Rear mounted turbos - the US has some crazy fads

[merlin]

[merlin]

THats one way "if you've got it flaunt it" You couldn't drive it in the rain though.

Sticks out like dogs balls.

[henry 351]

More like a fibreglass BBQ, one half decent tap in that Corvettes butt and that hot turbo oil will spray over a red hot exhaust...and one firey puddle of trouble.

[Allen]

I can see that getting taken out by a speed hump :P

Wasn't there a thread a while back with beemers having twin rear mounted turbos?

[Hunter]

What in the hell purpose does mounting the turbo on the rear bar serve? Please tell me the engine in that thing is rear mounted else that is even dumber than I thought.

[TZENU]

Originally Posted by fairlane_ghia

I can see that getting taken out by a speed hump :P

Or one of Victoria's MANY potholes

[colossus]

Originally Posted by Hunter

What in the hell purpose does mounting the turbo on the rear bar serve? Please tell me the engine in that thing is rear mounted else that is even dumber than I thought.

Nup, front mounted engine. Dumb, dumb, and dumber.

[ardei]

It's not really a fad.. people have been rear mounting turbos for years.

They have their advantages, can't remember them off the top of my head. But this looks like a silly system, it's full exposed. A proper rear mounted turbo should be hidden from sight.

This system would be LOUD though, theres just that short pipe leading from the exhaust of the turbo to the rear of the car. Unless they put mufflers in the return from the extractors to the exhaust turbine, which is stupid because you lose the kinetic energy of the gas flows and hence it takes longer to spool.

[XR8putts]

can someone say............................................... ................................TURBO LAG?

That just goes against all logic..

*Look at me; I have a turbo!*

Hows the space in the engine bay of one of these.

The sheer length of piping to the engine would make for some long *** doses.

[Raptor]

Before you guys rubbish the idea without really understanding why it might make sense have a read of this => Benefits of Remote Mounting

There is an Aussie agent for their systems in Sydney now too.

[jabba]

The rear mount turbo system works quiet well.. I almost went this on my Ute (it was going to be the test vehicle for STS australia). But I decided against it as I was scared I would blow up my stock motor.. As it happens, 2 months later I blew up my NA motor any way..

Here's there link to Squires turbo systems
http://www.ststurbo.com/

[merlin]

Efficiency is compromised though...

[jabba]

Originally Posted by puts99

can someone say............................................... ................................TURBO LAG?

That just goes against all logic..

*Look at me; I have a turbo!*

Actualy there is almost no turbo lag in the STS set up.. Take a normal XR6T. How long to you think the plumming from the Turbo to the plenum. It would be at least 6-7ft after it has gone through the intercooler.... Now because the STS does not need a intercooler it plumming is about 5-6ft.. Also because the turbo is located away from the engine bay the turbo stay cool, Hence why they don't require a intercooler to work efficently.. Most off the heat generated by a turbo comes from the exhaust gasses, which super heat the turbo and which add extra heat to the compressed air going into the motor.. How much cooler would you think the compressed air be if the turbo ran cool rather then glowing red hot??

[jabba]

Originally Posted by merlin

Efficiency is compromised though...

How???

[superpursuit83]

I was going to say there is nothing wrong with it too. Jabba has covered most of it. Lag from rear turbos is no worse than normal, and less piping to engine as mentioned because no intercooler needed.....

Been thinking about this myself... (and a blower and a NA.. I can't make up my mind)

[jabba]

Originally Posted by superpursuit83

I was going to say there is nothing wrong with it too. Jabba has covered most of it. Lag from rear turbos is no worse than normal, and less piping to engine as mentioned because no intercooler needed.....

Been thinking about this myself... (and a blower and a NA.. I can't make up my mind)

If I remember correctly it was a 5 grand to fit a STS turbo to a ute.. Boosted to 6psi... Any more then that you want to toughen the internals anyway..

[Falcon Coupe]

A member here has done a rear mount turbo on a BA Ghia with great results:

http://www.fordforums.com.au/showthread.php?t=82968

[merlin]

Originally Posted by jabba

How???

More lag over a traditional set up and less efficient heat transfer. Its only advantage is that it is cheaper on an aftermarket set-up

[XR8putts]

No lag? Doubt it. And the claim that there is no need for an inter-cooler, is that under all conditions? And I'd imagine the exhaust preassue/efficiency that far away from the engine would be comprimized.

If it were perfect, or even had some advantages over a traditional set up, then car manufacturers accross the world would be using it. I can't think of one?

[Hunter]

Ok if this were so beneficial then why is it not utilised by the major car makers?

[kenz]

Originally Posted by henry 351

More like a fibreglass BBQ, one half decent tap in that Corvettes butt and that hot turbo oil will spray over a red hot exhaust...and one firey puddle of trouble.

Nah its all good hes a fire fighter, check the number plate :P

[jabba]

Originally Posted by merlin

More lag over a traditional set up and less efficient heat transfer. Its only advantage is that it is cheaper on an aftermarket set-up

As I explained there is the same or lesser amount off lag with the STS then traditional set ups..

Large majority off heat that is generated in traditional turbos is caused by exhaust gasses super heating the turbo housing.. With STS the exhaust gasses have cooled and the turbo housing is considerably cooler therefore the efficiency is better then traditional turbo systems....

Heat is still generated by the turbo compressing the air, but consider the difference it makes to efficiency when a STS turbo operate at 80deg over a traditional turbo operates at 300 - 400deg....

And it's cheaper..

[ebxr8240]

Heat is one reason turbo's work and the closer to head the better...The exhaust is more critical in this area to lag than the cold side...This system is o/k on light trucks where it sits behind cabin and in front of diff.Used for low boost , power gains ..Keep in mind these cars have 6Ltr plus engines... I don't like it sitting out the back like that either.. Reminds me of monkeys...

[Nikked]

Originally Posted by Hunter

Ok if this were so beneficial then why is it not utilised by the major car makers?

why arn't roll cages? (ok lets not include R-type stuff like GT3's)
why arn't free flowing exhausts?
why arn't ...

[merlin]

Originally Posted by jabba

As I explained there is the same or lesser amount off lag with the STS then traditional set ups..

Large majority off heat that is generated in traditional turbos is caused by exhaust gasses super heating the turbo housing.. With STS the exhaust gasses have cooled and the turbo housing is considerably cooler therefore the efficiency is better then traditional turbo systems....

Heat is still generated by the turbo compressing the air, but consider the difference it makes to efficiency when a STS turbo operate at 80deg over a traditional turbo operates at 300 - 400deg....

And it's cheaper..

OK well I will just have to disagree and leave it at that (except for the cheaper part :-))

[4Vman]

As the exhaust gas cools it looses volume and therefore velocity.. i can't see how this system would be better than one mounted close to the engine...

[Fair302]

it would have to be 10x beter for me to even consider it, as it looks cr..

[M14A-Mclaren]

That is straight up one of the stupidest things I've ever seen.