sts turbo worth it?

If i go with the sts turbo, LT headers, cam and exhaust how much power will i be pushing to the wheels? Would it be worth it for me to go with the sts turbo? I only want around 400-450 HP with a good tune off course. It's either that or LT4 hot cam kit. what would you guys go with?

I actaully have the STS kit on my 94 z28. It's defently a awesome kit. It pulls very hard. I'm made 400rwhp on a mustang dyno on a stock lt1 engine with a lt4 hotcam @7psi. It was defently worth the money. - Mike

IMO I don't like the STS system. I say either make it a cammin' jammin motor, or save the extra $ and put a real turbo on it.

I actaully have the STS kit on my 94 z28. It's defently a awesome kit. It pulls very hard. I'm made 400rwhp on a mustang dyno on a stock lt1 engine with a lt4 hotcam @7psi. It was defently worth the money. - Mike

You have both LT4 hot cam kit and STS ?

i have the STS kit too on 5lbs and its awesome. i decided to pump it up a lil and spun a rod bearing but that was my fault. even with 4.11s it pulled hard and got full boost around 3300. the kit was easy to install only took 1 full day. only bad part is the pipe that connects the subframe pipe to the over rear end pipe hangs down a lil low but i know a way to fix that. also the filter being in the back you kinda gotta watch where you are driving dont wanna suck up water. recomment the snorkel kit from the GTO.

You have both LT4 hot cam kit and STS ?

Well you see. Before the STS kit I had the lt4 hotcam put in. Then about 2 years down the road decided to go with the STS kit. It works great with the STS kit. Cause I have both the cam and turbo kicking on at around 3k rpm. But yeah it's defently a awesome kit. Car never sees rain or snow so I could not tell you how the turbo performs in those weather conditions. But other then that it pulls very hard. Just waiting for the new shortblock to to turn the boost up

Well you see. Before the STS kit I had the lt4 hotcam put in. Then about 2 years down the road decided to go with the STS kit. It works great with the STS kit. Cause I have both the cam and turbo kicking on at around 3k rpm. But yeah it's defently a awesome kit. Car never sees rain or snow so I could not tell you how the turbo performs in those weather conditions. But other then that it pulls very hard. Just waiting for the new shortblock to to turn the boost up

Have you got it dynoed?
I wanted the exact same thing like you have. LT4 hot cam kit ad then add the STS turbo, but my friend told me that your car will be too much to handle.

Have you got it dynoed?
I wanted the exact same thing like you have. LT4 hot cam kit ad then add the STS turbo, but my friend told me that your car will be too much to handle.

Yeah I had my car dyno tuned on a mustang dyno. Put down
377/378@5psi low boost and high boost 400/408@7psi with Meth injec. That was on a stock lt1 engine with the lt4 hot cam. I run the car on the streets all the time with no problems. Very dependable and the best part is when you want all the power just hit the pedal. Cause the car will drive normal untill you floor it. I walked on allot of supercharged cars already. Just do your research on the set-up that you want. I almost based my decision on other members thoughts such as [CALL911] who said STS systems are junk. Honestly since I had the sts system it has been the best thing I did to the car. It makes awesome power and I would defently do it all over again if I had the chance.

sts is like having nitrous ready but don't need to refill the bottle ever. So it ain't sound to bad at all. Full power come on at only WOT. And of course front mount turbo will always be better but some thing gotta gave. Rear mount turbo will be faster and made more power than any head cam combo.

Mine is not a STS kit but a custom built rear mount turbo with 383ci LT1 T6 turbo 85mm, during testing few yrs ago, at 18psi on 4th gear tires busting loose at 80mph. Now you show me where a big cam jamming combo can do that. THERE NONE..... Turbo Turbo, regardless where it is mounted, it always be a power on demand..

Awesome guys...Thanks for all your comments. I'm going to get the LT4 hot cam kit and then add STS turbo to it.

If you're putting a cam in it anyway go with a custom cam or a turbo grind. Just about any cam is going to be better for a turbo car than the Hot Cam.

-Chris

If you're putting a cam in it anyway go with a custom cam or a turbo grind. Just about any cam is going to be better for a turbo car than the Hot Cam.

-Chris

True. Even thow I'm running the lt4 hot cam with my set-up. Theres better cams out there that will make more power. I just happen to have the cam installed years before I even had the turbocharger. My forged shortblock that I'm currently building up I'm going with a custom grind turbo cam. The specs are 224/230 .581/.588 115. But either way the hot cam will still work great if you decide to go with it -Like I mentioned I had no problems with it . Mike

i put down 398rwhp on a supper hot day with 5psi but i also had alot of computer tuning. im sure on a cool day it could have made a lil more.

i put down 398rwhp on a supper hot day with 5psi but i also had alot of computer tuning. im sure on a cool day it could have made a lil more.

Was that on a stock engine or the 383 you have in your sig?

stock LT1 the 383 will make around 550-600 on around 8-10lbs and if it dont il kill chad golen lol no hes a good guy

I always thought the STS kit would be cool for a Fiero. Mount the turbo and cooler in the front to get some weight up front and reduce understeer. Of course, there's no exhaust up front now that I think of it, so maybe that's a stupid idea.

I'm curious about the lag, is it any worse than a front mount turbo due to piping length/volume? (probably only marginally). Lag could actually be a good thing for driveability and traction in a V8 RWD anyway, plus you have the extra weight in the back where it should be, and it can stay cooler back there and not heat up the engine bay. These STS kits have been bashed a lot in here but I see a lot of common sense inherent advantages to it ...maybe I'm ignorant though.

is it safe to put the STS turbo at 5psi on a stock engine or is the stock compression to high. I have 81000 original miles on a 94...do u think that is too high??

is it safe to put the STS turbo at 5psi on a stock engine or is the stock compression to high. I have 81000 original miles on a 94...do u think that is too high??

Any boost is a gamble, but 6-7psi intercooled (or water/metha/alky injected) is fine with a good tune.

The Procharger P1SC is a MUCH better deal than a rear-mount turbo. At $400 more than the STS, it comes with an intercooler and the blower has a self-contained oiling system. If you wipe your motor out with the STS, odds are that you'll damage the turbo. Since the Procharger is self-contained, there's no worry about that.

That's just one of the benefits. Also, you'll have the ability to make MUCH more horsepower with that blower over the tiny STS turbo that comes in the $3900 package.

To sum it up:

P1SC:
More horsepower.
Comes with an intercooler.
Self Contained oiling system.
Extended 3 year warranty.

STS:
$400 Cheaper
"Look, I got a turbo!" factor.

:lol:

I walked on allot of supercharged cars already.


Alot of supercharged cars? Fbodies? This kid in town has a bolt on ls1 with the STS turbo kit on 7 psi and meth injection, and to make it quite simple, i ripped his doors off. By the time he hit boost, i was 2 cars on him in 1st gear, and kept pulling from there. I wasnt too impressed considering he has the mighty ls1 with a 7 psi STS...AND Meth injection.. Obviously a front mount turbo will allways make the most power and be the most efficient, but as far as a car that sees the track from time to time and is most road driven, you cant really get a getter deal than a SC, especially the deals us fbody guys have been getting on IC'd procharger kits...i got my D1SC tuner kit with high flows for 3600. I added a 255 lph FP, Ross FMU, and kept the stock injectors, and put down 446 rwhp with bolt ons..and thats with my Moser 9 inch and 4.11's

its funny how i used to be like you guys for superchargers..... till i had my supra.... i used to get walked by my buddies 427 supercharged cobra... put down 700 something hp... untill about 100... after that i left him sooo far behind i might as well have had the clutch in and coasted....


point is, ya a charged car will make a turbo car seem slow off the bat... but then when your half way through... turbo car will walk the charger.....


and dont forget guys this is an on going argument in the world of forced induction.....

but its all personal pref..... for me, i would get the sts kit, and run an intercooler, and just up the boost.... vs a charger.... superchargers are parasitic... they take what 4% of your power to run, where as turbo's are "free"


up to you, but i have heard nothing but good praise from sts ppl, especially if you upgrade the turbo....

its funny how i used to be like you guys for superchargers..... till i had my supra.... i used to get walked by my buddies 427 supercharged cobra... put down 700 something hp... untill about 100... after that i left him sooo far behind i might as well have had the clutch in and coasted....


point is, ya a charged car will make a turbo car seem slow off the bat... but then when your half way through... turbo car will walk the charger.....


and dont forget guys this is an on going argument in the world of forced induction.....

but its all personal pref..... for me, i would get the sts kit, and run an intercooler, and just up the boost.... vs a charger.... superchargers are parasitic... they take what 4% of your power to run, where as turbo's are "free"


up to you, but i have heard nothing but good praise from sts ppl, especially if you upgrade the turbo....

Different strokes for different folks like you say. Turbo eats up power too, but not as much ...it is not totally "free" though (exhaust stroke). Either way can get you to the goal but yes, turbos are the ultimate for the street (for the track though, aren't top fuel cars supercharged?). In a way turbo cars make sc cars seem "slow off the bat" ....they can make more boost at a lower rpm ..right off the bat. When it comes to speed, rwhp is rwhp though ....I think what the STS bashers are somewhat rightfully saying is that the kit as is just doesn't make enough power for what you pay, compared to a comparable SC kit. Why don't they include a real turbo with it or an option for one? I see advantages to rear mounting, but why not have a big one back there? You say you'd rather have the STS kit but "up the boost" ....would this require simply retrofitting a totally different turbo back there? Is the rest of the kit up to par to handle high boost levels?

its funny how i used to be like you guys for superchargers..... till i had my supra.... i used to get walked by my buddies 427 supercharged cobra... put down 700 something hp... untill about 100... after that i left him sooo far behind i might as well have had the clutch in and coasted....


point is, ya a charged car will make a turbo car seem slow off the bat... but then when your half way through... turbo car will walk the charger.....


and dont forget guys this is an on going argument in the world of forced induction.....

but its all personal pref..... for me, i would get the sts kit, and run an intercooler, and just up the boost.... vs a charger.... superchargers are parasitic... they take what 4% of your power to run, where as turbo's are "free"


up to you, but i have heard nothing but good praise from sts ppl, especially if you upgrade the turbo....

ok bro, First of all...Supra This, Supra that...this has nothing to do with a supra

Do you really think that there is no top end on a blower? Think hard about what you are saying...Centrifugals make peak boost at redline...so in 4th gear at 6000 rpm, a turbo car making the same exact power will blow the sc away? I could see a slight advantage to the turbo car, but there are other variables to consider.

Yes we all know about the parasitic loss of a supercharger. Turbos bottle-neck the exhaust, so its never free power. Turbo's are in fact more effiecient than blowers.

the reason the rear mount guys run smaller turbos are due to the fact that air is less dense at the back of the car, so a smaller one is used.

To each their own on the STS topic because i dont want to start huge flame on, but it seems to me that if you took two cars with the same HP, one was sc'd with the same boost as the STS car, i bet the blower car will have a faster ET, and the STS car will have a higher trap speed, slower ET.

again could be a back and forth squable ya.... but you can run a large turbo with the sts kit, i mean my friend mike is running a gt55 back there and i have no idea what hp he makes but its alot i know that....

i have had a 20lb supercharger kit before, and i have had a 20lb turbo kit... either or... depends what your going to do with the car, but from what i have seen, i would go with a turbo all day long


just make sure when you build it, u have the right trim, a/r ect... for the app your using


as for sts kits being able to handle more boost..... i believe the supporting parts of the kit would allow you to go about 3-5 turbo sizes larger before you run into problems

The Procharger P1SC is a MUCH better deal than a rear-mount turbo. At $400 more than the STS, it comes with an intercooler and the blower has a self-contained oiling system. If you wipe your motor out with the STS, odds are that you'll damage the turbo. Since the Procharger is self-contained, there's no worry about that.

That's just one of the benefits. Also, you'll have the ability to make MUCH more horsepower with that blower over the tiny STS turbo that comes in the $3900 package.

To sum it up:

P1SC:
More horsepower.
Comes with an intercooler.
Self Contained oiling system.
Extended 3 year warranty.

STS:
$400 Cheaper
"Look, I got a turbo!" factor.

:lol:


when u get into this are you considering that you would prob like to have headers for the P1SC, and you dont need them at all for the turbo... and the fact that its actually better to not have them for the turbo.... so now you got 400 cheaper, plus 1000 bucks for headers, and get a full exhaust to compliment the headers////so at that point, upgrade your turbo, run meth injection or a larger cooler etc.......


just how i see things.... not to mention time to install vs being able to go 100% back to stock... just a few things....

when u get into this are you considering that you would prob like to have headers for the P1SC, and you dont need them at all for the turbo... and the fact that its actually better to not have them for the turbo.... so now you got 400 cheaper, plus 1000 bucks for headers, and get a full exhaust to compliment the headers////so at that point, upgrade your turbo, run meth injection or a larger cooler etc.......


just how i see things.... not to mention time to install vs being able to go 100% back to stock... just a few things....

WTF? You don't think a rear-mount turbo and exhaust would benefit from longtube headers? Guess what? It would.

LT Headers are under $600, an exhaust cutout is $35 (electric is under $200).

Price that against an intercooler that you get with the P1SC, a turbo equal to the P1SC (P1SC is good to around 800 horsepower), a 3-year extended warranty, and a self-contained oiling system and there's no reason at all that anyone should even remotely consider an STS system.

oh really tell me why you believe headers are a good idea for an sts system??

from what i know headers are designed to eliminate backpressure in the exhaust system and facilitate exhaust scavenging and flow on normally aspirated engines. Turbocharged engines work on slightly different principles. Namely, there is exhaust "Pressure" between the cylinder heads and the turbocharger because the turbocharger is the smallest diameter orifice in the exhaust system. The turbine housing gets smaller in diameter to increase the velocity of the exhaust gasses before they hit the turbine wheel. This is how you get 100,000 rpm wheel speeds.
Turbocharged exhaust gas pressures can see as high as 30+ psi on high boost applications. So spending money on higher flowing exhaust components designed to lower exhaust backpressure is usually a waste of money. This money would be better spent on an upgraded turbocharger which would produce more efficient boost with less backpressure or just spending the money on upgrading the engine and fuel system to handle more boost.

I think he's right on this one. headers should decrease exhaust air density. Guys running with the stock manifolds and factory y pipe are getting better spool times. A lot of heat escapes the exhaust with headers which in turn will decrease velocity to the turbo.

I think he's right on this one. headers should decrease exhaust air density. Guys running with the stock manifolds and factory y pipe are getting better spool times. A lot of heat escapes the exhaust with headers which in turn will decrease velocity to the turbo.


This may be true in the case of STS setups due to the increased heat loss, but I can't believe that lowering exhaust backpressure ALONE is bad for turbo performance in all cases. After all, it's the same principle as on the cold side of the turbo - less restriction from the filter/ducting = less intake pressure drop = more power.

the reason the rear mount guys run smaller turbos are due to the fact that air is less dense at the back of the car, so a smaller one is used.


More dense = lower temperature. Front mount turbo exhaust is higher temp and less dense (charge wise).

I think he's right on this one. headers should decrease exhaust air density. Guys running with the stock manifolds and factory y pipe are getting better spool times. A lot of heat escapes the exhaust with headers which in turn will decrease velocity to the turbo.

again, as temp drops, density increases....

see i love being right lol..... im glad you think u would go that route... and hell all to you.. but i think ill keep my stock manifolds... and enjoy my intercooler and larger turbo i got for the same price as some nice headers+ install

This may be true in the case of STS setups due to the increased heat loss, but I can't believe that lowering exhaust backpressure ALONE is bad for turbo performance in all cases. After all, it's the same principle as on the cold side of the turbo - less restriction from the filter/ducting = less intake pressure drop = more power.

Well of course less restriction in the ducting and filter will produce more power. I was referring to STS and rear mount setups only.

Well of course less restriction in the ducting and filter will produce more power. I was referring to STS and rear mount setups only.

Gotcha - the intake thing was an analogy though, my point is that the same principle applies to exhaust, regardless of turbo position.
Anyway, wrapping the headers/exhaust can combat the heat loss. Whether or not you can keep enough heat to make the backpressure drop worthwhile, I don't know.

Gotcha - the intake thing was an analogy though, my point is that the same principle applies to exhaust, regardless of turbo position.
Anyway, wrapping the headers/exhaust can combat the heat loss. Whether or not you can keep enough heat to make the backpressure drop worthwhile, I don't know.

From what I understand and from what ive heard from a shop that builds fbodies in town (my motor being professionally built there now) They say that heat wrapping certainly helps, but the stock manifolds do a great job of retaining heat.

Coat the headers and heat wrap them. Anyway, it doesn't matter. Rear-mounts are a poor idea when compared to front mounts or superchargers anyway. :shrug:

It was a concept designed to aid ease of installation and eliminate underhood space problems for the regular joe with little thought put into actual engineering design problems like heat loss, air density loss, increased spool times, etc.

No need to elaborate anymore on a dead issue.

Coat the headers and heat wrap them. Anyway, it doesn't matter. Rear-mounts are a poor idea when compared to front mounts or superchargers anyway. :shrug:

It was a concept designed to aid ease of installation and eliminate underhood space problems for the regular joe with little thought put into actual engineering design problems like heat loss, air density loss, increased spool times, etc.

No need to elaborate anymore on a dead issue.

I wouldn't call it a dead issue when there are many in use out there with people interested in solving such problems. Not to mention this thread is, in fact, a query about the STS system...

i think someone just thinks to highly of him self and his ideals....

honestly this is about everyone else, not what you think.... so get over the dead issue... cause its not.... there are ALOT of ppl who will use and like the STS system, and there is ALOT of reasons its good to do.... front mount will only reduce spool time and may increase the "snap" factor with the turbo being there.... and honestsly the under hood temps are a KILLER with front mount turbo's..... so unless you can send it out and get it ceramic coated or heat coated for EVERYTHING thats a hot part... then wrap it ect.... the rear mount set up an amazing idea

oh really tell me why you believe headers are a good idea for an sts system??

from what i know headers are designed to eliminate backpressure in the exhaust system and facilitate exhaust scavenging and flow on normally aspirated engines. Turbocharged engines work on slightly different principles. Namely, there is exhaust "Pressure" between the cylinder heads and the turbocharger because the turbocharger is the smallest diameter orifice in the exhaust system. The turbine housing gets smaller in diameter to increase the velocity of the exhaust gasses before they hit the turbine wheel. This is how you get 100,000 rpm wheel speeds.
Turbocharged exhaust gas pressures can see as high as 30+ psi on high boost applications. So spending money on higher flowing exhaust components designed to lower exhaust backpressure is usually a waste of money. This money would be better spent on an upgraded turbocharger which would produce more efficient boost with less backpressure or just spending the money on upgrading the engine and fuel system to handle more boost.

This is the most retarded thing I've heard anyone say in months. You need to go back to turbo school.

-Chris

ok and since you know more then I, pls tell me why you feel thats the more retarded thing you have heard..... since i am not the only one who believes this, so do about 20 custom turbo makers that i know, and so does the whole entire supra forum ect.... so fill me in master.....

ok and since you know more then I, pls tell me why you feel thats the more retarded thing you have heard..... since i am not the only one who believes this, so do about 20 custom turbo makers that i know, and so does the whole entire supra forum ect.... so fill me in master.....

No, custom turbo makers do not believe this. Don't pretend to be the media spokesperson for turbo builders. All the good turbo kits for any car use headers. In general headers don't make as much power on a turbo car as they do on a naturally aspirated car, but that doesn't mean you lose power with them. If more restriction in front of the turbo is good, as you claim, then why not just use half-inch primaries and one inch up-pipes? Or better yet, why not just make the most power, as your theory suggests, and just cap off the exhaust in front of the turbo completely? That HAS to make the most power.

For many stock turbo cars, like Buicks, SyTys, and Supras, the money put into a header system, on a dollar-per-horsepower ratio, is better spent elsewhere, but that doesn't mean that headers make LESS power than a cast manifold. Any time you can increase exhaust efficiency on a four-stroke engine you are creating gains. This is basic engine tech.

-Chris

im not saying you will make LESS, im saying its not worth doing, cause the increase IF any is wasted money....

front mount will only reduce spool time and may increase the "snap" factor with the turbo being there.... and honestsly the under hood temps are a KILLER with front mount turbo's..... so unless you can send it out and get it ceramic coated or heat coated for EVERYTHING thats a hot part... then wrap it ect.... the rear mount set up an amazing idea

What exactly is a "snap" factor? And explain this KILLER underhood temps theory for me. My turbo is under the hood and has never caused a problem. Neither have the millions of turbochargers under the hoods of millions of production cars since the first production turbo car, the Corvair, was built.

None of the piping on my car is coated. It's 304 stainless. This is also how the PTK kit comes by defualt. I don't know of any production turbo cars that came with coated piping from the factory, either. Again, no problems on those millions of cars. If this whole "running cooler" theory is the STS nuthuggers' reason for thinking this thing is a great idea, then why don't they design a kit to sit on the roof of the car? It will run even cooler up there.

One more thing. If the rear mount is such an amazing idea then why don't the high horsepower cars use them? Pro cars don't have a restriction on where the turbo is mounted, yet they all put them up front. You want to know why they don't put them in the back? Because it makes less power and it's less efficient. Talk to pro series driver some time about putting the turbo in the back. They'll laugh you off the racetrack.

-Chris

It's 304 stainless. This is also how the PTK kit comes by defualt.

Mild steel is the default base material....

Mild steel is the default base material....

And....?

And....?

mild steel doesnt equal 304 stainless...

It reads like you were stating that stainless is the standard/entry level used by PTK... I was stating that it wasnt. :cool:

What exactly is a "snap" factor? And explain this KILLER underhood temps theory for me. My turbo is under the hood and has never caused a problem. Neither have the millions of turbochargers under the hoods of millions of production cars since the first production turbo car, the Corvair, was built.

None of the piping on my car is coated. It's 304 stainless. This is also how the PTK kit comes by defualt. I don't know of any production turbo cars that came with coated piping from the factory, either. Again, no problems on those millions of cars. If this whole "running cooler" theory is the STS nuthuggers' reason for thinking this thing is a great idea, then why don't they design a kit to sit on the roof of the car? It will run even cooler up there.

One more thing. If the rear mount is such an amazing idea then why don't the high horsepower cars use them? Pro cars don't have a restriction on where the turbo is mounted, yet they all put them up front. You want to know why they don't put them in the back? Because it makes less power and it's less efficient. Talk to pro series driver some time about putting the turbo in the back. They'll laugh you off the racetrack.

-Chris


If you picked apart the STS website, and all the rediculous bull**** on it, it'd probably take you all day :D

BTW, all the turbodiesel pickup truck and semi tractor owners better take notice... Their underhood turbos could be causing them major heat problems!!!! And even though they've been designed that way for decades, they should all change to the inferior STS design. At least those underhood temps would go down!!!!:yes: :lol:

hey im not saying for everyone to swap, all my friends who drive rigs have huge intercoolers..... nothing at all with running underhood turbo's i have 4 cars that are conventional turbo's.... so nothing at all wrong with them... but for someone who wants an easy turbo install, with no bs, ect... sts is a perfetct way to go

I have had the STS system on my car for at least 3 years now. No problems. Past 2 years I have been driving it on the street with 500+ rwhp 600+ rwtq. Front mounts work great, Superchargers are great, and STS system has worked great for me. Each system has pros and cons.