the throttle going from close to wide open.
Boost response as much as an issue at the track when the engine speed doesn't dip lower than the launch RPM....especially when you are making boost at the line with an automatic.