sts turbo's

[02kyle]

ok well I dono if I should put this here but I figured it may come up at some point. looking threw a car mag today I came across the sts turbo add, (STSturbo.com) and I think it is cool.... but.... whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa? how could it be effecient? I mean if you mount the turbo all the way at the ass end of the car, you then have to run that air all the way back up front.... am I missing something or is this really a.... "good idea" for lack of better terms? if you have not seen it check it out and see what you think. also the oil lines would be LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG as hell for this lol. I am just not seeing it as a good thing.

so has anyone heard of them?

[Ryan]

Yes, plenty of people have heard of them. In fact they're based about 20 mins drive from where in live in SLC, UT.

The concept sounds off the wall but it does work. Keep in mind, whether you measure from the front of the car near the engine, or from the tail pipe, there is an equal MASS of gasses flowing through the exhaust.

The VOLUME of gasses however is dependant on temperature, thus you have to run a smaller turbine housing/wheel to account for the smaller volume of gasses.

Intercooling? Need not apply. Just like the exhaust cools as it heads towards the rear of the car, so does the air charge on it's way to the engine.

Oiling? supply engine oil pressure to the turbo and use a pump to send it back to the oil pan.

The concept works, and solves many issues with traditional turbo charging, excess heat and clutter in the engine bay being one of them and need for an intercooler in front of the radiator.

Ryan

[Turk]

Yer turbos dont need heat to work at all, the muffler is plenty warm enough.

Had a great discussion about this on PT.com not long ago. Nothing came out of it other then it is a much bigger headache to get it to work properly then to just put it in the right spot in the first place. Oh but you will be different....

[DrBrown]

Show me where its easier to run a 2.25" charge pipe from the muffler all the way up to the engine bay. With a 2.5" catback I can vouch for there being no room aside from the narrow gulley in the chassis for the stock exhaust. You'd have to use a .48 stock turbine to get a T4 compressor to spool fast enough to make usable power. And by using the smaller turbine you actually limit yourself on power output. A .48 A/R housing is only rated for 300HP. And Ive known several cats that were using Mogul style water/oil pumps to push the oil back into the pan and they go bad frequently. So you are relying on an electric pump to move the oil back to the pan. And if it fails your turbo dies within a week. It really isnt efficient and in the long run its better to spend the $400 or less to get a stainless turbo pipe setup on ebay or the folks on PT selling pipes. Ive built a few setups now and I still say the battery mounted location is perfect. If you wrap the downpipe and primary pipes it only gets 20* hotter under the hood versus stock. The aluminum engines run 210* on a warm day already.

[ls six]

I dont normaly like to link between the forums but we covered most of the issues on this thread> remote turbo? - ProbeTalk.com Forums

If you read to the end you'll see the third location I thought of.

Basicaly I think it is a good overall compromise between the battery mount setups and the rear remote mount idea.

Keep in mind that the battery mount location is a remote mount also. Just not as remote.

My idea mounts the turbo as close to the exhaust ports as possible with a single turbo setup. It still requires a pump to return the oil to the engine but not nearly as much line.

The thread on PT kinda flamed out so if any one has any ideas let me know.

[matt89glturbo]

I know 2 people who run this style of setup, one is actually a true sts system on a ws6 transam, and it spools plenty fast, the other is a copy of the sts system, but pretty much the same, on a 3800 series gm v6, also spools plenty fast when he put the right turbo on it, he couldnt spool a full t4 though. heat is i good part of turbo power, but it doesnt need too much either, 15 liter cummins diesels can easily hit 20psi with egts of about 800 or so. diesel is different, but same physics apply...i didnt think much of the system at first, but have watched 2 cars do really good with it. you can also do a remote oil system in the rear...less plumbing to the front, space is tight under our cars anyways, so woulnt make much sense to me...except to appear turboless

[Turk]

Originally Posted by ls six

The thread on PT kinda flamed out

Your welcome .

I think the whole idea on a KL is like working backwards.

Did you know that your handbrake would work heaps better if your wheels were square? You would just have to do xyz and abc then A to B and it would work almost as good.

[ls six]

Originally Posted by Turk

Your welcome .

I think the whole idea on a KL is like working backwards.

Did you know that your handbrake would work heaps better if your wheels were square? You would just have to do xyz and abc then A to B and it would work almost as good.

WoW you were smoking the good stuff!

I'd like some input as to my position though. It would be an easier install than the older turbo setups that require the modded X member and I think it would flow better than the new style pipes with the sharp angle where the Y pipe merges.

[Turk]

I wasnt but I might as well be, without going through 15 pages of bull[shizzle] on the PT thread (a few of which is my bull[shizzle]) what exactly was your idea.

I just dont see the need to do it other then to be different. I mean, yer you could make it work with this comprimise, and changing this and changing that, but why would you when the template is their and has been their for several years very succesfully and all you(meaning anyone) have to do is copy and worry about the REAL issues that come with boosting a KL.

[Ryan]

The only reason I would think about doing it would be to get all that heat out of the engine bay.

Choosing the right turbo would consist of figuring out how much heat is lost from the location the turbo would normally be compared to where you would mount it. Thus you can know how much volume the air looses, and thus choose an appropriately sized turbine housing to keep a quick spool.

Were I to guess, a medium sized T3 turbine housing/wheel with a T4 sized compressor similar to what is used on KL's already.

It would work, will anybody ever do it? Dunno, but it's fun to think about it

Ryan

[Turk]

It doesnt get that hot. I have electric tape right next to the turbo and it isnt even melted at all. Maybe, 1-2 inches away. Engine heat in a KL is always a problem, I would even go so far as saying that it isnt significantly increased with the turbo their. With the turbo so far from the head (which is a remote mount like you mentioned) it doesnt build up as much heat. I mean look at the little turbos on first gens, 3 minutes of boosting and they glow red. Add a heat shield using proper automotive heat shield material and I bet you wouldnt even notice the extra heat made by the turbo, at all.

[ls six]

Originally Posted by Turk

I wasnt but I might as well be, without going through 15 pages of bull[shizzle] on the PT thread (a few of which is my bull[shizzle]) what exactly was your idea.

I just dont see the need to do it other then to be different.

Well my idea would place tha turbo closer to the heads than anything besides a TT setup. A few feet closer than the other setups when tracing the flow path.


If you can get under your car look at the space around where the Y pipe merges to just in front of the rear of the subframe.

Theres plenty of room for a fair size turbo. With out an IC the charg pipe could run up between the engine and firewall to the throttle body.

This would also offer a cleaner flow on the hot side than either front mount setup. Especialy the PT setup that seems to merge both banks at a severe angle.

One compromise compared to the other setups is the oil drainage situation that may require a pump to return the oil to the engine. A turbo kit for the base mazda 3 designed by the people who helped design the MS3 setup returns the oil through a modified drain plug and claim no back flow issues.

[Turk]

Hmmm I see what you mean now, that is a good idea. Im not against using an oil pump for the return, I mean plenty of cars do it so it must be fine. Cant be anyworse then the thousands of cars out their with very very [shizzle]ty designed return lines.

[ls six]

Originally Posted by Turk

Hmmm I see what you mean now, that is a good idea. Im not against using an oil pump for the return, I mean plenty of cars do it so it must be fine. Cant be anyworse then the thousands of cars out their with very very [shizzle]ty designed return lines.

Thanks. I have to wait a while before I try anything but it should be easy enough to fab up a basic setup using stock manifolds and Y pipe.